Some scary things that follow Reagans death.
 

Lets see. First they wan't to replace FDR's profile with his.
Link
Link
There was legislation proposed to do this! While he was still alive! Nancy even came out against it.

Up to now there are 56 different things named after him ranging from streets to schools to post offices to a Battleship and an (ironic) Airport. The largest Federal Office in DC bears his name as well. That is just a start for

This is scary. It's scary because of the absurd level of hero worship that has been making itself clear. It's like a segment of the population is trying to bestow demi-god status to a man.

Reagan Legacy Project
This is a group, headed by Grover Norquist (also including Dick Armey, John Ashcroft, Bob Barr, Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich, Chuck Hagel, Jack Kemp, Peg Noonan, Marc Raciott, Rick Santorum)

And their sole job is to get everything possible named after the man.

The following have been rumblings for years but have ratcheted up in recent days.

Reagan on the Ten Spot
So stupid. Yeah replace a founding father. The guy who played a pivotal role in defining the governmental mechanisms for managing the national economy.

Then there is Rushmore
This isn't just proposed by your run of the mill kooks. This is coming up to Congressional approval.

And another one. The Pentagon

There is a 25 year rule, that Reagan himself signed, that prohibits a memorial for a man until he's been dead for 25 years.

There are good reasons for it too. Absence makes the partisanship go away. And it separates those who are fondly remembered from those who are giants among men in what they did for America. To name the Pentagon after a recently deceased president just smacks of partisanship. What would the conservatives here think if next year when Democrats control the Senate/House or both they propose and pass a law that renames the Pentagon after Carter when he dies? Or give Clinton the 5 dollar bill? How many of you would REALLY not be heavily ticked off by that.

Leave the man to rest for a few decades. Then if his legacy can stand up to time like the great presidents of this nation already have, give him a monument.

Personally, I don't think Reagan will be able to endure for 25 years. (Just IMHO) I think that's why there is such a push to cannonize him now.

I think it's nice that they want to honor his memory, but I think they should at least wait until the body is cold.

If the law is 25 years (any linkage?), then they should bloody well wait 25 years.

I agree.. Let the chest beating and the pomp die down.. Wait a few decades, and see if anyone remembers

Renaming the Pentagon? Sticking his mug on Rushmore? Changing money? Argh!

Man, my country sure does perplex me at times.

I guess I don't understand why this is so horrible. It doesn't phase me one bit if he gets something named after him or not.

The outrage over the "honors" is about equal to the desire to carry them through, IMO.

Why? Not everyone thinks of him as highly as you. For the same reason you wouldn't like to see the Pentagon named after Clinton, I want it to stay free of Reagan.
Iran-Contra for one (without us getting into it) does not sit right with me. I can't support that kind of honor to him.

These honors become permanent. And right now there are a select group of Reagan fanboys who are just trying to ram anything substantial down the countrys throat in a period where it is uncouth to speak out or negatively about the man.

These kinds of honors should not be bestowed while he is so fresh in the nations mind. Give him time to remain on his accomplishments and worth and allow those not emotionally attached to the man to make a decision 25 years down the line.

Naming something after someone you don't like doesn't impact your life one bit.

I wouldn't like to see the Pentagon named after anyone so that's a bad example (well, I might be convinced that naming it after a military hero would be appropriate but that would cause too many riots within ther services over which service the honoree is from). But I have no problem with Clinton's name landing on any number of things. He was the POTUS. I don't particularly care for a number of his policies or his definition of ethics but feel free to name highways, government buildings, aircraft carriers, etc after him. Anyone who devotes years of their life to leading our country deserves to be honored.

As far as the "Reagan fanboys" ramming things through, there seems to be a fair amount of support from the public on any number of things.

The outrage being displayed over people's desire to honor him is at least as fanatical as the fanboys' efforts.

I think putting him on Mt. Rushmore or the ten dollar bill, or building him a memorial on the Mall is a little extreme, but I agree with onetime2.

I'll bet the next time we have a Democratic president, we'll be seeing the U.S.S. William Jefferson Clinton not long after.

The ten dollar bill honor doesn't bother me and the memorial on the Mall would be ok, I guess. (No real feelings either way)

But I definitely agree about Mt Rushmore. I just don't think it's a workable monument for the future. They spend so damned much money trying to keep the faces from falling off I think it should probably be in Hollywood. Adding more faces is too much of a hassle and the project would take a ridiculous number of years and the cost overruns to do something like that now a days would be insane.

Just wait the 25 years. There is a reason for it. Oh, and for the record, I am a Reagan supporter, "fanboy", whatever you want to call it.

