[Vision2020] Teabaggers
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Fri Mar 12 09:19:05 PST 2010
Let them go free? You said they were freed once they PAID for their
freedom. Yes I think it is bad to buy a slave and keep him or her as a
slave until they can buy their own freedom because slavery is wrong.
The more you keep pushing the Wilson "slavery wasn't so bad," the more
you look like an idiot and the more you make the rest of Christians
look like idiots. Sorry but I'll point out this stupidity every time.
Your friend, Joe
On Mar 12, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com
> wrote:
> Joey,
>
> Who is defending slavery? You crazy man?!
>
> Do you think it was a bad idea for people in the past to buy slaves
> and let them go free? Is that a pro-slavery position from your stand
> point? I would think it would be the best way of ending slavery
> short of a huge bloody civil war.
>
> DNA tests can prove someone is or is not the father of six children.
> Thought you PhDs knew that?
>
> Your Friend,
>
> Donovan Arnold
>
> --- On Fri, 3/12/10, Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
> To: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Wayne Price" <bear at moscow.com>, "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com
> >, "garrettmc at verizon.net" <garrettmc at verizon.net>
> Date: Friday, March 12, 2010, 3:45 PM
>
> There is no DNA test to prove someone did not sleep with someone else.
>
> Again, if I only had 1 slave, would that make me a good person? That
> is just a stupid claim. Slavery is wrong, even in limited doses.
>
> It is fine with me if you kiss Doug Wilson's butt in private but
> when you do it in public you should expect to be criticized --
> whoever you are. Defenses of slavery are never a good idea.
>
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Wayne,
>>
>> There is certainly nothing wrong with their information just with
>> your ability to read and understand it and what I said.
>>
>> Here is what I said,
>>
>> "George Washington did not own many slaves, his wife owned most
>> them, she obtained from her previous husband, Daniel Parke Custis a
>> wealthy plantation farmer, upon his death."
>>
>> I did not say he owned no slaves.
>>
>> Here is what you said,
>>
>> "at the age of 22, he had a work force of about 36 slaves."
>>
>> She owned 285 slaves, Washington owned 36. Last I checked, 285 was
>> a much larger number. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Washington
>> Custis, Martha's first husband owned over 285 slaves, which she
>> inherited for herself and her minor son (the other children died
>> young). How many of those 316 slaves do you think were George's,
>> and how many do you think were her slaves?
>>
>> The slaves Washington "acquired" was with her wealth and sale of
>> the tobacco grown on farm land bought by her.
>>
>> You are also dead wrong about Jefferson sleeping with his slaves.
>> DNA testing has proved this to be the case.
>>
>> Your Friend,
>>
>> Donovan Arnold
>>
>> --- On Thu, 3/11/10, Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
>> To: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: garrettmc at verizon.net, "keely emerinemix" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>, vision2020 at moscow.com
>> Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 9:38 PM
>>
>> Clearly Dr Donovan, you are correct and the Mount Vernon Society
>> ( The folks that OWN Mt. Vernon) are wrong. How could I have been
>> so silly to trust what they said and not you?
>>
>> http://www.mountvernon.org/learn/meet_george/index.cfm/ss/101/
>>
>>
>> "George Washington was born into a world in which slavery was
>> accepted. He became a slave owner when his father died in 1743. At
>> the age of eleven, he inherited ten slaves and 500 acres of land.
>> When he began farming Mount Vernon eleven years later, at the age
>> of 22, he had a work force of about 36 slaves. With his marriage to
>> Martha Custis in 1759, 20 of her slaves came to Mount Vernon. After
>> their marriage, Washington purchased even more slaves. The slave
>> population also increased because the slaves were marrying and
>> raising their own families. By 1799, when George Washington died,
>> there were 316 slaves living on the estate.", Washington purchased
>> even more slaves. The slave population also increased because the
>> slaves were marrying and raising their own families. By 1799, when
>> George Washington died, there were 316 slaves living on the estate."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:
>>
>>> Rev. Keely, nobody is defending slavery. Let me say it twice so
>>> even you understand, NOBODY is defending slavery. I was just
>>> explaining inaccuracies in his (Mr. Price's) posts about Thomas
>>> Jefferson sleeping with his slaves and George Washington being a
>>> large slave owner. They are factually incorrect statements.
>>>
>>>
>>> I forgot, accuracy of the facts was not a concern for you, just
>>> unfounded misguided displays of fake catty emotional outrage,
>>> Keely when slandering people on both the local and national level,
>>> living and dead.
>>>
>>> Your Friend,
>>>
>>> Donovan Arnold
>>>
>>> --- On Thu, 3/11/10, keely emerinemix <kjajmix1 at msn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: keely emerinemix <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
>>> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
>>> To: donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com, garrettmc at verizon.net, "Chris
>>> Price" <bear at moscow.com>
>>> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 3:37 PM
>>>
>>> This eloquent defense of slave-owning American Presidents is
>>> something less than heartening. It's almost as if we've heard
>>> similar arguments before from local folks interested in convincing
>>> us that, you know, on the whole, slavery wasn't, like, THAT bad,
>>> really.
>>>
>>> That George and Thomas are numbered among anti-slavery
>>> abolitionists, as appears to be the contention here, is as
>>> ludicrous as it is offensive. They may not have been the
>>> absolutely worst slaveholders ever, but I don't think either man's
>>> biographies are testimonies to their egalitarian, Christian,
>>> progressive morals.
>>>
>>> Keely
>>> www.keely-prevailingwinds.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:48:58 -0800
>>> From: donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com
>>> To: garrettmc at verizon.net; bear at moscow.com
>>> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
>>>
>>> Wayne,
>>>
>>> The tea was tipped overboard not because most people drank it, but
>>> because it denied revenue to the British. The average colonists
>>> didn't want to be independent from the British, but they were not
>>> happy under them either.
>>>
>>> The British government prevented western expansion which seriously
>>> hindered the expansion of the economy and the well being of many
>>> western colonists and farmers.
>>>
>>> Thomas Jefferson bought slaves and freed them when they paid their
>>> price of purchase off. Many anti-slavery people did this.
>>>
>>> Thomas Jefferson did not sleep with his slaves, DNA tests from his
>>> know relatives prove this. His brother did sleep with Sally
>>> Hemmings, who was the half sister of his wife who passed away and
>>> looked a great deal like her. He cared for her greatly and she
>>> lived in his house because she was his wife's sister and didn't
>>> want her living as a common slave.
>>> George Washington had willed his slaves to be freed upon the death
>>> of his wife. Although she freed them earlier because she felt
>>> uncomfortable with all the slaves asking if she was dead yet (a
>>> little humor, but true). Little do people know, but George
>>> Washington did not own many slaves, his wife owned most them, she
>>> obtained from her previous husband, Daniel Parke Custis a wealthy
>>> plantation farmer, upon his death.
>>>
>>> Your Friend,
>>>
>>> Donovan Arnold
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Thu, 3/11/10, Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Wayne Price <bear at moscow.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Teabaggers
>>> To: "Garrett Clevenger" <garrettmc at verizon.net>
>>> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 12:52 AM
>>>
>>> Garrett,
>>>
>>> While the Tea Bag movement has hijacked the name, I'm not so sure
>>> they even realize what the 1770's movements were all about!
>>> The average colonist was happy being British!
>>>
>>> At that time in the colonies, TEA was not the drink of the average
>>> (read that as NOT wealthy) colonist. Rather they drank cider,
>>> because they could make
>>> it locally, and could afford it. Ever wonder why real tea chests
>>> of the period have a locks on them? Because it was expensive and
>>> the rich didn't want the servants to
>>> steal it! The original so called "patriots" were nothing more
>>> than a bunch of folks with money trying to avoid taxes. Sound
>>> familiar?
>>>
>>>
>>> Same deal with the folks that shot at government troops on their
>>> way to and from Lexington and Concord to bring the GOVERNMENT
>>> owned arms and powder back
>>> to Boston, so the colonists/traitors/early american terrorists
>>> couldn't use it. Can you imagine today if that happened? Makes me
>>> wonder what would happen if the
>>> average citizens marched on the local National Guard armories so
>>> that they could prevent the government from using the arms! Think
>>> they would be considered
>>> "patriots"?
>>>
>>>
>>> I have to laugh when I see the fractured history that George
>>> Nethercutt is trying to sell on TV..... Did the boy never read a
>>> history book! I laughed when I saw one about
>>> George Washington being anti-slavery! One of the richest slave
>>> OWNERS in Virginia at the time! And then there is that scion of
>>> colonial america Thomas Jefferson,
>>> he not only owned slaves, but would bed them too! Or was that
>>> just for the benefit of the slaves?
>>>
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ---
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 10, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Garrett Clevenger wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks, Joe, you summed up well what I've been thinking.
>>>
>>> It is rather presumptious of the teabaggers to think their "tea
>>> party movement" is anything close to the real deal back when the
>>> colonies were fighting for independence.
>>>
>>> The contemporary tea partiers are more like carpetbaggers in that
>>> regard, so it seems "teabagger" is a rather appropriate term.
>>>
>>> I have no idea what the sexual definition of teabagger is and
>>> don't really care to so when I say "teabagger" I'm describing "tea
>>> party" people who are exploiting the patriotism of the Boston Tea
>>> Party.
>>>
>>> But are we really surprised that people who carry guns in the open
>>> to rallies and shout down those who disagree with them would be
>>> anything less than arrogant?
>>>
>>> Teabaggers, indeed.
>>>
>>> Garrett Clevenger
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>>
>>> Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
>>> Sign up now.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100312/e11bedba/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list