Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Wingnut revisionism: Oh, that ole time slavery was so much better than welfare

  1. #1
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default Wingnut revisionism: Oh, that ole time slavery was so much better than welfare

    On the November 6 broadcast of The War Room with Quinn & Rose, co-host Jim Quinn compared "slave[s] in the Old South" to welfare recipients today, stating that the "difference" is that "[t]he slave had to work for" the benefits Quinn said they received. Quinn said: "You know, if you were a slave in the old South, what did you get as a slave? You got free room and board, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children because that was just, you know, tomorrow's slave. So, you got a free house, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children. Can I ask a question? How's that different from welfare? You get a free house, you get free food, and you get rewarded for having children. Oh, wait a minute, hold on a second. There is a difference: The slave had to work for it." The show then aired an audio clip of a buzzer sounding and a voice repeating, "Insensitivity!" Quinn then stated: "Ah, the truth stings, does it not?"

    Talkers Magazine lists Quinn & Rose on its "Heavy Hundred" list, which it describes as a list of the "100 most important radio talk show hosts in America." According to the show's website, it airs on 18 radio stations and XM Satellite Radio.

    From the November 6 broadcast of Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn & Rose:

    QUINN: This is by Frances Rice. You can Google this in HumanEvents.com. Just Google "Frances Rice," a black historian. Frances Rice says, "It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? Well, from its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks." Gee, you'd never know that walking through the hallways of a school today or listening to the media. "And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democratic Party is, as it always has been, the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation, and now, socialism."

    You know, I was thinking about this. You know, if you were a slave in the old South, what did you get as a slave? You got free room and board, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children because that was just, you know, tomorrow's slave. So, you got a free house, you got free money, and you got rewarded for having children. Can I ask a question? How's that different from welfare? You get a free house, you get free food, and you get rewarded for having children. Oh, wait a minute, hold on a second. There is a difference: The slave had to work for it.

    [audio clip: buzzer, voice repeating, "Insensitivity!"]

    QUINN: Ah, the truth stings, does it not?
    Media Matters - Quinn stated that unlike welfare recipients, slaves "had to work" for food, housing
    How unhinged is this loss making the right wingnuts? I'll say seriously unhinged, probably certifiable.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  2. #2
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    246

    Default

    It's sometimes hard for me to believe that people like this still exist. But apparently they do, in large numbers. sighs

  3. #3
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,250

    Default

    This is 100 times worse than anything Imus said. I don't even think Rush Limbaugh went there.

  4. #4
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    4,186

    Default

    Was this on FOX news or talk radio?

    This guy is stupid - the reason blacks began to support the Democrats vs. the Republicans (which was Lincoln's party that freed the slaves) is that the Democrats actually supported civil rights legislation.

  5. #5
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Whaaaaaaaaaat? I guess...you know I was trying to put a reply together to this and all I can see is the uglies coming out because they are jealous a blackman won.

  6. #6
    Silver Member marvel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    575

    Default

    I've heard a lot about this before but never researched it all but it is effed up if it is true. I don't know how much changed but if the Democrats started out racist starting the kkk and supporting the jim crow laws and crap and Repub's started the NAACP and first black colleges and wanted to help blacks and so forth why the hell are so many blacks Democrats now? I've heard plenty of "disagreements" about why should anybody have to work to get ahead when the government will pay you. To me though that still is slavery, if that's how people think the government still owns them. But thanks for bringing up this thread. I'm going to do more reading into this, it's been a while since I heard this stuff. Good thing I'm poor because at least with a Dem in office I should be gettin me some money. HA.

  7. #7
    Elite Member McJag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    42,521

    Default

    What the heck????? He is sick!
    I didn't start out to collect diamonds, but somehow they just kept piling up.-Mae West

  8. #8
    Gold Member ymeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,415

    Default

    yep, this is what happens when you start with a racist slant and go looking for support of your bigotry. There are as many whites on welfare as blacks. Myth:
    People on welfare are usually black, teenage mothers who stay on ten years at a time

    It isn't about race, it is about poverty.

  9. #9
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    ymemean, I don't like it when people try to be PC and twist the data to prove something it really doesn't prove. Statisitics among blacks and hispanics especially are disproportionately high for their numbers. That's just a sad fact. There are many reasons why. But when you say there are more whites on welfare, or that "more whites buy rap" and these sorts of arguments, its only because there are vast numbers more of white people in general.


    Using the link you posted you can scroll to the bottom to read this


    Notes on race

    Blacks comprise only 12 percent of the nation, but, according to the above figures, they comprise 37 percent of the welfare rolls. This should not be surprising; in 1994, blacks had a poverty rate of 33 percent. We should not, of course, think it unusual to find poor people on welfare. Consequently, discussions of race and welfare must turn on different issues.

    The most prevalent question is why there are so many blacks in poverty. Liberals argue that it is the result of continuing racism and discrimination, especially at hiring time. Conservatives have argued a variety of other causes: moral shortcomings, poor work ethic, even intellectual inferiority. Another important question is whether welfare causes poverty.
    You can not deny that crime rates, abortion rates, welfare rates are disproportionately high for these communities. And you could argue that poverty has something to do with it. However if you take other minority groups that are poor the numbers don't stand across the board the same way.

    Racism is a vicious cycle of cause and effect. Its difficult to know where it begins and ends. Bottom line no amount of 'mad about racism" argument is going to change the data. So to offer it up is in my mind a bit pointless. Because it only serves to bolster a racist argument when they are not willing to consider the implications beyond it proving what they want it to.

  10. #10
    Gold Member ymeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flipstick View Post
    ymemean, I don't like it when people try to be PC and twist the data to prove something it really doesn't prove.

    There is a bit of a difference between quoting statistics and "twisting data/trying to be PC/whatever" that you are accusing me of. I don't like having to constantly hear ignorance from people around me (I am in the south) who really do believe that there aren't any whites on welfare. On this board I've even read a comment that there aren't any 'housing projects for whites, only blacks'. I haven't looked at the stats for abortion for minorities so I really don't know what they are and what this has to do with welfare but were I to make the leap you made in the reading of my post I might say that perhaps that would make someone like you happy since you seem disturbed by the high number of minorities on welfare. I'm not making that leap though, because it's a ridiculous parallel to make based on inadequate information. Shame you couldn't show me the same courtesy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Joe/Sam the Fake Plumber/tax cheat was once a welfare queen
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 7th, 2008, 08:57 PM
  2. Celeb on welfare -- Panachereport 04/09/07
    By sanlee in forum Blind Items
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2007, 06:26 AM
  3. Welfare to kids of illegals at $276 million (Los Angeles County)
    By AliceInWonderland in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: May 8th, 2006, 12:03 PM
  4. Aussie Welfare Agency Recognises Polygamy
    By A*O in forum Politics and Issues
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: March 25th, 2006, 07:56 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 12th, 2006, 10:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •