Cenk of The Young Turks on MSNBC Debates Confederate History Month & More (4/7/2010)
September 3, 2010 by
Filed under Redneck
Cenk “mixes it up” with Mike Lewis of politicsdaily.com on Dylan Ratigan’s program on MSNBC. Vote? for?? TYT?? Once A??????? Day:? vote.streamys.org (3/22/10???? -?? 4/11/10)????
@tomitstube Your logic is a complete failure. By the 1940’s the attitudes of the South were more or less similar when it came to race as in the Civil War. The bulk of the US military was made of Southerners; so much so that the Confederate flag was flown on some ships and even raised over Shuri Castle once the US took it from Japan.
I highly doubt that American Southerners in World War II (many many of whom were white supremacists) were equal to Nazis, which is obviously who they were fighting.
@theskiesbelowme ~ uh well let’s see, confederates are white racist supremacists, and nazis are white racist supremacists. gee, looks like you’re unequivocally wrong.
nazi’s = confederates.
congratulations virginia.
@tomitstube Confederates are nowhere close to Nazis
It’s a shame when in the United States of America a Southern state cannot celebrate Confederate History Month. It is Virginia, they fought the US, they have every right to celebrate it! It’s their own damn history!
yeah, let’s “remember and honor” racist confederate traitors. hey, while we’re at it, lets have “nazi” month in virginia too. no mention of the holocaust of course.
does matt lewis and conservatives interrupt on every talk show?
How did Hamas “take over”?
If he means that they staged a violent coup, then he’s wrong; if he means they won a fairly run democratic election, then he’s right.
I appreciate some Americans have a problem with popularly elected governments but how about learning from history and dealing with these governments instead of trying to illegally undermine them?
Every discussion about the mid-east conflict in America is so superficial, and so disconnected from reality…
Israel is prepared to withdraw from the occupied territories. The dispute isn’t about that. The dispute is about the fact that the Palestinians demand that Israel takes millions of Palestinian refugees, effectively turning Israel into a Palestinian state.
That’s the bone of contention. When are you going to realize it?
cenk wow this guy is good!!!!!
The rednecks are like children who never learned humor. They are mostly boring and dumb. Maybe they just need a little more Depleted Uranium in their environment. I hear they enjoy laughing at suffering and deformed people. Perhaps we could erect a national redneck park, complete with deformed babies. There could even be a section where if they sign a release clause, we’ll even let them perform random acts of stupidity; sending themselves to the hospital at the audience amusement.
Cenk ! Da Big Fratboy !
4:21 to 4:35 is HILARIOUS!!! Cenks face was like “what the hell are you talking about?”
Cenks doesnt know shit about Israeli – Palestinian politics…but he’s clearly pro-Palestinian.
Cenk is a Beast. I don’t think he can be out-debated and he always uses just simple logic.
i hate television debates there is so much pr involved
cenks an idiot if he cant tell the difference
@mellla so?
“Eventually” perhaps, but I was under the impression that trading with nations that practiced slavery wasn’t exactly something that “civilized nations” refused to do, in the 19th century or even today… I know I’m making a generalization there, but that’s in response to the notion that the CSA couldn’t have hoped to survive the civil war with the institution of slavery intact. Slavery was a big part of the Civil War, and it began long before the Emancipation Proclamation.
Politics aside.. I hate the constant dirty smirk on this Matt guy, makes me wanna smack it off him with full force
The “latness” in abolishing slavery really has no part in the argument. The South would have prolonged slavery as long as they could, because again, the wealth of the elite was primarily based upon it. They didn’t want to give up this resource that was so tied to their economic prosperity. the civil war was waged over states rights, the primary right being to own slaves.
@grobo11 that was in fact their plan. Apart from re-affirming the ban on the slave TRADE, the constutition of the CSA would have protected the rights of slave owners. The wealth of the south was still based primarily on work done mostly by slave labor. Sure, eventually you could say the dependance on slavery could have been reduced, but that’s like saying there’s no need for slaves today. Of course there is. most have just understood that it’s not worth the human degradation.
@XSC3 Possibly, but to imagine that if the CSA had won their independence that they would have continued with slavery is popostorous. Slavery would of had to of ended other wise no ‘civilised’ nation would trade with the CSA and may of driven it into economic disaster. They may have been un-willing to do it but it would of have to have been done. In honesty the USA was pretty late in the abolishment of slavery anyway, one of the last to do it.
But it’s true that some fought to end slavery and others fought to preserve it, even if most soldiers probably did so for other reasons…
Slavery continues in our world all over the globe, but it does so mostly in a clandestine manner or in regimes where there are no explicit protections in the law against such things. sadly the West still profits from interactions with these nation states, and so the struggle for freedom continues.
I’m really not sure what the fact that many of the Founding Fathers were slave owners or that slavery “helped” build the country in the first place somehow makes fighting against slavery generations later invalid. the fact is that many were coming to realize the inhumanity of the institution. Sure, it may have helped that other nations were beginning to outlaw slavery, and that the economy of the nation was becoming less dependent upon this institution.
@grobo11 practically speaking the main question of the Civil War was over states rights… and the primary right in question was over WHETHER TO KEEP SLAVERY LEGAL.
@grobo11 actually there were a good number of Northerners that actively fought to end slavery. Sure, not EVERY SINGLE UNION SOLDIER, but you’d be completely out to lunch to believe they all fought for “nationalism” and “healing the union” as well. I’m sure there were a great number of soldiers on both sides (perhaps the majority), who fought because they felt they “had to” (drafted, pressured by family, economy, thought their home was threatened, etc) just like in EVERY war.