Harriet Tubman

[kscarbel2]

At a moment when our government should be using its time and effort to focus on serious issues confronting the country and world, why are our employees in Washington wasting their time (my opinion) by going through the motions to put Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill?

I, John Q. Public, have not submitted a request for this change to my employees in Washington.

I want the face of America’s seventh President, Andrew Jackson, to remain on the $20 bill.

Harriet Tubman is one of a long list of famous Americans, but her face doesn’t belong on our currency.

“If” Harriet Tubman was worthy of consideration, then why not John Glenn, Thomas Alva Edison, George C. Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower or John Wayne?

We have a long-standing and just policy dictating that the face of U.S. Presidents and founding fathers be on United States currency.

Harriet Tubman does not qualify.

The American people have NOT voted to change our currency policy.

If anything, the face of Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s greatest founding fathers, should be transferred from the little used $2 bill to the $20 bill, and the face of three-term President Franklin Delano Roosevelt honored on the $2 bill.

$1 bill – George Washington

$2 bill – Thomas Jefferson

$5 bill – Abraham Lincoln

$10 bill – Alexander Hamilton

$20 bill – Andrew Jackson

$50 bill – Ulysses S. Grant

$100 bill – Benjamin Franklin

$500 bill – William McKinley

$1,000 bill – Grover Cleveland

$5,000 bill – James Madison

$10,000 bill – Salmon P. Chase

$100,000 – Woodrow Wilson

[tjc transport]

why? because the animals want "one of their own" on money to make them feel worthy

[41chevy]

Why do we keep letting this crap rammed down our throats? Another part of Obama's legacy? More important things for politicians to work on and the public to get vocal about.  Obama  taking the Saudi Kings views on the 911 bill over the Americans is but one example. (every decision involving the Middle East seems to favor the Arabic countries)

I personally feel that the up coming election could be the breaking point of our government / citizen relationship.  So what the Feds want to do is probably moot.

[kscarbel2]

12 minutes ago, 41chevy said:

Why do we keep letting this crap rammed down our throats? Another part of Obama's legacy? More important things for politicians to work on and the public to get vocal about.  Obama  taking the Saudi Kings views on the 911 bill over the Americans is but one example. (every decision involving the Middle East seems to favor the Arabic countries)

I personally feel that the up coming election could be the breaking point of our government / citizen relationship.  So what the Feds want to do is probably moot.

Because the American people have been "programmed" from an early age, via school and other, to be generally submissive, realizing they are powerless to effect genuine change. You have to hand it to the powers that be, they really have it down to a science. 

From age 50 or so, some begin to reflect and question. But it ends there.

Paul, this isn't about Obama. It's been happening since 1776. This Tubman event is merely one speck on the timeline.

 

 

[HeavyGunner]

It seems to be getting worse though. In the last 7 1/2 years more young Americans have been told by their commander in chief that it's bad if you've achieved more than someone else or other countries and if someone else achieves more than you everyone should share the profits. We've also learned that we should be mediocre like many other countries, that we shouldn't produce anything anymore and simply be consumers in a soon to be service based economy. We've also learned that we can't call bad guys bad guys because it might hurt their feelings i.e. Muslim terrorists. I think Paul is right about citizens about fed up with our crappy politicians and bloated government run by lobbyists. 

[kscarbel2]

1 hour ago, HeavyGunner said:

It seems to be getting worse though. In the last 7 1/2 years more young Americans have been told by their commander in chief that it's bad if you've achieved more than someone else or other countries and if someone else achieves more than you everyone should share the profits. We've also learned that we should be mediocre like many other countries, that we shouldn't produce anything anymore and simply be consumers in a soon to be service based economy. We've also learned that we can't call bad guys bad guys because it might hurt their feelings i.e. Muslim terrorists. I think Paul is right about citizens about fed up with our crappy politicians and bloated government run by lobbyists. 

A lot of truth to what you said.

Many would argue the United States has not had a "great" president since Reagan. In other words, for almost three decades. 

Many dislike Obama, and I understand why. But I humbly suggest that George W. Bush was every bit as bad. And the stature of H.W. Bush has diminished over time.

[HeavyGunner]

Never cared for bush either, voted on simply a lesser of two evils basis.  I certainly did not like Gore. 

[kscarbel2]

1 hour ago, HeavyGunner said:

Never cared for bush either, voted on simply a lesser of two evils basis.  I certainly did not like Gore. 

We brag about our democracy, our ability to choose the president. But that all falls apart when neither individual has the qualifications for that highest of post.

Neither Bush nor Gore were qualified to be more than a state governor. Where was the choice for president? There was none.

[rustydog]

10 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

At a moment when our government should be using its time and effort to focus on serious issues confronting the country and world, why are our employees in Washington wasting their time (my opinion) by going through the motions to put Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill?

