The Reagan dime

There are rumors circulating about removing FDR from the dime again, and replacing him with Ronnie.

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20954~1802912,00.html

This is the quintessential example of partisan politics. How much does this administration think they're going to get away with? First Patriot I, II and now this!

Why are they planning to replace one of the greatest presidents in our century, the president who inspired the "March of Dimes" by his childhood bout with polio. Only to be replaced by a man who, admittedly helped bring down the Berlin Wall and end communism. But who also left office hounded by the Iran-Contra scandal.

But isn't a major international airport, an aircraft carrier and countless roads and libraries enough? When will folks finally believe Reagan has had his due?

I urge all DU'ers to contact their congresspeople and tell them to vote against this blatant move by Congressional republicans to deify the father of trickle-down. Tell the cons enough is enough.

I suggest we ram through a law mandating a new motto to be placed on the Reagn Dime. Here are some possibilities:

IRAN-CONTRA

DEAD KURDS TELL NO TALES

LIBERTY OR... UH, I FORGOT!

But yeah, it's a travesty. If I ever have to use one of those things, I'll just be gutted.

But we get Clinton on the quarter.

:evilgrin:

And I think he has to be dead for a certain amount of time.

snip:
Media Center
The law prohibits portraits of living persons from appearing on Government Securities. Therefore, the portraits on our currency notes and coins are of deceased persons whose places in history the American people know well. The designs shown on our coins have changed at different times for different denominations.

http://www.moneyfactory.com/newmoney/search/doSearch.cfm

It wasn't very long afterward, that's for certain.

n/t

BTW, I'd keep that if I were you. As well as any $1 coins with Eisenhower.

For sure...you can't be alive before you go on currency or securities.

O8)

n/t

The evidence over the last decade has shown what Reagan opponents were saying when he took office. The USSR was DOA when Reagan was elected. But Reagan needed an enemy to sell his massive government spending programs, which he needed to help float the economy as his tax giveaways crippled production. So Reagan took to inflating the threat of the Soviet Union, fixing numbers to make it look as though the Russians were building more weapons, to create an arms race. There was no arms race-- the Russians couldn't afford it.

There is evidence now to suggest that Reagan even gave money to the Soviets to prop them up, so he could continue to scare the American people with the Soviet boogeyman. It was dead, but Reagan pulled a weekend at Bernie's.

Imagine if there had been a responsible person in office. Imagine if instead of ending all effective contact with the Soviets and bleeding them dry, a president had helped them to make internal market reforms, and a move towards capitalism. Imagine if the Soviet Empire had transitioned to capitalism and democracy before its total collapse. A lot of suffering could have been prevented.

But there is a Republican belief which drove Reagan, and is driving Bush. An outside enemy, they believe, is good for the national spirit, and if there is not an enemy, one must be created. That's what's behind Bush's terror warnings.

Reagan did nothing good, and lots bad, for this nation and the world. Bin Laden and Hussein both came out of his administration's bad policies, as did most of the other hotspots in the east. But rather than solve problems, Reagan just read scripts and talked tough. This revival of his reputation is only bad for this nation, which is already so detached from reality that we will only once again grasp it after great tragedy, I suspect. Take FDR off the dime, I doubt he'd want to be associated with a nation which acts more like the one he defeated than the one he presided over.

And I agree with alot of what you say. The USSR had been in the can for years. They never really recovered since the arms race. It was the paranoid mentallity that Stalin personified that would never allow the Soviets to function in the emerging capitalist power that was the US.

Of course Reagan gave them money. I think, as Americans, we became comfortable with the "Red Menace" of the Cold War. And Reagan played up to that in his term. By keeping our enemy firmly in our sights, we feel more secure in our ignorance of the facts.

I agree that our fingerprints are all over SH and OBL. The CIA had their fingers in evrything. We were borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Propping up one dictatorship to put down another. Only to have the former to bite us in the ass.

By saying Reagan helped end Communism, I meant that he was in position when it happened. So,naturally, he gets all the credit.

If you ever thought Reagan had any hand in "ending the Cold War" (not to mention that the media was liberal), read this book. Tears the myth to shreads.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

I have this in the archives, so old DUers are thinking this is a repeat...it is...

On June 27, 1989, Hungary opened its border with Austria. Millions of East Germans, Poles and Czechoslovaks got travel visas to Hungary (not uncommon; many people who lived in Communist countries vacationed there) and never came back.

When the Polish and Czech governments figured out what was happening, they liberalized their governments so that their best and brightest would stay in their countries.

The East German dictator Erich Honecker refused to liberalize his government. His border command refused to tighten travel regulations to keep East Germans from "vacationing" in Hungary. After a pro-democracy demonstration on Alexanderplatz in East Berlin drew a million people, the East German Politburo met on November 4, 1999, and ran Honecker and his gang of thieves off, then installed Egon Krenz as dictator. Krenz was head of the secret police but he turned out to be a decent fellow in spite of his upbringing. He began to liberalize the government.

On November 9, 1989, rumors spread that Herr Krenz was going to open the Berlin Wall that night. Ten thousand East Berliners showed up at Checkpoint Charlie, which only had three people working the DDR side. Fearing that they'd be killed by the mob, the major in charge gave orders to open the gate.

Now, in all this, where is Ronald Reagan? He wasn't president, to be sure; unless Ronnie was the power behind the throne in the Bush administration, he had nothing to do with the events of 1989. (Neither did Bush 41. This was all the Hungarian premier's fault.

Krenz being a decent fellow? Hardly. The historic reading of above events is IMHO highly debatable.

And not Checkpoint Charlie was opened first, but the Checkpoint Bornholmer Straße ("Böse Brücke").

when they don't have an Osama to point at.

"liberals and queers", that's the enemy for them.

These people are sick fucks.

Reagan himself spoke out against this idolatrous hero-worship. It seems that Grover Norquist and the rest of his acolytes in their worship of the Gipper, have ignored their own master's words.

They ignore the words of the founder of their religion.
They ignore the words of the founders of their country.
They ignore the words of the founders of their political party.
Ignoring the words of Reagan is just continuing the pattern.

conservatives have mastered the art of ignoring the truth and making stuff up.

"FDR believed the federal government should spend your dimes. Ronald Reagan believed the people should spend their own dimes. I think it's clear that the dimes in your pocket should bear Ronald Reagan's image," Gallegly said in a statement explaining his support of the bill.

in American history. What the hell was he supposed to do? Sit on his ass and tell the people to get out of the depression themselves?

and let increased tax revenues miraculously solve the Great Depression.

I know it wouldn't have worked. But the Repugs don't.

First, Reagan believed no such thing. He spent more money, on an inflation adjusted basis than FDR, when correcting for the moblization of WWII. (Which was not a war of choice.)

Secondly, it is such two dimensional thinking that i would expect better logic from my dog.

The deification of Reagan must be stopped, and now!
The Professor

Considering how we've been nickel and dimed by them.

very witty! I am impressed!

:bounce:

so will he listen?

it's the dumbest idea I've heard of in a long time...

Hell, I'd be against them putting Clinton on the dime as well...not enough time has passed for either to be on a coin...what a bunch of partisan fucktards!

Is that Nancy Reagan is against it and says that her husband would be too. I agree with her 100 percent.

Is he dead? I thought he had to be dead before a likeness could be put on a stamp or coin.

currency since Haliburton bought and paid for it.

n/t

Has got to be one of the goofiest ideas I've ever heard. Dimes are something that ordinary, working class people carry around in their purses and pockets, the sort of people that Reagan could have cared less about.

Reagan's economic philosophy was to throw money at the rich and hope that it trickled down to the rest of us. Not surprisingly, the wealthy fared very well during the Reagan years, but the sort of people who carried dimes in their pockets saw many a pink slip and struggled to keep their heads above the water.

The Goopers still hate FDR for all the money he spent on helping the poor and downtrodden. It flies in the face of the GOP economic philosophy of further enriching the wealthy and afluent. And, this attempt to replace FDR on the dime is just more sour grapes

If they want to put Reagan on currency, they should stick his face on a $500 commemorative gold coin that wealthy investors will horde in vaults.

and plans if this farce should ever occur.

:evilgrin:

and part of this whole Republican "let's name everything we can after Reagan" effort that's been going on for years now. I don't know if the AIRPORT or the AIRCRAFT CARRIER were enough not to mention all kinds of STREETS everywhere.

The lunkheads driving the "name everything after ol' St. Ron" movement claim they're merely trying to balance out FDR & JFK, who as liberal icons had a gazillion things named after them, and now that conservatives are in charge it's "their turn" to do the same with their icons.

These dopes need to be reminded that this is rubbish right on its face. FDR & JFK don't have so many things named after them because they were liberal icons, it's because they DIED IN OFFICE. It's the sort of thing that draws people together, or at least used to back when conservatives had an ounce of decency, at least in public.

Reagan lost his shot at "fallen leader" martyrdom when he had the temerity to survive Hinkley's attack. If they really wanted to name things after him, they should have made sure he never left office alive, just like FDR & JFK.

"Their guy" got to ride off peacefully into the sunset. If that's not good enough for them, let's call them what they really are: the "John Hinkley Fan Club".

Manufacturing their heroes and sticking their mugs everywhere. Truly Soviet-style propaganda.

But try pulling down a picture of our current or any former US Pres. You might make the evening news, but not in way that you might like. The hypocrisy in this country confounds me. Sometimes I think people just don't see it, or don't want to (present company excluded).

After all, Comrade Norquist is a known admirer of Lenin and the tactics of the Bolsheviks....

Black & Decker. And I'm with you on the "plans."

Also, I don't plan to accept change in the new dimes (if it comes to pass) at any store. "No, give me 2 nickels. I don't want those damn dimes. And I'm gonna stand here and bitch about it until you give me the fucking nickels. And if you don't, I'll never darken the doors of this fucking Kroger store again!"

Fuck Reagan. He won't even know he's on the damn dime. That fucker doesn't even know who he is, or anyone around him. I bet if they show him one of the dimes he'd say, "Who is that?"

Bake

New damage.