On March 3, 2009, Representative Patrick McHenry (R-NC) proposed legislation that if adopted, would replace the image of Ulysses S. Grant with Ronald Reagan on the fifty dollar bill. After all, both of these Presidents represented the strength and resolve of the United States and both presided over periods of great economic expansion after overcoming the devastating affects of particularly unprofitable wars. Admittedly, I have always admired Ronald Reagan as a President and as a man. I think he reflected the highest examples American ideals and brought the United States out of the despair and embarrassment of the Carter years. Reagan instilled a new sense of dignity for America and a feeling of pride in our accomplishments and what his economic policies did not do, this new pride in being American did.
While Conservatives immediately joined the chorus call to immortalize Reagan, the Progressive left burst out in a cry of frustration. Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA) dismissed the idea and noted that the place of honor on American currency should be reserved for figures in American history that are well known for their contributions to the nation and unfortunately, many of Reagan’s policies are still considered far too controversial to consider this legislation seriously.
Well, that really doesn’t surprise me; especially in a day and age when White House advisors like Anita Dunn (former Obama communications director) and Ron Bloom (Obama’s current manufacturing Czar) don’t think it’s particularly controversial to quote the deadly Chinese dictator, Mao Zedong. In fact, I would suspect that Brad Sherman doesn’t have nearly as much of a problem with the policies of Zedong as he does with Reagan’s but then again, when was the last time California actually acted like part of the United States instead of a foreign irritant?
Truthfully, I oppose this legislation. Not because Ronald Reagan was controversial or undeserving, but because of the state of our economy. Considering the twelve trillion dollar National debt that President Obama says he will double in ten years, the face of United States currency isn’t the place of honor that it once was. In fact, I believe that if our former Presidents could communicate from beyond the grave, most would have already sued to have their names and images removed from the paper currency that may very well spell the end of America or at the very least, a free America.
Out of all the Presidents gracing the face of our money I found it funny that one is a perfect match while yet another is wholly inappropriate. The largest denomination ever printed for U.S. currency was the one-hundred thousand dollar bill. Issued in 1929, the $100,000 bill had borne the image of Woodrow Wilson who was not the first Progressive President but he is certainly the one that did the most damage to our nation. We can thank Wilson for the Progressive income tax that would become the foundation of power for future Progressives. That tax would allow Progressives to expand the scope and power of the Federal government beyond what is allowable in the Constitution; giving them limitless funds to create the political machines to do so. The $100,000 bill did not represent the vigor of Capitalism but rather, it was representative of the abstract views Progressives held on the economy as well as the amount of money they felt would be needed to fulfill their vision of government control. I can think of no better President to place on the $100,000 bill than Woodrow Wilson. Not as a place of honor but in recognition of how little that $100,000 is worth after a hundred years of Progressivism.
A bust of Franklin Delano Roosevelt appears on the face of the American dime, or ten cent coin. The ten cent denomination was first authorized by the coinage act of 1792 and would be minted in six previous styles before we would arrive at the familiar Roosevelt dime in 1946. At first I considered FDR appropriate for the face of the dime since the Tin Pan Alley song “Brother, can you spare a dime” written by Yip Harburg and Jay Gorney in 1931, was synonymous with the Great Depression; a Depression used by FDR as a lever to drive the nation further into the socialist morass of Progressive ideology.
For decades, Liberal college Professors have been teaching that FDR led us out of the Depression through a myriad of social programs and public works projects; making this the accepted theory of what ended the Great Depression. Now that their students have become teachers as well, this popular myth is currently being spread in elementary, intermediate and high schools across America to continue the indoctrination of our youth into the Progressive mindset. Unfortunately, the social programs FDR encouraged with the passage of Social Security are in the process of bankrupting America and his public works programs had as much effect on the Depression as Obama’s stimulus bill has been having on the current recession.
What actually ended the Depression was World War Two. America’s industries mobilized to provide war goods, the armies of the unemployed were now the armies of the American Republic and once the industrial centers of Europe and Asia were destroyed, it would be twenty years before you could buy anything from anywhere but America. Let us not forget the 406,000 brave Americans killed during the war and the more than 600,000 that were wounded. These men would not be returning to work and would never again, be counted among the unemployed. To praise FDR for ending the Depression ignores the bravery and sacrifice of those that shed their blood for democracy; negating their contribution to the end of one of America’s greatest financial crises. In short, Franklin Roosevelt’s contributions to America, to use another popular phrase from history, “weren’t worth a dime”.
In 1969, Richard Nixon signed an executive order that would cease the printing of high denomination bills leaving the one-hundred dollar bill as the most valuable United States paper currency still in print. The Federal Reserve began retiring the large bills and today, relatively few remain in circulation. Nixon ended the printing of high denomination bills to thwart organized crime’s efforts in counterfeiting and to complicate the use of cash in the illegal drug trade. Modern electronic money transfers and the abandonment of the gold standard eliminated the need for large denomination bills for banking and corporate transactions.
There are currently no plans to deviate from the seven denominations still in print making the face of these bills a rare place with which we can honor only the most notable people in American history. In that light, I understand Representative McHenry’s desire to replace Grant with Reagan as an example of an American legend that more people could remember and relate to. However, the value of American currency continues to decline in relation to the policies of the current administration. So where is the honor now that America’s currency is considered by the world market as a symbol of America’s folly? The things that Ronald Reagan held dearest cannot be found on the face of the injured currency of a demoralized nation. The hard work, perseverance and strength of convictions that he believed in have been diluted by the current course taken by an out of control government to seize power from a frightened people.
Washington, Lincoln, Franklin, etc.; we should probably removing the images of these revered men from all of our currency and replacing them with something a little more representative of reality. As long as the Federal Reserve is printing cash as if it were play money, perhaps the picture of that little old man and his top hat found on Monopoly money would be more appropriate. Better still, since the Obama administration plans on doubling our national debt over the next decade further crippling the dollar, maybe we should just use his picture on all of it. After all, Obama really loves the look of his own image and since his advisors already like to quote Mao, it wouldn’t hurt to have money that looks a little more Chinese.
Paul
While Conservatives immediately joined the chorus call to immortalize Reagan, the Progressive left burst out in a cry of frustration. Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA) dismissed the idea and noted that the place of honor on American currency should be reserved for figures in American history that are well known for their contributions to the nation and unfortunately, many of Reagan’s policies are still considered far too controversial to consider this legislation seriously.
Well, that really doesn’t surprise me; especially in a day and age when White House advisors like Anita Dunn (former Obama communications director) and Ron Bloom (Obama’s current manufacturing Czar) don’t think it’s particularly controversial to quote the deadly Chinese dictator, Mao Zedong. In fact, I would suspect that Brad Sherman doesn’t have nearly as much of a problem with the policies of Zedong as he does with Reagan’s but then again, when was the last time California actually acted like part of the United States instead of a foreign irritant?
Truthfully, I oppose this legislation. Not because Ronald Reagan was controversial or undeserving, but because of the state of our economy. Considering the twelve trillion dollar National debt that President Obama says he will double in ten years, the face of United States currency isn’t the place of honor that it once was. In fact, I believe that if our former Presidents could communicate from beyond the grave, most would have already sued to have their names and images removed from the paper currency that may very well spell the end of America or at the very least, a free America.
