TRIP TO CHICAGO, AND THE NOTION OF "MOURNING" REGAN

Trip to Chicago: I left work early last Thursday in order to head up to Chicago for a trade show related to work. This was my first solo driving trip to the Windy City, and I've gotta say, it's a really easy drive. Ever since I moved to Indiana I've had these ideas about the drive to and from Chicago. I'd convinced myself that I wouldn't be able to handle either the 'long' drive or the big city traffic. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Both ways took just three-and-a-half hours, and the 'big city traffic' wasn't any worse than a slow traffic day here in Indianapolis. What surprised me most though was that I didn't get lost. I made it from my doorstep in downtown Indy all the way to my buddy Luke's doorstep in the historic Bryn Mawr district of Chicago without missing a beat. In short, I feel like I've overcome some self-imposed obstacle. I arrived in Chicago safe and sound by around 8:00 p.m. on Thursday evening, and made it back to Indy by around 6:30 p.m. last night. All-in-all, it was a great trip (even if it was self-financed). I got to hang out with Luke, who was my roomie for a while back in Boulder, and I spent three amazing days among professionals from across my industry at this really great trade show called Book Expo America.

Ronald Regan: The online headlines this morning all say the same thing... "Nation Mourns the Death of Ronald Reagan." I can't stand headlines such as that one. While it's true that President Regan presided over profound changes in our world, in the three days since his death, I haven't witnessed any "mourning" per se over his passing. I contemplated and considered Regan's contributions and change in health years ago (when his failing health first made national headlines), and so I wasn't all that surprised or taken aback at the news of his death. So for the Associated Press to stick this "Nation Mourns..." headline in our face is a bit of stretch, to say the least. Every newspaper in the country has had their "Regan Dies" page designed and ready to go for years (as they do, Iím sure, for the Pope and Henry Kissinger). All they needed to do on the day of his passing was write the opening line and plop down an appropriate headline. Is the nation mourning Reganís passing? I think not. Are we aware and thankful for his contributions and leadership... I am, but I'm not necessarily "mourning" what had essentially happened years ago.

As our city motto puts it, Chicago: Much less scary than you'd think! Come again!.

What I donít like is that Friday all the federal, state and local government offices are closing down. What would he had said about the cost to shutting down the government offices for the day.

Since he shut down the government three times over his two terms, he might not have a beef at all. He might even argue that the government that governs best would be a government that governs Monday through Thursday.

Ronald Reagan would have been all for shutting the government down for a day. It SAVES, not costs us money.

The concept of a Nation should not be confused with the concept of the individual citizen. The Nation IS in mourning as it has forever lost a great leader. The manner in which his death has occured should not diminish the respect he deserves.

If someone very close to you was dying of Alzeimer's, God forbid, wouldn't you mourn that person's death or just contemplate and consider their contributions to your life when the condition was announced?

Our great Nation has lost someone very close to it.

Dave writes:

"The concept of a Nation should not be confused with the concept of the individual citizen. The Nation IS in mourning as it has forever lost a great leader."

... and ...

"If someone very close to you was dying of Alzheimerís, God forbid, wouldn't you mourn that person's death or just contemplate and consider their contributions to your life when the condition was announced?"

Well, Dave, your statements don't jive with this individual. Yes, that's right, I said "individual." I am but one of many, but still one. I am not mourning, nor do I sense that our entire nation, or even a large portion of it, is "mourning" either. The media coverage on Reganís passing is appropriate, as is the closing of government offices on Friday; but these facts alone do not necessarily mean that the nation is in mourning. It simply means that weíre following tradition, and itís not for me to say whether itís good or bad. I just know that the overwhelming majority of people I know--no, I'll restate that... everyone I know but you, Dave--is not ìmourningî Reganís passing. You may very well be, and for that my thoughts are with you, and thatís all well and good. But please, donít pass the indignation down to my side of the table.

I mourn for those close to me, and sometimes I mourn for those whom I've never met. In this case, I stand firm... I am not, nor did I ever, "mourn" or ìgrieveî the deteriorating health or timely death of this particular individual. Saying this, in my humble opinion, does not diminish the man's contributions to society, nor is it blasphemy.

Mikal writes: "The online headlines this morning all say the same thing... "Nation Mourns the Death of Ronald Reagan. I can't stand headlines such as that one."

then...

"But please, donít pass the indignation down to my side of the table."

Your original post expressed your anger at the unworthiness of these headlines, the very definition of indignation, yet you accuse me of it for responding contrary to your beliefs. If anything, my indignation was in direct response to your indignation.

With respect to whether or not indiviuals are mourning, look at the tens of thousands of people who waited 5 to 10 hours to pay their respects to him. I would bet you dollars to doughnuts that if Reagan's body traveled throughout the country (even Indy), you would see similar throngs of individuals waiting many hours to pey their respects.

Notwithstanding the above supposition, the salient point of my argument was, and is, that our great Nation is more than the sum of its people. Therefore, I stand firm... the nation is in mourning.

Dave: I'll concede on the indignation comment. However, my own informal survey of 10 people is a clear indication that people are not mourning Regan's passing. Of the 10 people whom I asked the question, "Are you mourning the death of the former President," none indicated that were. To each I posed this follow-up question: "Do you feel that the Nation is mourning the former Presidentís passing?" Again, not one person said yes.

While I too might very well spend up to five or ten hours in line to view his coffin before it's buried, that does not necessarily mean that I am mourning his passing. All it means is that I'd be willing to invest that sort of time in order to pay my respects. Similarly, if his coffin were driven across my state, I would likely stand outside to view its passing. But again, this does not mean that I am mourning.

