Proposal would put Ronald Reagan's face on the $50 bill

[Newsjock]

Source: Los Angeles Times

Ronald Reagan is honored by, among other things, an airport, a freeway, an aircraft carrier and -- ironically for a critic of big government -- one of the biggest federal buildings in Washington.

Now, some of the late president's admirers are launching a new effort to add another honor: printing his likeness on a $50 bill in place of Ulysses S. Grant's.

In polls of presidential scholars, Reagan consistently outranks Grant, said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (R-N.C.), who introduced legislation to make the change.

But at least one Democrat who serves on the House Financial Services Committee, where the proposal has been sent, isn't ready to jettison Grant for "someone whose policies are still controversial."

"Our currency ought to be something that unites us," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks).

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-reagan-fifty3-2010mar03,0,6008759.story

[PCIntern]

1. Grant...Sherman...I GET IT!

Oh...it's not a joke?

Woe is us...

[onager]

63. Brad Sherman is my Congressman.

I like the guy, overall. He's a former accountant who helped seize the assets of Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines, among other stuff.

He sure nailed the "Emergency" economy act of 2008...

...the only way they can pass this bill is by creating and sustaining a panic atmosphere.

That atmosphere is not justified.

Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday, that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day, another couple thousand the second day. And a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no.

That's what I call fear, fear-mongering, unjustified, proven wrong. We've got a week, we've got two weeks to write a good bill. The only way to write, to pass a bad bill: keep the panic pressure on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Sherman

[PCIntern]

76. I just thought it was funny that there was a juxtaposition

of Sherman and Grant...

[onager]

89. Yes, it is.

That was pretty funny. Quick reaction on your part, too!

:toast:

[JVS]

83. But Grant was awesome! Meant to reply to OP

[booksenkatz]

2. Ray Gun is the main reason we're stuck in this shitbox economy in the first place

He got the ball rolling on it, his successors just added more manure to the ball to help it along. These inbreds will not be happy until every damned thing/place/plant/insect/flake of shitdust in the country is named after their boy, will they?

[KansDem]

39. Then put his face on the $50 bill!

...it's not like we're going to be seeing a lot of them, anyway.

Now, if it were the $5 bill, I'd say "no way!" ;)

[WhoIsNumberNone]

84. Reagan belongs on the toilet paper, not the $50 bill.

If we were to put another Republican on the money- especially if it's going to be one from the 20th Century- my choice would be Roosevelt (Teddy, that is) or Eisenhower. They were to only good Republican presidents besides Lincoln anyway...

[No Elephants]

114. NO! Not Eisenhower!

[WhoIsNumberNone]

132. Better than Raygun-

although my first choice among Republicans would be Roosevelt.

[CatholicEdHead]

136. Eisenhower has been on currency before

There are dollar coins out there with his likeness on them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower_Dollar

I still have a few which I do not spend.

[No Elephants]

105. As money becomes worth less and less, we'll see more $50s and fewer $5s.

So, if we have to put a Republican's face--and why in God's name do we?--may as well use Lincoln's face again.

[warm regards]

80. Bull...W is the reason we are in this mess.

[Submariner]

99. And Raygun

[warm regards]

100. Your graph pretty much makes my point.

Prior to W, the 10 year projection was a surplus.

[No Elephants]

113. Yes, but Reagan was Dummya's idol and role model. And a much better salesman than

Dummya for the concepts of deficits, trickle down economics, etc. (Remember, Perot ran after Reagan.)

Besides, no one is proposing to put Dummya's face on anything right now and that probably won't happen for quite some time. So, what's the percentage for Democrats in defending Reagan as to deficits at this juncture, even indirectly. Or, indeed any juncture?

[warm regards]

143. "Besides, no one is proposing to put Dummya's face on anything right now..."

That will never happen. Never.

The point is, the books were full of black ink when Clinton left office.

[No Elephants]

109. Not to mention de-regulation and selling Americans on the concept that the

government, while possibly well-intentioned, is America's worst nightmare. Now that Democrats are closer to Republicans (also thanks in part to Ronnie, btw), he may be correct in hindsight, but he sure wasn't right in 1980.

Deficits

Trickle Down economics.

Arranging for the hostages in Iran to continue to be held until a few minutes after his inauguration. .

Being Dummya's hero and role model.

De-Regulation and hatred of government action that brought a tear of joy to the eyes of folks like Madoff.

Choosing to dismantle Carter's plan for U.S. energy independence in favor of selling us out to Big Oil.

Very bad choices about Afghanistan. (Charlie Wilson's war, my ass!)

Discouraging Democrats into forming the DLC, Third Way, New Democrats and other organizations aimed at making America a one party system for many practical purposes--and implementation of the highly undemocratic Super Delegate's role in choosing the Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party (conceived after McGovern's startling loss, but dormant until Reagan's sweeps).

I could go on, bu each one of those things should be enough for the nation and the last should be enough for classic Democrats.

IOW, put Reagan on anything else? BITCH, PLEASE! We should be changing everything his name and/or face is already befouling.

[LongTomH]

87. How about we put his face on the $3 bill?

Raygun was as phony as a $3 bill. Come to think of it - U.S. money, since Raygun and Boosh is phony!

[No Elephants]

112. Bingo. But, don't hold back so much next time!

I posted Reply 102 before I read this, but we sure agree on Reagan.

