This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-09-25 10:24
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 22, 2010
In a discussion about Texas governor Rick Perry, CNN’s Rick Sanchez told Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News that “people of color†consider the Constitution — in particular the Tenth amendment — racist. Sanchez made his comment at 1:45 in the following video.
[video=youtube;KbfFkoymtuU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbfFkoymtuU&feature=player_embedded[/video]
In essence, Sanchez said that if you believe that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution are reserved to the states, you’re a racist. Sanchez’s remark is an obtuse reference to nullification, John C. Calhoun, and slavery.
In the 1840s and 1850s, the federal government tried to impose the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 and school segregation through Brown v. Board of Education on the Southern states. It was argued that these measures were unconstitutional and that the states had the inherent power to prevent the federal government from enforcing them within their borders.
In response to the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison wrote the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, which provide a classic statement in support of states’ rights. Jefferson and Madison declared the Union is a voluntary association of states, and if the federal government violates that voluntary association with unconstitutional laws the states have the right to nullify those laws. The states, they wrote, “are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government†and “each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.â€
Nine states have passed resolutions reaffirming the principles of sovereignty under the Constitution and the 10th Amendment over the last year. The political opportunist Rick Perry exploited this trend last April at an anti-tax rally in Austin when he said Texans might get so fed up with the federal government they would want to leave the union. Democrats and other advocates of federal power over the states had a field day with Perry’s secession comment. “Talk of secession is an attack on our country. It can be nothing else. It is the ultimate anti-American statement,†declared Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco.
Despite Mr. Dunnam’s contempt, a large number of Texans support the idea of states’ rights and even secession.
CNN and the corporate media have since used Perry’s comment as a lightning rod to portray constitutionalists as racist troglodytes. It is no mistake during the above clip CNN decided to show the consummate politician and opportunist Rick Perry parading around on horse back dressed in cowboy regalia. It underscores the stereotype of the white Southern massa lording over cotton field slaves. It reaffirms the racist narrative and attempts to drive people away from the sovereignty movement.
States’ rights as a not so subtle codeword for racism is now a corporate media talking point. In February, the teleprompter reader Chris Matthews at MSNBC compared Texan political candidate Debra Medina to John Calhoun after she defended the principles of interposition and nullification in response to the encroachments of the federal government.
[video=youtube;o0OsfEziVyw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0OsfEziVyw&feature=player_embedded[/video]
None of this is accidental. It is imperative that the establishment attack the Constitution and the Bill of Rights if they are going to realize the globalist plan to merge our once proud constitutional republic into a world government. In addition to portraying the Constitution as a racist manifesto, they are attempting to criminalize the Tea Party and take down its political candidates.
Link to article:
CNN Declares the Constitution Racist
I don't know about you guys, but I am not surprised at all.
-
Phanterz wrote on 2010-09-25 14:35
There are so many racist laws I couldn't even care.
-
EienNoTsubasa wrote on 2010-09-25 14:56
Uh.....tl;dr?
-
Swordslayer wrote on 2010-09-25 15:20
I only scanned, but from what I've gathered this is stupid. The reason why they passed those laws was the agree with the southern states in a hope to prevent the civil war from breaking out. Then after the civil war southern states were still all "AH A BLACK MAN! >:O" and began taking away their rights. So the government decided to just segregate everything completely as long as it was equal (which obviously didn't work out).
The makers of the constitution were not racist, they were trying to be practical. At the very beginning when Jefferson wrote the declaration, he originally put both white and black men are equal, but Franklin told him to cut that out or else the south wouldn't help them become independent.
Anyway, I don't even know if that's what CNN is arguing, but who cares, they're a news station. They're just trying to draw attention =|
-
Phunkie wrote on 2010-09-25 15:32
Racial equality for all!~
-
Juno wrote on 2010-09-25 17:26
Quote from Swordslayer;165374:
I only scanned, but from what I've gathered this is stupid. The reason why they passed those laws was the agree with the southern states in a hope to prevent the civil war from breaking out. Then after the civil war southern states were still all "AH A BLACK MAN! >:O" and began taking away their rights. So the government decided to just segregate everything completely as long as it was equal (which obviously didn't work out).
The makers of the constitution were not racist, they were trying to be practical. At the very beginning when Jefferson wrote the declaration, he originally put both white and black men are equal, but Franklin told him to cut that out or else the south wouldn't help them become independent.
Anyway, I don't even know if that's what CNN is arguing, but who cares, they're a news station. They're just trying to draw attention =|
You sure about that? Jefferson owned plenty of slaves if I recall~
-
Chillax wrote on 2010-09-25 18:27
Some black people still carry a grudge from those times. Rick just said that state's rights may carry a negative connotation for those people.
-
Cucurbita wrote on 2010-09-25 18:35
My god, this entire article is biased as hell to make CNN look like crap.
OF COURSE the constitution is racist. It was written in times of racism.
The constitution may indeed be a sacred law which defines America, but its easily behind the times and seriously needs a makeover to better fit the culture and world that revolves around the NOW.