I would bet you your donuts to my dollars that more people are standing in line to view his coffin either because: A) They feel compelled to pay their respects; or, B) They have a genuine interest in personally bearing witness to a great historical moment.

One final though as far the ënation in mourningí thing goesÖ the last time the nation was in mourning was, in my humble opinion, when Kennedy was shot or on the days immediately following the September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, DC.

To claim our "nation is mourning" is just hype from the media. The average American is continuing their daily life and already bored with the week long production. We only have short attention spans - what have the studies said...something like 45 minute intervals?

Not everyone voted for Reagan back in the day. I doubt they are mourning. I barely remember him since I was in elementary school during his tenure and focused more on my coloring books during those days. I really don't "know him".

I went back over all the stories that have been printed on Yahoo! since President Reagan died. Not one uses the same terminology you do. One does use a play on his campaign slogan of "Morning in America" by stating "Mourning in America". That wouldn't be an incorrect statement either - if one person in America, there is indeed "Mourning in America". In your post you state that all of the online headlines state "Nation Mourns", but then go on to say the AP is the one sticking it in your face. Most of the stories for newspapers were probably not written by the AP, but by journalists for that paper. Then again, most papers make up the headlines for their stories - even AP stories.

Here is a link to stories on Yahoo! from several sources:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&lp=1&ll=a1&pg=1&mod=news_stories&in=US&cat=Ronald_Reagan

In any event, this appears to be along the lines of those who didn't agree with his political philosophy taking a subtle jab at him. You suggest that the nation cannot mourn if you aren't mourning or if the highly scientific poll of 10 friends yields no people in mourning. I don't even know why it matters - millions of people in the country are sorrowful at his passing. (Or maybe it the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy at work - they paid off enough people to have the first state furneral in 30 years.)

Alzheimerís is an awful disease and simply because he disappeared from public life 10 years ago didn't mean he was dead. Alzheimerís is not finality - death is, and it is at that point that the reality of loss is realized. To see the loss of a great leader such as Reagan ñ Alzheimerís or not - who carried 49 of 50 states in 1984 and was among the most popular in history deserves the headline of a "Nation Mourns..."

Taylor: Here's another fresh example of how the media is portraying everyone who is standing in a line to view the former President's coffin. This is June 10, 2004 Scripps Howard New Service article running in many papers across the country:

http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/nation_world_news/article/0,1713,BDC_2420_2952386,00.html

In this article you'll find the following:

"By midmorning Wednesday, a heavy-duty card game was under way at the front of the line on Capitol Hill to mourn Ronald Reagan."

... and ...

"The temperature was inching toward 90 degrees. The roughly 20 mourners in line were already sweaty and flushed, often taking turns running to nearby street vendors to replenish their supply of water."

First off, in my experience, you are either in a state of mourning or you are not. One does not wait in line for the opportunity 'to' mourn. Secondly, it's a gross generalization to say that anyone who waits in line to view the former President's coffin is indeed in a state of mourning or is grieving. The person who wrote the story I referenced can not possibly know what is in the hearts and minds of the thousands of people who are taking the time to view Regan's coffin.

My point is simply this... don't tell us that we're in mourning or that we as a nation are grieving the passing of this man. Some of us are, yes, but not enough to say that the nation is.

Finally, your comment, "In any event, this appears to be along the lines of those who didn't agree with his political philosophy taking a subtle jab at him." is way off base where I'm concerned. My post mentioned nothing about the political nature of the situation. That you feel that it needs to be politicized does, however, say a lot.

I'll say this much - to be so wrapped around the use of the words "nation" in a headline and "mourners" waiting to see the body of an ex-president in one article seems a bit odd to me. To criticize the media over something as trivial as word usage when there are so many other things more substantive to criticize them about (i.e. currently the Laci Peterson murder trial, in the past Jon Benet Ramsey, OJ Simpson, Gary Condit, etc.) and making that the focus of your comments regarding the death of President Reagan says a lot to me.

On the issue of people lining up to view the body, remember first that people are ghouls, second that people love seeing celebrities, and third that peolple love feeling like they are part of history. A dead president on display will fascinate for days (shoot, they lined up to see Lenin for decades after his death). I would go see it too, just to say that I did, and I didn't even like the man...or at least what he stood for.

On the issue of national mourning, let's put this into perspective by looking at Walt Whitman's "When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd," written on the occasion of Abraham Lincoln's death. "I mourne;ed, and yet shall mourn with ever-returning spring...Then with the knowledge of death as walking on one side of me, And the thought of death close-walking the other side of me, And I in the middle as with companions, as holding the hands of companions....And I saw askant the armies, I saw as in noiseless dreams hundreds of battle-flags, Bourn through the smoke of the battles and pierc'd with missles I was them, And carried hither and yon through the smoke, and torn and bloody, And at last but a few shreds left on the staffs, (and all in silence,) And the staffs all splinter'd and broken...Comrades mine and I in the midst, and their memory ever to keep, for the dead I loved so well, For the sweetest, wisest soul of all my days and lands..." Whitman, champion of the individual, describes a nation - individuals, regions, nature, cities - finally united in cathartic grief. Even people who hated Lincoln also mourned because the nation had passed through a brutal war and the national mourning merged with the individual mourning, and gave everyone an outlet for despair. THAT was "a nation mourns." Raw and emotional.

Meanwhile, as individuals, let us mourn the death of Ray Charles, "like an old, sweet song..."