:fistbump:

[FSogol]

3. Reagan is honored by our large deficit, by the amount of homeless in the streets,

and AIDs victims in our cemeteries. Isn't that enough honor for that horrible Pseudo-President?

[Solly Mack]

4. In currency we unite?

LMAO...

Would be better than in god we trust

No thanks on the Reagan 50...

People that esteem Reagan need to do so in the privacy of their own crapper....a fitting temple to the POS.

[asjr]

5. I suppose it is too late for a

Wanted poster in the post office.

[hlthe2b]

6. F__K that...

I have had it with the deification of Reagan. When they started talking about putting him on the dime, instead of FDR, I just about lost it. ENOUGH!

[No Elephants]

126. Are you saying a Reagan dime would not have been change you could believe in?

[izquierdista]

7. Outranks?

While a great Civil War general, doesn't Grant rank as one of the worst Presidents, along with Harding? Talk about lowered expectations.

[hlthe2b]

8. and a horrible alcoholic... but still more appropriate than Ronnie

[izquierdista]

13. It is nice

That after 150 years, his picture can still get southerners fuming. :rofl: :rofl:

[hlthe2b]

30. Does it? I have never heard anyone even mention it.

or Grant for that matter... Even the southern racist extremists seem to save their furor for Lincoln (and Sherman)...:shrug:

[No Elephants]

116. Perhaps Reply 13 referred to the article in the OP?

[No Elephants]

119. In view of what he was called upon to do for his country, his alcoholism is very understandable.

And should be eminently forgivable now that we are more enlightened about physical vulnerablities to and causes of the disease.

[happyslug]

93. Grant was looked down for his administration was tied in with Civil Rights

Grant had the worse recession between 1837 and 1930 (and the Depression of the 1870s MAY be worse then both, but people did NOT tie the Government it with the economy in the 1870s and they do today AND Congress was much more powerful and it set Economic policy in the 1870s and Wall Street was in complete control of Congress).

Anyway, most historians do NOT tie in the bad economy of the 1870s with Grant. As to the Corruption, most date back to Lincoln and Grant became known for it for when he found out about such corruption he rooted it out NOT covered it up. Thus Grant gets the blame for a lot of Corruption in his administration, but it predates him but no one wants to blame Lincoln (And in Lincoln's defense the corruption was part of the price Lincoln paid to maintain Northern Unity during the Civil War).

What Grant did do was try to enforce Civil Rights. He expanded the Freeman's Bureau, kept troops in the South in those states with clear background of discrimination against blacks. He had Congress pass the 1871 Civil Rights act (The Anti-KKK Act, it made it illegal to threaten someone under the "Color" of law, i.e. cover KKK efforts to say they were enforcing the law against the Blacks). In 1875 Grant pushed through the 1875 Civil Rights Act. The 1875 Act, has been called a combination of the later 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act. It was struck down by the US Supreme Court in the 1880s on the grounds that the only rights the Federal Government could protect was the rights stated in the Constitution itself NOT the Bill of Rights (For Example the Constitution says you could NOT discriminated in Federal Voting, but that did NOT include primaries, thus for decades the South had all white Primaries, where only whites could vote, black could vote in the General Election but by then they was only one Candidate, making the general election an unreal election).

In many ways Grant was attacked in the years after his Presidency by people who wanted WHITE Southern back in the American mainstream, even at the cost of massive discrimination against the former slaves. Thus Grant's fight for Civil Rights, his use of Troops to enforce Civil Rights law, was looked down on as "Un-american" and thus he was a "Failure". Yes, he was a failure for he fought for Civil Rights and then after he died that fight was viewed as something bad. Civil Rights did NOT come back till the 1940s and by then Grant's reputation as a bad president was well established. More recent historian have upgraded him. William Jennings Bryan actually broke with the movement of his time period when he made Grant's 1880 Speech as one of the Greatest Speeches of 1866-1905 for it shows Grant's main concern even as late as 1880, four years after he was out of office. The following is that speech, and its show ho the two parties have changed since 1880:

