In a chapter in his new book purporting to explain to "idiots" what "our Founding Fathers really intended," Glenn Beck praises an obsolete provision of the U.S. Constitution that prohibited Congress from outlawing the slave trade before 1808 and capped taxes on the slave trade at $10 per slave. In his explanation of the provision, Beck does not mention slavery, saying instead that the provision means that the Founders apparently "felt like there was a value to being able to live here" and lamenting: "Not anymore. These days we can't ask anything of immigrants -- including that they abide by our laws."
The provision Beck praised actually "barred Congress from ending the international slave trade before 1808." As noted by Yale Law School professor Akhil Reed Amar: "To make matters worse, despite the new Congress's general Article I, section 8 power over international commerce, section 9 barred Congress from ending the international slave trade before 1808. By that time, the Deep South hoped to have enough extra muscle in Congress, based on white migration and slave importation, to thwart any possible antislavery constitutional amendments and perhaps even to weaken any proposed ban on further slave importation. ... [T]he 1808 date itself was exempt from constitutional amendment under Article V." [Amar, America's Constitution: A Biography, Page 91]
h/tMediaMatters
23 comments:
Where is the blog about the GREAT speech that Netanyahu gave??? He did a great job of standing up for Israel and bashing the U.N. and Ahkmadinejad at the same time.
Something that Obama hasn't yet (if ever) learned to do.
You are so quick to criticize every Conservative no matter if they are right or wrong, but as long as they are Conservatives they are wrong in your UGLY blind eyes.
Well I got news for you sistra, Glenn Beck was RIGHT about Van Jones and he is RIGHT about Obama and time will show how WRONG this administration is for the USA. When this one term pipsqueak is out of office, along with his gang of liars and cheats. .
Technocrat,
You should start your own blog and post what YOU are interested in rather than scolding people who actually have blogs and telling them what they should blog about.
Please notice that I have not been "quick to criticize" David Brooks, Ross Douthat, David Frum, Peggy Noonan, The Unreligious Right blog,, Patrick M. of "Sane Political Discourse," Gordon of "A Political Glimpse from Ireland," Pamela D. Hart of "The Oracular Opinion, Jennifer of "Thinking Out Loud," and dmarks of "Throwawayblog," just to name a few conservative pundits and bloggers I visit to read and/or argue with.
So you are incorrect.
But that's not unusual with some angry people on the right who never bother with facts but sadly resort to merely mouthing their uninformed opinions.
And Glenn Beck is still an a**hole.
"So you are incorrect."
Why because YOU say so?
"And Glenn Beck is still an a**hole."
As You are!
May GOD Bless Glenn Beck for having the guts to tell it like it IS!
It's hard to call someone a a-hole when they to stand up to the intellectually and morally, cowardly and corrupt people we have running this country.. And risk it all on behalf of the truth.
Calling a person a dirty name as you do and as you always seem to do,only shows how Unintellectual you are.
"So you are incorrect."
Why because YOU say so?--Technocrat
Yes. I said so, and I gave you evidence to back up my assertion that I do NOT criticize "every Conservative."
You can ignore that if you choose, but that won't make your accusation correct.
Glenn Beck is a "rodeo clown"--his own words describing himself.
Glenn Beck is an a**hole--my own words describing him.
So People Exposing Communists are labeled as a-holes as far as you are concerned.... interesting.
Technocrat,
Please stop putting words in my mouth and changing the subject.
Glenn Beck is an a**hole on many, many levels, no matter what he "exposes." His witch hunts do not expunge from his record the fact that he's almost too stupid to remember to breathe.
And people who defend him are hopeless.
This is a perfect parody of Beckerhead.
The left hates him and calls him names like a-hole and crazy, Obama and his drones want him silenced... and for what? For telling the truth and exposing corruption. It's about time someone started questioning the things Obama is doing and the people he is surrounding himself with. Bravo, Glenn, bravo!
We don't need no stinken Parody
Red-Baiting.
For too many, America's real pastime.
I feel I've read 'Technocrat' before. Of course there ate so many hectoring, finger-pointing 'Real Americans' posting it's hard to tell.
Techno: You make some good points. Van Jones is such a loathesome person that it is hard to say anything too bad about him. Shaw, Beck's exposing Jones was not a "witch hunt". Because in this case, Jones himself readily said he was a "witch".
Techno said: "....one term pipsqueak...". I am not an Obama supporter, but I have been dismayed at many way-out-line of the insults hurled at him for the past several months. Compared to these, the pipsqueak thing is almost respectful!
Shaw: For whatever reason, you choose not to post speeches made by Israeli politicians in your blog. Come to think of it, no blogger I read ever does that. So your decision to not blog about Netanyahu's speech is really not too far out there.
Back to Beck, I've hardly seen him. But I did manage to catch a bit where he was ranting in detail demanding the outright murder of a left-wing journalist commentator. For one thing, if you don't like a commentator, ignore them. For another, it is way way out of line to demand to murder someone. After that, it would take me a lot to get me to respect Glenn Beck.
Arthur: Nothing wrong with "Red baiting" if its victims happen to be the very worst of the "reds". Just exactly like it is not wrong to call someone a Nazi if it turns out that they actually are one.
"Obama and his drones want him silenced... and for what?"--Technocrat
Good heavens! We don't want Beckerhead silenced! The more he says the more crazy he looks. Too much exposure of a nut is never enough!
Bring it on! Beckerhead!
PS. dmarks,
Re: Beck and Van Jones
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Van Jones? Very worst of the 'worst reds'? Hardly.
