Debate over the dime pits Reagan against FDR - Page 3

MrFun · December 7, 2003, 04:04

But I have other reasons why I detest Raegan so much.

Imran Siddiqui · December 7, 2003, 04:10

Quote:

now that is FLAT OUT unconstitutional

Actually no, because the SCOTUS has said it is not. Even though today people consider it a bad thing, Korematsu has never been overruled. Remember, the Constitution does allow for the suspension of haebus corpus during wartime.

Mr. Harley · December 7, 2003, 05:21

I'll have to check the case law, and I only have my links on my home computer. I know that the cases resulting from the Civil War under the Lincoln adminstration specifically found, after the fact, that suspension of habeus corpus in non-war zones with functioning civil government, like Ohio in one of the specific cases, was unconstitutional. You could argue interning the civilians in Hawaii was constitutional. Not Japanese Americans born in, and living in, the continental US. It may have been constitutional in the sense that the constitution is whatever the Surpreme Court says it is, look at the cases coming out of the Southern leaning Court just prior to the Civil War. I will argue that what was done to the Japanese Americans was not constitutional, but that the government got away with.

The Mad Monk · December 7, 2003, 05:41

I'm just wondering what Mr. Fun will do if Reagan gets on the twenty...

Felch · December 7, 2003, 10:15

Anybody trying to cop a dime?

mrmitchell · December 7, 2003, 14:00

Quote:

Roosevelt
(Known for defeating the forces of hell itself)

Oh yeah, that's right too. I never saw Reagan defeating any forces of hell.

Asmodean · December 7, 2003, 15:11

Who cares...money (that is paper and coins) will be dead in half a century anyway. If they really want to make a lasting impression, they should issue a bill puting his ugly face on all visa cards instead.

Asmodean

MrFun · December 7, 2003, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
I'm just wondering what Mr. Fun will do if Reagan gets on the twenty...

I'm angry -- not crazy.

Jaguar · December 7, 2003, 16:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Actually Andrew Jackson should be best known for adovocating universal white male sufferage (taking away property requirements) and being known as the man of the common people (I'm sure you've hear the stories of dirty commoners staining the White House during Jackson's inaugeration), and, of course, his amazing victory in the Battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812.

Quote:

His abuses of human rights by far eclipse those of any president before or after him.

The Trail of Tears was worse than slavery?

I believe there were slaves during his presidency as well, so I don't know why you brought that up. There was no president who made slavery national policy, so there's nobody more guilty or less guilty than Jackson among the first 15 presidents in that regard.

His victory in the Battle of New Orleans was after peace had been signed.

Jaguar · December 7, 2003, 16:05

Quote:

Originally posted by MrFun
Or worse than propping up anti-communist dictatorships in third world countries during the Cold War??

The people in the third world countries had the choice between communist dictatorships and anti-communist dictatorships. They were screwed over no matter what we did. The Cherokee didn't have to be screwed over.

MrFun · December 7, 2003, 17:53

Um -- God forbid if third world country people could have a choice for an anti-communist democracy!!

horrors of all horrors!!

The diplomat · December 7, 2003, 18:03

It is a no brainer, folks. Reagan should be on the dime!

Kuciwalker · December 7, 2003, 18:08

Quote:

I believe there were slaves during his presidency as well, so I don't know why you brought that up. There was no president who made slavery national policy, so there's nobody more guilty or less guilty than Jackson among the first 15 presidents in that regard.

I'm 99% sure there was no slavery during his presidency (unless he stopped it). The amendment banning slavery (in all of the states) was either made during his presidency or Lincoln's.

Jaguar · December 7, 2003, 18:12

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker

Quote:

I believe there were slaves during his presidency as well, so I don't know why you brought that up. There was no president who made slavery national policy, so there's nobody more guilty or less guilty than Jackson among the first 15 presidents in that regard.

I'm 99% sure there was no slavery during his presidency

His presidency was 1829-1837. Would you like to revise that statement?

GePap · December 7, 2003, 18:13

Quote:

Originally posted by The diplomat
It is a no brainer, folks. Reagan should be on the dime!

Ok, now that the comic relief is over...

Jackson is a crucial figure in US history, and so are Franklyn and Hamilton, the only two non-presidents on money. Everyone on money deserves to be there, with the exception of Kennedy..he had a pretty wife and got himself killed (fine, he idd more bu no more than say Eisenhower or Truman): not enough to get on money. You can question Grant's precidency, but then there is his role as Union commander...

There is no reason for any pres. after FDR getting on money, cause none have done much to compare. I wonder when republicans decided to create a cult of personality? How Stalinist of them....

Next up: Reagans unfinished Opera..the greatest piece of fiction EVER!!!!! You must submitt!

Kuciwalker · December 7, 2003, 18:13

Never mind then.

Wasn't there a Jackson that came after Lincoln?

GePap · December 7, 2003, 18:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

It's a good tactic to ensure your guy is remembered, despite his failings as a president.

Exactly. It certainly worked for FDR.

You mean it wasn't being president for 12 years during the Great Depression and WW2 and his great speeches about fear and December 7 and fireside chats, and the creation of....... that make him memorable?

Jaguar · December 7, 2003, 18:16

Quote:

Originally posted by MrFun
Um -- God forbid if third world country people could have a choice for an anti-communist democracy!!

horrors of all horrors!!

Believe me, if we could just go into any old country and easily set up a functioning capitalist democracy, we would have done that a lot during the Cold War.

Jaguar · December 7, 2003, 18:18

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
Never mind then.

Wasn't there a Jackson that came after Lincoln?

You're thinking of Andrew Johnson, who came directly after Lincoln. It's OK, I used to confuse them too.

chequita guevara · December 7, 2003, 18:40

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker

Quote:

I believe there were slaves during his presidency as well, so I don't know why you brought that up. There was no president who made slavery national policy, so there's nobody more guilty or less guilty than Jackson among the first 15 presidents in that regard.

I'm 99% sure there was no slavery during his presidency (unless he stopped it). The amendment banning slavery (in all of the states) was either made during his presidency or Lincoln's.

There was slavery during the Jackson presidency, seeing as it was 25 years before the Civil War.

mrmitchell · December 7, 2003, 18:43

Quote:

His victory in the Battle of New Orleans was after peace had been signed.

So? They didn't know of the peace yet.

Quote:

It is a no brainer, folks. Reagan should be on the dime!

Only if Clinton is on the dollar

Quote:

I'm 99% sure there was no slavery during his presidency (unless he stopped it). The amendment banning slavery (in all of the states) was either made during his presidency or Lincoln's.

Andrew JACKSON, not Andrew JOHNSON. Andrew JACKSON was 1829-1837. Andrew JOHNSON succeeded Lincoln after his assassination, and was from 1865-1868 IIRC.

I'm pretty sure the amdmts banning slavery were passed during JOHNSON's Presidency (maybe it was the guy after him. I dunno), but it surely wasn't JACKSON (who came 30 years before Lincoln, remember).

Normally Jaguar I'd laugh at him too, but it's a legitimate mistake (sort of).

Guynemer · December 7, 2003, 19:39

Quote:

Originally posted by The diplomat
It is a no brainer, folks. Reagan should be on the dime!

"No brainer" seems an accurate description of that statement, though not in the way you intended, mon ami.

The diplomat · December 7, 2003, 20:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Guynemer

"No brainer" seems an accurate description of that statement, though not in the way you intended, mon ami.

Reagan is one of the great American Presidents of the modern era. It would be very fitting to put him on the dime. Especially considering his health, it would be a very touching homage to his accomplishments.

mrmitchell · December 7, 2003, 20:19

Quote:

Especially considering his health,

So you're admitting he's already dead?

Drake Tungsten · December 7, 2003, 20:28

Quote:

You mean it wasn't being president for 12 years during the Great Depression and WW2 and his great speeches about fear and December 7 and fireside chats, and the creation of....... that make him memorable?

Reagan was president for 8 years in what turned out to be the last gasp of the Cold War, was a great orator himself, and created........ so I can see why people consider him just as memorable as FDR.

At any rate, your original post was about the failings of Reagan, not his successes. I was just pointing out that FDR had his fair share of failings as well.

Kuciwalker · December 7, 2003, 20:31

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
There was slavery during the Jackson presidency, seeing as it was 25 years before the Civil War.

Jaguar Warrior already corrected me on this. I mixed up Jackson and Johnson (btw, thanks JW).

Kidicious · December 7, 2003, 20:49

Reagan was not a great president. He is only thought of as being great right now because he is the most recent Republican president that Republicans will claim. He didn't see the US through any crisis and he didn't build a railroad or put us on the moon. He was just mediocre and in 50 years no one will remember him.

These people are seriously morons.