╌>

Democrats Should Pay Reparations for Slavery and Abuse of Blacks

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  make-america-great-again  •  5 years ago  •  138 comments

Democrats Should Pay Reparations for Slavery and Abuse of Blacks
So, if Democrats want reparations to atone for their nearly 200 years of anti-black sins, they should finance them. From Barbra Streisand to George Clooney to Tom Steyer to George Soros, the Democratic 1 percenters should shove their billions into a huge pile and then show us the money!

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Democratic presidential candidates Julián Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren recently pushed their party even further left with their latest radical scheme —slavery reparations. This is beyond ironic, of course, since Democrats have tortured blacks for centuries and hammer us even today.

Slavery spread agony across the South, under the watchful eyes of Democrats, such as President Andrew Jackson, since the party’s 1828 launch. It was not until 1860’s election of Republican Abraham Lincoln that the final, decisive push toward abolition began.

The GOP-led Union Army crushed the Democrat-led Confederacy in 1865. That’s when Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation came into full force, as Republicans freed the slaves.

The Republicans Radical Reconstruction empowered newly liberated blacks. Overriding the vetoes of Democrat Andrew Johnson, congressional Republicans pressured Southern states to ratify the 14th Amendment, guaranteeing blacks equal protection under law.

"Blacks won election to  southern state governments and even to the U.S. Congress during this period," History.com recalls. Alas, by 1877, the Democratically-launched " Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist organizations targeted local Republican leaders , white and black, and other African Americans who challenged white authority."

Tightening Democratic control of state legislatures and Congress rubbed out Reconstruction and swept in Jim Crow segregation. Democrats adopted and enforced these statutes across Dixie and even in Washington.

Democratic President Woodrow Wilson re-segregated the previously integrated bathrooms in the then-State, War, and Navy Department Building, adjacent to the White House.

The order to create separate toilets for "women, white men, and Colored" was signed on Aug. 7, 1916 by none other than Assistant Navy Secretary Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

FDR became, arguably, the most influential Democratic president ever.

His actions included the 1937 nomination of former Klansman Hugo Black to the U.S. Supreme Court. Before defeating Adolf Hitler and Hideki Tojo, FDR forced some 112,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry into World War II internment camps .

Democrat President Harry Truman integrated the armed forces in 1948. This was about the first good thing a Democrat ever did for black Americans.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, decision ruled separate-but-equal government education unconstitutional in 1954.

Chief Justice Earl Warren, previously California’s three-term Republican governor, delivered the Court’s unanimous, pro-integration opinion. Warren rejected the oral arguments of John W. Davis, the 1924 Democratic presidential nominee, who defended separate-but-equal classrooms.

U.S. Sens. Robert Byrd of West Virginia (a former Exalted Cyclops in the KKK who recruited some 150 new Klansmen) Albert Gore, Sr. of Tennessee, J. William Fulbright of Arkansas, and other Democrats filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act for 60 legislative days. Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois finally broke the filibuster and clinched the measure’s passage.

Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the bill, which was a beautiful thing.

He also approved the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and G.W. Bush each re-authorized for 25 years in 1982 and 2006.

Reagan also signed into law the Martin Luther King national holiday.

Today, teachers-union-funded Democrats tirelessly battle school choice, thus stranding black children in classrooms where, too often, too little learning occurs. Obama struggled mightily to kill the Washington, D.C. School Voucher Program, which G.W. Bush signed.

Then-U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and former Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., secured the funds to keep this sliver of hope alive.

Republican President Donald J. Trump has championed school choice, not least by signing Senator Ted Cruz’s, R-Texas, language to let "529" savings accounts accept tax-free deposits for K-12 studies , not just university tuition. Trump also approved a new criminal-justice- reform law that will reduce mass incarceration, largely benefiting black prisoners.

So, if Democrats want reparations to atone for their nearly 200 years of anti-black sins, they should finance them. From Barbra Streisand to George Clooney to Tom Steyer to George Soros, the Democratic 1 percenters should shove their billions into a huge pile and then show us the money!

Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor with National Review Online. He has been a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1  seeder  XXJefferson51    5 years ago

“Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and G.W. Bush each re-authorized for 25 years in 1982 and 2006.

Reagan also signed into law the Martin Luther King national holiday.

Today, teachers-union-funded Democrats tirelessly battle school choice, thus stranding black children in classrooms where, too often, too little learning occurs. Obama struggled mightily to kill the Washington, D.C. School Voucher Program, which G.W. Bush signed.

Then-U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and former Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., secured the funds to keep this sliver of hope alive.

Republican President Donald J. Trump has championed school choice, not least by signing Senator Ted Cruz’s, R-Texas, language to let "529" savings accounts accept tax-free deposits for K-12 studies, not just university tuition. Trump also approved a new criminal-justice- reform law that will reduce mass incarceration, largely benefiting black prisoners.”

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1    5 years ago

Where do you find this nonsense?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.1.1  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @1.1    5 years ago

Normally when someone cites "nonsense", they are rightfully referring to a left wing "publication".

I don't think KAG cites left wing lunacy.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2  Dulay    5 years ago

So what you're saying is that you want Democrats to take responsibility for everything the Confederate states did? 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @2    5 years ago

No, the African American author of the seeded article wants the democrats to pay for all that they have done from 1801 when they first had the presidency to the present day.  Not just for what confederate democrats did.  The seeded article is clear as to who he feels owe his fellow African Americans reparations and why and he’s right. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.1  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1    5 years ago

Well then the Democrats can start with taking all of the Confederate monuments down so that AA don't have to be reminded of their oppression. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @2.1.1    5 years ago

Feel free after the reparations are paid up.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.3  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.2    5 years ago

I consider removing the Confederate monuments as part of the reparations. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.4  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1    5 years ago
No, the African American author of the seeded article wants the democrats to pay for all that they have done from 1801 when they first had the presidency to the present day.

Though the author of the seeded article is obviously from African decent, he is only a second generation American, his parents are from Costa Rica and therefore HE would not qualify for 'reparations'. So his demand that Democrats "shove their billions into a huge pile and then show us the money!", he is claiming membership in a group to which he does NOT belong.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.1.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Dulay @2.1.3    5 years ago

Well...

But that's just...

Really not what the goal was here.

It was about fighting Democrats, not racism.

As your comment and KAG's response revealed.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.7  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @2.1.4    5 years ago

It will be interesting how African Americans are divided up by the Dems to determine which get reparations and which don’t.  It’s likely that the ancestors of African Americans from the Caribbean Islands also were slaves as well in excess of 90% of all slaves brought from Africa on ships did not come to the territory that became the United States. Also one African American certain to be ineligible is Barack Obama. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.8  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.5    5 years ago

Racism is a democrat problem far more than an overall American issue.  Most of us are ready to share in MLKJr’s wonderful dream for all of our country. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.1.9  sandy-2021492  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.8    5 years ago

Sure, sure.  David Duke probably says the same thing.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.10  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.7    5 years ago
It’s likely that the ancestors of African Americans from the Caribbean Islands also were slaves as well in excess of 90% of all slaves brought from Africa on ships did not come to the territory that became the United States.

Yet with all that blathering, you still fail to recognize that US reparations would ONLY go to Ancestors of people who were enslaved in the US.

And YES, that would mean that Obama would not be eligible. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.11  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.9    5 years ago

When he was a democrat?  The GOP has always rejected him.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.1.12  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.11    5 years ago

Duke was a democrat from 1975 to 1988, and a GOP Louisiana State House Rep from 1989 to 1992.

He was unaligned from 2001 until 2016 when he primaryed as a Republican for the US Senate.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.1.13  sandy-2021492  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.11    5 years ago
The GOP has always rejected him.  

Did they?  He wasn't a Republican when he was a Louisiana State Representative from 1989 until 1992?

Oh, wait, he was.

GOP leadership may have rejected him.  GOP voters haven't always.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @2.1.3    5 years ago

Take all those monuments, melt them down and sell the scrap metal to help pay for the reparations

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.1.15  Ronin2  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.13    5 years ago
Duke was a democrat from 1975 to 1988,

The Democrat voters haven't rejected him either, nor the Democrat Party when he was one of their bunch.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
2.1.16  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.15    5 years ago

Apparently, he felt that the Dem ideology didn't mesh with his own.   I wonder why that was?

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.2  Studiusbagus  replied to  Dulay @2    5 years ago
So what you're saying is that you want Democrats to take responsibility for everything the Confederate states did?

No, this is the same old trick they try to keep playing...

They love using the Democrat/Republican lables when it can be used to escape the actual facts which were the conservatives were the writers of Jim Crow, and they were the one's that always had enough rope to string to a tree

When civil rights were introduced, the conservatives couldn't run away fast enough.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Studiusbagus @2.2    5 years ago

The Civil Rights Act could never have been passed without the GOP. Percentage wise more Republicans voted for it than democrats and the roadblock for JFK WAS southern democrats.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.3  Vic Eldred  replied to    5 years ago
You can't change history how hard you try.

They are revisionists, no question about it!

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.2.4  Studiusbagus  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.2    5 years ago
The Civil Rights Act could never have been passed without the GOP.

Which were the liberals at the time.

Percentage wise more Republicans voted for it than democrats and the roadblock for JFK WAS southern democrats.

Again, it was the southern conservatives that was the roadblock for JFK.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.2.5  Studiusbagus  replied to    5 years ago
You can't change history how hard you try.

No, you can't but learning history would be mandatory if you're going to make misinformed and snarky comments.

The conservatives were the Dem party then...and you're correct...they had to be dragged back kicking and screaming.

It's the conservatives that walked out of congress when the civil right bills were introduced.

You have to learn history first...

But this is not your first rodeo of being wrong...your record of disapearance is common knowledge.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Studiusbagus @2.2.4    5 years ago

Wrong! You had the southern segregationists & liberals in the democratic party at the same time. The Conservatives were Republicans and it was they who came on board to pass the Civil Rights Act.

The democratic party has always been the party of hate. The segregationists were the haters of that time. The liberals are the haters of today.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.7  Texan1211  replied to    5 years ago
ou can't change history how hard you try.

Heck, some folks are still trying to convince us that Southern Democrats who were conservative all became Republicans. because going to the party which supported the things they were against makes sense to them!

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.2.8  Studiusbagus  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.6    5 years ago

Okay....explain the mass exodus of Black people from the Republican to the Democrats?

They knew where the bigots were and still are.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.3  Studiusbagus  replied to  Dulay @2    5 years ago

"No, the African American author of the seeded article "

Notice how that had to be thrown in?

"Therrrrre's my African American" - 

    ---Donald Trump

     
 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Studiusbagus @2.3    5 years ago

Democrats never, ever, do that. jrSmiley_85_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
2.3.2  Studiusbagus  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.1    5 years ago

Why would they need to? Diversity is common to liberals and Democrats, jumping up and down saying "we have blacks!" Or "There's my African American" would really look stupid at a Democrat rally, or even publicized.

Yet it took what 7 or 9 votes for them to get it across that the handlers wanted a black guy to prop up as the head of the GOP? "We have one too!"

And when that novel trick didn't work they slandered him and shoved him out the back door.

Yeah, just more "facts be damned" huh?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.3.3  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.1    5 years ago

Democrats are perfect holy beings, the very ground they walk upon we’re to hold in reverence of their sheer awesomeness. /s

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3  Tacos!    5 years ago

It's one of those things people talk about when they want to sound morally superior. It's never going to happen and there's no way to implement it in a way that's fair and reasonable.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tacos! @3    5 years ago

Exactly right.  It is democrat presidential candidates who are talking about it now.  Murdock and Rush Limbaugh are right that if reparations are ever paid out it is the democrat party and it’s financial backers who should have to pay them.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @3    5 years ago
It's one of those things people talk about when they want to sound morally superior.

It's one of those things democrats talk about when they fear they are losing their hold on minorities. So, they spread some divisive goodies to get out the minority vote. The problem is that minorities begin to believe that BS and we have more & more racial animosity!

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.2.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    5 years ago

At least now there are conservative and libertarian African Americans who can call out that type of nonsense and point to where the real blame belongs.  

 
 
 
nightwalker
Sophomore Silent
3.3  nightwalker  replied to  Tacos! @3    5 years ago

Sadly, I have to agree with you on that. Not that I'm opposed to agreeing with you, sadly because there is no amount of money that is going to affect the ones who were slaves, the ones who really suffered even after they were freed, they're very much dead.

They're the ones that deserved compensation it's sort of late and meaningless now since the only slaves nowadays are wage slaves and you don't have to be black to be one.

The other injustices and bigotry against black people and every other minority is a different subject, where it would be most helpful if people would just stop it. Impossible, of course.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    5 years ago

Wait right here while I go get my checkbook.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1  Ender  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4    5 years ago

While you are at it, Trout said something about an ostrich and high heels.

There were other things involved, will not bring it all up right now.

I wasn't there butt it all seemed pretty serious.

I know it was a while ago, I figure it hasn't fallen under limitations.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
4.1.1  Split Personality  replied to  Ender @4.1    5 years ago

Well, lo and behold, we were talking about how that bitch ostrich just up and left the BHN clubhouse with Trouts high heels, Jen's blouses, CB's glasses

and Fargo's Mini Cooper, never to be heard from again, until the other night.

now she's masquerading as an emu

Add identity theft to her long list of character flaws, lol

384

 
 
 
nightwalker
Sophomore Silent
4.1.2  nightwalker  replied to  Ender @4.1    5 years ago

If I recall right, trout said you were ALSO there with a dozen Pomeranians and a 5lb bucket of axel grease. She said you looked cute in your spedos and that sexy leather mask. (trout's words, not mine.)

(I'm not one to spread rumors so you didn't hear it from me, sister Mary Agnes,) but..

GET'M SISTER!!!

Just remember not to hurt nightwalker the squealer, ok? Not that I was there, but the rumors...oh my...

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Split Personality @4.1.1    5 years ago

They were Veronikka's heels and CB's tiara.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  nightwalker @4.1.2    5 years ago

Pomeranians and axel grease? Sounds kinky

If I said that I'm pleading the fifth....

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Ender  replied to  nightwalker @4.1.2    5 years ago

One of them was half Pomeranian half Shih Tzu.

I call it a Pomshit.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.1.7  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Ender @4.1    5 years ago
I wasn't there butt it all seemed pretty serious. I know it was a while ago, I figure it hasn't fallen under limitations

My current drunken stupor must be interfering with my excellent recall abilities, but did I do something shitty on NV that I forgot about?  

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1.8  Ender  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.1.7    5 years ago

You? Never. I was just taking advantage of your generosity.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
4.1.9  Studiusbagus  replied to  nightwalker @4.1.2    5 years ago

Did you say a dozen big palmed Iranians and a 5lb. bucket of grease?

SIGN ME UP!!

 
 
 
nightwalker
Sophomore Silent
4.2  nightwalker  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4    5 years ago

Not so fast, sister Mary Agnes. Everyone knows all sisters carry a metal engineers' ruler (3 edges of katana-grade steel) up their sleeves and when someone reaches for the check....POW!!!! right across the knuckles.

You vicious brutette, you.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
4.2.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  nightwalker @4.2    5 years ago

th?id=OIP.L-HP0_PaHLWBOcONyglshgHaKW&w=124&h=173&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7

Ruler schmuler.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.2.2  Kavika   replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.2.1    5 years ago

LOLOL, The BAD SISTER MARY AGNES.....The photo reminds me of the quote of De Niro....''You talking to me''.....

taxidriver_de-niro.jpg

 
 
 
nightwalker
Sophomore Silent
4.2.3  nightwalker  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.2.1    5 years ago

Well, I expected you were the machete type, but that'd sure work.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5  Kavika     5 years ago
Chief Justice Earl Warren, previously California’s three-term Republican governor, delivered the Court’s unanimous, pro-integration opinion. 

While Attorney General of  California and then as Governor of CA. Warren was a strong advocate of Japanese interment. No one from either party voiced an opposition to the illegal interment of the Japanese Americans with the exception of the Governor of Colorado.  

Since Trump has a painting of the most racist president of all time hanging in his office (Andrew Jackson) I guess that Trump is a racist as well and should get out his checkbook and and start writing. 

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
5.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Kavika @5    5 years ago

Since Trump has a painting of the most racist president of all time hanging in his office

I thought that was paid for by Trump’s ‘charitable foundation’ and found hanging at Mar-a-Lago.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @5    5 years ago
Since Trump has a painting of the most racist president of all time hanging in his office (Andrew Jackson) I guess that Trump is a racist as well

Why do people assume that to the extent Jackson was racist, that must be the thing anyone admires about him in the 20th or 21st centuries? Was his picture put on the $20 bill because he was such an outstanding racist? It doesn't make a lot of sense.

FWIW, this list here has Thomas Jefferson as the most racist president of all time:

He may have said, “All men are created equal.” But he also characterized “the blacks [as] inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind.” And others used his ideas to rationalize slavery after the American Revolution.

Guess we'll have to redo the nickel and the $2 bill, too.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.1  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @5.4    5 years ago
Why do people assume that to the extent Jackson was racist, that must be the thing anyone admires about him in the 20th or 21st centuries? Was his picture put on the $20 bill because he was such an outstanding racist? It doesn't make a lot of sense.

You are aware of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 signed and enforced by Jackson aren't you....The end result was that nine tribes lost millions of acres of land and were forced onto what is known as ''The Trail of Tears'' which resulted in the death of thousands of Natives.

Of course they were his war's with the Creek and Seminole before 1830 that resulted in the dead of thousands and the lost of hundreds of thousands of acres of their land. 

Of course he was also a proponent of slavery...

Jackson stepped into the U.S. presidency as a wealthy Tennessee enslaver and military general who had founded and spearheaded the Democratic Party. Jacksonian Democrats, as historians call them, amassed a winning coalition of southern enslavers, White working people, and recent European immigrants who regularly rioted against abolitionists, indigenous and Black communities, and civil rights activists before and after the Civil War. When the mass mailings of antislavery tracts captured national attention in 1835, President Jackson called on Congress to pass a law prohibiting “under severe penalties, the circulation...of incendiary publications.” And the following year Jackson and his supporters instituted the infamous “gag rule” that effectively tabled all the anti-slavery petitions rushing into Congress.
And yet, it was his Indian removal policies that were the most devastating of all on the lives of Native Americans (and African Americans). Beginning with the Indian Removal Act of 1830, President Jackson forced several Native Americans nations to relocate from their ancestral homelands in the Southeastern United States to areas west of the Mississippi River—all to make way for those enslaved Africans being forcibly hauled into the Deep South. President Jackson help forge this trail of Native American tears out of the Deep South, and this trail of African tears into the Deep South.

I'm aware of Jefferson being number one is some articles while Andrew Jackson rates usually 1 or 2...But why split hairs over 1 or 2..They were both racist. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.2  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @5.4.1    5 years ago
But why split hairs over 1 or 2..They were both racist.

Two reasons.

First, the outrage is selective and arbitrary. You could point a sanctimonious finger at any number of prominent political figures in our early history. Why Jackson? Not because he was so much worse than everyone else. It is modern politics that drives the outrage. Jackson had a kind of populist appeal that Trump identifies with. So, if Trump likes him, he must be the most evil person who ever walked the Earth. Before Trump was elected, no one cared about Andrew Jackson.

Second, getting all judgy and holier-than-thou about people who lived 2 1/2 centuries ago is just dumb, particularly when those people were seen as fine people by their contemporaries. (And by scholars: a series of scholarly polls consistently rank Jackson as one of our best presidents .)

Different societies in different eras have different values and priorities. Two or three hundred years from now, our descendants may well look back with disgust at the things we did as part of everyday life.

This latter point is particularly hypocritical because in so many other contexts, we speak of cultural relativism and how unfair it is to hate or judge the practices and beliefs of cultures other than out own. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.3  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.2    5 years ago
It is modern politics that drives the outrage.

Then you cite MODERN poll rankings for Jackson. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

This latter point is particularly hypocritical because in so many other contexts, we speak of cultural relativism and how unfair it is to hate or judge the practices and beliefs of cultures other than out own.

The irony is that all too many insist that the bedrock of our PRESENT culture was set by the very Founders that insist should be viewed as having 'different values and priorities'. They demand that the Judges on our highest court make rulings on the 'values and priorities' of over 2 hundred years ago. They demand that our society remain unchanged and we retain it's 'historically European' demographics as a matter of patriotism. 

All too often, instead of empathy for other cultures, we hold them to standards that took us generations to realize and/or in some cases, we have failed to achieve ourselves.

Even worse, we demand that other cultures 'assimilate' to ours without recognizing that we are ignoring the qualities of the culture they would be giving up. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.5  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @5.4.2    5 years ago
First, the outrage is selective and arbitrary. You could point a sanctimonious finger at any number of prominent political figures in our early history. Why Jackson? Not because he was so much worse than everyone else. It is modern politics that drives the outrage. Jackson had a kind of populist appeal that Trump identifies with. So, if Trump likes him, he must be the most evil person who ever walked the Earth. Before Trump was elected, no one cared about Andrew Jackson.
First off the there is no outrage, I'm pointing out a fact to you. If you choose not to accept it, that's on you. 

My disapproval of Jackson has nothing to do with Trump, so don't even go there. If what I posted about ''Indian Removal Act'' didn't sink in for you that again is on you. 

Before Trump was elected, no one cared about Andrew Jackson.

That comment is certainly a load of BS...Perhaps in your world no one did, but there is a much bigger world out there that a hell of a lot of people did care about Jackson.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.6  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.3    5 years ago
Then you cite MODERN poll rankings for Jackson. 

Oh, I'm sorry. Was the distinction between scholarly perspectives over the last 70 years and political perspectives over the last two years too subtle for you?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.4.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  Kavika @5.4.5    5 years ago

It seems we discuss Jackson a lot around here and it has nada to do with trmp. I think a lot of us care about Andrew Jackson. I want to see his image come off the 20 dollar bill

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.8  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @5.4.5    5 years ago
I'm pointing out a fact to you

Oh, is that all you're doing? Got any other facts? I got one. The atomic weight of nickel is 58.6934u. I'm just pointing it out.

Is that helpful? Or can we dispense with disingenuous claims like "I'm just pointing out a fact" and acknowledge that you're pointing out a fact . . . for a reason.

Perhaps in your world

You mean the world where generations of historians thought he was a pretty good president? Sure, ok. I don't think it's "my" world. It's just the world.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.9  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @5.4.8    5 years ago
Oh, is that all you're doing? Got any other facts? I got one. The atomic weight of nickel is 58.6934u. I'm just pointing it out. Is that helpful? Or can we dispense with disingenuous claims like "I'm just pointing out a fact" and acknowledge that you're pointing out a fact . . . for a reason.

Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with my comment...Good try though...I'll keep that fact for the next game of Trivia Pursuit. 

The reason has been clearly pointed out to you a couple of times. Because you're not capable of understanding it isn't my problem. 

There are many historians that do not see Jackson as pretty good. In fact many see him as a racist and abuser of the power of the Presidency..

So there you go Tacos.

Feel free to get in the last word.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.10  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.6    5 years ago
Oh, I'm sorry. Was the distinction between scholarly perspectives over the last 70 years and political perspectives over the last two years too subtle for you?

Why yes, it was so subtle as to be nonexistent.

Oh wait, it WAS non-existent since the 'scholarly perspectives' you linked were dated as recently as 2018. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.4.11  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.8    5 years ago

It’s sad when current modern people hold people who lived long ago to our standards now and defame them if they weren’t perfect reflections of the way we think they should have been.   

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.12  Kavika   replied to  XXJefferson51 @5.4.11    5 years ago
It’s sad when current modern people hold people who lived long ago to our standards now and defame them if they weren’t perfect reflections of the way we think they should have been.

