New RNC chair plans 'off the hook' campaign

[daniel3417]

not that those guys weren't going along with the times, and that they didn't accomplish some pretty important things for this country, but i find it a little humorous that 3 of the 4 presidents you named who stood up for the common man were also slave owners....thomas jefferson being one of the largest slave owners in Virginia in his day

I don't mean to act like that was okay, but we can all agree that the time was very different. I don't think Washington looked out and saw his slaves every morning thinking how inhumane it was.

Thomas Jefferson had children with one of his slaves.

And the Founders wanted there to be a step-by-step reduction in slavery but needed Rutledge from South Carolina to sign the Declaration and he wouldn't do so unless it didn't mention abolition in it. Like I said, it was a very different time.

[RedGoneWILD]

wow, how did that come into play?

well, how can you say that somebody represents the common man, and at the same time they traffic human beings....makes no sense to me.

I'm not saying they weren't great presidents...our country is what it is today because of these men...but the fact is they owned human beings, so how is that representing the common man?

I don't mean to act like that was okay, but we can all agree that the time was very different. I don't think Washington looked out and saw his slaves every morning thinking how inhumane it was.

Thomas Jefferson had children with one of his slaves.

And the Founders wanted there to be a step-by-step reduction in slavery but needed Rutledge from South Carolina to sign the Declaration and he wouldn't do so unless it didn't mention abolition in it. Like I said, it was a very different time.

i agree the time was different, but i just think it's crazy if george washington didn't think owning slaves was inhumane...thomas jefferson owned the woman, he could do what he wanted with her

im not debating their accomplishments as president...im just saying it's hard to say they represented the common man

[OnePimpTiger]

I'm not saying they weren't great presidents...our country is what it is today because of these men...but the fact is they owned human beings, so how is that representing the common man?

i agree the time was different, but i just think it's crazy if george washington didn't think owning slaves was inhumane...thomas jefferson owned the woman, he could do what he wanted with her

im not debating their accomplishments as president...im just saying it's hard to say they represented the common man

But what Daniel is saying is during that time slavery was a common practice...the only reason it might not have represented the "common man" is because everyone couldn't afford slaves. But I think it's adequate to say they represented the common ideals of the time.

[drtom2005]

Like I say, I only ask for someone to represent my interests. That is the purpose of voting. If people want to call that narcissism, then they can just be wrong.

Yes, but does Sarah Palin represent the common man or is she one of them? I would argue she is one of the common people even though she is governor of the 50 state. She didn't know basic facts about the world. This is not good if you want to govern the U.S. And if she is smarter than she let on, shame on her for pandering to people.

[RedGoneWILD]

But what Daniel is saying is during that time slavery was a common practice...the only reason it might not have represented the "common man" is because everyone couldn't afford slaves. But I think it's adequate to say they represented the common ideals of the time.

i'm not disagreeing with you...but by your own quote, you are agreeing with me that they didn't represent the common man...i just dont see the relationship between representing the common man and being a slave owner at the same time...maybe i'm off topic, and maybe it's not cool to bring up the fact some of our countries greatest presidents were slave owners, but i think its valid

if anything, slave owners were the elite...in 1860, 95% of the "free" population in states where slavery was legal did not own a slave...the average slave owner at this time owned 10 human beings...in the 15 states where slavery was legal, there was a population of 12 million people, with 4 million of them being slaves...so 1 out of every 3 people was a slave

[daniel3417]

I don't know what to say. I don't believe either George Washington, who hated political parties, or Thomas Jefferson, who encouraged self-sufficiency to the utmost degree, would be considered people-above-the-rest of all of us this day in time. If you want to hover over the slavery issue, okay, but that was 200 years ago, and no one here can accurately explain how anyone felt about all of it 200 years ago.

[piranhaenter]

Couple comments:

1. The article didn't have any content in it other than a couple of buzz words and "stuff it". I don't even know how anyone can take a position in any way on this article other than to debate if he is correct in not taking a deputy chair.

2. This whole common man thing is crazy. I don't care if the President is a common man or not as long as they keep our country wealthy and protected. I didn't support Mitt Romney in the primaries because he represented the common man (me), I supported him because he knew how to run an economy.

[daniel3417]

2. This whole common man thing is crazy. I don't care if the President is a common man or not as long as they keep our country wealthy and protected. I didn't support Mitt Romney in the primaries because he represented the common man (me), I supported him because he knew how to run an economy.

It's gotten very skewed. My point was that the media, and in particular Bill Maher, try to make the citizens feel stupid for voting for a candidate that strives to relate to the us.

[piranhaenter]

I understand that but you need to tell the a pinko liberal that is saying that stuff that it doesn't matter. You select the best guy for the job. Regardless of how he makes you feel. An Elitist that does a good job is just as good as a common man that does a good job. An Elitist that sucks *** is just as bad as a common man that sucks ***.

It's gotten very skewed. My point was that the media, and in particular Bill Maher, try to make the citizens feel stupid for voting for a candidate that strives to relate to the us.

[mintman2]

i'm not disagreeing with you...but by your own quote, you are agreeing with me that they didn't represent the common man...i just dont see the relationship between representing the common man and being a slave owner at the same time...maybe i'm off topic, and maybe it's not cool to bring up the fact some of our countries greatest presidents were slave owners, but i think its valid

The point (relationship) is that even though it was mainly the elite and wealthy that owned slaves the majority of people, the common man, condoned/approved of it. So just because the common man wasn't actually able to own slaves there views were being represented.


I always get a kick when people use our current value system, which is VERY screwed up in many ways, to judge someone that lived 200 years ago. 200 years from now we'll likely look just as silly.