You said neutral news is boring and pointless because they're not willing to speak out their thoughts worrying that they might offend someone. Well here it is, and you don't like it, so you rage about it.
And last I checked, the Tea Party really hasn't done a single productive thing except to beat the living life out of anything they don't like. Until they can stop being the white version of "extremists", they're no better than the middle eastern extremists. I don't blame CNN for criminalizing them. They spread slander and fictitious information to get their point across, and they sound like they're ready to torch down something at any given notice.
Now I'm no CNN fan (and seriously, I don't like CNN), but I'm defending them on this one. If Fox news can get away with giving away fake numbers and false facts, claim to be balanced news while talking about republicans in first person but calling democrats in 3rd person, then CNN can voice their opinion on the constitution all they want. Its a war of the media, you guys can hate on it all you want, I'm going back to BBC where the monotonous voice tells me whats really going on in the world. Politics isn't entertainment, it decides what happens to the future of everything. I'm not gonna let rage, hate, bias, and the whole freaking "party" support drag me down.
-
Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-09-25 22:24
Quote from Cucurbita;165521:
My god, this entire article is biased as hell to make CNN look like crap.
OF COURSE the constitution is racist. It was written in times of racism.
The constitution may indeed be a sacred law which defines America, but its easily behind the times and seriously needs a makeover to better fit the culture and world that revolves around the NOW.
You said neutral news is boring and pointless because they're not willing to speak out their thoughts worrying that they might offend someone. Well here it is, and you don't like it, so you rage about it.
And last I checked, the Tea Party really hasn't done a single productive thing except to beat the living life out of anything they don't like. Until they can stop being the white version of "extremists", they're no better than the middle eastern extremists. I don't blame CNN for criminalizing them. They spread slander and fictitious information to get their point across, and they sound like they're ready to torch down something at any given notice.
Now I'm no CNN fan (and seriously, I don't like CNN), but I'm defending them on this one. If Fox news can get away with giving away fake numbers and false facts, claim to be balanced news while talking about republicans in first person but calling democrats in 3rd person, then CNN can voice their opinion on the constitution all they want. Its a war of the media, you guys can hate on it all you want, I'm going back to BBC where the monotonous voice tells me whats really going on in the world. Politics isn't entertainment, it decides what happens to the future of everything. I'm not gonna let rage, hate, bias, and the whole freaking "party" support drag me down.
After the 3/5 compromise, was ammended over, I don't see how one could justifiably say that the Constitution is racist lol. My problem with neutral news is that I would rather read things written by human beings with opinions (Gasp! Opinions?! What?!?!! 9000???). Besides, just because I like opinions doesn't mean I agree with
every opinion (duh). I'm not criticizing them for having an opinion, I'm criticizing them for what their opinion is.
For one, the tea party is one of the only political parties that is still aware that this country has a constitution that it sort of has to follow. And I'm no fan of Fox (Faux) News either.
-
Chillax wrote on 2010-09-25 22:46
Quote from Spartaaaaa;165808:
After the 3/5 compromise, was ammended over, I don't see how one could justifiably say that the Constitution is racist lol. My problem with neutral news is that I would rather read things written by human beings with opinions (Gasp! Opinions?! What?!?!! 9000???). Besides, just because I like opinions doesn't mean I agree with every opinion (duh). I'm not criticizing them for having an opinion, I'm criticizing them for what their opinion is.
For one, the tea party is one of the only political parties that is still aware that this country has a constitution that it sort of has to follow. And I'm no fan of Fox (Faux) News either.
A lot of times, your beloved Infowars reads way too far into something someone says in an attempt to discredit him/her. Rick said, "State's rights is to most people of color, a racist term". He did not say that the Constitution is racist, and he is also not the sole representative of CNN.
The Tea Party has some admirable ideas, but I don't think they are going about this the right way to making them a reality.
-
Spartaaaaa wrote on 2010-09-25 23:08
Quote from Chillax;165819:
A lot of times, your beloved Infowars reads way too far into something someone says in an attempt to discredit him/her. Rick said, "State's rights is to most people of color, a racist term". He did not say that the Constitution is racist, and he is also not the sole representative of CNN.
The Tea Party has some admirable ideas, but I don't think they are going about this the right way to making them a reality.
Yes, but it's still
implying that it is racist. And nowadays in our super-sensitive tolerant society, I would be labeled as racist for thinking that the "people of color" in question are paranoid and way over-thinking the matter.
-
Chillax wrote on 2010-09-26 00:26
Quote from Spartaaaaa;165841:
Yes, but it's still implying that it is racist. And nowadays in our super-sensitive tolerant society, I would be labeled as racist for thinking that the "people of color" in question are paranoid and way over-thinking the matter.
As I said, that interpretation is reading too far into his statement. I could easily say that you are intolerant of different people from your saying that our society is super-sensitive, but there really is no strong basis to my claim. I've heard plenty of comments that I've raised an eyebrow to, but Rick's isn't one of them.