Proposal to put Reagan on $50 Bill

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,253
Media
213
Likes
32,166
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
You may or may not know that legislation has been submitted to replace Ulysses S. Grant on the $50 bill with the image of former president Ronald Reagan.

For me and the estimated 20,000 American lives that were lost to AIDS before this president even mentioned this health crisis, this would be a stab in the heart.
Reagan's first remarks on the AIDS crisis came on May 31, 1987 at the Third International Conference on AIDS in Washington. This was near the end of his second term.
With the first reported cases coming to light in 1981 and over 1,000 cases being reported by 1983, this indifference to American suffering is the Reagan legacy, in my opinion.
Dr. C. Everett Koop, Reagan's surgeon general, said he was kept out of all AIDS discussions for the first five years of the Reagan administration "because transmission of AIDS was understood to be primarily in the homosexual population and in those who abused intravenous drugs." The president's advisers, he said, "took the stand, 'They are only getting what they justly deserve.'
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Indy - It is hardly fair to admonish Reagan for not addressing AIDS. Reagan was not a doctor or medical researcher - he would have been receiving input or pressure from another source(s) had they known AIDS was such a threat at that time.

I understand your frustration, but it is simply not the job of the Commander In Chief to wage crusades against new viruses.

Obama wasn't the chairperson on containing the Swine Flu.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Absolutely no way.
Reagan? On money? My GOD... some of these same people talk about those who are overpraising Obama. This is just insane!

Indy - It is hardly fair to admonish Reagan for not addressing AIDS. Reagan was not a doctor or medical researcher - he would have been receiving input or pressure from another source(s) had they known AIDS was such a threat at that time.

I understand your frustration, but it is simply not the job of the Commander In Chief to wage crusades against new viruses.

Obama wasn't the chairperson on containing the Swine Flu.

The only difference is that Obama didn't stay silent about the problem for six years while it grew to a major pandemic. Reagan received info about AIDS since it was discovered in the early 80s, and he remained silent on the subject for a very long time. Even if he isn't a doctor, presidents are looked upon as figures for information important to our nation. With tens thousands of people dying and contracting the virus, actions should have been done beforehand.
 
Last edited:

FuzzyKen

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
100
Points
193
Gender
Male
Ok, there is another way to lose my lunch! A mediocre actor who offered decent service as a California Governor and let his own views of the world and the people in it cloud judgement. The best words ever uttered from the mouth of Ronald W. Reagan were those he uttered when called in to testitify at the H.O.U.A.C. hearings started by Joseph McCarthy. They became the mantra of the Republican Party. Interesting but very flawed man and an interesting but flawed legacy.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,253
Media
213
Likes
32,166
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Indy - It is hardly fair to admonish Reagan for not addressing AIDS. Reagan was not a doctor or medical researcher - he would have been receiving input or pressure from another source(s) had they known AIDS was such a threat at that time.

I understand your frustration, but it is simply not the job of the Commander In Chief to wage crusades against new viruses.

Obama wasn't the chairperson on containing the Swine Flu.
Watch this movie sometime. You may learn something about the early politics of the Aids Crisis. And The Band Played On

 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
When there are so many other worthwhile historical figures to commemorate on USA money, Reagan is just the rank-and-file Reaganists pushing for more attention. Leave Andrew Jackson right where he is. And while the mint is at it, bring back the $500 and $1,000 bills!


EDIT: And Starpooper, when it comes to AIDS and the history of that disease in the USA and around the world, keep your ignorant mouth shut and let the grown ups talk. You, of all people, are in no position to comment on the subject.
 
Last edited:

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Absolutely no way.
Reagan? On money? My GOD... some of these same people talk about those who are overpraising Obama. This is just insane!



The only difference is that Obama didn't stay silent about the problem for six years while it grew to a major pandemic. Reagan received info about AIDS since it was discovered in the early 80s, and he remained silent on the subject for a very long time. Even if he isn't a doctor, presidents are looked upon as figures for information important to our nation. With tens thousands of people dying and contracting the virus, actions should have been done beforehand.

Nobody knew what the hell was going on with AIDS in the early 80's - even doctors. By 1987 Reagan call AIDS 'public enemy number 1' and then George Bush was heckled for calling for mandatory HIV testing that same year.

To hold Ronald Reagan accountable for those deaths is ridiculous. You've got to be kidding me.

Why didn't George Washington do more about cancer? That sonafabitch - do you know how many people died of cancer and I don't recall seeing anything he said publicly about defeating cancer.
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
While i am not condoning putting Reagan on the $50 bill, it should be noted that many of the folks on U.S. currency supported things far worse than Reagan.

Andrew Jackson, is on the $20...he advocated slavery and indian removal...
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I would favor either Roosevelt before Reagan. I also favor removing Grant and Jackson, who weren't exactly great Presidents.

I would rather our money have national symbols on them (flag, bald eagle, etc), not partisan symbols.
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Grant on $50 and Jackson on $20 -- duly noted. And Uncle Ben on $100. But if they take Jackson off a a $20 then there will be a giant cultural gap in the USA because no one will ever figure out what the expression "Slip me a Jackson," or "If I slip you a Jackson?" means without having to consult Wikipedia -- which gets too much consultation time as it is.
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I would rather our money have national symbols on them (flag, bald eagle, etc), not partisan symbols.

I would rather they had reminders on them - such as "Money doesn't grow on trees," or "Where did you get this?" or "Someone earned this, was it YOU?"

This type of thing would foster more fiscal responsibility.
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
^While funny, I hardly think that our currency is the place to be revealing to the world that some of our citizens aren't very bright.


To hold Ronald Reagan accountable for those deaths is ridiculous. You've got to be kidding me.
Who the hell are you trying to kid?

I'm a fan of Reagan's (my mom met him at the 85' Inauguration. I still have the special pin she received for attending), but blatantly lying through your teeth does nobody any good, least of all Reagan's legacy.

Reagan's White House was vehemently anti-gay and everyone knows it. Hell, Reagan's communications director Pat Buchanan frequently remarked that "AIDS is nature's revenge on gay men."... It was White House policy to do NOTHING about AIDS, until further research finally showed that anyone could get it and was getting it, not just gay men. Only when political pressure was overwhelming, did Reagan and his people finally begin to do what they should have done literally years earlier. The President is supposed to be a leader for ALL Americans, not just the ones whose lifestyle he personally approves of.
 
Last edited:

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
^Clarified my remark since you appearing to be trying to play a word game... Reagan's personal beliefs are irrelevant to the discussion... What he did professionally as President is what is at issue.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Nobody knew what the hell was going on with AIDS in the early 80's - even doctors. By 1987 Reagan call AIDS 'public enemy number 1' and then George Bush was heckled for calling for mandatory HIV testing that same year.

I'm sorry, star. You are so wrong on this.
I got into a very heated debate with a woman on this board months ago and if you give me some time I can link it so you can follow along. Although doctors weren't completely aware of what the disease was capable of, a good amount of information was available as early as 1980 to figure out there was a problem. They even discovered HIV, the virus that causes AIDS as early as 1982. At one point, it was labeled as GRID (or Gay Related Immune Deficiency) which sent a message to most people that unless you were gay you didn't have to worry about it. That mentality fueled the issue until someone like Rock Hudson, an actor that was perceived as straight until his death, died of AIDS. Then, people's attitudes (including our government) started to change.

To hold Ronald Reagan accountable for those deaths is ridiculous. You've got to be kidding me.

People hold him responsible for staying silent. We know that Reagan didn't go around and kill every single person who had AIDS. But all it would have taken was a brief moment on TV to talk about the problem and people would have been more aware and better educated to address the problem.

Why didn't George Washington do more about cancer? That sonafabitch - do you know how many people died of cancer and I don't recall seeing anything he said publicly about defeating cancer.

Damn... :mad:
You do realize it's badly placed sarcasm like this, especially when you're addressing people who have friends who have either contracted or died from complications the virus, that makes people detest you? Also, considering that this isn't the first time you ever had a disagreement on this very subject matter it's more than disappointing that you would have such a nonchalant attitude over such a touchy subject. Because it was that same mentality that resulted in the unnecessary deaths of people to begin with.

Just pointing it out... because in all honesty, if you lost a loved one to a disease and we started making fun of it I'm sure you'd be pissed as well.