Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Penn · 08-10-2012 9:01am

jank wrote: »

So again, am I right or wrong to state what I said about the quality of life of black people in the US. Liberia is a great place to live I hear!

You're wrong, because the quality of life in the US is better in general than the other places you mentioned, and slavery (or the abolition of slavery) did not contribute to that. The quality of life for everyone is better in the US than in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba etc.

decimatio · 08-10-2012 10:43am

Nodin wrote: »

In a remarkable bit of life imitating art, you're making the same argument as Alf Garnett did, when he said slavery wasn't all bad, and where would Sammy Davis Jr be if his ancestor hadn't been dragged "kicking and screaming" up a gangplank.

In fairness it wasn't all bad, in that people (slaveowners, slave traders etc) did benefit from it. You can look at slavery through history to see just how extremely beneficial it was to various civilisations and individuals. Rome wouldn't, indeed couldn't, have become the civilisation it did without slavery.

And regardless of how non-PC it is, an argument can be made for slavery affording slaves a more comfortable form of life in respect to food, shelter, clothing etc. It wasn't uncommon for people to sell themselves into slavery to pay off a debt or simply to survive in Roman times.

That's not to say it wasn't, and isn't, an evil institution which caused, and causes, untold suffering and death. But to label it as all bad is simply untrue.

And just to be clear, no I absolutely don't agree with the Republican commentator that said black slavery in the US was a blessing in disguise. Saying something isn't all bad is very different from saying it is acceptable or a good thing.

joseph brand · 08-10-2012 9:54pm

Charlie Fuqua, Arkansas Legislative Candidate, Endorses Death Penalty For Rebellious Children In Book!! :eek: :eek:

This doesn't just take the biscuit, it takes the whole biscuit factory!

In "God's Law," Fuqua's 2012 book, the candidate wrote that while parents love their children, a process could be set up to allow for the institution of the death penalty for "rebellious children," according to the Arkansas Times. Fuqua, who is anti-abortion, points out that the course of action involved in sentencing a child to death is described in the Bible and would involve judicial approval. While it is unlikely that many parents would seek to have their children killed by the government, Fuqua wrote, such power would serve as a way to stop rebellious children.

Land of The Free. . . .to be batsh1t crazy.

Reminds me of a quote which goes something like:
"For good people to do evil things and call them good, THAT takes religion!"

Nodin · 08-10-2012 10:00pm

decimatio wrote: »

In fairness it wasn't all bad, in that people (slaveowners, slave traders etc) did benefit from it. You can look at slavery through history to see just how extremely beneficial it was to various civilisations and individuals. Rome wouldn't, indeed couldn't, have become the civilisation it did without slavery.

And regardless of how non-PC it is, an argument can be made for slavery affording slaves a more comfortable form of life in respect to food, shelter, clothing etc. It wasn't uncommon for people to sell themselves into slavery to pay off a debt or simply to survive in Roman times.

That's not to say it wasn't, and isn't, an evil institution which caused, and causes, untold suffering and death. But to label it as all bad is simply untrue.

And just to be clear, no I absolutely don't agree with the Republican commentator that said black slavery in the US was a blessing in disguise. Saying something isn't all bad is very different from saying it is acceptable or a good thing.

You'll find a number of differences between US slavery and the Roman variety. Chiefly amongst them are the fact that the former is race based and thus destroyed any hope of advancement in the (slim) event of manumission.

decimatio · 09-10-2012 1:22am

Nodin wrote: »

You'll find a number of differences between US slavery and the Roman variety. Chiefly amongst them are the fact that the former is race based and thus destroyed any hope of advancement in the (slim) event of manumission.

Well not any hope. Slaves were known to be set free in the US and there were even African-American slave owners and other businessmen who supported the confederacy.

Also in Roman times it wasn't as slim a chance as you may think. It was actually quite common for slaves to gain freedom in Roman times, especially educated slaves and slaves working in a personal assistant role. Slaves who became free could also become Roman citizens, an astounding proposition if you think about it. One Roman Emperor was even the son of a freed slave.

The Roman view on slavery might be compared to someone being down on their luck, almost like being "on the dole" in a fashion.

Of course it depended on what kind of slave you were. The life of an educated Greek slave was incomparable to the life of a Gaulish slave working in a mine.

And yes your absolutely right the Romans held no racial bias in any way comparable to racism today. What mattered most was culture, language, and education.

An Italic could be considered just as much of a barbarian as an African or a Celt.

But back to the orginal point. No matter how non-PC it sounds an argument can be made that (US) slavery had some benefits. The same way it can be argued that the famine in Ireland had benefits. Clearly the benefits are tiny and rather insignificant compared to the suffering and death caused but its just silly to deny they exist.

Eg. Slavery was evil but it did benefit the US economically. The irish famine was evil but it did benefit the US with immigrants.

Gbear · 09-10-2012 5:38am

joseph brand wrote: »

Charlie Fuqua, Arkansas Legislative Candidate, Endorses Death Penalty For Rebellious Children In Book!! :eek: :eek:

This doesn't just take the biscuit, it takes the whole biscuit factory!

Land of The Free. . . .to be batsh1t crazy.

Reminds me of a quote which goes something like:
"For good people to do evil things and call them good, THAT takes religion!"

I like it when these nutters appear. At least they're actually reading their bibles.

jank · 09-10-2012 6:14am

Penn wrote: »

You're wrong, because the quality of life in the US is better in general than the other places you mentioned, and slavery (or the abolition of slavery) did not contribute to that. The quality of life for everyone is better in the US than in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba etc.

Hmm, so the quality of life of your average american is better than the quality of life of your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba but when I mention that African Americans have a better quality of life then your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba I am wrong.....

You do know African Americans are well... American?

decimatio · 09-10-2012 6:46am

jank wrote: »

Hmm, so the quality of life of your average american is better than the quality of life of your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba but when I mention that African Americans have a better quality of life then your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba I am wrong.....

You do know African Americans are well... American?

I don't think that was his why he was saying you were wrong.

Regardless, yes of course your average African-American in the US has a better quality of life than an average person living in Liberia, Haiti, or Cuba. What's your point ?

No it's not wrong to point out that there were positives or benefits to slavery or anything else for that matter but that's not what the Arkansa Republican is doing. He explicity said it was a blessing. That African-Americans shouldn't consider it an abomination.

The positives and benefits of slavery to the slaves and their descendents are incomparable to the evil that it inflicted on them.

joseph brand · 09-10-2012 9:52am

jank wrote: »

Slavery is of course terrible and wrong but I fail to see how if one points out a small positive to a historical event that they are all of a sudden "defending" slavery. We should always examine the legacy of such events, rather than ignore it.

If I were to point out that the black death brought about the rise of the European middle class and the roots of the renaissance, does that mean I am a supporter of the plague? :rolleyes:

So again, am I right or wrong to state what I said about the quality of life of black people in the US. Liberia is a great place to live I hear!

You can't equate the black death with with the slavery of black people in the US. One is man made and subsequently, willingly, propagated by man for their benefit at the expense of others.

Typical of you to give credence to outlandishly ignorant claims.

I suppose Charlie Fuqua has a point too? /sigh

Penn · 09-10-2012 10:08am

jank wrote: »

Hmm, so the quality of life of your average american is better than the quality of life of your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba but when I mention that African Americans have a better quality of life then your average person in Liberia, or Haiti, or Cuba I am wrong.....

You do know African Americans are well... American?

You're not wrong on black people in America having a better quality of life than black people in Liberia/Haiti/Cuba etc, you're wrong on what you're trying to connect it to. It has nothing to do with slavery, or the abolition of slavery. The quality of life is better in America in general. You're forgetting that many black immigrant families (even from the aforementioned countries) who moved to America even after slavery was abolished and after the civil rights movements, are also enjoying the same quality of life.

Black people in America are some of the "most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life of any other black people on earth"... because American citizens are some of the most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life of any other people on earth.

MagicMarker · 09-10-2012 10:35am

I suppose all those Jewish emigrants who made a good life for themselves in the U.S have the Nazis to thank for that, ah sure the Holocaust wasn't ALL bad....

jank · 09-10-2012 3:07pm

Penn wrote: »

You're not wrong on black people in America having a better quality of life than black people in Liberia/Haiti/Cuba etc,

So now I am not wrong, make up your mind.

Penn wrote: »

you're wrong on what you're trying to connect it to. It has nothing to do with slavery, or the abolition of slavery. The quality of life is better in America in general. You're forgetting that many black immigrant families (even from the aforementioned countries) who moved to America even after slavery was abolished and after the civil rights movements, are also enjoying the same quality of life.

I am not trying to connect it to anything, I was simply stating a fact that you rightly and eventually conceded. Your the one that tried to subject some type of ambiguous reasoning on top of it.

Penn wrote: »

Black people in America are some of the "most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life of any other black people on earth"... because American citizens are some of the most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life of any other people on earth.

Yes of course, that was the point I was making which now you eventually get! The vast majority of them would not be there only for the fact that their ancestors were forced into slavery. However, now the current generation of African Americans now enjoy living in a country that can afford them such a high standard of living say compared to Cuba or Liberia. That may not be PC to say but its true.

The GOP from Arkansas was a dick and comes across like an idiot but I gather his point could have been phrased better.

The Native Americans are the ones who got the raw deal in all this, they are the ones I feel sorry for.

jank · 09-10-2012 3:10pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

I suppose all those Jewish emigrants who made a good life for themselves in the U.S have the Nazis to thank for that, ah sure the Holocaust wasn't ALL bad....

Is that supposed to be a rebuttal to my comment, if it is then its in poor taste and historically not relevant at all to what is being discussed. I hear the term false equivalence a lot here, case in point?

jank · 09-10-2012 3:20pm

joseph brand wrote: »

You can't equate the black death with with the slavery of black people in the US. One is man made and subsequently, willingly, propagated by man for their benefit at the expense of others.

Well for a start there are many historical and sociological studies done on slavery which suggest the slavery is almost innate in human beings. It has been around since antiquity and to some extent still with us today in other forms. In that sense maybe slavery was as natural as the fleas that carried the black death...;)

Penn · 09-10-2012 3:28pm

jank wrote: »

So now I am not wrong, make up your mind.

Or perhaps you should finish reading a sentence before taking the first part of it to take it out of context.

jank wrote: »

I am not trying to connect it to anything, I was simply stating a fact that you rightly and eventually conceded. Your the one that tried to subject some type of ambiguous reasoning on top of it.

I don't believe I conceded anything. My point was that black Americans are some of the most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life for factors outside of their race. They're not given those opportunities for any reason to do with slavery, in the same way that successful Irish people over there don't owe the opportunities they had to the Famine which caused them to emigrate to America. Correlation does not imply causation.

jank wrote: »

Yes of course, that was the point I was making which now you eventually get! The vast majority of them would not be there only for the fact that their ancestors were forced into slavery. However, now the current generation of African Americans now enjoy living in a country that can afford them such a high standard of living say compared to Cuba or Liberia. That may not be PC to say but its true.

But again, the reason why they were brought to America had no factor on them now having the opportunities they wouldn't have had in Africa. It is because of America itself and the opportunities which are available there.

jank wrote: »

The GOP from Arkansas was a dick and comes across like an idiot but I gather his point could have been phrased better.

The Native Americans are the ones who got the raw deal in all this, they are the ones I feel sorry for.

Yeah, but now they have casinos, so it's all good, right?

Nodin · 09-10-2012 4:05pm

decimatio wrote: »

Well not any hope. Slaves were known to be set free in the US and there were even African-American slave owners and other businessmen who supported the confederacy. .

