Color Me Shocked!!!

[PoliticalChic]

AA works, and a Private institution can admit whomever they damn well please or, don't you believe in Property Rights?

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Could you name a few with those policies?

No faggots - Bob Jones university. No ******* - none that I know of. No Bitches - Hampden-Sydney and Wabash colleges.

The point has been made, Private Property exists and Private Institutions can, very often, exclude anyone they like for any reason they like...

So I can exclude anyone I want from my business?
All on private property.

That depends on the business? Is it a Public Accommodation? No, you say, then exclude away...

So now you claim universities are not public accommodation.
What a nutter.

A Private University? Yeah, not a fucking Public Accommodation, dumbass. It's ain't a Motel 6 with a Denny's next door...

Stop lying.

Any university that accepts students with federally guaranteed loans is under the purview of federal regulations.

 

[Rustic]

AA works, and a Private institution can admit whomever they damn well please or, don't you believe in Property Rights?

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

Affirmative-action work like a charm... Ya right
Lol

Pine Ridge Indian Reservation

Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota is the poorest county in the United States and the community that Re-Member serves.

Why help Pine Ridge Reservation?
From 1980 to 2000, the counties that make up Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota comprised the poorest of our nation's 3,143 counties. The 2000 census found them the third poorest, not because things got better on Pine Ridge, but because things got worse on two other South Dakota Indian Reservations.

Population
While the 2000 census reported a population of 15,521, a study by Colorado State University and accepted by U.S. Housing & Urban Development (HUD) estimated the population at 28,000. Tribal Government records show 38,000 enrolled members living on Pine Ridge Reservation.

Extreme Poverty
The poverty on Pine Ridge can be described in no other terms than third world. It is common to find homes overcrowded, as those with homes take in whoever needs a roof over their heads. Many homes are without running water, and without sewer.

Pine Ridge Statistics as of 2007

• Unemployment rate of 80-90%
• Per capita income of $4,000
• 8 Times the United States rate of diabetes
• 5 Times the United States rate of cervical cancer
• Twice the rate of heart disease
• 8 Times the United States rate of Tuberculosis
• Alcoholism rate estimated as high as 80%
• 1 in 4 infants born with fetal alcohol syndrome or effects
• Suicide rate more than twice the national rate
• Teen suicide rate 4 times the national rate
• Infant mortality is three times the national rate
• Life expectancy on Pine Ridge is the lowest in the United States and the 2nd lowest in the Western Hemisphere. Only Haiti has a lower rate.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No faggots - Bob Jones university. No ******* - none that I know of. No Bitches - Hampden-Sydney and Wabash colleges.

The point has been made, Private Property exists and Private Institutions can, very often, exclude anyone they like for any reason they like...

So I can exclude anyone I want from my business?
All on private property.

That depends on the business? Is it a Public Accommodation? No, you say, then exclude away...

So now you claim universities are not public accommodation.
What a nutter.

A Private University? Yeah, not a fucking Public Accommodation, dumbass. It's ain't a Motel 6 with a Denny's next door...

Stop lying.

Any university that accepts students with federally guaranteed loans is under the purview of federal regulations.

Stop lying about gooks not getting into Harvard. And, dump the public funds. The point stands, private property is private, if kept that way, and Conservatives used to defend that. You are not one of them.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

AA works, and a Private institution can admit whomever they damn well please or, don't you believe in Property Rights?

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So I can exclude anyone I want from my business?
All on private property.

That depends on the business? Is it a Public Accommodation? No, you say, then exclude away...

So now you claim universities are not public accommodation.
What a nutter.

A Private University? Yeah, not a fucking Public Accommodation, dumbass. It's ain't a Motel 6 with a Denny's next door...

Stop lying.

Any university that accepts students with federally guaranteed loans is under the purview of federal regulations.

Stop lying about gooks not getting into Harvard. And, dump the public funds. The point stands, private property is private, if kept that way, and Conservatives used to defend that. You are not one of them.

1. I never lie....but you do.
Unless you can find a quote where I claimed any group never gets into Liberal bastions.

2. This is proof of the discrimination I've claimed...and proven:
"To put it another way: Asians need SAT scores 140 points higher than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics, and an incredible 450 points higher than blacks (out of 1,600 points) to get into these schools. An Asian applicant with an SAT score of 1,500, that is, has the same chance of being accepted as a white student with a 1,360, a Latino with a 1,230, or an African-American with a 1,050. Among candidates in the highest (1,400–1,600) SAT range, 77 percent of blacks, 48 percent of Hispanics, 40 percent of whites, and only 30 percent of Asians are admitted."
Fewer Asians Need Apply by Dennis Saffran, City Journal Winter 2016



Did I just ram your post back down your lying throat, or what?

