The Black Population of New Hampshire

[Significantpower]

I think the issue in this video is that governor was not willing to do everything possible (including working with the Federal government) to protect his citizens. State's rights mean nothing if their inhabitants can't go about their daily lives without fear of unprovoked attack.

[MrDiceman9000]

The south pretends it has original such and such because it needs to feel good about itself.

[lanebatts26]

slap...down :)

[observer9670]

@sylosays I did the research. The black population in NH is 1.1%, or approximately 13,000.

[SciBishop]

Bartlett was making the point that it doesn't happen in New Hampshire because of the simple fact that while admittedly its a pretty homogenous "white" state.

The fact remains that we don't have a bevy of white supremacists in this region of the country who burn churches to the ground, and while I am in Ma. I can assure Trumwill that there is indeed a large number of 'black' churches all over the Northeast, and we don't have problems as rampant as men in white cloaks burning them down.

[bluesboy25000]

@SciBishop Santos would remark on something similar and it would kill him in New Hampshire

[homris]

Actually, I would argue that this scene does exactly the opposite, and has nothing to do with the arrogance of northerners and everything to do with the ambivalence of southern politicians to the problems that are still very present in their states. Sure, there is racism in the north, but down here it's such a legacy that people think they can just do whatever without any issues, as this scene shows. Toby and Josh scenes are much more about northern arrogance.

[drbayoms]

@homris

Just to add to your point. What is more insidious is the fact that most of these guys who are pandering to the "South's Old Guard" bigoted ideology are not racist themselves. There has been a purging of sorts in the Southern political arena. But, they know in order to be elected they MUST "coddle the baby".

[MrDiceman9000]

@drbayoms They are not racists they just play one for votes? So they are hypocrites.

[drbayoms]

@MrDiceman9000

Yes, yes they are hypocrites. You seem to be politically astute. So tell me you knew that the men and women who spout rhetoric (on both sides of the aisle) about various issues do not always believe in those policies of ideologies personally.

I personally believe that the constituency is always more bigoted and extreme than the men and women purporting to represent them. More so now then ever.

Which in my book makes them more dangerous.

[Idantino]

@mailforward4me - Up until 2007, the National Guard belonged to the State FIRST and the President had to get consent of the Governor to federalize the Guard. This was usually a formality. In 2007, the Bush Administration enacted a law that allowed for the President to take control of the Guard WITHOUT the Governor's consent. Every governor protested. A year later, parts of the law were repealed. Now, the feds could take over only during CONGRESSIONALLY declared emergencies/wars.

[mailforward4me]

Southern Politicians use words like STATE'S RIGHT'S and STATE SOVEREIGNTY, neither of which actually exist anymore....

When the Country was founded, we were a federation of Sovereign states, but the conflicts of the 1830's to 1850's, proved that impractical, and led to the Civil War. That war solved the question of who was in charge, and since that time, the Federal Government has been the Parent, and each state is subservient to them. State Sovereignty has not existed since 1861......

[mailforward4me]

Each State's National Guard actually belongs to the Regular Army, and The President IS Commander in Chief of the Military,. When the President "ASKS" a Governor to call them up like this, it is merely a courtesy.... He doesn't REALLY need the Governor's Permission to use his own troops...

In the 50's & 60's, Southern Governors refused to activate troops to protect Black students in Little Rock & other cities, President's Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson overruled them and sent troops anyway.

[younghoss]

@mailforward4me

States do still have rights, at least in theory.

Powers not granted specifically to the Feds in the constitution remain states' powers.

Some may argue the Feds have over-reached, but that's a different issue..

[mailforward4me]

@younghoss

you need to take a closer look at history... The (so called) States Rights issue was resolved by the Civil War, and by Supreme Court cases afterward. In the current legal arena, States Rights do not exist. States are subservient to the Federal government, just as children are subservient to their parents.

Even our founding fathers knew that, eventually, it would take a strong central government to run things more efficiently. States have whatever rights Washington Gives them...

[younghoss]

@mailforward4me

I am not referring to 1755, 1855, or 1955. I am not referring to states' rights as a euphemism for segregation.

Today, examples of states' rights include medical marijuana, assisted suicide, gay marriage rights, the death penalty, limits on rape trials, and others.

A person might argue the Feds usurp too much power, or might argue only the Feds should exist. Those can be compelling arguments. But both opinions are irrelevant to the fact that there are states' rights now.

[MrDiceman9000]

@younghoss A person argues that the states exercise to much discretion in social policy. The idea of bastions of uniqueness is really asking for differing protections and thus differing applications of the law. The law should be uniform. For example, corporations incorporated in Delaware are given rights and privileges across the US. Thus, Delaware controls the standards of corporate governance and not the larger federal government. That is bad.

[drbayoms]

@MrDiceman9000

Amen.

[younghoss]

@mailforward4me

And further, The powers of the federal government are spelled out in plain language, and the Tenth Amendment declares that powers not given to the federal government in the Constitution are kept by the states. The first amendment adopted after the Bill of Rights, the Eleventh Amendment, was specifically to limit the power of federal courts over state governments.

[MrDiceman9000]

@younghoss it also states "to the people" how are the people to exercise those rights?

[jesusthroughmary]

@mailforward4me On the contrary, Washington has whatever rights the states give to the federal government, and only those. The States created the federal government only on that condition.

[fidelio1980]

Sure, the Civil War was about state's rights - but slavery was the #1 "right" that the confederacy was determined to hold onto. The war wasn't JUST about slavery, but it played a very big part.

And I'd really like to know who these modern-day "arrogant Northerners" are, who believe that racism only exists in the South. I've never heard anyone say that there's no racism in the North. I've heard people say there's more racism in the South than the North, but that's a very different statement.

[snakestorm123]

0:32 I could swear ALLL that guys roles are special agent something or other. Of course he plays the Special Agent in the Marvel films...

[LadyNightthorn]

As a woman of color, the term "states rights" is a slap in the face, and is usually used by the white people in power to keep their foot on my neck.

[kevmarkpat]

@LadyNightthorn Indeed.

[gopfunk]

@LadyNightthorn are you out of your mind?

[EnigmaticMrWu]

It's about states rights. More than 600,000 Americans died over this issue in the Civil War. The slavery part was just to keep the British from helping the South. Given that the Southern States were absolutely crushed by the Federal government, even decades after the war ended it's understandably a touchy subject for them.

[nudist0885]

When I 1st saw this episode I was offended by what this guy said about "You got a pretty big black population in New Hampshire". I'm a white man from NJ where we have more than enough negroids of all nationalities and I love some of them.

If I had been sitting in the presidents chair at that moment in time I would have told that guy to "get out of my office".

[SuperHaer]

@nudist0885

Why on earth would that be offensive?

[gagothesith]

Ah, so the President decided to summon a Governor--the Governor did not ask for an audience with the President--but when that Governor points out something which demolishes the foundation of your argument about how you would have done it if you were the Governor, you tell him to "get out of [your] office"?

Now why would the President--even on TWW, not the real one--act like a coward with bravado on YouTube?

[SJT9791]

He's a racist governor, that's all. I've lived in the South all my life and I know a racist when I see one.

[Circely]

WTF?That guy's a douche bag! Why would he not accept help if people were going to get hurt?

[t1984t]

Snap!

[michellecansee]

yep.

[filegirl]

Preach it.