GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann thinks founding fathers ended slavery

The anchor states: "we believe facts matter" and also states: "the Constitution established slaves as 3/5 of a person". Apparently facts don't matter. :)
 
Damn Yankee said:
The anchor states: "we believe facts matter" and also states: "the Constitution established slaves as 3/5 of a person". Apparently facts don't matter. :)
Click to expand...

that is the effect of the compromise, slaves only counted for 3/5 of their population in determining apportionment for representation, thus effectively decreasing their representation based solely on their slave status

do you think bachman's comment was accurate?
 
Yurt said:
that is the effect of the compromise, slaves only counted for 3/5 of their population in determining apportionment for representation, thus effectively decreasing their representation based solely on their slave status

do you think bachman's comment was accurate?
Click to expand...
Counted for representation was the compromise. That doesn't mean that the Founders considered them 3/5 of a person. Yes, I believe her statements to be accurate.
 
She poorly worded and should have said, "Many of the founders fought to abolish slavery, although it did not happen within their lifetimes."

She was right:

http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnquincyadams.html

John Q. Adams was a strong opponent of slavery, and one of the founders. Many of the founders fought to abolish slavery, even some who then later owned slaves. Contradictory it may seem, but it is true.
 
Damocles said:
She poorly worded and should have said, "Many of the founders fought to abolish slavery, although it did not happen within their lifetimes."

She was right:

http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnquincyadams.html

John Q. Adams was a strong opponent of slavery, and one of the founders. Many of the founders fought to abolish slavery.
Click to expand...

J Q. Adams was John's son, not a founder. His father, however, instilled in Q. the same beliefs.
 
Damn Yankee said:
J Q. Adams was John's son, not a founder. His father, however, instilled in Q. the same beliefs.
Click to expand...
J Q. Adams was appointed by the first President to positions of power because he was part of the whole shindig. Both were present at and participated in the founding of the nation.
 
Damocles said:
J Q. Adams was appointed by the first President to positions of power because he was part of the whole shindig. Both were present at and participated in the founding of the nation.
Click to expand...
Born in Braintree, Massachusetts, in 1767, he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill from the top of Penn's Hill above the family farm. As secretary to his father in Europe, he became an accomplished linguist and assiduous diarist.

After graduating from Harvard College, he became a lawyer. At age 26 he was appointed Minister to the Netherlands, then promoted to the Berlin Legation. In 1802 he was elected to the United States Senate. Six years later President Madison appointed him Minister to Russia.
Click to expand...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/johnquincyadams

That would mean he was nine years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed, and 20 when the Constitution was being debated, and probably attending classes at Haahvid.
 
Slaves states wanted them counted as a whole person for purposes of apportionment. There was at lest one amendment introduced that would have has the counting decrease until it finally reached zero. Every southern representative rejected that one. Abolitiionists KNEW that it was immoral to allow slaves to be counted as a bit more than half a person for purposes of apportionment without allowing them to participate in their representation. The founders did NOT bring an end to slavery, the compromise extended it, and eventually led to the bloodiest war in US history. Bachman is a moron. She didn't word it incorrectly, she sought to rewrite history much the same way as Beck did.
 
Socrtease said:
Slaves states wanted them counted as a whole person for purposes of apportionment. There was at lest one amendment introduced that would have has the counting decrease until it finally reached zero. Every southern representative rejected that one. Abolitiionists KNEW that it was immoral to allow slaves to be counted as a bit more than half a person for purposes of apportionment without allowing them to participate in their representation. The founders did NOT bring an end to slavery, the compromise extended it, and eventually led to the bloodiest war in US history. Bachman is a moron. She didn't word it incorrectly, she sought to rewrite history much the same way as Beck did.
Click to expand...

Talk about rewriting history. The above is a perfect example.

Our founding fathers created this country with the understanding that Jesus was the supreme ruler of the land. They freed the slaves. They established rights for other religions to practice their beliefs, provided of course they pay annual stipends to and thrice a year bow down to Jesus. They established the right for anyone to say anything without any consequences. They promised that the government would take care of everyone's every need. Oh, and they were of course concerned with climate change... because variations from year to year and season to season were surely a result of mankinds (oops.. they meant peoplekinds) actions.

Anyone who says otherwise is full of shit.
 
Socrtease said:
The founders did NOT bring an end to slavery, the compromise extended it, and eventually led to the bloodiest war in US history.
Click to expand...
Although that's true, the motives that you allude to are not. The Founder's first priority was to unite the States, or face inevitable conquest by British invaders.
 
Who gives a damn even if the so called founding fathers did "fight" to end slavery? There was well over 100 years of Jim Crow and these so called white abolitionists never saw blacks as equals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top