Is anyone shocked by ‘the Gipper’s’ quip? It explains so much trash talk

The latest bit of historical trivia to make it into the “news” – former President Ronald Reagan said something racially offensive.

REAGAN: Would he be proud of old quip?

It was back in the days when Reagan was governor of California, and when he made a telephone call to then-President Richard M. Nixon – which means it was one of many that got captured on audiotape.

SO WE KNOW that Reagan was calling to tell the president the United States ought to drop out of the United Nations. Specifically, he was upset with a U.N. vote that sided with mainland (as in Communist) China over the island of Taiwan.

Which it seems members of the Tanzania delegation began dancing about when the vote was taken in 1971 (a year before Nixon made his own visit to mainland China to try to restore relations).

And resulted in the Reagan-esque line, “to see those … monkeys from those African countries – damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes.”

To which Nixon chuckled, according to the tapes that are the source of reports in The Atlantic, which told of how the quip originally was withheld due to privacy concerns – which Reagan’s death in 2004 made a moot point.

THERE ARE THOSE acting as though this disclosure is some sort of revelation of great significance. As though we ought to be shocked and appalled that a public official could say or think anything quite so vulgar.

But let’s be honest; this was Ronald Reagan – the one-time actor who probably wishes we’d all remember him solely for playing the part of one-time Notre Dame football player George Gipp.

Remember that line about “Win one for the Gipper” that supposedly was a motivational speech to get future Fighting Irish gridiron guys to march to victory? And was one that Reagan fanatics used to like to play off of to describe their own attachment to the man?

But Reagan also is the guy who used to use the line on the California campaign trail, “A hippie is someone who looks like Tarzan, walks like Jane and smells like Cheetah.” Which was always good for a laugh amongst ideologically-inclined supporters who might then write out a campaign contribution check.

The 'trio' that made Reagan politically

WHICH CERTAINLY SOUNDS like it’s in the same spirit as claiming Africans were barefoot AND monkeys.

Heck, I suspect that if the line had become as publicly known as his “Tarzan” quip, the same people who thought that funny would have found the “Africans” line hilarious! And quick to dismiss people who are offended as being overly touchy.

Something to keep in mind whenever we’re forced to contemplate the legacy of the Reagan presidency – and the 1980s, in general.

For the real Reagan wasn’t anywhere near as polished as the cinematic image. Perhaps he should have had Robert Buckner, the writer of “Knute Rockne, All American” to script out his political life, as thoroughly as he did that film, which is recognized by the Library of Congress as a classic of American cinema.

Reagan's highlight? Or lowlight?

ALTHOUGH I MUST admit to always finding it a bit ironic that Reagan would mock “hippies” with Cheetah the chimpanzee.

Since the future president’s most prominent role as an actor was in the 1951 comedy film, “Bedtime for Bonzo,” where he was a college professor who helped to try to raise the namesake chimp with human morals.

Did Bonzo grow up to be a Republican ideologue spouting off much of the rhetorical nonsense we hear passing for political theory these days?

That would certainly explain a lot of 21^st Century trash talk!

  -30-

EXTRA: Rauner, forever bitter?

“I am very scared for the people of Illinois. I believe that the folks who put Illinois into a financial quagmire are now back in complete control of the government. The policies that have created the financial mess for the state of Illinois are now the policies that will be dominating completely without any resistance whatsoever.”
--Bruce Rauner, Illinois governor, 2015-19

  -0-

RAUNER: Still peeved about electoral loss

Bruce Rauner let it be known this week that he’s not about to take the high road politically with regards to his Election Day loss earlier this month.

While Rauner wasn’t ready (still) to say much of anything about how President Donald Trump and his presence impacted the soon-to-be-former governor politically, he’s going to forever go about trashing the Democrats whom he seems to want to believe have a whole lot of nerve for challenging him in the first place.

