Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching ‘1619 Project’

[Tommy Tainant]

The teaching of an approved history is a key part of controlling people. We were taught how wonderful the empire was and the legacy of that lie endures today.
If this cretin wants a sanitised version of slavery it is because he wants to breed another generation of racist trash.

"Necessary evil" - my arse.

 

[otto105]

I’m trying to address your point that it is riddled with lies by actually looking at the things you consider lies but you won’t go down that road with me. Why not??

I agree that we have credible historians that have taken issue with it. I know corrections have been made. So let’s now look at what it is, what’s being discussed about it in school and if there is something you think is a lie then let’s look at it. Can you name anything specific? You mentioned Lincoln. What lie about Lincoln do you think it is telling? Or pick something else

Are you retarded? That is rhetorical because clearly I have pointed out many times now the citation I
provided that goes into detail about how the 1619 Project has lied and besmirched Abraham Lincoln.

Their shouldn't be one single question about the matter because obviously I have already provided lots of information. Get bent, troll.

The only thing the was changed for the criticism from some conservative historians was to add two words, "some of" the founding father based our country on slavery.

Other than that you have produced nothing.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The only thing the was changed for the criticism from some conservative historians was to add two words, "some of" the founding father based our country on slavery.

Other than that you have produced nothing.

Opinion | The ‘1619 Project’ Gets Schooled

The New York Times tries to rewrite U.S. history, but its falsehoods are exposed by surprising sources.

www.wsj.com

If you can read then it's possible for you to learn, though I doubt you will.
You seem adverse to independent thought.

 

[otto105]

The only thing the was changed for the criticism from some conservative historians was to add two words, "some of" the founding father based our country on slavery.

Other than that you have produced nothing.

Opinion | The ‘1619 Project’ Gets Schooled

The New York Times tries to rewrite U.S. history, but its falsehoods are exposed by surprising sources.

www.wsj.com

If you can read then it's possible for you to learn, though I doubt you will.
You seem adverse to independent thought.

Why would I want to read an opinion piece from the WSJ?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Why would I want to read an opinion piece from the WSJ?

Why would I give a crap about about what you believe? The information has been supplied.
I'm not surprised you are afraid to look.

 

[otto105]

Why would I want to read an opinion piece from the WSJ?

Why would I give a crap about about what you believe? The information has been supplied.
I'm not surprised you are afraid to look.

It's an opinion piece behind a paywall.

So....

The New York Times has said that the contributions were deeply researched and arguments verified by a team of fact-checkers in consultation with historians. However, historians Gordon S. Wood, James M. McPherson, Richard Carwardine, and James Oakes have criticized the 1619 Project, demanding "corrections" for inaccurate claims. Historian Leslie M. Harris, who served as a fact-checker for the project, contends that the authors ignored her corrections. The Times replied, "We don't believe that the request for corrections to The 1619 Project is warranted." Adam Serwer, reviewing the critiques, suggested that the bone of contention wasn't so much factual content as ideology--whether America was founded as a "slavocracy" or truly on principles of freedom.

Project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones was awarded the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for the 1619 Project.

In response to criticisms, Hannah-Jones has said that every part was deeply researched, and analyzed by fact-checkers, in consultation with a panel of historians, verifying every argument. Hannah-Jones has also said that she stands by the claim that slavery helped fuel the revolution though she concedes she might have phrased it too strongly in her essay, in a way that could give readers the impression that the support for slavery was universal. On March 11, 2020, Silverstein authored an "update" in the form of a "clarification" on The New York Times' website, correcting part of Hannah-Jones's essay to state that "protecting slavery was a primary motivation for some of the colonists", where the original version had stated it was "one primary reason the colonists fought the American Revolution".

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

We know that public schools are leftist democrat indoctrination centers. Sen. Cotton's bill is what fighting back looks like, and it has to start somewhere.

You left out the word "some" from your statement.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

1. I would never lower myself to read the New York Times.

2. But -- as a fair-minded person -- I admit that in this instance it is correct: Everything that is happening now and before can be traced back to 1619, when the first folks were brought here from a faraway continent to do unpaid work.

3. I sometimes think of what a happy country this would be today if that event in 1619 had not happened.

This country would not exist.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The author of a controversial racially charged reworking of history and her sponsor, NY Times,
both see nothing wrong with the 1619 Project. Isn't that remarkable!

 

[TheParser]

1. I would never lower myself to read the New York Times.

2. But -- as a fair-minded person -- I admit that in this instance it is correct: Everything that is happening now and before can be traced back to 1619, when the first folks were brought here from a faraway continent to do unpaid work.

3. I sometimes think of what a happy country this would be today if that event in 1619 had not happened.

This country would not exist.

Thank you for your considered opinion.

I think that this country WOULD exist today if 1619 had not happened.

And we would not be having the unpleasantness that has existed ever since 1619.


Have a nice day!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

1. I would never lower myself to read the New York Times.

2. But -- as a fair-minded person -- I admit that in this instance it is correct: Everything that is happening now and before can be traced back to 1619, when the first folks were brought here from a faraway continent to do unpaid work.

3. I sometimes think of what a happy country this would be today if that event in 1619 had not happened.

This country would not exist.

Thank you for your considered opinion.

I think that this country WOULD exist today if 1619 had not happened.

And we would not be having the unpleasantness that has existed ever since 1619.


Have a nice day!

No, it would not exist, because the country would not exist because it would not have the agriculture that developed in the south due to the use of slavery. We would have wound up similar to Australia or Canada.

 

[otto105]

1. I would never lower myself to read the New York Times.

2. But -- as a fair-minded person -- I admit that in this instance it is correct: Everything that is happening now and before can be traced back to 1619, when the first folks were brought here from a faraway continent to do unpaid work.

3. I sometimes think of what a happy country this would be today if that event in 1619 had not happened.

This country would not exist.

Thank you for your considered opinion.

I think that this country WOULD exist today if 1619 had not happened.

And we would not be having the unpleasantness that has existed ever since 1619.


Have a nice day!

No, it would not exist, because the country would not exist because it would not have the agriculture that developed in the south due to the use of slavery. We would have wound up similar to Australia or Canada.

That's bullshit, because you assume white people won't have picked cotton?

 

[Slade3200]

Why would I want to read an opinion piece from the WSJ?

Why would I give a crap about about what you believe? The information has been supplied.
I'm not surprised you are afraid to look.

You are hiding behind other peoples articles but seem incapable of providing specific examples from the project. I've been trying to get specific with you during this entire thread. You've referenced one thing... The passage about Abe Lincoln. I tried to dig in and engage with you about that section and you bailed from the conversation. You still haven't provided a specific lie that is in the document. Come on man, step it up, this is getting old

 

[TheParser]

1. I would never lower myself to read the New York Times.

2. But -- as a fair-minded person -- I admit that in this instance it is correct: Everything that is happening now and before can be traced back to 1619, when the first folks were brought here from a faraway continent to do unpaid work.

3. I sometimes think of what a happy country this would be today if that event in 1619 had not happened.

This country would not exist.

Thank you for your considered opinion.

I think that this country WOULD exist today if 1619 had not happened.

And we would not be having the unpleasantness that has existed ever since 1619.


Have a nice day!

No, it would not exist, because the country would not exist because it would not have the agriculture that developed in the south due to the use of slavery. We would have wound up similar to Australia or Canada.

But, Admiral, what is wrong with Australia or Canada? They do not have the, uh, unpleasantness that we have had ever since 1619 right up to this very second.

 

[otto105]

The author of a controversial racially charged reworking of history and her sponsor, NY Times,
both see nothing wrong with the 1619 Project. Isn't that remarkable!

It is neither controversial or racially charged.

Conservatives bitch about everything.

 

[Andylusion]

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times‘s 1619 Project in public schools.

