Skip to content

It’s Ronald Reagan Day at Wrigley Field on Saturday

Aug 4, 2011, 3:06 PM EST

Reagan

Via Paul Sullivan I have learned that Saturday is Ronald Reagan Day at Wrigley Field.

The Gipper’s son, Michael Reagan, throws out the first pitch. I imagine that poor people will be getting tickets too. All that needs to happen is for rich people to be given free tickets, and by some sort of economic mechanism they will be distributed to the poor.  Can’t just give the poor people tickets, though. That would be socialism.

OK, I kid the conservatives. I grew up in the Reagan years and I remember them fondly.  Policies matter the most, but I do believe that there is something to the whole national mood thing that is important, and Reagan really did shake us out of a pretty severe national funk, so I’m not gonna hate on the guy.

Besides, I infer that conservatives don’t like him anymore either given that he raised taxes and presided over a tremendous expansion of government spending and was quite active in opposing bigotry against homosexuals and stuff that conservatives really don’t much care for anymore.  So, hey, maybe no one should go to the Cubs game on Saturday?

  1. 18thstreet - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:13 PM

    The Cubs should sell Wrigley Field to Iran and use the proceeds to fund a secret, illegal war in Nicaragua.

    • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:26 PM

      Maybe that’s why they held on to Carlos Pena. He might have more value to Iran.

  2. koufaxmitzvah - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:14 PM

    I’ll hate on the guy.

    During the ballgame, Cubs will trade their 40 man roster and in return receive 15 players.

    Food concessioners will be fired in the 4th inning.

    And the home plate ump will forget all balls and strikes by the 7th inning.

    Yes. I’m awful.

    • spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:21 PM

      However, hot dogs will still have ketchup available, cause we want to make sure the fans have vegetables.

      • RickyB - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

        I don’t think folks in Chicago allow such nonsense as ketchup on hot dogs.

      • spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:31 PM

        Considering what they do to Pizzas I wouldn’t be too sure.

      • Tim's Neighbor - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:02 PM

        Spuchukar, you obviously don’t know much about Chicago cuisine.

      • spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM

        While I am hardly a connoisseur of N. Illinois gastronomy, I have enjoyed a few meals there. The Greek food was terrific, the Italian was tasty but secondary to that in St. Louis, and the Pizzas were adorned with some unique and succulent accents. However, the excessive dough, which Chicago is known for I fail to appreciate. Thin Crust, Baby. You know the authentic Italian way.

    • stevejeltzjehricurl - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

      I’m pretty sure all those folks are going to get fired anyway, thanks to Obamanomics.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

        But they’ll have health care.

        And they’ll still be a line at the concessions.

        And the toilets will start overflowing.

        It’s gonna be a blast.

      • thefalcon123 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:34 PM

        Yeah! remember right before Obama was elected and the economy was awesome! Everyone made a million dollars, babies were employed and Bush was running the biggest surplus’ in history?

        Oh wait…that’s right. It was *exactly the f**king same. If by “Obamanomics”, you mean “the same bs both sides do giving tons of money and tax breaks do those who don’t need it while shutting down New Deal and Great Society social programs that lead to generations of American prosperity”, then I totally agree with you.

      • drunkenhooliganism - Aug 4, 2011 at 11:21 PM

        Really Falcon, I don’t think Obama campaigned on a “we’ll suck exactly as much as Bush” platform.

      • thefalcon123 - Aug 5, 2011 at 11:03 AM

        It’s not about what he campaigned on, it’s about what he’s actually doing.

    • ta192 - Aug 4, 2011 at 5:41 PM

      No, you’re not…

  3. spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:17 PM

    And only a week later in St. Louis, the Red Birds will entertain the fans with Cardinal Christian Day. Looking forward to the Cross design in the outfield grass.

  4. scastro87 - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:19 PM

    At least you admit you’re trolling. In your analogy, Wrigley field would have to get much bigger so there’d be more tickets for everybody, right?

    • clydeserra - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

      Bigger? You mean to accommodate all the illegals Reagan granted amnesty for?

      • scastro87 - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:42 PM

        Well in Craig’s analogy, tickets=economy under Reagan. The economy under Reagan greatly expanded so the number of tickets available, and therefore, seats would increase.

      • thefalcon123 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM

        Hey Scastro:

        Annual GDP growth rate under Reagan: 3.4%*
        Under Lyndon Johnson: 4.37%*

        Boo-ya!

        *(source: Google Search for “Economic Growth Rate”, some website that I clicked on)

      • clydeserra - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:37 PM

        Can’t wait for the LBJ day in Houston!

      • thefalcon123 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:44 PM

        For some reason, despite his amazing success with the economy and the landmark civil rights legislation that broke the back of Jim Crow, people don’t celebrate him much. I can’t imagine why…..

    • kopy - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:55 PM

      This means that the rich season ticket holders would be given back an extra seat for their money, but rather than leave it empty, they’d hire someone to sit in the seat and produce beer at a cheaper rate than if they went out and purchased the end product of beer on their own, or something like that.

      But yes, Wrigley Field is expanding.

  5. sdelmonte - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

    So does this officially mean that the Cubs are the GOP team and the White Sox are the Dems’ team, with Pres. Obama as their Fan-in-Chief?

  6. The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

    Perhaps Ryan Dempster is planning to turn in all the Cubs who are Cincinnati Red-sympathizers. I’m looking at you Starlin Castro.

  7. dashtreyhorn - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:29 PM

    Craig, I can see through your thinly veiled insult at Philadelphia. Reagan, obviously, is a representation of the now economically fortunate and powerful Phillies, while these “free tickets” you refer to are some amalgamation of the Atlanta Braves, who you weep for because boo hoo they can’t sell out enough games to BIG name players, and your psyche, which is clearly broken to do the beating that the boys from the City of Brotherly Love have put on you and your precious Braves.

    Grow up, Craig. Why don’t you stick to what you do best! Not blogging!

  8. clydeserra - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM

    Seriously though, he was a Cubs fan, no? he was from Illinois so I assume.

    • spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

      He was once a Democrat too, so I imagine he was a Dodger fan.

    • jwbiii - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:27 PM

      Ronald Reagan re-broadcast Cubs games off play-by-plays sent by telegraph.

  9. bigleagues - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

    As someone who was once in charge of promotions and game day production (and once did a promotion around a two-sided Benedict Arnold bobblehead (one side wearing his Colonial uni and the other wearing his British uni), as well as, someone who also has fond memories of the Reagan years . . . I don’t get this Reagan promotion AT ALL.

    I mean if it were the Nats and it was paired with a Kennedy Day, then I could sort of kind of get it.

    • stevejeltzjehricurl - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:05 PM

      I’m pretty sure Dutch was the Cubs’ radio announcer in his younger days.

    • bigleagues - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:23 PM

      Apparently Reagan was born in Illinois.

      BUT still, it’s as if someone from the marketing department got in the ear of a VP and said, “I ran an interesting report. The White Sox have a vastly hire rate of Republicans coming through the gate. I think we need to reach out to these people in some way.”

      “I agree. I’ll have promotions come up with something,” the VP responds.

      A few days later the Promotions department presents its concepts for its GOP fan reach-out:

      – 50’s Cultural Appreciation Night – (Dress as a 50’s WASP – Get 50% off – all proceeds go toward Deficit Reduction)
      – Bigelow Tea “Tea Party” Day – Includes Obama Dunk Tank, Pin the ‘Fail’ on the Donkey and an exclusive post-game screening of “The Undefeated”.
      – Reagan Appreciation Night – First Pitch by Michael Reagan – Michael Reagan Meet and Greet (requires registration – show your Republican Inner Circle Membership card at door), Elephant Race, Reagan Birth Re-enactment and
      between innings Constitutional Trivia with former Reagan appointee Alan Keyes.

