Comments about ‘Even in death, Margaret Thatcher draws scorn from some’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, April 9 2013 12:27 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
worf
Mcallen, TX

All of us are scorned, sometime in life?

Being infested with liberals,--good people will continually be scorned.

Hmm? Romney didn't pay taxes?

SME
Bountiful, UT

Somewhat glossed over in this article is the fact that this is a leftist thing. It is conservative leaders who are reviled by the left when they pass on. The reverse reaction is rare. The left also reveres its leaders much more, perhaps because they are generally anti-religion and their leaders are substitute Gods? No one else embalms their heros for continued worship.

KDave
Moab, UT

Of course communists hate Thatcher. She pretty much destroyed them.

Tators
Hyrum, UT

A rather sad commentary on a significant segment of the British people. Thatcher was one of the greatest leaders to ever serve in Britain and nearly single-handedly lead their economy out of a bad recession when it was most needed, similarly to what Reagan did for the USA. And now some of her nation's people are too blinded by liberal rhetoric to even acknowledge her. Sad. Very sad.

These same people don't seem to realize that what the world currently needs more than anything else politically related is another good dose of exactly what Reagan and Thatcher gave to us. It's needed now more than ever. And the sooner the better.

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

The Brits do have a history of being disrespectful and or ungreatful of great people. One only need remember that after leading Great Britain in WW11, they voted out Winston Churchill's party and took him out of the PM. However, I think that the haters of Thatcher are probably a small minority that gets a lot attention from the Thatcher hating liberal press there.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

These people that find fault now with PM Thatcher know they have a positive audience with President Obama who would not be working with her for the good of the world. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum so it is only natural for these negative comments from people that have been silent for years.

They know our President has gone around the world bad mouthing our heritage while standing on foreign soil.

PM Thatcher was not afraid to speak out in her special calling to bring Britain into a repair mode and in the process tear down the Communism which threatened Europe and not just Britain. She established a good process for future generations in the world. She stood up against bullies and that had to be a tough thing to do for her. She and President Reagan did form a good bond for President Reagan to say "Mr. Gorbachev, Tear down that wall!!!"

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Ding dong, Yeah another false deity of the conservatives is in good company and warm.

Supporting secret wars, selling drugs to Americans, ignoring international embargos, supplying arms, destroying unions supporting apartheid, running up hugh deficits (that didn't matter) or privatizing everything enriching the 1 percent. Yeah real heros, ask someone from England instead of listening to am radio shout her and rons praises. Rock music and endless military spending, not Ronnies words brought down the Soviets.

Yes I'll choose to remember the actual people not the "fantasy" world leaders.

Listen to Pink Floyd's the Final Cut to get a little insight into her popularity.

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

Re: Happy Valley Heretic

"Yes I'll choose to remember the actual people not the "fantasy" world leaders." Unquote.

Boy I can't wait to see you post when you have to deal with the real Obama and not the fantasy he has been played up to be in the mainstream press.

I'm at least glad you acknowledge that Reagans big military spending had something to do with the end of Communism. But, how did "Back in the USSR" have any negative influence on the Soviets?

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

m.g. scott said:
I'm at least glad you acknowledge that Reagans big military spending had something to do with the end of Communism. But, how did "Back in the USSR" have any negative influence on the Soviets?

I'll just leave it at an Idea or words are far more powerful then weapons, hence the 1st Amendment before the second.

Now we're paying to get rid of that "Military build up"

JWB
Kaysville, UT

I like to think about how we got into World War II. We sat there waiting for the diplomacy of Japan even as of December 7, 1941 but we did have all our ships in Pearl Harbor, just in case.

I also remember how the flat lands of Poland got changed in a day when the German tanks and military rolled into Poland.

I also remember how 9/11 happened and how our national defense got a kick with their pants down. Basically all in Congress, House and Senate, agreed with the scenario afterwards to get our national pride and defense back up.

You just don't leave your borders, land and air open to anyone who wants to come in. We have made some mistakes in the past but a strong defense is what has made our nation strong. Cyberspace is where we get attacked now, militarily, monetarily, economically, and when an individual's personal information and bank account gets hacked, very emotional for that individual and family.

You cannot let your defense down. Americans and Europeans spend billions for sports, vacations, entertainment and other activities. Remember, without freedoms, you don't get those events in your life, even on the Internet.

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

Re: Happy Valley Heretic

Uh, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with the military and its weapons. The Bill of Rights was a list of protections of the people from government control.

By you comment I could conclude that you think we don't need a military? Because Clinton got rid of the Reagan military years ago.

And, words often don't win wars, where guns and bombs do. However, I will concede that trying words is the best first action.

mornixuur
Layton, UT

@SME, who said "Somewhat glossed over in this article is the fact that this is a leftist thing. It is conservative leaders who are reviled by the left when they pass on. The reverse reaction is rare."

I don't pretend to know much about British culture, but in our own country, I find your comment laughably dishonest.

I saw the commentary when Ted Kennedy died. The vehemence from the right-wing was repugnant.

And, quite frankly, if President Obama died tomorrow, or Carter, or either Bill or Hillary, I'm quite confident the comment boards would light up in joy and fanfare like there was no tomorrow from the Tea Party crowd. Quite frankly, I think you know that too, which makes me more than comfortable in my earlier use of the word "dishonest".

Yes, it happened with Nixon (who, I feel, earned whatever scorn he got), and Reagan (who did not), as well. You're more than welcome to point it out. However, two wrongs will never equal a right. If you're going to call someone out on it, make your calling-out "fair and balanced".

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments