Are White People the only ones who loved Reagan?

[lonewolf0507]

I am a Washingtonian viewing the funeral procession and I see a black person every now and then, probably curious. I have not seen any Asian, Hispanics, or any other race. His policies were never in the best interest of minorities anyway. Why pay respect to a man who had no respect for you.

[rumguy]

1. white asshole fascists are the only ones who love Ray-goon

[evil_orange_cat]

7. exactly!

;)

[AspenRose]

2. Think of the Alex P. Keaton character from "Family Ties"

and you've pretty much got it nailed.

[AntiCoup2K4]

3. I'm (mostly) white, and I can't fucking stand the bastard

Never could.

[sangh0]

4. The Marcos' liked Reagan

They were Filipino

[justjones]

5. Yeah, pretty much. (n/t)

[eyesroll]

6. There was a WaPo online discussion with Dinesh D'Souza today

where he pretty much blamed black people for not liking Reagan, rather than the other way around:

Dryden, N.Y.: A difficult question. Watching the SIMI viewing I have been struck by the overwhelming whiteness of the crowd. This to me is one dark facet of the Reagan legacy, a man who chose to start his campaign in Philadelphia, Mich.. Why do you think he was so tone deaf on the vital American issue of race?


Dinesh D'Souza: Reagan had an unfailingly inclusive vision of America. His view was that it didn't matter where you came from or who you were. What mattered was what you could do. Immigrants found this appealing. Blacks in general didn't. Blacks are at a peculiar point in their history where many of them believe that "race does matter" and "race should matter." A different vision from what Martin Luther King held in his "I Have a Dream" speech. So Reagan didn't reject blacks, blacks rejected Reagan. It's unfortunate, but I don't think it tells against Reagan. Maybe there will be some reconsideration of Reagan now by African Americans.

:puke:

[buycitgo]

11. douchebag Dinesh

one of the worst Reagan apologists on the planet

[buycitgo]

13. here's what that prick is like

http://logosonline.home.igc.org/kelly.htm

snip

There is nothing typical about Dinesh D’Souza’s ride to the top. His is an exceptional journey, but exceptional only in the sense of odd or irregular. He holds the post of “scholar” but has earned only a BA in English from Dartmouth where he eventually transferred. At age 26, he served as Senior Domestic Policy Analyst under Reagan without a shred of serious policy training. In fact D’Souza, the political “expert,” has no training whatsoever in social science. Moreover, he has been appointed to two research institute positions without a single peer- reviewed essay or publication. And, perhaps not surprisingly, he is treated as a serious intellectual in the media and publishing world despite the remarkable lack of research that goes into his books.

As an immigrant “success” story, his is more reminiscent of the political patronage and smoke-filled backroom promotions of over a century ago—only this time ethnicity and tribalism are denounced and denied as the source of D’Souza’s power. In reality, D’Souza has little in the way of credentials or training to merit any of his promotions.1 In transparent violation of his own meritocratic-fanaticism, D’Souza’s rewards are, in the end, a result of his willingness to fill the role of brown-skinned provocateur for the Right. The rest of his booty comes in the forms of both party-paybacks and the ironic glory bestowed upon him by a low-brow media (including a profit-anxious publishing industry) he bashes. Though race, ethnicity and identity are all liberal bogeymen for the Right, it is they who so skillfully play the “race” card. If Dinesh D’Souza were not East Indian, he would simply have no role to play for the Right: there would be no White House credentials, no appointments as “scholar,” and no press.

Nothing can testify to the truth of this perhaps disquieting charge more than the evidence of his own poor scholarship, philosophical inconsistency and his signature but shamelessly sophomoric panache. In the two titles he released in 2002—What’s So Great About America (Regenery Press) and Letters to a Young Conservative (Basic Books)—D’Souza has really outdone himself. Indeed, the real story between these two books is the utter laziness and flouting of academic integrity their author displays.

[eridani]

16. Arundhati Roy righteously nailed his type--

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040209&s=roy

The best allegory for New Racism is the tradition of "turkey pardoning" in the United States. Every year since 1947, the National Turkey Federation has presented the US President with a turkey for Thanksgiving. Every year, in a show of ceremonial magnanimity, the President spares that particular bird (and eats another one). After receiving the presidential pardon, the Chosen One is sent to Frying Pan Park in Virginia to live out its natural life. The rest of the 50 million turkeys raised for Thanksgiving are slaughtered and eaten on Thanksgiving Day. ConAgra Foods, the company that has won the Presidential Turkey contract, says it trains the lucky birds to be sociable, to interact with dignitaries, school children and the press. (Soon they'll even speak English!)

That's how New Racism in the corporate era works. A few carefully bred turkeys--the local elites of various countries, a community of wealthy immigrants, investment bankers, the occasional Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice, some singers, some writers (like myself)--are given absolution and a pass to Frying Pan Park. The remaining millions lose their jobs, are evicted from their homes, have their water and electricity connections cut, and die of AIDS. Basically they're for the pot. But the Fortunate Fowls in Frying Pan Park are doing fine. Some of them even work for the IMF and the WTO--so who can accuse those organizations of being antiturkey? Some serve as board members on the Turkey Choosing Committee--so who can say that turkeys are against Thanksgiving? They participate in it! Who can say the poor are anti-corporate globalization? There's a stampede to get into Frying Pan Park. So what if most perish on the way?

[playahata1]

25. Ishmael Reed, in his novel "Japanese By Spring,"

satirizes D'Sousa as "Gunga Din-Din."

[mitchum]

23. In both senses of the word...

worst as inept
worst as rabid

[fujiyama]

38. Hey I'm the son of Indian immigrants

and I can't stand that annoying prick Dinesh...

[DrWeird]

8. Reagan only loved white people.

He was quite a racist.

[gumby]

9. Well it sure ain't

Teenage immigrant welfare mothers on drugs who drive Cadillacs and have babies for cash. Hey?

(thanks to the Lounge Lizards)

[Career Prole]

10. I'd heard in another thread it was a light crowd...

I guess they speaking of the shading rather than of the numbers. :D

[lonewolf0507]

12. The crowd is fairly light

I have seen better crowds in parades

[David__77]

14. 98% white following.

He wouldn't repudiate the KKK endorsement of his candidacy. David Duke was his sworn follower--attacking "welfare mothers" and so forth.

[Kahuna]

15. Yep. He was the, "Angry White Man" president. Per Heir Schneider..

CNN today, 'Although Raygun abhorred racism," he had a strong constituency among people who were intolerant towards minorities.' This is paraphrased. :puke:

[mopaul]

17. like the repub convention, blacks onstage, whites in the audience

what a freak show that was. now, with the 99% white mourners, it's an obvious symbol of what he represented. white supremacy. he made us all feel good about that again.

[GumboYaYa]

18. I haven't heard any of the chatterheads say anything about the white

crowd. It's so obvious to anyone watching. There ain't a dark skinned person in that crowd. Hmmmm maybe not EVERYONE loved Reagan.

[The Backlash Cometh]

19. If it's this obvious, why commemorate this man? He obviously didn't

represent everyone.

[Sliverofhope]

20. Armstrong Williams

Just to be factually accurate. Your observations are probably on target.

[DaveSZ]

22. He was an old racist

Why would non-white people like him?

My father told me he was teaching in an inner city school when Reagan was shot, and all the little kids cheered.


From The News Hour:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/remember/jan-june04/historians_reagan_6...


ROGER WILKINS: Well, Reagan was an incredible combination of a person who was very optimistic, upbeat, but underneath there were some really ugly parts of his politics.

He was, I said once before on this program, he capitalized on anti-black populism by going to Philadelphia and Mississippi , for example, in the beginning of his campaign in 1980.

Nobody had ever heard of Philadelphia and Mississippi outside of Mississippi , except as the place where three civil rights workers had been lynched – in 1964 – he said I believe in states rights.

Everybody knew what that meant. He went to Stone Mountain , Georgia , where the Ku Klux Klan used to burn its crosses, and he said Jefferson Davis is a hero of mine.

He was rebuked by the Atlanta newspapers – they said we don't need that any more here. He went to Charlotte, North Carolina one of the most successful busing for integration programs in the country and he said I'm against busing and again the Charlotte papers rebuked him. And the impact of that plus his attacks on welfare women, welfare queens in Cadillacs, for example. And his call for cutting the government. He didn't cut the government; the military bloomed in his time. But programs for poor people diminished entirely and America became a less civilized less decent place.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

21. Nutshell.

[TexasMexican]

24. South Texas

In general whites and hispanics seem to either have a positive or atleast neutral view of him.

This is a pretty solid democratic area and myself and my family all have a pretty good view of Reagan, we arent all going to go out and vote Republican for him, but out of everyone here that I know or seen I havent seen anyone hate on him like they do on these boards.

I guess its just because we are generally apathetic to most politics and as long as someone doesnt do something to specifically fuck us over we are okay with them.

I suppose if I or more people that I knew were gay and/or had AIDs I might think about it different, but that isnt the case.

[Solon]

28. That seems like the general attitude of most Americans...

So if a president decided to reinstitute slavery for blacks but it didn't affect you specifically or your family, you wouldn't have a problem with him?

[TexasMexican]

30. That would be a problem.

I seriously doubt that it would be possible to reslave blacks without it being a problem for most people.

However I do agree with your general assessment, "That seems like the general attitude of most Americans..." because it for the most part is correct.

As long as the government isnt doing anything to actively fuck you over most people will remain apathetic to it.

[minkyboodle]

31. as usual

your compassion knows no bounds..... :puke:

[JetCityLiberal]

33. I just do not believe a word of your post

Not one word.

The Democrats I know are not okay with any of the disgusting far right wing reagan policies. Not okay AT ALL. They see the horrible reality of how despicable reagan's policies were and still are.

You may be apathetic but that is YOU, quit labeling anyone else.

I have a VERY LARGE NUMBER of family in Texas---south, west and central, none of them would agree with your post. They are all Democrats who saw then and still see now the reagan policies for the racist, bigoted, lying, and murdering policies they were and continue to be.

In general I consider your post to be nothing more than right wing talking points sickening bs.

"I suppose if I or more people that I knew were gay and/or had AIDS I might think different, but that isn't the case." :puke:



JetCityLiberal

[TexasMexican]

34. Fine dont believe me...

"The Democrats I know are not okay with any of the disgusting far right wing reagan policies."

I would venture to say that the majority of democrats nationwide arent too well informed about Reagan's disgusting far right wing policies, as most Americans are pretty much politically apathetic.

My neck of the woods is no exception, and infact my neck of the woods is more conservative than most, Democrats included.

"I have a VERY LARGE NUMBER of family in Texas---south, west and central, none of them would agree with your post. They are all Democrats who saw then and still see now the reagan policies for the racist, bigoted, lying, and murdering policies they were and continue to be."

Well maybe your familiy is a bit more politically active. Mine certainly wasnt and still isnt, although they are straight ticket democrats. I'm probably the most politically active one of us all.

[JetCityLiberal]

35. I will not believe your 'blanket observations'

about what you say Democrats believe about reagan. I see something different.

Good for you for being politically active, spread the word then, reagan was a right wing corrupt criminal. Inform your family and friends. Tell them the truth. Lying, murdering, criminal reagan.

Tell your family, friends, neighbors, tell them all the truth. Now. It is all over DU, a great resource here for the slime reagan was and his policies still are. Educate people now.


JetCityLiberal

[TexasMexican]

36. maybe

but I dont really see the point in going on with Reagan, he is dead.

I dont see the point in kicking a dead horse, literally.

Whatever happened with Reagan was about 20 years ago and people have for the most part already formed thier opinion of him, its going to be hard to change that opinion and for the most part I dont think its worth it.

I definately think the Reagan issue is something that will alienate people rather than to bring them into the fold.

Saying something like "Reagan died, by the way he was an asshole for xyz reasons isnt something that reasonates real well in the real world."

[keithyboy]

26. Not ALL white people loved Reagan. I am one who didn't.

And most of my family except for two and some in-laws think Reagan was a dunce and not a 'great communicator.' I I remember it, Reagan murdered the "kings English" and after every major public speech someone on his staff had to go to the papers and explain what the latest "Reaganism" meant. He ofter got his facts wrong and corrections were routinely printed in the newspapers. "Great used car salesman" perhaps, but great communicator...NOT!!

[Skittles]

27. stupid white people, yes

nt

[anelson]

29. The Cosby Show in the 80's

fed into the lie that Reagan's America wanted to believe regarding blacks. "See how well these blacks have made it....we don't need affirmative action any longer....the playing field is balanced" or

"damn, these blacks are passing us by...damn affirmative action" or

"the blacks are poor by choice, and don't want to work as hard as the Huxtables..."

I know the show was intended to represent a positive vision of blacks in America, but I fear it fed into the racist attitudes we see today, still.

[minkyboodle]

32. Its mighty white out there

Honestly, I think the crowd today was at least 75 percent out of towners.

[TexasMexican]

37. every thang's gonna be all white...

http://www.cafeshops.com/fightinwhite