IN view of the known character of the speaker who is to address you to-day, and his long public career, and association with the leading statesmen of this country for the past twenty years, it would not be becoming in me to detain you with many remarks of my own. But it may be proper for me to account to you on the first occasion of my presiding at political meetings for the faith that is in me.
I am a Republican, as the two great political parties are now divided, because the Republican party is a national party seeking the greatest good for the greatest number of citizens. There is not a precinct in this vast nation where a Democrat can not cast his ballot and have it counted as cast. No matter what the prominence of the opposite party, he can proclaim his political opinions, even if he is only one among a thousand, without fear and without proscription on account of his opinions. There are fourteen States, and localities in some other States, where Republicans have not this privilege. This is one reason why I am a Republican.
But I am a Republican for many other reasons. The Republican party assures protection to life and property, the public credit, and the payment of the debts of the government, State, county, or municipality, so far as it can control. The Democratic party does not promise this; if it does, it has broken its promises to the extent of hundreds of millions, as many Northern Democrats can testify to their sorrow. I am a Republican, as between the existing parties, because it fosters the production of the field and farm, and of manufactories, and it encourages the general education of the poor as well as the rich.
The Democratic party discourages all these when in absolute power. The Republican party is a party of progress, and of liberty toward its opponents. It encourages the poor to strive to better their children, to enable them to compete successfully with their more fortunate associates, and, in fine, it secures an entire equality before the law of every citizen, no matter what his race, nationality, or previous condition. It tolerates no privileged class. Every one has the opportunity to make himself all he is capable of.
Ladies and gentlemen, do you believe this can be truthfully said in the greater part of fourteen of the States of this Union to-day which the Democratic party control absolutely? The Republican party is a party of principles; the same principles prevailing wherever it has a foothold.
The Democratic party is united in but one thing, and that is in getting control of the government in all its branches. It is for internal improvement at the expense of the government in one section and against this in another. It favors repudiation of solemn obligations in one section and honest payment of its debts in another, where public opinion will not tolerate any other view. It favors fiat money in one place and good money in another. Finally, it favors the pooling of all issues not favored by the Republicans, to the end that it may secure the one principle upon which the party is a most harmonious unit—namely, getting control of the government in all its branches.
I have been in some part of every State lately in rebellion within the last year. I was most hospitably received at every place where I stopped. My receptions were not by the Union class alone, but by all classes, without distinction. I had a free talk with many who were against me in war, and who have been against the Republican party ever since. They were, in all instances, reasonable men, judging by what they said. I believed then, and believe now, that they sincerely want a break-up in this “Solid South” political condition. They see that it is to their pecuniary interest, as well as to their happiness, that there should be harmony and confidence between all sections. They want to break away from the slavery which binds them to a party name. They want a pretext that enough of them can unite upon to make it respectable. Once started, the Solid South will go as Kukluxism did before, as is so admirably told by Judge Tourgee in his “Fool’s Errand.” When the break comes, those who start it will be astonished to find how many of their friends have been in favor of it for a long time, and have only been waiting to see some one take the lead. This desirable solution can only be attained by the defeat, and continued defeat, of the Democratic party as now constituted.

http://www.bartleby.com/268/10/13.html

William Jennings Bryan's List of Greatest Speeches:
http://www.bartleby.com/268/

[No Elephants]

125. Thank you. I didn't know that. He literally spent his last breath trying to provide for his family.

Which tells me he was a good human being and NOT a theiving politician!

[happyslug]

135. The story behind Grant's Autobiography is just wild

Grant wrote it to provide for his widow. When he was finished, he remembered having to read a book of a General from the Revolution and found it to long. On remembering that experience, Grant kept his first draft but cut out huge sections to make it a much smaller and readable book (and by that time he was bed-ridden, but wanted it done).

It is also noted that while writing the book Grant was dieing of cancer and some historians who have read it notice the affects of the Laudanum Grant was on as they get to the end of the book. Now it is unlike most other Civil War autobiography, it is enjoyable to read, it is NOT an attack on the people at his same rank, below him or above him (I mention this for most of the Civil War Biography of the time period suffered from such attacks, as one historian noted, if you go by those books, the worse enemies of either side was the officers of that same side). Grant avoided such attacks, he even made a comment that when he meet Lee at Appomattox "He knew me well" (and this was after Lee had told his own Generals he remember meeting Grant during the Mexican War, but could NOT remember a thing about Grant).

Now the book is written as a beginning to end book. You start with his youth and end with the end of his Presidency. At least one historian joked that it was the only Civil War book he ever read that he could not stop reading so he could more quickly get to the end and found out who won the war. It is considered the best auto-biography to come out of the Civil War and one of the few first hand accounts of how the Mexican war went.

When he was finished Grant had a hard time getting it published, the publishers had printed so many memoirs over the previous 10-20 years that had been nothing but justification of the author's actions (See above) This series of books had turned off most readers and publishers by the time Grant finished his book so none of the publishers would touch it. Mark Twain then stepped into the picture. Mark Twain on reading the book took it to his publisher and told him to publish it and he, Mark Twain would bare the cost of publishing the book out of the proceeds from his own profits from his own books. People on hearing this objected, but Twain said do not worry, it tied up his revenue from the sale of his books, but Mark Twain had been asked to go to Europe for years and many had outstanding offers to Mark Twain to pay for his visit (and thus NOT a lost to him). Thus Grant's book was the cause of Twain's trip to Europe as an author (He had gone right after the Civil war, but as an unknown author, so this was his second trip abroad. a trip he had avoided for over ten years but did so for Grant).

Aside: Mark Twain had been on Grant's wing of the Republican Party (i.e. pro-Civil Rights) but also supported Civil Service, which Grant opposed (Grant view was Civil Service protected incompetents which he had seen in the Army, while driving out compete workers thus Grant opposed Civil Service and that it was up to Congress and the President to watch for corruption). Mark Twain supported Civil Service do to the massive turnover you had after every election. Twain preferred a professional bureaucracy (Something Benjamin Franklin has also opposed) just to get things done. I bring this up for Twain supported Grant even through both had completely different views on Civil Service.

[No Elephants]

115. Me likes Republican anti-Secessionist Civil War hero Prez on $50 bill. Why don't Republicans?

[happyslug]

139. They hate Grant for his support for the 1871 and 1875 Civil Rights Act

And lets NOT forget the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands (The Freeman Bureau):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Refugees,_Freedmen_and_Abandoned_Lands

Congress killed the Freeman's Bureau in 1872, but Grant pushed it for four years and tried other ways to get the South to treat Blacks fairly, ultimately getting Congress to pass the 1875 Civil Rights Act

The Civil Rights Act of 1875:
http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/122/recon/civilrightsact.html

Be it enacted, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.


