“Ulysses S. Grant” was a Republican who owned a slave.
The original statement was “In 1860, the year before the Civil War, no Republican owned a slave.”
Ulysses S. Grant essentially inherited a slave through marriage. Technically he bought him from his father-in-law in sometime between 1854 and 1859, and freed him in 1859.
But he did not own him in 1860 and he was NOT A REPUBLICAN when he owned a slave:
“Grant: a Biography.” Grant: a Biography, by William S. McFeely, Norton & Company, 1982, p. 64.
So, yeah, technically this is an example of a Republican (Grant) owning a slave... WHEN HE WAS A DEMOCRAT.
Now, D’Souza’s statement is just an anecdote. Good men owned slaves. The Bible allowed slavery in the Old and New Testaments. It is easy to get carried away with debates over something that occurred over a century ago. We could go back and forth endlessly. Abuses and injustices happened. Evangelical Christians were, for the most part, the driving force behind the abolition movement worldwide. Christians desired to spread liberty to all people. It really is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. It was a Christian versus anti-Christian issue.
D’Souza is just helping to illustrate that the Democrat ideology is deeply flawed. Their attempts to smear Republicans, and especially conservatives, as vile, hateful, abusive people is the opposite of the truth. Sure, bad apples are in every group. Take Judas for example. But the accusations that Democrats and antifa types make against Trump, Republicans, and conservatives in general are all merely manipulative, mind-control garbage. They are lies and smears.
And I think that is the main takeaway from D’Souza’s commentary. Though the issue of slavery itself is very deep and can not be honestly dissected into simple soundbite answers, D’Souza does a good job of showing how the left is driven by a destructive ideology, and it misrepresents the beliefs, values, character, and actions of conservatives.
Also, some people who had slaves treated them very easy, and others were very harsh. Still, the New Testament appears to want to do away with the idea of a “slave” who really didn’t want to be there, with the phrase “giving up threatening.” As illustrative as the adventures and misadventures of the Hebrews are, America wasn’t desired by God to be a second Israel. Mixing and matching the theologies of Old and New Testaments per our convenience just gives us a mischmosch that cannot consistently look forward in a gospel direction.
“So, yeah, technically this is an example of a Republican (Grant) owning a slave... WHEN HE WAS A DEMOCRAT.”
Just for the tally book, when did Grant start voting for Republicans, and when was his voter registration changed to Republican.
I understand all too well that Democrats have successfully played the race card against Republicans and that D’Souza wants to play it right back. And he has come up with a narrative that he thinks will prompt certain groups, that today don't often vote Republican, to flock to the polls to vote Republican.
Just be careful playing the race card - unless you are prepared to tear down the monuments to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Mason. And General Grant. And Moses.