Next on ‘When Congressmen Attack’ — Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-NC); Update: Sorry…that he got caught
**Written by guest-blogger Doug Powers
You know when you go up to your member of Congress and ask if they support the president’s agenda how they almost always take a swipe at you and then put you in a semi headlock? Yeah, Democrat Rep. Bob Etheridge of N. Carolina did that to a student who approached him on the street.
Etheridge’s opponent Renee Ellmers’ campaign might get some advertising mileage out of this one (suggested slogan: “I’ll focus my swings on knocking out the debt instead of my constituents”):
Getting a little testy, aren’t they?
Newsbusters asks: Did Etheridge commit a crime? Well, Etheridge voted for the health care sham, so he may have done so long before he took a swipe at this kid.
Reminder for Democrats: If somebody comes up to you and expresses a concern for where their tax dollars are going, just do like Charles Rangel and say “None of your damn business” and walk away.
(h/t Big Government)
**Written by guest-blogger Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
***
Update (MM): Bob “Headlock” Etheridge is sorry…that he got caught:
Rep. Bob Etheridge apologized Monday for his physical confrontation with two young men who identified themselves as students and asked if the North Carolina Democrat “fully supports the Obama agenda.”
“I have seen the video posted on several blogs. I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved.
Read the rest of his pathetic response, which blames “intrusive and partisan” politics for his behavior and ends with this triple-snorter:
“I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse.”
***
Help GOP challenger Renee Elmers send Bob Etheridge home.
Democrats blame the messenger.
Update 2:52pm Easter: Etheridge at apology presser…”All of us have bad days, but that’s no excuse.”
Update: More video via Breitbart via Hot Air.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
44 Comments
Senate finally passes a budget approves bill striking word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
May 24, 2012 11:22 AM by Doug Powers
191 CommentsStammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPig Maher’s boy Bill Burton mocks my support of Hatch challenger Dan Liljenquist
May 23, 2012 11:37 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsFree speech blogburst: Show solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers; Update: It’s Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day; Donation fund for targets
May 23, 2012 05:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
74 Comments
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid’s sexist crony gets the boot
May 23, 2012 05:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
31 CommentsPalin officially endorses desperate, clingy Orrin Hatch; time to rally around Dan Liljenquist
May 22, 2012 11:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
83 CommentsGOP Senators question upcoming $1 million Hawaiian conference for Ninth Circuit Court
May 21, 2012 03:12 PM by Doug Powers
151 Comments
Categories: Politics
JustOneMinute
» Mama Also Said There Be Days Like ThisPundit & Pundette
» Patterico's chilling account of harassment
I’d love to see Pelosi apologize.Gawd, what a sadist/masochist…!!!
The strain on that tuning key the plastic surgeons installed in the back of her head would be overwhelming…
There would be wild, loose flesh flying everywhere…!!!
As Obamas people always say.
Never let a good crisis go to waste. Thats where we are as a nation and it’s propogated by the leader of the country.
What goes around comes round.
On June 14th, 2010 at 4:47 pm, babiesgrandma said:
Thank you, but I must correct one typo in that comment…
Yeah, well Cicero never had someone cut him off without signaling during rush hour!
I feel like saying this again:
Etheridge works for us.
Any employee who treated his boss the way Etheridge treated that citizen would be FIRED. IMMEDIATELY!
It’s not enough for Etheridge to be defeated in November and leave office in January. Etheridge needs to leave NOW!
Claiming a “bad day” is no excuse.
Do you think an employee could say, “Sorry, boss, that I put you in a headlock… I was just having a bad day” and have any hope of keeping his job? No way!
Bob Etheridge, will you please go away now?!
Maybe I heard wrong, but…
he was offered the opportunity to excuse his conduct as the result of a bad day (by one of those
reporters), and he declined to take it. He said we all have bad days, and that was no excuse, which was the totally correct response. No?
What is “my scenario?”
The kids may as well have approached the Congressman with the script I provided because that’s exactly what they wanted to get.
Surely, you’re not under the false impression that the kids would rather have had him answered, “I support some portions of the Obama agenda, fellas.”
The Congressman gave them something much better (and exactly what they wanted) all too freely.
Now, what’s your problem?
Ragspierre,
Etheridge needs to fire himself for his unacceptable and inexcusable behavior.