I, John Q. Public, have not submitted a request for this change to my employees in Washington.

I want the face of America’s seventh President, Andrew Jackson, to remain on the $20 bill.

Harriet Tubman is one of a long list of famous Americans, but her face doesn’t belong on our currency.

“If” Harriet Tubman was worthy of consideration, then why not John Glenn, Thomas Alva Edison, George C. Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower or John Wayne?

We have a long-standing and just policy dictating that the face of U.S. Presidents and founding fathers be on United States currency.

Harriet Tubman does not qualify.

The American people have NOT voted to change our currency policy.

If anything, the face of Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s greatest founding fathers, should be transferred from the little used $2 bill to the $20 bill, and the face of three-term President Franklin Delano Roosevelt honored on the $2 bill.

$1 bill – George Washington

$2 bill – Thomas Jefferson

$5 bill – Abraham Lincoln

$10 bill – Alexander Hamilton

$20 bill – Andrew Jackson

$50 bill – Ulysses S. Grant

$100 bill – Benjamin Franklin

$500 bill – William McKinley

$1,000 bill – Grover Cleveland

$5,000 bill – James Madison

$10,000 bill – Salmon P. Chase

$100,000 – Woodrow Wilson

Who the hell  was Salmon Chase???  I apologize for being stupid and demented....but  its been awhile since I had a 10g bill in my pocket...any pics of one???

[kscarbel2]

41 minutes ago, rustydog said:

Who the hell  was Salmon Chase???  I apologize for being stupid and demented....but  its been awhile since I had a 10g bill in my pocket...any pics of one???

A U.S. senator, governor of Ohio and Supreme Court chief justice who served as the U.S. secretary of the Treasury during the Civil War. He served as a justice until his death in 1873 at age 65.

After representing Ohio in the U.S. Senate from 1849 to 1855, Chase went on to serve as the state’s governor from 1855 to 1859. He made a failed bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 1860 before serving as Abraham Lincoln’s secretary of the Treasury.

And as fate would have it, Chase was a staunch abolitionist who spent his early career as a lawyer and became known as “the attorney general for fugitive slaves” for his frequent defenses of runaway blacks.

In 1837, Chase argued before the Ohio Supreme Court in defense of James G. Birney, an abolitionist charged with harboring an escaped slave. His eloquent indictments of the Fugitive Slave Law were later reprinted in newspapers and widely circulated. Chase gained further acclaim when he defended the abolitionist John Van Zandt before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1847. While Chase lost the case, his impassioned defenses of Van Zandt and other abolitionists and runaway blacks eventually earned him the nickname “the attorney general for escaped slaves.”

So there you go, we're already adequately politically correct as is.

How is face got on the bill

When the federal government started issuing greenback notes in 1861, Chase, as Secretary of the Treasury, was in charge of designing and popularizing the new currency. The politically ambitious Chase had to pick a portrait subject for the first $1 bill, and he chose......Salmon P. Chase.

Although putting his face in everyone's pocketbooks never propelled Chase to the presidency, when the Treasury started issuing the new $10,000 bills in 1928, they put Chase's portrait on the bill to honor the man who helped introduce modern banknotes.

Chase National Bank, the forerunner to Chase Manhattan Bank, was named in his honor.

[Brocky]

KS  Thank You.. That Salmon Chase name did not compute in my memory bank either..

[Keith Pommerening]

Now just a minute here:  First a little info about what Andrew Jackson was is in order.  He is the father of the Dumbocrat party, much like Lincoln is the father of the Repubocrat party.  Jackson was a slave owner and trader.  His Attorney General, and later Supreme Court appointee wrote laws to make slavery legal, a highpoint in Democrat lawmaking.  His treatment of Native American is legend, ever hear of The Trail of Tears?

Harriet Tubman was a Republican because of their abolitionist stance.  She was a major part of the Underground Railroad, she was active in the civil war as a soldier, nurse and spy, she was handicapped from age twelve when she was hit on the head with a two pound rock thrown by a slave owner, she was a strongly religious woman...

Might not be a bad thing, great opportunity for our advancement in knowledge of American history!  Thanks,  Keith

 

[RedBullDog]

1 hour ago, kscarbel2 said:

We brag about our democracy, our ability to choose the president. But that all falls apart when neither individual has the qualifications for that highest of post.

Neither Bush nor Gore were qualified to be more than a state governor. Where was the choice for president? There was none.

That was not a one election occurrence.  There hasn't been a qualified, viable candidate on either side for quite a while now.

[kscarbel2]

27 minutes ago, Keith Pommerening said:

Now just a minute here:  First a little info about what Andrew Jackson was is in order.  He is the father of the Dumbocrat party, much like Lincoln is the father of the Repubocrat party.  Jackson was a slave owner and trader.  His Attorney General, and later Supreme Court appointee wrote laws to make slavery legal, a highpoint in Democrat lawmaking.  His treatment of Native American is legend, ever hear of The Trail of Tears?

