OUR VIEW: More faces on Mount Rushmore? Seriously?

• OUR VIEW

OUR VIEW

Talk about it

Once again, political pundits and talking heads are suggesting an update to Mount Rushmore. And once again, we think we may just be sick thinking about it.

The most recent barrage of lunacy started with an article by the National Journal, which revived discussion about adding Ronald Reagan’s face to the national monument, located high in South Dakota’s Black Hills near Rapid City. That talk prompted further discussion by Al Sharpton on his leftleaning television program. Sharpton wondered whether Barack Obama should be included on the mountain.

Sharpton asked, “Reagan or Obama?”

He said it as if it literally should be one or the other. Other analysts jumped in.

“How did Teddy Roosevelt get up there?” Sharpton said.

“… How do we determine the qualifications of those who are already there before we say that President Obama, or for that matter, Ronald Reagan, are not qualified. What are the qualifications?”

Oh goodness. Where do we begin?

Mount Rushmore is a work of art. Nobody will ever change it, nor should it even be considered. Contemporary presidents are not welcome, just as we would never suggest Reagan’s likeness be added over the shoulder of The Mona Lisa.

We realize these are just political analysts pontificating, but it’s still bothersome to us here in the Rushmore State.

For those who don’t know, Mount Rushmore was carved from 1927 to 1941 by sculptor Gutzon Borglum.

It received federal funding and kept dozens of men at work during a difficult time in American history.

Thomas Jefferson is included because of his role in penning the Declaration of Independence.

He also was the president who orchestrated the Louisiana Purchase, which included the mountain on which the sculpture is carved.

George Washington is included because of his role in leading American troops in the revolution against the British Empire, as well as his service as the country’s first president.

Roosevelt is included, in part, because of his interest in the American West and for his role as a conservationist.

And Abraham Lincoln is included for his leadership during the Civil War and his role in ending slavery in America.

It’s too soon to judge whether any recent president, Republican or Democrat, has done anything to merit inclusion on Mount Rushmore — even if it were a feasible proposition, which it isn’t.

Give it a rest.

Tags: mount rushmore, opinion, updates, editorials