PERSONALLY, I’M INCLINED to view the issue as one where a whole lot of Illinois people voted the way they did to replace Rauner because they saw all his politically partisan actions as the reason why our state’s financial problems got exacerbated into a calamity of historic proportions. They were “very scared” of “four more years” of partisan-motivated nothingness within our government.

Not that the actions of Rauner should have been shocking. This was a man who campaigned back in 2014 on the idea that he wanted to undermine the influence of organized labor in our government, and that IT was to blame for not kowtowing to the self interests of business and corporate America.

Of course, considering the fact that we in Illinois have a state Legislature with leadership who are protective of working people and their interests, the activity of the past few years shouldn’t have been at all surprising.

The only real shock, if you think about it, is that Rauner (who had never before held political office) ever got elected in the first place. Although that’s most likely due to apathy felt about then-Gov. Pat Quinn, and a not-so-realistic thought that ANYBODY who replaced him would be better.

NOW, WE KNOW that we were deluded in our political apathy, and took the first chance we could get to remove Rauner – regardless of what we truly think of Gov.-elect J.B. Pritzker.

I don’t doubt that Republican partisans are peeved about the Election Day results in Illinois, although I suspect what really bothers them is the fact that back in 1994 when the GOP managed to take control of all the state constitutional offices and General Assembly, the Republican period of domination only lasted two years.

ROGERS: Not organized, just Democrats

By comparison, this modern-day Democrat domination of Illinois government lasted 12 years, became one of Democrat control for four years, and now has been restored to Democrat domination. It sounds more like political jealousy to me!

And to those people I know who have fantasies of Ronald Reagan-like resuscitation in Illinois, I say to keep in mind the words of Will Rogers, who once said, “the difference between a Republican and a Democrat is the Democrat is a cannibal they have to live off each other. While the Republicans, why they live off the Democrats." Perhaps a majority of us were tired of Rauner trying to enrich himself and his business colleagues at the expense of the rest of us.

  -30-

Short-term ‘retirement’ post turns out to be a long-term one for Jesse White

It was a couple of decades ago when Jesse White ran for election as Illinois secretary of state.

WHITE: At age 84, is he up to sixth term?

The line of logic that existed amongst his political supporters is that White had been an 18-year member of the Illinois House of Representatives from Chicago’s Near West side who then returned home to Chicago for a term as Cook County’s recorder of deeds.

AT AGE 64, sending him back to Springfield for a term as secretary of state (replacing George Ryan, who gave up the post for his now-infamous stint as governor) was sort of a reward for White.

He could finish out his political career “on top,” so to speak. Before wandering off into a retirement from a life of community and public service, while occasionally reminiscing about “what might have been” if he had made it to the major leagues with the Chicago Cubs back in the 1960s.

Shows you how little we all knew back then.

For now, 20 years later, White is about to finish his fifth four-year term as the man who runs the state government office that – most prominently – puts his name on everybody’s driver’s license. Along with a whole slew of other services that makes the local secretary of state’s office the one Illinois residents most frequently deal with in their daily lives.

HELLAND: Out to make it a prime issue

NOW, COME NOV. 6, White will be the Democratic nominee seeking a sixth term, taking on Republican Jason Helland and Libertarian Steve Dutner. Both of whom are ridiculously young, compared to White.

Dutner is a 2002 college graduate, while Helland was in high school back when White was running the recorder of deeds office.

It almost brings to my mind the old Ronald Reagan debate wisecrack, the one where he said of presidential opponent Walter Mondale, “I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

 

REAGAN: Able to beat it down against Mondale

The point being that Reagan already was 73 years old, and wasn’t about to be intimidated out of running for office just because some people would prefer he retire to memories of his days as a B-grade movie actor.

JUST AS SOME people, including Republican Helland, are trying to make age an issue in this election cycle.

They’re claiming that electing White to a sixth term is really nothing more than putting control of picking the secretary of state into the powers-that-be of the Democratic party.

They’re claiming White has every intention of retiring shortly after his re-election – thereby giving the governor the ability to hand-pick a replacement – similar to how Rauner in 2014 picked an Illinois comptroller when Judy Baar Topinka died before she could be sworn into office.

An 'alternate life' version of White … 

Of course, Republicans want to believe that all Democrats are puppets of Michael Madigan, the Illinois House speaker and state Democratic chairman whom they’re trying to demonize.

OR COULD THIS be the admission by Republicans that Bruce Rauner’s re-election dreams are little more than delusions? Which means a “Gov. J.B. Pritzker” will go along with whomever Madigan desires for the post!

Even though the real admission is that Helland is a candidate with no chance of winning secretary of state, and is merely doing service to the GOP by allowing his name to fill the ballot slot.

… if there hadn't been an 'Ernie Banks?'

Because running the Grundy County state’s attorney and a former prosecutor in Kankakee County for the post comes across as falling way short of White’s political service dating back to 1975, and his work with kids, particularly leading the Jesse White Tumblers, that goes back even further.

About the only reason people might find a negative about White is his time as a professional athlete – playing first base for Chicago Cubs minor league affiliates back in the 1960s and futilely trying to beat out Ernie Banks for his major league job. Then again, I don’t think even Chicago White Sox fans would hold that against him.

  -30-

Trump “beating” Lincoln? Well, he wasn’t ever going to take Illinois vote

How over-bloated is the ego of President Donald J. Trump? He’s the guy going around saying he’s the most popular Republican ever – even topping one of the Republican Party’s founders, Abraham Lincoln.

Besmirching the rep of Honest Abe?

Of course, the fact that Trump would say he’s bigger than Honest Abe, so to speak, is predictable. If he really wanted to engage in overbearing egomaniacal rhetoric, he’d claim he’s bigger than Reagan.

EXCEPT THAT THEN, former President Ronald W. Reagan has surviving family members who would immediately rush out to “clean his clock,” so to speak. The Lincoln family line of descendants came to an end several generations ago.

So who’s about to challenge Trump’s nonsensical claim?

For the record, Trump was basing his claim off a poll showing that amongst people inclined to vote Republican, some 90 percent think favorably of The Donald. Which could be true – a recent Gallup Organization poll of Trump’s popularity shows 88 percent of Republicans favor him.

Compared to 37 percent of people who call themselves political independents, and only 9 percent of those who are Democrats. None of this is surprising.

NOT EVEN THE fact that Trump feels compelled to bloat his political significance with this trivial tidbit. Does it really mean much that the people who voted for Trump in the first place support their action of 2016 – or that the people who didn’t want him back then still can’t stand him!

TRUMP: The Man of the Over-bloated Ego

Or that Trump is the kind of guy inclined to believe that only certain people in our society matter. Those who didn’t like Trump in the first place, the hell with them, is probably his honest attitude.

I noticed that CNN felt compelled to do a story about Trump’s claims, saying that just about every Republican who has been president in recent years has had overwhelming favorable approval ratings amongst Republican voters.

And that there is no credible polling data remaining from the 1860 and 1864 election cycles to show us just how popular Lincoln really was amongst the American people.

'Bigger than Reagan' would be a real fight

OF COURSE, CONSIDERING that the election and inauguration of Lincoln as president was so unpopular that it caused officials in 11 southern states to talk of trying to break away and create their own nation (the whole Civil War was about whether such an action was legitimate), it wouldn’t surprise me to learn the noble image of Honest Abe held in Illinois isn’t universal.

Even if Lincoln did ultimately get his image on the penny – and the five-dollar bill. What will Trump ever get; other than his name on a batch of tacky buildings that society as a whole will celebrate when the day comes that they are reduced to rubble!

Considering that many of the kinds of people who now support Trump are the ones who also are determined to look back upon the Civil War as the “War for Southern Independence,” it may well be that amongst Trump supporters, they look more favorably upon him than that of Abraham Lincoln.

Trump may be truthful, but his ridiculous claim goes a long way towards explaining just what is wrong with this Age of Trump our society is now in.

I’VE ALSO NOTICED that some people are bringing to mind that moment from 1966 when John Lennon of the Beatles said he and his co-horts were “more popular than Jesus Christ.”

Is John Lennon more popular than Trump?

Which had an element of truth if you consider many of that era were shallow enough to be more concerned with pop music than religion. Lennon’s statement wasn’t really anything to be taken as a compliment.

So the idea that Trump is more popular than Honest Abe? I suppose it’s not like he said HE’S bigger than Jesus? Although I wonder if the kind of people inclined to support Trump would forgive him for such a blasphemous thought because they’d like how the very notion would offend people of sense.

Such as those of us of Illinois, where Lincoln remains our biggest political name in U.S. history. Ah well, it’s not like Trump was ever going to get Electoral College votes out of Illinois or would be a political asset to any Republican running for office in the Land of Lincoln.

  -30-

EXTRA: Lingering since my high school days, ERA gets approval. Or is it just Illinois asserting its “blue” nature?

Politics and government from back in the days when I was a high schooler – Ronald Reagan and Harold Washington became, respectively, president and Chicago mayor. Adlai Stevenson III gave up his U.S. Senate seat and came, oh so close, to becoming Illinois governor.

Illinois history? Or state remaining solidly blue?

And people seriously quarreled over the Equal Rights Amendment, which never became a reality in large part because Illinois failed to act to ratify it.

NOW, WE ADVANCE three-and-a-half decades to the present day, where there are those who are going about saying Illinois finally got off its collective behind and voted to ratify the constitutional amendment that says a person’s right to equal treatment should not be limited by their gender.

WASHINGTON: A mayoral dream for many

For the Illinois House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to approve the amendment – making Illinois the 37^th state to do so. Get 38 states to go along, and you have a change to the U.S. Constitution!

Yet I’m not convinced that Illinois’ action means much of anything – except showing that Illinois is NOT among the states where conservative ideologues prevail on social issues.

I actually think there’s a better chance that the head cheerleader of my high school days will suddenly pop back into my life and throw herself at me, than that Illinois’ action actually means the Equal Rights Amendment is now a part of law. And yes, I realize that's a very un-ERA type of thought to have.

IT ALL COMES back to the notion that there is a time limit on considering constitutional amendments, and the issue of the ERA far exceeded that limit.

REAGAN: The far-right fantasy

Which was March 22 1979 – although Congress voted to extend it to June 30, 1982. It still failed to get the 38 states for ratification – with Illinois’ refusal to consider the measure considered by some the move that killed the ERA.

I know of some political people who, to this day, still want to blame then-Illinois House Speaker George Ryan for the ERA’s failure and think that act is more heinous than his behavior later as secretary of state and governor that got him a six-year prison term.

So I’m not sure of the significance of the 72-45 vote the Illinois House took Wednesday, with some people who might have been sympathetic to the ERA’s goals voting “no” because they considered it a pointless action.

STEVENSON: Came so close to being gov.

I KNOW THAT from my standpoint, the General Assembly had better come up with a state budget for the upcoming fiscal year – an act it has not been able to do in any of the past three years.

If the Illinois House couldn’t sign off on a budget (which does impact state government’s daily activity) before adjourning Thursday night for the summer months but managed to find time to deal with the abstraction that the ERA has become, then there are going to be those who question political priorities.

And yes, I realize that government officials are capable (or at least they’re supposed to be) of addressing multiple issues.

But anybody who’s acting as though the Illinois House made history on Wednesday, they’re living in the past. Wednesday’s vote would have been of great historic significance for Illinois had it been done back when I was a high school junior – and not at a time when I have a nephew finishing up his high school days.

SCHLAFLY: ERA opponent rolling over in grave?

PARTICULARLY SINCE THE Equal Rights Amendment is such a simple, declarative sentence that says all people ought to be treated equal – one whose approval should not have been any kind of controversy.

All that talk by critics about how it means the genders will have to share public bathrooms is just a bunch of bunk. Which remains all these years later among the most absurd argument I’ve ever heard made against an issue.

People opposing the Equal Rights Amendment back then and still today? It says more about your hang-ups in life than anything wrong with the concept itself.

  -30-

Let’s just honor everybody with statues on the Illinois capitol grounds

The “Christmas Tree bill.” It was a phrase I always particularly detested from my days back when I covered the Illinois Statehouse scene.

Do we really need Thompson ...

The term applies to a piece of legislation that gets so many people adding on their pet projects to the original idea (usually completely unrelated) – in hopes that all the other things give political support to something that might not gain political favor if it stood all on their own.

WHAT I AWAYS hated about the phrase was the cutesiness of it; as though people were trying to legitimize the idea of piling on so many unrelated items onto one bill so to force approval of something that many might detest.

But that is the reality of our government – the concept that some people feel they’re entitled to “get” something for themselves in exchange for their political votes.

If you think about it too much, it really is greedy. As well as legitimizing some fairly worthless legislation.

This was the thought that crossed my mind when I read a recent report in the State Journal-Register newspaper of Springfield – one that told of efforts to pass a bill calling for various statues to be erected on the Capitol grounds. Technically, Christmas Tree bills relate to the state budget, so this isn’t one. But it certainly shares the spirit.

... or Harold Washington along ...

THE MEASURE STARTED out with the desire by some to have a statue set up to honor the memory of one-time President Ronald Reagan. He may have lived the bulk of his life in California (and served as a governor there before moving up to the federal level).

But Reagan was born in Dixon, Ill., lived one year of his childhood in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood, and attended college in Eureka, Ill. – before leaving the Land of Lincoln for an adult life elsewhere. Let’s not forget his eventual wife, Nancy, was a Chicago native (and a student at the Francis W. Parker School in Lincoln Park).

That has the ideologues amongst us determined to shove his memory down the throat of everybody. To enhance the chance that people wouldn’t vote against it for partisan reasons, there also was a suggestion that another statue be erected to the memory of Barack Obama – the one-time state senator from Hyde Park who eventually rose to the presidency.

... to get a Statehouse tribute to Obama ...

But that’s where the piling on started.

FOR IT SEEMS that some people tried suggesting a third statue – one for James R. Thompson, the man who served as Illinois governor (14 years) longer than anybody else.

That begat thoughts of honoring one-time Illinois State Federation of Labor president Reuben Soderstrom. Others tried throwing into the mix a statue of Harold Washington – a one-time state representative who eventually became Chicago’s first black mayor.

Thus far, it seems that the weight of so much bronze and/or marble is such that it is killing off the entire concept. But the legislator sponsoring the original bill told the Springfield newspaper says it’s natural to include a few extra people in the honors if it means he can get his original intent – which is to make us think of “the Gipper” himself as an Illinois native.

... or Ronald Reagan?

Even though you could argue that Reagan left us Illinoisans behind – unlike Obama, the Hawaii native, who came to us in Illinois and Chicago to achieve his greatness. Similar to Abraham Lincoln – who came to Illinois for an adult life that achieved intense success, which is why his statue on Capitol grounds occupies a prominent place up front.

BUT YOU JUST know the idea of an Obama statue solo would offend some, while others are bothered by the idea of ANY KIND of Reagan tribute.

It reminds me of when the General Assembly some two decades ago renamed a portion of Interstate 88 in the northwestern suburbs for Ronald Reagan. To get others whose memories of Reagan are less than favorable to go along, we got the renaming of the one-time Calumet Expressway for Bishop L.H. Ford. – head of the Church of God in Christ and a man of significance in certain South Side neighborhoods.

FORD: His freeway a Reagan toll road trade

Although as I remember it, even then the Legislature passed separate bills – with all the Reagan backers expected to go along and vote for Bishop Ford as well. Our state government, hard at work!

The end result being all these years of radio traffic reports every morning talking of the latest congestion on the Bishop Ford Freeway. And at least a few wiseacres responding with, “Who?”

  -30-

T-minus 15 (days) and counting ‘til Election Day, or you can vote now

I’ve been remembering one-time Illinois state Senate President James “Pate” Philip quite a bit in recent days.

PHILIP: Would he be offended?

We’re coming up on Election Day in a couple of weeks, and the beginning of the Early Voting process actually begins Monday. Although you don’t have to even be registered yet in order to have a ballot that will count come March 20.

A THOUGHT THAT I’m sure would appall Philip. I remember a moment from the Legislature a couple of decades ago when the concept of “motor voter” (registering at a Department of Motor Vehicles bureau when you renew your driver’s license) came up.

Philip went into a diatribe about how uncomplicated it was to register (a trip to the election authority for your home county), and did we really want to have people registered to vote who couldn’t bring them to make such a trip?

I suspect the idea that people can now actually show up at an Early Voting Center without registration; but cast a ballot anyway that eventually will be counted would offend him.

Of course, much of the strategy for Republican political operatives is keeping the total number of voters down – as in only select types of people turning out to the polls. Getting more people to vote usually results in those pesky types who vote for the other political party’s candidates.

Can this cast of characters ...

ONE CAN ARGUE that increasing the number of people who are properly registered to vote benefits society as a whole. Getting people interested in the political process and seeing that it’s their voice in the eventual electoral outcome is a plus.

Then again, public concern usually isn’t the top concern of political people. Even though many operatives describe what they do for a living is “doing the peoples’ business.”

I wonder if they’d be offended by the circumstances of my own extended family.

... motivate people to want ...

I have a nephew, Tyler, who just turned 18 a couple of weeks ago. Yes, he expressed some interest in how to go about registering to vote.

BUT IN THE end, it took my own father’s nagging to get my nephew to sit down at a computer long enough to go through the Illinois State Board of Elections website and fill out a registration form on-line.

... to vote in the next two weeks?

Is it going to take a similar effort to get him to turn out to the polling place in a couple of weeks? Or is there something special about the prospect of political characters such as Bruce Rauner, J.B. Pritzker, a Kennedy of our own or a possible political comeback for Pat Quinn that would stir up interest for his first election cycle.

I know in my case, the “first” election cycle was 1984 – the one in which incumbent Ronald Reagan cleaned Walter Mondale’s “clock” in his re-election bid.

And yes, to this day I take a certain perverse bit of pride in not being amongst those who wanted “four more years” of “the Gipper” himself.

REAGAN: An election 'first' all those yrs ago

AS FOR MYSELF, I’m most likely going to take advantage of Early Voting this week (for professional reasons, it makes the reporter-type person in me more free to work on Election Day if I don’t have to set aside time on March 20 to go to a polling place).

Although I have to admit to not being fully sure yet who I’m going to vote for in the primaries for governor, attorney general or any of the other state, federal or county government posts that are up for grabs this time around.

Yes, I got the text message on Friday from “Team JB,” asking me if they could count on my vote for Pritzker and lieutenant governor running mate Juliana Stratton.

I haven’t ruled it out. But then again, about the only person I’ve ruled out is Robert Marshall. Anybody who wants to run for governor, then break the state up into multiple pieces, isn’t worthy of anyone’s vote.

  -30-

EXTRA: Who uninvited whom?

I see where President Donald J. Trump says he won't show up this spring at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner, a traditional event in which the presidential press corps winds up interacting for the evening with the president himself, and other top politicos.

Could Alec Baldwin fill in for Trump at correspondents' dinner

The event has taken place for nearly a century. Yet celebrity has added a tinge in the past decade or two -- entertainers like to show that they're also a part of the political scene and use the event to be seen in D.C.

NOT THIS YEAR, though. Trump says he's not going. But many people have said they were likely to skip out because they didn't want to be seen with the Trumpster.

Which is why I really wonder if this is a case of Trump publicly saying he's not showing up -- before anyone could publicly make it known that his presence at the event wasn't particularly desired.

For what it's worth, money raised by the annual event does go toward a college scholarship fund, which is always the noble rhetoric spewed by participants as to why they feel compelled to show up and suck up to each other.

As for those people who go out of their way to deride the event and lambast it as the "nerd prom," I'd have to say they always come across as pathetic losers themselves. Perhaps they're just jealous they weren't able to warrant an invitation for themselves?

IT WILL BE interesting to see if the event continues to take place even without a president present (the last time a president didn't show up was the year that Ronald Reagan couldn't be there because he was still recovering from gunshot wounds).

It might be all the more better if it becomes something where the segment of society that couldn't bring itself to back Trump (the 54 percent) celebrates its opposition. I'm sure it would massively irritate Trump if an impersonator (perhaps actor Alec Baldwin?) fill in for him.

Considering how much of a publicity hound Trump is at heart, I suspect that if the party takes place without him, he'll wind up feeling neglected and ultimately wishing he had been present!

  -30-

65,844,610 – More than just Chicago will miss what we’re losing Friday

The day upon which Barack Obama departs our federal government's employ and becomes just another private citizen has finally arrived.
 

A Chicago bye-bye to Barack Obama

It’s Inauguration Day in the District of Columbia and we transition into the presidency of Donald J. Trump, which has the potential to undermine the eight years of the possibility of “hope” and “change” that many of us voted for back in 2008.

BUT WITH THE quirks of the Electoral College, the 62 million-plus people who wanted Trump in office actually outweighed the 65 million-plus who preferred the thought of “President Hillary Clinton,” let alone the other few million who went for a Libertarian or Green party person – or perhaps some other stray name that appeared on the ballot in certain states.

Not that I’m turning this into a diatribe against the nitwits who stuck our nation with the egomaniacal Trump as its leader. I’m sure I’ll have plenty of reasons to write such commentary in the future.

Because this would be a sad day on Friday even if it was the chance to transition into a presidential administration that did not see its mission as to undo what little was accomplished (largely due to strident GOP opposition) during the Obama years.

The past eight years have been unique from the perspective of Illinois and Chicago because there was that sense of one of our hometown people was actually in a position of authority.

SOMEONE WHO WASN’T going to use our city to score cheap partisan political points for himself.

 

A "President Hillary" wouldn't be the same

Which may be the most offensive aspect of a Trump administration – he’s already taken enough cheap shots at Chicago to last a four-year presidential term; and he hasn’t even started that term yet!

We’re no longer going to have someone in office who comprehends the sense of neighborhood that makes up Chicago, or who realizes that there is a Chicago beyond the tourist traps along Michigan Avenue.

Potential to be "President Pot-shot?"

If anything, I’m sure there are those who found the fact of a Chicago president who settled into the South Side of the city was a unique touch. Living in that Hyde Park home, which actually is just across the neighborhood boundary in Kenwood. Not that most people ever noticed.

EVEN IF WE were transitioning from an Obama administration to a Clinton presidency, it would not be quite the same local touch. Even though Hillary herself would have been the first Chicago-born U.S. president who was raised in suburban Park Ridge.

Unlike any first lady because she WAS Chi!

For she left us for the east coast to attend college, then Arkansas to follow husband Bill through his own political aspirations. She became of elsewhere.

Just like Ronald Reagan, who some like to try to claim for purely partisan reasons as one of our own because he was born here and attended a local college, even though he left us for an adult life in California and never returned. The fact that spouse Nancy Reagan was a Chicagoan as a child added little to his understanding of our city.

For Ronald was the guy who gave us the “welfare queen” in the form of a Chicago woman, Linda Taylor, who managed to collect benefits while driving around in a Cadillac and had expensive jewelry and furs. Trying to claim that all welfare recipients were the same!

WE’RE COMING UP on the four-year anniversary of the death of 15-year-old Hadiya Pendleton; shot to death by a stray bullet fired in the Kenwood neighborhood. First Lady Michelle Obama was the one who famously said of the girl who lost her chance to have a significant life, “Hadiya Pendleton was me and I was her.”

