Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CONDI SAYS: Anti-War = Pro-Slavery!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:11 PM
Original message
CONDI SAYS: Anti-War = Pro-Slavery!
Edited on Thu Sep-07-06 04:20 PM by DinoBoy
This woman has a doctorate? Yet she can't see she's creating a false dilemma and straman (at the very least), two major major logical fallacies? And RW nutters will fall for this bullshit like it's straight from Jesus' own lips.... :eyes:

Rice: Being Anti-War Is Being Pro-Slavery
By BET.com News Staff & Wire Services

Posted Sept. 6, 2006 – If you’re against the war in Iraq, you might as well consider yourself pro-slavery, according to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

In a recent interview with Essence magazine, Rice said that Blacks folks might have been enslaved much longer than they were if the North decided to end the American Civil War earlier than it did.

"I'm sure there are people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end and to insist that the emancipation of slaves would hold," she told the magazine.

"I know there were people who said, 'Why don't we get out of this now, make peace with the South, but leave the South with slaves?'"

More at BET
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Spinzonner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Didn't Lincoln himself, the party icon ...

say that the war was about the Union, not slavery ?

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yes. The Emancipation Proclamation
was signed in 1863, two years after the war started and was ONLY effective in the states that had seceded. Much later slaves in the states that had not seceded were freed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. lincoln wrote an amendment to the constitution
to protect slavery (anonymously) prior to taking office, it didn't pass of course but i read recently another original copy of it was found recently, apparently they are rare as they were normally destroyed when found to protect his image.

been a week or so since i read this but i could try to find it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes. Martin Luther King was notoriously pro-slavery.
Calling her drivel "crap" would be giving her too much credit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. it would be an insult to crap
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
18. Good thing I read first, because that was my first thought.
The mind boggles.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kutjara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. So, by making this comparison...
...is Condi saying that what's happening in Iraq is a civil war? Quite an illuminating analogy for her to draw. There's no slip like a Freudian slip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. nice one :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. Condiliesalot has lost all perspective
and is shooting the kool-aid through her veins these days....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
8. "I know there were people who said, 'Why don't we get out of this now..."
Okay, then, name them. Name those people who said that, Condi. Go ahead. Grab your history book, peruse some pages, and name them.

Another APOOHA from Condi. (Argument Pulled Out Of Her A**.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. actually the entire Presidential campaign of 1864
which most historians think Lincoln might well have lost but for the fact the war starting going well in 1864, was all about ending the war. The Democratic candidate, had he won, would have done just that. That doesn't make her analogy correct but she is right that people opposed the contituation of the Civil War.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. My problem is her failure to cite names and specific instances.
Edited on Thu Sep-07-06 08:19 PM by Straight Shooter
I stand corrected, to a degree. :)

But, Kindasleezy is using words to express the situation today as if we were in a parallel situation with the events leading up to the Civil War. We aren't, not by a long shot. Totally different scenario.

I'm just tired of the whole "some people say" defense/offense posture used by the bush administration. If some people say it, or said it, then quote the person directly. This gives us the opportunity to judge the validity of the quote and we can weigh its merit in accordance with how we view the character of the one who said it.

If Daniel Webster said it, that would give me pause for thought. John Wilkes Booth, I would discard it as without merit.

edit my spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-08-06 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. I agree she is wrong in her comparision
and naming names would have been helpful too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nutmegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
9. We were fascists, now we're pro-slavery?
Great job on the cease-fire by the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OregonDem Donating Member (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. Um the right has been implying that the Civil War & WWII were started to
end slavery, and fascism. Nothing could be further from the truth, since the south started the war by firing on Fort Sumter and the Germany declared war on the US after we were attacked at Pearl Harbor. These were wars started to spread slavery and fascism, and fortunately they were defeated in their efforts. So as far as starting wars goes the Bush Administation can be found among Nazis, and slaveowners. If Kindasleezy is saying that we should finish the job against those that actually attacked us (al Queda) then by that measure they have failed since they diverted the military's resources away from the real enemy to fight a nation that was not involved in 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. perfect g bomb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. Nonononono
There's a world of difference between believing that all wars everywhere are wrong, and that a specific war is wrong.

It makes no more sense to compare opposing Iraq to opposing the civil war than it does to compare supporting it to supporting Hitler's invasion of Poland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Yep
That's exactly the false dilemma and strawman I was referencing. And people refer to her as Doctor Rice with a straight face....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loves_dulcinea Donating Member (384 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. what is sad is
that there are people in this country who will swallow that shit without even pausing. it's F*cking Orwellian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
14. If you're a Republican
you might as well consider yourself a Nazi.

Really, the vast majority of people who oppose the Iraq war are not against ALL wars, only against wars that clearly have no justification. Repukes are such idiots.:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
16. The big difference is....

we started another nation's civil war. As democracy is looking less and less hopeful, we are merely there to protect our oil interests. What does Condi take us for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
17. For fucks sake!! Still working hard for whitey I see....
That makes no since what so ever, being anti-war is equal to being pro-slavery?! what a dumb bitch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SalmonChantedEvening Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-08-06 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
22. If only the ancestor's of today's GOP knew this.
They'd have never shelled Fort Sumter.


Whatta load of fertilizer, Condi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
24. I wonder if she ever looks in the mirror and just feels revulsion.
Edited on Sat Sep-09-06 09:04 PM by Marr
Talk about a total lack of pride. The power structure she's defending is the modern version of the plantation owner, not the Union. But her bosses send her out with this line specifically because she's black, and she just dutifully parrots it.

Pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarlVK Donating Member (632 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
25. Why would you listen to a word that scuzzbag has to say?
I'd rather clean my toilet than listen to a word of hers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC