We Must Stop Teaching Our School Kids to Hate America

[Moonglow]

I love America and all the freedoms that we enjoy. I love it so much that I refuse to whitewash the unsavory aspects of our history or marginalize all the good we've done. We have stumbled quite a few times along the way, but overall we are a forced of good in this world.

And most of these 'unsavory aspects' are simply fictions of the Hate America First derangement.

What 'unsavory aspects' do you find to be mostly fiction? I am curious.

As am I.

To me, if someone is SO delusional that they think their country is perfect in every way....they are setting themselves up for a mighty fall.....and are not helping the country they allegedly love so much. They don't love America....they love their fantasy of America.......while hating a large chunk of the American people.

But John Wayne....

 

[JimBowie1958]

read it again. not all of hemmings children have descendents - or an unbroken male lineage.

you seem to be under the impression that descendents from each heming child was tested.

Lol, If a male descendant of any of Hemmings kids had a Jefferson as a male ancestor, they would have had the JEffersonmarker. Totally 100%. No fudging, no doubt. One would be enough but they tested as many as would send in samples anyway. You apparently did not read a single one of the articles I linked to, doofus.

Your understanding of genetics would appear to fill a golf ball dimple.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The stupid never stops, the right wingers have a head harder than a 2 year old child..This has been explained over and over.....What you consider to be a need, has been met, even though the picture you drew, is not the same as the one drawn by somebody that has to practice international politics...

Lol, it is the leftwing revisionists that show their ignorance of genetics and the testing done. They are the ones deliberately twisting and distorting our nations history on this topic and many others I listed as well.

Read the articles I posted, again, dear.

 

[ogibillm]

read it again. not all of hemmings children have descendents - or an unbroken male lineage.

you seem to be under the impression that descendents from each heming child was tested.

Lol, If a male descendant of any of Hemmings kids had a Jefferson as a male ancestor, they would have had the JEffersonmarker. Totally 100%. No fudging, no doubt. One would be enough but they tested as many as would send in samples anyway. You apparently did not read a single one of the articles I linked to, doofus.

Your understanding of genetics would appear to fill a golf ball dimple.

i don't know how to get through to you.

am i going to have to give you a remedial course in biology or will you accept that a direct male lineage from the father of hemings' child to today is necessary for testing and that such a lineage did not exist for all of her children?

 

[Wry Catcher]

What 'unsavory aspects' do you find to be mostly fiction? I am curious.

Well we could start with our supposed genocide of Amerindian tribes which is completely fictional.

We could then go to Thomas Jefferson's supposed all of Sally Hemming's children.

And visit the PC bullshit about the Civil War being about nothing other than slavery, make a horse shit pit stop at the fiction surrounding the Federal Reserve, then go to the entry into WW1.

After that we can look at the struggle against communism, all bastardized now into Marxist lies and spin about it really being just another imperial struggle between the USSR and USA. The East German frontier wall disproved that forever in my mind.

And finally we can peruse the utterly ridiculous spin on our actions in Korea, Vietnam and the War against Salafi Islamic terrorism, which has been consistently FUBARed all to hell by the Democrats at every opportunity.

Wow, sometimes you're almost reasonable, this post is anything but. Maybe you might consider collaborating with PoliticalChic, at least she cherry picks obscure people who wrote a book to 'prove' her opinions.

 

[JimBowie1958]

read it again. not all of hemmings children have descendents - or an unbroken male lineage.

you seem to be under the impression that descendents from each heming child was tested.

Lol, If a male descendant of any of Hemmings kids had a Jefferson as a male ancestor, they would have had the JEffersonmarker. Totally 100%. No fudging, no doubt. One would be enough but they tested as many as would send in samples anyway. You apparently did not read a single one of the articles I linked to, doofus.

Your understanding of genetics would appear to fill a golf ball dimple.

i don't know how to get through to you.

am i going to have to give you a remedial course in biology or will you accept that a direct male lineage from the father of hemings' child to today is necessary for testing and that such a lineage did not exist for all of her children?

