Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
Sun May 19, 2013, 06:31 PM May 2013

VA GOP Lt. Gov. Candidate says blacks responsible for genocide, supports 3/5 of a person amendment


Virginia Republican: ‘Black civil rights leaders’ responsible for ‘genocide’
By Stephen C. Webster
Sunday, May 19, 2013 16:48 EDT

A Virginia Republican who on Saturday secured the nomination to run for Lt. Governor said in an online video published last year that he believes “black civil rights leaders” are responsible for a “genocide” of African-American children by supporting Democrats and reproductive choice.

snip

“The Democrat Party has created an unholy alliance between certain so-called civil rights leaders and Planned Parenthood, which has killed unborn black babies by the tens of millions,” he said in a video published to his official YouTube page. “Planned Parenthood has been far more lethal to black lives than the KKK ever was.”

During his last run for public office, Jackson insisted that the so-called 3/5ths clause in the Constitution, which counted slaves as 3/5ths of a man, was “an anti-slavery amendment” designed to reduce the voting power of slave-owning states. That woefully wrong theory was originally floated by Republican conspiracy theorist Glenn Beck and apparently repeated by Jackson without examination.

In the video published last year, Jackson adds that Democrats “and their black civil rights allies are partners in this genocide,” going on to insist the persecution of LGBT people is nothing like the persecution of African-Americans throughout U.S. history.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/19/virginia-republican-black-civil-rights-leaders-responsible-for-genocide/
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
VA GOP Lt. Gov. Candidate says blacks responsible for genocide, supports 3/5 of a person amendment (Original Post) Bjorn Against May 2013 OP
counted slaves as 3/5ths of a man, was “an anti-slavery amendment” designed to reduce ..... Bonhomme Richard May 2013 #1
The exact opposite was true, it increased the voting power of slave states. Bjorn Against May 2013 #2
You're both wrong; It neither upped nor reduced power. There was no bicameral Congress before 1787. Bucky May 2013 #5
*facepalm* sakabatou May 2013 #3
Huh? Wha-? Bucky May 2013 #4
+1.000 malaise May 2013 #6
Hay republicans, hows that "Image"change working for you? nt wandy May 2013 #7
Another Pubbie accusing the Democrats of genocide. Boomerproud May 2013 #8
Stupidity and hate IDemo May 2013 #14
you should change your op title cali May 2013 #9
He called it an "anti-slavery amendment" Bjorn Against May 2013 #10
E.W. Jackson keeping company with RWNJ Victoria Jackson Loup Garou May 2013 #11
Black right wingers... MrScorpio May 2013 #12
Sad very sad olddots May 2013 #13

Bonhomme Richard

(9,000 posts)
1. counted slaves as 3/5ths of a man, was “an anti-slavery amendment” designed to reduce .....
Sun May 19, 2013, 06:44 PM
May 2013

the voting power of slave-owning states"

I thought I had just read that in a biography of Thomas Jefferson as fact.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
2. The exact opposite was true, it increased the voting power of slave states.
Sun May 19, 2013, 06:50 PM
May 2013

Slaves could not vote, but by counting them as 3/5 of a person for the census the slave states were able to cite a higher population to receive additional representation in Congress.

Bucky

(54,003 posts)
5. You're both wrong; It neither upped nor reduced power. There was no bicameral Congress before 1787.
Sun May 19, 2013, 07:06 PM
May 2013

The Articles Congress, before the Constitution, had no representation by population at all. So the compromise neither increased nor decreased the voting power of the slaveholding states.

The 3/5s clause was a compromise between the states with and without slaves who could not agree on whether or not to count slaves. After all, it's not like they had universal manhood suffrage in more than a few places in 1787. But the real intent behind it is to represent the greater wealth of the tobacco-exporting slave-holding states. Under the Articles of Confederation, their allotted contribution to Congress to pay for confederal expenses went by state population, but included the 3/5s calculation because (1) the people in the South were richer at the time and (2) it was assumed that a slave didn't earn as much wealth as a free man. By the way, free persons of color were counted as 5/5s of a white man for purposes of representation and Confederal contributions quotas, even though in most states they couldn't vote.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
9. you should change your op title
Sun May 19, 2013, 07:58 PM
May 2013

he's a loathsome creature but he clearly does not support the "3/5ths clause". He misinterprets it but no where does he say that he supports it.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
10. He called it an "anti-slavery amendment"
Sun May 19, 2013, 08:02 PM
May 2013

Sounds like support to me, I think my subject line accurately reflects what he said.

MrScorpio

(73,631 posts)
12. Black right wingers...
Sun May 19, 2013, 08:11 PM
May 2013

Those of us who are black and aren't right wingers look on people like this as an embarrassment.

This guy is, most certainly, someone's "crazy uncle."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»VA GOP Lt. Gov. Candidate...