BUSH IGNORANT on AMERICAN HISTORY!!! says dred scot case legalizes slavery!! - TennisForum.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 02:41 AM Thread Starter
Enjoying married life.
 
Wigglytuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: lolcat
Posts: 19,642
                     
BUSH IGNORANT on AMERICAN HISTORY!!! says dred scot case legalizes slavery!!

bush said
DRED SCOTT CASE LEGALIZED SLAVERY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i have never heard something so stupid and ignorant in all my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EDIT: because not everyone wants to read the whole thing here is the break down from a MUCH later post:

bush was WRONG on NO LESS than EIGHT POINTS
"Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights." - GW Bush
1-the court did not legalize slavery, it gave that power to the territories
2-the court took this power to dictate what was a free or a slave territory from the congress
3-it was not because of personal property rights that the court gave this power to the territories or took it away from the congress ("...where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights.")
4-giving someone, or someplace, the power to make a decision, DOES NOT mean that you are making it for them.
5-slavery was not legalized (or allowed) in 1857
6-slavery was not legalized (or allowed) because of "the judges".
7-it was not "years ago", it was in 1857
8-Dred scott, the person, was not allowed CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS, because he was black.


but to be fair he was RIGHT on no less than 3 points.
"Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights." - GW Bush
1-the dred scott case did deal with black people during slavery
2-it was an "activist" decision.
3-the phrase "personal property rights" was spoken during that time.

"racism is dead, it died when MLK walked on a bridge and freed the slaves. Now we have a socialist Kenyan president who is not an American and if anyone mentions race they are a reverse racist (while racism is dead, reverse racism is alive and well.) #whattheyteachyouatfox"

Last edited by Jigglypuff; Oct 10th, 2004 at 01:39 PM. Reason: adding stuff
Wigglytuff is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 12:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,673
                     
YEah, I was a litle surprised to hear Bush even bring that up. I wasn't surprised he couldn't explain it.

Proud to be an American
Not blind. Not uninformed. We are party to atrocities. But the response of the world after 9/11 is worth noting. Even our most dire enemies offered aid. We should all be so lucky.
Volcana is offline  
post #3 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 05:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Bacardi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Raccoon City's Hive
Posts: 14,737
                     
What's new? George W Bush is IGNORANT on EVERYTHING!

Unless he's coached he has no idea what he's talking about, and he still even screws up what he's been coached on.

I'm BACK & SINGLE. So lock up all the hotties!
Bacardi is offline  
post #4 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 06:17 PM
Senior Member
 
lizchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bergen County
Posts: 20,943
                     
Red face

If he knew anything about history, then he would know that the Dredd Scott decision stated that if you were an escaped slave who escaped to a free state, you were still considered a slave.

Go back to school W.

BTW, why did the Dredd Scott case come up in the debate?
lizchris is offline  
post #5 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 07:58 PM Thread Starter
Enjoying married life.
 
Wigglytuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: lolcat
Posts: 19,642
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by lizchris
If he knew anything about history, then he would know that the Dredd Scott decision stated that if you were an escaped slave who escaped to a free state, you were still considered a slave.

Go back to school W.

BTW, why did the Dredd Scott case come up in the debate?
normally, i say really mean things about bush, but this is just

Oct 8, 2004: "Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights." - GW Bush

which is just out there on many many many many levels.

as for the "context" i have to admit that i was so floored by that statement, that i couldnt even recall the "context".

"racism is dead, it died when MLK walked on a bridge and freed the slaves. Now we have a socialist Kenyan president who is not an American and if anyone mentions race they are a reverse racist (while racism is dead, reverse racism is alive and well.) #whattheyteachyouatfox"
Wigglytuff is offline  
post #6 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 10:03 PM
Guest
 
*JR*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On the Peace Train
Posts: 34,247
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by lizchris
BTW, why did the Dredd Scott case come up in the debate?
Bush was (besides seeking some black votes) trying to illustrate a case of a Judge (Chief Justice Taney, who I'm sure he couldn't name) "making law". The only problem is that the Supreme Court was indeed acting then (1857) as the "strict constructionists" (of the Constitution) that Bush cherishes.
*JR* is offline  
post #7 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 10:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Barrie_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Fenway Park
Posts: 155,657
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacardi
What's new? George W Bush is IGNORANT on EVERYTHING!

Unless he's coached he has no idea what he's talking about, and he still even screws up what he's been coached on.
BIG NEWS: Every President and Every Candidate gets coached on positions, speeches, debates, etc!
Barrie_Dude is online now  
post #8 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 9th, 2004, 11:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 10,389
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigglypuff
normally, i say really mean things about bush, but this is just

Oct 8, 2004: "Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights." - GW Bush

which is just out there on many many many many levels.

as for the "context" i have to admit that i was so floored by that statement, that i couldnt even recall the "context".
thats ironic considering it was also those "activist judges" that allowed me to go to school with everyone else.

Horrible analogy Georgie

And it was an honest mistake, but George you gotta do better man
CJ07 is offline  
post #9 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 12:04 AM Thread Starter
Enjoying married life.
 
Wigglytuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: lolcat
Posts: 19,642
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by -SMM-
thats ironic considering it was also those "activist judges" that allowed me to go to school with everyone else.

Horrible analogy Georgie

And it was an honest mistake, but George you gotta do better man
see i got into a debate with a friend of mine about whether it was a mistake or not.

Dred Scott is one of more important cases in american history we learn about it in middle school, junior, high school and often again in college. its not a case that only some would know about, like say the Loving case during the civil rights movement.

its true that no one can be asked to know everything. but i dont think its too much to ask the president to know that slavery was not "allowed" in 1857 "because of personal property rights".

"racism is dead, it died when MLK walked on a bridge and freed the slaves. Now we have a socialist Kenyan president who is not an American and if anyone mentions race they are a reverse racist (while racism is dead, reverse racism is alive and well.) #whattheyteachyouatfox"
Wigglytuff is offline  
post #10 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 12:27 AM
Senior Member
 
~ The Leopard ~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Kissing my little Lolita
Posts: 13,105
                     
The court held that:

1. Dred Scott had no standing to sue in the American courts because blacks were not and could not be US citizens (even if they were not slaves) and essentially had no legal rights.

2. A slave was indeed property and could not get freedom by living temporarily above the line set by the Missouri Compromise.

3. In any event, Congress lacked legislative power to deprive citizens of their "property" - in this case slaves. The anti-slavery provisions of the Missouri Compromise were thus struck down, and slavery in territories above the Missouri Compromise line was legalised.

The findings were radical enough to shock many people, and could indeed have been considered to be "activist". Many legal and constitutional writers today mourn the stance that was taken by the court.

All in all, Bush's account is not that far from the truth, though he was doubtless coached on a simplistic overview of the case, rather than understanding the above detail.

I don't like the man, but I'm not going to grasp at straws.

Vin, kvinder og sang
~ The Leopard ~ is offline  
post #11 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 01:17 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
Blacks could be citizens if they immigrated to the country post-Revolution and did so to a northern state.

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #12 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 01:21 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
oh and I have heard far more ignorant things. Whenever someone says, "where's it at" or "me and her are going to the movies," I consider that FAR more ignorant. In fact, I have heard my own siblings say more ignorant things in the past three hours.

My 17 year old sister: "Who the hell is Nelson Mandusa (sic.)?"

Mboyle: "He is only the guy who ended Apartied (sp?)!"

Sister: "That would be good if I knew what Apartied was."

Then we have my 9 year old brother in reference to a picture: "Who is him?"

I think both examples display far more ignorance than Bush's not knowing the details of the Dread Scott case, which many schools do not even teach.

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #13 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 01:40 AM
Team WTAworld
Senior Member
 
Martian Willow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Below the stars.
Posts: 6,695
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
oh and I have heard far more ignorant things. Whenever someone says, "where's it at" or "me and her are going to the movies," I consider that FAR more ignorant.
That's pretty stupid.
Martian Willow is offline  
post #14 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 02:14 AM
Senior Member
 
decemberlove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: My sin, my soul.
Posts: 10,491
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
oh and I have heard far more ignorant things. Whenever someone says, "where's it at" or "me and her are going to the movies," I consider that FAR more ignorant. In fact, I have heard my own siblings say more ignorant things in the past three hours.

My 17 year old sister: "Who the hell is Nelson Mandusa (sic.)?"

Mboyle: "He is only the guy who ended Apartied (sp?)!"

Sister: "That would be good if I knew what Apartied was."

Then we have my 9 year old brother in reference to a picture: "Who is him?"

I think both examples display far more ignorance than Bush's not knowing the details of the Dread Scott case, which many schools do not even teach.
you consider people that don't use formal english in a casual setting ignorant, yet you can't spell apartheid?

i'm glad you've toured the country's schools so that you could come to the conclusion that most schools don't teach the dred scott case. i know i was taught the case in high school, and i just went to a regular public high school in the burbs.

even if it's not taught in most schools, it isn't a good excuse as to why one shouldn't know the case... esp if that person happens to be the president of a country with known racial problems.

maybe if some people didn't rely so much upon schools to teach them about life, they wouldn't have such large sticks up their pompous, ignorant asses. no names needed.


....This is fucked up, fucked up....

This is your blind spot, blind spot.
It should be obvious, but it's not.

You cannot kickstart a dead horse
You just crush yourself and walk away
I don't care what the future holds
Cause I'm right here in your arms today
With your fingers you can touch me

I'll be your black swan, black swan
I'm for spare parts, broken up.




decemberlove is offline  
post #15 of 32 (permalink) Old Oct 10th, 2004, 02:52 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 6,247
                     
I can vouch that I too learned the Dred Scott case in high school.

Hell, my teacher even emphasized the importance of it, much like the later Brown v. Board of Education.

Even though I was the man in History class back in those days (still no idea why I got fucked out of AP) I have forgotten a lot of details here and there but the Dred Scott case will always stick with me.

Getting back to the topic on hand, does anything Bush says or does surprise anyone? The guy has proven time and time again that he's an idiot. How he even has a chance of winning the election shows how truly awful John Kerry is and is being portrayed.
Steam is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome