Sunday, June 19, 2016

Pecksniffian Commits Schadenfreude

Math Teacher Skewers Evangelicals

Columnist Roger Guffey (op-ed18 June) took dead aim at those “evangelical prophets of God” who described the Orlando massacre as God’s punishment of homosexuals and feel “they know God’s will so well that they can prophesize [sic] to the rest of us.” He then lists sarcastically a number of events such as floods and other massacres in the U.S. (didn't mention the Civil War, strangely) God visits on folks to show His hatred for them and consequent punishments.

Guffey wrote that far too many Christians suffer from schadenfreude and Pecksniffianism and explained both terms to the Great Unwashed, like me. He didn’t explain the difference between the accursed evangelical prophets and Christians but one guesses he thinks the former are hell-bound and at least wonders about the latter.

Guffey’s problem is that he can’t prove the evangelicals are wrong, which makes him sort of Pecksniffian, especially concerning a personal righteousness that qualifies him to judge those insensitive evangelicals, even though some biblical events concerning God’s direct/indirect actions toward people are gruesome, thus suggesting a proclivity for mayhem, pain and death for whatever reason.

Guffey brought up the event – Orlando massacre – that might explain why evangelicals consider homosexuality worthy of censure and current condemnation, i.e., God’s biblically-documented wrath and consequent judgments, such as His treatment of Sodom and Gomorrah, cities predominantly peopled by homosexuals, as outlined in Genesis 19.

Abraham’s nephew Lot was hosting two male visitors in Sodom when he was accosted by rabid homosexuals who demanded that he make his visitors available to be raped. Lot refused so they attempted a break-in/kidnapping with a view toward a grand orgy. In his anger, God struck the interlopers blind and told Lot to get his family out of town. The next morning, God completely destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah – fire and brimstone.

In Leviticus 20, as part of God’s design for an acceptable lifestyle, He indicated that those practicing “detestable” homosexual behavior be put to death, also indicating thereby that their lifestyle was one of choice and not of Creation activity. In Matthew 11, Jesus alluded to Sodom as the most evil standard by which cities could be judged.

Paul wrote in Romans 1 that both lesbians and homosexual men are condemned because through lust (not Creation) they defile their bodies by choice even though they know better, and reminded everyone of God's Leviticus-mandate about being worthy of death in that defilement. Sounds a bit harsh but Paul was not known for attempting to be God, only to quote Him.

The foregoing is not to judge homosexuals as Guffey did regarding the evangelicals, only to explain why evangelicals interpret homosexual behavior differently from Guffey on the basis of what is scriptural, taken quite literally but allowing for biblical poetry, parables, etc. Regarding obvious pronouncements by God/Jesus in both Old and New Testaments, they consider some things right or wrong with no shades of gray between.

Guffey cited Isaiah 55:8-9: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. … So are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” Substitute the word Guffey for the word Lord and discover the perfect example of Pecksniffianism with respect to Guffey's approach to evangelicals.

Guffey ended by writing that individuals who revel in judging others (evangelicals, for instance) and relishing their sufferings (schadenfreude) should spend more time reading the Bible they claim to already know. This is good advice that Guffey should put into practice when considering another hatchet-job on people who simply disagree with him.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Friday, June 17, 2016

The Pulse Peroration

As more is made known, the Orlando homosexually-oriented nightclub massacre seems more and more bizarre.  Was the shooter actually a homosexual himself, though married and a father, or perhaps a both-ways murderer?  And what about his wife as an accomplice?  Motive: Who knows? The answer is as inaccesible as the gunman.  

The candidates have weighed in, as has the president, whose heritage is Islamic (death to homosexuals) but who “evolved” by his own account and signed the same-sex marriage legislation.  In the Middle East, Muslim homosexuals are thrown off buildings to their deaths or perhaps just beheaded.  So, Obama is caught on the horns of a dilemma, fearing this weird contradiction between his religious heritage and his own subverting of it (raised until age ten in Muslim households) will damage his legacy, the thing of most concern to him now as he plows through lame-duck mode while treading carefully, especially during the current Ramadan during which Islamic pooh-bahs have urged more killings such as those in Orlando.  