Even if he turned down an excuse offered by a reporter, that doesn’t change the fact that when his employer asked him a question, not only did he not answer the question, he physically accosted his employer. No employer should have to tolerate that from an employee, and Etheridge needs to go.
He has lost the privilege of representing “We the People”. I respect “innocent until proven guilty”, but the video evidence speaks for itself, and Etheridge has admitted his behavior was wrong.
Did George Allen receive sympathy or excusing of his “macaca” comment? How about Trent Lott for his comment? And they didn’t even physically assault anyone.
Etheridge needs to leave Congress NOW.
I don’t really care if he is criminally charged – rags or chap may correct me, but I believe it would only be a misdemeanor anyway. And whether or not his obligatory appology was sincere, the damage is done and he will likely pay for this at the polls, as I believe he should.
I guess my take is that though elected officials are human, we ought to be able to hold them to a higher standard of conduct as his title “Representative” suggests. And doing this with a camera in his face seems to introduce a serious dopey factor into the equation. This bahavior is not just wrong, it’s abusive and seems to indicate a serious character flaw. I can’t imagine myself or anyone I respect acting that way under any circumstances. If he were my rep, conservative or not, I wouldn’t vote for him again.
Wow. Just wow.
I salute the kid for his restraint in not using the perfect excuse to beat the crap out of old Bob. I doubt that Bob would ever have the use of his right arm had he done that to me.
I agree with you. The conversation seems to have devolved into a debate on how serious a crime he committed. I’d be more inclined to view it as an assault against his constituents, in that it’s clear that he is one of the (apparent) majority of members of the government who view themselves as above us (i.e. ruling us), rather than as our representatives. It would have cost him nothing to politely answer or decline to answer the question and proceed on his way, but it was just too much of an affront to his ego and his perceived privileged status.
I do not believe a Representative or Senator should hove to a higher standard than the rest of us.
It should be EXACTLY the same.
I think that Etheridge SHOULD resign, personally. He has committed multiple crimes.
While I think his apology
ismay be sincere, an apology is never exoneration. Sometimes, our conduct exacts a stronger consequence beyond mere contrition, and IF WE ARE LUCKY, we have an opportunity to say “sorry”.BTW, happy birthday fellow Doggies…!!!
Do you think he should be prosecuted, Rags?
It’s been a fun day to be an NC Republican! While I don’t live in ‘neck lock’ Bob’s district, I support Renee Ellmers, the candidate that will be running against him in November.
You want Bob gone, go here and help!
http://www.reneeforcongress.com/
Here’s the radio interview with Ed Morrisey :
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7662240/highlight/81566
On June 14th, 2010 at 7:46 pm, Ragspierre said:
I’ve followed this series of commentaries, as usual, you are well argued and presented.
I knew there was a reason I liked you besides the well reasoned arguments. Now I know.
Happy 235th US Army!
My guess is that politicians have been going off the rails for years, but have yet to figure out that now everyone has a camera and everything they do or say will end up on the Internet.
The odds are against people getting away with this kind of lunatic behavior. There are millions of cell phones in this city and most of them are video capable.
If you screw up in public odds are somebody is going to grab it on video or pictures.
This may not be new behavior and they may be used to getting away with it but those days are over.
Funny thing is this guy KNEW he was being taped and didn’t seem to think about the implications of assaulting someone on tape! That is either stupid or drunk or both…
I hope he get’s prosecuted but I bet he won’t. Maybe he can form a 2012 ticket with Alvin Greene and run as the Felon Party from the Carolinas.
Do you think all crimes should be prosecuted, WE82?
Another democratic politician who thinks he is a demigod. Oh please.
Chaps;
I guess if I had the mind of a prosecutor, I would prosecute. Happily, I have avoided that calamity.
But, as I hope you know, there is this broad gulf between what is right and wrong, and what is crime.
OJ was exonerated in a criminal trial. He was, and is, a murderer.
Well, I certainly believe all your crimes should be prosecuted. It would probably be tedious but it would keep a lot of lawyers and judges otherewise engaged and prevent them from other, more harmful pursuits…
My only crime is caring too much. That and the dead hooker in my trunk.
But anyways…I am genuinely curious. Do you think that all crimes should be prosecuted?
On June 14th, 2010 at 8:03 pm, ssnark said:
Thank you! I was a very small, humble Doggie. But a good Doggie…
Break out a fresh box of Dutch Masters Gold’n Honey?