It was rare, and became rarer as time went on. I think the enacting of legislation post-civil war in the south gives a good idea as to matters of race at the time.

decimatio wrote: »

Also in Roman times it wasn't as slim a chance as you may think.

I contrasted the difference Roman position with the American one, so no, I don't think it was a "slim chance".

jank · 10-10-2012 5:41am

Penn wrote: »

I don't believe I concededanything. My point was that black Americans are some of the most successful, educated and have the highest quality of life for factors outside of their race. They're not given those opportunities for any reason to do with slavery, in the same way that successful Irish people over there don't owe the opportunities they had to the Famine which caused them to emigrate to America. Correlation does not imply causation.?

So slavery has nothing to do with the fact that there are up to 40 million African Americans where by even today the vast majority still live in the south?

Irish emigration was always a fact of life well before the famine, it ramped up significantly after the famine of course but still remained for many high years after up until the start of the 19th century. The 1950's and 1980's kicked off another round, as well as what we are seeing today. To equate the two is a false equivalence, never mind that your average Irish emigrate had some small say in where they were going. The average African slave was just dumped on a ship and it was pot luck that they ended up in the US rather than the Caribbean or Brazil.

Penn wrote: »

But again, the reason why they were brought to America had no factor on them now having the opportunities they wouldn't have had in Africa. It is because of America itself and the opportunities which are available there.

Of course its a factor! Again, why did they find themselves in that envirnoment in the first place? They were brought over from Africa as forced labour. If there hadn't been any slavery the vast majority of them would still be living in West Africa, hence why I used Liberia as an example.
Liberia was a state that was founded by free slaves from the US. Which country would you rather be living in today?

This is going around in circles but I want to state again that the end does NOT justify the means.

jank · 10-10-2012 5:50am

Nodin wrote: »

It was rare, and became rarer as time went on. I think the enacting of legislation post-civil war in the south gives a good idea as to matters of race at the time.

Dont forget that in Africa slave ownership was very common among Africans themselves, for example Ethoipa only offically abolished it in 1942, Nigeria in 1936 and so on. Niger only outlawed it in 2003 and Mauritania in 2007, crazy stuff!

Penn · 10-10-2012 8:42am

jank wrote: »

So slavery has nothing to do with the fact that there are up to 40 million African Americans where by even today the vast majority still live in the south?

Irish emigration was always a fact of life well before the famine, it ramped up significantly after the famine of course but still remained for many high years after up until the start of the 19th century. The 1950's and 1980's kicked off another round, as well as what we are seeing today. To equate the two is a false equivalence, never mind that your average Irish emigrate had some small say in where they were going. The average African slave was just dumped on a ship and it was pot luck that they ended up in the US rather than the Caribbean or Brazil.

Of course its a factor! Again, why did they find themselves in that envirnoment in the first place? They were brought over from Africa as forced labour. If there hadn't been any slavery the vast majority of them would still be living in West Africa, hence why I used Liberia as an example.
Liberia was a state that was founded by free slaves from the US. Which country would you rather be living in today?

This is going around in circles but I want to state again that the end does NOT justify the means.

I'll break it down as simply as I can:

Slavery was the reason many of them were in America.
The opportunities they have now (education, business etc) are because they are in America.

However, the difference between the two is the fact that the black Americans who have those opportunities today, are not the ones who were brought over as slaves. Black Americans who have these opportunities today have them not because they are black Americans, but because they are Americans. You're saying that they wouldn't be in America now if not for slavery, but you're placing the emphasis on their race and the fact they are black. The reasons why they are in America are irrelevant to the opportunities they have, because for the vast majority of them today, they are American.

Let me ask you this: Are black people in Africa unlucky because their ancestors weren't brought to America as slaves?

Nodin · 10-10-2012 2:03pm

jank wrote: »

Dont forget that in Africa slave ownership was very common among Africans themselves, for example Ethoipa only offically abolished it in 1942, Nigeria in 1936 and so on. Niger only outlawed it in 2003 and Mauritania in 2007, crazy stuff!

O that makes it all ok then. Soz for mentioning it.

jank · 10-10-2012 4:10pm

Have been thinking of this question the past day or two, thinking I might be way off track so I asked one of my friends his opinion who I think is qualified to answer. My friend is an African American (from Alabama of all places) who has been living here in Sydney for the past 5 years (now an Australian citizen).

Basically I asked him on thoughts on the legacy of slavery in the US and if he thought himself better off that it happened (i.e he happened to be born in the US) His answer surprised me.

"Hell yeah!"

Maybe I was expecting a punch in the face but then again I have known him for almost 3 years and he knows who and what I am at this stage, he is an honest guy, salt of the earth and as good a person you will ever meet.

He said that it was good the some good came out of it at the end. He says that America is built for opportunity and that if you want to be successful and rich you can be, all you got to do is work your balls of, 6-7 days a week. It is all about your drive at the end of the day.

There is still racism in the south, still issues with blacks and whites in some communities. The "old south" dies hard. Its kinda there under the surface but nobody ever talks about it, not even allowed to talk about it. Very sensitive topic to all concerned as people can take you up wrong, so people avoid it.

He would tell me of stories that as teenagers that he would go to clubs where there would only be blacks and his other white friends would go to bars where there would only be whites, not that blacks/whites were banned in these places but that was/is the way it is. This was only 15 years ago! He also tells me that Americans don't know what poor is, compared to poor in Africa.

He qualified it all though by saying if you are coming across as racist or trying to push buttons that it be would be seen as that.
He voted Clinton once, George W Bush twice, and Obama last time and probably again this time just for comparison sake. He got his postal ballot last week, pity we don't get that in Ireland.

I know this is all anecdotal but take it what may.

jank · 10-10-2012 4:21pm

Penn wrote: »

However, the difference between the two is the fact that the black Americans who have those opportunities today, are not the ones who were brought over as slaves. Black Americans who have these opportunities today have them not because they are black Americans, but because they are Americans. You're saying that they wouldn't be in America now if not for slavery, but you're placing the emphasis on their race and the fact they are black. The reasons why they are in America are irrelevant to the opportunities they have, because for the vast majority of them today, they are American.
.

Throughout history people migrate, due to war, famine, slavery, economics and so on. Yes, they are american but they are also African american. You want to dismiss the notion that slavery had anything to do with the 40 million African Americans that are now present in the US, which is utterly preposterous.

Penn wrote: »

Let me ask you this: Are black people in Africa unlucky because their ancestors weren't brought to America as slaves?

Not sure I would go as far as saying they were unlucky but an argument could be made for it. Again, not sure the average African is wishing that his forefathers was carried off to the US to be sold as slaves. He is too busy trying to survive to think of such matters.

For the slave itself 150 years ago it doesn't mean anything as he/she is still a slave in the US or Cuba or somewhere in Africa, life still sucks. The only sure thing we know now is that there is a large African american community in the US because of slavery who also happen to be the most educated and successful African/Black community in the world.

Have you been to Africa? Most beautiful place in the world. Something truely magical about the place but you ain't seen poverty till you go there, makes our daily grips about this or that in the west seem utterly trivial compared to the daily struggle millions upon millions go through on a daily basis. It is all down to dumb luck at the end that we are here and they are there.

Penn · 10-10-2012 4:36pm

jank wrote: »

Throughout history people migrate, due to war, famine, slavery, economics and so on. Yes, they are american but they are also African american. You want to dismiss the notion that slavery had anything to do with the 40 million African Americans that are now present in the US, which is utterly preposterous.

Not sure I would go as far as saying they were unlucky but an argument could be made for it. Again, not sure the average African is wishing that his forefathers was carried off to the US to be sold as slaves. He is too busy trying to survive to think of such matters.

For the slave itself 150 years ago it doesn't mean anything as he/she is still a slave in the US or Cuba or somewhere in Africa, life still sucks. The only sure thing we know now is that there is a large African american community in the US because of slavery who also happen to be the most educated and successful African/Black community in the world.

I don't dismiss the notion, I dismiss it's validity on the opportunities black people have in America. "Black Americans" don't have those opportunities, "Americans" have those opportunities. Again, my whole point is that correlation does not imply causation. Slavery is the reason they are born in America. Because they are born in America, they have certain opportunities. However, that doesn't mean that slavery is the reason why they have certain opportunities.

jank wrote: »

Have you been to Africa? Most beautiful place in the world. Something truely magical about the place but you ain't seen poverty till you go there, makes our daily grips about this or that in the west seem utterly trivial compared to the daily struggle millions upon millions go through on a daily basis. It is all down to dumb luck at the end that we are here and they are there.

Not really, but whatever. I think we should agree to disagree at this point and move on.

Sulla Felix · 10-10-2012 10:12pm

jank wrote: »

Of course its a factor! Again, why did they find themselves in that envirnoment in the first place? They were brought over from Africa as forced labour. If there hadn't been any slavery the vast majority of them would still be living in West Africa, hence why I used Liberia as an example.
Liberia was a state that was founded by free slaves from the US. Which country would you rather be living in today?

If their ancestors hadn't been enslaved, the vast majority of them wouldn't even exist considering the massive odds against the past causal chain being repeated. I'm not sure that that means that a contemporary black should be thankful for slavery being the very reason for his/her existence.

Sindri · 11-10-2012 2:47am

What happened to the fruitcakes?

joseph brand · 11-10-2012 10:08am

jank wrote: »

Well for a start there are many historical and sociological studies done on slavery which suggest the slavery is almost innate in human beings. It has been around since antiquity and to some extent still with us today in other forms. In that sense maybe slavery was as natural as the fleas that carried the black death...;)

Well, we did have slavery here in Ireland not too long ago. Church-run slavery, in various 'laundries' scattered about Ireland.

The Lord, mysterious ways etc.

joseph brand · 11-10-2012 10:16am

Scott DesJarlais, Pro-Life Republican Congressman And Doctor, Pressured Mistress Patient To Get Abortion.

WASHINGTON -- A pro-life, family-values congressman who worked as a doctor before winning election as a Tea Party-backed Republican had an affair with a patient and later pressured her to get an abortion, according to a phone call transcript obtained by The Huffington Post.

The congressman, Rep. Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee, was trying to save his marriage at the time, according to his remarks on the call, made in September of 2000. And, according to three independent sources familiar with the call and the recording, he made the tape himself.

DesJarlais, who was provided a copy of the transcript by HuffPost, did not deny its contents, but in a statement released through his campaign characterized it as just another sordid detail dredged up by the opposition. "Desperate personal attacks do not solve our nation's problems, yet it appears my opponents are choosing to once again engage in the same gutter politics that CBS news called the dirtiest in the nation just 2 years ago."

That race featured charges culled from DesJarlais' divorce from Susan DesJarlais, which was finalized in 2001. The filing included allegations that he held a gun in his own mouth for hours in one instance and that he "dry fired" a gun outside his wife's bedroom in another.

Corkfeen · 12-10-2012 3:24pm

Found that last nights debate was highly entertaining, here's the video in its entirety for those who missed it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05VnURkqjXs

For those who don't want to watch the entire thing. It's worth watching this clip.... :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfcQWrfkmRI

MagicMarker · 12-10-2012 10:03pm

Corkfeen wrote: »

Found that last nights debate was highly entertaining, here's the video in its entirety for those who missed it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05VnURkqjXs

Wow, it's been on youtube all day and it has a whopping 300 views. The first presidential debate had 100k+ within a few hours.

Corkfeen · 12-10-2012 10:13pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

Wow, it's been on youtube all day and it has a whopping 300 views. The first presidential debate had 100k+ within a few hours.

That's just the Wallstreet Journal's youtube account. The copy the New York Times uploaded has 724,000 views.

Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Comments