What is really sad is that as a supposed Christian you cannot see the injustice and crimes that were committed. Jackson even defied SCOTUS on the Indian Removal Act. 

Remember from your reading of the Constitution that Article III set up the Supreme Court and
gave that court the power to hear all cases "arising under this Constitution" (Art. III, Sec. 2). In
two cases commonly combined and called the Cherokee Cases decided in 1831 and 1832, the
Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokees were a "domestic dependent nation" and as such could
not be forced by a state to give up their lands unwillingly. In other words, the Supreme Court
recognized the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation. President Jackson famously said about
Chief Justice John Marshall's ruling: "John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce
it." Under the Constitution, who enforces the laws? The President not the Supreme Court.
Jackson essentially said that he would not enforce the Court's decision and he did not.

Are you aware that 4,000 Cherokee died on the ''Trail of Tears'', and there were a number of other tribes that suffered the same fate....Did God think that was OK? 

The Jackson administration was very corrupt, it was with Jackson that the ''spoils system'' was started and it took decades to get rid most of it. I wasn't aware that corruption was looked at differently in the 1830 then it is today...

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Guide
5.4.13  Raven Wing  replied to  Kavika @5.4.12    5 years ago
Did God think that was OK? 

No.....but a large portion of Christians did. And many think there is a good excuse for the sins committed against Native Americans even today. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.4.14  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Kavika @5.4.12    5 years ago

I’m not going to defend the trail of tears as that was by far the biggest mistake of his presidency.  I would have voted for Adams had I been around then.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.15  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.10    5 years ago
the 'scholarly perspectives' you linked were dated as recently as 2018

And as old as 1948. 71 years ago. It's kinda crappy that you want to act like that isn't so. I notice you also aren't acknowledging the scholarly versus political perspectives. There seems little point in trying to talk to someone like that. Have a nice day.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.16  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @5.4.9    5 years ago
The reason has been clearly pointed out to you a couple of times.

Yes I know. That's the point. You're the one who claimed you weren't outraged at all and were just pointing  out a fact - as if it were to no purpose other than trivia. 

There are many historians that do not see Jackson as pretty good.

I don't know how you define "many." I have no doubt that somebody who is a historian thinks that. After all, it's a big world and anything is possible.

But here's the difference between us: I claimed that a consensus of scholars concerned with this topic thought highly of Jackson and thought so over a period of decades. I backed that claim up with a link.

By contrast, you disregarded that claim for no reason and then made your own claim that "many" historians see him as racist and an abuser of the presidency. You made this claim with no support and as far as anyone can tell you pulled it out of the aether, your imagination, or someplace else. Again, I don't doubt somebody thinks those things about Jackson, but based on the evidence I have supplied, I think it's fair to say that enough intelligent experts were ok enough with Jackson that Trump is not some kind of racist outlier for hanging his picture on the wall.

For that matter, America isn't racist just for spending $20 bills which have displayed Andrew Jackson's face for 90 years.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.17  Kavika   replied to  Tacos! @5.4.16    5 years ago

Why do you keep trying to pawn off that I'm outraged. I'm not outraged, what I've done is presented the facts about Jackson. 

I said he was a racist, even your own link shows him as the 3rd most racist president of all time. There are many other links that will show the same thing. Look them up. 

He initiated ''The Indian Removal Act'' championed it and made it happen. It resulted in the deaths of thousands of natives. He defied SCOTUS decision on the Indian Removal Act. Additionally his administration was corrupt and he was the originator of the ''spoils system'' 

Why is he on the $20 bill, not even the Treasury department knows. 

Again, I said he was a racist president, and that he was. 

There is a big difference between us. I see the death of thousands of natives and the defying SCOTUS as a real problem and ''Trail of Tears'' as a racist act. You don't and that's sad. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.18  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.15    5 years ago
71 years ago.

One of the 20. When you post data, members should view it in it's entirety, no just what YOU want to recognize. 

It's kinda crappy that you want to act like that isn't so.

Almost as crappy as you pretending that the vast majority of the 'scholarly perspective' isn't from after 1990. 

I notice you also aren't acknowledging the scholarly versus political perspectives.

I notice that you aren't acknowledging that the methodoglogy of the scholars takes political perspectives into consideration. 

Perhaps it was too subtle a perspective for you.

jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

There seems little point in trying to talk to someone like that.

Yes Tacos!, cogency does get in the way for some doesn't it...

Have a nice day.

Always a nice day here on NT...

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
5.4.19  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.16    5 years ago

Well Jackson is certainly a political jackpot.

He believed that the preservation of the Union by any means, was paramount.

On one hand a hot head involved with many many duels; mostly over insults to his wife.

He defeated the Creek Indians.

He defeated the British in 1812

He thought he was  the hero and spokesman for the common ( white) man

and started the Democratic party.

He increased the number of men who could vote;  White men.

He increased trade while shrinking the government  and government 'corruption'.

He sent explorers west to map the continent.

But  he also

passed the heaviest protectionist tariffs in US history providing some seed for the Civil War.

The Nullifacation Proclamation provided the rest of the bile that would result in Lincoln's bloody war.

he removed American Indians from treatied territories that he had already purchased years before

in order to benefit personally and expand slavery.

His career as a general included numerous actions which would absolutely warrant criminal action today.

he executed prisoners, imposed martial law on NO and defied writs of habeus corpus and courts alike, jailing judges and members of the local governments.

he also executed 6 of his own militia men weeks after the Battle of NO for petty infractions when everyone except Jackson believed the war was over.

But mostly he's know for, and despised by almost every American Indian for forcing almost all AI tribes, but particularly the Cherokee of Georgia,

enemies and allies alike from their lands all over the Southern States, reneging on his word and government treaties alike, in spite of the rulings of SCOTUS and Georgia,

and forcing them to Trans Mississippi/the Indian territories/ eventually called Oklahoma.

From rich temperate farms to the desert.

As Presidents go, almost any other President Mr. Trump chose to admire would be an improvement by many magnitudes.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.20  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.16    5 years ago
You're the one who claimed you weren't outraged at all and were just pointing  out a fact - as if it were to no purpose other than trivia. 

Wow, that is some utter bullshit right there. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.21  Tacos!  replied to  Kavika @5.4.17    5 years ago
Why do you keep trying to pawn off that I'm outraged.

Oh I apologize. So you approve of Trump hanging Jackson on the wall of the Oval Office. My mistake.

I see the death of thousands of natives and the defying SCOTUS as a real problem and ''Trail of Tears'' as a racist act. You don't and that's sad.

Not at all. I disagree with many things that many of our leaders have done over the last two and half centuries or so. I just don't think hanging Jackson's picture on the wall makes the hanger a racist.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.22  Tacos!  replied to  Split Personality @5.4.19    5 years ago
But mostly he's know for, and despised by almost every American Indian

I get that and I get why, but I think it's naive to imagine that native Americans weren't going to be displaced by the expanding United States. The government certainly could have done many things better, but the Indians - as tribes - were never going to be allowed to remain on prime farm or ranching land - no matter who was president.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.23  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.18    5 years ago
members should view it in it's entirety

You don't even see your hypocrisy, do you? 

 
 
 
nightwalker
Sophomore Silent
5.4.24  nightwalker  replied to  Split Personality @5.4.19    5 years ago

Jackson was indeed a hardass among hardasses, and I think that's who trump wants to be. Get what he wants and smash everything in his way.

He shoulda picked a better idol, Jackson's methods worked for him at that time but trump is no Jackson and it's not the 19th century.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.25  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.23    5 years ago
You don't even see your hypocrisy, do you? 

You don't ever fail to devolve to personal comments, do you? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.26  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.25    5 years ago
You don't ever fail to devolve to personal comments, do you?

Pointing out hypocrisy is an attack on your argument, not you. If you don't like it, try being less hypocritical.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.27  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.26    5 years ago
Pointing out hypocrisy is an attack on your argument, not you.

You said 'your hypocrisy', NOT 'the hypocrisy of your argument'. 

BTFW, you didn't point out hypocrisy, you made a personal comment. 

If you don't like it, try being less hypocritical.

Then to prove that you still can't comment to me without making it personal, you make another personal comment. 

Well done...

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.4.28  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @5.4.25    5 years ago

Pot, kettle, black?  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.29  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @5.4.28    5 years ago

No. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.30  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.27    5 years ago
You said 'your hypocrisy', NOT 'the hypocrisy of your argument'.

Boy, anything to avoid addressing your hypocrisy that you presented with your hypocritical comments, eh? I mean where else would the hypocrisy in your comments come from but you? Is someone else writing your material? But getting back to the subject, let's review your hypocrisy as presented in your hypocritical argument. You said,

When you post data, members should view it in it's entirety, no just what YOU want to recognize. 

You said this right after being shown a list of surveys dating from the 1940s to the present day and characterizing that list as follows:

Then you cite MODERN poll rankings for Jackson. 

That is called hypocrisy, my friend. Hypocrisy is when you insist on a certain standard but violate that standard yourself. And it's no one's hypocrisy but yours. That makes it "your hypocrisy."

You can face these facts or continue to tap dance and spin. Your choice.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.31  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.30    5 years ago
That is called hypocrisy, my friend.

Then it's YOUR hypocrisy because as I said and YOUR link will prove that the vast majority of the surveys on that list are from AFTER 1990 which means they are unequivocally MODERN. Truth be told, since YOU cited Jackson's 'populist appeal' while POTUS the fucking 1948 survey is MODERN in comparison. 

You said this right after being shown a list of surveys dating from the 1940s to the present day and characterizing that list as follows:

So 'present day' isn't MODERN. Got ya. 

Hypocrisy is when you insist on a certain standard but violate that standard yourself.

Yet EVERY one of my comments PROVE that I DID look at ALL of the data from the ONE link you provided. 

And it's no one's hypocrisy but yours. That makes it "your hypocrisy."

Actually as I've just stated, it's YOUR comments that are hypocritical. 

You can face these facts or continue to tap dance and spin. Your choice.

Your personal comments aren't facts, they're opinions. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.4.32  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @5.4.31    5 years ago

giphy.gif

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.4.33  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @5.4.32    5 years ago

I always pictured you as white...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
5.4.34  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dulay @5.4.33    5 years ago

i think he's

ducking you

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.4.35  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @5.4.33    5 years ago

The sound that the image makes in nature is the nature of the typical progressive position on the issue.  

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
6  Kavika     5 years ago
Slavery spread agony across the South, under the watchful eyes of Democrats, such as President Andrew Jackson, since the party’s 1828 launch.

170315-trump-andrew-jackson-wide-njs-939

And there Jackson is, in a place of honor in Trumps office....

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

"Before the Jackson Administration, the right to vote was extremely limited. Even if you were a white man, there was a property qualification written into the law. If you didn’t own property (some states required a specific type of property), then you could not vote. The fight for the “common” man to vote became the foundation of what would become known as Jacksonian Democracy. It would become a coalition of laborers, farmers, and Irish Catholics that would eventually call themselves the Democratic Party."



Every President had Pros & Cons. If you have a grievance you won't like many.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
8.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    5 years ago

His voting rights expansion was an effort to win a second election.


When Andrew Jackson served as President, the United States was going through a turbulent period of politics. The formation of the two-party system changed how Republican and Federalist campaigns were held. Conventions were held to nominate political candidates for the first time. Because the wealthy and elite would never vote for Jackson after his anti-bank platform, the expansion of voting rights to the “common” white man was as much a political ploy than anything else. Most of the votes he gathered for his re-election bid wouldn’t have been cast in the election before.

I find it disgusting that your link considers this a 'PRO'.

Andrew Jackson helped to expand the powers of the Presidency.
In May 1830, Jackson signed the Indian Removal Act into law. This legislation expanded the powers of the Presidency to speed the removal of Indian communities in the eastern United States and territories that were west of the Mississippi River. He also issued the Nullification Proclamation, which affirmed his belief that municipalities and states were not allowed to nullify federal laws. If Jackson didn’t like a law or court ruling, he simply found a different way to get the job done.
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @8.1    5 years ago

I don't like being called a  [Deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
8.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.1    5 years ago
removed for context [SP]

My comment in total was:

I find it disgusting that your link considers this a 'PRO'.

Claiming that my comment was about YOU merely shows a deep need to play the victim card...

Please proceed...

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
9  seeder  XXJefferson51    5 years ago

Perhaps we should remind democrats of all their Jefferson Jackson day events and dinners they have had celebrating the two founders of their party.  

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
9.1  Kavika   replied to  XXJefferson51 @9    5 years ago

Perhaps we should remind the conservatives which party the majority of minorities belong to....Now, of course, you can fall back on the ''free stuff'' or the ''lemming'' defense but every time you do you insult millions of minorities. That is not the way to garner our vote. 

You may want to review the make up of the current congress.....

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
9.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Kavika @9.1    5 years ago

Has nothing to do with paying reparations for past injustices which is the issue. The Party of Lincoln that was formed to oppose slavery and that freed the slaves lost hundreds of thousands of troops in the civil war and created the 13th to 15th amendments and who counted  Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass and many others as members or supporters certainly is not liable for slavery nor did the GOP engage in Jim Crow laws or have the kkk as a paramilitary wing of our party. It is strictly an issue between the descendants of slaves and those affected by segregation and the democrat party which perpetrated both.  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
10  Dulay    5 years ago
The Party of Lincoln that was formed to oppose slavery

Which was the LIBERAL political position. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
10.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @10    5 years ago

Republicans even then were not liberal. The Republicans position is the American position since they won the civil war against the democrats. Pay 💰 up! 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
10.1.1  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @10.1    5 years ago
Republicans even then were not liberal.

False. That ridiculous statement proves an ignorance of the facts.  

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Guide
10.1.2  Nowhere Man  replied to  XXJefferson51 @10.1    5 years ago
Republicans even then were not liberal. The Republicans position is the American position since they won the civil war against the democrats. Pay 💰 up! 

You really believe this trash?

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Quiet
13  Studiusbagus    5 years ago

I'm a polack....I want the royalties from all those jokes.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
13.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Studiusbagus @13    5 years ago

Well I’m part Italian so we get some of that too. 

 
 

Who is online


Jeremy Retired in NC
Veronica
Ronin2


95 visitors