I posted three source links. This page cites numerous others: http://civilwartalk.com/threads/black-slaveowners.21812/ How much info did you have to skate past to defame Grooms? Whether or not he is a murderer, has nothing to do with the information. Your defamation of him was written by a member of a message board! Just because Grooms' article was posted on some racist cite does not make him a racist necessarily, but that is the way you play...
She didn't ADMIT that at all. It was REVEALED to her just a year or so ago. Watch the video. This was NEWS to her just a year or so ago. I read and cited numerous sources for the kind of info that Grooms provided.
You are old enough to know to pick your battles. You win some and you lose some. You lost this one.... just let it go and move on.
You post one dismissal of Grooms' article by a member of a board like ClutchFans and run with it.... Grooms' info is supported by other sources. Why don't you go outside and beat a dead horse?
Having said that.... Paula Deen got a raw deal. It is completely irrelevant whether her relatives owned slaves or not, and what she told her ex husband in private about a man that robbed her at gun point is off the table in my mind.
How did she get a raw deal? No one's entitled to a food network contract. They can hire and fire (choose not to renew) whoever the want. She's a celebrity chef, who, like all other celebrities, live and die by their reputation/brand. She failed to do her best to protect said reputation, whether it be through carelessness, ignorance, or bigotry, and now must live with the consequences. Why should we feel bad for her?
Again, there is a bigger issue behind all of this. She allowed and fostered personal and sexual harassment in the workplace among other things. Yes, the smaller issue of the word(s) she uttered is what brought about the attention and probably led to her being dropped from many of her endeavors but let's not forget the larger issue behind it all.
paula deen wanted to do a slavery oriented dinner. so maybe the word "nostalgia" isn't the best term but you know what I meant. who do you think visits old plantation homes?
you misunderstood what I typed, I didn't say she was of slavery, I said she was nostalgic of slavery.
Now the quesiton is, does Baldwin get dropped as the Capitol One sponsor after his homophobic tweets he made other day like Paula Deen lost all her sponsors on racist coments made years ago?
Paula got dropped for the Racist Sexist environment in her Restaurant and businesses People kill me trying to change **** around to try and make it a black and white thing 1. She was sued by . . . . A WHITE WOMAN Who revealed the SEXIST RACIST environment Ms. Deen and family created Rocket River Not from something 27 yrs ago . . . .
giddy, give me Grooms' credentials rather than his popularity on white supremacist websites. Give me ANY credentials.
Sure, if Capital One decides that those tweets will affect the image of their company. I would have no sympathy for him being dropped regardless of my views on homosexuality. In the end, it's the prerogative of the entity whom the celebrity represents. If you're going to reap the rewards of celebrity you better be ready to deal with the downsides.
So when she acknowledged her relatives held slaves she wasn't admitting to her relatives owning slaves? WTF? Where do you get this nonsense? Typical word games from you. admitting present participle of ad·mit (Verb) Verb 1.Confess to be true or to be the case, typically with reluctance. revealed past participle, past tense of re·veal (Verb) Verb 1.Make (previously unknown or secret information) known to others.
Why don't you post Grooms' credentials. Wiki indicates his article is not credible. Post why his article is credible. Authors are typically credible based on their body of work and credentials. Post his credentials, other than him being a convicted murderer and a fan of white supremacists. Thanks.
And it just keeps getting worse and worse for giddy's sources. http://americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm DIXIE'S CENSORED SUBJECT BLACK SLAVEOWNERS By Robert M. Grooms © 1997 (THIS ARTICLE IS COPYRIGHTED AND IS PROVIDED HERE COURTESY OF THE BARNES REVIEW) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnes_Review Barnes Review From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search The Barnes Review is a bi-monthly magazine founded in 1994 by the Liberty Lobby.[1] The publication is dedicated to historical revisionism such as Holocaust denial. Willis Carto is closely affiliatd with the Review and had earlier founded the Institute for Historical Review in 1979 but lost control of that organization in an internal takeover by former associates. It is named for Harry Elmer Barnes.[2] Linked with it is a TBR Bookclub promoting revisionist publications on a wide range of subjects. The organisation also holds conferences with speakers such as Eustace Mullins and Ted Gunderson. The Southern Poverty Law Center describes the Barnes Review as "one of the most virulent anti-Semitic organizations around".[3]
Just go watch the video. She gets informed of that fact and she is surprised. You can watch her discovering her great-great-?-grandfather's name on the log with the notation that he owned 35 slaves. Careful, you are going to hurt your back twisting this much.
Forget Grooms if it pleases you. You are ignoring the other multiple sources going for this kill shot. At any rate, you are no closer to the truth of the matter by feasting on this question. You don't have to be an historian to count census data.