Did you read the posted articles or not? If so where do you disagree?

I am not going into a pissing contest with you as you with hold information and play bullshit head games.

Spit it out or shut the fuck up.

 

[JimBowie1958]

What 'unsavory aspects' do you find to be mostly fiction? I am curious.

Well we could start with our supposed genocide of Amerindian tribes which is completely fictional.

We could then go to Thomas Jefferson's supposed all of Sally Hemming's children.

And visit the PC bullshit about the Civil War being about nothing other than slavery, make a horse shit pit stop at the fiction surrounding the Federal Reserve, then go to the entry into WW1.

After that we can look at the struggle against communism, all bastardized now into Marxist lies and spin about it really being just another imperial struggle between the USSR and USA. The East German frontier wall disproved that forever in my mind.

And finally we can peruse the utterly ridiculous spin on our actions in Korea, Vietnam and the War against Salafi Islamic terrorism, which has been consistently FUBARed all to hell by the Democrats at every opportunity.

Wow, sometimes you're almost reasonable, this post is anything but. Maybe you might consider collaborating with PoliticalChic, at least she cherry picks obscure people who wrote a book to 'prove' her opinions.

So you really dont anything of substance to add?

Thanks for playing, now run along little child.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I love America and all the freedoms that we enjoy. I love it so much that I refuse to whitewash the unsavory aspects of our history or marginalize all the good we've done. We have stumbled quite a few times along the way, but overall we are a forced of good in this world.

Well then you obviously are not a liberal if you truly believe that overall America is a force of good in the world.

 

[ogibillm]

read it again. not all of hemmings children have descendents - or an unbroken male lineage.

you seem to be under the impression that descendents from each heming child was tested.

Lol, If a male descendant of any of Hemmings kids had a Jefferson as a male ancestor, they would have had the JEffersonmarker. Totally 100%. No fudging, no doubt. One would be enough but they tested as many as would send in samples anyway. You apparently did not read a single one of the articles I linked to, doofus.

Your understanding of genetics would appear to fill a golf ball dimple.

i don't know how to get through to you.

am i going to have to give you a remedial course in biology or will you accept that a direct male lineage from the father of hemings' child to today is necessary for testing and that such a lineage did not exist for all of her children?

Did you read the posted articles or not? If so where do you disagree?

I am not going into a pissing contest with you as you with hold information and play bullshit head games.

Spit it out or shut the fuck up.

I'm not withholding information. the test that was done relies on the unique nature of the y chromosome - it doesnt change much on its own and passes from father to son, meaning that a great-great-great-great grandfather will have nearly the same y chromosome as his distant direct male lineage grandson.

but if there isn't a direct male link - if a father only has daughters or no children at all the y chromosome is not passed down and the test cannot be performed.

so for heming's children two were tested - eston and tom. a link was found with eston, meaning that a male jefferson sired him, and given the other historical clues it was likely Thomas. Tom Woodson's descendants did not have a match - which is inconclusive.

but hemming's other children did not have the descendants necessary for the test, so claiming the test 'proved' that Jefferson was not their father is a fabrication.

 

[guno]

Teaching children about the real history of America, both the good and the bad along with the people and events left out of American history (not the white washed version) isn't hate, no mater how uncomfortable it may make some who no longer control the narrative

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm not withholding information. the test that was done relies on the unique nature of the y chromosome - it doesnt change much on its own and passes from father to son, meaning that a great-great-great-great grandfather will have nearly the same y chromosome as his distant direct male lineage grandson.

but if there isn't a direct male link - if a father only has daughters or no children at all the y chromosome is not passed down and the test cannot be performed.

so for heming's children two were tested - eston and tom. a link was found with eston, meaning that a male jefferson sired him, and given the other historical clues it was likely Thomas. Tom Woodson's descendants did not have a match - which is inconclusive.

but hemming's other children did not have the descendants necessary for the test, so claiming the test 'proved' that Jefferson was not their father is a fabrication.

Is It True? - A Primer On Jefferson Dna | Jefferson's Blood | FRONTLINE | PBS

Testing showed that Woodson was not of Jefferson descent (or else he would have the Jefferson male habplotype) and Eston was, but that makes Thomas Jefferson only one of 8 possible sires. Descendants of Madison Hermmings refused permission to dig for DNA.

New Woodson DNA Tests.
DNA tests performed on 1 Eston line came up positive, but tests performed originally on 5 Woodson lines in November 1998 came up negative, as did a recent DNA test on a 6th line performed in March 2000. These results should demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that Thomas Jefferson was not the father of Tom Woodson. The Woodson DNA tests are important because if Tom Woodson is Sally Heming's Paris-conceived son and could be shown to have Jefferson DNA, it would then be almost certain that Thomas Jefferson was his father, since Thomas was the only Jefferson in Paris at the time who could have impregnated Sally.

Further reading
https://web.archive.org/web/20101008063811/http://www.tjheritage.org:80/documents/SCReport1.pdf

The only conclusion the DNA testing has supported is that there is a 1 in 8 chance that Thomas Jefferson fathered Eston, and has proven he did not father Woodsen and his descendants. To assert that the DNA evidence proved Thomas Jefferson father ed all of Hemmings children is total horse shit.

 

[ogibillm]

I'm not withholding information. the test that was done relies on the unique nature of the y chromosome - it doesnt change much on its own and passes from father to son, meaning that a great-great-great-great grandfather will have nearly the same y chromosome as his distant direct male lineage grandson.

but if there isn't a direct male link - if a father only has daughters or no children at all the y chromosome is not passed down and the test cannot be performed.

so for heming's children two were tested - eston and tom. a link was found with eston, meaning that a male jefferson sired him, and given the other historical clues it was likely Thomas. Tom Woodson's descendants did not have a match - which is inconclusive.

but hemming's other children did not have the descendants necessary for the test, so claiming the test 'proved' that Jefferson was not their father is a fabrication.

Is It True? - A Primer On Jefferson Dna | Jefferson's Blood | FRONTLINE | PBS

Testing showed that Woodson was not of Jefferson descent and Eston was, but that makes Thomas Jefferson only one of 8 possible sires. Descendants of Madison Hermmings refused permission to dig for DNA.


Further reading
https://web.archive.org/web/20101008063811/http://www.tjheritage.org:80/documents/SCReport1.pdf

The only conclusion the DNA testing has supported is that there is a 1 in 8 chance that Thomas Jefferson fathered Eston, and has proven he did not father Woodsen and his descendants. To assert that the DNA evidence proved Thomas Jefferson father ed all of Hemmings children is total horse shit.

no, it doesn't prove he didn't father Woodson. it makes that unlikely.

but given the rest of the evidence it's pretty clear that jefferson fathered at least one child by hemmings, likely more.

 

[JimBowie1958]

no, it doesn't prove he didn't father Woodson. it makes that unlikely.

Yeah libtards never let facts get int he way of their ideological agenda.

New Woodson DNA Tests.
DNA tests performed on 1 Eston line came up positive, but tests performed originally on 5 Woodson lines in November 1998 came up negative, as did a recent DNA test on a 6th line performed in March 2000. These results should demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that Thomas Jefferson was not the father of Tom Woodson. The Woodson DNA tests are important because if Tom Woodson is Sally Heming's Paris-conceived son and could be shown to have Jefferson DNA, it would then be almost certain that Thomas Jefferson was his father, since Thomas was the only Jefferson in Paris at the time who could have impregnated Sally.

but given the rest of the evidence it's pretty clear that jefferson fathered at least one child by hemmings, likely more.

No, there is no evidence to support your ideologically driven opinion on historical facts.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Great column that fairly well reflects the thoughts I have been having lately.

Multiculturalism cannot survive a war on Salafist Muslim Extremism, and we cannot survive if we fight this war on strictly PC terms, refusing to even name our enemy for who they are, which keeps everything out of focus and the public moving in every direction including against each other.

We need a clear signal, clearly defined enemies and lines of conduct all devloped for one purpose; WE WIN.

We Must Stop Teaching Children to Hate America

...when Hillary Clinton says, “E Pluribus Unum, One—Out of Many, One—has seen us through the darkest chapters of our history,” as she did at her first major speech after Orlando, conservatives should say, “Bring it on.”...

Yes, let’s by all means return to that goal. Why did we ever abandon it in the first place?

Let’s debate how an American like Omar Mateen, born in Queens, New York, and raised in Fort Pierce, Florida, can turn into a terrorist bent on executing his compatriots. How does he grow up cheering the 9/11 attack in high school, thinking that women ought not to drive, and swearing allegiance to the Islamic State?

Everybody, but especially young men, needs to feel like they’re part of something bigger than themselves, a sense that we’re all in this together. If we as a society fail to give citizens national pride, we can be sure that some outside force will come along and do it.

The founders knew that the constitutional republic they were crafting required a single nation with one national identity smelted out of different ethnicities. Right away, in 1776 in fact, they came up with the concept of E Pluribus Unum.

To instill the new creed into the immigrants already flocking to America, they set an educational system that would create a nation with one national identity....

For the past three decades, for reasons that will also require analysis (though at a later date), we have been doing exactly the opposite. The new model, exemplified by the bestselling historian Howard Zinn, is to present America as a spectacular experiment in oppression.

Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” set the stage for the grievance mongering that passes for history classes today, and is still widely used. It has sold over 2 million copies since it was first published in 1980 and continues to sell over 100,000 copies a year because it is required reading at many of our high schools and colleges. That’s a lot of young minds.

This is how Zinn described the founding:

Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.​

And our educational authorities are doubling down today—even in the face of danger. The College Board’s leftist curriculum framework for Advanced Placement U.S. History—the courses that our best students take in high school—denigrates the founders’ assimilationist ethos and presses students “to think beyond national histories” and patriotic attachments....

This is what is being taught to students, like Mateen once was, every day in our schools. So, yes, by all means, let’s have a discussion on why we should indoctrinate young minds in a way no society has ever done, why we should teach our young to “unlike” America.

Is this the approach we want to have, especially at a time when a force like the Islamic State will only be too glad to fill the patriotic vacuum, or should we teach again that America is an exceptionally free and prosperous nation that requires love and affection and constant attention?...

The fact that the Orlando massacre has failed miserably to be a bond for national unity, but has only exposed our fissures, should be a mighty sign of how divided we are. This debate is well overdue.

E Pluribus Unum is dead. We're now a collection of opposing identity groups fighting for political advantage.

What's done is done.
.

I second Mac comment...

 

[ogibillm]

no, it doesn't prove he didn't father Woodson. it makes that unlikely.

Yeah libtards never let facts get int he way of their ideological agenda.

New Woodson DNA Tests.
DNA tests performed on 1 Eston line came up positive, but tests performed originally on 5 Woodson lines in November 1998 came up negative, as did a recent DNA test on a 6th line performed in March 2000. These results should demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that Thomas Jefferson was not the father of Tom Woodson. The Woodson DNA tests are important because if Tom Woodson is Sally Heming's Paris-conceived son and could be shown to have Jefferson DNA, it would then be almost certain that Thomas Jefferson was his father, since Thomas was the only Jefferson in Paris at the time who could have impregnated Sally.

It's unlikely, but if the lines tested did not contain a direct male link - like say a son fathered in an affair - the test would not show a link. so while a test can show a link the possibility, however small, that the line was broken exists in any negative result

but given the rest of the evidence it's pretty clear that jefferson fathered at least one child by hemmings, likely more.

No, there is no evidence to support your ideologically driven opinion on historical facts.

there is plenty of evidence - enough that Jefferson's legitimate descendants recognize it as does monticello

the near universally accepted theory is that jefferson fathered at least one bastard, likely more

 

[aris2chat]

Great column that fairly well reflects the thoughts I have been having lately.

Multiculturalism cannot survive a war on Salafist Muslim Extremism, and we cannot survive if we fight this war on strictly PC terms, refusing to even name our enemy for who they are, which keeps everything out of focus and the public moving in every direction including against each other.

We need a clear signal, clearly defined enemies and lines of conduct all devloped for one purpose; WE WIN.

We Must Stop Teaching Children to Hate America

...when Hillary Clinton says, “E Pluribus Unum, One—Out of Many, One—has seen us through the darkest chapters of our history,” as she did at her first major speech after Orlando, conservatives should say, “Bring it on.”...

Yes, let’s by all means return to that goal. Why did we ever abandon it in the first place?

Let’s debate how an American like Omar Mateen, born in Queens, New York, and raised in Fort Pierce, Florida, can turn into a terrorist bent on executing his compatriots. How does he grow up cheering the 9/11 attack in high school, thinking that women ought not to drive, and swearing allegiance to the Islamic State?

Everybody, but especially young men, needs to feel like they’re part of something bigger than themselves, a sense that we’re all in this together. If we as a society fail to give citizens national pride, we can be sure that some outside force will come along and do it.

The founders knew that the constitutional republic they were crafting required a single nation with one national identity smelted out of different ethnicities. Right away, in 1776 in fact, they came up with the concept of E Pluribus Unum.

To instill the new creed into the immigrants already flocking to America, they set an educational system that would create a nation with one national identity....

For the past three decades, for reasons that will also require analysis (though at a later date), we have been doing exactly the opposite. The new model, exemplified by the bestselling historian Howard Zinn, is to present America as a spectacular experiment in oppression.

Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” set the stage for the grievance mongering that passes for history classes today, and is still widely used. It has sold over 2 million copies since it was first published in 1980 and continues to sell over 100,000 copies a year because it is required reading at many of our high schools and colleges. That’s a lot of young minds.

This is how Zinn described the founding:

Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.​

And our educational authorities are doubling down today—even in the face of danger. The College Board’s leftist curriculum framework for Advanced Placement U.S. History—the courses that our best students take in high school—denigrates the founders’ assimilationist ethos and presses students “to think beyond national histories” and patriotic attachments....

This is what is being taught to students, like Mateen once was, every day in our schools. So, yes, by all means, let’s have a discussion on why we should indoctrinate young minds in a way no society has ever done, why we should teach our young to “unlike” America.

Is this the approach we want to have, especially at a time when a force like the Islamic State will only be too glad to fill the patriotic vacuum, or should we teach again that America is an exceptionally free and prosperous nation that requires love and affection and constant attention?...

The fact that the Orlando massacre has failed miserably to be a bond for national unity, but has only exposed our fissures, should be a mighty sign of how divided we are. This debate is well overdue.

How do you describe someone is you can't say how tall they are, if they are male/female/other, the color of their eyes or hair, their skin color, their voice, or anything else because it is "PC".
It does matter what they say if it is hateful or violent. If it indicates motive or even their origin. If it give any hint to finding them again or others who might be involved.
Crime is not PC and nor should profiling for criminal be.

I think swallowing your voice, your opinions, is more harmful than just letting it out. Too much frustration builds up.
Freedom of speech is part of America, when it turns to harmful actions it becomes criminal.

 

[Unkotare]

Great column that fairly well reflects the thoughts I have been having lately.

Multiculturalism cannot survive a war on Salafist Muslim Extremism, and we cannot survive if we fight this war on strictly PC terms, refusing to even name our enemy for who they are, which keeps everything out of focus and the public moving in every direction including against each other.

We need a clear signal, clearly defined enemies and lines of conduct all devloped for one purpose; WE WIN.

We Must Stop Teaching Children to Hate America

...when Hillary Clinton says, “E Pluribus Unum, One—Out of Many, One—has seen us through the darkest chapters of our history,” as she did at her first major speech after Orlando, conservatives should say, “Bring it on.”...

