shmoogrrrl
Tigger Goddess
- Joined
- May 18, 2000
- Messages
- 2,899
Can anyone tell me WHY the newscasters and people who wrote articles about the Reagan thing last week insisted on mentioning that Michael Reagan was adopted at every opportunity?
I mean I understand that it needs to be mentioned when someone is detailing President Reagan's life, but is it necessary, when pointing out who the kids are, to add that he was adopted? It's like they are saying "There is his daughter Patti, and Ron and the adopted (less important) son, Michael.
I'm not adopted, and my daughter isn't adopted, but I can't imagine that if I had an adopted child I would be constantly pointing out that he/she was adopted. It doesn't sound like President Reagan did either (unless it was an important piece of information to what he was talking about) so I wish the media would stop.
Am I the only person who noticed this?
I mean I understand that it needs to be mentioned when someone is detailing President Reagan's life, but is it necessary, when pointing out who the kids are, to add that he was adopted? It's like they are saying "There is his daughter Patti, and Ron and the adopted (less important) son, Michael.
I'm not adopted, and my daughter isn't adopted, but I can't imagine that if I had an adopted child I would be constantly pointing out that he/she was adopted. It doesn't sound like President Reagan did either (unless it was an important piece of information to what he was talking about) so I wish the media would stop.
Am I the only person who noticed this?