SEC. 2. That any person who shall violate the foregoing section by denying to any citizen, except for reasons by law applicable to citizens of every race and color, and regardless of any previous condition of servitude, the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges in said section enumerated, or by aiding or inciting such denial, shall, for every such offense, forfeit and pay the sum of five hundred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, . . . and shall also, for every such offense, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or shall be imprisoned not less than thirty days nor more than one year . . .


SEC. 3. That the district and circuit courts of the United States shall have exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offenses against, and violations of, the provisions of this act . . .


SEC. 4. That no citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; and any officer or other person charged with any duty in the selection or summoning of jurors who shall exclude or fail to summon any citizen for the cause aforesaid shall, on conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and be fined not more than five thousand dollars.


SEC. 5. That all cases arising under the provisions of this act ... shall be renewable by the Supreme Court of the United States, without regard to the sum in controversy ...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reconstruction/activism/ps_1875.html

The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 1870, 1871 and 1875 (Notice THREE was passed during Grant's Administration):
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/jwkplan/law/civil%20rights%20acts%20of%201866,%201870,%201871,%201875.htm

And lets NOT forget Grant's Choice of Commanders for the 9th and 10th US Calvary and the 24th and 25th Infantry. These were "Colored" units but the Colonels of each were considered some of the best to ever a command a regiment. Benjamin Grierson was already known for his raid on Newton's Station during the Civil War (An act every Calvary man wanted to duplicate up till and through WWII) and his defeat of the Apache Victorio by simply denying Victorio all the water holes in West Texas, forcing Victorio to retreat back into Mexico where the Mexican Army destroyed his group.

For more on Benjamin Grierson:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Grierson

Victorio:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorio

Victorio and the 10th Calvary:
http://www.buffalosoldier.net/BuffaloSoldiers&ChiefVictorio.htm

[leftofcool]

9. Doesn't matter. I gots no fifties anyway

and probably won't have.

[Coventina]

10. One word: BARF!

:puke:

[nyc 4 Biden]

11. i think i'm going to be sick...

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

[Demeter]

12. Put Reagan on the $50,000 bills that inflation will cause in 2011

on the 100th anniversary of his birth.

We'll be like Zimbabwe, or Wiemar Germany, with wheelbarrows instead of wallets.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ishoutandscream2]

42. We are? I didn't hear that at the last meeting

[marshall]

15. Ulysses Grant was a tireless defender of civil rights

It is thanks to him that African Americans were first elected to Congress. I agree with Brad Sherman--he is a figure that we should all be able to unite behind.

[hlthe2b]

33. and Native Americans... at least far more than others of the era

[tularetom]

16. If they want a 20th century republican on there I suggest Eisenhower

He turned out to be not as dumb as we all thought at the time.

OK, he is responsible for Nixon, but he tried to warn us about insane military spending and the arms race.

And for all that was wrong with them, the '50's were arguably our most prosperous decade of the 20th century.

[Big Orange Jeff]

19. Don't forget the 90s under the Big Dog...

The country prospers most when the middle class prospers. Nearly everyone's quality of life is improved, not just the upper-upper-upper class.

[Chef Eric]

43. Eisenhower was responsible for the 1953 Iranian coup as well. That was pretty dumb.

We're still dealing with the consequences.

[rexcat]

75. Don't forget Guatemala in 1954...

The CIA brought down a fledgling democracy and screwed up Central America in the process just for United Fruit Company.

[liberalhistorian]

46. Eisenhower was, indeed, a decent man and a decent

president. He wasn't all that crazy about Nixon. He didn't just warn about the "military-industrial complex", he warned JFK about getting involved in Southeast Asia wars (too bad JFK and Johnson didn't listen). He sent federal troops into the south to enforce civil rights orders. Yes, he did, indeed, have his faults, like they all do; yes, there were things he could have done and didn't and things he did do that he shouldn't. But, compared to many others, he was still a decent man and president.

And btw, did y'all know that he was the younger brother of a childhood friend of Harry Truman? So Truman knew him pretty much from his childhood on and privately got a kick out of his following him in the presidency.

[No Elephants]

104. HELL, NO. Please see Reply 122 (which I posted before seeing this).

And, for those who would excuse it on the basis of Eisenhower's age--which I have heard--Adlai Stevenson was born in 1900, only ten years after Ike, and Stevenson got it. In fact, decent people all through history got it the evil of segregation and unequal rights, even when slavery was legal. So, no, being born in 1890 does not excuse white supremacy. Not today and not then.

BTW, Reagan and Tip O'Neill famously got along after hours better than Reagan and Poopy Bush. In fact, the Reagan-O'Neill relationship is often cited--especially by Chris Matthews, who witnessed it up close--as the archetypal example of how different partisanship was back then. So what? It still doesn't mean Reagan's face should be on the $50 bill. Neither does Truman's feelings about the Eisenwhowers support putting Ike's shit eating grin on our money.

If we must have a Republican on the bill--and why do we, ffs?--then use Lincoln's again. He was the last semi-good one. Or maybe Teddy Roosevelt's. At least Teddy had the sense to change Parties after his Presidency.

[No Elephants]

117. Sorry. "122" was a typo. It should have read " Reply 102." Too late to edit, though.

[No Elephants]

108. HELL, NO. Please see Reply 102. And yes, IN HIS FAREWELL SPEECH,

the "military idustrial complex" was a potential problem, but what the hell had he done in the 8 years before that to stem it? Does one speech-- given only after he has zero skin in the game--after 8 years of doing nothing about it--really warrant putting his face on money?

And why in hell would Democrats even consider kicking Grant, a Civil War Union (non-secessionist) military hero and a Republican President, off the $50 to make room for any other Republican, let alone a racist Republican?

Since when did it become a rule that Democrats have to glorify Republicans for years to come by putting their faces on money anyway? Can we even imagine a Republican Congress and President these days doing anything remotely like that?

But, if Democrats insist on shooting ourselves in the foot at every turn and looking as lame as we can, let's at least do Teddy Roosevelt. He was the first to propose health care and he had the sense to leave the Republican Party, although, unfortunately, only after his Presidency. And he's already on Mt. Rushmore anyway. Or just leave Grant where he is. He was a Republican, too (when they were the lesser of two evils Party, at least in terms of issues of race and being for the working stiff).

[Jkid]

17. No , just no.

[lonestarnot]

18. Ackety! I'll always ask for 20's just for that reason if it happens. Wouldn't want to puke my

money full.

[CLANG]

20. That's what I was thinking

Q: "How would you like it"
A: "Anything except for $50 bills, please"

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

22. ummmmm....

.....I suggest you do some reading on President Jackson before you make that decision.......

[lonestarnot]

144. Well I don't like your suggestion.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

21. well why not I guess

Andrew Jackson is already on the twenty and he was a slavery-loving genocidal lunatic. What's one more criminal old white man on our currency?

[No Elephants]

118. Because teh stupid has to stop sometime and stopping before we allow

any more misguided idolatry of Reagan seems like a good time.

[maxrandb]

23. Why don't these "A$$-pickles"

just propose renaming the country the United States of Reagan???

I would only support this if we produce a new "-(minus)$50"...that would be more indicative of the truth surrounding this asshat president.

I'm surprised they haven't dug up his body and eaten it like communion.

[LiberalFighter]

24. They could name the Washington Times the Reagan Ragpaper.

Or FOX could be RRR.

Or instead of single piece of currency they could name the financial and insurance secret funds the Reagan Slush Fund. Or for federal military funding the Reagan-Contra Slush Fund.

I know it is getting stupid.

[Robb]

25. Perhaps the quarter would be better

...for that two-bit idiot.

[bemildred]

26. Put him on the penny.

The Reagan penny, that's what we need.

[Enthusiast]

56. He deserves zero recognition! nt

[No Elephants]

120. For Triumph, the insult comic dog, to poop on!

[Kind of Blue]

27. Please God, No! That's the last place the highest-deficit-

-running president should be. Horrible energy.

[activa8tr]

28. Now HERE'S JUST ONE MORE... piece of Republican waste of

time and money, and energy.

This is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

Is THAT all Republicans can come up with to improve our nation?

Geeze.

[tom_paine]

29. Funny thing is, Raygun wasn't even really president. He was part of the First Bush Imperium (1980-

1992)

Also known as "the begining of the end".

Now we are approaching the "penultimate phase" of the end.

What Are We Becoming? You don't want to know.

[mopinko]

31. i know, lets outlaw the $1, and start print a $3

ronnie can have that one.

eta- every year on april 1st, we will print a trillion or so, and pay off his old debts with them.

[Speciesamused]

32. HE IS THE REASON NO ONE HAS $50.

[mvd]

69. Good one!

:thumbsup:

[Vermontgrown]

34. Reagan's face

should be on rolls of toilet paper. If it was, people would be putting his face where it actually belongs...He was a creep repuke, and he helped to put this country where it is today. We would have been much better off if he was never elected to anything.

[tomm2thumbs]

35. put his face on food stamps

more appropriate

[No Elephants]

121. Nah. Not for the guy who counted catsup as a veg. for purposes of school lunch.

[tomm2thumbs]

137. true, maybe just put his face on the 'this is poison' labels

[WhiteTara]

36. nip that nasty idea in the bud! n/t

[Jennicut]

37. Um...no. Old Ronnie isn't good enough for that honor. Next.

[salguine]

40. If they have to put Reagan's face on something, make it toilet paper.

[iwearshoesinky]

41. BAHHHH! Grant has the most reason of any president to be on currency!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(1869)

[Magleetis]

44. I guess I need to purchase

a few red sharpies.

[no_hypocrisy]

45. McHenry's from North Carolina. They STILL haven't forgiven Grant for winning the Civil War.

[Deep13]

47. We should put his face on food stamps...

...to remind users how they got that way.

[CountAllVotes]

48. +1

Great idea! I like it!

:dem: :kick:

[Scout]

60. +100 n/t

[No Elephants]

122. Please see Reply 121.

[happyslug]

138. Can't, Food Stamps are all electronics now, issued by each state,

Reagan's face would have to be on the Card Welfare gives you to "charge" what you buy with Food Stamps (And any welfare a person may get).