 

[PoliticalChic]

AA works, and a Private institution can admit whomever they damn well please or, don't you believe in Property Rights?

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

AA works, and a Private institution can admit whomever they damn well please or, don't you believe in Property Rights?

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That depends on the business? Is it a Public Accommodation? No, you say, then exclude away...

So now you claim universities are not public accommodation.
What a nutter.

A Private University? Yeah, not a fucking Public Accommodation, dumbass. It's ain't a Motel 6 with a Denny's next door...

Stop lying.

Any university that accepts students with federally guaranteed loans is under the purview of federal regulations.

Stop lying about gooks not getting into Harvard. And, dump the public funds. The point stands, private property is private, if kept that way, and Conservatives used to defend that. You are not one of them.

1. I never lie....but you do.
Unless you can find a quote where I claimed any group never gets into Liberal bastions.

2. This is proof of the discrimination I've claimed...and proven:
"To put it another way: Asians need SAT scores 140 points higher than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics, and an incredible 450 points higher than blacks (out of 1,600 points) to get into these schools. An Asian applicant with an SAT score of 1,500, that is, has the same chance of being accepted as a white student with a 1,360, a Latino with a 1,230, or an African-American with a 1,050. Among candidates in the highest (1,400–1,600) SAT range, 77 percent of blacks, 48 percent of Hispanics, 40 percent of whites, and only 30 percent of Asians are admitted."
Fewer Asians Need Apply by Dennis Saffran, City Journal Winter 2016



Did I just ram your post back down your lying throat, or what?

6% of the population is 21% at Harvard, and that's unfair to the 6%?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

Gads, you're a dunce.

OK....ok....your remedial lesson coming right up.

1. Usually, the ‘Founders’ refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.
   1. The three non-Southerners worked tirelessly against slavery.
   2. While reading Ron Chernow’s book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. After reading about Alexander Hamilton’s work for the New York Manumission Society, I gained a greater appreciation of Alexander Hamiltonhttp://angelolopez.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/alexander-hamilton-and-the-new-york-manumission-society/
   3. Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had many several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Society’s efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.

2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called Miracle in Philadelphia, by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didn’t want slave residents counted at all.

The Founder’s compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the slave states were permanently limited to a minority. With that one stroke, the state was set for slavery’s eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Big Journalism Articles - Breitbart


Now....I fervently hope that this re-education will replace your biases with knowledge.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” - Chief Justice John Roberts

 

[PaintMyHouse]

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

Gads, you're a dunce.

OK....ok....your remedial lesson coming right up.

1. Usually, the ‘Founders’ refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.
   1. The three non-Southerners worked tirelessly against slavery.
   2. While reading Ron Chernow’s book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. After reading about Alexander Hamilton’s work for the New York Manumission Society, I gained a greater appreciation of Alexander Hamiltonhttp://angelolopez.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/alexander-hamilton-and-the-new-york-manumission-society/
   3. Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had many several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Society’s efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.

2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called Miracle in Philadelphia, by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didn’t want slave residents counted at all.

The Founder’s compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the slave states were permanently limited to a minority. With that one stroke, the state was set for slavery’s eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Big Journalism Articles - Breitbart


Now....I fervently hope that this re-education will replace your biases with knowledge.

Washington owned slaves, and didn't even free them upon his death, and Jefferson owned and fucked, even making children. And that ends that debate.

 

[PoliticalChic]

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

Gads, you're a dunce.

OK....ok....your remedial lesson coming right up.

1. Usually, the ‘Founders’ refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.
   1. The three non-Southerners worked tirelessly against slavery.
   2. While reading Ron Chernow’s book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. After reading about Alexander Hamilton’s work for the New York Manumission Society, I gained a greater appreciation of Alexander Hamiltonhttp://angelolopez.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/alexander-hamilton-and-the-new-york-manumission-society/
   3. Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had many several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Society’s efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.

2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called Miracle in Philadelphia, by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didn’t want slave residents counted at all.

The Founder’s compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the slave states were permanently limited to a minority. With that one stroke, the state was set for slavery’s eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Big Journalism Articles - Breitbart


Now....I fervently hope that this re-education will replace your biases with knowledge.

Washington owned slaves, and didn't even free them upon his death, and Jefferson owned and fucked, even making children. And that ends that debate.

