suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Dude, have you lost your mind?!!! Or do you just lack one? He was not addressing the equality of all people in the Declaration of Independence. No one at the time believed that slaves were equal to whites of any stature. He was addressing the disparate treatment of English citizens in the American colonies compared to the citizens in England. You don't study history much, do you? Lordy. Please do your research. I'm embarrassed for you.

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

There you go. I like the enthusiasm. Unfortunately, only c+ execution.

TxTarpon said:

---

The man was ahead of his time.
Now on TV the ebony and ivory combo is everywhere.

---

He deeply loved Sally Hemmings. The feeling was mutual. It was a real deal kind of thing. That's probably why he provided for the Hemmings family through his estate after he died.

Martin Luther King Jr was a preacher. Yet he had sex outside of his marriage. Do not know if he sired off any children form these affairs. How many young ladies, who were seeking God, were taken advantage of, and left disillusioned by a man, and felt guilt and that somehow God had let them down? How many young men knew of King's affair and figured that was okay to spill your seed around town and run off, and this affected a generation of fatherless children perhaps? Is that enough to pull statues down and change street names?

But forced finger banging is ok, right? Asking for a syphilis ridden nitwit.

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

Good Article on Jefferson and Sally Hemmings:

https://www.amren.com/features/2012/12/did-jefferson-sleep-with-his-slave/
TLDR
The person who started the original rumor (Callender)was a newspaper filth slinger who was mad at Jefferson after getting passed over for postmaster general. He never stayed at Monticello.

The descendant of Sally Hemmings who confirmed the story got simple things like surnames wrong in a way which mimicked verbatim the account of Callender. This suggests the descendant got the story from another source which was not first hand knowledge...such as the family rumor some southern families pass down about being a relation to john wilkes booth because it was glamorous to do so.

DNA testing showed 1 of Sally Hemmings 6 descendent lines carried the Jefferson Y chromosome.

That could have been any of a dozen Jeffersons. But likely not Thomas who was ailing and in poor health when the descendant was born. The most likely individual, was Jefferson's younger brother Randolph who partied with the slaves and whom Jefferson's long time overseer stated was seen going to and from Hemming's lodgings at all hours.

Randolph married after this child was born and his wife never let him go to Monticello again. He fathered 5 more kids after marrying. (dude was very potent).

Jefferson is least likely candidate and only one of Sally's family line could have possibly been related.

I Have Spoken said:

---

Mostly triggered by Jefferson's greatness

---

He was a vindictive President that didn't understand economics. Thankfully he stumbled into the Louisiana Purchase.

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Quoted so everyone can read this drivel and point and laugh at its author.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

Good Article on Jefferson and Sally Hemmings:

https://www.amren.com/features/2012/12/did-jefferson-sleep-with-his-slave/
TLDR
The person who started the original rumor (Callender)was a newspaper filth slinger who was mad at Jefferson after getting passed over for postmaster general. He never stayed at Monticello.

The descendant of Sally Hemmings who confirmed the story got simple things like surnames wrong in a way which mimicked verbatim the account of Callender.

DNA testing showed 1 of Sally Hemmings 6 descendent lines carried the Jefferson Y chromosome.

That could have been any of a dozen Jeffersons. But likely not Thomas who was ailing and in poor health when the descendant was born. The most likely individual, was Jefferson's younger brother Randolph who partied with the slaves and whom Jefferson's long time overseer stated was seen going to and from Hemming's lodgings at all hours.

Randolph married after this child was born and his wife never let him go to Monticello again. He fathered 5 more kids after marrying. (dude was very potent).

Jefferson is least likely candidate and only one of Sally's family line could have possibly been related.

---

Monticello seems to be of the opinion that Jefferson was the father.

He understood the English language and human nature. I'd put up his accomplishments and intellect against any of our current crop of "statesman". And no, Paul krugman is not a statesman, and perhaps a worse understanding of economics.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

Good Article on Jefferson and Sally Hemmings:

https://www.amren.com/features/2012/12/did-jefferson-sleep-with-his-slave/
TLDR
The person who started the original rumor (Callender)was a newspaper filth slinger who was mad at Jefferson after getting passed over for postmaster general. He never stayed at Monticello.

The descendant of Sally Hemmings who confirmed the story got simple things like surnames wrong in a way which mimicked verbatim the account of Callender.

DNA testing showed 1 of Sally Hemmings 6 descendent lines carried the Jefferson Y chromosome.

That could have been any of a dozen Jeffersons. But likely not Thomas who was ailing and in poor health when the descendant was born. The most likely individual, was Jefferson's younger brother Randolph who partied with the slaves and whom Jefferson's long time overseer stated was seen going to and from Hemming's lodgings at all hours.

Randolph married after this child was born and his wife never let him go to Monticello again. He fathered 5 more kids after marrying. (dude was very potent).

Jefferson is least likely candidate and only one of Sally's family line could have possibly been related.

---

Monticello seems to be of the opinion that Jefferson was the father.

---

Houses have opinions?

Proc92 said:

---

He understood the English language and human nature. I'd put up his accomplishments and intellect against any of our current crop of "statesman". And no, Paul krugman is not a statesman, and perhaps a worse understanding of economics.

---

He understood human nature like an academic does. It would seem that we would consider him an ivory tower academic in today's world.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

Good Article on Jefferson and Sally Hemmings:

https://www.amren.com/features/2012/12/did-jefferson-sleep-with-his-slave/
TLDR
The person who started the original rumor (Callender)was a newspaper filth slinger who was mad at Jefferson after getting passed over for postmaster general. He never stayed at Monticello.

The descendant of Sally Hemmings who confirmed the story got simple things like surnames wrong in a way which mimicked verbatim the account of Callender.

DNA testing showed 1 of Sally Hemmings 6 descendent lines carried the Jefferson Y chromosome.

That could have been any of a dozen Jeffersons. But likely not Thomas who was ailing and in poor health when the descendant was born. The most likely individual, was Jefferson's younger brother Randolph who partied with the slaves and whom Jefferson's long time overseer stated was seen going to and from Hemming's lodgings at all hours.

Randolph married after this child was born and his wife never let him go to Monticello again. He fathered 5 more kids after marrying. (dude was very potent).

Jefferson is least likely candidate and only one of Sally's family line could have possibly been related.

---

Monticello seems to be of the opinion that Jefferson was the father.

---

Having fairly recently been to Monticello and after engaging some of their historians in history discussions, color me not impressed.

That's not really an argument nor is their view on Jefferson fathering those children a new opinion by Monticello.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

That's not really an argument.

---

Neither is "Monticello thinks so". Need some original source to support the argument.

Here ya go :

What is the fallacy of appeal to authority?

Appeal to authority is a common type of fallacy, or an argument based on unsound logic. When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

That's not really an argument nor is their view on Jefferson fathering those children a new opinion by Monticello.

---

The argument is implied in my criticism of their understanding of history (and evident political biases as well, I should add). You appealed to their authority and I find their authority lacking. Shouldn't have to be spelled out for you but here we are.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

MindofCarlos said:

---

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

Some really disgusting truths behind Jefferson. He should be treated as all other oppressors in societies history.

---

Good Article on Jefferson and Sally Hemmings:

https://www.amren.com/features/2012/12/did-jefferson-sleep-with-his-slave/
TLDR
The person who started the original rumor (Callender)was a newspaper filth slinger who was mad at Jefferson after getting passed over for postmaster general. He never stayed at Monticello.

The descendant of Sally Hemmings who confirmed the story got simple things like surnames wrong in a way which mimicked verbatim the account of Callender.

DNA testing showed 1 of Sally Hemmings 6 descendent lines carried the Jefferson Y chromosome.

That could have been any of a dozen Jeffersons. But likely not Thomas who was ailing and in poor health when the descendant was born. The most likely individual, was Jefferson's younger brother Randolph who partied with the slaves and whom Jefferson's long time overseer stated was seen going to and from Hemming's lodgings at all hours.

Randolph married after this child was born and his wife never let him go to Monticello again. He fathered 5 more kids after marrying. (dude was very potent).

Jefferson is least likely candidate and only one of Sally's family line could have possibly been related.

---

Monticello seems to be of the opinion that Jefferson was the father.

---

And the article says WHY they do.

Donations and money has gone from 2 mil a year to 10 mil a year since the controversy.

Read the article.

It does not exonerate him.

It does however show that it is HIGHLY unlikely and in no way proven that he did.

not even with dna evidence. and in fact the dna evidence shows the rumors have been highly exagerated.

people think all 6 of her kids were jeffersons's and the truth is that only one MIGHT have been.

and jefferson was so ill at the time it is unlikely.

when Monticello says all 6 were his without a doubt and 5 have been proven to not possibly be his....it makes any story they spin suspicious...no?

What exactly did they say that leads you to believe they are inept?

The most important part of this thread is that we have all of this history of Jefferson so that we can discuss his good and bad aspects and make intelligent decisions. Judging someone by today's morality isn't an intelligent decision, by the way. In fact it's a miserable way to live your life, angry at dead people for doing things that were normal in their time but reprehensible in ours. What possible good can come of that? None.

For all of their flaws the indisputable truth of Jefferson and all of the founders is that they created a nation based on individual liberty, a stable nation that now enjoys the oldest constitution in the world, a nation where we assume individuals are good and government is not to be trusted. Which of those in false? None of them. The rest of this nonsense is just an attempt to discredit the nation by discrediting the men who created it and it's pathetic if I'm being honest.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What exactly did they say that leads you to believe they are inept?

---

No idea about their historians, but do you have any research or original source material that supports your claim?

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What exactly did they say that leads you to believe they are inept?

---

I engaged three different employees, two of them in pretty senior positions, in historical discussions and in several instances they weren't aware of things they should have been aware of, or didn't acknowledge competing sources which they should have acknowledged.

If you've done Monticello recently one thing that will stick out to you relative to 15-25 years ago is the focus on slavery and Hemings. It's been a windfall for them financially, and it's clearly a (really comes across more as THE) primary focus of the overall presentation. Having lived in DC when I was younger and gone to Monticello a number of times accompanying out-of-town visitors, it's really quite striking in terms of the relative emphasis.

