Posts Tagged ‘Andrew Jackson
ACTION ITEM: Republicans should push to replace Andrew Jackson with Martin Luther King Jr. on the $20 bill
If Republicans pushed for this change, it would cripple the Democrat Party in the end.
In the mid-90s, there was a great show on FOX called “Sliders”, in which a band of adventurers “slid” through parallel dimensions, where history turned out differently, using a suped-up remote control. In some worlds, the British won the Revolutionary War, and the royal family lived in a palace in Cleveland. In another, Egypt conquered Rome and pharaohs built their pyramids in San Francisco in the 20th Century. Same Earth, same date, different circumstances.
A bit of Sliders lives on in the current CBS series “Fringe”, which dabbles in the multiverse on occasion. Sometimes it’s an X-Files creature of the week clone, with a little CSI and police procedural shows tossed in too, but during the season finale the show played out mainly on “the other side”, where Andrew Jackson was never president, and Martin Luther King Jr. appeared on the $20 bill.
People, in the vernacular, referred to these bills as “Juniors”. When someone brought a “Jackson” over from our world to theirs, police examined our bill by comparing it to a “Junior”, and marveled at the care that went into creating such a perfect counterfeit.
When we saw this scene, all we could think of was how brilliant a strategic move it would be for Republicans to push for Martin Luther King Jr. to replace Jackson on the $20.
This would achieve a number of things, long term, if Republicans had foresight to see the many benefits (which, we know, is like wishing we were in another dimension where Republicans took chances, planned ahead, and devoted any time at all to strategy that would cripple the Left and divide its voting coalition).
(1) Since the DNC and Lamestream media created the Obama cult of personality, Dr. King’s legacy has been shunted to the side. Honoring Dr. King with the $20 would do much to reclaim that focus. It would take some of that spotlight away from Obama, and focus it on a man who was much more deserving of attention and honors. The Norwegians awarded Obama the Nobel Prize for being awesome. Dr. King’s legacy surely warrants another honor, if the bar has been lowered for recognition to such an extent that Obama’s receiving Nobel Prizes with no accomplishments to justify them.
(2) The Socialist-Democrat Party depends on lockstep, unthinking, blind black voting. Dr. King was a Republican. Many in the black community don’t know that. The Republican Party should push to honor one of its own by loudly calling for Dr. King to be honored on the $20. If Democrats try to block this, or impede it in any way, it’s politically damaging to them. The black community is told day in and day out that Republicans are evil, and the Left tells the black community that anyone who does not agree with Liberals is RAAACIST. So, Republicans should think of creative ways to shake that paradigm up. It would be very hard to argue against giving Dr. King this honor…especially if the idea started in conservative circles. Who would be the bad guys then?
(3) There’s no valid argument anymore for refusing to update our currency, since new versions of our bills are seemingly created every few years anyway, with the claim that there are increasingly new and vital security measures that render old bills obsolete. A new round of $100s is due to be unveiled soon. Why not seize this opportunity to make the switch to Dr. King now, before the new $20s are rolled out?
(4) The $50 bill should honor Ronald Reagan. President Grant has had a long and comfortable stay on that bill, but America is not a stagnant nation mired in the past. We are vital and forward moving, and leaders from the 20th Century, such as Dr. King and President Reagan, should be included in the ongoing redesigns of our currency to illustrate the fact that America’s best days have never been in its past. We believe Dr. King would be the precedent that would allow Reagan to follow very soon after. And we’d love to have Eleanor Roosevelt put onto the $100. Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, and other non-presidents who have appeared on our currency through the years already serve as precedent for Dr. King and Mrs. Roosevelt to be honored with appearances on our bills.
(5) Going into the 2012 Election, having the public rediscover Dr. King would be an immense boon to Republicans, as a renewed focus on his legacy would truly put Obama and his Golden Age of Hope and Change into clear focus. Obama promised he would change the way Washington works, but didn’t. Obama promised he would unite the country, but didn’t. Obama promised he would lower the oceans and “fix (our) broken souls”, but didn’t. Obama promised everyone jobs, a revived economy, and a rainbow of other marvelous changes towed to all of us by teams of gallant unicorns. The Lamestream Media still proclaims Obama to be the greatest orator they’ve ever encountered…but his TelePrompTer performances are not in the same league as Dr. King’s unforgettable speeches and sermons. If people are reminded of just how great a man like Dr. King was, then they will debate whether or not the current president lives up to his own hype, and how great that hype even is when those who came before him were so much better than anything the media hoped to make Obama into.
(6) Putting Dr. King on our currency would also permanently remove another “first” Obama no doubt dreams of owning — being the first black person to appear on United States currency. Give this honor to a deserving man, like Dr. King. Give it to a deserving woman, like Harriet Tubman or Sojourner Truth. Do not let Obama have this “first” some day in the far future because no effort was ever made to give it to someone whose lifetime of accomplishments calls out for such an honor.
We don’t think Republicans can in our lifetimes win more than a small percentage of the black vote, no more than they could ever win a tiny fraction of the gay vote. Blacks and gays keep drinking the Democrats’ Kool-Aid, believing the lies the DNC tells them, and voting blindly however Democrats tell them to vote.
BUT, things like this Action Item could help muddle things a bit, and could make blacks start to question WHY they are blindly loyal to Democrats. What have Democrats ever really done for them, except keeping them in the situation the black community is in, which is the ideal condition for Democrats to control them and make them forever dependent on Democrats’ welfare programs.
If Republicans can make it harder for Democrats to paint them as the evil villains in every script they send out into the black community, then a window opens for blacks to apprise the political situation for themselves, and start to wonder WHY they’ve been pulling that same D-lever their whole lives, without getting much of anything in return, and things never getting any better in places like Chicago’s Southside.
Anytime the Left is forced to devote time and energy, and commit resources, towards shoring up the Democrats’ blind-voting racial blocs, the less focus the Left is able to muster for all the crazy things it’s been pushing in this Golden Age of Hope and Change.
How many United States Presidents won second terms?
Mr. 4,422 Days in Office
Just something to think about on this the Eleventh Day, Year One, of The Golden Age of Obama. It’s actually very rare for a President to win a second term, no matter how well things go in that first term. Because of Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush, we assume a second term’s a given for presidents because the majority of those in our lifetimes have been two-termers (especially for those of us in our early 30s, who’ve mainly known two-termers). But, historically, that’s not the case.
Here are the men (and, unfortunately all men so far, despite all the talk of change still in the air) who’ve held the office two terms (or more, in one case):
(1) Franklin Delano Roosevelt (served 3 full terms, but elected to 4)
(2) Thomas Jefferson (2 terms)
(3) James Madison (2 terms)
(4) James Monroe (2 terms)
(5) Andrew Jackson (2 terms)
(6) Ulysses S. Grant (2 terms)
(7) Grover Cleveland (2 nonconsecutive terms)
(8) Woodrow Wilson (2 terms)
(9) Dwight Eisenhower (2 terms)
(10) Ronald Reagan (2 terms)
(11) Bill Clinton (2 terms)
(12) George W. Bush (2 terms)
(13) George Washington (2 terms)
(14) Richard Nixon (2 terms)
(15) William McKinley (2 terms)
(16) Abraham Lincoln (2 terms)
Those who wanted second terms but lost their elections:
(a) John Quincy Adams
(b) Martin van Buren
(c) Franklin Pierce
(d) Benjamin Harrison
(e) William Howard Taft
(f) Herbert Hoover
(g) Jimmy Carter
(h) George H.W. Bush
(i) John Adams
So, 16 wanted a Part Deux and got one. 9 wanted re-election but were denied. Almost 2/3 of our presidents were thus one-termers (or less).
And another interesting thing to note is that the last time THREE two-term presidents happened in a row was all the way back in the early 1800s, with Jefferson/Madison/Monroe (the 3rd, 4th, and 5th presidents). That hasn’t been repeated for 200 years now.
Not saying it won’t ever again, because it’s much too early to tell, but just noting it’s not an automatic, considering past as probability if not predictor.
Clinton/Bush/Obama as three two-termers in a row would be anomalous but certainly not impossible.