Do you think all wine should be imbibed? All chocolate eaten? All beautiful women romanced? All wrongs avenged?
eeeeEEEwwww…!!!
Yes. No. Yes. No.
Geez, I have had wine and bier that should never be consumed. I once tried a Belgian bier called Jupiler that was not fit for swine.
There are a couple of wines from some parts of the Balkan that might be best used to clean toilets.
Nothing is ever as cut and dried as we might like…
Okay. Lets make it a bit more concrete. Remember ACORN? Remember how it came out that they had forfeited their corporate charter in Maryland, but were still operating? That is actually a crime.
Do you support prosecution of this specific statute?
I was once planning legal action against a client who had not paid a bill for nearly a year. I went down to the DC government to do a little research on the company and discovered their charter had expired for some time yet they were still doing business in the District.
I alluded to this fact in a letter in a dunning letter to the organization and, low and behold, my invoice was promptly paid. It paid for a nice tropical honeymoon…
Is that a “yes”, then?
If all wine were imbibed, we would have no wine vinegar, brandy or cognac. Some women do not care to be romanced.
I support the complete imbibement of all of those things.
Support Army flight surgeon Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin as
he faces court martial because our government won’t prove that Obama is eligible to hold the office of Commander-in-chief.
The student was a zombie in disguise. Etheridge had to grab him before the student zombie could suck out his brains thereby rendering Etheridge incapable of a decent apology. Ooops, too late.
Nonsense! A Zombie would never attack a Dim-o-crat! They would starve!
Not necessarily!
Well, I didn’t say Zombies couldn’t BE Dim-o-crats. I just said they couldn’t subsist on them!
So if they were Zombies they wouldn’t attack themselves, yet they seem to be chowing down on each other like the Donner Party. I’m confused.
Well, frankly, Zombies can be confusing. And they can indulge in self-destructive behavior which is probably what often leads to their current predicament. The fact that Zombies may do something doesn’t mean it is beneficial to them. Of course, the same holds true for Dim-o-crats. The main difference is that Zombies no longer suffer the same stigma as Dim-o-crats as Zombies actually serve a useful purpose…
Ah, the resolution is simple, Swede. Remember, Zombies and Deemocrats are not consistent. Zombie Deemocrats less so, if anything.
Dems defend the soon-to-be former NC Congresscritter. Well, PubScout found another friend who agrees with him. You can tell a lot about a person by his friends…
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Dems_defed_Etheridge_attack_Breitbart.html?showall
I guess you could think of a Zombie attacking a Dim-o-crat like a junk-food-junky chowing down on a carton of Twinkies. Both might be full afterward but neither will have gained any nourishment. Empty heads, empty calories…
No opinion on 4A-919, WE82? Or maybe you think Acorn shouldn’t be prosecuted?
If he was truly sorry for his actions, he’d retire from his position. He’s a grown man, who needs to take responsibility for his actions.
If I were to do that to one of my customers at my work, I’d be fired so fast, my head would spin.
He should be held to the same standards. After all, he works for the people. At least, that’s what his job description states.
I think the A4919 is a functional sidearm but if you are expecting Zombies you really want The Judge from Taurus. Of course, you will want a quick loader and lots of practice since it is a revolver with only 5 rounds.
And you could carry two! A matching pair is always stylish…
Why is it so hard for you to say whether or not you support prosecution of a law that ACORN itself violated?
Why do you seem to hate our allies and love our domestic enemies?
I love my allies. I am not fond of your allies. Then again, you are the domestic enemy.
It is not difficult for me to say whether I support prosecution for a specific statute or not. I could do so quite easily. I simply have not chosen to do so up to this point.
Why is it so hard for you to recognize the difference…
He must be a Dim-o-crat Zombie!
You insult England and refuse to renounce ACORN. Your posts belie your position.
You might as well throw on a “Free Mumia” and start collecting welfare.
The major problem with The Judge is that it is HEAVY! You are not going to throw this weapon around lightly. It only weighs 37 ounces (not sure if that is loaded or unloaded) but it feels a lot heavier! And it is bulky. You are NOT going to carry this as a concealed weapon.
The A4919 would almost certainly be lighter but it probably wouldn’t be suitable for concealed carry either.