Obama claims to have become a Christian under the mentoring of the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah (God damn America) Wright and attended Wright’s church for 20 years, listening to Wright rage against white people and the United States.  Wright was to offer a prayer in Obama’s first inauguration but account his publicly expressed animosity to the U.S. was “thrown under the bus.”  Christian doctrine in most churches (at least until Political Correctness became the new god) also condemns homosexual behavior and disallows homosexual’s ordination as ministers, though Obama’s church/denomination at the time of his participation (UCC) approved same-sex marriage in 2005.  

The president said that Muslims, especially Syrian refugees whether real or simply self-described, should be allowed to enter the U.S (up to 100,000 in 2017) even though they can’t be vetted and this will be the case in the foreseeable future since the U.S. has no relations with Syria, whose president Obama told to turn his country and his office over to the local insurrectionists in 2011, as if he could expect Assad to just do that.  He also told Libyan President Qaddafi to do the same in 2011.  Qaddafi (with virtually no military of substance) of course said “No thanks” anyway whereupon Obama simply made unprovoked illegal war on the Libyans for seven months until Qaddafi was killed.  Libya is in a shambles now, ungovernable and an outpost of ISIS.  This outrageous action against a sovereign state will shatter his legacy as future historians inflict their sharp knives.  

Now, fifty-one U.S. diplomats have signed some kind of memo urging Obama to start bombing Syrian targets in order to hurt Syria, while Obama is already bombing installations in Syria to displace ISIS. The unprovoked bombing of Syrian government targets (and probably the ISIS targets as well) would be the same as Obama's bombing of Libya, which ended in total disaster. Obama has already mismanaged Middle East policy enough and actually should just begin total withdrawal of American forces from that area so the Muslims could settle their wars there instead of threatening the rest of the world.

Trump is for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration but Clinton is horrified at such a thought, i.e., bring in the Syrians no matter what their backgrounds are.  She and Obama claim that this conforms to American “values.”  Neither she nor Obama has any concept of those values, as proven by their well-documented lies, unless they consider subterfuge a “value.”  Consider their tandem effort concerning the Benghazi massacre as just one of those humongous LIES.  Trump is right. Jihadists are holding the world hostage (think airport-lines and mass killings throughout the world).  The Koran and the ayatollahs insist on death to the infidels.  Inviting potential murderers to just walk in and immediately sign-up for all the entitlements is loony-tunes.  

Not only the LGBTQ gang is at risk.  Every non-Muslim is at risk.  

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Ali's Planned Beatification

It isn’t often, if ever, that one is treated to a three- or four-hour funeral (perhaps based on when it began and ended) and it’s hard to imagine that anyone would contrive to plan such a thing. It happened in Louisville, Ky., on 09-10 June. Yes, his entire last rites, according to the plan conceived by Muhammad Ali for his own final gratification or celebration of life or whatever the last rites are called these days took two days, the first in obeisance to Allah, Ali’s god, and the second to treat Louisville to virtually a whole day of funeralizing [sic].

The second day began with a grand motorcade procession started in late morning and using about three or so hours of tying up Louisville streets for a 19-mile trip to the funeral site (about 6 mph), the Yum Center downtown, where the University of Louisville plays its basketball games. The funeral, no matter how it was conceived, lasted for hours and was a combination of Islamic incantation, eloquent preaching, comedy, solemnity, and political speeches, everything from comedian Billy Crystal to a frantic, raging rabbi in a strange garb to Buddhist music-intoning to former president Clinton, who sort of delivered the final dissertation, with only a shadow of his once speech-strength and hopefully without pay.

Since the actual mileage noted elsewhere indicated 23 miles for the motorcade, the final four-mile segment was probably from the Yum Center to the cemetery, so the entire affair was one long experience for the attendees. The old rabbi made a caustic, arm-waving political harangue and actually had to be forcefully pulled away from the speaker’s stand by the master of ceremonies, but the tone of the funeral was set early in the affair by Dr. Kevin Cosby, pastor of St. Stephen Church and president of Simmons College, both located in Louisville, who made it clear that the funeral was all about white racism.

Cosby’s church is affiliated with both domestic and international Baptist institutions so one might have expected more of a bridge than a wall (Crystal’s political swipe at Trump). This seemed unseemly, also, since Ali’s entry into boxing was bankrolled by a group of white businessmen in Louisville; otherwise, he might not have had the opportunity to train and learn his trade. His trainer, Angelo Dundee, was a white guy, so why the “Jesse Jackson” approach, though Ali’s father claimed that the Muslims had taught Ali to hate whites?