 

Created the "welfare queen," can Trump top that?

Can anyone envision Trump or anyone in his circle identifying with Chicago, or anything significantly urban? Particularly Trump himself, whose own idea of Noo Yawk life is seen from that 69^th floor penthouse he lives in when not spending time at his gaudy Palm Beach, Fla., mansion.

This is a day of note because I do remember Obama from his earliest days in the Illinois Legislature, and I suspect none of the other local clowns whom I’ve written about throughout the years will have the ambition or talent to seek the presidency.

Friday is a day of loss for Chicago, and even a “President Trump” will come to realize that. Who's he going to blame for the next homicide in Chicago without Obama around when he makes the next of his Tweets from a twit!

  -30-

It’s Presidents Day; and many of us seem eager to dump all over the office

I don’t know what to think of the fact that Monday is a federal government holiday where we’re supposed to honor the concept of the U.S. presidency, yet most of us seem more interested in showing nothing but contempt.

OBAMA: Most hated since Clinton, or Lincoln?

That is the impression I gained during the weekend when it seemed that most people were interested in nothing more than dumping their ideological hang-ups onto the office we once used to seriously refer to as the “Leader of the Free World.”

BARACK OBAMA IS in a position these days where he is supposed to fulfill one of his constitutional obligations – picking a new member of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Yet the conservative ideologues are going on and on about how Obama has no business even thinking of trying to fill the post. The Senate’s Republican leader let it be known he’s prepared to ignore the issue – which is important because the Senate has to confirm any appointment the president tries to make.

And when Obama on Saturday said he plans to make an appointment no matter what anyone else says, there are those who put the spin on this act that Obama is the one who’s provoking a dispute with the United States Senate.

Of course, I’m sure there are those who are going to argue that the actions of former President George W. Bush came under similar contempt from his ideological opponents.

THERE ALSO ARE those who think that the image of Ronald Reagan deserves something close to deification, and are quick to lambast anyone who dares give “the Gipper” anything less than complete admiration.

REAGAN: Hating on haters?

We’re a long way from thinking of the White House occupant as someone worthy of respect. Heck, the only thing I’m sure about with regards to the 2016 presidential election cycle is that regardless of who actually wins, there are going to be some seriously peeved people in this country.

And if the cheap threats bear any truth, there are going to be many fewer residents of this country come 2017. The only real question is, “Where would they move to?”

BUSH: Fans were Obama critics

Our politically partisan nature has become so intense that we just can’t think of any of the recent occupants of the presidency as being the holders of the same post once occupied by Abraham Lincoln.

LINCOLN: One of few worth remembering

WHOM I REALIZE came under hostile rhetoric during his own lifetime, and only became worshipped so intensely because of the circumstances of his death. How long until someone someday says something should be put into writing specifying that President’s Day does not include any recognition of Barack Obama – that’s the direction we’re headed in as a society.

So I really don’t think anyone is enjoying their day off from work or school (or more likely having to work anyway while also agonizing about what to do with the kids whom they have to arrange day care for because they’re not in school) and giving any serious thoughts as to our president.

Or probably not even remembering a past presidential figure.

If anything, there’s the chance that most people are thinking that this holiday is the one that came the day after the holiday that really concerned them – Valentine’s Day.

The 'true' meaning of President's Day

OR MAYBE THEY’RE the types who will see Monday as an excuse to buy a sale-priced mattress or dresser, or maybe take advantage of loan rates from a credit union advertised in the Chicago Sun-Times as, “some of the lowest in the nation.”

If anything, that may be the true meaning of President’s Day. Unless you happen to be like me – a freelance writer whose paychecks are sent to me through the U.S. mail and are timed to arrive at the week’s beginning.

And since this is a federal holiday, there is no U.S. mail delivery on Monday. So my potential payday gets pushed back a day to Tuesday – unless the postal service gets a little slow and I have to wait a day or two longer.

Somehow, getting paid late seems like all-to-appropriate way to commemorate the presidential post.

  -30-