Harriet Tubman was a Republican because of their abolitionist stance.  She was a major part of the Underground Railroad, she was active in the civil war as a soldier, nurse and spy, she was handicapped from age twelve when she was hit on the head with a two pound rock thrown by a slave owner, she was a strongly religious woman...

Might not be a bad thing, great opportunity for our advancement in knowledge of American history!  Thanks,  Keith

 

During the period that Andrew Jackson was alive, 1767 to 1845, slavery was common place in much of North America. 

Respectfully speaking, I don't feel it's proper to apply the racially sensitive standards of year 2016 to a man who lived in the America of 1767-1845.

Based on the standards, intellect and way of life in the 1767-1845 period, I continue to judge him for his contributions to our country during his time.

I fear there is an effort to cleanse and rewrite American history. That is a dangerous path indeed.

Be it the civil war, or the argument at Princeton over Woodrow Wilson, history must be known in its accurate entirety, and judged on that period of time - not the standards of today.

[41chevy]

5 hours ago, Keith Pommerening said:

Might not be a bad thing, great opportunity for our advancement in knowledge of American history!  Thanks,  Keith

 

Want to advance knowledge of American History? Teach the non "politically correct" history in school. Put the so called "offensive" chapters back in. Look at the "new" American History taught today. S.E. United States was "stolen" from Spain and Mexico. Our war with Japan is now taught as The American Conquest of the Pacific Rim and we are now credited with starting the war with Japan by the USS Ward sinking an "innocent" Japanese submarine. Korea and Vietnam are taught as the continuation of our Pacific Conquest. There is a sub chapter on the American crime of using the Atomic Bombs an U.S. Internment camps in the States. Nothing about the Bataan Death March Corregidor or the killing of Allied prisoners. What history is taught, is clean, non offensive, politically correct and apologetic. 

 Ask most people from the average person on the street to a professor or banker whose picture is on most any bill, most have no idea. Heck, most people have no idea who we fought in the Revolutionary War, Civil War or even the Gulf War. We live in a society where Home Depot had a hiring requirement that an applicant need the ability to do basic 4th grade math.  They were sued and the court fined them for un fair hiring practices.  Most Americans only care about the denomination of the bill not the history.   my 2 cents.    Paul

[Mike]

Amen and Amen. I'm thinking about Cracker Barrel getting sued for not hiring GAYS some years back. I don't see things turning around anytime soon how this nation is to get better. Most people that grew up in the 80's have had TV to brain wash them and forced to intigrate.   

[41chevy]

The people need to just stop pandering individuals and groups. History is History , good or bad, it's what happened. . .  learn from it. Every little thing has to be checked and made non offensive. Well I own a pair of INDIAN Chiefs and don't feel guilty about it. Don't feel guilty about slavery, bombing the Japs or Germans, my going to fight in Vietnam, profiling groups prone to crime or terrorist attacks or saying "boy am I tired".  I pick my friends by who they are not by color, sex or ethnic group. My enemies are stupidity, narrow mindedness, anybody who attacks or threatens my family or my country. Time for people to learn that life isn't fair, not everybody is special, work if you want something, you want my respect? Earn it! Jealous of what I have? Work for it. No one owes you anything, quicker people learn that the better off they'll be. 

Edited April 22, 2016 by 41chevy

[Keith Pommerening]

Yea, I agree with your statements, you have a firm grasp of the obvious results of a public education.

 Guess I expect the best of our leaders to be leaders not just followers of the status quo.

 If one makes a deal with your people, you should follow the terms.  For example: his actions on native treaties lead to the Trail of Tears.  A treaty was made that he didn't honor.  Would this be a indicator of character?  After this kind of treatment by the founder of the democrat party it still amazes me that First Nation People are such stanch democrats!

14 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Respectfully speaking, I don't feel it's proper to apply the racially sensitive standards of year 2016 to a man who lived in the America of 1767-1845.

I would agree with that statement also.  Have tried to put myself into Jackson's place with his upbringing and history.  Don't have a good answer.  Guess his faults and prejudices are evidenced by his actions here also.    

[41chevy]

12 hours ago, Keith Pommerening said:

Yea, I agree with your statements, you have a firm grasp of the obvious results of a public education.

 Guess I expect the best of our leaders to be leaders not just followers of the status quo.

 If one makes a deal with your people, you should follow the terms.  For example: his actions on native treaties lead to the Trail of Tears.  A treaty was made that he didn't honor.  Would this be a indicator of character?  After this kind of treatment by the founder of the democrat party it still amazes me that First Nation People are such stanch democrats!

I would agree with that statement also.  Have tried to put myself into Jackson's place with his upbringing and history.  Don't have a good answer.  Guess his faults and prejudices are evidenced by his actions here also.    

Violating treaties or just plain ignoring them seem the be the norm. Remember as up to the 1960's most ethnic groups were considered second class citizens from the the Indians to the Irish. That was the European mind set going back centuries (for want of better words). Europe still holds ethnic "grudges" going back centuries to this day. I can't put myself in my fathers place with his up bringing, as can my children or grand children in mine.

Then as now politics is about prestige, power, money and leaving a legacy that rarely includes anything for the common citizen. Also remember most of the Founding Fathers were the upper class educated, land owners and men of status. In that time period they were raised to consider the average man as unrefined, uneducated lower class, but still miles above the " native savages" whom were considered to have lower status than their slaves.        Paul

[B MACK]

The twenty that we have now works JUST FINE. There are more important things that should be addressed, not changing the face on a paper note. Just to be P C.      Recently ,( the past 30 years) both parties have pushed this country down the tubes. Bush senior tried to get NFTA through but the democratic congress would not pass it. Then Bill Clinton got in and that trade agreement was passed. It helped kill the timber industry here in Montana and has not helped the Montana grain growers much...  J.F.K. wanted to get out of Vietnam and also wanted to say "F. O." to the Federal Reserve.   He was assassinated.....

[Underdog]

Pandering to a small minority. Ask most people of any race or gender, they don't care whose face is on the $20, nor do they even know who Andrew Jackson or Harriet Tubman is. What a waste of taxpayers money.

[Mike]

I took down my Rebel flag (which you can't buy on e-bay any more and peeled the NRA sticker off the front door. I disconnected my home alarm system and quit the candy butt Neighborhood Watch Program. I bought 2 Pakistani flags and put one at each corner of the front yard. Then I purchased the black flag of ISIS (which you can buy on e-bay) and ran it up the flag pole. Now the local police, sheriff, FBI, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, Secret Service and some other agencies are all watching my house 24/7. I've never felt safer and I'm saving a whole $69.95 a month that ADT used to charge me. Plus, I bought burkas for me and the g/f when we shop or travel. Everyone moves out of the way and security can't pat us down. Holy Moly......SAFE AT LAST!!!.

 

p.s. AIN'T AMERICA GREAT or WHAT? 

[kscarbel2]

Here we go............again. Our employees in Washington at the U.S. Mint clearly have too much free time on their hands.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Associated Press  /  January 13, 2017

The United States Mint and Treasury have unveiled a new gold coin that portrays Lady Liberty as a woman of color for the first time in American history.

In a press conference Thursday held in the Department of Treasury's "historic" Cash Room, the two departments introduced the 2017 American Liberty High Relief Gold Coin, which celebrates 225 years of coins being minted in the U.S.

"We are very proud of the fact that the United States Mint is rooted in the Constitution," said Principal Deputy Director Jeppson. "Our founding fathers realized the critical need for our fledgling nation to have a respected monetary system, and over the last 225 years, the Mint has never failed in its mission."

In "a departure from previous classic designs," the new coin portrays Lady Liberty as a black woman wearing a crown of stars. The coin is inscribed with "1792," for the year the U.S. Mint was established, "2017" and "IN GOD WE TRUST." The reverse side of the coin contains a "bold and powerful eagle in flight," according to the press release.

The 1-ounce coin will be struck in .999 fine 24-karat gold at the West Point Mint facility in New York. It is the first in a series of 24-karat gold coins that will feature designs representing Lady Liberty as Asian-American, Hispanic-American and Indian-American. The coins will be issued every two years.

Last year, the Treasury announced that civil rights activist and abolitionist Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill.

.

 

[Mike]

On 4/21/2016 at 8:23 PM, tjc transport said:

why? because the animals want "one of their own" on money to make them feel worthy

I could not have said it any better. Thanks for saying it like it is. I'm so fed up with it.

[kscarbel2]

Harriet Tubman $20 bill won’t be released next year, Mnuchin says

Greg Robb, MarketWatch  /  May 22, 2019

The new $20 bill featuring a portrait of Harriet Tubman, the abolitionist who guided many slaves to freedom, won’t be unveiled in 2020 as has previously been scheduled, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday.

Mnuchin, who has generally avoided the issue since taking office, was pressed for an update on the status of the new design during a House Financial Services Committee hearing.

Under questioning, Mnuchin said the new $20 bill will now not come out until 2028.

The Tubman design was announced by the Obama administration in 2016 after a public poll that drew lots of attention.

President Donald Trump has never seemed at ease with the Tubman design. He called it an example of political correctness and suggested the image should be on a $2 bill instead.

Mnuchin denied that he was scrapping the Tubman design entirely. Rather, he said he was focused solely on the security features of the currency revamp and that what the currency would look like would be left for a successor.

“It is not a decision that is likely to come until way past my term,” Mnuchin said.