Google

Thursday, June 10, 2004

NY Times Editorial - Honors For Reagan

The New York Times > Opinion >Honors for President Reagan

There will be plenty of ways Americans can further honor his memory in the months ahead. But Congress should not rush to alter American currency as a reaction to the passions of the moment. Even Mr. Reagan's most ardent fans should be calling for restraint, lest we wind up with a frenzy of new but short-lived currency designs. Some years need to pass so the country has more perspective on the Reagan presidency. Whatever honor the Treasury then accords him will be more meaningful, not to mention more enduring.


While I agree in principle with this editorial's assertion - that legislators should not rush to put Reagan on any currency - I think this editorial falls terribly flat. The main argument is that we, as mourners, shouldn't let our high emotions get the better of us. Needless to say, the NY Times editorial board is not going to be reconsidering the merits of Reagan currency in a few years either, but set that aside. The article makes no mention of the fact that Kennedy and FDR were rushed onto currency about a year after they died. Argue against Reagan all you want, but don't be a hypocrite about it. There's clearly been ample precedent for liberal icons being rushed into the treasury right after their deaths, so to suddenly call for calm when Reagan dies is a little obnoxious. Personally, I'd love to see everyone agree to set this matter aside for 5 or 10 years because by then all the flag waving will have died down and everyone will forget how much they loved ronald reagan right after he died. This editorial just struck me as ridiculously insincere and patronizing.