If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Former senator says the American people, not the federal government, ended slavery. Other than the Constitution, Army and president, he's basically right   (rawstory.com) divider line 156
    More: Dumbass, U.S. Constitution, Americans, federal government, Emancipation Proclamation, Dred Scott, slaves, senator, Jim DeMint  
•       •       •

1326 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Apr 2014 at 6:05 PM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-09 04:20:24 PM  
Maybe I'm confused, but aren't the federal government and the Army generally composed OF the American people?

I'm not defending what the senator is saying but "the American people" is not a distinct entity from "the federal government" or the Army.
 
2014-04-09 04:23:17 PM  
"Republican nut says nutty things about history that make no rational sense." Again?
 
2014-04-09 04:31:09 PM  
Of the people, by the people, for the people
 
2014-04-09 04:33:35 PM  
So he admits the South was wrong and hes happy that its un constitutional states rights rebellion was put down?

Good
 
2014-04-09 04:34:11 PM  

NateAsbestos: Maybe I'm confused, but aren't the federal government and the Army generally composed OF the American people?

I'm not defending what the senator is saying but "the American people" is not a distinct entity from "the federal government" or the Army.


It has to be for the GOP bullshiat machine to work. You can't go pointing out that government is just a voluntary social contract between individuals because it undermines their 'all government is bad' message.
 
2014-04-09 04:36:13 PM  
The Army is made up of people, the Constitution was written by people(and the Amendments that made it more perfect), and Presidents are people too(well, your guy isn't, but mine is)
 
2014-04-09 04:36:30 PM  
Rape and slavery, slavery and rape. It's like republicans can't open their mouths without one or both words falling out.

Kind of a puzzling political strategy, although I admit it makes me wonder what their parties are like behind closed doors. I'm thinking "Eyes Wide Shut" but whiter and with more chin waddle.
 
2014-04-09 04:39:21 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: The Army is made up of people, the Constitution was written by people(and the Amendments that made it more perfect), and Presidents are people too(well, your guy isn't, but mine is)


Even "big government" is people, but DeMint would never admit that
 
2014-04-09 04:42:57 PM  
"No liberal is going to win a debate that big government freed the slaves," DeMint said

Remember when everyone on the South wanted to end slavery, but the federal government wouldn't let them, so they seceded from the Union?
 
2014-04-09 04:47:01 PM  
Keep talking. This can only end well.
 
2014-04-09 05:02:32 PM  
 
2014-04-09 05:02:43 PM  

jaylectricity: Of the people, by the people, for the people


I know that quote.  It's from the Emanicpation Suggestion, right?
 
2014-04-09 05:03:43 PM  
Here's the fun thing about the Civil War, which is guaranteed to drive both sides nutty: Not every state left solely because of slavery.  The first seven (pre-Sumter) states absolutely left because of slavery, with a side of Scots-Irish "don't you tell me what to do!" thrown in for good measure.  Tennessee and North Carolina both were divided (mostly along the lands of the Appalachians vs the flatland, plantation types) and parts of Tennessee were in Union control for most of the war because of it.  Virginia essentially felt that they didn't necessarily need or agree with slavery anymore given the tobacco economy's lessening need for them, but they (a) weren't for the idea of an army that had to go through their state to go fight someone else, and (b) had been basically forced into hanging on with the Deep South politically for protection from tariffs and the like.  (It obviously didn't take everywhere there, either, or else we wouldn't have West Virginia.)  And Arkansas seceded without most of its state even having slaves or the economy to need them. Hell, parts of Maryland, Delaware, Missouri and Kentucky wanted to secede but failed, and before Sumter the Philly area even wanted to let them secede.

I know it's fun (and in this black-and-white mentality America seems to have, easier) to just say everyone did (x) because (y), but the only simple truth is, there is no such thing as a simple truth.  What we call the South is really at least four or five groups of people and mindsets, and in modern times that number is watered down by relocated Northerners in a lot of the more populated places.  It's like assuming 100% of the white population of the South in 1861 owned slaves - it didn't.  But sometimes, you just have to back your brother's play, to quote a Fark-favorite movie.
 
2014-04-09 05:05:13 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: and Presidents are people too(well, your guy isn't, but mine is)


Oh god, you're from an alternate reality where an alien is president!
 
2014-04-09 05:06:31 PM  

neritz: factoryconnection: Lucky LaRue: That's about on par with Herbal Teabagger reasoning.

You keep trying to make this a thing.  It might work... conservatives love chants.

That being said: of course something this pie-in-the-sky came from Jim Demint.  I can't tell you how happy I am to no longer have him representing me.  "The good will of people of conscience, Christian people."  Except that it was the antithesis of what people from this state believed in then and many still do now.  This is just a riff on the whole "the Confederacy didn't secede over slavery" fantasy.  As he said with the historical facts, when one reads the articles of secession and the Confederate Constitution, one could only come to that conclusion if you abjectly ignore facts.

Now, if we could just get rid of that asshole Lindsey Graham....

/who am I kidding, SC will just replace him with someone worse.


What do you have against Graham?  By all accounts, he's a moderate conservative.  Of course South Carolina isn't going to replace him with a liberal, but he's a hell of a lot better than some of the teabagger alternatives they want to replace him with.
 
2014-04-09 05:06:39 PM  
Other than the Constitution explicitly allowing for slavery, and the USSC ruling that people can be property a few times, it was the Constitution that ended slavery.
The repeated assertion and expansion of Federal power by Lincoln had nothing to do with it.

Oh, and people of faith ended it, fighting against those godless atheistic antebellum Southern slave holders.
 
2014-04-09 05:09:46 PM  
FTFA: "Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to 'all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights' in the minds of God."

THAT'S NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION GODDAMMIT. YOU WERE A US SENATOR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.
 
2014-04-09 05:16:05 PM  

nmrsnr: FTFA: "Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to 'all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights' in the minds of God."

THAT'S NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION GODDAMMIT. YOU WERE A US SENATOR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.


Must be the same Constitution on Julia Louis-Dreyfuss's back that's signed by John Hancock.

\thanks to  Roseville Dan for pointing that out
 
2014-04-09 05:20:49 PM  
The People were on BOTH sides of that vigorous "debate" - that's why we needed a war to settle things.

Religious leaders were both for and against slavery, depending on location and denomination as much as congregation - I'm sure there were pro-slavery churches in the North, and abolitionist churches in the South (though obviously, those were minority opinions in those areas).

Also, the Constitution had to be amended specifically to outlaw slavery, poll taxes (which aren't servitude, but were just as representation-denial-y), and ensure that everybody knew that EVERYBODY had to follow the same laws (because that was in doubt?), and SCOTUS had to make a few rulings - Federal government involvement of the most basic kinds.

Jim DeMint is (still) an idiot.
 
2014-04-09 05:28:55 PM  

Lucky LaRue: neritz: factoryconnection: Lucky LaRue: That's about on par with Herbal Teabagger reasoning.

You keep trying to make this a thing.  It might work... conservatives love chants.

That being said: of course something this pie-in-the-sky came from Jim Demint.  I can't tell you how happy I am to no longer have him representing me.  "The good will of people of conscience, Christian people."  Except that it was the antithesis of what people from this state believed in then and many still do now.  This is just a riff on the whole "the Confederacy didn't secede over slavery" fantasy.  As he said with the historical facts, when one reads the articles of secession and the Confederate Constitution, one could only come to that conclusion if you abjectly ignore facts.

Now, if we could just get rid of that asshole Lindsey Graham....

/who am I kidding, SC will just replace him with someone worse.

What do you have against Graham?  By all accounts, he's a moderate conservative.  Of course South Carolina isn't going to replace him with a liberal, but he's a hell of a lot better than some of the teabagger alternatives they want to replace him with.


He's gone full Benghazi.
 
2014-04-09 05:30:01 PM  
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men....

The Constitution is the practical result of attempts to institute a government among Men to secure the previously identified rights. The Declaration flows into the Constitution.  This is like 9th grade Civics stuff.

/sorry ladies, better luck next time
 
2014-04-09 05:32:18 PM  

FriarReb98: Here's the fun thing about the Civil War, which is guaranteed to drive both sides nutty: Not every state left solely because of slavery.  The first seven (pre-Sumter) states absolutely left because of slavery, with a side of Scots-Irish "don't you tell me what to do!" thrown in for good measure.  Tennessee and North Carolina both were divided (mostly along the lands of the Appalachians vs the flatland, plantation types) and parts of Tennessee were in Union control for most of the war because of it.  Virginia essentially felt that they didn't necessarily need or agree with slavery anymore given the tobacco economy's lessening need for them, but they (a) weren't for the idea of an army that had to go through their state to go fight someone else, and (b) had been basically forced into hanging on with the Deep South politically for protection from tariffs and the like.  (It obviously didn't take everywhere there, either, or else we wouldn't have West Virginia.)  And Arkansas seceded without most of its state even having slaves or the economy to need them. Hell, parts of Maryland, Delaware, Missouri and Kentucky wanted to secede but failed, and before Sumter the Philly area even wanted to let them secede.

I know it's fun (and in this black-and-white mentality America seems to have, easier) to just say everyone did (x) because (y), but the only simple truth is, there is no such thing as a simple truth.  What we call the South is really at least four or five groups of people and mindsets, and in modern times that number is watered down by relocated Northerners in a lot of the more populated places.  It's like assuming 100% of the white population of the South in 1861 owned slaves - it didn't.  But sometimes, you just have to back your brother's play, to quote a Fark-favorite movie.


Remind me to sponsor you some day
 
2014-04-09 05:46:35 PM  
Yes, it was the American people who fought in a war against the Confederate people, who ended slavery.
 
2014-04-09 05:58:35 PM  

img.fark.net

Would like to debate Mr. DeMint

 
2014-04-09 06:01:28 PM  

nmrsnr: FTFA: "Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to 'all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights' in the minds of God."

THAT'S NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION GODDAMMIT. YOU WERE A US SENATOR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who wanted to scream this.  Jesus Fark - WTF is the country coming to when a goddamn U.S. Senator doesn't know the difference?
 
2014-04-09 06:02:46 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: InterruptingQuirk: and Presidents are people too(well, your guy isn't, but mine is)

Oh god, you're from an alternate reality where an alien is president!


Hi, nice to meet you.

img2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-04-09 06:14:42 PM  
Are conservatives ever right about anything?
 
2014-04-09 06:14:55 PM  

NateAsbestos: Maybe I'm confused, but aren't the federal government and the Army generally composed OF the American people?

I'm not defending what the senator is saying but "the American people" is not a distinct entity from "the federal government" or the Army.


Well he is saying the federal government was not responsible for it at all. So even with your pedantic distinction he would still be very wrong.
 
2014-04-09 06:15:11 PM  
It was those southern Christian Klansmen what freed the slaves, out of the goodness miraculously placed in their hearts by Gawwwd.

/vote Republican
 
2014-04-09 06:17:12 PM  

jcooli09: Are conservatives ever right about anything?


Only by accident.
 
2014-04-09 06:17:46 PM  
None of his claims make any sense.

1.  Slavery was ended by the 13th Amendment, a piece of legislation.  Every one of the people who drafted and signed it were in the federal government.

2. Mr. DeMint either considers the 1789 Constitution to not be a part of government ("The reason that the slaves were eventually freed was the Constitution"), which is incoherent, or he views the original Constitution as being a governmental action, but for some unexplained reason, not the 13th Amendment.
 
2014-04-09 06:18:19 PM  

Tigger: NateAsbestos: Maybe I'm confused, but aren't the federal government and the Army generally composed OF the American people?

I'm not defending what the senator is saying but "the American people" is not a distinct entity from "the federal government" or the Army.

It has to be for the GOP bullshiat machine to work. You can't go pointing out that government is just a voluntary social contract between individuals because it undermines their 'all government is bad' message.


Came here to say this.  While it has its pros and cons, the government of the United States is not some despotic entity ruling over the people with an iron fist.  It is a freely elected representative body.

The whole purpose behind the "all government is bad" schtick is to build enough indifference to build voter apathy, so small groups with powerful PACs can usurp the democratic process with money thanks to Citizens United.  If you can't convince someone to vote for you or your side, convince them that their vote doesn't mater and the government is evil.
 
2014-04-09 06:20:30 PM  
Are Xtian conservatives right about ANYTHING???
 
2014-04-09 06:23:44 PM  

Dr Dreidel: and ensure that everybody knew that EVERYBODY had to follow the same laws (because that was in doubt?


Well, in context it was. Hell, it still is.  The framers were coming from an era where only wealthy land-owning white males had any say in matters.  The Declaration's "all men are created equal" was still fairly novel even for a country with the Magna Carta (and unheard of in most of the world that wasn't British), and even then, we've been expanding the definitions of men and equal for centuries--no slavery, women's suffrage, civil rights movement, and now gay marriage.  And I'm betting there will be more in the future, situations of inequality we can't even fathom right now because of how ingrained our current culture is--though my bet is it will have something to do with wealth disparity and how the law is applied.

We're still in doubt that everyone has to follow the same laws, and that's at least in part because our definition of 'everyone' is evolving.
 
2014-04-09 06:25:34 PM  

lordjupiter: Are Xtian conservatives right about ANYTHING???


No.
 
2014-04-09 06:26:19 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: jcooli09: Are conservatives ever right about anything?

Only by accident.


Not even then.  They may be correct, but it doesn't make them right.
 
2014-04-09 06:27:00 PM  
Like Jesus, today's Republicans love Lincoln only when it's convenient to them.
 
2014-04-09 06:31:17 PM  
Subby could have just said "Jim DeMint said something today" and saved us all a click.
 
2014-04-09 06:32:56 PM  

FriarReb98: Here's the fun thing about the Civil War, which is guaranteed to drive both sides nutty: Not every state left solely because of slavery.  The first seven (pre-Sumter) states absolutely left because of slavery, with a side of Scots-Irish "don't you tell me what to do!" thrown in for good measure.  Tennessee and North Carolina both were divided (mostly along the lands of the Appalachians vs the flatland, plantation types) and parts of Tennessee were in Union control for most of the war because of it.  Virginia essentially felt that they didn't necessarily need or agree with slavery anymore given the tobacco economy's lessening need for them, but they (a) weren't for the idea of an army that had to go through their state to go fight someone else, and (b) had been basically forced into hanging on with the Deep South politically for protection from tariffs and the like.  (It obviously didn't take everywhere there, either, or else we wouldn't have West Virginia.)  And Arkansas seceded without most of its state even having slaves or the economy to need them. Hell, parts of Maryland, Delaware, Missouri and Kentucky wanted to secede but failed, and before Sumter the Philly area even wanted to let them secede.

I know it's fun (and in this black-and-white mentality America seems to have, easier) to just say everyone did (x) because (y), but the only simple truth is, there is no such thing as a simple truth.  What we call the South is really at least four or five groups of people and mindsets, and in modern times that number is watered down by relocated Northerners in a lot of the more populated places.  It's like assuming 100% of the white population of the South in 1861 owned slaves - it didn't.  But sometimes, you just have to back your brother's play, to quote a Fark-favorite movie.


It boils down to areas that aspired to the ideas of the Southern plantation aristocracy (even in the poorly-developed swamps and woods of Florida and Arkansas) versus areas without that sort of social baggage. Hence Appalachia didn't willingly go to the Confederacy. Hence the Southerners in Texas favored the Confederacy while the Germans fled to Mexico and the formerly-Northerners did what they could to stay in state to protect the border areas from Native raids. Virginia still had plantations and slavery, but they were cemented with old families and old blood and not with new dynasties formed on the Mississippi. The society and culture was heavily invested in slavery in the South even amongst the majority of the white people too poor to own slaves along with parts of the border states that tried to leave (but that lead to bitter partisan fighting in Missouri and other border areas).
 
2014-04-09 06:34:37 PM  
What in the fark

What's really sad is this is actually more enlightened then the people that say "the market would have ended slavery! The Civil War was for nothing!"
 
2014-04-09 06:36:47 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: Other than the Constitution explicitly allowing for slavery, and the USSC ruling that people can be property a few times, it was the Constitution that ended slavery.
The repeated assertion and expansion of Federal power by Lincoln had nothing to do with it.

Oh, and people of faith ended it, fighting against those godless atheistic antebellum Southern slave holders.


You mean those godless slaveholders who quoted bible verses as justification for slavery?
 
2014-04-09 06:38:51 PM  

fusillade762: tallguywithglasseson: Other than the Constitution explicitly allowing for slavery, and the USSC ruling that people can be property a few times, it was the Constitution that ended slavery.
The repeated assertion and expansion of Federal power by Lincoln had nothing to do with it.

Oh, and people of faith ended it, fighting against those godless atheistic antebellum Southern slave holders.

You mean those godless slaveholders who quoted bible verses as justification for slavery?


He's a Northern (True) Baptist. He doesn't recognize splitters.
 
2014-04-09 06:44:06 PM  
Back in those days the politicians didn't elect themselves, so....
 
2014-04-09 06:52:38 PM  

lordjupiter: Are Xtian conservatives right about ANYTHING???


They opposed the Soviet Union.
 
2014-04-09 06:54:21 PM  

FriarReb98: Here's the fun thing about the Civil War, which is guaranteed to drive both sides nutty: Not every state left solely because of slavery.  The first seven (pre-Sumter) states absolutely left because of slavery, with a side of Scots-Irish "don't you tell me what to do!" thrown in for good measure.  Tennessee and North Carolina both were divided (mostly along the lands of the Appalachians vs the flatland, plantation types) and parts of Tennessee were in Union control for most of the war because of it.  Virginia essentially felt that they didn't necessarily need or agree with slavery anymore given the tobacco economy's lessening need for them, but they (a) weren't for the idea of an army that had to go through their state to go fight someone else, and (b) had been basically forced into hanging on with the Deep South politically for protection from tariffs and the like.  (It obviously didn't take everywhere there, either, or else we wouldn't have West Virginia.)  And Arkansas seceded without most of its state even having slaves or the economy to need them. Hell, parts of Maryland, Delaware, Missouri and Kentucky wanted to secede but failed, and before Sumter the Philly area even wanted to let them secede.

I know it's fun (and in this black-and-white mentality America seems to have, easier) to just say everyone did (x) because (y), but the only simple truth is, there is no such thing as a simple truth.  What we call the South is really at least four or five groups of people and mindsets, and in modern times that number is watered down by relocated Northerners in a lot of the more populated places.  It's like assuming 100% of the white population of the South in 1861 owned slaves - it didn't.  But sometimes, you just have to back your brother's play, to quote a Fark-favorite movie.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2014-04-09 06:55:12 PM  

way south: Back in those days the politicians didn't elect themselves, so....


What?
 
2014-04-09 06:57:40 PM  
Jim was caught having non-consensual sex with Jesus' favorite dinosaur. His punishment includes being more of a fool that usual, expand the teachable controversy.

quirkyberkeley.com
 
2014-04-09 06:57:41 PM  

Ambivalence: Yes, it was the American people who fought in a war against the Confederate people, who ended slavery.


The war wasn't faught to end Slavery, it was faught to preserve the Union.
 
2014-04-09 06:58:39 PM  

Captain Dan: lordjupiter: Are Xtian conservatives right about ANYTHING???

They opposed the Soviet Union.


Even then, for the wrong reasons. Tsarist class and caste divisions and duties were an aspect of religious duty as much as they were cultural norms. Serfdom in name had ended, but it continued in practice. The Orthodox Church and the aristocracy had to be broken to give the peasants any freedom, even though the process was insanely messy and ultimately failed.
 
2014-04-09 07:08:11 PM  
They buried the lede:

"Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to 'all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights' in the minds of God."

First, that's from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

Next, this is the Constitution:

Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

What a farking idiot.
 
Displayed 50 of 156 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report