tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post7569885826918955035..comments2024-03-29T00:49:19.921-04:00Comments on Nicholas Stix, Uncensored: Giving Thomas Jefferson the Business: The Sally Hemings HoaxNicholashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12372393717833610657noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-17799169441889124942019-06-12T22:37:38.005-04:002019-06-12T22:37:38.005-04:00Let’s not forget that Sally was Jefferson’s late w...Let’s not forget that Sally was Jefferson’s late wife’s half-sister, shall we. She was not the “coal-black Sally” of contemporary Federalist doggerel but 3/4 white. Her father, Jefferson’s father-in-law, John Wayles, openly cohabitated with Sally’s mother, and had six children with her, much to the horror of the Virginia gentry. So did his neighbor Thomas Randolph, whom Jefferson idolized as a young man.<br /><br />To know definitively the content of a person’s heart based on what papers of theirs and what recollections of them that chance has allowed to come down to us is not a realistic expectation. Let us not forget that all human beings are frail and imperfect, and often driven by passions that they do not themselves understand.<br /><br />Racial antipathy is the most emotional and embarrassing scandal of the American civic religion. Its intractability all but voids the self-congratulatory delusion that America is somehow the new Zion with a holy destiny to reform the world in its image. But blaming individual blacks or whites for the behavior their culture expects of them is a simplistic reaction that robs both of their humanity. In truth, nothing more dramatic than flawed human nature is revealed in our shared racist past and present. No wonder some of us wish it were all a simple morality play with identifiably “bad” actors to hiss and “good” actors to cheer. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-32381806942136083302011-01-04T00:15:09.028-05:002011-01-04T00:15:09.028-05:00"It may be that this myth is so firmly enscon..."It may be that this myth is so firmly ensconced in the public consciousness that it is becoming one of those things that ''everybody knows'', even though it's likely untrue."<br /><br />Great point. But that's how the far left operates. A great example is Obama. Our leftist media and propaganda machine have been hard at work for years preparing everything we are to believe about the one who now sits in the White House.<br /><br />And to Nicholas, keep chipping away at this. And while you do, know there are many of us across this great nation who would love to see this extraordinary Patriot's name cleared. People wanting to make allegations should be prepared to have bodies exhumed. Otherwise, let them go yap somewhere else.<br /><br />So keep up the great work!Kim in TXnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-4269099752807797092010-03-11T12:07:34.283-05:002010-03-11T12:07:34.283-05:00"Back to the point: You cannot possibly belie..."Back to the point: You cannot possibly believe that Jefferson never sexually abused his slaves. At least not with 100% certainty. I can't even say that my personal view of Jefferson is 100% accurate"<br /><br />Yes, I can believe that, and I can believe it with 100% certainty, and my view of Mr. Jefferson is 100% accurate. I was a next door neighbor to Monticello while in his university, and visited there regularly where I read many of his writings which now seem to have disappeared. A visit from there to the slave quarters was very easy, and you would see that it would not be at all convenient to sexually abuse slaves there. The ONLY person in all of history to actually make that claim was the LIAR Callendar whose stories were never confirmed by anyone else at the household, and were denied in writing by Mr. Jefferson in hundreds of ways.<br /><br />Furthermore, after Thomas Woodson et. al. demanded that his grave be desecrated in order to prove their "verbal history" that they are were his descendants and DNA tests proved they were NOT, they then decided to run wiht the "verbal history". What chutzpah.<br /><br />His own granddaughter confirmed what she saw, which is that it would be impossible for Hemmings to be in his room without the household knowing it, AND that she never believed he ever had sex with her (or any other slave). It was this KEY witness whose WRITTEN account was altered by LIAR Dianne Swann-Wright to DECEIVE the whole world, including YOU, into believing this provable, proven, discredited (not to mention racist) LIE.Jacob Israelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03729761746555716522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-39759325500844898092010-03-11T11:53:56.471-05:002010-03-11T11:53:56.471-05:00On October 25, 1858, Thomas Jefferson's grandd...On October 25, 1858, Thomas Jefferson's granddaughter, Ellen Randolph Coolidge, wrote a letter to her husband Joseph in which she argued that the charge that Jefferson was sexually involved with Sally Hemings was false. This is a photocopy of one portion of that letter: <br /><br /> <br /><br />The handwritten letter, a photocopy of which is included in Appendix E of the TJMF Report, is not particularly difficult to read. The following is the passage in question, with the mistranscribed portion in bold face and underlined: <br /><br />"His apartments had no private entrance not perfectly accessible and visible to all the household. No female domestic ever entered his chambers except at hours when he was known not to be there, and none could have entered without being exposed to the public gaze." <br /><br />In the transcription of this letter that appears in Appendix E of Professor Annette Gordon-Reed's book, Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings (see page 259), this key sentence