Harriet Tubman to be the new face of the $20 bill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for Harriet or MLK to get a bill or coin. I've advocated for Harriet in the past. But, I'm not happy with changing the $1, $5, every denomination from a founding father or president to an influential woman or minority. Especially GW. I think there's balance to be considered, and tradition.

What do you expect from this president. A decision NOT based on his 'cool factor' and how people view him? Consider one of his 'esteemed' WH guests had is ANKLE BRACELET GO OFF while visiting. Why did this guest HAVE an ankle bracelet you ask? He pistol-whipped a contractor doing work on his home, and would not let him leave, leading to an additional charge of kidnapping. What a GREAT GUY to have in the WH, don't you think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny seeing all these people saying yes, yes, yes to this. Most of you haven't heard of her before today. She might have been a great person and all but that fact is this just political correctness because of sex and skin color. Once again everyone's afraid to say it.

Of course it is! Who remembers their 5th grade history class where we all learned of her?

So what was her claim to fame? I do know Andy Jackson defeated the bloody British at the Battle of New Orleans and was a president of the United States.

Do you really not know? Maybe you should take a look at her Wikipedia page.

Harriet Tubman was born a slave, escaped, and then went back a dozen times (or more) to lead slaves to freedom on the Underground Railroad. Then during the civil war she helped the union as a spy, and soldier I believe. She was an incredible woman.

Jackson on the other hand was a slave owner and the genius behind the trail of tears. I think it's fitting he be either taken off or moved to the back of the bill. Harriet Tubman earned her place in history.

You didn't know either without looking at her wiki page. Did you know she was with the Republican Party and Jackson a democrat?

I knew without looking at her wiki. I was directing you to it for more details. I learned about her in school, decades ago, and my son (in first grade) told me what he learned about her a few months ago.

And if you'll remember, the political parties have shifted since Harriet Tubmans day - her party affiliation isn't important to me.

This exactly. I was one of the advocates for Harriet Tubman in the thread discussion from last year. The ridiculous PP you are trying to educate is not worth it. The Underground Railroad and Harriet Tubman have been taught in schools for decades. The Underground Railroad is part of American mythos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

As I understand it, Jacksons ownership of slaves is not the real issue with him - it's one of many. He also was the reason behind the Trail of Tears. Another piece of history you should have learned about in grade school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

As I understand it, Jacksons ownership of slaves is not the real issue with him - it's one of many. He also was the reason behind the Trail of Tears. Another piece of history you should have learned about in grade school.

So you want that to be erased from history as well? I don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

Yes, I do. Why? Because look what happened with September 11th. What happened was not forgotten, but WHY has been whitewashed to the point where it's now OUR fault, according to liberals. WE provoked it. So yes, I want Hitler in everyone's face, ALL THE TIME.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

As I understand it, Jacksons ownership of slaves is not the real issue with him - it's one of many. He also was the reason behind the Trail of Tears. Another piece of history you should have learned about in grade school.

Yeah, no, sorry if I wasn't clear with that. Hamilton's slave ownership was a response to the assertion that liberals want all slave owners stricken from history; I was showing proof that that's not necessarily true. I know very well about Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears, but thanks for throwing shade on my education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:s. This decision was made by the Democrat appointee --- Jack Lew, formerly Obama's chief of staff --- of a Democrat President, at the behest of Democrat politicians. Andrew Jackson was one of the founders of the Democrat Party and the first Democrat President. He is of far, far greater historical significance than Tubman. But he's being expunged from history by the revisionists of the modern Democrat Party as part of their ceaseless pandering to buy votes.

Yeah, well, the parties kund of flipped positions many decades ago, such that the GOP is the racist party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson was a great President. Tubman - Obama was behind it.

Obama thinks platitudes like this will raise his popularity. It will - with those who don't think things through and simply react to how it feels.

I think Tubman deserves honoring, but not at the expense of another individual. In fact, re-writing history like this is foolish. As a Jew, I don't want Hitler forgotten - I want his photo everywhere. I want youth to know who he was and what happened, as if they don't, his evil deeds will be minimized and they WILL occur again. Liberals wanting all visual signs of slave-owners purged in the name of feeling good are risking youth not caring that slavery occurred at all. What, you say? They will teach it in the schools? It will mean NOTHING to these kids - they are simply too far away from it.

Being offended is a very, VERY important life-lesson. If you've never been offended or been faced with something offensive, you have no idea how NOT to offend others.

(Also a Jew) But would you really want Hitler to be prominently featured on the most popular bill in the treasury? One you'd get several of every time you go to the ATM? One you'd handle every day of your life? I sure wouldn't. I want the face of my country represented, with people who changed history and laws in our country for the better. Of course that includes our founding fathers. But it also includes many, many women and people of color who aren't taught about as much in school.

FWIW, I'm a raging liberal, and I think the expunging of the names of slave owners and other people who have questionable history (beyond the good they did for our country) is ridiculous. And Alexander Hamilton, who was saved from being taken off of the $10, was a slave owner.

Yes, I do. Why? Because look what happened with September 11th. What happened was not forgotten, but WHY has been whitewashed to the point where it's now OUR fault, according to liberals. WE provoked it. So yes, I want Hitler in everyone's face, ALL THE TIME.

Who are all of these liberals who are whitewashing 9/11? Again, raging liberal here, who recognizes 9/11 as an act of terrorism in the name of a form of Islam. (But I don't think that all Muslims are terrorists, nor are all terrorists Muslim. Is that the "whitewashing" you're talking about?)

Also, I have to believe that you're hyperbolizing about plastering Hitler all over the place, especially on government-issued currency. That kind of reverence and reference is usually for people we want to celebrate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:s. This decision was made by the Democrat appointee --- Jack Lew, formerly Obama's chief of staff --- of a Democrat President, at the behest of Democrat politicians. Andrew Jackson was one of the founders of the Democrat Party and the first Democrat President. He is of far, far greater historical significance than Tubman. But he's being expunged from history by the revisionists of the modern Democrat Party as part of their ceaseless pandering to buy votes.

Yeah, well, the parties kund of flipped positions many decades ago, such that the GOP is the racist party.

Also, I believe he's still going to be on the back of the bill, so not "expunged from history."

[Anonymous]

Jackson will still appear on the $20, but on the back.

I'm an Oklahoman and therefore think of Jackson as a genocidal Indian remover.

[Anonymous]

Black women much respect.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand this idea that updating the bill to reflect current values and notions of who should be honored is expunging or erasing history. Especially since Tubman is a part of this very same history that people are worried will be expunged? Very odd. Sounds like an excuse to maintain status quo me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this idea that updating the bill to reflect current values and notions of who should be honored is expunging or erasing history. Especially since Tubman is a part of this very same history that people are worried will be expunged? Very odd. Sounds like an excuse to maintain status quo me.

+1