- Aug 29, 2020
- 10,678
- 8,926
- 2,138
Exactly.No one part of American history is the entire thing.... that's kinda inherent in being a part....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Exactly.No one part of American history is the entire thing.... that's kinda inherent in being a part....
What's wrong is that your culture is so fucking deplorable and backwards that you're still using a song written by slaver as your anthem and thus are compelled, through shame, to also play one that isn't offense to non mutant Americans."Black National" anthem.
What's wrong with this picture?
And yet he is correct.Where is Nygeria? Is that in China?
Armstrong Williams? His record speaks for itself.
STFU commie goat fucker.What's wrong is that your culture is so fucking deplorable and backwards that you're still using a song written by slaver as your anthem and thus are compelled, through shame, to also play one that isn't offense to non mutant Americans.
I don't have to bitch. You do have to put up with the Black National Anthem playing at your sporting events because you're a culture of cucks.STFU commie goat fucker.
I only stand for our national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner. There is only one national anthem.Democrat fumes at Super Bowl crowd for not standing during black national anthem sung by Andra Day
Tennesse Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen expressed outrage at the Super Bowl LVIII crowd for not standing up during the black national anthem.nypost.com
Armstrong Williams: Playing the Black national anthem at Super Bowl 58 ‘attempts to divide the nation’ by race | STAFF COMMENTARY
Armstrong Williams explains why he believes playing the ‘Black National Anthem’ at the Super Bowl is divisive.www.baltimoresun.com
Armstrong Williams: Playing the Black national anthem at Super Bowl 58 ‘attempts to divide the nation’ by race
there is only one anthem in america the american anthem. racist dem want all black nfl. if want to her go to nygeria. this is americna were americna national anthem is sung. you dot like it move.
I agree, so why is it conservative whites don't want it taught?American black history is a part of American history not the entire thing.
Actually he isn't, I find it comical when I hear fools like Armstrong Williams accusing black folks of dividing the country.And yet he is correct.
I find it comical when a libtard doesn't believe the truth. Most racists I know are black.Actually he isn't, I find it comical when I hear fools like Armstrong Williams accusing black folks of dividing the country.
No, I turn the channel. The cucks are you and idiots like you.I don't have to bitch. You do have to put up with the Black National Anthem playing at your sporting events because you're a culture of cucks.
Looking away doesn't stop it from happening.No, I turn the channel. The cucks are you and idiots like you.
I find it comical when a libtard doesn't believe the truth. Most racists I know are black.
It's even more comical when someone asserts black "folks" are homogeneous.Actually he isn't, I find it comical when I hear fools like Armstrong Williams accusing black folks of dividing the country.
Perhaps conservatives want history taught accurately.I agree, so why is it conservative whites don't want it taught?
Now the victims of racism in America are the racist. How many black folks do you know that are racist?I find it comical when a libtard doesn't believe the truth. Most racists I know are black.
Who asserted that?It's even more comical when someone asserts black "folks" are homogeneous.
You mean the white historians who want us to teach His-Story and not History.Perhaps conservatives want history taught accurately.
The 1619 Project - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Snip
The 1619 Project has received criticism from historians, both from the political left and the right, who question its historical accuracy.[6][10] In a letter published in The New York Times in December 2019, historians Gordon S. Wood, James M. McPherson, Sean Wilentz, Victoria E. Bynum, and James Oakes applauded "all efforts to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history" and deemed the project a "praiseworthy and urgent public service," but expressed "strong reservations" about some "important aspects" of the project and requested factual corrections. Most prominently, these scholars denied the project's claim that slavery was essential to the beginning of the American Revolution. In response, Jake Silverstein, the editor of The New York Times Magazine, defended The 1619 Project and refused to issue corrections.[11]
In March 2020, in light of persistent criticism of the project's portrayal of the role of slavery, including from one of its own consulting historians, Leslie M. Harris, The New York Times issued a "clarification", modifying one of the passages on slavery's role that had sparked controversy.[12][13] In September 2020, controversy again arose when the Times updated the opening text of the project website to remove the phrase "...understanding 1619 as our true founding..." without any accompanying editorial note to point to what was being redone.[a] According to critics, including Bret Stephens, a conservative columnist at the Times, claimed the differences showed that the newspaper was backing away from some of the initiative's controversial claims.[15] The Times defended its practices, with Hannah-Jones saying that most of the project's content had remained unchanged.[16][