-
Ray Manzarek, R.I.P.
May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Thoughts on The Tornado in Moore, Oklahoma
May 20, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Alan O’Day, R.I.P.
May 20, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Elijah Harper, R.I.P.
May 18, 2013 | 1 comment
-
That’s a Lot of Caca in Caracas
May 16, 2013 | 7 comments
The Spectacle Blog
On January 20th, Google marked the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s inauguration.
Today, on the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth, I looked at the Google front page and….nothing.
In the grand scheme of things you could say it’s no big deal. But given Google’s overarching presence on the web it does make one wonder about its selectivity in comemorating significant events in American history. Let’s consider Google’s criteria for its doodles:
Who chooses what doodles will be created and how do you decide which events will receive doodles?
A group of Googlers regularly get together to decide the events and holidays that will receive doodles. The ideas for the doodles themselves are gathered from numerous sources including Googlers and the general public. The doodle selection process aims to celebrate interesting events and anniversaries that reflect Google’s personality and love for innovation. We are aware that the list of doodles is not exhaustive, but we try to select doodles that show creativity and innovation.
So the 50th anniversary of JFK’s inauguration is an interesting event and anniversary that reflects Google’s personality and love for innovation but the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth isn’t?
Of course, Google would argue that they can’t comemorate everything but it is quite curious that they would choose to pay homage to a beloved Democratic President but choose not to pay homage to a beloved Republican President a little over two weeks later.
Michaewl David Hotard | 2.6.11 @ 2:13PM
So did the liberal Yahoo main page.
David Hill| 2.6.11 @ 10:19PM
As far as google, I don't normally look at their logos (my homepage is yahoo), yeah it was a pretty sizable oversight, since they acknowledged the 173rd birthday of Cezanne. I seriously doubt, however, that they got together and said 'Reagan b-day? F him! We're evil! BWAAH-HAH-HAH!'
Not everything is a conspiracy (see Jon Stewart rally sign '9/11 was an outside job').
As far as Yahoo, it was on their main page, in the hotlinks, in the headlines, and in the pics of the big news stories. But in the top left corner, they showed prominent black figures, rather than Reagan (since its black history month).
Michael David Hotard | 2.6.11 @ 2:22PM
Ooops. Must proof text name next time.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.6.11 @ 2:34PM
No surprises. Their claim that Googlers put it together is suspect since I doubt many of them know who JFK is or what he did. If they like him I suspect the Googlers beleive he was a liberal which he wasn't. At least they honored one America President. The White House only does it under pressure. They would rather pay accolades to known terrorists while the Justice Department does everything it can to get terrorists off the hook.
mortimer| 2.6.11 @ 4:15PM
KENNEDY WAS THE LAST PERSON TO STAND UP TO ISRAEL,HE ALSO DEMANDED AIPAC REGISTER AS A FORIEGN AGENT.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.6.11 @ 4:45PM
Big deal, Kennedy stood up to Israel (But I really don't remember what he stoop up to them about?), Ronald Reagan on the other hand stood up to the friggin' Soviet F'ing Union, big difference. One stood up to a Friend (but obviously, you don't think of them as one), and the other stood up to a Foe, I'll take the Giant Killer any day!! Ya got something against the Jews, Mortimer? You come off that way!! Shalom!!
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.6.11 @ 5:34PM
Lullabys,
Mortimer and John are obviously the Jihadists assigned to Amspec, but they are so subtle, (subtile) like a serpent that one would never suspect them.
Heh, the way I look at it, we are better off with them here rather than having them out running around in traffic. They can do no harm here.
PS: how did your golf game go today?
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.6.11 @ 7:48PM
Ken, I let the Gipper down today by shooting a horrible 113, which is ten points higher than just last week (I was trying for a 100 in his honor of his Birthday). Friggin' Golf!! That's why it's a four letter word, it's a cursed sport!! Three nines in a row to start the back nine, it's hard to overcome that you know? But I was down to a light shirt by the 10th hole, which isn't too bad for February, Thank God for that Global Warming thing Al Gore keeps talking about (you might not have it down there in Texas this week, but it's humming along pretty well up here in North Carolina today). But it was a good day overall, two pars, a few great putts, good weather, good friends, and not a Commie to be found anywhere (it turns out, FT Bragg bans them).
BD57| 2.6.11 @ 4:54PM
Of COURSE!!!!!! That's IT!!!!!
Google chose to commemorate Kennedy's inauguration because he 'stood up to Israel'!!!!
(psst .... hey mortie .... you realize that has nothing to do with the subject, right?)
Roy| 2.7.11 @ 1:27AM
He stood up to..who? Wow.
MarkJ| 2.6.11 @ 5:39PM
Here's an irony of Google snubbing Reagan in favor of Kennedy:
Given how he approached foreign and domestic issues, JFK would today be a REPUBLICAN. Indeed, in hindsight, JFK and Ronald Reagan were more alike than different.
But *sigh* this is all clearly lost on the folks at Google. I'll bet if you asked them about "the Bay of Pigs" they'd reply, "Oh yeah, I think I went wind-surfing there last year."
Byron Rivers| 2.9.11 @ 12:34PM
Clearly you're crazy! Kennedy would never be a Republican. That's like saying the Raygun switched from being a Democrat! That would never happen...
...right?
Laura| 2.6.11 @ 6:20PM
MarkJ, I am in complete agreement with you. I have been upset since this morning when Google failed to honor Reagan. Shame on them.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:28PM
I know. Of course, Reagan would have told you to get back into the kitchen and make him a sandwich.
January 1981: Ronald Reagan becomes the first U.S. President opposed to a constitutional amendment which provides equal rights for women.
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 11:35PM
Women already have equal rights, dumb ass. Only a Libtard leftist would demand a special amendment for rights already included in the Constitution.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:45PM
And yet, they don't have equality. It works both ways, kid. Women are routinely sentenced to less time in prison, are routinely offered lower salary, are routinely put into positions as subordinates, etc. There's nothing in the Constitution forbidding discrimination based on sex except for voting rights. I don't expect you far-right wing radical terrorist extremists to understand, though. Comprehension is far above your level of intelligence.
Roy| 2.7.11 @ 1:30AM
So women are unequal because they are "routinely sentenced to less time in prison"? Or "assigned positions as subordinates" like everybody else in the world except for a tiny sliver?
Hillary| 2.7.11 @ 5:05AM
Forget it Roy, you won'r get any sense out of a crack-head.
omar| 2.6.11 @ 8:06PM
I do not recognize reagan because he viewed martin luther king jr as a communist and was against the civil rights act and voting rights act. Even after he became prez, he still had the same view even after passing a holiday for king. As president, he supported saddam hussein, the contras and iran. Any one who dismisses these things does not care about real history or justice.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.6.11 @ 8:36PM
Jackass!!
kingsmill| 2.6.11 @ 10:57PM
I do not recognize JFK because he engineered a coup of Diem in South Vietnam and insured the US would be trapped in a quagmire; JFK and RFK attempted to assassinate the great progressive Castro; Kennedy and RFK used J. Edgar Hoover's wiretaps of Martin Luther King. Just a sampling of disasters that can be laid at the door of the Kennedy cabal.
Legendary| 2.6.11 @ 8:57PM
There's a big difference between an inauguration and a birthday. Kennedy's inauguration was an historic event, no doubt about it. It still gets quoted, fifty years later.
Now, if they snub the 50th anniversary of Reagan's inauguration (if he's still a big deal then; who knows what the future holds?), we might have cause to talk. But seriously, guys. It's lots of people's 100th birthdays. It is some people's 5000th birthdays, and it is entirely possible that 5000 years ago some guy did something that changed the course of history forever.
