As usual, SC is off the rails here, but also as usual, he's gone too extreme on a legitimate gripe. If the media running this story is more bothersome to you than the comments made, you should really stop and think about why that is and how you can adjust your attitude. Reagan, and the cult of personality that grew around him, influenced the entire direction of this country for a generation. My entire life has been one big experiment in Reaganomics, the drug war, econo-militaristic foreign belligerence, and conformist nationalism. So the media, once again, can't possibly win. If they run it, the curmudgeons on one side say they are stirring the pot, if they don't run it, the whipper-snappers on the other side say they are whitewashing history.
Personally, I side more with the whipper-snappers, but that's because I've read the People's History lol
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
What im saying is that the word was used to describe people different than us. For example..'be careful when you go over to Prospect Avenue.. it's very "ethnic' over there." The irony is that my dad was more ethnic than the Puerto Ricans that lived there.
As usual, SC is off the rails here, but also as usual, he's gone too extreme on a legitimate gripe. If the media running this story is more bothersome to you than the comments made, you should really stop and think about why that is and how you can adjust your attitude. Reagan, and the cult of personality that grew around him, influenced the entire direction of this country for a generation. My entire life has been one big experiment in Reaganomics, the drug war, econo-militaristic foreign belligerence, and conformist nationalism. So the media, once again, can't possibly win. If they run it, the curmudgeons on one side say they are stirring the pot, if they don't run it, the whipper-snappers on the other side say they are whitewashing history.
Personally, I side more with the whipper-snappers, but that's because I've read the People's History lol
I personally am ambivalent as to whether this is news worthy or not. In fact, I think it should be printed, certainly not avoided. At the same time, considering Reagan's history, the fact that he kicked off his campaign in Philadelphia, MS, and the contemporaneous language, no one should be surprised either. LBJ's racial language was notorious and the subject of speculation for years. If something came out that JFK, FDR, Ike, any of them used language like Reagan, I would similarly be unsurprised.
As usual, SC is off the rails here, but also as usual, he's gone too extreme on a legitimate gripe. If the media running this story is more bothersome to you than the comments made, you should really stop and think about why that is and how you can adjust your attitude. Reagan, and the cult of personality that grew around him, influenced the entire direction of this country for a generation. My entire life has been one big experiment in Reaganomics, the drug war, econo-militaristic foreign belligerence, and conformist nationalism. So the media, once again, can't possibly win. If they run it, the curmudgeons on one side say they are stirring the pot, if they don't run it, the whipper-snappers on the other side say they are whitewashing history.
Personally, I side more with the whipper-snappers, but that's because I've read the People's History lol
I personally am ambivalent as to whether this is news worthy or not. In fact, I think it should be printed, certainly not avoided. At the same time, considering Reagan's history, the fact that he kicked off his campaign in Philadelphia, MS, and the contemporaneous language, no one should be surprised either. LBJ's racial language was notorious and the subject of speculation for years. If something came out that JFK, FDR, Ike, any of them used language like Reagan, I would similarly be unsurprised.
Would the media print it if that language was used by JFK or FDR?
As usual, SC is off the rails here, but also as usual, he's gone too extreme on a legitimate gripe. If the media running this story is more bothersome to you than the comments made, you should really stop and think about why that is and how you can adjust your attitude. Reagan, and the cult of personality that grew around him, influenced the entire direction of this country for a generation. My entire life has been one big experiment in Reaganomics, the drug war, econo-militaristic foreign belligerence, and conformist nationalism. So the media, once again, can't possibly win. If they run it, the curmudgeons on one side say they are stirring the pot, if they don't run it, the whipper-snappers on the other side say they are whitewashing history.
Personally, I side more with the whipper-snappers, but that's because I've read the People's History lol
I personally am ambivalent as to whether this is news worthy or not. In fact, I think it should be printed, certainly not avoided. At the same time, considering Reagan's history, the fact that he kicked off his campaign in Philadelphia, MS, and the contemporaneous language, no one should be surprised either. LBJ's racial language was notorious and the subject of speculation for years. If something came out that JFK, FDR, Ike, any of them used language like Reagan, I would similarly be unsurprised.
Would the media print it if that language was used by JFK or FDR?