Cosby, like Jackson, whether consciously or not, seemed to be proclaiming to young people the Jackson approach, i.e., hate white people and work the system for what it offers for the least amount of effort, like protesting for something or other. Making solemn occasions into racial and political opportunism speaks ill of those who do that, especially those in the field of education. He took the mourners back some 350 years or so to about 1666 to define the time-line of white mistreatment of blacks. That’s about 66 years before George Washington was born and 123 years before the U.S. became a nation.

The most surprising speaker was Attallah Shabazz, a daughter of Malcom X, Ali’s mentor as the boxer converted to Islam and joined the Nation of Islam, headed by Elijah Muhammad, with whom Malcolm X later parted ways account the old man’s dalliance with young girls. Ali refused to leave the sect, turned his back on Malcolm X and even ridiculed him publicly.

Malcolm X was assassinated by three members of the NOI, and one of his other daughters was alleged to have conspired to have Louis Farrakhan, Elijah’s successor via a sort of power-grab, assassinated. Farrakhan attended Ali’s funeral although Ali left the NOI in 1975 when he became a full-fledged Sunni Muslim. The murderous ISIS is the current high-profile Sunni branch of Islam, perhaps beheading Christians in Iraq (a favorite pastime) while Ali’s funeral was in progress.

The quirkiness of an intolerably long funeral, virtually a day-long affair, designed to beatify oneself is strange enough, but even stranger is the fact that a pallbearer, presumably picked by Ali, was Mike Tyson, infamous for biting off part of Evander Holyfield’s ear and spitting it out during a bout as well as being an ex-con imprisoned for rape, but Baghdadi el Baghdadi, head of ISIS, might have been amused.

Ali was unmerciful in ridiculing and taunting his opponents (called Frazier a gorilla) and, ironically, used his hands to pummel people into unconsciousness but was virtually deified in Louisville, wherein the first reattachment of a severed hand to its wrist/arm took place by some genius-doctors. That’s how coarse the culture has become.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Thursday, June 09, 2016

The GREATEST?

CAVEAT ALERT! To some, the following will be racist or insensitive or politically incorrect or anti-diversity or bigoted or disrespect for the dead. It’s none of those things, just a look at how people act in life and react to death, especially celebrity-death, the point of reference being the death of Muhammad Ali, also known at one time as Cassius Clay, Jr. Also, I consider prizefighting a cruel and crude “sport,” marked as much by corruption as by the pain. One wonders, for instance, about the second Ali/Liston fight that lasted less than three minutes.

Ali shouted, “I'm the greatest,” and the phrase took off in both the public and especially the media, both of which have virtually deified him. Ali didn’t say the greatest of what but he’s been termed the greatest of a lot of things by government officials and others such as goodwill ambassador, boxer, representative of the nation, etc.

The term “greatest” needs to be placed in the proper perspective. Most will agree that greatness is ascribed to those who in a good cause make the greatest sacrifice possible, the ultimate being one’s life. Thus, the nineteen-year-old soldier shipped home in a box from the Middle East has achieved greatness, while at age 19 Ali was well into his career, which involved bashing people’s brains into mush for money – not a great cause.

It has been claimed over and over that Ali was the “greatest” boxer of all time, even though he was savagely beaten a number of times. The greatest heavyweight boxer since at least the 1940s was Rocky Marciano, who held the championship in the 1950s. He fought 49 times, including numerous bouts for the title. He won every bout, 43 by knockouts, and simply retired, never beaten. He also served in the army 1943-46 (drafted) during WWII, though he could have claimed to be a conscientious objector. The greatest heavyweight of the last hundred years was Joe Louis, who held the title 1937-49, the longest such tenure in boxing history. In his prime, he enlisted in the army for WWII.

Ali dodged the Draft, however, in the Vietnam era, claiming upon religious grounds since he had converted to Islam and described himself as a minister of sorts. Elijah Muhammad, head pooh-bah of the Chicago-based Nation of Islam at the time, is said to have given him the name Ali. Elijah and the NOI were later condemned by Malcolm X because of Elijah’s adulterous activities with young girls, and was assassinated soon after. Fittingly, Ali died on the eve of Ramadan.

