If the California gubernatorial elections taught us nothing else...it's that Mr. Hamilton was on to something.

I hate LBJ!! I still believe he was behind the whole Kennedy assanination. I have totally no proof...he just looks evil! :p

Then I agree with KSigkid. Who said, FDR was overrated. Umm, yea....check out some serious biographies of his assistants. Interesting.

And then there's Clinton - I say we just name a cigar after him.

I would support the Reagan 10.00 bill And way to go KY REP-Mitch!!!!

Okay, thats my stupid opinion.

Oh, I dunno.

Perhaps it’s just because I’m a lawyer, but I think that every time our federal, constitutional system, with its balances of state-federal powers and executive-legislative-judicial powers, works, we have Alexander Hamilton to thank. The framework he gave us is a very big reason that we are the strong, stable country we are today.
No, the contributions of Reagan are more recent, which gives them the illusion of being more tangible or more important. Whether they really are, time will tell. But assuming that the more recent is the more important is always a dangerous thing.

Yes, Reagan had a major role in ending the Cold War. (So did a lot of other people, and I think it probably is a bit over the top to give Reagan credit for averting the end of humanity. But anyway.) But was that role more “tangible” than George Washington’s role in gaining this country’s independence, which we now take for granted? After all, without that we wouldn’t be having this discussion on who should be on our money. Queen Elizabeth II would be on all of it.

Or were Reagan’s contributions more “tangible” than the abolition of slavery? I think quite a few people would say “no.”
I could argue otherwise. (After all, I’m a lawyer -- I can argue anything.) When my then 3- or 4-year old son would get pennies, quarters, dollar bills or five dollar bills (the later making him rich as all get out), I was surprised that he would ask “whose picture is this on here?” When we’d say “that’s George Washington” or “that’s Abraham Lincoln,” he would then ask, “why is his picture on here?” And we would give a 4-year-old level history lesson.

When, at age 6, he made his first trip to DC, he could stand on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and say “Hey, this is the picture from the five dollars!” When he saw the statue of Lincoln, he could say “that’s Abraham Lincoln, the guy from the penny.” When he saw the Washington Monument, he knew who Washington was because he had asked about the pictures on the $1 bill and the quarter. The other day, out of the blue, he asked “Dad, is there a $100 bill? Whose picture is on it?” So, we had a talk about Ben Franklin.

Never underestimate the power of simple things like bank notes to carry messages about our history or provide teaching opportunities for our kids -- and maybe even for some grown-ups, like the reporter whose article started this thread, and who identified Hamilton merely as "the first Secretary of the Treasury."

What is that? That they picked a governor that changed things around for California? That a moron like Davis was elected to begin with and Arnold has come in and cleaned house like noneother? Maybe.

As for the currency, there is no reason Hamilton should be removed. Hamilton was one of the greatest and you don't just go around doing that. Personally I think the frigging penny should be removed from circulation and another paper amount added in - and then Mr. Reagan can be on there if people so wish.

-Rudey

No, because people did not vote for him because he was qualified. They voted for him because of who he is...an action movie hero. Also, we have yet to see how wonderful his actions will be.

Also, I agree with MysticCat. Alexander Hamilton was one of the most important Founding Fathers. I was enraged this morning when someone on the Today Show (or Good Morning America, interchangeable to me) joked that he wasn't a president so he should be removed. Also, the fact that he formulated the plan to get the country out of debt after the war and basically established our economy (in addition to the contributions mentioned by MysticCat) is just something to sneeze at.

Oh really? So avoiding a fiscal crisis was nothing?

And they probably voted for him more because of how much Davis had screwed up - not because he was an action movie hero.

-Rudey

It's Gray Davis, not David that got terminated by the Governator. :)

The S and the D are right next to each other. LOL Leave me alone man.

-Rudey

either way you spell it it was a great day all over california when davis got the boot! i feel better when i turn on my AC and i wont get a rolling black out or have topay triple car tax tags this yr either.

;) :p :D

HOLLA BACK.

That is very wrong. He won in a landslide because not because of who he is, but who he isn't: Gray Davis.

I hope not.

OK, so the people of California voted for him because of who he isn't...does that make a more sound decision. I think that's worse.

The other candidates in the running were all not Davis. He was the best "not Davis" so that's not all it was.

-Rudey

This is moving so far away from the original intent of the thread, but oh well.

My original statement was that he was elected because he was Arnold. The other posted offered another reason. I proceeded as if it was true. My point is, it doesn't matter if people voted for him because he was not Davis or because he was a popular entertainer. My point is, he is unqualified.

Ugh...because to be qualified you have to be what? I want someone that can represent me. I want someone that can go into most situations and be able to handle them because he is intelligent just like me. The country's political system was not built for career politicians actually. So far the results have shown that he is qualified. Just like Reagan (bringing it back to topic), they said he wasn't qualified and just like Reagan he has defied predictions.

-Rudey

Well, to perform any job I feel a person should possess a certain set of skills. Also, sue me for thinking that experience is important. I'm not saying that a person should be a career politician. But there's nothing wrong with thinking a person should pursue the office of city councilman, state senator, or mayor before becoming governor.

So far, his results mean very little to me. Only time will tell how successful his administration will be.

Also, I was not a huge Davis fan. I was not a fan at all. However, I was opposed to this election.

Do you not think it's enough that Arnold has surrounded himself with experienced and smart people? I think he's a very principled man who is smart enough to be able to take in information and make good decisions.

Yeah sometimes I wake up and put on my sunglasses and live in pretend world too where results mean very little to me.

-Rudey :)

Well, I do live in California so I am able to suspend reality at my whim.

But, nice that you only focused on a small part of my statement. Again, early results mean very little. Some of his decisions will have long-range consequences that may very-well overshadow some of his early favorable results.

An effective manager will always surround themselves with experienced and smart people. However, I think that it is important that the manager is equally experienced and intelligent.

$50 Bill
 

Charlie Schumer was on the boob tube this morning suggesting a much better alternative. Put Reagan on the $50 bill, instead of U.S. Grant. Grant was a great Civil War general, and has cool initials, but he was a mediocre president.

I like this idea much better. Hamilton should never be removed. He was far too important to developing America. He was the intellectual adversary of Jefferson, and it was these two minds, more than any other, that shaped the ideas of early America.

:eek:

Ignore that! Contrary to popular belief, all Demos are not poor and all Republicans are not rich.