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
What im saying is that the word was used to describe people different than us. For example..'be careful when you go over to Prospect Avenue.. it's very "ethnic' over there." The irony is that my dad was more ethnic than the Puerto Ricans that lived there.
Interesting. It has to be a regional thing maybe? The way you just described it is exactly how I've heard the term used in NY.
I guess it's like calling hillbillies "rural"?
Your parents using the term that way isn't disparaging to me.
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
In central new jersey ethnic was never used as a negative term. There were "ethnic neighborhoods", "ethnic food", etc. When I think ethnic I think of eastern europe or caribbean for some reason. (maybe because my grandmother was lithuanian?)
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
In central new jersey ethnic was never used as a negative term. There were "ethnic neighborhoods", "ethnic food", etc. When I think ethnic I think of eastern europe or caribbean for some reason. (maybe because my grandmother was lithuanian?)
Yes it was used that way too. But there was a subtle context available as well which was not overtly racist, but implied "different".
Fail to see how this is newsworthy. You would be hard-pressed to find people from Reagan's era that did not say something racist at some point. They still do today.
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
In central new jersey ethnic was never used as a negative term. There were "ethnic neighborhoods", "ethnic food", etc. When I think ethnic I think of eastern europe or caribbean for some reason. (maybe because my grandmother was lithuanian?)
Yes it was used that way too. But there was a subtle context available as well which was not overtly racist, but implied "different".
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
In central new jersey ethnic was never used as a negative term. There were "ethnic neighborhoods", "ethnic food", etc. When I think ethnic I think of eastern europe or caribbean for some reason. (maybe because my grandmother was lithuanian?)
Yes it was used that way too. But there was a subtle context available as well which was not overtly racist, but implied "different".
Comment is made in 1971; I am trying to understand why this is a story.
Im pretty most of our parents made a disparaging remark in 71, regardless of the country of origin.
Um, a LOT of people in 1971 actually did not call black people monkeys. I can't believe you think that "most" people said stuff like that at that time. I guarantee you that my parents would NEVER use that language when talking about black people, and have never use any kind of racist slurs... And my parents are actually kind of racist! Even some racist people would think that was unacceptable in 1971 FFS.
I said disparaging, not monkey. So you say your parents were a little racist. Doesn't that support my point? The word my parents tended to use was "ethnic", which was ironic since my dad was born in the Ukraine.
You never heard the term ethnic used for people of color? When I hear the term ethnic I'm not thinking Ukraine that's for sure.
In central new jersey ethnic was never used as a negative term. There were "ethnic neighborhoods", "ethnic food", etc. When I think ethnic I think of eastern europe or caribbean for some reason. (maybe because my grandmother was lithuanian?)
Yes it was used that way too. But there was a subtle context available as well which was not overtly racist, but implied "different".
Absolutely but not negative in anyway.
For my mom, it meant a little scary...
Yeah I could see that. A little different but scary. Like I remember my grandfather calling a church "ethnic" one time, I think it was eastern orthodox.
Someone I figured was probably racist is confirmed to have been racist. That doesn't really stop me in my tracks (at least not this day in age where everyone soils themselves & loses their minds with every new headline).
What's the proper level of outrage when news comes out about something that happened 50 years ago and is relatively unsurprising?
Racism was shitty then, it's shitty now, and is a scourge on our society.
Fail to see how this is newsworthy. You would be hard-pressed to find people from Reagan's era that did not say something racist at some point. They still do today.
So were they supposed to suppress this newly found information? How would that be any better?
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
People in here defacto defending and wanting news to not cover the Governor of California calling the President of the USA being racist as fuck and the President laughing.
Amazing.
Talk about regressive.
Correction. The CA Governor and President in 1971. No one (that I’ve seen) is condoning his comments. I just think most people don’t see how comments from 50 years ago are relevant today.
Sounds like racism apologists to me. What does it matter if it was in 1971? It is still an unheard recording of the President laughing while the then future President is being a big ol´racist.
Ofc its news. Unless one has murky reasons for feeling the need to downplay it.
Historical perspective. Learn something about the academic side.
Racism apologists.
You keep using that term, yet I haven’t seen anyone apologize for his awful comments. So why do you insist on using that term and painting everyone with a broad brush? Oh yeah...you enjoy stirring the pot. That’s why. Raegan’s comments were terrible. My point is, why is this a story in 2019 when he said it in 1971? We have enough other shit to focus on and fix in present day.
Why was Shadow of your Love a story in 2018 when it was recorded in 86-87?
Didn't get an answer from you?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
No one thinks it shouldn’t be reported. But it’s own thread wasn’t needed. Could have just as well gone in the Republican Party thread. And the snarky “US darling” preface is just you being you.
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
Yeah give Nixon credit for taking it down a few notches at least
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
No one thinks it shouldn’t be reported. But it’s own thread wasn’t needed. Could have just as well gone in the Republican Party thread. And the snarky “US darling” preface is just you being you.
In fairness, St. Ronald is a US darling. That's why he lost only DC and Minnesota (his opponent's home state) in 1984. And I don't think there's a right and wrong about whether it is in its own thread...but there does seem to be a lot of people annoyed that we'd dare talk about the things that Ronald Reagan said.
Maybe this thread would have gone over better if someone else had started it. In any case, there's no way this was not going to be reported once it came out. It just is bizarre that it came out right now.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
No one thinks it shouldn’t be reported. But it’s own thread wasn’t needed. Could have just as well gone in the Republican Party thread. And the snarky “US darling” preface is just you being you.
In fairness, St. Ronald is a US darling. That's why he lost only DC and Minnesota (his opponent's home state) in 1984. And I don't think there's a right and wrong about whether it is in its own thread...but there does seem to be a lot of people annoyed that we'd dare talk about the things that Ronald Reagan said.
Maybe this thread would have gone over better if someone else had started it. In any case, there's no way this was not going to be reported once it came out. It just is bizarre that it came out right now.
I don't think history has been as kind to Reagan as the present was to him.
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
No one thinks it shouldn’t be reported. But it’s own thread wasn’t needed. Could have just as well gone in the Republican Party thread. And the snarky “US darling” preface is just you being you.
A lot of people in this thread have expressed it shouldn't be reported.
Why wouldn't a thread about it be needed - it's two presidents having some racist-fun? One of them actually being a "US darling". "The party of reagan" etc.
Stop being colored by whatever you feel about me when posting. It makes your post come of as silly.
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Just the term "monkeys" reveals intense hatred. Disgusting
Not for people in here.
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
No one thinks it shouldn’t be reported. But it’s own thread wasn’t needed. Could have just as well gone in the Republican Party thread. And the snarky “US darling” preface is just you being you.
A lot of people in this thread have expressed it shouldn't be reported.
Why wouldn't a thread about it be needed - it's two presidents having some racist-fun? One of them actually being a "US darling". "The party of reagan" etc.
Stop being colored by whatever you feel about me when posting. It makes your post come of as silly.
Whatever. You’re just trying to be an instigator when you title your post like that.
Comments
If the media running this story is more bothersome to you than the comments made, you should really stop and think about why that is and how you can adjust your attitude.
Reagan, and the cult of personality that grew around him, influenced the entire direction of this country for a generation. My entire life has been one big experiment in Reaganomics, the drug war, econo-militaristic foreign belligerence, and conformist nationalism.
So the media, once again, can't possibly win.
If they run it, the curmudgeons on one side say they are stirring the pot, if they don't run it, the whipper-snappers on the other side say they are whitewashing history.
Personally, I side more with the whipper-snappers, but that's because I've read the People's History lol
I guess it's like calling hillbillies "rural"?
Your parents using the term that way isn't disparaging to me.
Someone I figured was probably racist is confirmed to have been racist. That doesn't really stop me in my tracks (at least not this day in age where everyone soils themselves & loses their minds with every new headline).
What's the proper level of outrage when news comes out about something that happened 50 years ago and is relatively unsurprising?
Racism was shitty then, it's shitty now, and is a scourge on our society.
Is that a strong enough response?
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
"If a president says it, and another president laughs about it and later replaces monkeys with "cannibals" when retelling the oh so funny anecdote - it shouldn't be reported at all"
Think about that for a second.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Maybe this thread would have gone over better if someone else had started it. In any case, there's no way this was not going to be reported once it came out. It just is bizarre that it came out right now.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Why wouldn't a thread about it be needed - it's two presidents having some racist-fun? One of them actually being a "US darling". "The party of reagan" etc.
Stop being colored by whatever you feel about me when posting. It makes your post come of as silly.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com