  10. Paul Zummo - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM

    Stick to baseball, Craig.

    • clydeserra - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:50 PM

      Stick to making whatever jokes you want, Craig.

    • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 3:51 PM

      Stick to not commenting, Paul.

      • 18thstreet - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:00 PM

        Stick to not telling Clyde what to stick to, Common Man.

      • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:02 PM

        Stick to keep sticking to, 18th street

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

        Common Man,

        While I have you attention. It’s not related to this thread. I know you have the tools to find this out for me. What are the Phillies’ 4 starters (Halladay, Lee, Hamels and Oswalt) record (not player specific credited, but the team’s record) win totals when they have pitched this year? For example, Halladay is 14-4 this year, but had games he pitched in that he did not get the decision but the Phils still won.

        I was talking to a friend earlier and we were trying to figure how to calculate this.

      • stevejeltzjehricurl - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM

        This is what I call a sticky situation.

      • scastro87 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM

        While it would be nice to be able to make jokes about politics, when you go to sports sites you probably aren’t looking for political jokes. When you agree with the joke, you mind less, but it’s still slightly annoying. Especially when it comes to partisan politics, I think it’s better to avoid on a sports blog.

      • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM

        Bicepts,

        Go to baseballreference.com and go to their player pages. Check their game logs. Those game logs will tell you which team won the game. The rest is just addition.

      • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:12 PM

        If they don’t want to read those conversations, scastro, nobody is forcing anyone to read the articles or comment sections. The answer is simple. Ignore things that you find “slightly annoying” and don’t complain.

      • scastro87 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:34 PM

        Did I offend you common man? I’m sorry for providing my opinion on whether sports blogs should comment on political issues. You’re right echo chambers with no disagreement are the way to go. What other rules should I follow for reading and commenting on blogs? Hurry up with the rules, though, because there’s a lot I want to read but I don’t want to run afoul of any of your rules.

      • halladaysbiceps - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:43 PM

        Thanks, Common Man. I am familiar with the Baseball Reference site. I just thought that there was maybe an easier way to calculate the total. But, that’s cool. Thanks again.

      • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

        Not offended at all. I just don’t understand why you’d want to read an article and the comments about which you have very little interest.

    • scastro87 - Aug 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM

      Um I guess I did find it interesting. I honestly don’t read HBT that often, but since I follow Craig on Twitter and he admitted to political trolling, I wanted to see what he said. Why, because the blog content is free, do i have to ignore everything I don’t agree with?

  11. The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM

    @stevejeltzjehricurl

    +a million

  12. jackkoho - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:10 PM

    craig, i just dont understand why you would make a joke that potentially alienates 50% of your readership by insinuating that conservatives are “against opposing bigotry against homosexuals”, etc. This is why I agree with above commenter that you should stick with baseball.

    • nategearhart - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:24 PM

      “If you’re involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it’s bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement.”
      “You have a teacher talking about his gayness. (The elementary school student) goes home then and says “Mom! What’s gayness? We had a teacher talking about this today.” The mother says “Well, that’s when a man likes other men, and they don’t like girls.” The boy’s eight. He’s thinking, “Hmm. I don’t like girls. I like boys. Maybe I’m gay.” And you think, “Oh, that’s, that’s way out there. The kid isn’t gonna think that.” Are you kidding? That happens all the time. You don’t think that this is intentional, the message that’s being given to these kids? That’s child abuse.”
      “It isn’t that some gay will get some rights. It’s that everyone else in our state will lose rights. For instance, parents will lose the right to protect and direct the upbringing of their children. Because our K-12 public school system, of which ninety per cent of all youth are in the public school system, they will be required to learn that homosexuality is normal, equal and perhaps you should try it. And that will occur immediately, that all schools will begin teaching homosexuality.” — Senator Michele Bachmann

      I know not all conservatives share her views, but until the rest of you shut her up, it has to be assumed that you at least might be on board with it.

      • The Common Man - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:33 PM

        Except that she’s not a senator. Still, it’s a valid point that leaders within the conservative movement are rabidly anti-gay. It stains the whole sheet of the GOP, just like santorum.

      • kopy - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:53 PM

        So, because Jack doesn’t understand why Craig trolls his readers, Nate assumes that Jack “at least might be on board with” Bachmann’s stance on homosexuality? Did I follow this correctly?

      • jerseydevi1 - Aug 4, 2011 at 5:16 PM

        Seriously, the first statement is a personal belief, probably based on her religious faith. Last I checked, she’s entitled to that opinion, whether you like it or not.

        As far as the rest…what is the problem?

        The second statement is absolutely possible. Sorry if you don’t like it. Anyone that has kids knows that is possible. The third may be the truest of all of them. There are people suing over the Pledge of Allegiance because it “makes” their children do something they don’t like. Can’t thank God in a graduation speech because the one atheist in the crowd might be offended. We need to stop allowing ourselves to be so damn offended all the time.

        Sometimes Rep. Bachmann speaks plainly, and when she does it upsets people. Sometimes when President Obama speaks plainly he offends people. It happens. We used to be able to deal with it, but have lost that in this country. Now everyone gets offended and files a lawsuit. That used to be juvenile, but now it is mainstream. Both sides are guilty of it. Neither is right in this fight, there is no high ground between them.

        Just makes me sad. Who cares who sleeps with whom. Why do we need to teach that in school anyway? Remember when we were kids and the girls watched a movie about how their bodies changed, and we got to go play kickball or something? We were taught about everything else, including relationships by our parents. Wasn’t then and shouldn’t be now, the school’s job. They shouldn’t teach about God and religion either. Remember the 3 R’s? Reading, ‘Riting and ‘Rithmetic? If we had the schools teach only those and maybe let the local school system decide on a history curriculum, we’d all be a lot better off.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Aug 4, 2011 at 6:33 PM

        Michele Bachmann’s husband makes money praying the gay away. It’s nauseating and true.

      • Marty - Aug 4, 2011 at 7:29 PM

        Nate, So I don’t assume that you’re “on board with it”, I’d appreciate it if you’d disavow every disparaging left wing comment ever made.

        I’ll check back tonight.

  13. nategearhart - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:13 PM

    Maybe the metaphor is, Hendry is actually a genius when no one is looking?

    • 18thstreet - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:19 PM

      I LOVE THIS BIT.

  14. thefalcon123 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM

    Reagan deserves to be honored. I didn’t know until I saw this video, but Reagan solved Communism and crime in just by giving two short speeches! Man, why didn’t Carter think to say Communism was bad and we shouldn’t kill each other?!?

    • thefalcon123 - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:19 PM

  15. SmackSaw - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:48 PM

    Ronald Reagan claimed that the Russian language had no word for “freedom.” (The word is “svoboda”; it’s quite well attested in Russian literature.) Ronald Reagan said that intercontinental ballistic missiles (not that there are any non-ballistic missiles—a corruption of language that isn’t his fault) could be recalled once launched. Ronald Reagan said that he sought a “Star Wars” defense only in order to share the technology with the tyrants of the U.S.S.R. Ronald Reagan professed to be annoyed when people called it “Star Wars,” even though he had ended his speech on the subject with the lame quip, “May the force be with you.” Ronald Reagan used to alarm his Soviet counterparts by saying that surely they’d both unite against an invasion from Mars. Ronald Reagan used to alarm other constituencies by speaking freely about the “End Times” foreshadowed in the Bible. In the Oval Office, Ronald Reagan told Yitzhak Shamir and Simon Wiesenthal, on two separate occasions, that he himself had assisted personally at the liberation of the Nazi death camps.

    • rhandome - Aug 4, 2011 at 5:45 PM

      Rocky Svoboda?

      • spudchukar - Aug 4, 2011 at 6:40 PM

        Ron Swoboda-Ron Freedom-Rum Freedom-Rum Libre-Cuba Libra, Russians, Bay of Pigs, Iron Pigs, Iron Curtain, Castro, Baseball, Svoboda. I’m on to you Ray-Gunites.

      • jwbiii - Aug 4, 2011 at 8:44 PM

        Somehow, we need to walk this over to Iron City Beer, spudchukar.

    • jwbiii - Aug 4, 2011 at 6:32 PM

      Da. Svoboda is the noun, svobodnii is the adjective, and Ron is the rightfielder.

    • TheWizard - Aug 4, 2011 at 8:33 PM

      It was actually “Strategic Defense Initiative” for those with an I.Q. above 60.

  16. SmackSaw - Aug 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

    There was more to Ronald Reagan than that. Reagan announced that apartheid South Africa had “stood beside us in every war we’ve ever fought,” when the South African leadership had been on the other side in the most recent world war. Reagan allowed Alexander Haig to greenlight the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, fired him when that went too far and led to mayhem in Beirut, then ran away from Lebanon altogether when the Marine barracks were bombed, and then unbelievably accused Tip O’Neill and the Democrats of “scuttling.” Reagan sold heavy weapons to the Iranian mullahs and lied about it, saying that all the weapons he hadn’t sold them (and hadn’t traded for hostages in any case) would, all the same, have fit on a small truck. Reagan then diverted the profits of this criminal trade to an illegal war in Nicaragua and lied unceasingly about that, too. Reagan then modestly let his underlings maintain that he was too dense to understand the connection between the two impeachable crimes. He then switched without any apparent strain to a policy of backing Saddam Hussein against Iran. (If Margaret Thatcher’s intelligence services had not bugged Oliver North in London and become infuriated because all European nations were boycotting Iran at Reagan’s request, we might still not know about this.)

  17. leftywildcat - Aug 4, 2011 at 7:05 PM

    Stick to baseball on a baseball blog, Craig, and you won’t alienate a good percentage of your readership.

    Talk politics elsewhere, such as TeaPartyPatriots.com. There’s no baseball talk there.

    BTW, they have a nice edit function, also.

  18. Marty - Aug 4, 2011 at 7:26 PM

    It’s helpful to be reminded of the difference between a journalist and blogger every once in a while.

    Thanks.

  19. Chris Fiorentino - Aug 4, 2011 at 8:35 PM

    koufax…”And the home plate ump will forget all balls and strikes by the 7th inning.”

    That line is a FUCKING disgrace and it is very distasteful that it was allowed to remain in the comments section this entire day. You want to mock Reagan because you are a liberal and disagree with his policies, then that’s your God-given right as an American. Fire away.

    But to stoop so low as to mock President Reagan for his later year alzheimer’s sickens me having lost a loved one to this horrible disease.

  20. bobwheel - Aug 4, 2011 at 8:43 PM

    I bet Michael Reagan will reach the plate, not like the nation’s #1 White Sox fan.

  21. Gary - Aug 5, 2011 at 1:13 AM

    Just deleted this blog from my Google Reader.

  22. angrycorgi - Aug 5, 2011 at 3:09 AM

    Way to turn baseball into your own personal soap box for preaching your religion. This may come as a shock to you, Craig, but most people don’t visit baseball blogs in the hope of having political rants shoveled onto them. All you’ve done is added support to the allegations that msnbc and its partners have a leftist slant in all they do. This is why most people hate fox and msnbc…we are all fedup with the political sermons. Go find an appropriate forum for your blathering, because this isn’t it.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Gonzalez (2069)
  2. D. Ross (2007)
  3. J. Grilli (1971)
  4. A. Pierzynski (1877)
  5. M. Scutaro (1860)
  1. D. Young (1834)
  2. T. Stauffer (1813)
  3. D. Haren (1798)
  4. W. Myers (1796)
  5. S. Smith (1772)