• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bill O’Reilly: Slaves who built White House were ‘well-fed’

Just curious. Not particularly partisan, so what's your point? Slavery was legal. They were relatively well treated. So.....??

I don't think most slaves were relatively "well treated".
 
They weren't castrated either like Islamic slaves, but hey, running down America is what it is all about.

oh no?

How Violent Was American Slavery? Colonial Slave Codes

The South Carolina legislature pioneered these laws in the 1690s, mandating that for the first offense, male and female slaves would be branded with an “R” on the cheek. For a second offense, female slaves would have an ear cut off, while male slaves would be castrated. It is not clear how often these punishments were actually carried out, but one episode of slave castration caused a furor in a South Carolina Baptist congregation in 1710.
 
That is an exception not the rule. Islam castrated almost all male slaves. Do some research and you will find out no one can hold a candle to the cruelness of Islam. But running down America.....

Exception, even though it was the law?

Whatever, I am not running down American but rather admitting to the fact that we did not treat slaves relatively well. If you find that our true history runs us down, then put your blindfold back on.
 
Relatively well? As compared to what, livestock??


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatment_of_slaves_in_the_United_States


Antebellum slavery


https://www.boundless.com/u-s-histo...-122/treatment-of-slaves-in-the-u-s-652-9460/

I guess if you call being owned and treated like it "relatively well"....

I don't think most slaves were relatively "well treated".

I wasn't addressing slavery in general. I was addressing the OP.
 
OMG.

But then, that's the guy who unwittingly showed his ignorance when he stated on his show that he had eaten at an African American restaurant, and was happy to report that they were all well mannered and even ate with utensils. I kid you not. He said that.

Have any context for that? Maybe even a link?
 
Exception, even though it was the law?

Whatever, I am not running down American but rather admitting to the fact that we did not treat slaves relatively well. If you find that our true history runs us down, then put your blindfold back on.

The fact that this country tries to fix it mistakes makes us shine brighter than any other country, and always will. And I do not wear a blindfold, I can handle the fact we will always have enemies. I just wish so many didn't live here.
 
Have any context for that? Maybe even a link?

Nope. I was watching his show when he said it. This was several years ago. I watched his show on occasion, as well as other political entertainment shows.
 
That is an exception not the rule. Islam castrated almost all male slaves. Do some research and you will find out no one can hold a candle to the cruelness of Islam. But running down America.....

Yeah, I bet you I can find a lot of contenders for "most cruel"
 
Just curious. Not particularly partisan, so what's your point? Slavery was legal. They were relatively well treated. So.....??

I find the idea that slaves were used abhorrent. Sure it's a part of history, our history. Certainly not something I'm proud of. That they were well fed means what? Billo makes it sound like a 9 to 5 job.
 
Just curious. Not particularly partisan, so what's your point? Slavery was legal. They were relatively well treated. So.....??
As a reminder, the relevant passage:

Leaders like Hillary Clinton, who has
the guts and the grace to keep coming back and putting
those cracks in that highest and hardest glass ceiling
until she finally breaks through, lifting all of us along
with her.

That is the story of this country, the story that has
brought me to this stage tonight, the story of generations
of people who felt the lash of bondage, the shame of
servitude, the sting of segregation, but who kept on
striving and hoping and doing what needed to be done so
that today, I wake up every morning in a house that was
built by slaves -- and I watch my daughters –
- two beautiful, intelligent, black young women –- playing
with their dogs on the White House lawn. And
because of Hillary Clinton, my daughters –- and all our
sons and daughters -– now take for granted that a woman can
be President of the United States.


So, O'Reilly did a brief history lesson on this claim. His information was correct, but it was downright bizarre for him to mention that the slaves were "well-fed" and had "decent lodging provided by the government," and that Michelle Obama was correct but failed to mention free citizens involved in construction.

I have no idea what he was trying to accomplish there, and he doesn't seem to have clarified his purpose yet. The "WTF" is that it's a tone-deaf statement, which intentionally or not, sounds like it is downplaying the conditions of the slaves. For a guy who claims to love freedom so much, it's a rather odd statement.
 
They weren't castrated either like Islamic slaves, but hey, running down America is what it is all about.

Well there you have it. Our slaves are better treated than theirs!!!! Woohoo!
 
Back
Top Bottom