I agree with you... and it would seem more than appropriate that the background and familial history of other figures in the public eye also be open to scrutiny... rather than when it is merely convenient to do so.... does anyone know if the Hargrove is question is in fact an ancestor, the circumstances under which that Hargrove became a slave-holder and what the ultimate conclusion was i.e. was the slave in question held in bondage, sold or imancipated?
I agree and disagree. I agree that all should be subjected to the same scrutiny. My problem is with why the scrutiny is even applied at all! It is literally impossible for me to care less whether (insert any democrat) had a slaveowner in his/her distant ancestry for all the well-expressed reasons in this thread. So, please, media, move on to something that actually IS intertesting....like the actual issue he was discussing!