was altered in such a way as to totally reverse the clear meaning of the original: <br /><br />"No female domestic ever entered his chambers except at hours when he was known not to be in the public gaze." <br /><br />N.B. This error in transcription could not be ascribed to a simple omission of words, since "to the public gaze" was changed to "in the public gaze." Without the change of "to" into "in," the altered sentence would have contained a grammatical error. <br /><br />The Scholars Commission notes that it has no information about how or why these errors occurred, but it is clear that they have had an unfortunate impact upon the scholarship of even the leading historian at Monticello. While Appendix E to the TJMF Report included both versions, Lucia Stanton (former Director of Research at Monticello and currently Shannon Senior Research Historian at Monticello's International Center for Jefferson Studies) did not notice the error and indeed quoted the inaccurate Gordon-Reed version of this key sentence in response to questions from the Scholars Commission. <br /><br />As one member of the Scholars Commission remarked: "Someone once said that if you gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite amount of time, they would recreate all of the great literary works of history (or something like that). But the odds of a single human being 'accidentally' changing 13 words in a single sentence in a manner that just happened to totally reverse its meaning, and just happening to have made the 'errors' in the most critical sentence of the document, strike me as being high." <br /><br /><br />The LIAR here is Dianne Swann-Wright, who has YET to correct her "error" nor to apologize for this LIE which smeared not just the memory of this great man, but in essence the entire nation.Jacob Israelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03729761746555716522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-30698338573273967532010-03-11T11:50:42.269-05:002010-03-11T11:50:42.269-05:00It's important to understand that the original...It's important to understand that the original LIAR was Dianne Swann-Wright.<br /><br />I will attempt to post more details here, but if all of it won't post, please see:<br /><br />http://fathersmanifesto.net/dianneswannwright.htmJacob Israelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03729761746555716522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-18609036178377463202010-02-16T06:45:19.595-05:002010-02-16T06:45:19.595-05:00To Eileen Smyth:
You’re kidding, right? The resea...To Eileen Smyth:<br /><br />You’re kidding, right? The research librarian at the Jefferson Library faxed me the letter over six years ago. Since then, I’ve published over 300 articles. Do you think that I have nothing better to do, than keep material from over six years and 300-odd articles ago, that I used for a print magazine article ready to hand, in case Her Royal Highness, Queen Eileen Smyth, would demand to see it?<br /><br />It would take me days to search for it. Are you going to pay me for my time? If so, send $500 via my PayPal button. In advance.<br /><br />If you want to see the letter, get off your high horse, Queen Eileen, and do what I did. Contact the Jefferson Library! That would be “the most natural, logical” thing to do.<br /><br />This isn’t a monarchy, or the welfare office.Nicholashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12372393717833610657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-87433676361041125112010-02-16T05:35:45.159-05:002010-02-16T05:35:45.159-05:00I would be very interested in seeing the original ...I would be very interested in seeing the original Coolidge letter. Since it was faxed to you, would you please scan, post and link to it, along with the Gordon-Reed email?<br /><br />(I must admit, I wonder that anyone even has to request this, since your doing so at the beginning would have been the most natural, logical, journalistic thing to do for a reporter who is working so hard to "set the record straight.")Eileen Smyth (NJ)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-83640591179063641542009-05-22T14:48:39.166-04:002009-05-22T14:48:39.166-04:00Wow does it bother white america that much that bl...Wow does it bother white america that much that black american's can claim decendancy from the founder of the Declaration of Independence... The concept that the children of a slave do not have rights to their lineage is outdated as slavery itself.. and yes many "slave" women did take the place as the master's "lover" .. this wasnt aushwitz... come on people get with the program!!!!!1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-23165290230355156612009-05-12T10:24:00.000-04:002009-05-12T10:24:00.000-04:00I'm afraid the only person at odds with the facts ...I'm afraid the only person at odds with the facts in this is you:<br /><br />"Only four recorded visits to Monticello (in September 1802, September 1805, May 1808, and sometime in 1814) are known, none related to Sally Hemings's conceptions. In August 1807, a probable conception time for Eston Hemings, Thomas Jefferson wrote his brother that "we shall be happy to see you also" at Monticello, where Randolph's twin sister, Anna Marks, was then visiting. A search of visitors' accounts, memorandum books, and Jefferson's published and unpublished correspondence provided no indication that Randolph did, in fact, come at this time. A similar search was made of the probable conception time for Madison Hemings, without finding reference to a Randolph Jefferson visit."<br /><br />http://www.monticello.org/plantation/hemingscontro/appendixj.html<br /><br />Must be those "black racists" at it again. Funny how you say that, yet a ctrl+f for "black" of the front page of your blog yields 33 hits!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-21192828988984375162009-04-14T22:43:00.000-04:002009-04-14T22:43:00.000-04:00Thomas Jeferson is a fascinating character in Amer...Thomas Jeferson is a fascinating character in American history, as Ellis shows in his book American Sphinx. <br />Here was a man who admired the common man, yet despiesed Hamilton and Jackson for their common roots; who protested slavery, yet owned slaves; who championed small government, yet expanded the U.S., and it's national debt more than any president before him or for years after. He was a utopian, a peaceful man who encouraged James Madison to "destroy" Alenader Hamilton politically, financially and personally, while Jefferson himself smiled to Hamilton's face. (Not such a bad thing as it seems, in fact quite smart. Hamilton was a combat veteran and skilled duelist. Attacking Hamilton face to face would be the equivilent of the weakest kid in the class challanging the toughest to a fight.) He told Washington he shared his distatste for factions (political parties) while working hard to create the first modern political party in history. In short Jefferson gave lofty vision to ourhighest and best ideals, while falling far short of the reality of any of them. <br /><br />Did he have children with Sally Hemings? <br /> I don't know, neither do you or any of the people reading this. Was he capable of doing so? <br />I am certain he was.<br /><br />Does it matter?<br />I think not in the least. Either way Jefferson was the same perfect dreamer of the American imagination; and the same frail and fallible human being of realityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-5810046069265029432009-04-11T08:40:00.000-04:002009-04-11T08:40:00.000-04:00Those who are indifferent or hostile towards the f...Those who are indifferent or hostile towards the facts--Stix<BR/><BR/>I can't be hostile towards the facts simply because I can't be certain what Jefferson did over 200years ago. He's dead, she's dead so I really don't care. All I can say is if a man took it upon himself to own human beings, I won't put anything passed him...whether rape, beatings, or even killing. Who knows, he could have treated his slaves with respect but that's wishful thinking. <BR/><BR/>If it were true that he fathered Hemmings's children, would he then cease to be a hero in your mind? <BR/><BR/>As for his black descendants, I see no logical reason why they would seek official recognition. After all, that would be legitimizing what most believe to be a crime...(rape).lormariehttp://lormarie.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-86019739555193923952009-04-11T07:08:00.000-04:002009-04-11T07:08:00.000-04:00Vanishing American:"Anyway, you do a thorough job ...Vanishing American:<BR/><BR/>"Anyway, you do a thorough job of dissecting the falsehoods, but it seems as if the people who have bought this myth, along with those who spread it for political reasons, do not care about facts."<BR/><BR/>Exactly.<BR/><BR/>"It may be that this myth is so firmly ensconced in the public consciousness that it is becoming one of those things that ''everybody knows'', even though it's likely untrue."<BR/><BR/>And that was exactly their purpose. Those who are indifferent or hostile towards the facts (see the next commenter) wanted to create an environment in which people who DO care about facts would be bamboozled into believing the former's fabrications.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for writing.Nicholashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12372393717833610657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-78263843088324651052009-04-11T06:06:00.000-04:002009-04-11T06:06:00.000-04:00What really offends me about this article is the i...What really offends me about this article is the implication that Sally was a willing participant via the use of the term "lover." Would anyone suggest that a sexually abused Jewish woman was the lover of a nazi guard (during WW II)? I doubt it. It's equally appalling to believe that a female slave would consider her owner or any member of his family her lover. <BR/><BR/>Back to the point: You cannot possibly believe that Jefferson never sexually abused his slaves. At least not with 100% certainty. I can't even say that my personal view of Jefferson is 100% accurate. That being he was nothing more than a slave-owning pedophile. We are ALL going by assumptions based on personal biases, not facts.lormariehttp://lormarie.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24200494.post-84107426831921501182009-04-10T22:26:00.000-04:002009-04-10T22:26:00.000-04:00Thanks for posting this. I somehow missed it when ...Thanks for posting this. I somehow missed it when it originally appeared.<BR/><BR/>This persistent slander is a personal issue for me as a Jefferson descendant, but even if I were not, I think it would bother me greatly because it's so transparently an attempt to discredit a Founding Father, and by proxy White America. As you mentioned in the piece, the Clinton defenders resurrected this canard back during the Clinton scandals in an attempt to say that 'everybody has skeletons in their closet', and I remember that during that time, some Clintonista said 'great men have great vices' or something along those lines. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, you do a thorough job of dissecting the falsehoods, but it seems as if the people who have bought this myth, along with those who spread it for political reasons, do not care about facts. It may be that this myth is so firmly ensconced in the public consciousness that it is becoming one of those things that ''everybody knows'', even though it's likely untrue.Vanishing Americanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07723746944036650219noreply@blogger.com