The comments, as one might expect at WaPo, are loaded with foaming hate rants about the Reagans and their supposed racism. This is boiled down to several common issues.
First, Reagan referred to a "welfare queen" who was abusing the system. This is exceedingly racist according to the commenters; no "welfare queen" existed; it was a racist creation by Reagan. But true, according to The Washington Post itself, which documented this:
Welfare queen, Linda Taylor, was further documented in the NYT:
"But as the original manuscript for Reagan biographer Craig Shirley’s book about the 1980 campaign, “Rendezvous with Destiny,” shows — not only did the Washington Post document that Reagan was right — but so did the New York Times:From Dailycaller
Chicago’s justice system was cracking down on people such as Reagan’s famed “welfare queen” Linda Taylor who was finally convicted of using multiple aliases and bilking the taxpayers out of thousands of dollars. (New York Times, March 19, 1977) Reagan had made much of the woman in the 1976 campaign as an example of the “waste, fraud and abuse” that the federal and state welfare agencies engaged in. It was much disputed at the time over exactly how much she stole. Human Events, Reagan’s favorite weekly newspaper, claimed one thing and some in the media claimed another about the amount of her excesses. The Washington Post account verified the conservatives’ charges about the woman, stating that she’d stolen over $150,000, had 26 aliases, three Social Security numbers, 30 different addresses around the city and “owned a portfolio of stocks and bonds under various names and a garage full of autos including a Cadillac, Lincoln and a Chevy wagon.” She incidentally had several dead husbands and had just returned from a trip to Hawaii, presumably to avoid the last bit of the winter of 1977. All of her ill-gotten goods were courtesy of the US taxpayer. “Prosecutors say there is no category of public aid—welfare payments, rent subsidies, medical reimbursements, food stamps, transportations allowances, child-care expenses, survivors’ benefits –that Taylor had neglected to apply” for. The Post re-dubbed her, “The Chutzpa Queen.” (Washington post, march 13, 1977 page 3)
The next objection is to Reagan's observation about "working people angry about the 'strapping young buck' using food stamps to buy T-bone steaks at the grocery store", because no one can use the word "buck" since everyone knows that it is racist - along with who knows how many other sacred words which can't be used. I lived in the South during my upbringing, and I never heard the term used that way, ever. But they can have their sacred terms, I suppose.
Actually, Reagan's point struck home because I personally have witnessed many, many incidents which are close to just that: abuse of food stamps to buy, among other things, lottery tickets, cartons of cigarettes, booze, cases of candy and pop, etc. - all on my dime. It was very common, back then, and I suspect that a great many working folks did, in fact, get angry as I did, and I was incensed.
But it is racist to point out any defect in the behavior of some who are abusing welfare, even though not all of the abusers were black, and no one said they were. Not only did Reagan NOT single out blacks, his thrust was against illegal fraud, not race. The charge of "racist" is itself racist, abusive, nasty, and pointedly protective of the dole on which the Victim Class is dependent; moreover, it is by default protective of actual fraud. And that, in pursuit of maintaining the Victim Class. The Victim Class must be maintained, or the Messiah Class is without a cause-celebre, and their self-ordained uber-morality is without a focus and has no outlet, no raison d'etre. Without a showcase, their moral superpowers are kaput. So any attack on the dole must be countered with the only weapon they have: verbal abuse. Well, that and hate crime laws.
The third objection is Reagan's use of the term: "States Rights", a Constitutional reference to the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, and part of the Bill of Rights. This term is also now sacred and cannot be used, because it is designated as a "code word" for racism, probably because of the Democrats' use of the term when they started the Civil War. The Race Baiters are really big on secret racism, unconscious conspiracies, and sacred code words taken out of context in order to pretend racism where it does not actually exist. Racism is very important to the Race Baiters. If it doesn't exist, it must be created.
So the Bill Of Rights is racist - several parts of it. Anyone who believes that federalism should prevail rather than the current oligarchy of government-wealthy patrons, is racist. Hmm. Probably the term "federalism" is racist, too, who knows?
So who, then, is actually racist, those who need racism for their own purposes to be realized? Or those who do not?
In her recent speech Hilary Clinton claimed that the Supreme Court decision was discriminatory against blacks (and the crowd went wild). The obvious implication is that blacks are too simple, too inferior to actually obtain IDs in order to vote. Either that, OR: voter fraud is necessary for the maintenance of the Democrat Party. So which is it? Racism? Fraud? Both? (It can't be "neither": she was emphatic, so that would be an obvious lie rather than a covert lie).
The Left; they would be a hoot... if they weren't in charge.