Permit me to instantly shut down this call to change the portraits on our currency.

21 thoughts on “Permit me to instantly shut down this call to change the portraits on our currency.”

1. Hmmm… what bill should Calvin Coolidge be on? Or should he be on a coin? Kick FDR off the dime perhaps? No, I know. Boot Wilson off the $100,000 bill.

   1. The Federal Reserve no longer issues bills in denominations higher than $100. The Wilson $100k bill hasn’t been printed since FDR was in office and even then was only in use for internal government transactions, not in general circulation.

2. Obama giving us the middle finger should be on that $100 bill.

   1. Nonsense–the $100 is relatively unused. Put it on the $1 or $20.

      1. I suppose none of you expect to be giving your children lunch money in the future eh?

         1. You would actually pay for what they call school lunch these days?

            1. They would. They designed them after all.

            2. Wait, I forgot what part of the thread your comment was on, so my reply makes no sense.

               That being said I went to a private Christian academy. The school lunches there were better, still I didn’t like paying for them, so I usually went to the school snack bar.

         2. My kid’s homeschooled. But I could give him tens instead. 🙂

3. There was a bit in the 163x series in which they described the pictures on the currency of the new United States of Europe: a male deer on the one dollar bill, hands kneading dough on the five, a loaf of bread on the ten, Johnny Cash on the twenty, etc. That’s the sort of change to the pictures on the currency I could get behind.

   1. Of course, those new bills were designed by a pot-growing hippie, but you can’t have everything 🙂

      1. Hey, you leave Tom Stone alone. He’s all right. Figured out a way to get people to put scrubbers on their smokestacks and smile while they were doing it. That was pretty slick.

         (Sorry about the extended 163x reference. Well, no, I’m not.)

4. Heck, I lived in Chattanooga for a while, and even there, Ross was a footnote.
   .
   So what’s this story they want told, “one was willing to fight, the other was not”, “the cost of appeasement”, or “the folly of relying on legal mechanisms for protection in the face of naked force”?
   I don’t believe they’ve thought the lesson through. The moral is incompatible with their worldview. Their thought process doesn’t seem to go deeper than “USA bad”.
   (I’ve walked the ground, it is emphatically NOT a good place to try and conquer through force of arms. There’s no way Jackson was unaware of this. As much as he hated Indians, it’s unlikely he’d have moved if he hasn’t served weakness.)

   1. Sensed, not served. Dang autocorrect.

   2. Ross wasn’t some sort of paragon of virtue either. When the Cherokee got to Oklahoma, the faction within Cherokee Nation that had been in favor of signing a treaty with the Federal Government, had their leadership systematically assassinated, with the exception of future CSA General Stand Watie.
      And while initially “Pro-Union” Ross eventually signed a treaty with the CSA. So you know, the Left clearly can’t put a former CSA supporter on any of our money.
      At least Jackson opposed the dissolution of the Union.

      1. While I am not in favor of putting John Ross on any American currency (for which honor only American citizens should be selected), I don’t know how you can criticize Ross for the assassinations following the Treaty of New Echota, since there has never been any evidence produced that he was involved in them, or even knew about them.
         .
         Also, there’s that whole bit about Ross not being directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people during an illegal forced relocation, which I think ultimately wins him the argument over who was the better (or, if you prefer, less bad) man.

         1. Who benefitted from the assassinations though? Who’s side committed them?

            Instead of less bad can we perhaps have someone I don’t know good?
            Maybe William T. Sherman.

            1. So…and I say again, despite the fact that no evidence has ever been produced to implicate Ross in the planning or execution of the New Echota reprisals…because people on John Ross’s “side” did some terrible things, John Ross himself is not a paragon of virtue. That makes no sense. The same argument can be leveled against us all, though I sincerely hope to lesser degrees.
               .
               And Sherman, who moved from waging total war against civilians in the South to waging it against Indians in the West, ought to fit no one’s definition of good.

5. I’m not fine with adding anybody alongside Andrew Jackson on the $20. I prefer outright replacement. Madison would be my first choice, as long as we could get him off any $5000 bills that the Reserve still uses for internal purposes. Reagan would also do nicely. Or Martin Luther King, Jr.

6. One of my pet hopeless causes is to put the $500 back into circulation (Europe has a 500-euro bill, after all) and put Ronald Reagan on it.

7. We should instead have Ronald Reagan on every VISA card (Silent Cal on Amex, of course)….

Comments are closed.