I...am at a loss for words
CPAC Participant Defends Slavery At Minority Outreach Panel: It Gave ‘Food And Shelter’ To Blacks
|by Anonymous||reply 34||03/16/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 1||03/15/2013|
I think it's official: Conservatism is a mental illness.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||03/15/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 3||03/15/2013|
Make it go viral.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||03/15/2013|
Which was definitely in demand after suffering the abrupt departure of those cushy cruise ships.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||03/15/2013|
We need to encourage these people. They need to become the face and the voice of the Republican Party!
|by Anonymous||reply 6||03/15/2013|
White supremacists certainly do appear regularly as CPAC panelists. There's plenty of room for hate at the table.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||03/15/2013|
Makes me snicker about all the people who have been shrieking on this board for years about how aberrantly racist white gay men are.
Those people are asleep at the wheel obviously. This is horrendous racism attached to actual people of an actual political party, not anonymous posters on a message board or some imagined underrepresentation at an HRC dinner. Wake up to the real racism in this country and understand its source and its perpetrators, m'kay?
|by Anonymous||reply 8||03/15/2013|
Oh, you mean like an R9 who bitches about a low income minority who gets into a college with an A- average and surpassing a white kid with an A average, yet keeps their mouth shut about a wealthy, entitled, white shithead with a C average who gets into that same school because daddy is an alum?
Is that what you mean by double standard?
|by Anonymous||reply 10||03/15/2013|
They're not just pro-rape, they're pro-slavery!
|by Anonymous||reply 11||03/15/2013|
I'm with r4. This stuff needs to get out there so it won't be forgotten.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||03/15/2013|
This just proves we like Blacks just as much as our other property: Women. Even though women who are raped shouldn't get abortions or health care, we do give them food and shelter.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||03/15/2013|
I hate r9.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||03/15/2013|
He is not entirely incorrect. The diet of the average slave was better than the diet of the average free white person in the industrial north. The house slaves were better off than 90% (yes 90%) of the white population in general. But house slaves were still nothing more than fancy dress up dolls for their white masters. Nobody has a right to own anyone. It is not about a standard of living. It is about human dignity.
Of course if you read the article, at least certain CPAC participants would like to go back to the days where women could not own property and were entirely dependent on their husbands. I have no doubt that they would like to go back to the days where child abuse laws did not exist, and if you wanted to press charges one had to creatively use animal cruelty laws.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||03/15/2013|
Santorum's #1 obsession is to deny equal rights to gays. He inserts his self-hatred in every speech. He's among the biggest closet cases in the entire nation. That's somewhat appropriate for a member of the Opus Dei cult.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||03/15/2013|
The people in front seemed shocked.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||03/15/2013|
The wealthy audience members should see this as instructive and stop paying their live in help.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||03/15/2013|
"At one point, a woman challenged him on the Republican Party’s roots, to which Terry responded, “I didn’t know the legacy of the Republican Party included women correcting men in public.”
That's the Michfest party and it rocks!
|by Anonymous||reply 19||03/15/2013|
For several reasons, I am really hoping that was a paid subversive.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||03/15/2013|
Can you provide a link about the comparable diets, R15?
|by Anonymous||reply 21||03/15/2013|
The Holocaust wasn't that bad. The concentration camps gave food and shelter to Jews.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||03/15/2013|
R15, you really need to shut up. The diet of slaves was NOT better. For the amount of work they had to do, slaves' diet was subsistance. They ate mainly corn and leftover hog fat. That's it. Occasionally their diet supplemented with vegetables from the garden that would have otherwise gone bad. Rotting vegetables, ground corn, and fat. That was their diet. EAT UP!
|by Anonymous||reply 23||03/15/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 24||03/15/2013|
Slaves' diets were so awesome, what with the weeds and offal so plentiful. And the shacks! Oh, it was fine livin' . . .
|by Anonymous||reply 25||03/15/2013|
What does he say about gays?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||03/16/2013|
I'm completely against torture, but in R15's case I'll make an exception. Only the slowest, most painful and excruciating torture will do. And it should be broadcast live on national TV so the entire world can be shown what an asshole R15 is.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||03/16/2013|
It's the dilemma Portnoy's mother faced. To give the maid half a can or a whole can of tuna for lunch.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||03/16/2013|
I am out of state because my father died, but when I get back, I will post the information. I own a set of ledgers from a a pre-Civil War plantation and I have copies of several others.
