On this day in history, May 14, 1857, former slave and abolitionist spokesman Frederick Douglass delivered a speech to the American Abolition Society about the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Dred Scott Case.
The Supreme Court ruled that black people were actually property and they had no rights that white people were bound to respect. Chief Justice Roger Taney cited the founding fathers to support the decision.
During his speech Douglass said, “Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Jay, and Franklin, and Rush, and Hamilton, and a host of others held no such degrading view on the subject of slavery imputed by Judge Taney. All looked for the gradual but certain abolition of slavery and shaped the Constitution with a view to this grand result.”
Douglass also said, “George Washington can never be claimed as the representative of slavery fanatics. The slaveholders use his name to give respectability to slavery. In a letter to Robert Morris, Washington uses language that would make him a terror of the slaveholders and a natural representative of the Republican Party.”
On April 11, 1961, Democrat Governor Ernest “Fritz” Hollings oversaw the raising of the Confederate Flag over the South Carolina State House. The flag was raised in observance to the start of the Civil War at Fort Sumter.
Commemorative events were held at the Francis Marion Hotel, in Charleston, and black visitors were denied admission throughout the week of observance.
Governor Hollings was also a member of the Dixiecrat Party. He was elected to the U.S. Senate, in 1966, and retired in 2005.
On April 13, 1873, on Easter Sunday, 150 black and 2 white men were killed during the Colfax Massacre in Colfax, Louisana.
After the Democrats lost a hotly contested race for governor of Louisiana, the Ku Klux Klan and a small army of supporters responded by attacking the Colfax Courthouse.
The state militia, which was mainly black, responded but they were outnumbered by their attackers.
“The colonists are by the law of nature freeborn, as indeed all men are, white or black.” (James Otis, Founding Father)
Ever been in a situation where you were trying to educate someone on the principles of the Constitution only to be stopped dead in your tracks by their attempts to discredit the Founding Fathers? As touched upon in a recent blog, there is no denying or defending the fact that some of them owned slaves. It was also noted that many of them verbally denounced the institution of slavery with disgust as well. Founding Father James Adams went on record stating that, “…never in my life did I own a slave.” Some may already know that many of America’s early Patriots verbalized opposition to slavery, but is the general public aware of the Founders’ concerted efforts to actually end it?
Thomas Jefferson has been praised many times over for penning the words of liberty in the Declaration of Independence. On the other hand, he has been criticized (and rightfully so) concerning the fact that he owned slaves while he penned those words. Benjamin Banneker, a black Patriot and almanac maker wrote a letter to Thomas Jefferson addressing slavery and forced him to recall the servitude that Britain placed upon white Americans as well.
“Suffer me to recall to your mind that time, in which the arms of the British crown were exerted with every powerful effort, in order to reduce you to a state of servitude; look back, I entreat you, on the variety of dangers to which you were exposed; reflect on that period in which every human aid appeared unavailable, and in which even hope and fortitude wore the aspect of inability to the conflict….This sir, was a time when you clearly saw into the injustice of a state of Slavery, and in which you had the apprehensions of the horrors of its condition. It was then that your abhorrence thereof was so excited, that you publicly held forth this true and invaluable doctrine, which is worthy to be recorded and remembered in all succeeding ages: ‘We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal: that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Being confronted with the fact that he was the epitome of hypocrisy during this time; Jefferson’s worldview of blacks and slavery made a 180 degree turn as he too joined the ranks of those wanting to end slavery. He drafted legislation whereas new states could not be admitted into the Union unless slavery was deemed illegal. In his first draft of the Northwest Ordinance submitted to the Continental Congress of 1784 he wrote:
“That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, there shall neither be slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty.” (Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume XXVI, pp. 118-119, March 1, 1784.)
A finalized version of the bill eventually passed in 1787, thus the reason slavery was illegal in the states Northwest of the Ohio river (i.e. Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota).
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was also recognized 100 years later as a threat to pro-slavery states such as Mississippi when they succeeded from the Union in 1861 right before the Civil War. Within their official Succession from the United States, they wrote:
“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery – the greatest material interest in the world…The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787.”
Folks, even racists of the south acknowledged that there was an anti-slavery sentiment with the Founders.
Benjamin Franklin was also among the many that not only changed his mind concerning slavery but also worked to see it abolished as well. In fact, an entire entity was created for this cause. Originally called The Society for the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage–it was later renamed the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery. Franklin was not only a member of this society; he served as President in 1787. In 1790, he submitted official legislation to Congress to end slavery. Though it was rejected, the fight continued on. Founding Fathers John Jay and Alexander Hamilton were also members of an anti-slavery entity (founded in New York) by the name of the Society of Promoting the Manumission of Slaves.
Facts like these are merely the tip of the iceberg as many more examples can be cited. The most salient question at this point is; why isn’t this history being taught in our public schools? Can it be argued that an attempt to discredit the Founders is also an attempt to discredit the principles of our Constitution? I’d say that it most certainly is. In today’s society where it’s popular for people to throw out the intellectually lazy slogan of, “Don’t Judge”; they most certainly exercise judgment in a negative disdain for our Founding Fathers. This judgment is typically the end-result of a lack of knowledge of historical facts and research on their part. As economist Walter Williams so eloquently put it:
“Here’s my hypothesis about people who use slavery to trash the Founders: They (leftists) have contempt for our constitutional guarantees of liberty. Slavery is merely a convenient moral posturing tool as they try to reduce respect for our Constitution.”
You can help us. Donate, Be a Sponsor, Become a Member or simply volunteer
We are the boots on the ground everyone says we need. We are Devoted Christians, Proud Americans, Active Republicans.
Donate Today – We are NOT a 501(c)3 and we are not one on purpose and we will not become one. We will not be silence.
Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama’s skin and instead paid more attention to his culturalidentity, maybe he would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa.
Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign “isms”, instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas.
The tropes of America’s racial history as a way of understanding all things black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial.
Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970′s from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come from — also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about to — but at the same time it does.
My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, North) African-Americans like myself — those of us who know our history — have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring inconsistencies:
First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire consequences for this country.
Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa’s long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these complexities — particularly the relationship that has existed between the two continents over the past two centuries. Europe’s complete colonization of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being one of them.
The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC’s have no real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC’s use aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama’s Muslim heritage).
On the other hand, AC’s strive to be the best at the culture that they inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and business moguls; this is all well and good. It’s when they decide to engage us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted.
The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. The ACP blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated in Africa. However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the “will of the people” becomes completely irrelevant.
Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here playing (colonial) African politics as usual.
In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father – an eloquent piece of political propaganda — Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father’s legacy; this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama.
Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama’s African colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book — from his feigned antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as distracting elements that get in the way of “progress”. (On p. 308 of Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an “ancient loyalties”.)
Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led — oftentimes to their own slaughter.
Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all forms of democracy.
Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you:
Convince the people that “clinging” to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) identity or history is bad and regresses the process of “unity”. British Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the state. “Tribalism” made the imperialists have to work harder to get people to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many “educated” Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own tribes.
Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone to have a “fair shake”.Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. They are interested in controlling all.
Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what Africa needed. Many of today’s Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can’t find a job?
Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that were being used to engineer “progress” (which the British had confiscated from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind the African independence movements of the1950 and 60′s. What will a post-Obama America look like?
Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for itself.
America, don’t be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political power can only become one thing: a despot.
Revealing the Truth about the Democratic Party…Share Away
by Frantz Emmanuel Kebreau
I have done extensive research on the subject because at one point, I was a Democrat. A few years ago, I was confronted with a fact that I knew to be false but after an investigation into the point, it turned out to be true. It was that Martin Luther King was a Republican.
This of course forced me to extend my research into other areas. What else could this Political Science Major be unaware of? The Truth became stranger than fiction. The list is quite long so here we go.
President Kennedy had little intention of enacting a Comprehensive Civil Rights Law during his 2 years in office. Tensions in society were running so high due to the riots and such that by the 1963 State of the Union address he had no other choice but to enact some kind of Law. Mind you, for the previous 100 years, it had only been the Republican Party who had supported any Civil Rights Legislations (I was not aware of these facts until I was 35 years old);
I do not want the “government” to treat me any differently than any other citizen. Therefore, I consider equality of opportunity and equal voting rights to be the summation of Civil Rights in America. If anything extra is afforded me or anyone else merely due to the color of their skin, I consider that to be an entitlement and patronizing.
Given my above statement, the Democratic Party, even if you sectionalize them by North and South, has never outvoted the Republican Party in any Civil Rights Law…Ever. The actual numbers play out like this;
Lifetime Republican Party support for Equal Rights for all Citizens: 94%
Lifetime Democratic Party Support for Equal rights for all Citizens: 35%
Now to the point of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This was a proposal that the Republican Party, during the Eisenhower Administration attempted to put forth but alas, their efforts resulted in the first Civil Rights Law in the previous 82 years…The Civil Rights Act of 1957 formed a Commission on Civil Rights. The Plan of the Commission was to eventually enact the very Comprehensive Law of 1964. Remember, this was the Bill that Senator JFK voted against, for political aspirations I’m sure.
JFK had his Justice department write the original Bill in early 1963. The first version passed the House but stalled in the Senate. Everett McKinley Dirksen (R), the minority leader in the Senate took it upon himself to REWRITE the entire Bill. It took him 1 weekend and he had 2 helpers, 1 Democrat and another Republican.
The final version of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was written by a Republican which means that since the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, every Civil Rights Law was written by a Republican with more Republican support than Democratic Party Support.
Due to Dirksen’s tenacity, a cloture vote was successful and the Senate passed the Bill. It then passed the Houses and became Law.
Some notes about its passage;
Robert Byrd (D) filibustered the Bill…the longest filibuster in American History
William Fulbright (D) voted against the Bill. He was Bill Clinton’s mentor.
Al Gore Sr. (D) voted against the Bill
Speaking to two Governors on Air Force One, then President LB Johnson was quoted saying, “”I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” according Ronald Kessler’s Book in relation to the Law.
So now let’s explore the Dixicrats. This has always been misrepresented. I wrote about it in my book, and I also made a video of it. Here is the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdJsPsU55PM
The big question is, did the South really turn “Red” after the CRA of 1964? Well, I researched that also and found the following conclusions.
Presidential Elections (covering “The Solid South”)
The 11 Former Confederate States
Year Blue States Red States
1964 6 5
1968 6 (Segregationist Wallace took 5) 5
1972 Landslide
1976 Landslide
1980 Landslide
1984 Landslide
1988 Landslide
1992 4 7
1996 4 7
2000 0 11
2004 0 11
2008 3 8
At least in Presidential elections, the Solid South wasn’t so “solid” until at least the year 2000 or 36 years after the CRA of 1964.
Now let’s take a look at the Governorships.
Governorships since 1964
(The 11 former “Confederate States”)
State Blue Red Years until a “Red” Gov. was elected
Georgia 7 2 39 years
Mississippi 8 2 28 years
Alabama 9 3 23 years
Louisiana 6 4 16 years
Texas 5 4 15 years
South Carolina 5 5 11 years
Arkansas 9 3 9 years
North Carolina 7 2 9 years
Tennessee 5 4 7 years
Virginia 7 5 6 years
Florida 7 5 3 years
Total 75 39
That’s almost 2 to 1 Blue over Red. I looked at the facts and not the rhetoric. The facts point to a different conclusion all together. The South did not become “Solid Red” after the CRA of 1964.
After finding out that both Martin Luther King Sr. and Jr. were Republicans, I tend to deal only in facts and not with what I’ve been told.
Last Points
My former party, The Democratic Party says that they are for the “minority”. In this case, I’ll just say “blacks”. I believe in neither black nor minority but I defer to their thinking for this discussion. If that’s the case, then how could the following piece of history have been erased?
Ninety-nine percent of the country does not know the name Hiram Rhodes Revels. Here is his story and why the Democrats are not for “black” people.
At the end of the Civil War, Jefferson Davis, the President of the Confederacy, was captured and subsequently imprisoned for 2 years. Prior to this time period, Mr. Davis was a Senator from the State of Mississippi. In 1870, the State of Mississippi filled the vacant post of Mr. Davis with one Hiram Rhodes Revels. The curious fact behind this exchange is that now Senator Hiram Rhodes Revels did not only replace the President of the Confederacy, but he was also the First Black Senator in U.S. History…and virtually nobody knows his name.
One last point to explain this lack of universal knowledge…Jefferson Davis, The President of the Confederacy was a Democrat and his replacement, Senator Hiram Rhodes Revels, was a Republican. Democratic leadership today will never share that history with their constituents of which I once was. That led me to believe that the Democratic Party is more interested in my vote than the Truth.
It gets bit deeper. 13 former slaves became members of Congress between 1870 and 1901. We as a nation killed our own citizens in a Civil War to FREE 4 Million slaves. 13 of those freed slaves became members of the U.S. Congress and the history books are silent to this fact. 640,000 Americans died in that war and the result was transformational yet, this groundbreaking and profound history is never taught in “left” leaning schools because it does not serve their agenda. All 13 of the former slaves were Republicans. I had to sift through the Library of Congress to reveal the following information…here it is for you in a video;
My belief is that the Party’s did not change. The tactics changed. They went from Pro-Slavery to Pro-Segregation to Pro-Entitlement, all of which results in nothing beneficial for the prosperity of an individual and is considered by many of my ilk, “Plantation Politics”.
All I want is the Truth and to be treated as an equal, no more and no less; as an equal. I do not need the Democratic Party telling me that I’m “black” or that I’m a minority who needs their assistance. I am not a color. I am Frantz Kebreau, an American Citizen.
For the Democratic Party, it has always been about “Control” over Freedom. Keeping the Truth from it’s constituents in order to maintain control over them is not what I want from my “Party”
