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-

Who’s more absurd, Trump or Rahm?

Both men are political people who have developed reputations for being the kind of guys who expect to be able to bark out orders – and have them followed.

EMANUEL: Wants Smollett to pay up -- or else

Both Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel like to think they’re tough guys who can stand up to anybody on any situation – and ultimately see their viewpoints prevail. Yet I’ve been wondering of late which one is capable of taking an issue most out of line with any reasonable approach to thought.

I’D LIKE TO think it is our un-illustrious president – who throughout his time in office has always been willing to pander to his ideologue nitwits and their irrational hang-ups with regards to anything related to Mexico.

Yet after listening to our soon-to-be former mayor, I can’t help but think it’s a good thing the man has only about a month left on his term, with replacement Lori Lightfoot lined up to take over the reins of city government come May.

Because Rahm is behaving like he’s in desperate need of a vacation. Eight years at the helm of Chicago city government means he needs a rest.

I’m sure some will be grossly offended that I’d think of Emanuel’s behavior as being as absurdly over-the-top as anything that Trump has done during his two-plus years as president. But it does seem to be that way.

TRUMP: Continues his Mexico rants

FOR IT SEEMS that Jussie Smollett, the television actor who had criminal charges against him dropped for an incident that police contend was an effort to stage a crime, really has got under Emanuel’s skin.

Emanuel claims he wants the actor to repay Chicago some $130,000 – to recoup the costs to the Police Department for what they say was the false investigation report he filed when he claimed he was attacked, taunted, and even had a noose placed around his neck.

Smollett, of course, has insisted all throughout that he did nothing wrong and really was a crime victim. This week, he formally rejected Emanuel’s request to repay the city anything. Still insisting he’s innocent.

Emanuel is now threatening the formality of a lawsuit by Chicago against the actor – with other city officials saying they’d like to see Chicago refuse to provide tax credits to benefit any cinematic or television production that employs Smollett.

O'CONNOR: Tell Trump and Emanuel to stifle

I CAN’T HELP but think of such behavior as Trumpian in nature. It either is pure theater that would show Emanuel’s sense of drama to make him even more skilled than Smollett.

Or else Emanuel truly is delusional if he thinks there are any conditions under which Smollett would ever repay a single cent to Chicago.

Because for whatever reason, the Cook County state’s attorney’s office dismissed the charges. Whether it’s because the police or prosecutors screwed up some procedural move that would make it impossible to get a criminal conviction that would stand up, the case is over. It would be better off to let it go – enough damage has been done to Smollett’s reputation. He’s permanently tainted.

JACKSON: Trump's cinematic alter ego?

But Emanuel has got that streak of Trump in him – he can’t let it go. Just like Trump with his recent line of thoughts saying he wants to close down access to the United States through the Mexican border.

TRUMP THIS WEEK had to realize that such an action was irrational and impossible to enforce. He’d be better off following the advice of Carroll O’Connor’s old “Archie Bunker” character and “stifling” himself.

SMOLLETT: Could Jules get him to pay up?

Instead, he’s trying to offer up rhetoric implying he’s making a concession – he’s giving Mexico one year to clean up its act, so to speak. Or else he’ll crack down on them with tariffs on Mexico-produced automobiles. Or maybe he'll shut down the border anyways -- unless he does something truly vile such as forcing Mexican people to eat what Taco Bell offers up as food!

It almost makes me think he thinks he’s the Samuel L. Jackson's "Jules" character from "Pulp Fiction," going into his diatribe about "striking down with great vengeance and furious anger," before killing someone.

Of course, I also suspect that both men would take such a comparison between themselves as the lowest-form of insult. All the more reason we’ll be better off when Trump follows Rahm into the ranks of former government officials.

  -30-

Getting in the ‘last’ word

MADIGAN: Still Mr. Speaker

It will be intriguing to see if soon-to-be former Gov. Bruce Rauner manages to figure out a way to take one final pot shot at Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, before he departs his role come Monday.

For it was quite obvious that Rauner is going to forevermore think that Madigan was the one who spoiled any chance that he could be successful during the one term he got to be Illinois government’s chief executive.

RAUNER: Soon to ride off into sunset

OF COURSE, MADIGAN seems equally determined to think ill of “The Rauner Years” and just how little managed to be accomplished in our state between 2015-18.

For what it’s worth, Rauner engaged in his final official public act as governor by giving a speech summarizing what he thinks he accomplished for Illinois during his gubernatorial term. While also using other moments to make comments that clearly can be interpreted as political pot shots.

The recent criminal complaint filed against long-time Chicago Alderman Edward M. Burke is “long overdue,” with Rauner insisting that Burke is not alone.

“I’m ecstatic they finally indicted him,” Rauner said, even though they didn’t really. “There are others that do the same, and worse. They haven’t been indicted yet. I hope they are.”

BURKE: Rauner pleased w/ predicament

AFTER GOING THROUGH four years of governing and a campaign cycle of constant complaints claiming that Madigan himself is worthy of criminal charges because he would not meekly cooperate with all of Rauner’s anti-organized labor initiatives, it’s disappointing to see that he’s determined to go down to defeat with the same stubborn attitude.

Not that Madigan will meekly let such rhetoric go by without a vociferous response. He used the beginning of the newly-elected General Assembly’s session to dismiss Rauner’s gubernatorial term as one of, “four long years of character assassination, personal vilification and strident negotiation positions.”

PRITZKER: Favorable Lege

He also said he sees the coming of a new Legislature (one with majorities large enough in both chambers for Democrats to overrule the governor’s veto power) as being the chance for government to learn from the errors of its ways.

Or, as Madigan put it, let’s, “take lessons, so we can move on to a new chapter where people work with people.” Rather than thinking they can impose their will on ever-so-many issues upon the masses.

WHICH MEANS THAT Madigan is figuring the truth in the old cliché, “history is written by the winners.” He gets to be the noble creature who fought off the potential tyranny of “The Rauner Years.” Anybody who tries to defend Bruce is going to find themselves seriously diminished – if not outright ridiculed.

It will work, mostly because many of us just won’t care to hear from Rauner any longer. We’d just as soon see him fade off into the sunset.

Which he’ll do as of Monday at Noon. We’ll be more focused on the future success of incoming Gov. J.B, Pritzker – who will have the advantage of a sympathetic Legislature that will have an interest in seeing the governor succeed in overcoming the problems of the state.

Many of which were exasperated by that two-plus year time period during which our state government was on hold because of a lack of a budget – which Rauner tried to defend as being a worthy hit for the state to take if some of his anti-union initiatives could become reality in Illinois.

MOST OF US just remember it as a political headache that made us all seem stupid – similar to how the current federal government shutdown motivated by a partisan battle over immigration policy and border security measures is threatening to make the nation look equally ridiculous.

STAVA-MURRAY: Lone vote of 'present'

It may well be that the national Democrats will take their lead from Madigan when it comes to dealing with Trump. There is a majority of our nation that would love to see the current president fade away in as much ignominy as the current governor.

But then again, there will be those who will turn to new state Rep. Anne Stava-Murray, D-Naperville, who insisted on voting “present” instead of “yes” for Madigan to once again be the Illinois House speaker. She was amongst the few who were swayed by all that anti-Madigan trash talk of campaign seasons past.

So who gets the last word? No matter whether it’s Rauner or Madigan, there’s bound to be somebody more than willing to respond, “bull----!”

  -30-

With all these felons in Trump entourage, it’s ESPN that’s at fault

Years from now, when we look back at this Age of Trump and try to comprehend just how nonsensical the era was, this week has the potential to be the height of ludicrousness.

TRUMP: Evading reality?

Particularly Tuesday, which was the day that former campaign chair Paul Manafort was found guilty of eight criminal offenses, while former attorney Michael Cohen avoided going to trial by pleading guilty to several offenses. Many political observers are going so far as to call it the “worst day” of the Trump presidency.

SO JUST HOW does Donald J. Trump respond to all of this?

He ventures down to West Virginia to speak to the partisans, and engages in a rant against ESPN – the cable television sports channel that winds up accounting for a significant part of one’s cable TV bill.

Specifically, Trump complained about how the channel – which these days has the Monday Night Football national broadcast rights – is refusing to include the playing of the National Anthem as part of the game broadcast. It is ESPN’s way of not drawing attention to those football players who try to protest their causes during the anthem’s playing.

They’re taking the same attitude we used to take back in my police reporter days when it came to writing about crime involving street gangs – we tried to pretend they didn’t exist on the grounds we didn’t want to glorify the gangbangers.

MANAFORT: Eight convictions

TRUMP APPARENTLY WANTS the anthem played, and every protesting football player caught on camera. Perhaps he thinks there can be a “hit list” of sorts against athletes who try to express their thoughts on issues.

ESPN’s attempt to downplay the issue bothers Trump because it is the very phony issue that he’s been trying to play up – largely because it gives him something to complain about rather than have to acknowledge the serious issues confronting our society.

Such as the growing number of Trump-types who are finding themselves in legal trouble and, particularly in the case of Cohen, could find themselves having to testify someday against the “Big” man himself – the one whose many critics deride him as “the big Cheetoh” on account of that ridiculous fake tan he has.

COHEN: Pleaded guilty to avoid trial

Complaining about ESPN and professional football is so much easier than having to acknowledge all the things going wrong on his watch.

NOW I KNOW some are going to want to point out that Manafort actually was not found guilty of many of the charges he faced, as though that works in his favor. The reality, however, is that all it takes is one “guilty” verdict for the “convict” label to apply. I also heard one legal observer explain that in cases where there is potential for a “hung” jury on certain counts, juries can be persuaded to go for the guilty verdict on some issues, and let everything else up in the air.

Which for the prosecutors who are trying to build up a conviction rate, that works well enough. Manafort is going to go into the history books as a corrupt government official just as much as any other political person who wound up being found guilty.

But Trump? He’ll continue to evade responsibility, acting as though it’s irrelevant.

Which will be made possible by the number of Trump supporters determined to believe in him – largely because they like being able to offend the sensibilities of those people who back in 2016 cast their ballots for having a responsible government in place.

HECK, IN WEST Virginia on Tuesday, there were Trump backers engaging in a “Lock her up!” chant – bringing back memories of the ’16 campaign rhetoric of how a “President Trump” would have opponent Hillary Clinton incarcerated.

Trump thinks the problem lies here

Rather ironic they’d chant that on a day when it’s the Trump allies who literally face a stint in the federal Bureau of Prisons.

But I’m also sure the people making the chants don’t have a clue what it was that Manafort or Cohen have done. They probably think that such details are “Boring!” and that paying attention to them is what is wrong with our government these days.

I understand that some people are just lacking in interest, and that they have a right to be that way. But the fact we have such people, and enough of them to elect a chief executive, IS the reason we are in this Age of Trump, and why it will get even uglier before it’s all over.

  -30-

Korean summit? It’s all about the ‘spin’

U.S. and Korean leaders will try to talk...

Assuming someone doesn’t say or do something stupid in the next few hours that causes somebody to go storming out of the room and bringing the summit between the United States and North Korea to an end – this is the week that the two sides will talk.

The nations that were at war back in the early 1950s and which ended in a stalemate that for decades has created the potential for the shooting to start up again are going to have their leaders try to talk out their differences.

... about peaceful relations in coming days

WHAT WILL COME out of all this? Who’s to say!

If anything, it doesn’t matter one iota what is actually done or said by officials of either side.

This truly will be an event about the political spin. Both sides are going to be looking for some sort of occurrence that they can distort into a story putting themselves in the best light.

When it comes to the officials from North Korea, I’m sure they want something to happen that they can claim to be the end of the war – with the North prevailing. It won’t matter that nothing will actually change. They want to be able to say they defeated the attempt of capitalism and Western imperialism to chase them out of power.

AND IF NOTHING truly occurs along those lines, they’ll want to be able to say it does.

Meanwhile, U.S. officials have their own agenda going into this gathering (which will take place in the early hours of Tuesday – our time). It may be over and done by the time we wake up Tuesday morning.

Or maybe the sides will talk late into the night (which will be about lunchtime, our time, on Tuesday)?

Remember how the 'Laverne & Shirley' stars both used to claim top billing because of how their names were positioned? This weekend will be filled with lots of equally ridiculous rhetoric by both Trump and Kim

What President Donald Trump wants to gain out of all this is something that he will be able to spin into stories of what a high-and-mighty, all-powerful negotiator he truly is.

TRUMP WANTS US to think that he’s the guy who was able to sit down face-to-face with North Korea leader Kim Jong-Un and knuckle under to his almighty aura.

On the surface, Trump says he wants to get North Korea officials to abandon the arsenal they have built up throughout the years of nuclear weapons – which, quite frankly, are the only reason anybody pays attention to the impoverished Asian nation whose attempt at Communism is so isolationist that there’s really no reason any other part of the world would want to be bothered with it.

Yes, it really is about his ego and that Nobel Prize – he will forevermore be bitter that his predecessor, Barack Obama, received the prize for his efforts to try to bring peace to the Middle East. I’m sure if it were possible, Trump would order the prize’s revocation from Obama.

Since that’s not possible, he’s out to get his own. His backers already are proclaiming him the man who “ended” the Korean War, and I’m sure the ideologues here will be more than willing to distort whatever actually happens into a story that backs their pre-summit rhetoric.

IN ALL HONESTY, I’m skeptical that anything of significance will happen as a result of the talks taking place in Singapore in coming days. Even Trump himself has made statements warning that long-term change will take years to achieve.

The kind of image Trump dreams he can make a part of the past in Pyongyang

Meaning we can’t proclaim him the ultimate failure if nothing has changed by Friday. Although nothing will stop the smarty-pants-types amongst us from pondering which of the two world leaders has the most ridiculous hairstyle.

This week’s activity is about talk. And talk is good. It’s better than isolationism keeping the sides apart to the point where our ignorance of each other results in somebody doing something stupid (always risky when nuclear warheads are involved).

And if it really is nothing but talk, I can’t help but remember the old cliché; “Talk is cheap!”

  -30-

EXTRA: Oh, be quiet; both of you!

Comedian/actor Roseanne Barr says her use of Ambien means she she shouldn’t be blamed for any thoughts she expressed while using Twitter – not even any nincompoop ideas about one-time Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett and a certain movie.

BARR: Claims she was overly-medicated

While President Donald J. Trump continues to insist during a rally in Nashville, Tenn., that Mexico WILL PAY the cost of erecting that physical barricade he wants built along the U.S./Mexico border – even though it wouldn’t accomplish a thing toward reducing the flow of people into the United States of the kind that the nativist element considers to be undesirable.

TRUMP: What's his excuse?

IT MAKES ME wonder which one qualifies as the Nitwit of the Week for this final week of May, 2018.

One could argue it is the president because he continues to harp on this issue and make his same rant – even though it doesn’t become any more accurate no matter how often or how loudly he shouts it out!

But I’m willing to give the “honor” to Roseanne, because she’s the woman who on Tuesday told us she was through with Twitter because of the controversy that has arisen and that may have permanently ruined her reputation (which wasn’t really all that stellar to begin with).

Yet I’ve lost count of the number of Tweets she has spewed since supposedly silencing herself – including the comment about blaming Ambien for her ignorance. It seems some people just don’t know how to just shut up, which is what the real majority of our society would prefer.

  -30-

Posting pictures at United Center entrances -- how else to ban them?

Chicago Blackhawks officials say four fans of the hockey team are now banned from the United Center for life because of their behavior at a weekend game against the Washington Capitals.

You know, the four who insisted on shouting racially-motivated taunts at a black Capitals player during his time in the penalty box!

THE BLACKHAWKS HAVE made all the appropriate statements how they’re appalled that any of their fans could have such horrid thoughts. A lot of people are engaging in verbiage meant to make themselves sound appropriately concerned.

Yet the truth is I don’t have a clue how you can possibly do anything to enforce this; unless you can find a way to put a Scarlet Letter, of sorts, on all the racist knuckleheads of our society.

Many of whom, if you branded them with a “K” (or a “B” for bigot) would probably take it as a badge of honor – that’s how twisted their thought processes are.

I don’t have a clue how the Blackhawks can say they’re banning four individuals from the stadium and their games. Do we literally post their pictures at the stadium entrance – with orders that the quartet be shot on sight if they try to attend a game.

DO WE EXTEND it to all the ticket services that none of the four ever be sold tickets to a Blackhawks game?

Maybe we should ban them from even following hockey games or teams? Although I don’t have a clue how this could be enforced.

Many people have gone out of their way to say the proper things, but I’m not convinced there’s going to be any serious change in attitudes or behavior.

Because a part of me believes that many sports fans are serious believers of Homer J. Simpson when he once said, “This ticket (to a ballgame) doesn’t just give me a seat. It also gives me the right, no the duty, to make a complete ass of myself.”

WHICH THOSE FOUR fans now banned from the hockey arena certainly did on Saturday when they insisted on implying that a black player doesn’t belong in hockey.

What I find almost humorous (but in a pathetic way) is the marketing campaign the National Hockey League has ongoing these days – “Hockey is for Everyone,” which is supposed to make the sport out to be something for all, and not just for white people from Canada.

In fact, the Blackhawks had a promotion based on the theme during their Thursday match against the Anaheim Ducks. It seems the message of a “safe, positive and inclusive environment for players and families regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation and socio-economic status” didn’t take.

Because just two days later, the incident singling out Devante Smith-Pelly occurred. Although the Blackhawks’ lone black player, Anthony Duclair, said those four fans’ bad behavior wasn’t in any way unique, or isolated.

I’M SURE THOSE four fans, along with many others, are prepared to dismiss the whole affair as a lot of ‘politically correct’ trash talk about nothing. There probably isn’t anything that can be done to change such attitudes, or convince them of how big of knuckleheads they truly are.

Now I’ll admit to not being much of a hockey fan (although I appreciate the significance to the Chicago sports scene of a team that has three Stanley Cup championships in this decade). Part of it is that I have never ice-skated – and floor hockey is a second-rate game that filled up some childhood gym class time.

I’m sure that is true for many others – particularly in parts of the country where the existence of ice and snow is considered a myth.

Which means we’re likely to see more continued bad behavior – and most likely the instances of the four banished from the United Center finding a way to sneak into a Blackhawks game; while taking a perverse pride in being able to do so.

  -30-

Should “Happy Hanukkah” be used as weapon against those who assault us with hostile holiday greetings?

Whenever I encounter one of those types of people who insists on using “Merry Christmas!” as a form of cultural intimidation, there’s a part of me that is tempted to turn to my step-mother for a retort.

Chicago's public menorah from five years ago can create split reactions, regardless of its actual intent. Photos by Gregory Tejeda

As in every “Merry Christmas” I hear coming from someone who is inclined to take Donald Trump’s “War on Christmas” rants seriously, I’d respond with a fake cheery “Happy Hanukkah!”

I DON’T ACTUALLY do that in part because it strikes me as tacky to use my step-mother’s religious faith to score political partisan points against the nitwits of our society. It would make me no better than those who want to use “Merry Christmas” as a weapon.

I bring this up because the Jewish holiday of Hanukkah actually began Tuesday night and will continue into next week.

And with my step-mother being Jewish (my father is a late-life convert), it means the time of year to recall the survival of the Maccabees in the face of elements of society that would just as soon have seen them exterminated is once again upon us.

Now in my own family, the little kids are growing up. So there’s not as much pressure any more to indulge my nieces and nephews with lots of presents so that they don’t feel cheated compared to their school friends for whom Christmas is the thing!

Do people notice holiday decorations when passing through the airport en route to a sunnier locale?

IN FACT, IN my parents’ household, most of the eight days will be marked with the lighting of the candles, a prayer in Hebrew, and little else.

There will be one night of various relatives coming over to the household for something of a party – whose primary purpose it will seem like is consuming the potato pancakes referred to as latkes.

Gary, Ind., govt. brightens their chambers

Much of this, I’ll admit, is lost on me. I was baptized many decades ago by a Catholic priest and personally haven’t felt any need to change.

But that isn’t held against me. I’m likely to be included in any celebration as we recall the old story of how a Godly miracle enabled the Maccabees’ oil intended to last one night actually kept their lamps lit for eight nights.

THE REASON WHY the menorahs include eight branches in their candelabrums – and why a fully-lit menorah has the potential to be a fire hazard if the celebrants get too clumsy.

All of which has just enough of a solemn effect on me to refuse to use “Happy Hanukkah” as a retort to the less-than-solemn “Merry Christmas” talk I have heard in recent days. I’d like to think I’m better than those people who want to turn the Christmas holiday and the birth of Christ that it celebrates into a weapon touting the omnipresent existence of Trump that they’d like to impose on our society.

Because I know it would be the perfect retort in that it would force those ideologues whose use of religious symbolism to tout their beliefs borders on being as offensive as the Ku Klux Klan’s uses of the cross to tout their own racist rants to have to acknowledge that theirs is NOT the only holiday in this winter season.

While I’ll be the first to admit that some of the efforts to equate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa (don’t forget the “aa” at the end) and whatever other festival one can dream up do become absurd, I’ve never felt the need to tout my own thoughts over everybody else’s.

LARGELY BECAUSE I have viewed much of religious-inspired thought as a personal one. It is something we ought to be celebrating internally.

There’s nothing wrong with sharing. But feeling the need to force one’s thoughts or celebration on others just seems wrong.

Just as it can be confusing at times when someone feels the need to say “Merry Christmas” to every single person they encounter. Are they just overly cheerful? Or are they making a politically-partisan statement that requires a retort?

Quite honestly, I resent having to try to interpret every holiday greeting to figure out if the call for sharing and celebration is more intended as an excuse to act as society’s religious-motivated bullies.

  -30-

‘Politicking’ police officers? Or just self-expression in an era of confusion?

The Chicago Police Department claims its policy is that patrol officers aren’t supposed to make political statements or take such actions while in uniform – which theoretically prevents them from taking on viewpoints that could be misconstrued as the official stance of the city.

First came the "support"

Which is why three officers in two separate incidents are now facing discipline – reprimands and, for one officer, a reassignment to new duties – because of pictures of themselves showing them engaging in actions that express controversial stances.

OF COURSE, THESE officers manage to cancel each other’s views out, since all were getting involved in the ongoing debate over the appropriateness of professional athletes to use National Anthem rituals at the stadium to express their own views on social issues.

In one case, two officers appeared in a photograph on Instagram with clenched fists and down on a knee, along with an activist who was expressing the view that the athletes were taking a just cause – in support of those who are concerned about police abuse of people based on race.

The Chicago Sun-Times managed to dredge up that photograph, and wound up making it a full-color, front-page cover for the newspaper last week.

Then, came the opposition

Which got the police department upset to the point where they said the two officers would face official reprimands – the kind of thing that gets written up and put in their personnel files. Which means the incident could come up again and be used against the officers under certain circumstances.

ALTHOUGH ODDLY ENOUGH, Mayor Rahm Emanuel said he was not upset about the image of uniformed police officers, both of whom are black, showing support for the activists on this issue. The mayor went so far as to say he hopes the idea of police officers supporting the cause means something is shifting in Chicago’s mindset, something for the better.

EMANUEL: First officers a 'plus' for Chicago image?

But if that was the hope, another incident came forth when officials learned of another officer who had posted a picture of himself where his intent was to show opposition to these types of activists – and support for the efforts of President Donald J. Trump whose rancid rhetoric on this issue is what has triggered the whole debate to begin with.

That photograph shows the uniformed officer waving a U.S. flag while standing in front of his police-marked SUV, with a sign in front of him reading, “I stand for the anthem. I love the American flag. I support my president and the 2^nd Amendment.”

Which, by the way, is the one often interpreted by social conservatives as giving them the right to carry whatever types of firearms they desire.

ASSOCIATED PRESS REPORTED that the officer in question, who is white, worked the past four years assigned to a high school, and also found students at that school who said the officer in question was a positive presence around the campus who often had helped avert trouble from occurring.

Which could mean he’s a good guy. Or maybe just that he’s in an environment where the masses are inclined to believe the protesters are the trouble-makers.

In short, where one comes down on these issues is going to depend on where one stands on many other social issues, particularly that of how concerned they are about the potential for police abuse of other individuals based on race.

I’m sure the Chicago Police Department would prefer it if none of this were to come up in public discussion. They’d rather not have an issue to deal with at all.

THE DEPARTMENT’S INTERNAL Affairs division is reviewing all the incidents, although there is a sense that the latter officer will get disciplined because of the need to create a perception that they’re not overly-harsh on the former officers.

TRUMP: All started with his trash talk

Which I’m sure there are others who will toss out the “politically correct” rant and claim that the latter officer is unfairly being tarred and feathered. Because they want to agree with him – no matter how much his stance (which was more reactionary and meant to hurt others) offends a segment of our society.

Much of the problem lies within the idea of a policy that our police are neutral. The reality is that it is near-impossible to stay out of issues – often, doing nothing winds up being an expression of content with the status quo.

And in a case where the status quo is questionable, perhaps the only just thing is to merely admit where you stand on the issue. Which is what these three officers managed to do; regardless of how some of us would rather not hear anything about it at all.

  -30-

How much is really gained from having public participation during govt mtgs?

The City Council in Chicago began Wednesday to permit public comment during its meetings, which really shouldn’t be a big deal.
 

Hot air emanates from da Hall, although not from pols

Illinois law actually requires municipal entities to set aside a portion of their meeting time to allow people to make statements about what their officials are doing. So the City Council really is just complying with the law.

IN FACT, AS reported by the Chicago Tribune, the City Council’s action was motivated by the courts – a lawsuit was filed and a judge issued an order requiring Chicago to permit some sort of public comment.

But as I have learned in writing about other government entities where public comment questions arose, Illinois law actually does not dictate what form the public comment must take.

Government entities are allowed to set their own rules.

I know that in my years as a reporter-type person, I have covered entities that strictly limited people to 3 minutes of talk and only on issues that were already on the council’s agenda. No trying to bring up anything else that might be of public concern, but that officials didn't want to discuss.

OTHERS HAVE PERMITTED people to bring up issues not on the council agenda, but usually in a portion of the meeting held at the end once all the actual business is complete and public officials are feeling antsy and are more interested in adjourning so they can go home.

I also know of one entity that requires people to submit their questions in writing, so that theoretically city officials can have their attorneys review them so that a proper answer can be provided. Although they’re not always rigid in enforcing that.

In Chicago, it seems the significant rule (as evidenced by Wednesday’s conduct) is that up to 30 minutes will be provided for public comment – with individuals allowed up to 3 minutes each.

If, by chance, there are too many people to fit within that half-hour, then it’s ‘tough luck’ for those individuals who lose out. We’ll have to see whether the courts accept this limit, since the people who filed the original lawsuit against the City Council indicate they intend to continue their court fight over this issue.

FROM MY OWN experience, I know that these government hearings usually attract characters. People who actually work for a living don’t have the time to spare to express themselves publicly.

We often get people who see it as their place in society to be the verbal pain in the political behind. I know one person who routinely shows up at Common Council sessions in Gary, Ind., who thinks his public comments are just as significant a part of the municipal process as the votes the council members take.