Ali remained a practitioner of Islam until his death, though Louis Farrakhan became its head and is best-known for his hate-speeches/writings concerning white people, including Jews. As a good Muslim, he should have been buried within 24 hours of death. That couldn’t happen because Ali had contrived a two-inch-thick document mandating his “funeral” arrangements, which sort of tied-up Louisville, his birthplace, for hours and hours, especially by a long hearse-processional (19 miles) through city-streets…sort of in-your-face stuff. Ali’s father claimed that the Muslims taught Ali to hate white people.

Ali was convicted of draft-avoidance, given a five-year sentence, but escaped it on a technicality. As a conscientious objector, to dodge the Draft he had to swear he was against all wars, which he did, but apparently had forgotten that he was on the record as willing to fight in a war involving Islam. Somehow (one wonders), this was not introduced correctly, if at all, at trial so he went free.

Much has been made of the three years the greatest couldn’t fight anywhere (all licenses nullified or not considered and passport revoked), thus costing him money. He spent that time railing against the war. Baseball-player Ted Williams batted .406, an unbelievable feat in 1941, had a Draft deferral but enlisted in the Navy anyway in 1942 and was recalled (fighter pilot) during the Korean War, during which he was shot down once, thus giving up five years in his absolute prime time (lifetime average .344 and 521 home-runs). One can only wonder what that five years cost him and hordes of fellow-pros who traded their skills, potential records and money for military service.

Ali was/is an idol for many, but actually he was just the “Greatest Narcissist.”

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Don't Cry for Me, Hiroshima

President Obama has just visited Hiroshima, something no other U.S. president has done.…memorializing the 1945 A-bomb events on the part of the “sanguinary” U.S… sort of a caterwauling apology in behalf of the “sensitive” few (like him?)…the never-ending discussion of the two things that set the tone for history post-WWII – Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He began his speech by reminding that “death fell from the sky” seventy-one years ago. This is the president who precipitated “death from the sky” five years ago onto Libya, one of the weakest nations militarily in the world...and for no reason since Libya was a threat to no nation.

Flash back to August 1945 to a six-week period from December 1937 to February 1938. The place: Nanking, China. The Japanese Army took the city and within a six-week period without the use of bombs, artillery, or anything much more lethal than bayonets and rifles managed to kill about 300,000 people (half the population), mostly civilians and POWs, the greatest atrocity of the WWII-era. How does an army stab to death or otherwise polish off 7,200 people per day without even a roadside bomb or a battalion of suicide bombers, while committing 20,000 reported rapes (maybe one reported for every ten unreported?) and getting the bodies out of the way?

It must have been mostly over by 17 January 1938 when then-Japanese Foreign Minister Hirota Koki confirmed in a message to the Japanese embassy in Washington that 300,000 had been killed in Nanjing (National Archives, Washington, D.C. – released September 1994). Koki probably didn’t mention it, but two Japanese officers held a competition to see who could bring about the most beheadings. The two officers were finally executed in 1947. Apparently, hara-kiri, the honorable way out, was not honorable enough for them, so they stuck around until somebody else did the deed for them.

Concerning the ladies, the euphemism for their wretched status was Comfort Women. These were the 200,000 women/girls, mostly Korean, who were shipped like so many pack mules to the various fronts where Japanese soldiers were fighting in order to allegedly protect the precious “freedom fighters” from STDs, ergo, foreclose their absence from the war, account of VD. The notion that this stopped the rape of whoever just happened to “be there” is too ridiculous to even contemplate. The Japanese were equal opportunity rapists, and their victims – at least in Muslim theology – represented paradise, albeit in the midst of massacres by the boatload.

But what does all this gory stuff have to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki? For those dumb enough to ask that question, the answer, via other questions, is simple: Would it have been better to bypass Japan in 1945 and thus give that cruel regime the opportunity to continue its bloodthirsty campaigns until it threatened the entire world, including this nation? Is it better to kill the enemy on his soil rather than kill the enemy on one’s own soil? In choosing weaponry, is it better to use the most powerful at a distance…or, is it better to go to the trenches and “fight fair,” eyeball-to-eyeball right at home…sort of like the English/French/Germans in 1914-18?

To rational people, the answers are simple enough. President Truman knew them in August 1945. Americans had been dying at about the 320-per-day rate (counting all war-induced deaths) for some three-and-a-half years. Why should more of them die just because a cruel regime had decided to conquer and enslave Asia, for starters, and the rest of the world, in time? He decided there was no reason for that and could hardly have faced the relatives of the American dead, or the survivors, tens of thousands of whom had been wounded, if he had failed to take all possible actions to end the conflagration started by the Japanese.

At 8:15 a.m. on 06 August 1945, the first atomic bomb, nicknamed “Little Boy,” was dropped from a B-29 known as the “Enola Gay” and piloted by Army Air Corps Colonel Paul Tibbets. It detonated at 2,000 feet altitude and obliterated 4.7 square miles of the city. Some 70,000 people died or went missing instantly and another 70,000 were injured, with perhaps 140,000 dead altogether by the end of the year. Compare that to Nanking. Rational leaders would have seen the handwriting on the wall, but Japan was not blessed on that day with rational leaders…only bloodthirsty and ambitious monsters.

President Truman waited for an offer of surrender, being a rational leader himself and thus expecting, in the face of such a threat of eventual utter destruction, that common sense would prevail among the Japanese leaders. Enigmatically, nothing happened; therefore, at 11:02 a.m. on 09 August 1945, a full three days having passed for allowing reasonable leaders to act, the second atomic bomb, nicknamed “Fat Man,” was dropped from another American plane on Nagasaki, destroying one-third of the city, or about 1.8 square miles. Some 40,000 people were killed or went missing and another 40,000 were injured, with perhaps 70,000 dead altogether by the end of the year. This finally grabbed the attention of Japanese leaders, and the rest is history.

So…was it better for Hiroshima and Nagasaki to happen than for the expected millions, including Japanese women and children, to die in the unavoidable invasion of Japan necessary to end the war? The answer is obvious. Had the Japanese not been defeated, as well as the Nazi Germans a few months before (after having brought about the deaths of millions), American women today would be in the “Comfort Brigades” shipped all over the world, and there would not be a single Jew still alive. When the “sensitivity” cadres look at things in this light, perhaps they will see the light, although one wonders, in light of the mushy-mindedness of those who rail against this country because they are too dumb to see the connection between Nanking 1937 and New York/Washington/Pennsylvania 11 September 2001.

President H.S. Truman drew a line in the sand in August 1945. President G.H.W. Bush drew a line in the sand in 1991. President G.W. Bush drew a line in the sand in 2001 and again in 2003. Though the sands constantly shift, one hopes for reasonable leaders who will always draw the line. Obama's “memorializing” in Hiroshima disgraced this country, which lost 405,000 dead in WWII.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark.

Friday, May 13, 2016

U.S. as BULLY

AG Lets Transgenders & Homosexuals BULLY the Masses

Two social problems are currently intersecting, causing consternation and conflict as well as calling for another interpretation of the Constitution. One has to do with laws in many locations having to do with bullying. The other deals with transgenders (or those claiming that status) using public bathrooms of choice, no matter their biological gender.

Attorney-General Lynch, in hammering the North Carolina legislature and governor for enacting laws preventing this absurdity, has predictably posited this matter in terms of racism hearkening back to the 1960s civil-rights era, although race is not a factor, just bathroom privacy for everyone. Strangely, one wonders why those who claim to be bisexual are not a part of the conversation. Should they also occupy the facility of choice?

How is a transgender or bisexual identified. There's no clinical test to determine transgender-sex. A transgender or bisexual is self-identified, no matter how he/she is dressed or undressed. Apparently, it's all in the mind, which cannot be deciphered. There's no genetic or chromosomal anomaly involved, as is the case with homosexuality.

Anyone can claim to be transgender to frequent bathrooms of choice, no questions asked. A 250-pound male, who may be a child molester or other type of pervert, can enter a restroom occupied solely by a mostly undressed twelve-year-old girl. The potential danger is obvious.

CNN's Jake Tapper, showing considerable angst on 11 May arguing with North Carolina Governor McCrory, stupidly asked if there had been a problem to date. There had been no complaints because the issue has just presented itself in the rabid political correctness craze. Transgenders, with no harm, had simply gone to the proper restrooms. The plot will thicken when that drunken 250-pound "transgender" (on his own say-so) assaults and perhaps kills that twelve-year-old girl, thus giving Tapper his answer.

This is where bullying intersects the bathrooms. Business people have been bankrupted by a handful of homosexuals account, for religious reasons, not accommodating their marriage activities. They can now be bankrupted for refusing the transgenders opposite-sex bathrooms if for no other reason simply guarding against lawsuits for what happens in those bathrooms. Bullying!

The actual bully, however, is the government, the only power the transgenders or homosexuals have for pushing this social engineering agenda. The 99.99% of straight Americans are being bullied by their own government depriving them of their right to privacy without harming another soul. Plain common sense.

A father does not want his daughter subject to exposure or worse. His son should not be forced to hear ribald conversation and even advances by silly women in the men's restroom. High-school boys, prone to pulling pranks and enduring raging hormones, can claim to be transgender to enter girls' restrooms, locker-rooms and showers (already happened in Ky.), then laugh later in their own bathrooms, perhaps joined by some girls for a great orgy all around.

This violation of privacy for the masses will affect business, manufacturing, education and all other entities if allowed to happen. SCOTUS has ruled that a right to privacy exists. Transgenders and everyone else will have that right if the government decides not to be a BULLY!

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

Wednesday, May 04, 2016

Columnist Peel Censures Jackson

There's no argument with Barry Peel's castigation of Andrew Jackson (H-L 02 May) though making it a case for "updating" currency to political correctness mode trivializes his point of reference, the mistreatment of "Native Americans," a mistaken appellation since Peel likely has no idea who inhabited North America (native-native Americans) before the Indians dislodged them and became the current Native Americans.

A long article in the current Weekly Standard took on Jackson, too, though it had to do more with his political shenanigans, like forestalling a banking system. He was ruthless but no more so than current politicians and hardly more coarse.

Peel might wonder how it is that he is what he is where he is in light of history. The Indians were as treacherous and genocide-prone as any people group, such as the Africans, who in the 1600-1800s, after winning tribal wars, either ate, enslaved, tortured or sold the losers or their families to slave-traders for a handful of trinkets.

In other words, history is if anything an account of the survival of the fittest. The primitives have always been at the mercy of those who are inclined toward inventing or grabbing things that make them able to overcome either their enemies or just folks who had something they wanted. Current example: ISIS, the grabbers, who predicate their success on committing terrorism, using implements of destruction taken from their owners.

The Persians (Iran ancestors) comprised an advanced culture/civilization before the time of Mohammad, an illiterate cutthroat who established a religion in Egypt after being the caravan-plundering edition of Jesse James. That "faith" made its way to Persia and throughout the Middle East and all the way to Spain before being stopped there in Europe in the 1400s. The sorry situation worldwide today because of Islamic terrorism is obvious.

A culture either advances or stagnates and then begins a gradual dissolution. The result is that the more fit will take it over. This is what happened with Jackson and the "Trail of Tears," guns against bows and arrows, and is largely the reason Peel is writing columns in Kentucky instead of hiding from a scalper.

As far as the current situation is concerned, Peel would likely prefer the Lexington of today over that of Daniel Boone's era - education, sanitation, law and order, representative government instead of tribal face-offs. He might prefer driving 70 mph in an air-conditioned car over the care, feeding, and general upkeep of a horse.

If Jackson hadn't dealt harshly with the Indians, some other person-of-power would have, perhaps the most graphic and easily proven lesson of history. If the colonists had not booted the British (French, too), either of those worthies would have done-in the Indians and worried about it a lot less than Jackson.

Lesson: If the U.S. continues on its obvious descent morally, militarily and otherwise, it will be fair game for the people-group that will ultimately become strong enough to dislodge this nation. In fact, the North Koreans and Chinese governments could wipe out much of this weakening self-worshiping nation in a heartbeat now while citizens clamor for all genders to use whatever and wherever bathrooms they desire, something really important.

As for the currency, it should include imprints or engravings (if perceived as necessary in the case of pictures) of U.S. officials only. The currency should not comprise a museum of sorts for individuals who have been important in affecting government but not effecting government. Jackson, like Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, Roosevelt (both), was a president and trying to means-test him off the currency is both mean-spirited and shallow. Re-writing history is beneath contempt.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark