Obama: 'Unacceptable' to omit slavery from Confederate History Month

[jefferson_dem]

Obama: 'Unacceptable' to omit slavery from Confederate History Month
By Michael O'Brien - 04/09/10 07:40 AM ET

It was "unacceptable" for Virginia's governor to omit references to slavery in declaring Confederate History Month in the state, President Barack Obama said Friday.

The president said that while he thought it was important for Americans to be familiar with the history of the Confederacy, it was impossible to see the full picture without studying the institution of slavery.

"I don't think you can understand the Confederacy and the Civil War unless you understand slavery," Obama said during an interview on "Good Morning America" on ABC. "And so, I think that was an unacceptable omission. I think the governor's now acknowledged that."

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) revived observance of the month, something his two predecessors in office, both Democrats, had declined to do.

McDonnell found himself caught in a firestorm, though, after his declaration made no reference to slavery, a fact which aides had seemed to dismiss in the immediate aftermath. The governor has since apologized, and added references to slavery.

"I think it's just a reminder that when we talk about issues like slavery that are so fraught with pain and emotion, that, you know, we'd better do so thinking through how this is going to affect a lot of people," Obama said. "And their sense of whether their part of a commonwealth or part of our broader society."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/91297-obama-unacceptable-to-omit-slavery-from-confederate-history-month

[lunatica]

1. Yeah, the whole South and Southern thing had nothing at all to do with slavery

Absolutely no slaves were harmed in the making of the South. None.

[LeftishBrit]

2. How on earth can you teach about the American Civil War, without mentioning slavery?

[pnorman]

3. This had been discussed earlier on DU. I can't find the thread, but this is what I had saved:

Cornerstone Speech
.
.
.
But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other -- though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
.
.
.

http://civilwarcauses.org/corner.htm

[Cha]

4. KickerR