Out of all the Presidents gracing the face of our money I found it funny that one is a perfect match while yet another is wholly inappropriate. The largest denomination ever printed for U.S. currency was the one-hundred thousand dollar bill. Issued in 1929, the $100,000 bill had borne the image of Woodrow Wilson who was not the first Progressive President but he is certainly the one that did the most damage to our nation. We can thank Wilson for the Progressive income tax that would become the foundation of power for future Progressives. That tax would allow Progressives to expand the scope and power of the Federal government beyond what is allowable in the Constitution; giving them limitless funds to create the political machines to do so. The $100,000 bill did not represent the vigor of Capitalism but rather, it was representative of the abstract views Progressives held on the economy as well as the amount of money they felt would be needed to fulfill their vision of government control. I can think of no better President to place on the $100,000 bill than Woodrow Wilson. Not as a place of honor but in recognition of how little that $100,000 is worth after a hundred years of Progressivism.
A bust of Franklin Delano Roosevelt appears on the face of the American dime, or ten cent coin. The ten cent denomination was first authorized by the coinage act of 1792 and would be minted in six previous styles before we would arrive at the familiar Roosevelt dime in 1946. At first I considered FDR appropriate for the face of the dime since the Tin Pan Alley song “Brother, can you spare a dime” written by Yip Harburg and Jay Gorney in 1931, was synonymous with the Great Depression; a Depression used by FDR as a lever to drive the nation further into the socialist morass of Progressive ideology.
For decades, Liberal college Professors have been teaching that FDR led us out of the Depression through a myriad of social programs and public works projects; making this the accepted theory of what ended the Great Depression. Now that their students have become teachers as well, this popular myth is currently being spread in elementary, intermediate and high schools across America to continue the indoctrination of our youth into the Progressive mindset. Unfortunately, the social programs FDR encouraged with the passage of Social Security are in the process of bankrupting America and his public works programs had as much effect on the Depression as Obama’s stimulus bill has been having on the current recession.
What actually ended the Depression was World War Two. America’s industries mobilized to provide war goods, the armies of the unemployed were now the armies of the American Republic and once the industrial centers of Europe and Asia were destroyed, it would be twenty years before you could buy anything from anywhere but America. Let us not forget the 406,000 brave Americans killed during the war and the more than 600,000 that were wounded. These men would not be returning to work and would never again, be counted among the unemployed. To praise FDR for ending the Depression ignores the bravery and sacrifice of those that shed their blood for democracy; negating their contribution to the end of one of America’s greatest financial crises. In short, Franklin Roosevelt’s contributions to America, to use another popular phrase from history, “weren’t worth a dime”.
In 1969, Richard Nixon signed an executive order that would cease the printing of high denomination bills leaving the one-hundred dollar bill as the most valuable United States paper currency still in print. The Federal Reserve began retiring the large bills and today, relatively few remain in circulation. Nixon ended the printing of high denomination bills to thwart organized crime’s efforts in counterfeiting and to complicate the use of cash in the illegal drug trade. Modern electronic money transfers and the abandonment of the gold standard eliminated the need for large denomination bills for banking and corporate transactions.
There are currently no plans to deviate from the seven denominations still in print making the face of these bills a rare place with which we can honor only the most notable people in American history. In that light, I understand Representative McHenry’s desire to replace Grant with Reagan as an example of an American legend that more people could remember and relate to. However, the value of American currency continues to decline in relation to the policies of the current administration. So where is the honor now that America’s currency is considered by the world market as a symbol of America’s folly? The things that Ronald Reagan held dearest cannot be found on the face of the injured currency of a demoralized nation. The hard work, perseverance and strength of convictions that he believed in have been diluted by the current course taken by an out of control government to seize power from a frightened people.
Washington, Lincoln, Franklin, etc.; we should probably removing the images of these revered men from all of our currency and replacing them with something a little more representative of reality. As long as the Federal Reserve is printing cash as if it were play money, perhaps the picture of that little old man and his top hat found on Monopoly money would be more appropriate. Better still, since the Obama administration plans on doubling our national debt over the next decade further crippling the dollar, maybe we should just use his picture on all of it. After all, Obama really loves the look of his own image and since his advisors already like to quote Mao, it wouldn’t hurt to have money that looks a little more Chinese.
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment