The article does make a pretty good point ...
Posted on 08/20/2017 4:02:15 AM PDT by Zakeet
Al Sharpton just may be right about the need to remove offensive statues from the American public way.
I'd been somewhat torn on the idea of erasing history by tearing down statues, even Civil War Confederate statues, since destroying public imagery and iconography isn't the kind of thing Americans do.
Actually, it's the kind of thing that ISIS does.
But Sharpton, the noted race hustler, helped me see things in a different way.
[Snip]
Because if [Sharpton] and others of the Cultural Revolution were being intellectually honest, they'd demand that along with racist statues, something else would be toppled.
And this, too, represents much of America's racist history:
The Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party historically is the party of slavery. The Democratic Party is the party of Jim Crow laws. The Democratic Party fought civil rights for a century.
And so by rights - or at least by the standards established by the Cultural Revolutionaries of today's American left - we should ban the Democratic Party.
Not only get rid of it in the present, but strike its very name from the history books, and topple all Democratic statues of leaders who benefited, prospered and became wealthy by cleaving to the party. And shame Democrats until they confess the truth of it.
The Democratic Party's military arm in the South was the KKK. The Democratic Party opposed the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, making the former slaves citizens of the United States and giving them the vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
The article does make a pretty good point ...
Great cartoon, too!
The Soros-funded, Obama/ValJar-promoted Red Guards rioting in the streets care only about the Communist party and anarchy. They’re using the thug Negroes of BLM to do the cop-killing for them.
Well said!
Follow the money trail and when the source and enablers are found, take em out.
Recent DNA research I've read about indicates it wasn't Thomas Jefferson, but his brother, or another male member of his family.
Check this out: I just found this message on a Facebook Antifa page:
“There is no room for capitalists, conservatives, libertarians, “classical liberals” or supporters of the US constitution in our city. You MUST leave. #BostonResist”
Well there you have it folks, these people have just declared themselves enemies of our constitution and our politicians and military have taken an oath to defend it. What are they doing about it?
https://www.facebook.com/BostonAntifa/
Purging history and reeducation - it's the Communist way. USSR, Red China Cambodia, to name a few.
DemocRats should be confronted with this statement and be forced to defend or denounce it.
How do you blame him for WW2 and Vietnam?
What I have seen indicates that it is not possible to say that THOMAS Jefferson fathered those children, only that they were fathered by a Jefferson family member. Beyond that where is the evidence that rape occurred?
Just another example of the media reporting supposition as established fact and that is giving them the benefit of the doubt by not calling them outright liars.
Even if it was Thomas, how does one assume he raped her?
Wow. Their cover photo has a free speech sign being burned.
First they came for the crosses...
Just shooting a guess: it’s because of the Federal Reserve and Income taxation. Made it easier for war funding.
In 20 years America will be almost like the America of the 19th and 20th centuries with overt racial discrimination common and accepted.
There will be segregated schools, bathrooms, water fountains, restaurants.
The only difference will be that the roles of whites and blacks will be reversed.
It will be white people who must cross the street when black people walk by.
It will be white people who are objects of overt discrimination because of their skin color.
Scurrilous Commentary by Fred Reed
"It is curious that blacks, the least educated thirteen percent of the population, the least productive,
most criminal, and most dependent on governmental charity, should dominate national politics.""Yet they do."
"Virtually everything revolves around what blacks want, demand, do, or can't do. Their power seems without limit."
"Courses of instruction in the schools, academic rigor, codes of dress, rules regarding unceasing obscenity, all must be set to suit them, as must be examinations for promotion in fire departments, the military, and police forces.
Blacks must be admitted to universities for which they are not remotely qualified, where departments of Black Studies must be established to please them.
Corporate work forces, federal departments, and elite high-schools must be judged not on whether they perform their functions.
"Do laws requiring identification to vote threaten to end multiple voting?
The laws must go.
Do blacks not like Confederate flags?
Adieu, flags.
Does Huckleberry Finn go down the Mississippi with the Nigger Jim, or Conrad write The Nigger of the Narcissus?
These must be banned or expurgated to please blacks who haven’t read them or, usually, heard of them.
Do we want to prevent people coming from regions infested with Ebola from entering the United States?
We cannot.
It would offend blacks.""We must never, ever say or do anything that might upset them, as virtually everything does.
It is positively astonishing.
One expects the rich and smart to have disproportionate power. But America is dominated from the slums."READ MORE HERE:
https://fredoneverything.org/black-power/
They still do.
The difference is that prior to the Civil Rights Act, democrats were openly vile and crude with their hatred of minorities. Now, they honey-coat their hatred.
Whether they sneeringly call blacks "lazy n-words" or condescendingly sympathize with blacks for being not quite as capable as everyone else, the fundamental message remains the same. They do not want blacks (or other minorities) to have self-determination.
The DNA research I’ve read about indicates it wasn’t Thomas Jefferson, but his brother, or another male member of his family”
What I came across a year or so ago was that DNA testing is not that exact, especially in the format of determining the DNA of a Thomas Jefferson/Sally Hemmings match. DNA evidence can determine source within a group (the Jeffersons) of which Thomas is but one of that group.
There are writings by several people during those years which are more damning to Thomas Jefferson than just this recent DNA testing.
John Adams wrote specifically about Jefferson’s penchant for his slaves after his wife had passed away, and Adams remarked that it was rather confusing to him as to why anyone would engage in such a manner as Jefferson was. It is also documented that Hemmings had several children after a long term relationship with this Jeffersonion gene pool.
Human nature being what it is along with rudimentary detective work points directly to Thomas Jefferson, as he was the owner and Hemmings was located on the premises, which puts Thomas in almost daily contact with his workers.
I never really bought into the theory of Thomas Jefferson being the father of (some?) Sally Hemmings’ children until I read the papers of John Adams who discussed it in letters with contemporaries. I now believe at that point in time, it was rather common knowledge that Thomas Jefferson had gone off the deep end (so to speak), and was practicing things which were rather looked down upon and unmentionable during that period of American history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.