Replies

The position you have taken is radically leftist. The problem is, this comes full circle. By agreeing with the New York Times 1619 Project that the Constitution is pro-slavery, you are also agreeing with everything down stream. You can't separate them as if there's a magical line in the sand.

"America has long been recognized as exceptional"

America has long been without the 1619 Project too. You appear to be wanting to have it both ways. You want to carry the banner of the New York Times high and proud, and you want to carry the banner of years of old-time recognition as well. But you're not realizing the gross contradiction of the two.

“By agreeing with the New York Times 1619 Project that the Constitution is pro-slavery, you are also agreeing with everything down stream.”

You have misunderstood and imaged more.

To be clear: President George Washington was a southern farmer and used available farming methods (or do you deny that too?).

The fact he was a southern farmer does not disqualify him from greatness and respect.

What the New York Times 1619 Project has done is to convince you to accept presentism.

Get rid of presentism; and embrace southerner Richard Henry Lee, author of the Lee Resolution, the first official call for independence.

Embrace southerner George Washington, Father of Our Country.

Embrace southerner Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence.

Embrace southerner James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution.

Embrace southerner George Mason, Father of the Bill of Rights..

Embrace southerner Patrick Henry who proclaimed “Give Me Liberty . . .” and fired up America's fight for independence.

The New York Times needs to work up a whole new set of values.