James C. Curtis’ “Andrew Jackson and the Search for Vindication” was actually a well thought out and interesting book. Curtis obviously does his research, and the story is very detailed. It is very easy to get lost in the story. Although some parts were really boring and some sentences were run on sentences, but for the most part it was a good story. Curtis wanted the readers of this book to have the whole perspective of Jackson’s life, and where he comes from. Curtis laid all the information out very well. The reader can learn so many new things about Andrew Jackson from reading this book. For example, how he thought his dad was a hero, only because he had never really knew him, and how growing up Jackson was a little rebellious and had a wild side, facts about the president that most people probably do not know. The evidence of all information seems very real too, because after he tells us another story of how he grew up, he gives Jackson’s input of what he had to say about it, almost like it was an interview. …show more content…
Which is why this is a good book for college students to be reading because it is very relatable, and teaches the reader how any goal is achievable, and to never say never, because coming from Jacksons whole life situation, from losing his mother to the smallpox disease to getting drunk all the times at taverns, Jackson still managed to become president and do a life time of goals that most people do not even think about doing. It sounds like a story to motivate others going through the same crises to achieve their
Southern Horrors Lynch Law in All Its Phases Book Review Da B. Wells-Barnett has written the book under review. The book has been divided into six chapters that cover the various themes that author intended to fulfill. The book is mainly about the Afro-Americans and how they were treated within the American society in the late 1800s. The first chapter of the book is “the offense” band this is the chapter that explains the issues that have been able to make the Afro-American community to be treated in a bad way by the whites in the United States in the late 1800s.
Andrew Jackson transformed from the man on the twenty dollar bill to a great commander and leader, and I learned how important this battle really was to modern America. I liked how fast paced the book managed to be, while still fully explaining the details of the war. A lot of nonfiction books tend to lose me with all of the different names and dates, but I feel that I was able to keep up with this one fairly well. I wanted to praise this book for showing that America was not a perfect place at this time, as it feels like a like of people actually believe that. For example, the depiction of the slave who had a “collar of spikes around his neck” put on him for trying to escape by an American was necessary for this purpose (88).
Jackson was known to be a man of the people, but he messed up his relationship with the people when he denied the bill. Supposedly, the bill put the common people at a disadvantage and the higher class at a benefit. Jackson claims that the wealthy control the bank, and he did not like that at all. For example, he says that too often the “rich and powerful” bend the acts of government to what they want, and they don’t think about other people. I personally think that is a little hypocritical because Jackson made his own decisions without others approving at all, and now he is turning around saying the rich and powerful are twisting the rules of the government.
Andrew Jackson was a self made man and didn’t need the wealthy man 's money to succeed his goals in life. He was a hardworking middle class American who was born into poverty from Irish immigrant parents in 1767. He fought briefly in the American Revolution War, studied law and became the prosecuting attorney for western North Carolina, elected to the House of Representatives in 1796, and later the Senate the very next year in 1797. He rose to fame during the War of 1812 when he soundly defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans using a remarkably egalitarian force of slaves, Haitians, Choctaw, French pirates, Canary Islanders, and frontiersmen. After the war at New Orleans he was dubbed the name “Old hickory” for his leadership and
Andrew Jackson came across many controversies in his life and he had many ways to face all his problems. He was determined to what his mind was set to and Jackson was a very stubborn man. Jackson was not the kind of guy that would listen to just anybody he would do what he choose to do. Andrew Jackson and the national bank, The bank war refers to the political struggle that developed over the issue of recharting and i believe that he took the national bank to help himself and to help the people also, the bank of the united states also printed the country 's paper money and it was the only bank permitted to have offices across the nation. when president Jackson was leader of the country he did not get along very well with the bank and he
Margaret Bayard Smith even described that many people went to the capital just to see Andrew Jackson. Even so with so many people looking up to him, he may have crashed under the pressure and was not able to always do the right thing for
Is Andrew Jackson a hero or a villain? Throughout history Jackson has been viewed as both. Some see him as a war hero and the people’s president. Others see him as a racist and a political tyrant. To me, Andrew Jackson is more of a hero.
