Where Michele Bachmann Learned About the Founding Fathers: David Barton

Delusional alternate history with a theocratic message
Wingnuts • Views: 41,553

Right Wing Watch has a post about the source of Michele Bachmann’s odd views of American history: religious right theocrat and pseudo-historian David Barton. For decades the religious right has been indoctrinating an entire generation with a fantasy version of US history, and Barton is one of the main proponents of this fundamentalist revisionism. Michele Bachmann is a big fan, and even invited Barton to address members of Congress.

Here’s Barton explaining that the War of Independence was actually fought to end slavery. Yes, that’s really what he says. There are so many distortions in this minute-long clip you may develop a headache.

Youtube Video
Related
Glenn Beck Promotes Theocracy and Interviews David Barton - Speaker at Neo-Nazi Rallies American Taliban Leader David Barton: The Bible Should Rule the World Religious Right Pseudo-Historian Barton: The Founding Fathers Wanted Schools to Teach Creationism

Jump to bottom

39 comments
1 Alexzander  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:06:46pm

And June 28th was forever known as the Day of Our Lady Bachmann.

2 darthstar  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:06:59pm

The stupid is cyclical.

3 darthstar  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:07:41pm

Barton-->Bachmann-->Wikipedia-->Fact.

4 Obdicut  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:09:01pm

Um.

So.

Why was their slavery after the war of independence, then?

5 researchok  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:10:32pm

I get it now.

David Barton was the inspiration for Homer Simpson.

6 researchok  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:11:11pm

re: #4 Obdicut

Um.

So.

Why was their slavery after the war of independence, then?

Not so loud. You'll upset the narrative.

7 elizajane  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:18:19pm

Standing up for the unpopular side here...
OK, if you were a smart right-winger, you could make an argument that both Bachmann and her detractors were wrong. Yes there WERE Founding Fathers (TM) who argued against slavery. There were also FFs who owned slaves. What ended up in the constitution were compromises among these guys, because back then, politicians knew how to compromise, unlike our legislators today.

Happily I cannot hear Barton's discussion because I don't have sound on my computer, but if he says that some of the FFs wanted to end slavery, he isn't actually wrong. However, if he says that the entire motive of the Revolution was to get rid of a terrible institution that was supported by the Evil British and hated by all the good Americans, then he's an idiot.

8 Lidane  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:24:24pm

re: #5 researchok

I get it now.

David Barton was the inspiration for Homer Grandpa Simpson.

Youtube Video
9 BongCrodny  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:25:04pm

If Michelle Bachmann gets the nomination, I think she should tap this guy for her running mate:

Michael R. Turner

That's right, it's

Bachmann-Turner Overdrive II!

...playing their hits "Let It Ride," "Takin' Care of Business," "You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet" and "Looking Out for Number One."

10 Kragar  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:25:31pm

re: #7 elizajane

He claims the colonies wanted to end slavery, but Britain wouldn't let us, and list that as one of the major reasons we fought the War of Independence.

Which explains why the Brits outlawed slavery decades before the US did.

11 darthstar  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:37:15pm

re: #10 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He claims the colonies wanted to end slavery, but Britain wouldn't let us, and list that as one of the major reasons we fought the War of Independence.

Which explains why the Brits outlawed slavery decades before the US did.

You sure that's not the Spanish American Civil War of Independence of 1812?

12 Robert O.  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 3:54:24pm

The right-wing re-invention of "US Independence Mythology" is possible because:

(a) Most Americans have terrible grasp of history. Recently, National Assessment of Educational Progress found that only 20 percent of fourth-graders, 17 percent of eighth-graders, and 12 percent of high school seniors were proficient in history. If you don't know facts from fiction, you are liable to believe in any lie peddled by a politician.

(b) The lack of a standardized, peer-reviewed, public education curriculum. Let's face it: the US education system is in the toilet. In a recent survey on belief in evolution, the US scored lowest out of all OECD countries except Turkey. Such profound ignorance cannot pass muster in China or Korea. I cannot help but think that there is an ulterior motive behind the religious-right's campaign to defund public education. Namely, it allows churches to have free license to re-invent scientific and historical facts to fit their world view, which cannot otherwise happen under compulsory public education. I do NOT for a moment believe parents in middle America (without religion) could vote against their own childrens' interests in support Koch's platform. When our classrooms teach lies (political propaganda), whereas Asian classrooms teach facts, guess who will be 21st century's winners?

13 wrenchwench  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:23:17pm

@ClearlyNM
RT @pourmecoffee: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to edit Wikipedia versions of it. -- George Santayana, I believe.

14 darthstar  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:26:32pm

re: #13 wrenchwench

@ClearlyNM
RT @pourmecoffee: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to edit Wikipedia versions of it. -- George Santayana, I believe.

Just fezzzbooked that as my status. Thanks.

15 HAL2010  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:38:59pm

Dont mind me, just quoting wikipedia ...

Revolutionary leaders began to be fearful of using blacks in the armed forces. They were afraid that slaves who were armed would uprise against them. Slave owners became concerned that military service would eventually free their slaves.

In May 1775, the Massachusetts Committee of Safety, stopped the enlistment of slaves in the armies of the colony. This action was adopted by the Continental Congress when they took over the Patriot Army. George Washington in July 1775 issued an order to recruiters, ordering them not to enroll "any deserter from the Ministerial army, nor any stroller, negro or vagabond".

This order did not apply to blacks already serving in the army. In September 1775, the southern delegates moved that Washington should discharge all blacks, free or slaves. The northern delegates were aware of how brave the blacks had been in the Massachusetts battles and opposed the notion. The blacks that were already in the army were then allowed to finish out their enlistments.

In October 1775, Washington announced that all blacks, both free and slave would be "rejected altogether." In November he said that "Neither Negroes, boys unable to bear arms, nor old men unfit to endure the fatigues of the campaign, are to be enlisted." Most blacks were integrated into existing military units, but some segregated units were formed, such as the Bucks of America.

The War of Independence was actually fought to end slavery!

16 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:42:08pm

re: #4 Obdicut

Um.

So.

Why was their slavery after the war of independence, then?

As far as I can tell from the sites who promote Barton's line of reasoning, it was all Edward Rutledge's fault. We should probably burn him in effigy every fourth of July.

17 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:43:55pm

re: #7 elizajane

Standing up for the unpopular side here...
OK, if you were a smart right-winger, you could make an argument that both Bachmann and her detractors were wrong. Yes there WERE Founding Fathers (TM) who argued against slavery. There were also FFs who owned slaves. What ended up in the constitution were compromises among these guys, because back then, politicians knew how to compromise, unlike our legislators today.

Happily I cannot hear Barton's discussion because I don't have sound on my computer, but if he says that some of the FFs wanted to end slavery, he isn't actually wrong. However, if he says that the entire motive of the Revolution was to get rid of a terrible institution that was supported by the Evil British and hated by all the good Americans, then he's an idiot.

Some of them did want to end slavery. Even the men who owned slaves had their doubts about the long-term viability and desirability of the system.

But he makes it sound much less muddled and complicated than it was, and he does manage to make it sound as though we're doing the founders a terrible wrong by suggesting that they allowed slavery to persist.

Which they, any way you slice or dice it, did.

18 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:44:21pm

re: #10 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He claims the colonies wanted to end slavery, but Britain wouldn't let us, and list that as one of the major reasons we fought the War of Independence.

Which explains why the Brits outlawed slavery decades before the US did.

We gave them the idea. Britain abolished slavery because the U.S. inspired them.

//

19 yoshicastmaster  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 4:49:06pm

so, to sum this guy up:

Youtube Video
20 The Ghost of a Flea  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 5:53:24pm

The US reaction to the Haitian Revolution also punches a big hole in this assertion.

21 sagehen  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 5:56:55pm

re: #12 Robert O.

I cannot help but think that there is an ulterior motive behind the religious-right's campaign to defund public education. Namely, it allows churches to have free license to re-invent scientific and historical facts to fit their world view, which cannot otherwise happen under compulsory public education. I do NOT for a moment believe parents in middle America (without religion) could vote against their own childrens' interests in support Koch's platform.

Ulterior? Nothing secret about this, that was exactly the deal Reagan's campaign team brokered between the Robber Barons and Theocrats.

The Robber Barons (tm) needed a mass of voters to support their 1890's economic agenda; the Theocrats (tm) needed to reduce availability of knowledge/ science/ public assistance or anything else that might give people somewhere to turn for help other than the church.

The Theocrats held up their end of the deal, and they've raised a whole generation and a half to believe in Supply Side Jesus. They're pissed off that after all that, the Robber Barons haven't been entirely successful in keeping women in the kitchen and gays in the closet, and don't prioritize the social issues. It's true the RB's don't care so much about it, they just play along to placate the rubes... but they didn't think the religious whackjobs would catch on.

22 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 6:53:17pm

Well, they DO share an alma mater...

23 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 6:54:35pm

re: #20 The Ghost of a Flea

The US reaction to the Haitian Revolution also punches a big hole in this assertion.

Yeah, Europe wasn't so thrilled about it, either.

24 labman57  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 8:01:39pm

The following bit of rationalization can be used by historical revisionists such as Bachmann, Palin, et al. -- tea party brown-nosing patriot wannabes who apparently know far less about our nation's history than they attempt to portray to the public:
"Aliens recently invaded the earth and created a breach in the space-time continuum, resulting in an alternate chain of events impacting the lives of famous Americans such as Paul Revere and John Quincy Adams, and important incidents such as the Battles of Concord and Lexington."

Expect this line of reasoning to appear in the next edition of U.S. History textbooks to be approved by the Texas State Board of Education.

25 Cydney  Tue, Jun 28, 2011 8:39:42pm

I had to listen to this clip several times to get exactly what he said because he talks so fast you can't keep up with him. Barton mentioned Jefferson's “original Rough draught” of the Declaration of Independence ([Link: www.princeton.edu...] He's probably referring to this passage from it ("he", of course, is George III):

"he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people* who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce:[11] and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another."

*"distant people" would refer to the slaves from Africa and the West Indies.

--Barton refers also to the years 1773-1774. At that time the colonies were still subject to British rule, i.e., they were British colonies. He mentions anti-slavery legislation being vetoed by George III. Jefferson actually addresses this in the above original draft: "he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce". RI forbade the slave trade in 1774. Virginia also tried to pass similar legislation but it was vetoed by the British Privy Council.

--Regarding Barton's statement that 70 percent of the FFs were abolitionists, at the time there were three slave colonies (SC, NC, and GA) and 10 non-slave colonies. Perhaps this is where he is coming up with the "70 percent" figure.

--Edward Rutledge-SC objected to to the above passage and and would not sign the document unless it was removed. If you read "John Adams" by David McCullough and/or saw the HBO series "John Adams" you will remember that scene and the contention over this issue. Rutledge was a wealthy plantation owner from one of SC's most prominent families, and he owned slaves.

--Furthermore, Pennsylvania delegates John Dickinson and Robert Morris both abstained. Their abstention allowed PA to vote for independence. Thus, with Rutledge's signature the vote became unanimous. There was a scene in the HBO series where Franklin, Jefferson, and, as I recall, John Adams met with Dickinson, a Quaker, the night before and convinced him that he might want to be "indisposed" the next day when the vote was taken.

The slave trade was outlawed in Great Britain in 1807; it was outlawed in the U.S. in 1808. Slavery was finally abolished in the British Empire in 1833 and three decades later in the U.S, after a civil war. Abolitionists in the U.S. Undoubtedly knew of the great social reformer William Wilberforce and his anti-slavery campaign in Great Britain. Personally, I'm not convinced that slavery would have been abolished in this country when it was, had it not been for Wilberforce's work in England. Just my humble opinion.....

26 Obdicut  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 6:48:41am

re: #25 Cydney

--Regarding Barton's statement that 70 percent of the FFs were abolitionists, at the time there were three slave colonies (SC, NC, and GA) and 10 non-slave colonies. Perhaps this is where he is coming up with the "70 percent" figure.


That's a lie, though. There were still slaves throughout the colonies.

Any particular reason you're lying to defend Bachmann's view of history?

27 Lidane  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 7:02:23am

re: #25 Cydney

LOL @ you for trying to defend David Barton's idiotic historical revisionism.

Barton is the reason why the Texas State Board of Education is currently trying to change reality to say that John Calvin was more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson. Barton's a hack with no background in history at all. He's full of shit.

Don't defend him. He doesn't deserve it. If anything, he deserves heaps of scorn and for real historians to call him on his bullshit.

28 Cydney  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 8:26:47am

re: #27 Lidane

LOL @ you for trying to defend David Barton's idiotic historical revisionism.

Barton is the reason why the Texas State Board of Education is currently trying to change reality to say that John Calvin was more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson. Barton's a hack with no background in history at all. He's full of shit.

Don't defend him. He doesn't deserve it. If anything, he deserves heaps of scorn and for real historians to call him on his bullshit.

Defending Barton? LOL! How so? My source for those comments are from Princeton's archives, not from Barton, who did not actually quote that particular paragraph in the original draft. So exactly how do you interpret Jefferson's own comments cited in my post? What do "real historians" say about it? And who are they?

With all due respect, you make no arguments to support your accusations. Did you really read the whole post? I cited actual, historical information, which can easily be verified apart from David Barton and Michelle Bachmann.

Cite your specific sources if you believe any of the historical other information about slavery and the contention over it in the Continental Congress is wrong. Or do I hear crickets chirping?

29 Obdicut  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 8:37:08am

re: #28 Cydney

Why did you claim only three of the colonies were slave colonies, when they all had slaves?

Hell, a slave was wounded at Lexington-Concord

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

30 Lidane  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 9:36:32am

re: #28 Cydney

By your idiot logic, all of the slave-owning Founders lived in SC, NC, and GA. Can you verify that for me?

Take your time.

31 Decatur Deb  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 9:38:45am

re: #30 Lidane

By your idiot logic, all of the slave-owning Founders lived in SC, NC, and GA. Can you verify that for me?

Take your time.

Wiki--

Martin Van Buren was born in the village of Kinderhook, New York, on December 5, 1782, approximately 25 miles south of Albany. His father, Abraham Van Buren (1737–1817) was a farmer, the owner of six slaves, and a tavern-keeper in Kinderhook.

32 Girl with a Pearl Earring  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 10:31:43am

re: #25 Cydney

"Regarding Barton's statement that 70 percent of the FFs were abolitionists, at the time there were three slave colonies (SC, NC, and GA) and 10 non-slave colonies. Perhaps this is where he is coming up with the "70 percent" figure."

Barton said that 10 of the colonies wanted to abolish slavery and 3 did not, not that 10 of the colonies were non-slave colonies and 3 were.

As for "70 percent" of the Founders being abolitionist, that should be easy to verify or not.

33 Cydney  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 11:02:07am

re: #29 Obdicut

Why did you claim only three of the colonies were slave colonies, when they all had slaves?

Hell, a slave was wounded at Lexington-Concord

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

You are correct on that point, and I stand corrected. My bad.

34 Obdicut  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 11:43:02am

re: #33 Cydney

So why did you lie about it?

Why don't you also note that the slave trade in the US wasn't outlawed in 1808-- the international slave trade was. Domestic slave trading was still alive and well. Britain had already outlawed domestic slave trading.

35 fiveonefive  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 8:02:50pm

re: #34 Obdicut

Why don't you also note that the slave trade in the US wasn't outlawed in 1808-- the international slave trade was. Domestic slave trading was still alive and well. Britain had already outlawed domestic slave trading.

The Northwest Oridinance banned slavery in the Northwest in 1787.

The exportation of American slaves was outlawed in 1794.

In 1798, the importation of slaves into Alabama and Missippi was outlawed.

In 1790, American citizens were banned from participating in the slave trade anywhere in the world (IE. between Africa and Brazil).

In 1803 a number of laws were passed restricting the domestic slave trade.

As you mentioned, in 1808, American participation in the international slave trade was completely outlawed.

In 1820, the US government added the penalty of death for any participation in the international slave trade.

And so on

As you can see, there is clearly a pattern of hostility towards slavery straight from the very foundation of the country that finally crescendos into a massive civil war to end it.

36 Obdicut  Wed, Jun 29, 2011 10:09:18pm

re: #35 fiveonefive

There was a hostility from some. Not from all. Or we wouldn't have had that civil war.

What was your point?

37 Charles Johnson  Thu, Jun 30, 2011 10:58:06am

'Cydney' is a sock puppet for "Girl With a Pearl Earring," and both of these accounts are now blocked.

38 SanFranciscoZionist  Thu, Jun 30, 2011 12:31:20pm

re: #30 Lidane

By your idiot logic, all of the slave-owning Founders lived in SC, NC, and GA. Can you verify that for me?

Take your time.

I can verify right now: it's not so. John Hancock, MA, can capably represent the slave-owners not from those colonies.

39 SanFranciscoZionist  Thu, Jun 30, 2011 12:33:31pm

re: #35 fiveonefive


As you can see, there is clearly a pattern of hostility towards slavery straight from the very foundation of the country that finally crescendos into a massive civil war to end it.

There's both a pattern of hostility and unease about slavery, and a pattern of increasing financial, cultural and political investment in slavery. There would have been no need for the Civil War if the matter had been as generally resolved upon as Barton likes to paint it.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Good Liars at The Libertarian Convention [VIDEO] The Good Liars visit the Libertarian Convention in Washington DC. They interview presidential candidates, talk to someone who thinks people should be allowed to own nuclear weapons, and Starchild. SUPPORT US: http://Herohero.co/thegoodliars SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!NASHVILLE, TN JUNE ...
teleskiguy
9 hours ago
Views: 151 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Ranked-Choice Voting Has Challenged the Status Quo. Its Popularity Will Be Tested in November. JUNEAU — Alaska’s new election system — with open primaries and ranked voting — has been a model for those in other states who are frustrated by political polarization and a sense that voters lack real choice at the ...
Cheechako
5 days ago
Views: 163 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0