[JBoy]

49. Put his face on the T-Bill. He's the one who started the tax cuts that led to massive debt.

[clarence swinney]

62. REAGAN LEGACY

WRECKONOMICS
COURTESY :WALL STREET OF AMERICA
LEADERSHIP VIA CONSERVATIVE POLICIES
THANKS TO RONALD REAGAN AND G W BUSH

From 1946 to 1980 the period was known as the GREAT MIDDLE CLASS YEARS
Each President worked to reduce the Debt from WWII.
In 1980 Debt was less than 1000 Billion and Government Spending was 600 Billion per year.

Reagan boastful Cut Taxes plus Cut the size of Government was a Trojan Horse, per his OMB Stockman, to cut Taxes for very rich.

Reagan was Governor for 8 years during which he increased Taxes on many items.
He increased the state revenues more than any predecessor.
By Far. Cutting Government? Ho Hum. Blarney Baloney once more.


Reagan policies increased Spending by 80% .
Debt by 186%.
9-3-01 Debt was $999.9 Billion and 9-30-89 at $1,859 Billion
Conservatives use Spin: It was Congress.
From 1930 to 1980 we spent $6066 Billion.
Reagan 8 Budgets totaled over $7000 Billion.
Congress? Ho Hum.
Blarney Baloney.
Congress returned Reagan 8 budgets for his signature with
fewer total dollars on them.
Haynes Johnson in “sleepwalking” said Reagan administration was “most scurrilous in history”
138 were investigated /charged/fined. More than total for all preceding Presidents in 20th century.
There were scandals in 27 Departments of the Federal Government.
Most involved money fraud.
The book “Ronald Reagan-There he goes again” documents over 300 incorrect statements by good old Ron.
Each President from 1945 reduced the Debt then came Spend-Borrow Reagan
to increase government by 80%.

THEN-Here comes GHW BUSH.
No braggart here. Nice Gentleman.
He increased Debt to $4411 Billion.
A 54% Increase.
Give him credit for increasing Tax on Rich due to out of control Deficits.
He had courage to put America first over ideology and party.

THEN-Pay your Way CLINTON ARRIVES
The Debt on 9-30-1993 was $4411 Billion.
The Debt on 9-3-01 was $5807 Billion.
An increase of $1396 or 31%
Clinton reduced the Deficit in each of first four years.
He ended with a surplus.

HERE comes old King of Spend-Borrow GW BUSH
Debt was $5807 Billion and on 9-30-09 it was $11,909 Billion.
105% increase.
Reagan-186%
Bush I-54%
Clinton-31%

Reagan-Bush I-Bush II did not pay down a penny of debt in 20 years

Those 4 added $10,946 Billion to our Debt.
Bush I and Bush II added $9551 Billion.

Three so called conservatives promoted cut government.
Up = Down to them.

INTEREST ON DEBT
9-30-81 to 9-30-09 we paid $8400 Billion in Interest.
87% Interest Paid on Debt incurred by the Famous 3.

The $10,946 in Debt plus $8400 Billion of Interest is $19,346 Billion.

Revenue not received due to Reagan + Bush I Tax cuts was $26,000 Billion.
We have a $12,00 Billion Debt in 2010 and would have a $14,000 Billion Surplus
were there no Tax Cuts primarily to enrich the rich of richest.

Now! What do we do?

Increase Unearned Income Tax to 28%.
Increase Top Income Tax Rate to 40%
Increase Estate Tax big time big time biggie

Or go to Flat Tax of 35%.
Or Flat Tax on Consumption of 40%.

Neal Boortz 2005 Book proposes a 23% Flat Tax.
Smoking a weed?
How do you cover a 3500B budget with 23% of 10,000 Total National Income?

No deductions. None. Dream on.

Clarence Swinney
Political historian since 1991 on Reagan-Clinton-Bush II administrations.
Lifeaholics Of America -- old n ugly but honest
Author-Lifeaholic-Work for a Life not just a Living—Workaholic to Lifeaholic
Author-forthcoming-All American Party—How Democrats created a Great Middle Class and Conservatives are determined to destroy it
Stats from 12-6-09 polidose.com article by John Lucia “The National Debt:Betrayal and Devastation

[No Elephants]

124. And the de-regulation that led to too big to fail, Bernie Madoff and a host of other evils.

[No Elephants]

130. I prefer Nancy Reagan's idea. "Just say no"

To her shame, that was the extent of her signature project, an anti-drug campaign. So perfect for Republicans bc it cost nothing (and solved nothing) that they became the Party of Just Say No.

To her credit, it's what she said when the Republicans proposed removing FDR from the dime so Reagan could be on it.

With all due apologies to Nancy, bc Reagan was a good husband to her, Reagan's shit eating grin does not belong anywhere but on the Screen Actor's Guild list of Past Presidents. Or maybe as a footnote in an astrology book.

[Dulcinea]

50. Oh God, not this crap again!

There's some organization that wants something in every state named for Saint Ronnie. Ugh.

As far as I'm concerned, he's the guy that cut student loans in the '80s so rich people could pay less in taxes.

[DebbieCDC]

67. And the guy who busted PATCO and started the process

that still continues now of union busting all over this country :puke:

[Hosnon]

51. Rep. Sherman's position is absolutely correct, in my opinion.

We should try to avoid placing controversial figures on our money.

[No Elephants]

127. That let's out all Presidents maybe all politicians and maybe all humans.

[Hosnon]

131. I think we can agree there are many politicians who are only marginally controversial.

George Washington comes to mind. As does Benjamin Franklin.

