Do you have proof that Ronald Reagan was a racist?

Comments

• That's not true at all. Republicans or at least the vast majority of them, believe that EVERYONE should have the same opportunities as any other American regardless of color. They don't split people into groups.
  If we remember it was the Republican President Abraham Lincoln that freed the slaves. It was the Democratic lead congress that fought to stop the civil rights act of 1964. I have always wondered why the blacks of America sided with the Dams considering that it's only been in the recent past that they have been on their side.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on July 8th, 2009

Comments

• That's the propaganda that I read that prompted this question. It's hardly correct. Jack Reagan(Dutch's Father) all be it an alcoholic was staunchly against racism of any kind and taught both Jack and Ronald that it was wrong. This stemmed from him being an Irish Catholic and reading signs that said "no dogs or Irish need apply".
  Below is a wikipedia entry that I've read in one of his biographies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
  According to Paul Kengor, author of God and Ronald Reagan, Reagan had a particularly strong faith in the goodness of people, which stemmed from the optimistic faith of his mother, Nelle,[7] and the Disciples of Christ faith,[7] which he was baptized into in 1922.[8] For the time, Reagan was unusual in his opposition to racial discrimination, and recalled a time in Dixon when the local inn would not allow black people to stay there. Reagan brought them back to his house, where his mother invited them to stay the night and have breakfast the next mo

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• It's a shame what the liberals do to the person when they can't beat their message.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• You didn't actually respond to Austinius' assertions. You provided a character assessment based on a theory about his upbringing, but that doesn't address the specific points he's making in his answer here. And, once again, you've introduced the notion that it's about liberal-vs-conservative, rather than about the facts. Your arguments would be much more effective without that monotonous drone.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• LOL...It's history. He had a black college buddy that he used to play football with that told the story about the black player staying at his house when they were not allowed to stay in the motel with the team. I believe his name was "Buea" but I'm not for sure. I'll look it up and get back to you. He ended up becoming a doctor and unfortunately died in 81', but he's the one that told the story.
  
  You know now that I think of it there was once a KKK in my hometown that I used to live in. Does that mean that I am a racist?

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• You're still not answering the specific allegations. This is the difference between handwaving and solid argument: handwaving ignores the points being made, while supplying alternative explanations in great whirlwinds of words. Solid argument just addresses the charges with counter-evidence... you could challenge Austinius to provide evidence, for example. Or you could cite sources which reinterpret those events in a different light with more details. But simply ignoring them and saying "he had a black buddy" does not qualify.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• Ah you're a liberal. You make everything to complicated anyway. Try reading "When Character Was King: A Story of Ronald Reagan" Peggy Noonan backs all her information up with references.
  I'm going to write a book someday called "How the Liberal lost their Common Sense".

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• Someone with true character would not go around labeling everyone who disagrees with them as "liberal". You don't know me well enough to say things like that, you see anyone who disagrees as "the enemy".
   
  Character starts with respect for the truth. I've seen how you feel about facts, so it's laughable to hear you try to take the high road on character.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• LOL..Alright your correct liberal is a dirty word. Perhaps I was a little harsh with you. Please accept my apologies.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• No, liberal isn't a dirty word... but I'm not a liberal. You jump to conclusions rather quickly, I have observed, and your tolerance for precise thinking and the details of fact seems weak. If you want respect, you have to earn it by being willing to do the work of backing up your statements with strong facts and solid arguments. You seem too weak to do that, from a character standpoint. You like to sling arrows generally at the other side, but run and hide when someone presents you with evidence. I don't call that liberal or conservative, I call it "dim".

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• I have seen no facts backed up the Reagan was a racist. Usually I ignore you, but for some reason I felt like entertaining you.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• You ignore everything you can't counter properly. Austinius listed what he is obviously claiming are facts. You changed the focus, instead of addressing the evidence YOU asked for. So which is it? Are you a man or a mouse? Either take on the challenge, or don't throw down the gauntlet.
   
  I'm imagining you got beat up a lot as a child. But it doesn't have to continue.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• I still see no evidence backing up the assertions. The original question asked for proof. Starting a campaign in a city were a civil rights worker was killed by a bunch of democrat KKK bigots is hardly proof.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• It's evidence. As he says, each piece can be explained away on its own, but the cumulative stack has weight. In order to counter that, you need to supply alternative explanations, or challenge the facts.
   
  "Proof" is a pretty high standard to set for a politician's internal views. A good stack of evidence is about as good as it will ever get.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• Ba ha ha ha....Oh Gawd now I've herd it all. So if I start calling you a murder, child abuser, racist, wife beater and liberal and back it up with loose facts that have no bearing, the weight of all of that has bearing? Dude, I'm sorry, but you've totally lost your marbles. But thanks for the laugh.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• Your hilarity is out of place. It's very difficult to prove someone's internal state, but a preponderance of evidence is still worth paying attention to. I cannot, for example, prove that you're mentally unstable... but your constantly bizarre reactions tend to pile up evidence. Is it "proof"? No...

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• LOL....Well I guess we'll wait till your dead then charge you as a racist until you prove otherwise....LMAO!
  If you haven't herd a person in this country is innocent until proven guilty. It's not the other why around.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• Nobody has put him on trial. That rule is intended for legal proceedings with potentially devastating consequences for the innocent. That is not what regulates ordinary discussion of politicians and their character.
   
  Really, the wild swings between extreme interpretations which you exhibit leave me wondering why I bother -- you don't seem to have much grip on reality, let along politics.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• No I don't have a grip on what you call reality. I'm going to bet that it's because you lack common sense, but that's just a guess. I will say that you have yet to prove any type of common sense in anything that you've said. That is a fact.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

• So now you can't tell your opinion from fact? Interesting. Do you even have a way to define the word "fact", or do you just equate it with whatever thought pops into your head? Don't forget that I've personally watched you ignore perfectly good evidence and argument many times... your basic dishonesty shows clearly.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• Hasnt there's no point in arguing with Payton, he's only a slightly more articulate form of WoG.

  • Report
  

  by ConservativelyLiberal on June 25th, 2009

• Payton is intelligent. If he were stupid, it would be easier to just shrug.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 25th, 2009

• You give him more credit than I do, I guess.

  • Report
  

  by ConservativelyLiberal on June 25th, 2009

• I was just getting you guys worked up. I hope that the are no hard feelings.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 26th, 2009

• I don't put that much of my heart into our chats. But I do admit it's frustrating and baffling. I actually want to contribute something worthwhile with my time and effort here. I realize that's hopelessly romantic and innocent and naive, but I am nevertheless committed to it. So when I encounter someone who seems to have potential, but also seems perversely committed to just twisting things for no good reason, sometimes I get more attached than is wise.
   
  You are not an idiot. I know, I've seen some of your posts on non-political topics that clearly indicate creativity and intelligence. So it does make me a little nuts that you behave like this on political topics -- with your head so far up your backside that I KNOW you can smell the crap, and yet unwilling to ever admit it. How can the world as a whole make any progress if the intelligent and creative people can't say to themselves "the truth matters to me"?

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 26th, 2009

• Oh Hasnt you take your politics far too seriously. Which is hardly a bad thing. I enjoy a good heated discussion and I love to question the standards.
  Unfortunately, you are excellent at giving a well packaged response that I could find on any left leaning blog or Political talk show. Those types of media tend to want to muddy the water and confuse the opponent in a debate. I know that you always say that it's never just black and white, but I think that exactly were we have our disagreement. Not that I think that everything is black and white, but that I think the a large majority of issues in our society are over thought. Most of the time the answer is right in front of our faces. But I digress.
  My point is (and I've said it before) that for you and Austinius to have the guts to lay your beliefs on the line knowing that someone like me will come along and ridicule them is respected by me. I just have an abrasive way of criticizing them.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 26th, 2009

• At the end of the day we are still fellow ABers.

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 26th, 2009

• At the end of the day, we are all humans -- not conservatives or liberals or radicals. It is YOU who keep dividing the landscape up like that, I never use those words to refer to myself, and in fact you're completely wrong about my views... I go after liberal silliness too. You don't see those threads just because you only see a fraction of what I post. What interests me is the truth -- I realize that there is room for honest people to disagree about the *interpretation* of the facts, but to simply ignore the facts when presented, or change the subject with "that's just liberals being jerks" is dishonest.
   
  I have absolutely no clan loyalty. I have no clan. If I see BS, I say it, regardless of which team the speaker bats for. There are liberals here who think I'm a conservative shill.
   
  This business of thinking everything is about the liberal/conservative conflict is absolute nonsense. It's about whether or not people can face the facts first, THEN root for their team... only AFTER they have studied the facts. To reject the facts because you believe the newsbearer works for the other side is utterly perverse. It represents lack of respect for the truth. Regardless of one's political leanings, every body needs to be anxious to learn the relevant facts -- digging into them, not trying to bury them.

  • Report
  

  by HasntBeen on June 26th, 2009

Comments

• http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/6914429

  • Report
  

  by Sodahead on June 25th, 2009

Comments

Comments