John Quincy Adams a Founding Father? Michele Bachmann Says Yes (warns of investigation of all 23 foster kids)

This little snippet from the ABC News transcript of their interview:

**Stephanopoulos: **Finally one—one final question. I think one of the most impressive things that people find in your background is the fact that you and your husband have helped raise 23 foster children and I know you want to shield them but are they prepared and are you prepared for the loss of privacy that comes with a presidential campaign? And is that something you are concerned about for them?
*Bachmann: Well when we were making this momentous decision we sat down for a long time as a family and contemplated what this was meaning and yes, we are ready. We have five wonderful biological children. Our last one is off to college our oldest one is a doctor. And then we had great – a great 23 foster children in our home as well. And as you can imagine and appreciate we’ve tried to keep a good handle on their privacy and we will do that, we will respect their privacy. We are thankful that we had them but we also want to observe their privacy and that of their families.
Translation: are you prepared for us to look into every dirty diaper, every report card, each and every possible incident we can regarding both your natural children and those you provided foster homes for? Do you know what we will do to you if we find even the slightest amount of criticism from any of those 28 kids? Do you realize the living h
we are going to make their lives until we can force you to drop out? And, by the way, G-d help you if you dare criticize us for dumpster diving and acting like paparazzi. We will use that against you as well.

What the MSM did to Palin they will do to Michelle 28 fold.
All for the greater good of society f course, because the left is, by definition, compassionate.

Just so long as we are perfectly clear about that. It’s about compassion.

It is, after all, for the children.

Stephanopoulos vs. Bachmann:

spectator.org/blog/2011/06/28/levin-stephanopoulos-is-foolis

I bet if the media followed YOU around (and me!) for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, they could make you look stupid/foolish/glorious whatever they want.

It doesn’t help she is a conservative woman. Media people hate them.

I like her alot, and because I’m in NH (the only state that matters when it comes to this! ;)) my vote matters big time!

Palin did herself in with lack of common knowledge expected of a mainstream presidential candidate. I’m sure she is much better prepared now. As for Michelle, she is an attorney and other than a few mis-speaks concerning US History seems to be able to deal with all reporters without hesitation (not just those from Fox) :slight_smile:

Bachmann is in good comany: Princeton’s James M. McPherson in the Battle Cry of Freedom. summarizes Lincoln’s argument that the founding fathers opposed slavery:
The founding fathers, said Lincoln, had opposed slavery. They adopted a Declaration of Independence that pronounced all men created equal. They enacted the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 banning slavery from the vast Northwest Territory. To be sure, many of the founders owned slaves. But they asserted their hostility to slavery in principle while tolerating it temporarily (as they hoped) in practice. That was why they did not mention the words “slave” or “slavery” in the Constitution, but referred only to “persons held to service.” “Thus, the thing is hid away, in the constitution,” said Lincoln, “just as an afflicted man hides away a wen or a cancer, which he dares not cut out at once, lest he bleed to death; with the promise, nevertheless, that the cutting may begin at the end of a given time.” The first step was to prevent the spread of this cancer, which the fathers took with the Northwest Ordinance, the prohibition of the African slave trade in 1807, and the Missouri Compromise restriction of 1820. The second was to begin a process of gradual emancipation, which the generation of the fathers had accomplished in the states north of Maryland.
Here’s what Lincoln said of the Founding Fathers in his 1854 Peoria speech:

hat tip

History is a good thing

:thumbsup: John Adams was anti-slavery as were Franklin, Hamilton and Carroll among many others. After liberals learn their history regarding this issue, maybe they’ll try to learn what the Founding Fathers meant by rights “endowed by Our Creator” and the real meaning of the First Ammendment regarding Church-State relations.

One can dream…

John Quincy Adams’ father was a Founding Father, not he himself

Yes - she misspoke. However, John Adams was also anti-slavery and Steponallofus was incorrect when he claimed that she was wrong about the Founding Fathers being against slavery.

Even if Adams didn’t have slaves, the other Fathers did have slaves, including Washington and Jefferson. Heck, Jefferson put in that 3/5 compromise. So it is ludicrous to say that the FOunding Fathers in general were against slavery

How many Founding Fathers do you think there were? Many did not have slaves, and the slavery issue was a very contentious one during the forming of our country.

Do you know the reason for the 3/5 compromise?

Btw…what year did slavery end in Canada?

We didn’t have all 58 states yet in the time of the founding fathers, did we?
:smiley:

“MSM”… hehehe

Excellent point. :wink:

I hope you are not assuming that Canadians cannot know American history.

Agreed.

Few people realize how hard it is to take in children from the foster care system. They each present their own special brand of heart break. Until you’ve been involved you have no idea how depraved people are - or how screwed up the government’s idea of “care” is.

Until that interview I never knew that about Bachmann.

The first two girls we had were two and four, they were covered with lice, ate from trash cans and their father allowed his freinds to “feel them up” for hits of meth. They were in our care for 9 months before the state returned them to their mother. The state social workers attempted to return them after only a two months but we took steps to prevent it, and the case worker HATED us for it and tried to remove them from our care. Eventually the dad was sent to prison and the mom seemed to finally understand what was expected of her.

Not sure, actually. I’m sure some of them were vehemently opposed to slavery and Jefferson was certainly conflicted, but I don’t think many of them worked tirelessly to end it

Do you know the reason for the 3/5 compromise?

I learned about it briefly in a class I took about the politics of North America. I think it was smaller districts or States wanted their slaves to be included in the population so there can be more districts, so they decided to have the slaves count as 3/5 of a person. Again, my memory on the subject is a little muddled, so I might be wrong

Btw…what year did slavery end in Canada?

Slavery was banned in Upper Canada in 1793

The British Empire passed the Slavery Abolition Act passed in 1833, and Canada was still part of the UK at that time

JQA was Minister to Prussia in 1797. There Adams signed the renewal of the very liberal Prussian-American Treaty of Amity and Commerce after negotiations with Prussian Foreign Minister Count Karl-Wilhelm Finck von Finckenstein. He served at that post until 1801.

close enough.

He can’t be “close enough” he either was or he wasn’t

Perhaps one should discuss what it takes to be considered “a founding father”. I would think there’s a much broader area to cover in that term than there is in the words “hostilities” or “is”.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.