Gads, you're an ignorant, vulgar boor.

You don't know history, politics, economics......and now you've proven your are bereft of a science education as well.


Well...here I go....ripping another one of your posts to shreds:

John H. Works, Jr., a Jefferson descendant and a past president of the Monticello Association, wrote a carefully worded explanation of the DNA test that attempted to link President Thomas Jefferson to a child of the slave Sally Hemings.


1. "Since Thomas Jefferson himself had no known legitimate male descendants (his wife Martha bore six children between 1772 and her death in 1782, but only two daughters lived to adulthood), a direct comparison between his and Sally Hemings' offspring could not be made. Dr. Eugene Foster, a retired UVA pathologist, therefore analyzed DNA from other male members of the Jefferson clan and compared them with samples from Sally Heming's male descendants to see if a Jefferson fathered them.


2. Dr. Foster conducted DNA tests on

5 male line descendants of 2 sons of Thomas Jefferson's paternal uncle, Field Jefferson, and

5 male line descendants of 2 sons of Thomas Woodson, including Thomas, Sally Hemings' first child (1790-1879),

1 male line descendant of Eston, Sally Hemings' last child (1808-1852), and

3 male line descendants of 3 sons of John Carr (grandfather of Samuel and Peter Carr, or Jefferson's nephews), long thought by the acknowledged Thomas Jefferson descendants to have been responsible for Sally Heming's children. For good measure, a panel of white descendants of Monticello's neighbors were also tested in case their forefathers might have contributed to Sally Heming's offspring.


3. Dr. Foster found that there was a match between the male descendants of Uncle Field Jefferson and those of Sally Heming's youngest son, Eston Hemings.

However there was no match between the male descendants of Tom Woodson, Sally Hemings' first-born son.

The nephews' heirs also did not match any of the others, and neither did the neighbors' descendants.


4. This DNA study testing the Y chromosome found that there was a link to "some" Jefferson, but not necessarily Thomas, having been the father of Eston, Sally Heming's youngest son. These DNA tests indicated that any one of 8 Jeffersons could have been the father of Eston and there was nothing to indicate it was Thomas.


5. On 5 November 1998 the journal Nature placed an inaccurate and misleading headline based on this study which read, "Jefferson Fathered Slave's Last Child". Most of the mass media and many others assumed the headline to be correct.


6. DNA tests performed on 1 Eston line came up positive, but tests performed originally on 5 Woodson lines in November 1998 came up negative, as did a recent DNA test on a 6th line performed in March 2000.

These results should demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that Thomas Jefferson was not the father of Tom Woodson. The Woodson DNA tests are important because if Tom Woodson is Sally Heming's Paris-conceived son and could be shown to have Jefferson DNA, it would then be almost certain that Thomas Jefferson was his father, since Thomas was the only Jefferson in Paris at the time who could have impregnated Sally."
Is It True? - A Primer On Jefferson Dna | Jefferson's Blood | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[Rustic]

Only stupid people think the way you do...
Affirmative-action has destroyed Indians, it only encourages weakness...

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

At that the time in Africa black Africans all over Africa owned African slaves... Common practice then.
Context... Dumbass

 

[PaintMyHouse]

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

Gads, you're a dunce.

OK....ok....your remedial lesson coming right up.

1. Usually, the ‘Founders’ refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.
   1. The three non-Southerners worked tirelessly against slavery.
   2. While reading Ron Chernow’s book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. After reading about Alexander Hamilton’s work for the New York Manumission Society, I gained a greater appreciation of Alexander Hamiltonhttp://angelolopez.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/alexander-hamilton-and-the-new-york-manumission-society/
   3. Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had many several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Society’s efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.

2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called Miracle in Philadelphia, by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didn’t want slave residents counted at all.

The Founder’s compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the slave states were permanently limited to a minority. With that one stroke, the state was set for slavery’s eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Big Journalism Articles - Breitbart


Now....I fervently hope that this re-education will replace your biases with knowledge.

The family acknowledges his fucking of slaves, and the children from them, so maybe you should?

And your romantic views of the Founders are nothing like the truth:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/01/opinion/the-real-thomas-jefferson.html

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"Over the last two weeks, Op-Eds have rolled and roiled. Legal historian Paul Finkelman, writing in the Times, said that Wiencek is wrong only in his timing, and that Jefferson was not suddenly roused to racism when he discovered his 4 percent solution–no, he was always “deeply committed” to slavery. Finkelman terms Jefferson “creepy,” fixing understandably on Jefferson’s words in calling free blacks “pests in society” and emotionally primitive. Finkelman targets Jefferson, but at the same time excuses Washington, whose slave-owning experience differed from Jefferson’s only in that Washington was not perpetually in debt as Jefferson was, and could therefore have lived quite well if he had freed his slaves while he was in his prime and set a standard for others to follow. (We should add that even the urbanite Benjamin Franklin was a slave owner, and only freed his slave in his will.)

