tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post7851857094907384398..comments2023-06-13T10:03:01.228-05:00Comments on Blue Christian on a Red Background: Glenn Beck Implies racially-based Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments Never HappenedJon Trotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08667858230128323729noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-85332025446814730332009-10-04T08:51:56.215-05:002009-10-04T08:51:56.215-05:00Jon, this is a pretty thin reason for a post, once...Jon, this is a pretty thin reason for a post, once you were corrected by Ron. Beck didn't even address the issue directly. Why not just admit the post was based on your misunderstanding of the issue, and delete it, this is a target rich environment we live in. By the way, those experiments were basically conducted by Democrats.<br /><br />"You're being a bit unimaginative here. Remember, Wright's reaction is based not just upon this event, but upon many other racially-based events as well, including lynchings which were still going on at the time of the Tuskegee Experiment's founding."<br /><br />I think if you examined this defense a little more dispassionately, you would realize that you would dismiss it out of hand of someone else made it. Frankly, it's more "imaginative" than Glenn Beck in this instance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-16244501691600834012009-09-24T17:43:38.114-05:002009-09-24T17:43:38.114-05:00Jon:
You are stretching mightily IMO to tar Mr. B...Jon:<br /><br />You are stretching mightily IMO to tar Mr. Beck. With your journalistic background, I would expect you to nail someone you consider a racist and a liar a little more definitively than you have to this point. Obviously, my preference is for the Truth in all these matters, but my sympathies lie with Beck (since I too am a honky, redneck, peckerwood cracker)//bb Bob Brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-76595853979935630942009-09-08T18:14:37.045-05:002009-09-08T18:14:37.045-05:00Will you boycott 20th Century Fox as well?Will you boycott 20th Century Fox as well?Jed Carosaarihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10775889983099808362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-5435366863423171262009-09-08T11:39:34.473-05:002009-09-08T11:39:34.473-05:00Ron, for forty years our government DID lie about ...Ron, for forty years our government DID lie about the Tuskegee Experiment. Why is it difficult to believe that they would have injected men with syphilis if they were willing to intentionally condemn men to death who had syphilis? You're being a bit unimaginative here. Remember, Wright's reaction is based not just upon this event, but upon many other racially-based events as well, including lynchings which were still going on at the time of the Tuskegee Experiment's founding. <br /><br />In addition, as I mentioned, the govt. to all intents and purposes WAS "injecting" wives / lovers of these men with syphilis by intentionally leaving the men untreated. Those doctors must have known what the results of their non-treatment would be. Women infected. Children infected as they were born.<br /><br />So for Wright to make his claim -- which was incorrect -- is not irrational or extreme. It is quite believable, since the doctors could have cared less about these men. The men were animals to be experimented upon.<br /><br />I await the day it turns out there were men injected. That question remains open to me... it would be more logical if they were injected, considering the mind set of the doctors and the govt. agencies involved.<br /><br />I can't know what Glenn Beck *meant* to say in his comments. What he did *do* by inference is to imply that the Tuskegee Experiments never happened. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one. <br /><br />Sincerely,<br />JonJon Trotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05269111052515857956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-64276035178826903532009-09-08T05:01:50.258-05:002009-09-08T05:01:50.258-05:00Jon,
You wrote: "In Wright's defense, I ...Jon,<br /><br />You wrote: "In Wright's defense, I think the difference between actively preventing a cure for forty years and actually causing the syphilis in the first place is a pretty thin line." I agree. But it still does not change the fact that Wright did not accuse the government of "preventing a cure" (in point of fact, the cure did not exist when the experiment began), but of deliberately infecting the men in the first place. So your defense of Wright does not change the fact that he made an indefensibly false statement for the sole purpose of inflaming the passions of his audience against the government. In all probability, this was either due to the fact that the truth, as bad as it was, would not have carried quite the punch he was hoping to land, or that he simply spoke out of ignorance. I do not find the latter possibility particularly credible. In any case, Jon, you are bearing false witness against Glenn Beck. He never denied the existence of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.Ron Henzelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02433743384047640111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-17219987041475753252009-09-07T22:21:17.163-05:002009-09-07T22:21:17.163-05:00as a christian who leans right of center, I come h...as a christian who leans right of center, I come here for a couple reasons. One, because I thoroughly enjoyed Cornerstone magazine and your contributions therein, and secondly, to read, consider and discuss views that I wouldn't normally entertain.<br /><br />That being said, i do have a problem with posts of this sort, by people of all spectrums, whether right leaning or left leaning.<br /><br />Why is it that the foibles, inconsistencies, errors, and egregious comments of our political foes are only commented on? <br />Would it take much effort to find similarly shocking comments/statemetns/views of those on our own side?<br /><br />Also, why is it that these commentaries usually try to generalize the foe's group/affilations/political party/viewpoints with the same brush?<br /><br />Let's be fair in our commentary.JMJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623913415313830829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-27393566667947428672009-09-07T14:33:14.099-05:002009-09-07T14:33:14.099-05:00Thanks, Ron. I revised the post (got your face boo...Thanks, Ron. I revised the post (got your face book comment before I realized you'd posted to bluechristian... )<br /><br />In Wright's defense, I think the difference between actively preventing a cure for forty years and actually causing the syphilis in the first place is a pretty thin line.Jon Trotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05269111052515857956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11057324.post-78903768123875217302009-09-07T14:10:31.273-05:002009-09-07T14:10:31.273-05:00Jon, the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was a terrib...Jon, the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was a terrible and shameful chapter in our nation's history. But Jeremiah Wright distorted it when he claimed that the government "purposely infected African American men with syphilis." This is a false statement. According to the Tuskegee University page you cited, "the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis." These men already had syphilis; the government did not purposely infect them. Was it wrong not to tell them they had syphilis? Was the government responsible for the fact that these men infected their wives and children? Was it immoral to withhold treatment from them after it was discovered? Was it racist? To all of the above: tragically, yes. But when Wright boldly declares, "The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African American men with syphilis," he only brings shame upon himself for sensationally exacerbating an already vile situation.Ron Henzelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02433743384047640111noreply@blogger.com