The bill—titled the Saving American History Act of 2020—would require secretaries from the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture to cut federal funding to schools choosing to implement the 1619 Project into their curriculum. The amount of funds cut from public schools would depend on teaching and planning costs for the 1619 Project curriculum. Federal funding for low-income and special-needs students would not be affected by the bill.

"The New York Times’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom and equality on which our nation was founded," Cotton said. "Not a single cent of federal funding should go to indoctrinate young Americans with this left-wing garbage."

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Bj's pull quote


Catching much traction in progressive circles, the project has not been immune to criticism. Several of the nation’s top historians drafted a letter in December 2019 to express their "reservations" about the project’s historical veracity.

"It still strikes me as amazing why the New York Times would put its authority behind a project that has such weak scholarly support," said Gordon Wood, a National Humanities Medal recipient at Brown University.

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Tom Cotton is now on my radar of Presidential hopefuls.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

It is neither controversial or racially charged.

Conservatives bitch about everything.

Obviously the matter is controversial. To deny that is idiocy.
People do not argue over non controversial matters.

And obviously with slavery the subject to say the matter is not
racially charged is even more idiotic. Looks like you picked the
wrong day to live in denial with your head underground.

 

[otto105]

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times‘s 1619 Project in public schools.

The bill—titled the Saving American History Act of 2020—would require secretaries from the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture to cut federal funding to schools choosing to implement the 1619 Project into their curriculum. The amount of funds cut from public schools would depend on teaching and planning costs for the 1619 Project curriculum. Federal funding for low-income and special-needs students would not be affected by the bill.

"The New York Times’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom and equality on which our nation was founded," Cotton said. "Not a single cent of federal funding should go to indoctrinate young Americans with this left-wing garbage."

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Bj's pull quote


Catching much traction in progressive circles, the project has not been immune to criticism. Several of the nation’s top historians drafted a letter in December 2019 to express their "reservations" about the project’s historical veracity.

"It still strikes me as amazing why the New York Times would put its authority behind a project that has such weak scholarly support," said Gordon Wood, a National Humanities Medal recipient at Brown University.

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Tom Cotton is now on my radar of Presidential hopefuls.

Good luck with that.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You are hiding behind other peoples articles but seem incapable of providing specific examples from the project. I've been trying to get specific with you during this entire thread. You've referenced one thing... The passage about Abe Lincoln. I tried to dig in and engage with you about that section and you bailed from the conversation. You still haven't provided a specific lie that is in the document. Come on man, step it up, this is getting old

Then fuck off! It seems simple to me.

You wanted an example of how Hannah-Jones played fast and loose with the facts and reality of historical racism and I gave you one. I don't remember you trying to "dig in and engage" about Lincoln, by the way.

 

[Billiejeens]

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times‘s 1619 Project in public schools.

The bill—titled the Saving American History Act of 2020—would require secretaries from the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture to cut federal funding to schools choosing to implement the 1619 Project into their curriculum. The amount of funds cut from public schools would depend on teaching and planning costs for the 1619 Project curriculum. Federal funding for low-income and special-needs students would not be affected by the bill.

"The New York Times’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom and equality on which our nation was founded," Cotton said. "Not a single cent of federal funding should go to indoctrinate young Americans with this left-wing garbage."

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Bj's pull quote


Catching much traction in progressive circles, the project has not been immune to criticism. Several of the nation’s top historians drafted a letter in December 2019 to express their "reservations" about the project’s historical veracity.

"It still strikes me as amazing why the New York Times would put its authority behind a project that has such weak scholarly support," said Gordon Wood, a National Humanities Medal recipient at Brown University.

Sen. Cotton Introduces Bill to Cut Funding to Schools Teaching '1619 Project'

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) introduced a bill Tuesday which would prohibit the use of federal funds to teach the New York Times's 1619 Project in public schools.

freebeacon.com

Tom Cotton is now on my radar of Presidential hopefuls.

President Cotton

That would make the cotton picking, cotton pickers, cotton picking crazy, yes?