Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from LifeisLIfe. Show LifeisLIfe's posts

    Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    The king of racist propoganda, Glenn Beck, is at it again:

    http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/06/glenn-beck-no-such-thing-as-racism-before-1861/
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    The king of racist propoganda, Glenn Beck, is at it again: http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/06/glenn-beck-no-such-thing-as-racism-before-1861/
    Posted by LifeisLIfe


    Wow.  Just wow.

    Hmmm....I wonder what Bobin would say about this.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : Wow.  Just wow. Hmmm....I wonder what Bobin would say about this.
    Posted by WhatIsItNow


    Thanks for the prompt.
    I read the transcript.Glen Beck never said 'racism was not a big deal before 1861'
    What he was explaining is that blacks were not segregated in the Revolutionary army, and were treated as equals. 
    His explanation was awkward, but his basic point is correct :
    But for the invention of the cotton gin in 1793, slavery may have declined on its own in both North and South.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    Transcript on the site somewhere?

    If it didn't say what Life says it did, then I guess that's one more blow against his credibility in my book.

    On the other hand, your explanation of Beck's argument doesn't make sense, but at least isn't racist.  

    One point alone should work:  Any crop grown with the use of migrant workers could have been grown with slaves; therefore, slavery would not have declined on its own but for invention of the cotton gin.

    And at any rate, the notion that blacks dying in an unsegregated revolutionary army indicates a lack of racism is idiotic.   The south kept slaves until the gettysburg address.  And in the north, blacks were not necessarily treated well or equally.  They just weren't slaves.   Plenty of people assisted runaway slave recapturers, or at the least turned a blind eye.     The fact that the revolutionary army was willing to accept extra cannon fodder doesn't show a lack of racism...it shows that they responded to necessities.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from movingtarget2. Show movingtarget2's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    Bobin, nice logic.  Like saying if not for the automobile the horse and buggy may have declined on its own.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from taxmeintooblivion. Show taxmeintooblivion's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    The king of racist propoganda, Glenn Beck, is at it again: http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/06/glenn-beck-no-such-thing-as-racism-before-1861/
    Posted by LifeisLIfe


    and I was thinking that Obama was the racism promoter.

    He needs it (like any other bad news) so he can prove himself to be the Messiah.
    ie: the way he jumped all over the Professor Gates incident.  
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from carolbost. Show carolbost's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    The loony beck of all loonies speaking again!Who cares what this animal says!No wonder his mother committed suicide,imagine such a son!I will just finish myself to spare myself from agony!Beck is the lowest of the low,he belongs down there,between ants and snakes!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    Our nation is so bitterly divided that we scream of racism when an entertainer with a talk show makes a crude but, logical comparrison but on history but, when the attorney general of the United States dismisses charges against people of a known racist group (black panthers) when they are charged for standing right outside a voting station door on election day wearing fatigues, holding clubs (night sticks) and making statements like "you about to be ruled by a black man Cracker" we make jokes and dimiss it.

    Glenn Beck enables this Nation division and so does this!

    The masses in America truly put politics above country!!

    DIVIDED WE FALL

    We must hang together or we shall hang seperately.
    Ben Franklin
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from schadenfreude99. Show schadenfreude99's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    The loony beck of all loonies speaking again!Who cares what this animal says!No wonder his mother committed suicide,imagine such a son!I will just finish myself to spare myself from agony!Beck is the lowest of the low,he belongs down there,between ants and snakes!
    Posted by carolbost


    carolbost

    Your posts are painful to read.  Please work on your grammar and punctuation. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsATravesty. Show ItsATravesty's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    The loony beck of all loonies speaking again!Who cares what this animal says!No wonder his mother committed suicide,imagine such a son!I will just finish myself to spare myself from agony!Beck is the lowest of the low,he belongs down there,between ants and snakes!
    Posted by carolbost


    My my.. you certainly do have I da Bamas sense of compassion and kumbaya.

    Maybe watch tele Tubbies instead of Beck if he upset you that much.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsATravesty. Show ItsATravesty's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    I think it's relatively fair to state that Racism was never such a consuming topic until January of 2009.
    I'm sure there's a reason for that.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lrecliner. Show lrecliner's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    Our nation is so bitterly divided that we scream of racism when an entertainer with a talk show makes a crude but, logical comparrison but on history but, when the attorney general of the United States dismisses charges against people of a known racist group (black panthers) when they are charged for standing right outside a voting station door on election day wearing fatigues, holding clubs (night sticks) and making statements like "you about to be ruled by a black man Cracker" we make jokes and dimiss it. Glenn Beck enables this Nation division and so does this! The masses in America truly put politics above country!! DIVIDED WE FALL We must hang together or we shall hang seperately. Ben Franklin
    Posted by sk8ter2008


    I think we are still quite a while away from any kind of earnest dialogue on race. One group is walking on eggshells while another group speaks more freely. The situation is understandable, but probably not all that productive
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    Bobin, nice logic.  Like saying if not for the automobile the horse and buggy may have declined on its own.
    Posted by movingtarget2


    Then, where is the logic labelling Beck as 'racist' in his story?
    Where did Beck say or imply racism before 1861 was no big deal?


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : carolbost Your posts are painful to read.  Please work on your grammar and punctuation. 
    Posted by schadenfreude99


    How about adding a space when beginning a new sentence as well. Isn't this something that was taught in grade school? Her posts are a train wreck.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsATravesty. Show ItsATravesty's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : How about adding a space when beginning a new sentence as well. Isn't this something that was taught in grade school? Her posts are a train wreck.
    Posted by hawkeye01


    Worse than our economy?? Oh my !!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : I think we are still quite a while away from any kind of earnest dialogue on race. One group is walking on eggshells while another group speaks more freely. The situation is understandable, but probably not all that productive
    Posted by lrecliner


    I agree.

    I also know that some use the term racism or racist to bring attention to an issue when it's not warranted and it's also used to divert critisizm on other issues.

    Those abuses make the rqacism issue in America much worse and stifle much needed honest debate.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : I think we are still quite a while away from any kind of earnest dialogue on race. One group is walking on eggshells while another group speaks more freely. The situation is understandable, but probably not all that productive
    Posted by lrecliner


    Yeah, it can be pretty tough to discuss race when you say "racism" and Republicans start screaming "race card! race card! race card!"   

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : Thanks for the prompt. I read the transcript.Glen Beck never said 'racism was not a big deal before 1861' What he was explaining is that blacks were not segregated in the Revolutionary army, and were treated as equals.  His explanation was awkward, but his basic point is correct : But for the invention of the cotton gin in 1793, slavery may have declined on its own in both North and South.
    Posted by BobinVa


    Transcript on the site somewhere?

    If it didn't say what Life says it did, then I guess that's one more blow against his credibility in my book.

    On the other hand, your explanation of Beck's argument doesn't make sense, but at least isn't racist.  

    One point alone should work:  Any crop grown with the use of migrant workers could have been grown with slaves; therefore, slavery would not have declined on its own but for invention of the cotton gin.

    And at any rate, the notion that blacks dying in an unsegregated revolutionary army indicates a decline in racism is idiotic.   The south kept slaves until the gettysburg address.  And in the north, blacks were not necessarily treated well or equally.  They just weren't slaves.   Plenty of people assisted runaway slave recapturers, or at the least turned a blind eye.     The fact that the revolutionary army was willing to accept extra cannon fodder doesn't show a lack of racism...it shows that they responded to necessities.

    If there weren't a cotton gin, the south would have found any other use for slaves (and they did have plenty of non-cotton uses anyway).  Why?  Duhhhhhhhhhhh......businesses that succeed with paid workers would succeed with slaves, too.



     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    Has anyone read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn? Considered a classic...
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : Yeah, it can be pretty tough to discuss race when you say "racism" and Republicans start screaming "race card! race card! race card!"   
    Posted by WhatIsItNow

    I think it is easy to discuss race relations and racism in America. The biggest issue I see is the notion that only white males can be racist. Race relations would go a lot further if we were all honest and admit the double standard. Also we should admit righting a wrong from 100+ years ago today isn't going to "fix" anything. It will/is creating a new group of wronged who in 50-100 years will have the same points to argue and be angry at society.
    The day we no longer have "Miss Black America", United Negro College Fund", "Black Music Awards" etc. is the day race relations will have come a long way in America. When we can agree "Miss Black America" is racist is the day we will be working with honesty.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : I think it is easy to discuss race relations and racism in America. The biggest issue I see is the notion that only white males can be racist. Race relations would go a lot further if we were all honest and admit the double standard. Also we should admit righting a wrong from 100+ years ago today isn't going to "fix" anything. It will/is creating a new group of wronged who in 50-100 years will have the same points to argue and be angry at society. The day we no longer have "Miss Black America", United Negro College Fund", "Black Music Awards" etc. is the day race relations will have come a long way in America. When we can agree "Miss Black America" is racist is the day we will be working with honesty.
    Posted by brat13


    Well if anyone really thinks only white males can be racist, they need to be beaten with transcripts of  Black Panther / New Black Panther speeches, etc.

