Reagan!
Dunno--I think there's plenty of irony to be had. It's not like the treaty was a desired outcome--"sign the treaty and get something for going away" versus "go away" isn't much of a choice.Not sure about the irony. Stand was a treaty-signer.
Monica.
A Monica for a Monica....
How about a picture of Stand Watie, or Quanah Parker, that'd be cool. But on the five, not the twenty.
Well, there would be a certain amount of irony, if not justice, in replacing Ol' Hickory with Stand Watie.
BTW - did Jackson send the troops to oust the Cherokees?
It's also wildly ironic that signing treaties proved to be a sucker move for the Indians every time. We laud the signers of treaties even though WE repeatedly broke treaties ourselves. Indians who believed we would keep our word made our lives a hell of a lot easier. Laugh the Fukc out loud.Dunno--I think there's plenty of irony to be had. It's not like the treaty was a desired outcome--"sign the treaty and get something for going away" versus "go away" isn't much of a choice.
The thing is, we already do spend money to redesign banknotes every so often. For fraud protection. Wasn't the $100 just redesigned recently?
I don't really give a flip about who is on the money. I just think there are actual problems in this world and this isn't one of them. And i'm not talking about the issue of a woman being on the banknote or not, i'm talking about the 'this is the end of america' attitude that comes with these types of threads. America isn't toast because we entertain the idea of putting a woman (or anyone one else, regardless of where the idea comes from) on a banknote.
Enter your email address to join: