Scott criticizes DeSantis over his support for Florida's slavery curriculum as they stump in Iowa

[riversedge]

Source: AP




U_S_ Sen_ Tim Scott is criticizing fellow Republican presidential candidate and Florida Gov_ Ron DeSantis for supporting standards requiring teachers to instruct middle school students that slaves developed skills that “could be applied for their personal benefit.”

By MEG KINNARD and HANNAH FINGERHUT - Associated Press 5 hrs ago

ANKENY, Iowa (AP) — U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina has criticized fellow Republican presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for supporting new standards that require teachers to instruct middle school students that slaves developed skills that "could be applied for their personal benefit.”

“What slavery was really about was separating families, about mutilating humans and even raping their wives. It was just devastating,” Scott, the sole Black Republican in the Senate, told reporters on Thursday after a town hall in Ankeny. “So I would hope that every person in our country — and certainly running for president — would appreciate that.”
..............................

DeSantis has been facing criticism from Florida teachers, civil rights leaders and President Joe Biden's White House on the school standards. Vice President Kamala Harris, the nation’s first Black vice president, traveled to Florida last week to condemn the curriculum.

DeSantis fired back on Friday, saying that “part of the reason our country has struggled is because D.C. Republicans all too often accept false narratives, accept lies that are perpetrated by the left.”

.............................

Read more: https://www.gazettextra.com/news/nation_world/scott-criticizes-desantis-over-his-support-for-floridas-slavery-curriculum-as-they-stump-in-iowa/article_0af33b91-71d7-5504-9a34-8e68b53c671c.html#tncms-source=block-behavioral

---

I hope Santy keeps getting hit with criticism of the new standards.

Link to tweet

?s=20

[peppertree]

1. Which for most GOP voters, is tantamount to a deal-breaker

It is what it is.

[JohnSJ]

2. Hey Scott, the party you belong to is a racist cult, and you have no problem with that do you?

[speak easy]

3. 'the party you belong to is a racist cult'

You mean like the Democratic South 1868 - 1968; nobody's hands are clean.
The 'Party of Lincoln' did not give up the ghost until Goldwater.

[Casady1]

4. When discussing this topic

One should use the political science definition which is conservatives and liberals. The part of the democratic party of 1865-1968 were conservatives who supported jim crow. The part of the republicans that supported civil rights were liberals like Jake Javits.
Instead stick to conservatives and liberals as it is more accurate to one’s position on civil rights and Jim Crow. Northern democrats (1858-1968) supported civil rights while today’s republican party who support racism today are conservatives.

[speak easy]

8. "the Democratic South"

Last edited Sat Jul 29, 2023, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)

[Casady1]

13. I thought I would not encounter this discussion on DU

Perhaps you should read a little history and why political parties is not a way to judge positions and that is why I use liberals and conservatives. Those are much more accurate when discussing political philosophies.
Please read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#:~:text=The%20phrase%20%22Southern%20Strategy%22%20refers,grievances%20to%20gain%20their%20support.

[speak easy]

14. What I am suggesting here,

is a little humility. It was not a Republican who said 'segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever'.

[Casady1]

15. Please educate yourself

And stop using parties. That is a lazy analysis and is not used at a college political science level.

[speak easy]

16. "And stop using parties"

I was responding to "the party you belong to is a racist cult" . Our Party harbored a racist cult for a hundred years. If the Jim Crow Southern Democrats/Dixiecrats were not a racist cult, I don't know what they were. Why am I not surprised you would respond to a request for humility with 'Please educate yourself'? Hubris does not become anyone.

[Casady1]

17. have you read the link I sent you?

Specifically that the parties changed in the sixties and our party is not in any way the southern democratic party. If you would look into it that part of the party became the dixiecrats and ran Strom Thurmond for president.
The reason why you don't use parties is that parties switch but philosophies don't.
This is the same argument that I have with today's republican party when they claim to be the "party" that freed the slaves under Lincoln which as far as philosophy is untrue.
Like I said please read a history book on how the parties have changed and which philosophy worked to free the slaves.

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

26. You're not telling people here anything that they don't know

We already know the parties switched.

Really.

