So Michele Bachmann signed a pro-marriage pledge that includes this language:
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.
What part of the term general election eludes her?
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families? What the what? Holy understatement, Batman!
Which families would those be?
The families in Africa torn apart when human beings were stolen away to America to be sold into slavery?
The families in America whose father and mother were legally forbidden to become husband and wife, to enter into a marriage contract, because they were the property of another human being?
I really want to like her. The pledge makes some good points. But there is no way for me to pretend this decision was well-advised.
I am not looking forward to the re-run debate over this one. Whining about media bias, Wiki revising, "you are missing the point," etc.
Read the thing before you sign it. Demand they revise idiotic language that is certain to bite you in [rear] before you sign it.
Is there really anything more to say?
Well there is this, how obtuse must an evangelical Christian organization be to draw on American chattel slavery in a positive light? Especially in defense of marriage.
The Apostle Paul clearly stated that the forbidding of marriage is a doctrine of demons. American chattel slavery forbade marriage. What possesses a person to draw on slavery in this context?
Bachmann has put her defenders in a difficult position. This is not a gaffe. This is a pledge she signed. The whole purpose behind her signing it was to affirm its contents. In defending her you have to defend her affirmation of the contents. That is the point of her signing a pledge.
Good luck with that.
- Comment (137)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
"Let's parse this ill-crafted paragraph for the ears of African-American voters:"
Kenneth, I think this sentence is extremely ill-crafted. If I were black my head would be exploding right about now. Most blacks don't buy into the poverty-pimp gold mine of learned helplessness and multi-generation handouts. Only the race baiting Al Sharpton types would twist the pledge's meaning.
Aug '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
katievs
Other Conor
Katie- would you prefer for your family to live as slaves or to live in the 'welfare state'?
Let me say this too:
I would rather be married and have my husband taken away from me by force than impregnated and abandoned by a man who took no responsibility for me or my children. · Jul 9 at 10:09am
The later was my mother's lot in life, and she suffered greatly. Growing up poor and fatherless was no picnic.
But we had the good fortune to grow up in America- we were free and able to improve our lot in life. Being somewhat religious, I thank God for that.
Preserving this possibility for all Americans is both personal and important to me.
Jun '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
"The later was my mother's lot in life, and she suffered greatly. Growing up poor and fatherless was no picnic.
But we had the good fortune to grow up in America- we were free and able to improve our lot in life. Being somewhat religious, I thank God for that.
Preserving this possibility for all Americans is both personal and important to me."
Bachmann is on your side, Squishy. Picking apart her pledge won't help preserve opportunity for all Americans ---- It will help elect Obama again and condemn another generation of blacks to the softer slavery of welfare state dependency.
Dec '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Or maybe we should believe that Bachman meant exactly what she said. There is no need to "demagogue" her statement. Her words are exactly what they are.
Bachman is a very intelligent woman. Had she meant to discourse on the writings of some learned scholar, she could have done that. She did not take that road. Instead, she chose to rely on images of slavery to describe the present day condition of African American families. And Bachman suggested that African Americans were better off under conditions of slavery. That idea is morally repulsive. It will be hard to take Michelle Bachman seriously as a candidate knowing how she looks at African Americans, and how she chooses to make her case about marriage to her supporters. Bachman appears to be appealing to racist stereotypes. Her apologists seem to share those stereotypes--and their "defense" of Bachman's statement (pointing at scholarship about welfare) does not redeem them. Finding so-called evidence to support racist stereotypes does not make them less racist.
Feb '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
katievs
I guess I'd want to dispute that.
But in any case, the alternatives are so different in kind as to be impossible to compare.
One thing I know. We can control our outward circumstances only to a limited degree. Our moral integrity is entirely in our hands.
Looking at this I see that I wasn't clear. I think the distinction is between the morality of the individual vs the morality of the society. As an individual it is better to live with your integrity before God and do the right thing, even in terrible situations even if it leads to terrible outcomes, including death. I believe this is the point you are making in post #69. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked.
But as a society it is better to give people the ability to direct their own lives, for better or for worse, than not to, which is the point I was attempting to make, but failed to. The best situation is where society allows people to direct their own lives and having this freedom individuals do so with integrity and morality.
Mar '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
"If I were black my head would be exploding right about now. Most blacks don't buy into the poverty-pimp gold mine of learned helplessness and multi-generation handouts. Only the race baiting Al Sharpton types would twist the pledge's meaning. "
Sticker: The problem here is that more than 90% of African Americans vote for Democrats.
Now, there are a whole host of interesting reasons for that, all of them worthy of exploration.
But one of them is not that African Americans recognize as self-evident the proposition that social programs have left them worse off than slavery.
Feb '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Harry Huntington It is the same when Republicans argue that we are heading toward disaster because the NLRB does not want Boeing to move to South Carolina.
Hello, what thinking politician says "what is best for our economy is for companies to fire good workers and replace them with lower paid workers in other places."
Harry- could you clarify this last bit? I'm not sure the point you are making. Are you saying that Republicans that are opposed to the NLRB's decision in this case are wrong?
Jun '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Crow's Nest:
That is: Moynihan does offer the premise that the black family is more fragmented in 1960 as part of a wider argument. He does not make the argument that they are worse off on the scale of human suffering.
Crow's Nest, this is a compliment - is there anything you have not read and contemplated? Your posts betray a breadth of knowledge that is quite admirable.
I would, however, ask this question: in the Republic, doesn't a fragmented family imply a greater potential for suffering and hardship? A coherent family unit is a strong line of defense in the free society. It helps to mitigate the inquietude which accompanies freedom. You know that there are people who have your back.
The destruction of la familia paves the way for the Nanny State, another form of slavery.
Jun '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
So-in-so signed a pledge, by association declaring a position on such-in-such topics. Politicians signing pledges - or not - are all succumbing to yet another variety of the political litmus test. Rare is the occasion when something positive comes out of such a signing. More often than not, they are trying to appease a limited constituency that puts value in the litmus test.
I'd rather have a candidate that can articulate principle, define a position, and stand on that position. Craft the message, deliver the message, be able to defend the position well. There is little to be gained by holding up a banner that shows all the pledges you've signed.
If she wanted to highlight the plight of the African-American family, then do so through considered communication and conversation. As has been noted in several comments above, there are plenty of ways to do that. Instead, we are forced to speculate on what her views are based on her signature to somebody else's work (or wording).
The discussion is valid, a good one to have. But it does not sufficiently enlighten us, I think, to her actual position.
Aug '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Squishy Blue RINO
I am being chippy...
Hmm... are you also being Canadian? · Jul 9 at 9:18am
Well- I have been carrying a torch for Caroline Dhavernas for eight long years.
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Alas, general election is not in the vocabulary. Candidates like Bachmann make the mistake of assuming a majority of voters agree with them because most everybody they know in their bubble agrees with them. So turning up volume = victory. This is just O'Donnell of Delaware 2.0. Or Angle of NV. Luckily though, she won't get the nomination so the whole thing is only a mildly interesting science experiment. Ironically, her campaign actually will most likely wind up helping Romney and the GOP establishment.
Nov '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Harry Huntington
What eludes Bachman is what eludes many Republican politicians: an understanding of how most Americans live, and what most Americans experience.
Take her words for what they are: Bachman is saying slavery wasn't so bad ... It is as if Bachman said "Germany in the period from 1943 to 1944 developed a highly efficient system of industrial production."
I just don't get it. She didn't say that.
This is much more like saying, "as bad as the genocide in Nazi Germany was, the genocide in Cambodia killed a larger percentage of the population." One evil does not justify the other. Both are bad. That's what the pledge said.
Also, by the way, she didn't write the pledge, she just signed it. Has anyone read it? The statement about the black family is footnoted, and it is followed by an immediate reference to Moynihan's report. For someone who claims to be interested in facts, you seem fairly unfamiliar with the facts of this particular situation.
Nov '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Let me add that this pledge is clearly designed to be a response to those who charge that social conservatives are ignoring the real marriage issue, the breakdown of the traditional family, in favor of focusing on gay marriage, a peripheral issue. It says that its signers "acknowledge and regret the widespread hypocrisy of many who defend marriage yet turn a blind eye toward the epidemic of infidelity and the anemic condition of marriages in their own communities."
May '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Other Conor
But as a society it is better to give people the ability to direct their own lives, for better or for worse, than not to, which is the point I was attempting to make, but failed to. The best situation is where society allows people to direct their own lives and having this freedom individuals do so with integrity and morality. · Jul 9 at 10:54am
No argument there.
Mar '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Hi Michael,
Appreciate the complement. Most people just call me nerdy.
To your question: Absolutely agree with you that the erosion of the family and the expansion of the welfare state are symbiotic--they are the twin poles that drive a vicious cycle (ignore the mixed metaphor there, guilty as charged).
I would offer a partial challenge to your premise, though. There is a significant difference between hard despotism and soft despotism, and there is a significant difference between physical enslavement and a state of dependency on the state.
In short: I think that the argument that the welfare state often undermines the family is sound. I think the argument that slavery not as bad a Social Security has lost perspective.
Dec '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Other Conor
Harry- could you clarify this last bit? I'm not sure the point you are making. Are you saying that Republicans that are opposed to the NLRB's decision in this case are wrong? · Jul 9 at 11:03am
It is really off topic here, but I am saying that Republicans who oppose the NLRB decision are telling American workers that Republicans favor a policy where companies may break freely bargained labor agreements by moving jobs elsewhere. Indeed, what Republicans who oppose the NLRB decision are saying to the American worker is: get used to accepting "third world" wages, because if you do not, companies are free to move your jobs elsewhere.
The Republican message is becoming increasingly clear. Republicans do not favor policies that help working Americans. Republicans favor policies that benefit a narrow group of investing Americans.
Republicans have done zero to protect high wage manufacturing jobs in the United States.
Dec '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Lucy Pevensie
Also, by the way, she didn't write the pledge, she just signed it. Has anyone read it? The statement about the black family is footnoted, and it is followed by an immediate reference to Moynihan's report.
Lucy
That is exactly my point. Someone makes a racist statement, then footnotes the words and explains the statement is really not that bad and she didn't author the words herself anyway. This has been operating practice among some Republicans since Richard Nixon co-opted the strategy from George Wallace back in 1968. Bachman is pulling out the same playbook to appeal to a certain electoral crowd for the primaries. The pledge is a twofer for Bachman. She can build ties to the statist social conservatives and she can do a nod and a wink to the crowd that has never come to terms with the fact that "equality for all" actually means all, not just some favored group. Her statist flank is covered because she has pledged that "big government" power will be used to foist their social and religious beliefs on everyone. And her "lost cause" flank is covered as well.
Jun '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Harry Huntington
The Republican message is becoming increasingly clear. Republicans do not favor policies that help working Americans. Republicans favor policies that benefit a narrow group of investing Americans.
Republicans have done zero to protect high wage manufacturing jobs in the United States. · Jul 9 at 11:39am
Wow. Because the only working Americans belong to labor unions? A company adds jobs in a right-to-work state, instead of Washington state, and you consider that "third world"?
I can't speak for Republicans, but conservatives favor policies that help ALL working Americans. Not just a narrow group including the high-wage manufacturing labor force.
Aug '10
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
HBO got me hooked on Game of Thrones. For those of you out there who have seen it, or read the books, like winter, the general election is coming.
Jan '11
Re: Bachmann Signs Marriage Pledge Asserting the Two Parent Household Benefits of American Chattel Slavery: Orwellian Wikipedia Revisions Will Begin Shortly
Harry Huntington
Lucy Pevensie
Also, by the way, she didn't write the pledge, she just signed it. Has anyone read it? The statement about the black family is footnoted, and it is followed by an immediate reference to Moynihan's report.
Lucy
That is exactly my point. Someone makes a racist statement, then footnotes the words and explains the statement is really not that bad and she didn't author the words herself anyway. This has been operating practice among some Republicans since Richard Nixon co-opted the strategy from George Wallace back in 1968.
Would you please take a moment to let us know what was racist about that statement? And, please let us know if you believe the statement to be true.
How difficult it must be to be politically correct in the face of incontrovertible facts. My hat's off to you; I certainly couldn't do it.