Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

JFK NIXON CASTRO

and they can fight zombie hordes

Thank you for an actual answer.

I thought sbout Eisenhower too. Why'd you think of Wilson?

in all seriousness i would go JFK REGEAN and FDR

they seem like outstanding presidents

although would this 2nd mount rushmore take into account erosion like the first one does?

also it would seem arrogent for obama to put his face on it BUT he is the first black president so maybe he should have an OBAMA monument ( bigger and blacker then the washington)

it's strange that we carve the faces of our leaders into mountains...

as per the list , i would think for a second about the aesthetics involved

i know it's a symbolic gesture and all that but at the end of the day it's going to be a piece of art and subject to be judged aesthetically

so i have to raise an objection to at least one member on your list

who? you might ask. well first off obviously kennedy stays because he's a ****ing greek god. obama gives us the "urban" angle, and tbh he's also a good looking man. reagan, once upon a time, was an actor that women would be very enthusiastic about ****ing. so if we could get a young looking reagan and not an old droopy skinned reagan then he'd work just fine. the problem, my friends, lies with FDR.

let me be the first to state that FDR was a great man and a true patriot, regardless of what your politics might be, and he helped guide this country though one of its most troubling times.

that being said..

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/first-family/32_franklin_d_roosevelt.jpg

that face. **** we gonna do about that face? that's just a plain old white as can be with nothing else worth noting face. and maybe we could let that slide, maybe, if the original mt rushmore didn't also have the same exact face

http://i.imgur.com/spFKZO6.jpg

so we're gonna have to do something about that guys

That...was a fun way to look at this, thanks!

Are you saying that FDR is George Washington reincarnate?

aslong as trumps hair piece isnt up there we are all good

We don't need to carve up any more natural wonders with faces of people that may-or-may-not be cared about in a century.

I do think, at *minimum*, no recent presidents- We're still too close to judge them objectively.

I wouldn't put Obama on it. I wouldn't put any president on it if that person is still in office.

Originally posted by Surtur
I wouldn't put Obama on it. I wouldn't put any president on it if that person is still in office.

Putting a president still in office?? Yea, I'm agreed, *heck* no, not even if they've had a fantastic term!

I think 'still alive' should disqualify someone. And 'in living memory.'

In a position where they can still mess up? Instant-veto.


(And still not in favor of carving up mountains...)

Put W on there

FDR, Reagan, and LBJ and Eisenhower. JFK really did nothing in his 1000 days and was viewed as part of the enemy for Cuba and Berlin Wall being put up on his watch as well as wanting to close out Viet Nam.

LBJ got all the work done for civil rights and without Vietnam, USA would be the same as the 60's. The protests to VIetnam led to more rights for lots of people. LBJ was also Senate leader in 50's when Civil Rights was getting moving.

Eisenhower for warning of military corporate complex getting out of hand and leadership role in Europe in WW2.

The rest self explanatory.


Least likely Nixon and Clinton. The opened up world trade with CHina and India with WTO and NAFTA, bad for USA jobs and economy.

Reagan, is another not worth adding. His famous economic policy, 'trickle down economics,' is now known for... not trickling down, that's when our wealth gap started expanding.

He did preside over a successful economic recovery- but one of fairly comparable scope to Obama's recovery. So, ask yourself, if you'd give a spot to Reagan based on his success there, would you do the same for Obama?

He had no big civil rights victories, wrong era.

He was president around the end of the cold war, but he didn't cause the end of the USSR by any means.

He didn't win any major wars either- obvious enough.


He's idolized, but more of that is for the political galvanization and strength he brought to his political party, and being around for a key moment in history, rather than any particular major accomplishment.

He'll be remembered in 40 years to be sure, but not in the same breath as FDR.

We shouldn't just limit a new monument to U.S. Presidents. FDR should be on the monument. MLK would be good candidate also with what he did for civil rights. I'd have to ponder over the other two.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
We shouldn't just limit a new monument to U.S. Presidents. FDR should be on the monument. MLK would be good candidate also with what he did for civil rights. I'd have to ponder over the other two.

Thomas Edison perhaps?

Originally posted by jaden101
Thomas Edison perhaps?

That is a good choice.

An ideal monument would represent the best in politics, the sciences, the arts, and humanitarian leadership.

^^^You started an intetesting tangent. Cool.

Personally I don't see why we need any gigantic monuments of peoples faces. It just seems like a waste of time, money, and energy.

Originally posted by jaden101
Thomas Edison perhaps?


Edison?? I'm gonna vote against him.

While he did make a number of inventions, he's also known for credit-stealing and acting like a huge jerk to other inventors.


There were people who made proto-lightbulbs before him, he just invented the best one to date.

And his treatment of Tesla is infamous.

Originally posted by Q99
Edison?? I'm gonna vote against him.

While he did make a number of inventions, he's also known for credit-stealing and acting like a huge jerk to other inventors.


There were people who made proto-lightbulbs before him, he just invented the best one to date.

And his treatment of Tesla is infamous.

Are you a communist? Why do you hate freedom?

Originally posted by Surtur
Personally I don't see why we need any gigantic monuments of peoples faces. It just seems like a waste of time, money, and energy.
I'm sure there are papers written about the need for people to do this; it's been happening since the dawn of time.

Originally posted by jaden101
Are you a communist? Why do you hate freedom?


The real question is, why do you hate Tesla coils?

Originally posted by Q99
Edison?? I'm gonna vote against him.

While he did make a number of inventions, he's also known for credit-stealing and acting like a huge jerk to other inventors.


There were people who made proto-lightbulbs before him, he just invented the best one to date.

And his treatment of Tesla is infamous.

Plus Edison quite literally held this country back from progress by fighting so hard against Tesla's alternating current. His jealously and greed held this country back.

Originally posted by riv6672
I'm sure there are papers written about the need for people to do this; it's been happening since the dawn of time.

Yes, but think about why it happened way back in the past. A lot of stuff was word of mouth then, your average person didn't know much about history and didn't have easy access to a library or the internet. So a long long time ago these things could serve as reminders about the past.

But now we don't need them in order to do that.

Henry Ford maybe, or the Wright brothers? The latter would take two spots though.

Neil Armstrong for the iconic moon landing.

Tattoos N Scars

Originally posted by Mindset
Tattoos N Scars

I'd be defaced in a day lol

Its still a part of our collective psyche though, i think.
I dont see it changing any time soon.
As a species we have a desire to say "look at THIS".

Originally posted by riv6672
Its still a part of our collective psyche though, i think.
I dont see it changing any time soon.
As a species we have a desire to say "look at THIS".

Yes, but we look kind of douchey for it if we are spending tax payer dollars on statues.

Why?
Its what tax dollars are for, like it or not. And yes, i'm aware that opinion can be argued against to death.
Still, considering the slave labor and countless deaths that mark most if not all of humanity's great monuments, i count it as a bonus i'm not pushing a massive block of stone up a hill getting whipped; you can have a few bucks out of my paycheck.

If we put Surter's mug on this monument, he'd change his tune lol

edit

Originally posted by riv6672
Why?
Its what tax dollars are for, like it or not. And yes, i'm aware that opinion can be argued against to death.
Still, considering the slave labor and countless deaths that mark most if not all of humanity's great monuments, i count it as a bonus i'm not pushing a massive block of stone up a hill getting whipped; you can have a few bucks out of my paycheck.

I suppose building statues could be one thing tax dollars are meant for..but aren't there more important things to worry about?

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
If we put Surter's mug on this monument, he'd change his tune lol

Not possible, anything with my likeness would explode from the sheer awesomeness of it. My momma learned a lesson when she put my face on some cupcakes for my birthday once. But when mountains explode people tend to get more then just chocolate and shame on them.

Originally posted by Surtur
I suppose building statues could be one thing tax dollars are meant for..but aren't there more important things to worry about?
There always are.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
We shouldn't just limit a new monument to U.S. Presidents. FDR should be on the monument. MLK would be good candidate also with what he did for civil rights. I'd have to ponder over the other two.
I agree

if we're going to put non presidents up there then i say lets put robert deniro, al pacino, joe pesci and james gandolfini smoking a cigar

it can be called mt. dago

Racist but interesting.