Another swerve from the Sainted Reagan

The current crop of Republican candidates, regardless of the office they are seeking, continually invoke the name of Ronald Reagan when they seek legitimacy. Problem is, just like with all the Bible quoting, he is either misquoted, or much of what he said and did is edited out to support the divine image.

Now, the younger people may be fooled by this, but those of us who were around at the time can see the differences between the appearance and the reality. One example is their mentioning that under Reagan, minus the small involvement in Granada, we were able to avoid the horrors of war. But they conveniently skip over that whole arms for hostages thing and how it affected all that Sandinista business. War by proxy.

Beyond that, if you compare the reality of the man to the image presently invoked, Mr. Reagan would in all likelihood not be able to measure up to what the party has become. Many of their actions would actually exclude him.

In a number of states controlled by Republicans there is a movement to “tighten up” who gets to vote.

Although there is no proof of voter fraud beyond urban legends that hold the same real strength as all those people who know “a nurse who worked in an emergency room when someone was brought in who had.....”, they like to throw that claim out there.

 Again, say it often enough and sound authoritative, and it must be true.

As part of this tightening up many states are now requiring a photo ID limited to what is received from the Department (or Registry) of Motor Vehicles with student ID’s or any other form deemed unacceptable. However, as a lot of these states are below the Mason Dixon Line, or are wannabe former confederate states that did not come into existence until after the Civil War, there is a strong possibility that many older people, especially those of color, who were born at home may not have the birth certificate required for such an ID. And, even though they have voted all their adult lives and are known to the people who hand out the ballots at the pols who have seen them sign next to their names in the big book that contains their names and addresses, they will not be able to vote if they cannot produce the ID they cannot obtain because of their lack of a birth certificate. Many have already been turned away for this during the primaries.

 The sainted Ronald Reagan was born at home, and, so, did not have a birth certificate. He finally got one in 1991, but he had already not only voted quite a few times, but had been president without being able to have produced a birth certificate if it had been asked for.

What would the Birthers have done in those days?

And, if an ID was required, besides his having lived in the U.S.A and been a movie star, would he have been legally able to produce any proof he was a citizen? After all, Bonzo lived in the U.S.A. all his life and was known from his movie appearances.

If the party then was the party it is now, poor Ronnie would never have been president first because he had no ID based on a birth certificate, and second because someone would have asked to see that document that he could not produce.

And I know he was not born in 1991, the date on his now official birth certificate.

Just sayin' welcomes thoughtful comments and the varied opinions of our readers. We are in no way obligated to post or allow comments that our moderators deem inappropriate. We reserve the right to delete comments we perceive as profane, vulgar, threatening, offensive, racially-biased, homophobic, slanderous, hateful or just plain rude. Commenters may not attack or insult other commenters, readers or writers. Commenters who persist in posting inappropriate comments will be banned from commenting on