By Hunter Baker on 7.28.04 @ 12:05AM
What kind of son would honor those who demonized his father?
When Ron Reagan eulogized his father in a more or less
respectful manner, I briefly hoped things might be different.
Perhaps Ron Reagan would bury in the earth his history of working
to humiliate the man many of us would have gladly called father or
grandfather. Maybe the no longer young Ron Reagan would find
meaning in his life without perversely cannibalizing his father's
legacy further.
When Nancy Reagan expressed her support for stem cell research,
many of us could understand her position. She was never a movement
conservative. She was simply a woman who loved her husband truly
and supported him in all his endeavors. Thus, she wanted to
restrict guns because one had nearly killed her man. She wanted to
increase stem cell research for hopes her husband's suffering might
have been alleviated or even reversed. There is something in us
that is able to give her the benefit of the doubt for the sake of
the consistency of her love for the man we appreciated so much.
Ron Reagan is a different piece of work, altogether. When his
father became President, all that meant for Ron was that he got
offers to work in interesting places doing interesting things. The
price of the nifty career prospects was that he had to be himself,
a person who never "got" his father's politics. I'll never forget
watching one of the interminable VH-1 or MTV decade in review
programs on the '80s where Ron blathered on about the uselessness
of "trickle down economics." As if he had a damn clue. His father
was the economist. Ron was a ballet dancer.
With the announcement that Ron Reagan would be a featured
speaker at the Democratic National Convention, many conservative
hearts sank. Even after the bumbling heir announced he would only
be using his platform to persuade citizens to support stem cell
research, the pain of the disrespect and dishonor did not subside.
President Reagan, the man who prided himself most on all those
lives he saved as a lifeguard during his youth, once again had to
suffer at the hands of his callow child.
Liberals like to claim Reagan talked a good game about abortion,
but did nothing about it. Maybe Ron bought into the idea. But, that
notion is absolute bunk. Not only did Reagan write a book
denouncing abortion and appoint a prominent pro-lifer to be Surgeon
General, he also did his best to appoint pro-life justices to the
bench. He was the first U.S. President to wear his pro-life
convictions as a badge of honor. Had two of his appointees not
proven inadequate to the task, today we'd be living in a land where
states could forbid the taking of unborn life if their citizens saw
fit to do so.
To have Ron Reagan mount an undeserved podium before those who
demonized his father and hack away at a beautiful legacy of
protecting innocent human life, seems now to be an almost perfect
injustice. We know that Ronald Reagan bore his maladies with
dignity. One only wishes his son had been bequeathed a tithe of
what the father had. It is only the conviction that Ronald Reagan
is past such suffering now, that makes the continuing betrayal of
the son endurable.
topics:
Economics, Abortion