The problem is that most of you know absolutely nothing about slavery except what you see on TV. You are the first to call Uncle Tom and Topsy stereotypes. Even Little Eva you recognize as a sentimental stereotype of Victorian childhood, but Simon Legree you see as photorealism. Sorry, you can't have it both ways.
Slaves received a monthly allowance of fatback, beans and rice/or cornmeal. This was augmented by vegetables that they were allowed to grow in the slave quarters. By today's standards it was not a good diet, and the portions were far less than you are used to at your Cheese Factory, but it was better than the factory workers in the industrial north.
And, of course, none of you have the slightest idea of the diet of workers in the industrial north. Indeed, one of the primary differences is that the slave diet included animal proteins and fats (in limited quantities). These were totally absent from the diets of workers in the North. And, before you sneer at offal, may I remind you that offal, includes livers, kidneys, tripe, etc., which are actually highly nutritious.
If workers in the north had access to vegetables and fruits, they were the rotten produce that could not be sold to the middle class. Fruits and vegetables were not a part of worker's diets in any regular way.
Sorry, if the realities of slavery do not reduce it to the absolute black and white/ right and wrong simplicity that you would like it to be. The fact is that most of you are so disconnected to the rhythms of agricultural life that you do understand the realities of slavery or plantation life. You can only understand it if you impose your own experiences upon it. As someone posted up thread, there is a tendency today to make slavery and the holocaust identical, and to interpret slave life in terms of a concentration camp. This is not truthful. (As to the poster above, a better analogy would be to say that Nazi slave labor saved people from the extermination camps. Which is to say being worked to death is better than being gassed. Not much of a choice.)
I am a Quaker. We were against slavery a hundred years before everyone else. Even in the early 19th century we rejected the argument that slavery provided a "better" life to the "savages", or the argument that slavery is permitted in the bible. (And to reject the bible was considered quite shocking at the time.) However, we Quakers also have a strong belief in the truth. A great deal of what you think you know about slavery is wrong. Or, it it not interpreted with in context of the time. In the early 19th century, brutality was common place. Unless you interpret slavery within the context of a labor (e.g. building the railroads, company owned mining camps, northern textile mills) you really do not have a concept of what is specific to slavery and what was common labor practices at the time. Similarly, one has to take into consideration the treatment of women and children, who were also considered property long past the end of slavery. As I mentioned earlier, the earliest child abuse cases had to be tried as animal abuse because there were no laws to protect children.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||03/16/2013|
[quote]Sorry, if the realities of slavery do not reduce it to the absolute black and white/ right and wrong simplicity that you would like it to be.
Wow. For someone who professes to be interested in the "truth" you sure seem to have a major blind spot.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||03/16/2013|
what's your point, r29?
Can you express the gist of it in a couple of sentences?
|by Anonymous||reply 31||03/16/2013|
It's not actually conservatism.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||03/16/2013|
"Even in the early 19th century we rejected the argument that slavery provided a "better" life to the "savages", or the argument that slavery is permitted in the bible"
But slavery IS permitted in the Bible, the Old Testament is full of references to slaves, concubines, "handmaidens", etc.
Which which is one reason of many that I ignore the bible.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||03/16/2013|
R29 No matter how well the slaves were treated, fed or 'cared for,' the fact remains that we as Americans KIDNAPPED PEOPLE FROM ANOTHER CONTINENT, SOLD THEM LIKE CATTLE, AND KEPT THEM IN SERVITUDE.
Nothing about that can be any less ugly than it is. Nothing about it can be reasoned as just or sensible.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||03/16/2013|