$12.
Fuck you, I was an English major.
If he had white skin, I’d still be pointing his middle name out. Fact is Obama tries to Islamsplain America’s enemies as well as enemies of our allies, like the Palestinians (who celebrated September 11, 2001), so mentioning the name Hussein is fitting. No, Islam is not some super peaceful religion. Obama being black, white, brown, yellow, or red wouldn’t change that. Herman Cain and Ben Carson know that. As so a decent amount of black Democrats as well, but they can’t say it for fear of offending the left.
My problem is that 1. Jackson vastly expanded America and brought democracy to the people, hence the name of the Jefferson/Jackson Dinner. 2. Erasing him is another example of holding people from different eras to modern standards of race. 3. That results in historical self-loathing. I don’t care if the POTUS who does it is white or not. I’d have a problem if Hillary was POTUS in charge when the bill change happened. Thing is she nor Bill would ever do that.
But most Republicans are far to the right of me too, given my stances on abortion, gay (but not trans) issues, the environment, and tax cuts for the rich.
Regardless of race, I think it’s pretty clear that, by not just modern standards, but by human standards, Jackson may have done some important things, but he was also an epic asshole.
Washington owned slaves, as did Jefferson. Them and Madison took part in expanding America at the expense of the Indians, and other big countries, like Russia and China, also subjugated indigenous people. Should all big countries engage in self-hating disguised under self-reflection?
:rolleyes: No, that is not a fact. To put it mildly.
So IOW you’re trying to characterize President Obama as a secret Muslim. He must be, because he isn’t shouting “DEATH TO ISLAM!!” every night on TV.
So you want us to worship our history but not learn from it or critique it.
This is not a fact. You may can’t stop saying false things about Obama. You have a personal problem with the man, and it’s not because of anything he said. It seems to be because of who he is.
Jackson is not being erased. You seem to say false things about this topic as well. Why is it a problem to move his face to the other side?
There’s no self loathing in changing our currency. We’ve done it hundreds of times. It’s only your personal problem with Obama, which causes you to repeat false things about him even when pointed out, that seems to drive your problem with the currency change.
I don’t see why anyone would want to defend Jackson. Even by the standards of his time he was a pretty evil guy. That’s not to say he didn’t do some good things as President, but all in all he’s a pretty scummy individual and nearly destroyed our democracy by defying the Supreme Court and our laws.
Thomas Jefferson is a good example of a guy who should be judged by the standards of his time. His contribution to this country and humanity in general vastly outweigh his sins, which were pretty normal for the time. But Jackson? Screw him.
You said it more eloquently than I could have. 
“Fuck you” is not even permitted in The BBQ Pit.
This is a Warning to refrain from such behavior in Elections.
[ /Moderating ]
Others have pointed this out, but maybe repetition will drive it home. He is not being erased. He is still going to be on the twenty dollar bill.
And even if he wasn’t, he’s an extremely important figure in American history. He was the first populist President, the first to be from the people instead of the aristocracy.
well there you go; he deserves to be on the front of a bill.
So does Harriet Tubman. We’ve changed our currency tons of times, moving faces around, and this time it’s no different, except that a black person is President and a black person is being honored. It’s long, long past time for both.
What is wrong with both being on a bill? One of the reasons I’m upset about getting rid of Jackson on the obverse of the 20 is that America doesn’t need to kick itself over the aboriginals anymore. What we did was no different than the development of other big countries, and even some smaller ones in the world. Also, I’m tired of sports teams being targeted over “cultural appropriation,” like the Redskins, University of Illinois’ former mascot Illiniwek, etc. Getting rid of Jackson from the front of the 20 validates this sick presentism and self-hatred over our history. We’ve already apologized the the aboriginals; they don’t have to pay taxes, they can open casinos, etc. And no, what happened to the aboriginals is never comparable to The Holocaust, EVER. The Jews’ suffering is, was, and will forever be unique; the end.
I don’t care about the color of skin of the POTUS or the person on the bill. I care what the action of changing it stands for.
“Jackson wasn’t as good a choice for the front of the $20 as Tubman is, but he’s good enough to be on the back.” Is that what it stands for?
Why compare everything to the Holocaust? Maybe it’s the worst thing that ever happened… but something can be plenty evil without being as bad as the Holocaust. It’s no coincidence that the two groups treated the worst in American history – black people and Native Americans – have the worst statistical outcomes in so many categories like crime, wealth, education, etc.
Your silly alarmist interpretation of changing currency is such that you could interpret any change at all in this way. Face it – it’s reasonable to put Harriet Tubman on our bills, and reasonable to move others’ faces around to make room. It’s not an attack on our heritage – it’s correcting a long-held error (the lack of women and people of color on our money, despite their incredible contribution to our country).
I don’t know if you don’t like Obama because of his skin color, but it’s something fundamental about him. It’s nothing he’s said or done, since you constantly get that stuff wildly wrong. It’s something about his heritage, considering how you focus on irrelevancies like his middle name.
I take it you never served in the military. I did – there were plenty of wonderful and patriotic Americans that I served with who had names as ‘unusual’ as Barack Hussein Obama, or more unusual, with heritage all over the world, and religious beliefs ranging from Muslim to Atheist. When guys named Muhammed risk their lives to save yours, it’s pretty hard to see ethnic and religious heritage as relevant at all to whether or not one can be a patriotic American.
I’m not the one who compares the fate of the aboriginals to the Holocaust; its the Jackson haters, the Ward Churchills, Edward Saids, etc. who do.
I could care less about his skin color, or really even his name. It indeed is things he’s said; I have big problems with what Obama said in 2009 at Cairo, comparing slavery to The Holocaust, comparing the Terrorstinian “nakba” to The Holocaust (by saying “on the other hand” when talking about it), purposely starting problems with Israel in hoping to make the Muslim world like America, is if Israel is the sole or main reason the Islam world does. And the Iran deal is indeed crap, per the analysis of former liberals like Alan Dershowitz, and many others.
There are a lot, A LOT more Jews and other non-Muslims in the military. And they don’t always say “but” when something evil happens in the name of their ancestry/faith (of course tho, that’s kinda rare). CAIR, etc. always try to explain motives of Islam terrorists. Sadly, Obama’s SOS, Kerry, kinda did that with Hebdo. I got no problem with atheism, Bahaism, Jainism, Sihkism, Judaism and Christianity; I only have issues with the one religion which is inspiring more terror in its name/cause around the world than the rest combined today.
If you don’t think the murder and displacement of tens of millions is comparable to the worst things in history, then your moral sense is skewed.
You only have problems with a fantasy Obama, since so much of what you say about him is untrue. As for the Iran deal, I trust the security experts in the US and even Israel, like the former Mossad chief, who almost uniformly praise it.
And if you don’t think slavery, which killed, brutalized, raped, and dehumanized tens of millions over centuries, is comparable to the worst things in history, then your moral sense is profoundly skewed.
Yes, you’re bigoted against Muslims (and trans people, based on your other statements), and this bigotry extends even to non Muslims like Obama who seem Muslim to you. Hopefully some day you can get over your bigotry.
Uh, okay.
But you revived this thread to discuss people who want Jackson on the back of the twenty, with Tubman on the front – which doesn’t sound like they put Jackson on a par with the architects of the Holocaust. Like, you don’t hear them saying, “hey, you know who’d look great on the back of the hundred? Heinrich Himmler!”
You’re talking about folks who think Jackson belongs on US currency; as far as I can tell, that’s not the choice of someone who thinks Jackson is like unto Himmler.