[demigoddess]

52. Oh God!! Mammon and republicans!!

[heli]

53. "Our currency ought to be something that unites us"

is right.

[proteus_lives]

54. No thanks. If they have to switch for a Republican, then put TR on the $50.

[No Elephants]

128. Grant was a Republican..

[Enthusiast]

55. After Iran-Contra Reagan

should receive nothing but scorn. But the media, with guidance from the GOP, persists in propping up an inaccurate image of Saint Ronnie.

[mitchum]

57. It would be VERY appropriate for Patrick T McHenry to appear on the 3 dollar bill

[mitchum]

58. Reagan belongs on the quarter; he was just a two-bit actor

[No Elephants]

129. Better: Let's just stop honoring two bit actors with things like money and airports.

Just say no.

[tinymontgomery]

59. McHenry is my congress critter

what a piece of crap he is.

[clarence swinney]

61. historians rate reagan

Historical societies wait till out of office for five years to poll membership.

One of top two polled in 1994.
21%=above average
79%= below average

A 1994 poll of 500 professors of history in colleges and universities
ranked him tenth from bottom tied with tyler.

Reagan has not one Great Number.

Clinton record makes him look like an amateur

Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTON—versus Republican’s hero--REAGAN

1.JOBS—grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOW—grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4. MARKET CAP INCREASE—Clinton + 330%--Reagan + 136%
5.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
6.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
7.DEBT—grew by 43% under Clinton—187% under Reagan.
8. DEFICITS—Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
9.NATIONAL INCOME—grew by 100% more under Clinton.
10.PERSONAL INCOME—Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
11.MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME-grew by 75% more under Clinton
12. DEFENSE BUDGETED-Clinton -2311B—Reagan-2062B (current $)
13.UNEMPLOYMENT—AVG—Clinton 5.2%--Reagan 7.6%
(I admit averaging averages can be dumb. I dumb.)
SOURCES—Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)—Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com
Federal Budget.Com 2009

A vote for a Conservative is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.

Recall 1920’s and Wall Street under Conservative control?
Recall 2000-2008 and Wall Street under Conservative control?

Want more of those years? It will take many years to recover.

political historian
Lifeaholics Of America
author-unpublished
“All American Party”
How Democrats created a great Middle Class
and Conservatives are determined to destroy it

[Unvanguard]

64. NO. n/t

[Psephos]

65. Given that US currency will soon be printed on toilet paper, this might make sense. n/t

[DebbieCDC]

66. Put him on the $50 and no one will ever see his disgusting mug

Of those who live on a cash basis, who of them can afford to carry around $50's these days?

Everyone else lives by debit card.

[Scout]

68. unnecessary expense we can't afford, and absolutely NO REASON to make a change n/t

[Zorra]

70. *snarf* Reagan...took us from being the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation

in only 8 years.

What a fucking hero.

[L. Coyote]

71. Put this dead horse back in the barn, and thaw it out too

so it falls over and rots :rofl:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

72. "In polls of presidential scholars blah blah..."

What "presidential scholars"? Why do I smell more bullshit?

[Quantess]

73. Blasphemy!

This is bad news.

[KamaAina]

74. That way McHenry can use a Reagan to purchase some male companionship

http://bluenc.com/florida-murder/suicides-nc-ties

Florida police are saying that Jason Robert Drake,* a man with North Carolina ties, left shot two republican political consultants, Ralph Gonzalez and David Abrami, and then himself last week. What they're not saying is why. After first calling it a lover's triangle, they're now saying:

Drake was found carrying a firearm and backpack full of ammunition. Deputies said in a short statement witnesses had mentioned "a number of potential motives."...

Sources tell The North Carolina Conservative that Drake volunteered on several Republican campaigns in western North Carolina, and was an associate of Congressman Patrick McHenry. Gonzalez is also believed to have been associated with McHenry in the past. Since being elected, McHenry has attempted to insure that all elected officials in his district are his supporters and cronies. This has caused a very nasty political war of attrition in the 10th District. Sources say that Drake worked on these campaigns as a surrogate of McHenry.

[bamacrat]

77. Bullshit. I had to leave right as they were about to announce that but I figured that is who

it would be. Grant wasn't a good president but we do not need modern presidents on currency. In 100 years ok but not now. No point just a waste of money to redo the $50. If anyone it should be Clinton. He balanced the budget for the first time and brought about the fastest largest economic expansion in our nations history. Oh but he got a blowjob. George Washington grew and smoked pot. Why Reagan and not FDR you know a president that did something other than spend us to near death. FDR may have spent shit tons but he enacted many of the programs that are a big success today. Ronnie gave us............................debt?..........a rich first and foremost economy?.......oh the largest expansion of government in the name of defeating the Soviets. :puke:

[John Kerry VonErich]

78. Who the hell cares?

I don't carry cash anyways.

[MaineDem]

79. I care

I don't want his mug on our money.

[John Kerry VonErich]

133. Thats why we have check cards

;)

[No Elephants]

103. WOW.

[WhoIsNumberNone]

81. Congressman Patrick McHenry wants Ronald Reagan's face put on $50 bill

Source: New York Daily News

A congressman is looking to change the face of the $50 bill – literally.

Rep. Patrick McHenry, a Republican from North Carolina, wants to give Ulysses S. Grant the boot and replace his visage with former President Ronald Reagan.

"Every generation needs its own heroes," McHenry said in a statement.

"One decade into the 21st century, it's time to honor the last great president of the 20th and give President Reagan a place beside Presidents Roosevelt and Kennedy."





Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/03/03/2010-03-03_congressman_patrick_mchenry_wants_ronald_reagans_face_put_on_50_bill.html

---

Naturally it's only Republicans who are behind this travesty. As long as we're talking about putting Ronnie Raygun on the money, why not Calvin Coolidge too? Or Warren G Harding?

Personally if we're going to put a new face on the $50, I'd rather see Roosevelt (either of them) Truman, Eisenhower or Kennedy.

[hisownpetard]

82. I think they should put Bunning's face on the 2-dollar bill.

He worse than worthless.

[No Elephants]

101. Self Delete. Wrong spot.

[fascisthunter]

85. fascism is here unfortunately

I won't be surprised if it happens.

[mbperrin]

86. Gawd, I'll hate never using a $50 bill again.

Fuck that old geezer Ronnie Raygun. That cocksucker started more shit that still is ruining the country today.

He's dead, let him rot.














And on the lighter side, how's that multi-trillion dollar Star Wars work out?

[Ter]

88. No need to worry about this one, it won't pass

No Democrat will vote for this. Even if we lose the House and Senate (and we won't), Obama would never sign this.

[Thor_MN]

90. Another failed attempt to honor the failed Republican policies of a failure of a President

[la la]

91. it'll mean

that the great american funeral tour will continue--

lordy, lordy!

:puke:

[Joe Bacon]

92. Is his ass going to be on the back side?

Who could tell the difference? :rofl:

[Kablooie]

94. As long as he is upside down, it's not a bad idea.

[KamaAina]

95. I've been thinking about cutting back a bit anyway

this way I could stop lighting my cigars with $100s. :eyes:

[BlueStater]

96. I don't know whether to laugh or cry, n/t

:puke:

[LynneSin]

97. I'd like to propose that we put Reagan's face on all rolls of toilet paper

because that's about all he is good for in my life - to wipe my ass and be flushed down a toilet

[Festivito]

98. NO! Unless it's a fake. /nt

[No Elephants]

102. De-Regulating Ronnie's face? Only the likes of Madoff and Rove would approve. No Ike, either.

I hope Democrats find their backbone and say NO to Dummya's hero and role model. (Reagan Democrats, my ass.)


As far as segregation-loving dead President Eisenwhower being put on money while our first visibly African American President is in office: I must just have to self-immolate in protest if that happens. And I probably would not even need a match, I'd be that angry. Here's why.

Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court. Before you cheer that, though: Warren's claim to fame at that time had been responsible for enforcing internment of California's Japanese during WWII, so that may give you an idea of where Ike's head was when he nominated Warren.

Warren was Chief Justice of the SCOTUS when then practicing civil rights attorney, the late, great Thurgood Marshall, masterfully argued Brown v. Board of Education before the SCOTUS. As you know, that was the landmark school desegregation case, which also overturned the evil "separate but equal" doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson, the case that had first upheld the Constitutionality of Jim Crow laws. Crying shame that Clarence Thomas now sits in Marshall's seat and Roberts now sits in Warren's, btw. (My eyes filled as I typed that, so I guess I mean "crying shame" quite literally.) That sure ain't progress.

Anyhoo, Eisenhower chided Warren for Brown v. Board of Ed., praising segregationist Southerners, while using very racist language about African American male students sitting next to their (the segregationists') daughters. We know that because Warren much later included the incidentin his autobiography. And, Ike called his nomination of Warren--wait for it--the worst mistake of Ike's eight year administration.

Fuck De-Regulating Ronnie for making an illegal and inhuman deal with Iran to hold off releasing hostages until he was in office, for being Dummya's hero and role model--not to mention showing up on the Ten Best Presidents ever list of DEMOCRATIC candidates for the Presidency. And fuck De-Regulating Ronnie for starting the process and "federal government is always wrong" mentality that led to the economic collapse of 2008 and possibly to the stalling of health care reform. And FUCK Eisenhower for his segregationism. Wallace eventually claimed to repent of his. Ike, however, re-affirmed it.

Racists like Ike and "states' righters, warmongers and stalwart supporters of McCarthy like Goldwater--even "your President really is a crook Nixon--seem to look a lot better to Democrats in hindsight than they should. So, fuck historical revisionism and bad history, too.

[argonaut]

106. Put MLK on the bill instead. nt

[City Lights]

107. Just say no!

Please. Just say no!

[bigworld]

110. wheresgeorge.com users don't like the idea one bit

http://forums.wheresgeorge.com/showthread.php?t=149471

[bigworld]

111. Dollar redesign forum -- somewhat OT but interesting

http://richardsmith.posterous.com/dollar-redeign-michael-tyznik

[Taverner]

134. Personally I like Jack on the $100

[goclark]

123. Then I'll have to continue using 20's

I don't want to see his face

[Rhiannon12866]

140. I Don't Want Reagan on My Money...

An A+ high school composition written in 2005 by a member of this board... :thumbsup:

[Jack Rabbit]

141. A $3 bill would be more appropriate

!!

[Umbral]

142. Put him on the the 1$ coin - his saggy mug would never be seen again.

Unless you happen to get change back from a Post Office vending machine.

[BlueIris]

145. I'd rather look at Larry Flint's face than Reagan's. nt