People are very reactionary and I like the idea of waiting 25 years on major things like that. People can get caught up in a rush and forget the big picture. Then some politition decides he can get some supporters by hooking himself/herself to it. Yuk.

For me, I think the History books will see the legacy that Reagan left us and how he ended what could have been the most deadly conflict known to man. Hopefully we will see in 25 years and not after the revolving door swings too far.

Oh yeah - in 25 years, I am in on Rushmore - although I doubt we could pull something like that off again. That thing is a work of art and very manual. I bet it would take billions of dollars in private funds.

Putting him on the 10 is dumb. No matter how good Reagan was, he just doesn't belong with these guys: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, Ben Franklin.

I'm sorry, he can't hang. Not even FDR or Kennedy can hang, in my opinion.

Is this really so shocking? To the GOP, Reagan is a god. He is the epitome of the conservative political culture.

"What would the conservatives here think if next year when Democrats control the Senate/House or both they propose and pass a law that renames the Pentagon after Carter when he dies? Or give Clinton the 5 dollar bill? How many of you would REALLY not be heavily ticked off by that."

If you ever produce someone that's worthy of either one of these, i wouldn't be ticked at all. I rest assured however that this will never happen.

Seriously, I think common sense will prevail here. We won't see him on a 10 spot in the next few years or Mt. Rushmore - no need to get worked up. He will / should be immortalized in one way, shape or form IMO, people recognize this and are throwing ideas. I think this will be the predominant viewpoint 25 years from now, i can wait.

Nice job on the original post, superbelt. kick ass research and real clear. just wanted to say that :D

As for the issue, 25 years is a goooooood thing. Wonder if Reagan had ANY idea when he signed it that it might be an issue with his name. Lots to respect about the guy, I'd like to think so.

I found it appalling that National Airport was renamed so quickly. The irony alone should have stopped that one.

I wish I could lay down $10,000 in vegas that there won't be a battleship named after Clinton in the next 50 years. I would do that in a heartbeat...

In 1988, I remember people talking about forgoing the 27th Amendment and allowing him to run a 3rd term. Never happened.

So I am not worked up about all this. JFK was put on the Half Dollar in 1964 (or '67) I believe, no 25 years. There were people then and for years afterward talking about JFK on Mt. Rushmore. It happens whenever we see a strong president.

Personally, I liked Reagan as a figurehead and inspirational speaker, but much like today he was not the true
leader making the decisions, that was Baker and company.... many of the same people making the decisions today. Reagan was good at one thing bankrupting the USSR over Star Wars, had the USSR been able to afford to research Reagan's great bluff then they would not have fallen and he would not even be a speck on the wall.
Reagan already has an airport named after him (Ronald Reagan National) in DC.

I am not a fan of his politics BUT he did unite the nation and brought back pride, He also destroyed the unions, opened the door for jobs to be shuttled overseas, allowed deregulations which have led to greedy corporations and the end of mom and pop stores. In short his programs benefitted people in the short run and led to a desperately needed prosperity, however in the long run his economic policies have destroyed the middle class and have totally wiped out the infrastructure and education.

But this is all my opinion.

I think assasinations could be an exception for any president. If you end up giving that ultimate sacrifice, go ahead and find something grand for him.

I'd just like to say I am fine with Reagan getting the little things like the streets and P.O's and even the battleship I can understand.

I'm just leery about the more grand ideas like currency, monuments, and iconic national buildings while his body is still warm.

I despised Ronald Reagan, and I continue to despise very nearly everything he stood for. While I am not happy he died (per se), and I have mixed feelings for his children (he's dead, but advanced Alzheimers is painful to watch), I would agree to putting Reagan on one of the bills. Only one. The $20.

See, Alex Hamliton was the man who made this country's treasure. Replacing him with the man who very nearly broke it would be even more insultingly ironic than naming an airport after the man who fired the air traffic controllers.

However, the current ugly mug on the double sawbuck is Jackson, the single worst butcher this country ever voted into office. Say what you will about Reagan, but you can't say he committed genocide (though for pure body count, his neglect of AIDS research likely exceeded the Trail of Tears).

Deserved or not, it would be a step up.

The 25 year rule makes good sense though.

Jackson isn't anywhere near the top of my list for who I would LIKE to see on our currency. But he was a prolific decision maker and had many moments on both sides of the wall.
He was a primary founder of the Democratic party. His admin took very crucial steps early on to democratize the government for real. The system originally set up by the framers wasn't really democratic at all. He was also a big supporter of a strong central government.

What is funny to me, is that Congressman J.D. Hayworth, who introduced the legislation to put Reagan on the ten dollar bill, has been highly critical of renaming a local mountain Piestewa Peak after Lori Piestewa who died in Iraq because we have not let enough time go by(Please note that this move was pushed through by a Democratic Governor who Hayworth is thinking about running against). Let's at least wait until the man is buried before we decide what type of memorial is appropriate.

