+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Kyra Memorial Spin Room (/forum-540.html)
+---- Thread: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery (/thread-374513.html)
Pages: 1 2
Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - SumOfAllFears - 06-19-2009 10:05 PM
Senate Backs Apology for Slavery
Resolution Specifies That It Cannot Be Used in Reparations Cases
By Krissah Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Senate unanimously passed a resolution yesterday apologizing for slavery, making way for a joint congressional resolution and the latest attempt by the federal government to take responsibility for 2 1/2 centuries of slavery.
"You wonder why we didn't do it 100 years ago," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), lead sponsor of the resolution, said after the unanimous-consent vote. "It is important to have a collective response to a collective injustice."
The Senate's apology follows a similar apology passed last year by the House. One key difference is that the Senate version explicitly deals with the long-simmering issue of whether slavery descendants are entitled to reparations, saying that the resolution cannot be used in support of claims for restitution. The House is expected to revisit the issue next week to conform its resolution to the Senate version.
Harkin, who called the Senate's vote an "important and significant milestone," said he wanted the resolution passed yesterday to closely coincide with Juneteenth, a holiday first celebrated by former slaves to mark their emancipation.
This recent willingness to deal with the nation's difficult racial history has come about in part because of President Obama's election, said Rep. Stephen I. Cohen (D-Tenn.), who began pushing for an apology more than a decade ago when he was a state senator and pronounced himself "pleased" with the Senate vote.
Still, Cohen said, "there are going to be African Americans who think that [the apology] is not reparations, and it's not action, and there are going to be Caucasians who say, 'Get over it.' . . . I look at it as something that makes people think."
Even among proponents of a congressional apology, reaction to yesterday's vote was mixed. Carol M. Swain, a professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University who had pushed for the Bush administration to issue an apology, called the Democratic-controlled Senate's resolution "meaningless" since the party and federal government are led by a black president and black voters are closely aligned with the Democratic party.
"The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Republicans, however, were supportive of the resolution. "It doesn't fix everything, but it does go a long way toward acknowledgment and moving us on to the next steps to building a more perfect union, doing the things that Martin Luther King would talk about, like building a colorblind society," said Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.).
As with all congressional apologies -- but especially this one -- concerns about liability for restitution were part of the political calculations, in this case because of the long-running debate about whether the descendants of slaves should be compensated.
Charles Ogletree, the Harvard law professor who has championed restitution, was consulted on the Senate's resolution and supports it, but he said it is not a substitute for reparations. "That battle will be prolonged," he said.
Randall Robinson, author of "The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks," said he sees the Senate's apology as a "confession" that should lead to a next step of reparations. "Much is owed, and it is very quantifiable," he said. "It is owed as one would owe for any labor that one has not paid for, and until steps are taken in that direction we haven't accomplished anything."
Cohen said he and Harkin worked closely with the NAACP and other civil rights groups on language that would not endorse or preclude any future claims to reparations. "It will not harm reparations but won't give any standing to it," Cohen said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803877.html
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Tripster - 06-19-2009 11:17 PM
.
They are just following their Leader and their Anointed One into "Apologetic-Appeasement" of everything from swatting a fly to taking responsibility for starting World War II and beyond.
Funny how I need a bunch of Congressional Goons apologizing for me when my family never owned a single slave.
I wonder what Obamagog will have these Nutbags doing next, apologizing for the eruption of Mount Vesuvius ????
What a life huh .... being accused of something your family never took part in and having some bunch of Elected Fools and Idiots Apologizing for YOU for IT .....
The "Insanity" is NEVER going to stop and I am just going to have to deal with that.
.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - T-Monay820 - 06-20-2009 12:06 AM
(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - RobertN - 06-20-2009 01:45 AM
(06-20-2009 12:06 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:I think he means in recent times. Just look at many righties on this board.(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - T-Monay820 - 06-20-2009 02:44 AM
(06-20-2009 01:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:(06-20-2009 12:06 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:I think he means in recent times. Just look at many righties on this board.(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
Yeah, because over the last 9 years the Republicans were so racist appointing and confirming the first black Secretary of State; the first black NSA; the first black, female Secretary of State; the first hispanic US Attorney General; retaining the first Asian cabinet member; appointing the first Asian, female cabinet member ever; appointing the first black Secretary of Education. Sounds like people out to keep the minorities down.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - SumOfAllFears - 06-20-2009 05:29 AM
(06-20-2009 02:44 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:(06-20-2009 01:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:(06-20-2009 12:06 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:I think he means in recent times. Just look at many righties on this board.(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
Yeah, because over the last 9 years the Republicans were so racist appointing and confirming the first black Secretary of State; the first black NSA; the first black, female Secretary of State; the first hispanic US Attorney General; retaining the first Asian cabinet member; appointing the first Asian, female cabinet member ever; appointing the first black Secretary of Education. Sounds like people out to keep the minorities down.
The facts never figure into any Roberta comment.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - dwr0109 - 06-20-2009 08:53 AM
Meaningful question. Was the American Civil War, a necessary war?
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Fo Shizzle - 06-20-2009 09:28 AM
No need to apologize in my behalf...I had nothing to do with it. I also had nothing to do with ANY of governments dictates or control freak legislations.
Just what obligation do I have anyway to all this anyway? Im not a citizen...since to be one would mean that the government owes me protection in return for my allegiance. It clearly does owe me protection and the SCOTUS has ruled to that effect several times.
Oh...I forgot...If I choose to just live my life free and ignore the dictates of the government......men with guns will come and kill me.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Fo Shizzle - 06-20-2009 09:33 AM
(06-20-2009 08:53 AM)dwr0109 Wrote: Meaningful question. Was the American Civil War, a necessary war?
No. There is NOTHING particularly important about having a USA. Of course...Abe felt it was worth sending half a million men to their deaths to preserve it. As it always is...those in power have a monopoly on the use of force and get to decide.
If it ever happens again....Do not fire on any forts!
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - DrTorch - 06-20-2009 09:58 AM
(06-20-2009 01:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:(06-20-2009 12:06 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:I think he means in recent times. Just look at many righties on this board.(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
I'm not sure how that's relevant, since you make the majority of racist comments on this board.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - DrTorch - 06-20-2009 10:01 AM
(06-20-2009 08:53 AM)dwr0109 Wrote: Meaningful question. Was the American Civil War, a necessary war?
If you mean in order to free tens of thousands of American citizens who were slaves...then yes.
If you mean it from Lincoln's perspective, to preserve the Union...then I don't care. It may have been "necessary" to preserve the Union (that we'll never know for sure) but it certainly wasn't moral, legal or ethical to go to war to preserve the Union. Secession was a State's right. Lincoln trampled on that.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Ninerfan1 - 06-20-2009 10:17 AM
(06-20-2009 01:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:(06-20-2009 12:06 AM)T-Monay820 Wrote:I think he means in recent times. Just look at many righties on this board.(06-19-2009 10:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: "The Republican Party needed to do it," Swain said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
Interesting considering that the Emancipation Proclamation was issued by the first modern Republican president, which essentially established the Civil War as a war to rid the US of slavery.
Says the terrorist loving anti-semite.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - dwr0109 - 06-20-2009 11:19 AM
(06-20-2009 10:01 AM)DrTorch Wrote:(06-20-2009 08:53 AM)dwr0109 Wrote: Meaningful question. Was the American Civil War, a necessary war?
If you mean in order to free tens of thousands of American citizens who were slaves...then yes.
If you mean it from Lincoln's perspective, to preserve the Union...then I don't care. It may have been "necessary" to preserve the Union (that we'll never know for sure) but it certainly wasn't moral, legal or ethical to go to war to preserve the Union. Secession was a State's right. Lincoln trampled on that.
Yes, it is a difficult question to consider.
I took a few history courses in college, but I never took U.S. history during that time period. I have come to understand, (in broad terms) that slavery wasn't the driving factor behind the war, but more the final piece of the puzzle. It wasn't the main cause, but if you take it out, we probably don't have a war.
I'm a southerner, so I have a certain degree of regional bias. Many of my ancestors fought and died for the Southern cause. I also have a northern parent, so many of my ancestors on that side fought and died for the opposing cause. Playing devil's advocate, I have argued in the past, that if the south were allowed to succeed, the two regions would have most likely rejoined in some form in the relatively near future.
I realize that modern history textbooks do not promote this view, but I was hoping to get some diverse answers to the question.
If you are Lincoln, what do you do?
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - SumOfAllFears - 06-20-2009 11:22 AM
Fo,
Everyone on here knows full well of your simplistic absurd belief system. That all human organizing principals are on their face bad for everyone, that any work for any common good is slavery. Why you feel it necessary to restate it in every post just goes to show Ad Nauseam it's absurdity. Who are you trying to convince? What you purport is unworkable, unsustainable and its been naturally selected to the bone yard. If there is anyplace in the entire world that embraces your idiotic beliefs. Go there, you could please yourself and be a slave under that belief system as well.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - smn1256 - 06-20-2009 11:40 AM
Only an American politican would apologoze for something s/he didn't do to a group of people it didn't happen to. The libs are doing it because their hearts bleed for everything. The GOP is doing it in order to be politically correct. Where does it stop?
While slavery was wrong, has the black leadership sat back and thought about what the black community would look like today if it never happened? There's be far fewer blacks in this country and basketball and football would suck.
I have a little Armenian blood in me, should I expect an aoplogy from the Turks or should I get over it?
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Paul M - 06-20-2009 11:47 AM
(06-20-2009 11:40 AM)smn1256 Wrote: Only an American politican would apologoze for something s/he didn't do to a group of people it didn't happen to. The libs are doing it because their hearts bleed for everything. The GOP is doing it in order to be politically correct. Where does it stop?
While slavery was wrong, has the black leadership sat back and thought about what the black community would look like today if it never happened? There's be far fewer blacks in this country and basketball and football would suck.
I have a little Armenian blood in me, should I expect an aoplogy from the Turks or should I get over it?
I've got a little Armenian in me also. We should (already) get over it.... unless reparations are offered. Then you and me can get in line for our share of what is due us. Naturally.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - nomad2u2001 - 06-20-2009 12:48 PM
It has been pointed out by many people that slavery is a black eye on this country even now. But I was born in 1988, and if history books are correct we were on the equal path by then. I don't even actually know if I am a descendant of slaves or not.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Fo Shizzle - 06-20-2009 06:24 PM
(06-20-2009 11:22 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote: Fo,
Everyone on here knows full well of your simplistic absurd belief system. That all human organizing principals are on their face bad for everyone, that any work for any common good is slavery. Why you feel it necessary to restate it in every post just goes to show Ad Nauseam it's absurdity. Who are you trying to convince? What you purport is unworkable, unsustainable and its been naturally selected to the bone yard. If there is anyplace in the entire world that embraces your idiotic beliefs. Go there, you could please yourself and be a slave under that belief system as well.
Sorry...You misrepresent my positions...shame on you!
I have NEVER advocated that humans not "organize". On the contrary...I fully advocate that people voluntarily join in contractual agreements,unions...ect..ect..whatever. These organizational paths are the ONLY non-violent directions to a peaceful and just society.
Im sorry you feel that the only way you and your neighbors can live peacefully is to be FORCED by men with guns to do so. That is a sick and perverted rationale...but..I am not shocked...It is the common thought of the indoctirnated flag waving American who is too cowardly to just be free....and needs the STATE to look over them....Yes...Comfortable slavery is the norm in the good ole USA.
As for my belief system being absurd and simplistic.....You have yet to offer a single thread of evidence to that effect. Instead...you do as all indoctrinated slaves of the state do when their belief system is challenged.....offer ad hominem attacks as debate.
BTW...I am going to a place that is on board with my belief system. I have joined the Free State Project....and am moving my family to NH in 2011 to get active for freedom....Lots of like minded pro liberty folks are heading to the Granite state to make a stand. You are welcome to join us.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Fo Shizzle - 06-20-2009 06:31 PM
(06-20-2009 10:01 AM)DrTorch Wrote:(06-20-2009 08:53 AM)dwr0109 Wrote: Meaningful question. Was the American Civil War, a necessary war?
If you mean in order to free tens of thousands of American citizens who were slaves...then yes.
If you mean it from Lincoln's perspective, to preserve the Union...then I don't care. It may have been "necessary" to preserve the Union (that we'll never know for sure) but it certainly wasn't moral, legal or ethical to go to war to preserve the Union. Secession was a State's right. Lincoln trampled on that.
+1...Agricultural technology would have freed the slaves....Lincoln was a murderer.
RE: Senate Backs Apology for Slavery - Tripster - 06-20-2009 07:09 PM
(06-20-2009 11:40 AM)smn1256 Wrote: Only an American politican would apologoze for something s/he didn't do to a group of people it didn't happen to. The libs are doing it because their hearts bleed for everything. The GOP is doing it in order to be politically correct. Where does it stop?
While slavery was wrong, has the black leadership sat back and thought about what the black community would look like today if it never happened? There's be far fewer blacks in this country and basketball and football would suck.
I have a little Armenian blood in me, should I expect an aoplogy from the Turks or should I get over it?
NO, you shouldn't get over it .... what the Turks did to the Armenians was totally different and was akin to what happened in the Balkans with Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing.
I, for ONE, am proud of the Armenians and for them hanging on to who they are and where they came from.
Even though Turkey is a "sort of a Pseudo Ally to us" in that region, they had no right to do what they did to the Armenians or what they are constantly doing to the Kurds.
Robert ******* and moans about a Palestinian State, yet says nothing about the Kurds of Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Afghanistan being beaten down like roaches by these Sunni and Shia Regimes.
The Kurds had an Entire Nation stolen from them homze ....
And before you start about how they have a recognized Kurdistan in Iraq there Robert - - that is only because we Forced Them to Do It under our Security Reforms in Iraq ... once we leave Iraq, the Kurds will be slaughtered or ran into Turkey where they will still be slaughtered. Fair is Fair huh kiddo ????
The KURDS NEED KURDISTAN BACK Robert and it be a legally recognized Nation .... you follow son of Palestine ????
.