Hell, on a much more important note, it is the 233rd anniversary of the Treaty of Alliance and the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, our treaties with France that gave our Founding Fathers validity and our fledgling nation defensive and commercial allies. And yet, not a word.
Real Deal| 2.6.11 @ 10:14PM
Google honored Dizzy Gillespie's birthday and the thirtieth anniversary of Pac-man. So no excuse for not honoring Reagan's.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:23PM
Why would they honor an average president that created a large divide between you poor people and us rich people? Their motto is don't be evil. I don't know why you, as a poor person, would want to honor an evil man.
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 11:33PM
Google is being ironic. Of course they're evil, so are you. Stupid, too.
Legendary| 2.7.11 @ 5:18PM
Dizzy Gillespie doesn't really have a lot of huge associated events with him, it makes SENSE to do his birthday. Pac-Man isn't HUMAN. Again, it isn't snubbing Reagan unless they snub him when his inaugural anniversary comes up.
Some Reader| 2.6.11 @ 8:59PM
Reagan's rise to the preidency, no matter what rebublicans would like to believe, did not create a saint or mark him as a great president. The best that can said about reagan is that he was a canny politician. Too bad he left such a legacy of false promises behind.
jim| 2.6.11 @ 9:12PM
There's a difference between the anniversary of an event and a posthumous birthday party.
Real Deal| 2.6.11 @ 10:17PM
Except that google frequently honors birthdays as they did recently with Dizzy Gillespie. Try again.
Pam Ellis| 2.6.11 @ 9:14PM
Google's motto is "Don't be evil".
So their decision makes perfect sense.
Real Deal| 2.6.11 @ 10:18PM
Bet you think that was really clever, don't you?
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 10:41PM
Google is evil, that's why they didn't honor the great man. Reagan stood for everything great about America which is everything they hate about America.
They're a bunch of commie bastards anyway, who gives a flip what they think.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:20PM
Terrorist,
You must be young and naive.
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 11:32PM
Neither, moron.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:40PM
So, it's willful ignorance?
Patriot| 2.7.11 @ 5:07AM
Wrong again, meathead.
mortimer| 2.6.11 @ 10:01PM
reagan funnled arms to iran through israel.......now you can pretend thats not true (even though it can be googled in 20 seconds) or you dont care.
LostProphyt| 2.6.11 @ 10:36PM
So? Big deal. Reagan wasn't as great as you neocon morons portray him to be. Look it up. You can't rewrite history...
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 10:43PM
Then why is Obummer trying to pretend he's like Reagan? You Leftists are so stupid.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:19PM
Terrorist,
Obama isn't trying to pretend he's like Reagan. The only people saying that are far-right wing media outlets that push the Reagan myth.
Patriot| 2.6.11 @ 11:29PM
Really, pervert? Then why has Time Magazine photoshopped a pic of the Bamster and Reagan for its cover?
It's obvious you're mentally challenged.
It won't work, though. Obama will never get the community organizer stink off his pathetic body no matter how many times you clowns photoshop him next to RR. Now, there was a real President!
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:39PM
Ah, your youthful ignorance is astounding. You sit here and mock community organizers, yet, you're led by the community organizers at Fox News and on AM Radio every single day of your life. They use the techniques outlined by Saul Alinsky to distort, personalize, and confuse you far-right wing terrorists. For instance, you believe that Reagan was a semi-decent President despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Amazingly ignorant.
As for the Time article, it was about persona, not policy. He's not trying to be Reagan. It's that Reagan was all about persona...very little actual good policy decisions (and many disastrous policies for you poor people).
mortimer| 2.7.11 @ 12:42AM
its the same mentality that supports palin, all you have to be is pretty to get their vote, if these people were banned from voting ,and they should be or my vote should equal 20,000 of theit votes thus making their vote purely symbolic like letting retarded people vote
Patriot| 2.7.11 @ 5:12AM
I'm sure ACORN makes sure your vote equals 20,000, moron. You liars and thieves have to cheat to win elections. You should all be thrown in jail.
Nice try, Lee--but that wasn't a pic of a "persona" Obama was cozying up to. Obama isn't fit to be seen with the great RR. You losers know it too, that's why you lie.
Byron Rivers| 2.9.11 @ 12:31PM
But he was president and won 49 states in the same country that Google decided to put it's HQ. Not irrelevant, just not leftist enough for Google. Now we know. Well we already knew, but there they go again.
mortimer| 2.6.11 @ 11:03PM
why did the t-party state "glenn beck serves to waste time on mostly nonsense while our boys and girls are fed into the meatgrinder of iraq afganistan and if the special interests (aipac) get their way iran,"
Hillary| 2.6.11 @ 11:22PM
Why does Obama continue to launch deadly predator drones that mutilate and kill many innocent Muslim women and children? Do you have an answer for Obama's cruelty toward Muslims?
Why does Obama insist on enforcing his meatgrinder policies that are killing so many people all over the Middle East?
I want to know.
mortimer| 2.7.11 @ 12:38AM
aipac is the reason. t-party patriots are being ignored and minimilized on fox now because they are calling for an end to the federal reserve and aipac.
Patriot| 2.7.11 @ 5:16AM
Your rubber room is waiting for you, freak.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:18PM
The American Spectator should protest this and de-list themselves from Google. ::snicker::
Hillary| 2.6.11 @ 11:23PM
Loser.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:28PM
The American Spectator? I know.
Hillary| 2.6.11 @ 11:30PM
Crawl back under your rock, troll.
Lee| 2.6.11 @ 11:39PM
How about you do what Reagan wanted you women to do and get back in the kitchen?
Patriot| 2.7.11 @ 5:13AM
How bout you slime back under your rock, worm.
Doug| 2.7.11 @ 12:00AM
When Reagan actually does something worth commemorating, I'm sure they'll get right on making a doodle for it.
ErnestPayne| 2.7.11 @ 2:44AM
Honoring Raygun for his "accomplishments" would be like honoring Hitler for his accomplishments
Patriot| 2.7.11 @ 5:15AM
Just because Hitler is your hero doesn't mean you should bring your sick fetish here.
Byron Rivers| 2.9.11 @ 12:28PM
Not quite the same. But since both Reagan AND Hitler both
took over healthcare,
took over the banks,
and the automobile industry,
and since both killed so many Jews,
and conquered France,
and conducted experiments on humans,
and bombed London,
and lowered taxes,
and since both beat Russia,
and were instrumental in the freedom of Poland,
and since the policies of both brought interest rates down from 21%,
and fired the Air traffic controllers,
and laid out the vision for SDI/Star Wars,
and won 49 Electoral states for re-election
and were governor of California,
and were Democrats until 1962,
and handwrote much of their philosophy in preparation for speeches to the California public...
I could see how you might make that mistake.
uncle curmudgeon| 2.7.11 @ 8:15AM
Hell-Low(?) Google honors Diego Riverra and snubs Thomas Jefferson. It's that old MSM wine in its new skin.
George| 2.8.11 @ 10:25AM
No Reagan honor, but they're honoring France's Jules Verne today. Who had more impact on world history? Yes, Google has an agenda.
Indy Pres| 2.20.11 @ 4:51PM
He's the one who raised the legal drinking age to 21 because of highway funds. But it still doesn't work. Minors as young as 15 have tried drinking alcohol without getting caught by cops. It is time to lower the drinking age back to 18. President F.D. Roosevelt ended the Prohibition era in 1933, and then alcohol became legal.
Indy Pres| 2.20.11 @ 4:51PM
He's the one who raised the legal drinking age to 21 because of highway funds. But it still doesn't work. Minors as young as 15 have tried drinking alcohol without getting caught by cops. It is time to lower the drinking age back to 18. President F.D. Roosevelt ended the Prohibition era in 1933, and then alcohol became legal.