Why would we want someone on our money who palled around with terrorists, cut and run from terrorists, turned America into a beggar nation and let the criminals around him run things while he consulted astrologers and walked into walls?

Put him on the penny, in recognition of how much wealth trickled down to 'welfare queens,' 'bucks,' and so on during the Reagan era.

Or put him on the deutschmark in honour of his visit to Bitburg. Oh wait, the mark was replaced by the euro. Ah, whatever.

More meaningless worship of the spokesman for the illusion of Morning in America.
More partisan posturing. That's how the Republicans spend their time to make our country better.
By the way, Pat, he raised taxes.

Dear Southern Senator: your side lost the Civil War. Get over it.

The one good idea Trent Lott had was to create a $1 coin with Reagan on the face. What Republican would dare oppose that?

$1 bills are environmentally unfriendly. If putting Reagan on the $1 coin is what it would take to move the US off $1 bills finally, I'd be all for it.

As soon as each GOP Rep and Senator performs fellatio on Reagan's corpse, instead of doing it virtually, I'll let them put Reagan's face on the $50.

St. Ron can be on currency as long as the security feature has Gearge H.W. Bush as the picture you see when you hold it up to the light. We should at least portray some accuracy for the historical record.

On the back we could have either Ollie North at his senate hearings or the All stars of the Savings and Loan Crisis.

What really must kill Repubs is that they know Obama will be on currency some day as his election in of itself was historic.

On the back we could have either Ollie North at his senate hearings or the All stars of the Savings and Loan Crisis.

This would, of course, include John McCain. Or if it's Ollie, we could include Fawn Hill shredding documents in the background.

Talk about devaluing the currency!

I had heard that Charmin was bidding to have the Gipper's face placed on every sheet of their product.

I'd be okay with putting Teddy Roosevelt on the $50 but I believe Glen Beck has determined that TR wasn't a Republican. Maybe that's why I still admire TR.

Reagan is not worth the paper he's printed on.

What a disgusting thought. Replace the man who saved the Union on the $50 bill with the man who began it's demolition. What an abomination.

Jesus RR Christ, if put Ronnie's image on it I'll forget where it came from, I won't ever remember where I put it, and I'll keep trying to pay several bills with it at the same time.

If each generation is to "provide opportunity for the next" then we have to address climate change. Some rethugs want to put a statue RWR in every county. If they put one near me I am getting a dog and walking it to the statue to do its business there every day.

Amount of inflation that guy created should be on a 500$ bill.

This is part of overthrow of the old Republican Party. The new folks, predominantly southern, are very uneasy with Abraham Lincoln and his legacy, including winning the Civil War.

Go to any web site that has an unmoderated comments section for each past US president, and you'll find a flood of right-wing hatred for Lincoln.

As a Civil War general, Grant is closely associated with Lincoln. But in truth, Grant was one of the worst presidents, and his administration was rife with corruption.

Moreover, in 1862, Gen. Grant made himself infamous for his "General Order No. 11", which expelled all Jews from Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, an order which was zealously carried out by his subordinates.

All in all, Grant and Reagan are both questionable choices for the high honor of being featured on currency.

And people say the Republicans have no ideas.

How about we sponsor a bill that states that no one can be put forth to be on our money unless he or she has been dead for at least 50 years? Yeah, I know that means that Kennedy would have to go, but if that's the price I have to pay to keep Reagan off my money in my lifetime, I'd happily pay it.

If they really want a Republican on there, how about Teddy Roosevelt, eh? Oh, wait, I forgot; he's much too "progressive" for the modern Republican party. Silly me.

In a related story, republicans are planning to introduce a bill which will bump Jesus from the cross and replace him with Ronald Reagan.

Theodore Roosevelt belongs on currency. Grant and Reagan do not.

Why don't we get it over with already and rename the US after Reagan instead of the $50 bill, because clearly naming an airport and one of the largest federal buildings (after the pentagon) and g-d knows how many other things after him isn't enough? And no irony in naming that aforementioned huge fed building after a guy who thought that government was the problem, not the solution. No, no irony whatsoever.

This reminds me of when the GOP jack-offs tried to put the American Bastard, Ronald W. Reagan, on the dime.

Good to see the GOP focusing on things that matter...

No time for health care - but hey, let's fool around with stupid zombie cults on currency.

Actually the Dems should make a deal with the GOP...

They can have complete and total control over all the stupid things.. what we name airports, what pictures we put on currency, etc.

We'll take care of policy. We'll write tax legislation, health care policy, etc.

I'm completely willing to live in a world where I have to travel on the Grover Norquist Interstate -- so long as the Democrats get to decide how to fund it, require contractors pay a living wage to build it, and set tax rates to pay for it.

It makes perfect sense to me...

I'm getting tired of the right trying to codify Reagan's place in US history by putting his name or face on everything they can.

Let's see now: Grant played a major part in winning the Civil War which saved the country. Reagan supported policies that were the bigging of our down fall. His second term was marked by a mental decline which makes many of us wonder who was running the country.

Nope. I don't worship at the altar of Ronnie. I adore his son,
Ron JR., but not him.

We should put Reagan on the new $1 million bill so only his supporters will have to look at him.

Given McHenry's political views, I'm surprised he didn't propose replacing Grant with Robert E. Lee.

Sheesh! Granted, being a dead president isn't a prerequisite for getting on a piece of currency, nor is being a particularly good president, but Ulysses S. Grant at least distinguished himself in the Civil War, if not in the White House.

I suggest we remove all pictures of actual people from our coins and paper money, and go back to stylized representations of Lady Liberty, updated to 21st Century standards, of course. While we're at it, I prefer our original national motto, "E Pluribus Unum" to the one imposed upon us in 1954, "In God We Trust." Besides the Establishment Clause issues, Latin just sounds cooler.

My last comment was snark,but I just noticed that FDR, the man who brought us out of the Great Depression and helped to win WWII, is nowhere to be found on our banknotes. If Reagan gets his mug on one ahead of Roosevelt, I will be royally pissed.

I believe we should put Mr. Reagan's face on the $1 coin. That way, just like in Canada, we could call it the "loony".

Conservatives need a deity. They need someone who can prosperity preach to them, just like their rural, traveling prosperity preachers who stimulate their dull, ordinary lives. They're ripe for the picking, and the GOP knew this decades ago when they chose to exploit them.

Before Reagan came along, Conservatives didn't have anyone who could forcefully articulate their feelings. Since Reagan, they have only had pale versions of this prosperity preaching, which both George Jr. and Senior could not maintain.

What you are currently witnessing could be interpreted as the death groans of that strategy. It's something that the GOP can no longer control, and in that sense, it's somewhat humorous to watch. I mean, talk about poor judgment.

That's exactly why Conservatives do not seem to enjoy serious reflection. Apparently, they find it endlessly depressing, and they would rather have sunshine blown up their asses 24 hours a day to drown out those dark thoughts.

The problem with Reagan is that one could argue that he wouldn't even pass the modern day, Conservative litmus test.

Reagan's presidency was a Conservative failure in the broad sense. He raised taxes, and created new gun laws. He is primarily known for beating up the middle class, and winning the Cold War. One could debate whether Reagan actually did anything unique in regards to battling the Soviet Union, but his affect on the middle class was quite obvious.

So, what we're left with is a President who primarily gutted the middle class, and for that, he is a middle class, Conservative hero.

However, the mythology that Conservatives have created about Reagan, when he threw Conservatives under the bus on two of their base issues: Taxes, and Gun Control, is bizarre.

Conservatives are so desperate for a leader, whether from the past or present, that they gloss over the reality of Reagan's failed Conservative promises. Conservatives appear to derive a strange satisfaction from hurting themselves, which seems ironic in that their attitude has become exactly what they claimed to hate: A kind of Postmodern nihilism.

MIght I propose instead the $3 bill?

I.e., "crooked as a".

Of course, we'd have to change the motto on the bill:

From "e pluribus unum" to "I don't know about future generations, the Lord is coming soon."

Ultimately, the picture doesn't matter...

We just need to make sure that the Stonecutters have a vehicle to embed hidden messages for Nicholas Cage to use to find treasure.

I oppose this simply because it is an unnecessary expense. You can't preaching being a fiscal conservative spending money on such silly things.

Wouldn't a Government Bond, a symbol of debt, be more appropriate?

Put him on the $20 bill and get rid of Andrew "Indian killer" Jackson.

Anyone is better than genocidal Jackson.

No. Absolutely not. Grant won a war. Reagan kicked off the migration of jobs and the cheapening us.

I've got a better idea... How about if McHenry works to rename one of the counties in his district after Reagan? How about starting there? If he wants to give the boot to a historical military figure, how about one of the following: Waightsville Avery (Avery County), Benjamin Lincoln (Lincoln County), Benjamin Cleveland (Cleveland County), or Griffth Rutherford (Rutherford County)? Or, he could call for Lenoir to be renamed (General William Lenoir). Or, he could have Shelby renamed (Colonel Isaac Shelby). He could even call to rename Mooresville. Maybe Reaganville. Plantation owner John Franklin Moore was probably a pretty conservative guy.

Better yet, why not stick it to the socialists at the University of North Carolina? He could call to rename Mitchell or Caldwell County. Both were named after men involved in founding that school.

Replace Grant? No.

Sorry, the weight of Ulysses S. Grant's contribution to our nation far out weighs Reagan's-- by a large measure. It's not close.

The GOP might get their way with this by promising to back off on the legislative cock-blocking and then promptly deny they promised anything! Spare us!

Ronald Reagan was such a cheapskate, how about a new denomination - half a penny.

If that goes through, boycott $50 dollar bills! Do not accept them from banks, or for change, etc. And if you do happen to have a few, make sure you spend them in things costing a dollar or less. Get people really pissed off at the sight of them.

The last time Reagan got into our wallets he tripled the national debt! If this goes throuogh I will refuse to carry, use, or touch a $50 bill. I don't need to carry around a memento of the most terrible president of my lifetime, aside from the Chimp.

One leader of a corrupt administration replacing another as a symbol, but at least Grant had a good war record.

It's immaterial to most Americans who is on the $50 bill, since few have $50 anyway.