Yes, let’s by all means return to that goal. Why did we ever abandon it in the first place?

Let’s debate how an American like Omar Mateen, born in Queens, New York, and raised in Fort Pierce, Florida, can turn into a terrorist bent on executing his compatriots. How does he grow up cheering the 9/11 attack in high school, thinking that women ought not to drive, and swearing allegiance to the Islamic State?

Everybody, but especially young men, needs to feel like they’re part of something bigger than themselves, a sense that we’re all in this together. If we as a society fail to give citizens national pride, we can be sure that some outside force will come along and do it.

The founders knew that the constitutional republic they were crafting required a single nation with one national identity smelted out of different ethnicities. Right away, in 1776 in fact, they came up with the concept of E Pluribus Unum.

To instill the new creed into the immigrants already flocking to America, they set an educational system that would create a nation with one national identity....

For the past three decades, for reasons that will also require analysis (though at a later date), we have been doing exactly the opposite. The new model, exemplified by the bestselling historian Howard Zinn, is to present America as a spectacular experiment in oppression.

Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” set the stage for the grievance mongering that passes for history classes today, and is still widely used. It has sold over 2 million copies since it was first published in 1980 and continues to sell over 100,000 copies a year because it is required reading at many of our high schools and colleges. That’s a lot of young minds.

This is how Zinn described the founding:

Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.​

And our educational authorities are doubling down today—even in the face of danger. The College Board’s leftist curriculum framework for Advanced Placement U.S. History—the courses that our best students take in high school—denigrates the founders’ assimilationist ethos and presses students “to think beyond national histories” and patriotic attachments....

This is what is being taught to students, like Mateen once was, every day in our schools. So, yes, by all means, let’s have a discussion on why we should indoctrinate young minds in a way no society has ever done, why we should teach our young to “unlike” America.

Is this the approach we want to have, especially at a time when a force like the Islamic State will only be too glad to fill the patriotic vacuum, or should we teach again that America is an exceptionally free and prosperous nation that requires love and affection and constant attention?...

The fact that the Orlando massacre has failed miserably to be a bond for national unity, but has only exposed our fissures, should be a mighty sign of how divided we are. This debate is well overdue.

E Pluribus Unum is dead.
.

No it's not. Straighten out your skirts and get ahold of yourself.

 

[Unkotare]

not a surprise that 'conservatives' see knowledge as the enemy

Not a surprise that you would repeat that lie.

 

[Correll]

not a surprise that 'conservatives' see knowledge as the enemy

So. Can't refute what he actually said, so you decided to lie about it?


Is that what they taught you in College?

what he actually said was tripe. it anounted to bitching that since actual history doesnt always paint america or our historical figures favorably we shluld whitewash it for student consumption.

it was an argument for the very thing it pretends to be against

It is interesting that you take what was ACTUALLY said, that you obviously disagree with, and instead of addressing what you don't agree with,

YOu lie about what he said. YOu create a Stawman, and then address that.

Ironically, you the WAY you showed your disagreement supports the argument that liberals are a bunch of dishonest liars that can't be trusted to teach our children.

Or to do ANYTHING, if there is even a POTENTIAL to abuse their trust in order to advance the agenda.

 

[Correll]

The distortion of "history" goes on right now.

How many Millennials understand that the purpose of the Iraq war was to bring down Saddam so that he would no longer be a threat in the region (with stockpiles of WMD's), and so that the people of Iraq could form an elected, legitimate government reflecting their own values?

In other words, the whole thing was motivated by completely altruistic intentions.

When is the last time you ever heard those truths expressed in a newspaper or periodical? Did you ever?

Why than did we not invade and occupy N. Korea? One reason maybe oil, another revenge or a third because war is good for business and Saddam's Army was not a match for us during Desert Storm.

Those questions have been answered thousands of times.

It is not credible that you have not heard the answers.

Repeating long ago answered questions in no way challenges DGS49'S post.