I can't imagine that I could disagree more with someone than Tophat on this. I never liked Alexander Hamilton and disagreed with him across the board as far as my understanding goes.

Not that I think anyone who just died should replace him, I just can't imagine defending him. Horrible founding father in my book - the worst. I think the current incarnation of the fed is a huge problem that very few understand and he is the person who was pushing for it way back when.

News flash - the Federal Reserve Bank is a Privatly held bank that makes money off of every dollar in circulation. This is not a governement institution. Hamilton was a real hero alright.

I bet we would agree on beer though. . . (not Hamilton and I - I have no idea what he drank or if he drank)

Oh yeah - and Boatin - I will take that 10k bet. Done deal. I will have my lawyer set it up and you won't even have to pay Vegas points. Just say the word. Not because the Navy won't ever name a ship after Clinton - let alone a flagship, but the odds of the US building ANY battleship in the next 10 years are pretty darn slim.

i must be fuzzy on betting. it seems like we both want the same side of that bet. am i confused, or did i mistype? either is more than possible :D

I am retarded - time for bed. We are on the same side. . .

What would be funny about naming a ship after Clinton would be the widespread displeasure, if not refusal, of or armed forces to serve on it. I can name one member of the armed forces I know who doesn't have something against Clinton.

Maybe they will come up with a new class of ship, something like

the Dodger class, then it would be appropriate for slick willie.

Or most of bush's cabinet, including your man g.w.

I think that they should start naming homeless shelters after reagan in light of his effort so make sure that they would never be empty.

I really hope this clears things up.
http://quest.cjonline.com/images/070300/bush2.jpg

I went and did a google search looking for slick willies military photos but the search did not find any.

Why? because he ran to england.

You're right, bush didn't dodge the draft, he just dodged the war. Splitting hairs.
Find me one of cheney, or ashcroft, or wolfowitz, or etc.

[/thread jack]

Since you've decided to delve into the military service of cabinet members, what about William Cohen, William Perry, Janet Reno, and other Clinton Cabinet members and advisors? They certainly don't have a military pedigree. The closest I seem to recall is Al Gore serving as a reporter in the Army.

Since when does military service equal competency to serve in the government?

Al carried a rifle on his assignments, which were into battle zones, and used it at times when called upon.

/clarifying

Really wasn't meant to disparage Al's service. Just trying to show that there is little to fall back on when getting into the nitty gritty of either President's Cabinets.

Certainly people can (and have) argue that flying a fighter plane (in peace, war, training, whatever) is at least (or more) dangerous as being a reporter that occassionally sees shots fired in anger.

Will we then have to determine the size of the risk each service member took to gauge how relevant they are to speak about military issues? It's just a ridiculous argument all around.

totally off topic (still), but have to say: this made me laugh...

i would add that it's true for any politician, but funny nonetheless :D

I wasn't the one bringing up military service. It has already been brought up. You're quoting the wrong threadjacker.

Andrew Jackson: Only President in American history (Before Clinton) who was actually Impeached. Unlike Clinton, the Congress did vote to Impeach him, but it was at the end of his term, so it never "officially" happened.

Not Andrew Jackson its Andrew Johnson that got impeached.. Johnson was after Lincoln

Andrew Jackson is considered one of our "great" presidents - he ushered in the Jacksonian era of politics which is true to this day where the mass populace voted, there was the growth of the president figure (Jackson had more vetoes in his terms than all his predecessors combined), and really started the spoils system

Whether you hate those features now or not, he is still widely regarded as a big president in history / figure - Andrew Johnson, on the other hand, is the guy who got impeached, not Jackson

You brought it down to a cabinet level. Questioning a President's military service (or lack thereof) is a standard whenever there is potential or actual warfare. Throwing in cabinet positions when the vast majority of cabinet members throughout our history were politicians rather than soldiers is irrelevant.

It would be a sub. What better tribute to Clinton than a ship that is supposed to go down?

Hayworth is a total ass. I can't believe he represents me. Total two faced asshole.

Andrew Jackson committed mass genocide against Native Americans while he was President... I hate him more than any other president.

Andrew Johnson was impeached to signal the restoration of the power of Congress after Lincoln had abused his power during the civil war, not saying what Lincoln did was right or wrong just that this was why he was impeached.

Anyways, if your President then things will be named after you. I think people have gone overboard with Reagans death and naming things after him but sure enough whether your conservative or liberal his presidency was succesful, he did bring down Communism.

You can sure as hell bet William Jefferson Clinton will have his name on plenty of items after his death, and both Bush Jr. and Sr. also.