This guy is a Chumphshit…He has just burned down any reespect or reputation he may have had.
‘Too many white people don’t know history’: Roland Martin schools the hell out of Gen. Kelly on the Civil War
Commentator Roland Martin delivered a scathing rebuttal to White House Chief of Staff John Kelly’s comments that the root cause of the Civil War was the “inability to compromise.”
Appearing on MSNBC’s Velshi & Ruhle, the popular political observer lashed out at Kelly, saying he needs to read a history book — later adding that Fox News host Laura Ingraham, who didn’t push back at Kelly’s comments during the interview, should brush up on her history too.
Responding to Kelly’s Civil War comment, that “men and women of good faith on both sides helped them make their stand,” Martin was off and running.
“History is history, but for fact’s sake, let’s tell the truth,” Martin began. “First of all, historic fact number one. The Civil War was fought over slavery. 11 southern states left the United States in 1860 and 1861 in order to protect the institution of slavery following the election of President Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was an avowed opponent of the expansion of slavery that said he would not interfere with it where it already existed.”
“The debate over the future of slavery led to secession, and secession brought about a war,” he continued. “The first state to secede, South Carolina, on December 20th, 1860, approved of an ordinance of secession and offered an invitation to form a confederacy of slave holding states,” he added.
Turning specifically back to General Kelly, Martin insisted that his comments shouldn’t be allowed to go unchallenged.
“I’m not going to allow four stars stuck on stupid to simply go on,” he lectured. “Here’s a man who’s utterly clueless. For him to say, ‘well, we could have compromised,’ really? We did compromise. It was a thing called United States Constitution and you know what that said? If you’re a black, you’re 3/5ths of a human.”
“How about the Hayes/Tilden compromise that ended the 12 years of Reconstruction and ushered in Jim Crow, removed the federal troops from the last three remaining southern capitals?” he added. ” So I need John Kelly to actually go back and read a history book that my 12-year-old nieces are reading right now because clearly he fell asleep in history.”
“We have too many people in this country who are white who do not know history and who want to somehow glorify these Confederate leaders,” Martin continued. “I’m telling you right now, they ain’t my founding fathers and they’re not my leaders. We need to have real history. And I will say to John Kelly: shame on you.”
“Shocking that someone charged with defending their country, in some profound way, does not comprehend the country they claim to defend.”
White House chief of staff John Kelly claimed Monday that a “lack of ability to compromise led to the Civil War.” But the reality is that the path to civil war was marked by numerous compromises on slavery, as the author Ta-Nehisi Coates pointed out on Twitter Tuesday morning. In fact, the war started because of the people who wanted to maintain and expand the right to own other people as property.
“I mean, like, it’s called The three fifths compromise for a reason,” Coates tweeted early Tuesday, referring to the constitutional provision that increased representation for slave states in the House of Representatives in 1787.
“But it doesn’t stand alone,” Coates said. “Missouri Compromise. Kansas-Nebraska Act.”
After the Civil War, he later tweeted, there was also the Compromise of 1877, which further disenfranchised black people once federal troops withdrew from Southern states.
President Abraham Lincoln, Coates noted, also compromised on several occasions. Not only did he not actually want to abolish slavery, but he “repeatedly sought to compromise by paying reparations ― to slaveholders ― and shipping blacks out the country.”
He didn’t even mention the Compromise of 1850, which among other things allowed the South to implement slavery in new U.S. territories gained during the Mexican-American War.
The enslaved black populations of the South, Coates said, “did not need modern white wokeness to tell them slavery was wrong.”
Kelly defended Gen. Robert E. Lee on Monday, calling him an “honorable man” ― a declaration that Coates compared to “some kid insisting his deadbeat dad is actually a secret agent away on a mission.” Lee, he said, was a “dude who thought torture was cool.”
“Even if one conceded Lee’s military prowess, he would still be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in defense of the South’s authority to own millions of human beings as property because they are black,” Adam Serwer, a senior editor at The Atlantic, wrote in June.
If Kelly can laud someone who sold human beings, Coates concluded, “you really do see the effect of white supremacy.” Last month, Coates said that President Donald Trump “might be a white supremacist.”