Yes, I must say I would be opposed to A4919. I feel that relying solely on this sidearm for self-defense would be nearly criminal.
4A-919. Not A4919.
Apparently you are dyslexic as well as dull and disingenuous.
For goodness sakes. The 4A-919 is a bathroom vanity. YOU might wish to carry one of those into action when confronted by Zombies but it would not be my personal choice!
Maybe you think appeasing Zombies with a quick refreshing towel, hot or cold, will dissuade them from their unholy pursuits but I suffer no such illusions! No, sir (or ma’am as the case may be), I prefer at least a .45 caliber sidearm.
Pathetic ACORN lover.
Why are you incapable of answering the question? Are you Bertha Lewis’s baby’s daddy?
Of course, in a pinch, if you can’t put your hands on a suitable firearm, you can always try Australian Table Wines when confronting Zombies.
Alas, I have always assumed you were the love-child of Mz. Lewis and Barney Frank after they shared several bottles of “Cuiver Reserve Chateau Bottled Nuit San Wagga Wagga!”
Let’s avoid numbers altogether since they just seem to addle your Piedmont-bred, corn-pone brain even further. I’ll put it this way:
Do you support the prosecution of someone that operates under the guise of a corporate entity in clear contrsvention of the law after the corporate charter has been revoked, like ACORN did?
Well, if one were to wax philosophical, I would have to say there are many waxy philosophical points to consider.
I imagine that someone of your ilk and bent would turn to Heidegger for inspiration and that you might conclude “The Fuhrer alone is the present and future German reality and its law. Learn to know ever more deeply: from now on every single thing demands decision, and every action responsibility.”
Of course, I assume you would take them out and hang them and then give them a fair trial. Or is that only for the Palin family? I get your murky rants on jurisprudence confused when you haven’t been drinking as much as usual. I’ll have to trust to your interpretation of “Mein Kampf” unless the copy you carry in your purse has become so worn as to be illegible…
Sydney Syrup! Sounds like that would pair well with Twinkies, Lil Debbies and Moon Pies. Where can I get me some of that vino? We gonna have us a PARTY!
Well, since you clearly suck at waxing philosophical, maybe you should aim a bit lower and just try to answer the simple yes/no question I posed.
If THAT proves too difficult for you, maybe we can start with your basic shapes and colors and try to build up from there.
I do find it curious that Chappy is apparently singularly concerned with Maryland State statute 4A-919 when considering the on-going criminal enterprise that is ACORN.
But, considering Chappy’s numerous peculiarities, this one isn’t as peculiar as most…
I find it curious that you refuse to say that this criminal statute should be enforced.
Actually, I don’t find it curious at all. You are afraid that this is a trap and you will be exposed as an intellectual fraud and partisan schill.
Let me just add that you should fear no such thing. You were exposed as a fraud and a shill long ago.
Chaps:
How many posts have you tried to stir up a fight here now?
You, lay a trap…!!?? Why, who could imagine that you’d do something so nefarious…???
Why don’t you tell us what you’ve been
layingdiggingsaying. Right on out, now.Well, I didn’t expect the Spanish Inquisition…
Well, I suppose as many posts as WE82 has written to avoid answering a simple question. Why should any nefariuos purpose on my part affect the answer to what I asked? Surely whether or not ACORN violated the statute, and whether or not such violation should be prosecuted, is not subjective based on who is asking.
I refer to the previous post…and this obvious restating of the point and of course, this.
Chaps, geez…
give up on the snare!!! Just come out and say what it is that you are getting at.
I expect War has played the game enough to NOT fall for your devices.
I guess Chappy is off to seek other amusement since it appears that nobody is buying his goods tonight…
On June 14th, 2010 at 8:48 pm, chapoutier said:
I tend to disagree Chapoutier, not all wine should be imbibed, were it so, I would be unable to enjoy my Remy Martin XO as it is made from unimbibed wine. On the other hand all but spoiled chocolate should be eaten. I’d expand and expound to say that all women should be romanced, although not necessarily by the same person.
All wrongs avenged, that’s a sticky wicket though. Once I would have answered yes. In dotage, I think not the petty ones or those that have been atoned for by a life showing contrition and that the wrong was not committed again (not because of external enforcement). I do believe in Justice as opposed to law if that helps.
As to the question you posed to WarEagle82. He and I rarely, see eye to eye. But let me essay an answer to your question regarding Maryland statue 4A-919. It is the prerogative of the state of Maryland to prosecute or not prosecute ACORN for a violation of its statues. If there were justice in the land vice law, ACORN would cease to exist. Since we are a land consumed by law and lawyers, what a poor simple Soldier would desire is not what will happen and I must perforce abjure to the rule of law and allow lawyers to haggle in time honored and codified manner set forth by merchants and princes to do in miniature what they do throughout the world.
How gross is it that the stinking old pervert touched that young guy. How do you get that kind of filth off of your clothes? Assault and battery and several separate attacks by the congresspervert mandate criminal charges being filed against the pervert as well as a personal liability lawsuit. Just imagine what would have happened to this kid if he had assaulted the old pervert? The same should be done to the congresspervert. Arrested, sent to jail awaiting a bond hearing and a FBI investigation to see if there is a pattern and practice of assaulting citizens. He also looked drunk if you ask me.
THROW Ethredige IN JAIL! He is a risk to the community. Next time he might offer a young woman a car ride across a bridge.
Politicalquano,
When I first saw that video clip and saw the congressperson grab the young mand and pull him close, I felt sick inside for exactly that reason. I felt as if I were watching a sexual asault.
Gross!!!!!!
Time for his resignation. His apology was a joke. He apologized because he got caught.
Uhm, do we give him a pass, accept the apology as given – which is in general – not even directly offered to those he assaulted?
The congressman is in a pickle. He must have consumed alchohol having had to stay at a Pelosi fundraiser! Looking at Pelosi (for more than the split second I allow myself) must be heck for anyone! So he was soused and out of his mind walking out of the event… Then was asked a question he couldn’t answer honestly! Wham! He snapped!
Be kind to an elderly, distraught liberal. Retire him, now.
I’ll accept his apology when I accept his resignation.
Government officials cannot be allowed to act like this. Violence from the government towards its citizens is as serious as cancer.
ssnark, I allow for the imbibement to occur after the wine has evolved to a new form, so long as it is eventually drunk.
This is not in jest. I abhor the notion of people buying great wine for “investment” purposes. Wine is meant to be drunk and shared.
An apology is a good thing-it seems to be an admission of guilt. If the young man decides to file charges perhaps the apology can be read in court.
On June 15th, 2010 at 8:56 am, chapoutier said:
Whew! That’s a good thing although perhaps you might agree with me that some things called ‘wine’ (e.g., Ripple, Boone’s Farm and certain Albanian and Latvian vintages) aren’t really fit for human consumption.
I completely agree with your in this regard. OTOH, were it not for some of those people I would not have had the opportunity to imbibe a nice Taittinger ’64 Brut in the late 1980s or a Chateau Lafite Rothschild ’59 at about the same period. I still have a magnum of the former and a bottle of the latter in a safety deposit box (wine does not travel well) for a special occasion. So, investor/collectors aren’t evil. There are some things I’d love to try like the Remy Martin Louis XIII which I’ve heard may be one of the smoothest cognacs ever.
Is that Piedmont, or Tidewater?
Have you been reading Thomas Harris recently, chap?
Yes, wine is to be shared. Why keep it? And a woman cannot get enough romance. That’s one of our flaws.
I doubt Chappy would know the Piedmont from the Tidewater when it comes to the Carolinas, especially if you catch him on one of those rare days when he isn’t as inebriated as usual.
And don’t knock corn-pone, especially served with greens, unless you have sampled a fair share.
Yes, I am a proud Southerner. As we like to say in South Carolina, “American by birth, Southerner by the Grace of God!”
I have never lived north of the Mason-Dixon line, at least on THIS continent, and that is by design. Though on my recent trips into northern climes I have fared better than several of my relatives who made that journey during “the Recent Unpleasantness.” Gettysburg is actually a pleasant little village as long as there aren’t 50,000 Yankees shooting at you.
And, ssnark, do we really not see eye-to-eye very often? I certainly don’t recall a recent disagreement…
And why hasn’t Etheridge been charged? And why hasn’t he done the decent thing and resign? Oh, of course, he is a Dim-o-crat and is largely incapable of doing the decent thing.