But it doesn't change the fact that Southern Democrats were historically racists and generally awful people. You don't overcome history without facing it.

Maybe you don't like reality all that much, but the rest of us can live with it perfectly well, thanks.

[speak easy]

18. Reagan gave his 1980 States Rights speech at the Neshoba County Fair.

I am well aware of the Southern Strategy. It was Reagan era when the GOP signaled, that it not only wanted 'Dixiecrat' voters, but their politicians as well. IMO, it was not until 2016, that white nationalism finally conquered all opposition within the GOP.

By all means call out the appalling racism of today's GOP, but given our history, with a little more humility.

[JohnSJ]

5. BS. We are talking today, and the repuke party since their Southern Strategy has made made it

clear who they are today, and a large part of that is because after LBJ’s Civil Rights legislation, those southern democrats became republicans, and the party of trump. Trump who tried to overthrow the government, and is the leading Republican candidate today.

I don’t buy that bothsiderism nonsense, because the Democratic Party evolved to what they are today, just like the republican Party did, and this is today, not 70+ years ago

[speak easy]

7. Nobody's hands are clean.

Not LBJ. Not me nor you.

[JohnSJ]

10. You speak for yourself buddy, don't include me in your "dirty hand analogy". If you want to

play your bothsiderism “original sin” crap, that is on you

I deal with the way things are NOW

DeSantis is a racist bigot, and you think saying the “Democratic party” used to have the same mindset 70+ years ago is somehow relevant to this conversation, and somehow rationalizes Scott’s affiliation with the Republican Party?

Nonsense

[speak easy]

11. ' "original sin" crap '

says more about you 'methinks'

[JohnSJ]

12. Your assumption about me is a perfect example of your critical thinking skills

If you don’t grasp the point I was making with the “original sin” comment, which had nothing to do with original sin, but an analogy of bringing in the past history of the Democratic Party, as somehow relevant to the racist behavior of the Republican Party today, then there is no use pursuing this dialogue

[Skittles]

22. THANK YOU JOHNSJ

YOU GET IT

[speak easy]

23. My assumption in a discussion about race is that THE original sin is slavery.

[JohnSJ]

24. That wasn't the context I was using. I was using the view that some Christian denominations use

when they use the concept of original sin, i.e. that is a child inheriting the “sins of your parents”

Appreciate the explanation of where you thought I was coming from, but that wasn’t the use of the “original sin” comment I was using.

The Democratic Party today is not the same party it was 70+ years ago, and neither is the Republican Party, who now openly embrace racism into their ranks, and evidenced by the republican members in Congress, unwilling to to call it out among their members.

and that in itself highlights a large difference between the two parties today, and what distinguishes one with cult like behavior versus the other

[Skittles]

19. I'll give you points for saying "Democratic"

.......

[speak easy]

20. That is a cheap shot.

[Skittles]

21. yes indeed

[The Magistrate]

25. After All, The Target's Not Worth Much Expense....

The fact is that there is a free-floating body of white supremacist Christian nationalists present here from the foundation. It attaches itself to, and is courted by, what reactionary factions arise in our politics.

In the early 1900s, the Democratic Party became an uneasy amalgam of progressive and reactionary factions. Progressives largely left the Republican Party after Taft, progressive then having more a 'moral uplift' character than it does now. Nor was the reactionary segregationist faction of the Party at the south necessarily the friend of banks and corporations, as such are now. It worked well enough nationally, and each ran its own patch as it was able.

The Dixiecrats exited the Democratic Party because its Northern and Midwestern leadership took steps to end segregation. Goldwater's opposition to civil rights laws made it easy for Dixiecrats to go openly Republican. Southern Republicans openly courted segregationists even before Goldwater, the line being that 'race-mixing' was a communist plot, which the traitors and dupes in the Democratic Party were promoting in furtherance of Red conquest....

[Astraea]

6. I hope every teacher in Florida quits

I'm sorry, but there is a line. And choosing to stay in a job that forces you to push racist crap on children, THAT is the line.

Let's see what DeSatan does when angry parents want to know why the schools are empty.

[Wonder Why]

9. They won't be. He'll hire fundamentalist preachers to fill in.