For he was a timid abolitionist at best. His primary constituency was the Southern planter class, landed men of social privilege. Like him, they borrowed heavily. They owed bankers in England and elsewhere. They were constantly perched on a fiscal cliff. And they, like the majority of their Northern peers, bought into the convenient consensus that those millions of individuals brought in chains from Africa and the Caribbean were an inferior race of people. Political men constantly privileged their own collective self-interest. No surprise there. Even in manumitting certain individual slaves (most commonly upon the death of the master), they allowed slavery to fester. There were a few heroes who spoke out for racial justice, a relative few who turned their backs on slavery. But in the first 50 years of the republic, the vast majority of elected U.S. representatives invested their hearts in issues we’ve long since forgotten. No inheritance continues to affect the U.S. and point to its deficiencies so much as the brutal memory of ugly mistreatment of a people whose skin pigmentation offended some lily-white European-Americans.


Why Jefferson? He is a bellwether, a moral indicator. Though the superior democrat, he is still compared unfavorably to the intrepid Washington, who finally freed his slaves in his will. But Washington never attempted to legislate in the interest of the enslaved in any one of his 68 years. In fact, his will kept his human property enslaved until after his widow Martha’s death, which occurred a few years later. One of those he owned was Martha’s half-sister – we learned that fact in Henry Wiencek’s earlier, well-received book, “An Imperfect God.”
Who is the real Thomas Jefferson?

 

[HenryBHough]

Harvard is so good at what they do that they made a village idiot look "presidential".

Imagine the competition to Ringling's Clown College if Harvard just advertised what it does best!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

AA worked like a charm. It's why people were willing to elect a ****** President, they'd actually met one or two...

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

At that the time in Africa black Africans all over Africa owned African slaves... Common practice then.
Context... Dumbass

And some blacks here owned slaves. I am well aware of that. It makes then what they were, human.

 

[PoliticalChic]

At the forefront of totalitarian biology, Eugenics, were Progressives, the very same folks who brought you second-class citizenship, segregation, and Jim Crow...in short....the Democrat Party.


The infamous, Democrat-inspired, Dred Scott decision made the nation a two-class nation based on skin color.
Clearly radical, when one considers that American values are memorialized in the Declaration of Independence ("All men are created equal").

Yet, under Democrat Lyndon Johnson....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action....division of the nation based on racial differences, skin color.

If All men Were Created Equal why were women, children, and ******* property? And why didn't all men have a vote?

Because the Democrats of the South wouldn't allow it......until the Republican Party defeated them in a war.

Pick up a history book, you dope.

Washington was a Dem? Jefferson, who not only owned slaves but fucked them and produced children? How about you pick up a history book, dumbfuck.

Gads, you're a dunce.

OK....ok....your remedial lesson coming right up.

1. Usually, the ‘Founders’ refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.
   1. The three non-Southerners worked tirelessly against slavery.
   2. While reading Ron Chernow’s book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. After reading about Alexander Hamilton’s work for the New York Manumission Society, I gained a greater appreciation of Alexander Hamiltonhttp://angelolopez.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/alexander-hamilton-and-the-new-york-manumission-society/
   3. Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had many several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Society’s efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.

2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called Miracle in Philadelphia, by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didn’t want slave residents counted at all.

The Founder’s compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the slave states were permanently limited to a minority. With that one stroke, the state was set for slavery’s eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Big Journalism Articles - Breitbart


Now....I fervently hope that this re-education will replace your biases with knowledge.

The family acknowledges his fucking of slaves, and the children from them, so maybe you should?

And your romantic views of the Founders are nothing like the truth:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/01/opinion/the-real-thomas-jefferson.html

1. Let's begin with this: I'm never wrong....you, the very opposite.

2. Your article was NYTimes, 2012
Mine....PBS, 2014

3. "The Myth of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings
The sexual relationship lives on in books and film, despite a lack of verifiable evidence."
By
ROBERT F. TURNER
July 11, 2012 7:30 p.m. ET


4. According to Dr. Foster the results can be summarized as follows:

There was no match between the DNA of Jefferson and the Woodson descendants. This means that Sally's Paris baby was not fathered by any Jefferson.