On June 15th, 2010 at 10:14 am, WarEagle82 said:
Not eye-to-eye doesn’t necessarily mean in total opposition. We don’t but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. I think we tend to agree on broader principles.
ssnark,
What exactly are your views on “broad principles?” I am mostly in favor of them, except for those Birkenstock-wearing, tree-hugging, leftists types that don’t shave their legs or pits…
Me thinks what I saw on you tube constitutes an assault (harmful or OFFENSIVE touching) which I believe constitutes a crime which I think constitutes a removable offense from the congress.
On June 15th, 2010 at 11:01 am, WarEagle82 said:
Well, my first wife attended Woodstock, used to like her Birkenstocks, wasn’t 100% tree hugging but did want to save seals, whales and was big on keeping the ocean clean. Of course she was 6′ tall, blond, dressed well but on a budget I couldn’t believe much less argue with and the only time she didn’t shave was when we were on Maui camping and couldn’t. But she stuck with me, put me back together and sent me out often citing “Με την ασπίδα σας ή σε αυτό” (With your shield or on it.)
Otherwise, I believe that almost any woman is beautiful (Helen Thomas being a notable exception). But being an unreconstructed Southerner, I’m partial to Southern women. I tend to date brunettes,with a couple of redheads thrown in for variety and marry blonds. I also seem to like tall women. I guess those are my “broad principles”.
Ah, the Southern Belle! Oddly enough I never really dated one but I admired quite a few. I did date a New Yorker once but when she referred to Lee and Jackson as “traitors” I knew it wouldn’t work…
My wife is from a bit further south than I am (around 14 degrees north in her case) so I suppose you could consider her a southerner too.
I have met a few women that I do not consider beautiful so I guess that is a point where we part company but beauty is in the eye of the beholder so I grant you that right.
I have it on good authority that the primary difference is that folks from Tidewater don’t reek of moonshine and despair until around 11 in the morning, whereas your typical good ol’ boy from Piedmont will be ripe by 9, 9:30 at the latest.
Really? I’m only familiar with the Piedmont & Tidewater in Virginia. But then again, I’m not from there…
And the ‘Virginians’ never let me forget it.
I will say this: I think the student should have introduced himself out of courtesy. “Sir, I’m Joe Smith, student at XYZ College. I’m working on a project. Do you support Obama’s agenda,” etc. The congress critter was wrong in what he did, but I think the student should take a little responsibility for his lack of common courtesy. I never walk up to somebody I dont know without introducing myself.
Chappy,
You really should know better than to accept the word of whatever Upstate New York moose you are currently defiling. Then again, you probably do not know better…
Did you make sure that moose has an current charter in Maryland?
On June 15th, 2010 at 11:32 am, WarEagle82 said:
See, not quite eye-to-eye, but not to the point of it being worth argument.
I do draw the line on anyone male or female who fails to understand that the War of Yankee Aggression was over State’s Rights and not over an institution that was dying as a result of changes coming from developments in industrialization and changes in the marketplace. General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson and many prominent Confederates believed that slavery as an institution was contrary to God’s will.
A moose? There are hardly any moose in NY at all. Maybe a couple hundred in the whole state.
At least pick an animal that is is someway associated with the region. For example when insulting NC, I might reference the Plott Hound, the Eastern Box Turtle, or the only slightly rarer Piedmont Boundandgaggednakedboyinmyrootcellar.
Dying?
The 1860 US Census counted 3,953,760 slaves in the US. Which was up 750,000 from the 1850 census. Which was up from the 1840 census. Which was up from the 1830 census. The rate of growth may have been slowing down by the time the War of Southern Smackdown rolled around. But it was hardly “dying.”
On June 15th, 2010 at 12:17 pm, chapoutier said:
Number of slaves is hardly a good measure of the institution. The importation of slaves to the US stopped in 1808. What you’re seeing is the result of births vs. deaths. Now if you could provide the number of slave owners over time, you might be able to argue your point. While it is true that over 55% of the population of the South were slaves, it is also true that “Most plantations were owner-operated and the planters themselves often worked in the fields. Of the total southern white population of 8,099,760 in 1860, only 384,000 owned slaves. Of these, 10,780 owned fifty or more. It was calculated that about 88 per cent of America’s slave-owners owned twenty slaves or less.”
So we have less than 5% of the South holding/owning any slaves in 1860. In 1850 that number was closer to 6% and in 1840 that number was about 7% At least according to a 1970 study of slavery and its economic impacts by the US Bureau of Census. It is upon this that I base my argument and not upon population growth among slaves. It should also be noted that fewer than 1,000 people held more than 20 slaves and that only about sixteen held 500 or more in 1860, the vast majority were due to population increases in existing populations
Please, you’re a wonderful attorney within your field. But leave the criticism of the South to Southerners who know our strengths and weaknesses far better than outsiders.
Yes, I’m just another corn-pone eating, moonshine swilling, Collar greens, grits and white gravy eating, rednecked, chest thumpin’, “me Tarzan you Jane’in’ “, illiterate who clings to his Torah and his firearms and was too stupid and uneducated to avoid serving in combat with his country’s military.
So, you can feel smug and superior OK?
Huh? That is absurd. You present a lot of interesting facts that have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that an institution that is adding numbers to its roll at a pretty good clip (75,000 a year) can hardly be considered “dying” by any reasonable measurement. What is the significance to the slave whether he was born into it or imported over here? Does that change the fact he is in servitude? And what significance is it that, as time went on, less people owned more slaves? Is that supposed to somehow offset the increase in sheer numbers?
I suppose we could have just said “screw it” and waited another decade to see if we could reduce the slave owning population another percentage point (while allowing those who did own them to own even more) pat ourselves on the back and call it a day. Maybe by 1920 or so, we could have distilled the slave owning population to just one guy named Gary who owned all of the approximately 6 million slaves that would have existed at that point.
As for me picking on WE82′s heritage, that is entirely personal to him. I mean no disrespect, or any serious criticism, to any southerner out there besides WarEagle, whom I do find odious.
Besides, I thought you were from Hawaii.
I am honored to not be numbered among Chappy’s friends. That may be the greatest honor Chappy could bestow upon anyone.
And I am sure the couple of hundred Moose in New York have learned to be wary when approached by Chappy…
On June 15th, 2010 at 2:08 pm, chapoutier said:
Just because birth rates vs. mortality rates are positive (population growth) is not at all indicative of the growth of an institution but simply of population growth. The facts are that you cannot refute that the number of people owning slaves was falling at 1 percent every ten years for some thirty years. Not that the percentage of people in the South owning slaves (less than 5% in 1860 according to the census bureau) was all that many to begin with. In terms of gross change in the number of slave owners in the South what we see is that between 1840 and 1860 the number of slave owners dropped by a little more than 11,000 over that period of time. Also remember that the total number of slaveholders accounted for less than 4 percent of the total free populace. So you somehow imagine that all of the other 95% of the populace was so enamored of slavery that this was the issue over which they’d secede? I’d probably say that the notion was preposterous in face of the facts.
Population growth would tend to indicate that slaves generally bred faster than mortality rates and that is all. Or did you expect Slave owners to simply cull their excess populace?
As to my origins, yes born and raised in Hawaii which if you’d care to note is well South of the Mason-Dixon line. Moreover, my great grandmother was enslaved in the 1890s by the former missionary third son of a New England family there.
Slavery it seems wasn’t just a Southern institution after all as much as Yankees would like you to believe.
I did my senior tutorial thesis in History as an undergraduate on the roots of the War of Yankee Aggression. You’re getting the notes from some of that work here (hence the 1970 dates).
OOPs!
So you somehow imagine that all of the other
95%96% of the populace was so enamored of slavery that this was the issue over which they’d secede?I hate rounding errors!
And now Chappy will ask you about 4A-919 and he is not asking about a .22 caliber sidearm or a bathroom vanity cabinet…
BTW, facts don’t matter to Chappy. He is an ambulance-chasing, left-wing, Marxist lawyer from Upstate New York with an unnatural interest in large quadrupeds. You’ll get nowhere with him with facts and reason.
You still haven’t explained why this matters if the number of persons actually enslaved continued to increase, which is a number you cannot refute. Again, take my extreme example. If one person owned 5 million slaves, would we say that slavery was virtually nonexistent in the US? No. We would (rightly) focus on the fact that 5 million people were legally being held in bondage.
And for the record, I am not arguing the causes of the Civil War. I am simply arguing that the institution of slavery was in no way “dying” by the time the Civil War came along. But I would say that 1) support for slavery was widespread in the South, whether or not everyone owned a slave and 2) I’ll bet the people actually making the decisions, the political elite, had a hell of a lot higher slave ownership rate than 4%.