DTP02 said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What exactly did they say that leads you to believe they are inept?

---

I engaged three different employees, two of them in pretty senior positions, in historical discussions and in several instances they weren't aware of things they should have been aware of, or didn't acknowledge competing sources which they should have acknowledged.

If you've done Monticello recently one thing that will stick out to you relative to 15-25 years ago is the focus on slavery and Hemings. It's been a windfall for them financially, and it's clearly a (really comes across more as THE) primary focus of the overall presentation. Having lived in DC when I was younger and gone to Monticello a number of times accompanying out-of-town visitors, it's really quite striking in terms of the relative emphasis.

---

I get that these organizations have started to focus more on the slavery side of things and have seen the same thing at Montpelier. Much of that is due to the basic ignoring of the stories of slavery for the most part before that, right?

It's my understanding that many folks had made mention about Jefferson's relationship with S.H. before Callender published his slander as well. I'd be interested in reading anything you have. I read the article posted above but it's openly biased.

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

So do leftists

Monticello is being politically correct and accepting the argument of the Hemmings descendants.

Keep in mind, it was one of the Hemmings that family lore was 100% sure was a son of TJ. DNA testing revealed 0% Jefferson DNA in his descendants

Lots of good info out there, for those with an open mind to read

I think it's understandable that rumors flew about TJ and Hemmings. She was a half sister to his late, beloved wife, and was said to resemble her. Given that many slave owners slept with slaves, as did his father-in-law, people probably assumed the worst.

You know, like people assume the worst of today's politicians, or project their own deviancy onto others

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Monticello is being politically correct and accepting the argument of the Hemmings descendants.

Keep in mind, it was one of the Hemmings that family lore was 100% sure was a son of TJ. DNA testing revealed 0% Jefferson DNA in his descendants

Lots of good info out there, for those with an open mind to read

---

What resources would you recommend?

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

But he wears a snazzy jacket in Hamilton.
He should be revered for that alone

Also bringing mac and cheese to WH dinners.

Quote:

---

What resources would you recommend?

---

Well, one would be the book you condemned above as being biased. Or maybe it was the article about the book you disliked.

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

And you know this factually because you were there?

Yet another thread of proof of Texags encouraging and allowing blatant drive by trolling by users with no intention to return to the thread and defend their idiotic statements.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

What resources would you recommend?

---

Well, one would be the book you condemned above as being biased. Or maybe it was the article about the book you disliked.

---

It's very clear I was talking about the article, if one is being intellectually honest.

suture_scissors said:

---

He raped his slaves. He wrote about all men being equal, but didn't believe it or live it. He belongs in the dustbin of history.

---

now do MLK.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

What resources would you recommend?

---

Well, one would be the book you condemned above as being biased. Or maybe it was the article about the book you disliked.

---

It's very clear I was talking about the article, if one is being intellectually honest.

---

Aside from taking some well-earned shots at the Orwellian trash on the left, did the article fail to describe the book in an accurate fashion?

This reminds me of the long-accepted storyline of Ty Cobb. Cobb the racist. Cobb the sadist. Cobb the redneck. Cobb the irascible *******. To this day, we see people continue to use Al Stump's work on Cobb in combination with Ken Burns' Baseball as if those sources were the truth regarding the man.

Just one problem: everything we think we know about Cobb is an absolute lie:

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/who-was-ty-cobb-the-history-we-know-thats-wrong/

Perhaps the prevailing wisdom at Monticello, and in other parts of the country, is wrong about Jefferson in this aspect of his life as well:

Monticello Research Committee Minority Report

Quote:

---

In regards to the historical interpretation of Thomas Jefferson and his family, Monticello, and slavery at Monticello, The Thomas Jefferson Foundation should continue to present a properly weighted historical interpretation to visitors. As new historical evidence is found, it should continue to be incorporated into interpretive presentations. However, historical accuracy should never be overwhelmed by political correctness, for if it is, history becomes meaningless.

---

There is a response to the minority report. You can find it here:

https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/response-to-the-minority-report/

So everyone who was in a position to know, including Jefferson himself, is lying. And then we get this nugget:

Quote:

---

Dr. Wallenborn questions the validity of a Monte Carlo simulation made without comparative data on other Jefferson males, about whom little is known. While it is true that the movements of Jefferson's brother Randolph and his sons is little documented, the fragments of information that have survived do indicate that they were sometimes at Monticello during Jefferson's absences. Yet Sally Hemings never conceived in Jefferson's absence.

---

Note the non-concession concession here. The article on the book makes it pretty clear that Randolph enjoyed his time at Monticello and that, upon remarriage, his wife banned him from going there. Doesn't take much to guess the reason for that ban extends well beyond the joy he got paying simple visits to his brother's slave quarters. It also doesn't take much of a stretch to believe that Jefferson's other younger relations, who were much less concerned with the concept of miscegenation than their older relative, would spread the Jefferson Y-Chromosome themselves.

The problem with Monticello's claim is that it does not categorically prove Jefferson is the father of Eston Hemings. It only proves that a Jefferson is his father.