No match was found between the DNA of the Carrs (Jefferson's nephews) and any of Hemings descendants. So, Peter and Samuel Carr were exonerated as father of Sally's last child, Eston Hemings.


3. But! Y-chromosome haplotypes* of the descendants of Field Jefferson (the uncle), and Eston Hemings, (Sally's last child) did match. Therefore, Field....not Thomas Jefferson....was the father of Eston.

Wm. Hyland, Jr., "In Defense of Thomas Jefferson," p. 18

*A haplotype is a group of genes within an organism that was inherited together from a single parent.



Now, consider this when you ascribe super human accuracy and/or objectivity to science-

Nature mag headline:

"Jefferson Fathered Slave's Last Child" Jefferson fathered slave's last child : Abstract : Nature

The headline was incorrect....for whatever reason.


It should have read:

"A Male of the Jefferson Family Fathered Slave's Last Child."
There is a lesson to be learned here, and it is one that involves politics, rather than science.


4. "In Defense of Thomas Jefferson: The Sally Hemings Sex Scandal"William G. Hyland Jr.

Historians have thewrong Jefferson. Hyland, an experienced trial lawyer, presents the most reliable historical evidence while dissecting the unreliable, and in doing so he cuts through centuries of unsubstantiated charges. The author reminds us that the DNA tests identified Eston Hemings, Sally's youngest child, as being merely the descendant of a "Jefferson male." Randolph Jefferson, the president's wayward, younger brother with a reputation for socializing among the Monticello slaves, emerges as the most likely of several possible candidates. Meanwhile, the author traces the evolution of this rumor about Thomas Jefferson back to the allegation made by one James Callendar, a "drunken ruffian" who carried a grudge after unsuccessfully lobbying the president for a postmaster appointment---and who then openly bragged of ruining Jefferson's reputation. Hyland also delves into Hemings family oral histories that go against the popular rumor, as well as the ways in which the Jefferson rumors were advanced by less-than-historical dramas and by flawed scholarly research often shaped by political agendas.
In Defense of Thomas Jefferson: The Sally Hemings Sex Scandal eBook: William G. Hyland Jr.: Amazon.de: Kindle-Shop


Keep in mind.....I'm never wrong.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Not what they say, and they manage the damn place:

"Sally Hemings had at least six children, who are now believed to have been fathered by Thomas Jefferson many years after the death of his wife. According to Jefferson's records, four survived to adulthood. Beverly (b. 1798), a carpenter and fiddler, was allowed to leave the plantation in late 1821 or early 1822 and, according to his brother, passed into white society in Washington, D.C. Harriet (b. 1801), a spinner in Jefferson's textile shop, also left Monticello in 1821 or 1822, probably with her brother, and passed for white. Madison Hemings (1805-1878), a carpenter and joiner, was given his freedom in Jefferson's will; he resettled in southern Ohio in 1836, where he worked at his trade and had a farm. Eston Hemings (1808-ca. 1856), also a carpenter, moved to Chillicothe, Ohio, in the 1830s. There he was a well-known professional musician before moving about 1852 to Wisconsin, where he changed his surname to Jefferson along with his racial identity. Both Madison and Eston Hemings made known their belief that they were sons of Thomas Jefferson.

Sally's name became publicly linked to Jefferson's in 1802, when journalist James Callendar published in a Richmond newspaper the allegation that she was Jefferson's “concubine” and had borne him a number of children. Jefferson's Randolph grandchildren denied the existence of such a relationship, while Sally Hemings's descendants considered their connection to Jefferson an important family truth. Jefferson himself made neither a public response nor any explicit reference to this issue, but a 1998 DNA study genetically linked Hemings's male descendants with male descendants of the Jefferson family. [Based on documentary, scientific, statistical, and oral history evidence, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation and most historians believe that, years after his wife’s death, Thomas Jefferson became the father of the six children of Sally Hemings who are mentioned in Jefferson's records.]

The descendants of Thomas Woodson (1790-1879) carry the strong family tradition that he was the firstborn child of Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson. Recent DNA testing, however, rules out Jefferson's paternity of the Woodson line. Woodson, who does not appear in Jefferson's records, left Greenbrier County, Virginia, for southern Ohio in the early 1820s. He was a successful farmer in Jackson County."

- Lucia Stanton, Monticello Research Report, November 1989, revised October 1994. Additional revisions made February 2012.
Sally Hemings | Thomas Jefferson's Monticello