    But frankly, the notion that most racism is white makes sense in absolute terms: There are still a lot more white people in America than black people. 

    Percentages? Who knows.  You can't get accurate results with an anonymous drug use survey, so I really don't think you can survey whether or not people are racists (ie, "oh, this is an anonymous poll?  Well put me down for racist!")

    Of course, this does ignore that there are many minority vs. minority racist views.  I'm sure you can find some Italians who don't like Black people, and some ex-Eskimos that hate Tibetans.

    As for "Miss Black America" being racist? Huh?  Perhaps they wanted their own "Miss America" because "Miss America" is usually white (assumption)?  I mean, if you never have any blacks win Miss America, why is it racist for them to start one for their own? 

    If all white restaurants in a city exclude blacks, would it be "racist" for blacks to start a restaurant and exclude whites? 



    But the problem I see is that when white racism is pointed out on this board, it usually earns a response of  "that's a race card!"
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fractals. Show fractals's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : Thanks for the prompt. I read the transcript.Glen Beck never said 'racism was not a big deal before 1861' What he was explaining is that blacks were not segregated in the Revolutionary army, and were treated as equals.  His explanation was awkward, but his basic point is correct : But for the invention of the cotton gin in 1793, slavery may have declined on its own in both North and South.
    Posted by BobinVa


    No his basic point was not correct.

    Only 'freemen' black soldiers were allowed to serve in northern militias, it was forbidden in the South, where slave-owners feared arming slaves. All-black units were formed in Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts and were segregated from white militia.

    1775 Militia Law of Virginia "forbidding any recruiting officers within this Commonwealth to enlist any negro or mulatto into the service of this, or either of the United States, until such Negro shall produce a certificate ... that he is a freeman."

    General Washington instructed recruiters to "enlist none but Freemen," the implication being that the recruit could be black just as long as he was free.

    http://www.americanrevolution.org/blk.html

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from lrecliner. Show lrecliner's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    ?  But the problem I see is that when white racism is pointed out on this board, it usually earns a response of  "that's a race card!"
    Posted by WhatIsItNow[/QUOTE]

    The reason is that some folk like to point out that something is racist when it really isn't. If these racist watchdogs would just point out racism when it actually happens as opposed to pretending its happening, then you wouldn't hear "thats the race card" as much.

    You could beat your wife on Friday and be back at work on Tuesday but if you are labeled a racist, your not coming back to work period. I think some people are aware of this and use it to their advantage.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    Our nation is so bitterly divided that we scream of racism when an entertainer with a talk show makes a crude but, logical comparrison but on history but, when the attorney general of the United States dismisses charges against people of a known racist group (black panthers) when they are charged for standing right outside a voting station door on election day wearing fatigues, holding clubs (night sticks) and making statements like "you about to be ruled by a black man Cracker" we make jokes and dimiss it. Glenn Beck enables this Nation division and so does this! The masses in America truly put politics above country!! DIVIDED WE FALL We must hang together or we shall hang seperately. Ben Franklin
    Posted by sk8ter2008


    You don't know the difference between the "Black Panthers" and the "New Black Panther Party" do you?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861

    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861:
    In Response to Re: Glenn Beck: Racism not a big deal before 1861 : I think it is easy to discuss race relations and racism in America. The biggest issue I see is the notion that only white males can be racist. Race relations would go a lot further if we were all honest and admit the double standard. Also we should admit righting a wrong from 100+ years ago today isn't going to "fix" anything. It will/is creating a new group of wronged who in 50-100 years will have the same points to argue and be angry at society. The day we no longer have "Miss Black America", United Negro College Fund", "Black Music Awards" etc. is the day race relations will have come a long way in America. When we can agree "Miss Black America" is racist is the day we will be working with honesty.
    Posted by brat13


    100 years ago????  The Civil Rights movement was 60 years ago.  Two weeks ago, a white politician was using racial epithats to describe another politician.

    How is "Miss Black America" racist?  How does it negatively impact white people?

    How does the United Negro College Fund hurt white people?

    How does the "Black Music Awards" hurt white people?

    How does the country identify and quantify the damage to black artists by white radio stations that refused to play their music?  Instead, they played the same songs recorded by white musicians.

    How does the country quantify the impact of not allowing Blacks to participate in beauty contests for so many years?

    How does the country quantify the impact of not allowing black kids to attend all white colleges?

    Racism will be declared over when racists stop whining about acusations of racism.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share