At the City Council, the Tribune reported that the first person to make a public comment to the City Council was George Blakemore. Although anybody who pays attention to local government knows Blakemore isn’t a stranger to speaking out.

Back when I used to write for a different newspaper, I covered the Cook County Board (amongst other things) and Blakemore’s presence was a given. He’d always have something to complain about. It would have been newsworthy if he hadn’t spoken.

PERSONALLY, I REMEMBER a time his rant turned into a diatribe against Latinos and how he saw them taking from black people – which caused President Toni Preckwinkle to cut him off and publicly denounce him for making racist remarks.

Of course, he insisted on perceiving the issue as one of being censored by the county board president. I suspect we’ll get lots more rants like this in coming weeks and months.

Personally, I have no problem with the idea of people being able to express themselves at a government meeting. Those officials, after all, are doing “the people’s business,” and the people ought to have a chance to say just what they think.

But now that we have public comment at the City Council sessions, we’re going to learn that the act of being a bloviated buffoon in public isn’t something necessarily limited to the elected officials.

  -30-

Trump’s just a bully best dealt with by ignoring his rhetorical nonsense

There are times when I think the best way to deal with the trash talk that emanates from the mouth of President Donald J. Trump is to ignore it.
 

A favorite spot for tourists to pose these days

He’s a bully and a dullard and is one who seems to relish being the center of attention.

WHICH IS WHY I wonder how much it would hurt him emotionally if we paid little attention to him – treated him for the triviality he truly is, rather than regarding much of anything he says as significant.

I think that would be the cruelest blow we could dish out to this egomaniac whom 46 percent of the electorate chose to be our nation’s leader.

I’m having these thoughts leading into Independence Day; the date upon which we celebrate the creation of our nation and the ideals of social justice for all that it supposedly stands for.

It is one upon which I can’t help but feel a little bit of shame over the pathetically-partisan nature our society has taken a turn to. We’re in an era in which some people are determined to turn back the advances we have made in our society toward achieving the American ideal – and those who voted for Trump did so largely because they think he supports their vision.

THAT IS WHY it shouldn’t be a surprise to learn of polls showing that Trump’s support levels remain ridiculously high amongst those people who voted for him.

Many are the kind of people who find themselves intimidated by people who actually understand government and its procedures and find Trump’s simple-mindedness easier to comprehend.

Particularly if it repeats to them over and over that everything wrong is somebody else’s fault!

Which is why I can’t help but chuckle at the recent outburst caused by Trump using some doctored video from the days of old when he tried boosting his public persona by becoming a character in professional wrestling.

ONLY NOW, INSTEAD of taking down a real wrestler, the video shows that wrestler being representative of CNN – the national news network that gets demonized by people who don’t want a dose of reality in their reports but want to be reassured that everything wrong is somebody else’s fault!

There are those people who are concerned that Trump has crossed over a line and is trying to incite violence against reporter-type people. As though he’s nothing more than one of those third-world tyrants who likes to criminalize people who dare to speak out against him.

Personally, I think that’s giving Trump way too much credit!

While it always is possible that some irrational sort is capable of taking anything out of context and turning it into a gross over-reaction, we also can’t go too far in terms of trying to limit this kind of stupid talk. People do, after all, have a right to be wrong.

IT SAYS SO in the Constitution – that document we’re supposedly celebrating Tuesday that says we have a right to free expression of our ideals. No matter how trivial or ridiculous those ideals may be.

In the case of Trump, personally I don’t think he has much in the way of a political philosophy. It wouldn’t shock me if his presidency winds up being a collection of contradictions, along with many trivial outbursts. Personally, I do believe that the political structure created by our Founding Fathers is capable of withstanding the nastiness we’re going to endure during this Age of Trump.

Which is why as a reporter-type person myself, I actually think the best way to respond to Trump’s doctored image of a body-slam of CNN is to come up with an alternate reality follow-up.

Perhaps one in which a symbolic American people puts Trump over its knee and gives him a spanking worthy of an insolent and bratty child!

  -30-