'Mass murderer'? Nope. Not even close.
Law-abiding, civic minded, forth-right and conspicuous in his actions during his entire career. And effective enough in his work to draw the ire of the Koch family & 'Americans for Prosperity'.
Beck's was yet another smear of a citizen who holds leftist political views reactionaries will not tolerate, but will distort and exaggerate virtually beyond recognition.
You defended every aspect of Jones "entire career". This included, as you should be aware if you know anything about him, his strong support of Maoist ideology. Which is indeed mass-murdering. If successfully implemented in the US, this ideology that Jones embraced would result in scores of tens of millions of Americans being killed.
You need to check into the fact that Van Jones willingly joined and worked for STORM, an organization that claimed to inspired by Mao Zedong.
And you call this "civic minded"???
Now, you seem to think that "leftist = good, always". I think few here would agree with you. There's a difference between the leftism of Mao Zedong, and the leftism exemplified by the late Sens. Wellstone and Kennedy.
It's amazing that you can again and again support Jones' Maoism is "civic minded", helping the community, etc.
Arthur: "Beck's was yet another smear of a citizen who holds leftist political views reactionaries will not tolerate, but will distort and exaggerate virtually beyond recognition."
Addendum: You need to do a little research. The "leftist political views" of Jones are of a very repugnant extreme variety held by few here, very few Americans, and very few Democrats. In other words, Democrats tend not to tolerate Jones' views either.
Van Jones has been smeared. His views distorted.
'Red-baiting' at it's very worst. A tactic the political right never, ever tires of using. Reverend Wright. Bill Ayers. Van Jones. All leftist progressives anathema to rightist 'patriots'.
Same old. Same old. Guilt by associatio, exaggeration and inference. The 'right' way.
Of course you're 'amazed' dmarks. I would expect no less.
But for what it's worth if we can allow secessionists, militia supporters and the like to serve in government then a few lefties can't hurt.
Arthurstone: Let's see here. You have included an actual terrorist, a hardline Maoist, and a screaming church-pulpit racist as "progressives". That's really rich.
I'd expect Rush Limbaugh to lump these completely despicable fringe kooks with actual progressives like the aforementioned Ted Kennedy and Paul Wellstone, but not you.
There's a difference there. No, I would not agree that a Maoist, a terrorist, and a screaming hatemongers (Jones, Ayers, and Wright) are progressives, and representative of liberalism.
And there is no "smear" in accurately presenting Jones as I have done.
As for "Red Baiting" and Jones, This is the type of "Red Baiting" that is nothing but honorable. Pointing out the facts of a person's genocidal views. There's no "guilt by association" here, but rather guilt by what the person actually does and supports. There's no smear, nor is there exaggeration. Jones' resume is there for everyone to see.
(The only "guilt by association" possible here would be if I said that Obama was a terrorist, Maoist, or screaming racist due to his association with these three men. But I have never, ever done that, and disagree with those who do. Obama is correct to get rid of these three guys).
You've gone out on a limb on this one. Your charactarization of an actual terrorist (Ayers) as a "progressive" is sure to raise some eyebrows. That is, the progressives who, unlike you, don't think that terrorism and the ideals of Mao are very good things at all.
So now I'm a mass-murdering Maoist too.
Not quite. Ayers is well known in Chicago and has been involved in civic affairs for decades. Rev. Wright likewise is highly regarded in Chicago. Van Jones is a Yale educated activist who has pissed off a lot of people and is paying the price.
Dmarks you sound just like the people who hounded MLK 40 years ago making the same sort of accusations his political opponents did then.
You and your ever decreasing ilk are the ones out on a limb happily sawing away.
By all means keep it up.
Arthur said: "So now I'm a mass-murdering Maoist too."
Actually, this is Van Jones' view. I doubt very much it is yours.
But you again and again make the claim that he was an always-perfect civic-minded hero of some kind. Despite his Maoism and other problems.
"Ayers is well known in Chicago..."
So? He has "terrorist" on his resume. Our President has distanced himself from Ayers and his views. I defer to his wisdom on this.
"Dmarks you sound just like the people who hounded MLK 40 years ago making the same sort of accusations his political opponents did then."
Just like? How about "not at all like". What you are doing is smearing Dr. King by lumping him in with three loathesome individuals:
1) King was never a terrorist. So much for including him with Ayers. We can dismiss this attempt of yours to drag King through the dirt quite quickly.
2) King was never a Maoist. He was left-wing and progressive. But unlike you, I know that Maoism is not a part of progressivism. Now you seem to be echoing the evidenceless "communist" accusations against King.
3) King did not preach hate from his pulpit. That is what Wright does.
Sorry, your attempt to smear Dr. King by lumping him in with these three kooks does not work.
Your argument of "the same sort of accusations" falls apart since the "accusations" I have described against these three extremists are well documented and mainstream to the point of being non-controversial.
I've made no accusations against Dr. King, let alone any inaccurate ones.
"You and your ever decreasing ilk are the ones out on a limb happily sawing away."
Well, whatever this limb you describe is, it is a huge and heavy one. It has to be . It includes President Obama, most all Democrats, and most all Republicans, all of whom recognize that these three individuals are fringe extremists.
It's not like that twig you are on, where you claim again and again what wonderful members of the community they are.
Here is the article for reference:
Article 1
Section. 9.
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
Article 4
Section. 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
Wow, this could start some tongues wagging around here since the Constitution is so important for this string!
Post a Comment