Members of the Squad are part of the Blame-America-First wing of the Democrat party. They see America as a special embodiment of all evil. They’ve drunk deeply of the 1619 Project poison.
Occasions like the 4th of July bring out a special seething against America, in which they spout their most loathsome ideas.
Our response? We came up with original merch that will let you give them the middle finger in words even they can understand. If they can’t handle history, try some math so clear that even they couldn’t POSSIBLY miss the point: 1776 > 1619
So, which loathsome idea did they throw at us this time?
There were several contenders we could have chosen from. But since Cori Bush is an actual elected member of freaking Congress… we’ll go with her.
Here’s her hot take:
Oooh boy did she get dragged for that one.
As enjoyable as it might be to post the replies ripping her a new one, we’re going to take this in another direction.
Here’s a teaser from that same thread before we get into the meat of it.
Many would look at some of the early work of Douglass and fully expect him to wholeheartedly agree with Cori Bush. His infamous 4th of July speech comes to mind.
That does not tell the whole story of where Douglass landed on his view of the Constitution and the Framers.
If we really want to make this comparison interesting, we can raise the bar for ourselves. Let’s go for the most convincing version of the argument possible by deliberately drawing from sources that even the Squad’s activist left supporters would accept as authoritative on the topic.
The following quotes are taken from an article about Frederick Douglass written by ‘Black Perspectives’.
“Black Perspectives is the award-winning blog of the African American Intellectual History Society (AAIHS).” The title of the article is “Frederick Douglass and the United States Constitution”
Let’s see if Douglass agreed with Cori Bush who clearly has nothing but contempt for both America’s founding and her founding documents.
The opening three paragraphs mince no words.
The United States Constitution has a powerful and enduring place in the career of Frederick Douglass. Once he committed to his belief in the Constitution as a valid document, he used it as a tool in his arsenal to advocate for the freedom, and later the civil rights of African Americans and women. Initially, Douglass found himself at odds with his fellow Garrisonian abolitionists; later his support of the Fifteenth Amendment and Black male suffrage was opposed by some of his White female allies. Despite the conflict with friends and allies, he would continue to view the Constitution as the ideal to which the country had yet to fulfill. Like all great thinkers, Douglass was a complicated man whose position evolved throughout his lifetime.
Douglass publicly changed his stance on the Constitution in the spring of 1851. The American Anti-Slavery Society established a new policy denouncing any paper that opposed the organization’s belief in the Constitution as a pro-slavery document at its 1851 annual meeting. Douglass, a longtime member, announced that under this new policy his paper The North Star was ineligible for their endorsement. He published his new stance in the May 15, 1851 edition of The North Star, stating that his interpretation of the Constitution as an anti-slavery document established a precedent which allowed it to be “wielded on behalf of emancipation.”
As Philip Foner has argued, the transition to political abolitionism made Douglass more moderate and palatable to the masses. By acknowledging the validity of the Constitution, Douglass inserted himself into a new dialogue and demonstrated he was a participant in American society rather than an agitator. Under his new thought, Douglass stated that recent presidential administrations had led the government away from its founding ideals. It was therefore the duty of every American citizen to use the Constitution and political processes at their disposal to bring the country in line with its founding intent. By becoming a political abolitionist, Douglass challenged the country to reconsider who was a citizen and entitled to protection under the Constitution. In 1852, he declared that the proper interpretation of the Constitution should always be construed toward freedom and natural rights despite the ambiguity of a particular situation. Douglass’s shift on the Constitution would inform the rest of his career. The Constitution would become the lens through which he would advocate for the freedom and natural rights of all people, African Americans and women.
Bold text has been added to draw the reader’s eye to key points.
The article closed with the following lines:
The tension between the burden and benefits of citizenship characterized the ongoing battle for civil rights in the United States. Yet even at the height of the violence and disenfranchisement of Black people, Douglass found no fault with the Constitution. He continued to hold the Constitution in high reverence, stating that his life’s work had been to see the principles of liberty and humanity expressed in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence fully realized without regard to race, gender, or religion.
It sure doesn’t seem like he’s looking at the same America, or even the same Framers and Founders that professional agitators like Cori Bush are talking about.
The question we are left with is simple.
Who’s vision of America ought we to see as more authoritative?
Do we accept the 1619 Project assumptions of Cori Bush and the Squad in their contempt of America and those who founded it?
Or do we defer to the actual life and experience of one of America’s greatest statesmen, who bore in his own flesh the marks of his slavery, who conducted those famous debates with Abraham Lincoln, and who personally played an instrumental role in, you know, Emancipation?
John The Baptist: A Rude Awakening Precedes A Great Awakening.
This timely little tome chronicles the politically incorrect ministry of one of God’s most effective wildmen, John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Christ’s ministry.
The abrasive message of repentance John preached 2000 years ago is still confrontational and offensive today — but it is also life-changing.
In our putrid, worldly culture that has turned away from God, this book is a must-read for every Christian.
Available in paperback for those of you who like the feel of the pages in your hot, little hands, on Kindle to keep it right at your fingertips, and as an epic Audiobook.