Andrew Jackson was a villain for a few reasons. One reason why Jackson was a villain is because he put America at risk. After he won this first term as president, Jackson put his supporters in top government positions. This meant that Jackson put less qualified people in charge of making the decisions that are necessary for America’s success. Furthermore, even after the Peggy Eaton affair in which Jackson was forced to have his unqualified cabinet to resign, he still only took advice from his loyal friends and supporters, known by his enemies as the “kitchen cabinet”.
Andrew Jackson, being a tyrant, abused his power in his time of presidency. He was the 7th president, but before Jackson’s presidency, he had no political experience. One of the only things that really qualified him was the hardships he went through when he was younger. His father had died while Jackson was young and Jackson received the reputation as a “self-made man”, or an independent man.
"The Plunkitt of Tammany Hall" written by William L. Riordon about George W. Plunkitt's multiple talks in defense of his career in the political machine Tammany Hall. George W. Plunkitt was a ward boss of the Tammany Hall Political machine. It was full of corruption which made George W. Plunkitt wealthy. Before people knew about Tammany Hall being corrupt, George W. Plunkitt tried to defend Tammany Hall throughout his political career in order to keep making a lot of money. Some of George W. Plunkitt's talks were on his honest graft against dishonest graft, Civil Service reforms, Tammany Hall being patriotic, and how successful politicians do not drink.
As I mentioned in the introduction, Jackson has been written in the history book as quite the tyrant. Jackson very well did step beyond his assigned power by overruling the Supreme court and enacting the Indian Removal Act. His act of tyranny does appear to be for the general good of the people of America. Though his actions were for the good of America, this doesn’t overshadow the effects on the indian people. The most significant ethical violation was the violation of civil rights.
Abraham Lincoln and Civil War America is a biography that tells the life and success of Abraham Lincoln. At the beginning it talks about his life and how rough he grew up. As Lincoln grew up he wanted to learn to read and write because he was ashamed that his father couldn 't. Lincoln learning to read and write was a key factor to help him win the election and become as successful as he was. Even as a young child Lincoln claims to naturally be anti-salvory ( page 281). This is important to his stand point during the war.
Flash-forward to when Jackson met his future wife. Rachel Donelson was boarding in North Carolina along with her mother when the two first caught each other’s eye. The attraction was nearly immediate. Donelson was previously espoused to Lewis Robards. The marriage was never dissolved and as a result, Jackson and Donelson’s marriage was nullified in 1791.
The Insight of Native Americans in Sherman Alexie’s Jackson Jackson According to the Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 11.7 percent of Native Americans and Alaska Natives deaths between 2001 and 2005 were alcohol-related, compared with 3.3 percent for the U.S. as a whole, more than three times the percentage of the general population. Native Americans are overrepresented in the homeless population by approximately 19 percent by a study of Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care for Homeless Veterans program. Jackson Jackson, in “What You Pawn I Will Redeem” by Sherman Alexie, embodies the above study. Unlike the traditional heroes who mostly win the fights, make all the right decisions, can do almost everything, and have perfect characteristics like bravery, strength, charm, Alexie portrays the protagonist, Jackson Jackson as a modern anti-hero who is very complicated.
Born into a non-aristocratic poor family, somewhere in the Carolina’s on March 14, 1767, was a man named Andrew Jackson. Jackson, also called “Old Hickory” was a very bold proactive man in American history. From being a military hero and founding the democratic party to enacting the trail of tears and dismantling the of the Bank of the United States, the man and his legacy are a prominent topic for scholarly debate. Some believe he was a great president and some believe he was the worse president. But if you look at it from a moral perceptive or in the eyes of a foreigner, Jackson’s legacy was far more villainous than heroic.