Burgess Owens: The NAACP Keeps People Angry and Hopeless to Shamelessly Breed Black Voters

Burgess Owens, former NFL star and author of the book Liberalism or How to Turn Good Men into Whiners, Weenies and Wimps, joined The Glenn Beck Program on Friday to address the current state of race relations across America and what role, if any, the NAACP has played.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Burgess Owens is an NFL legend and the author of a book Liberalism: Or How to Turn Good Men Into Whiners, Weenies, and Wimps. And really tells it like it is and is a good friend of the program.

Hello, Burgess, how are you, sir?

BURGESS: Glenn, good talking with you again, my friend. Looking forward to our discussion today for sure.

GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about what's happening on the streets of North Carolina, what's happening on the streets of Tulsa. But first, your thoughts on Betty Shelby, the police officer being charged with manslaughter in the first degree.

BURGESS: You know, I haven't had a chance to get any real information on what's happening there, what's happening in Tulsa. So I'm just going to -- I'm going to hold off and make my decision on my conclusion on that until I can get a little more information. I do have a very strong impression about Charlotte. I'd love to talk to you about that.

GLENN: Well, hang on just a second, I've understood from the alt-right, that we're now living in a post-fact world and that's a good thing. I mean, you should be able to comment without facts, Burgess.

All right. So let's talk about -- let's talk about Charlotte. Because yesterday afternoon, I saw a press conference with the NAACP. And the NAACP was there in Charleston, South Carolina. Kind of trying to whip things up, when there was a shooting -- oh, no, no. South Carolina, when they were trying to whip up the -- after the shooting in the church.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: Remember when we went?

PAT: Charleston, yeah.

GLENN: And they were doing the same thing. Yeah, in Charleston. And now, in Charlotte, yesterday, they were doing the same in North Carolina. Can you comment a little bit on the NAACP?

BURGESS: Yeah, well, the NAACP, you have to understand, they're not trying to find justice. They're not trying to find fairness or even bring American people together. They have one issue and one thing that they're after right now. At the end of the day, they are shameless in breeding black voters. They want to get the black community up in arms and angry, more hopeless than they've already made them, so they go out and vote in November. At the end of the day, that is their goal.

It didn't matter what happened. In this case, here's a black man, a black policeman, who shot a black man with an armed -- a firearm. You have black police chief. You have a white Democrat mayor. All that is a perfect scenario for our affirmative action community that we have today. But yet it all takes in our community today, six weeks out, is for some black person to get shot. It doesn't matter why. Is to have the NAACP and their group trying to get in and rev up their voters.

GLENN: You've talked about the history of the NAACP that I don't think most people know. You talk about it in your book. And it's fascinating.

BURGESS: Yeah, it is -- the an interesting process when you understand the stealth that's been going on in our nation for a long, long time.

For those who are just hearing for the first time, the NAACP, back in 1910, when it was formed, was not formed by black people. It was formed by 21 white, socialist, atheist, Marxist, race-control Democrats. It was an environment at the time -- keep in mind, during that time, the race -- the black race was one of the most competitive, industrious, patriotic, Republican communities in our country.

And so in order to get into that community to do the things they needed to do, to take us down the route they have, they needed to use stealth, and they needed to use the face of another black person, W.E. DeBois, who is also a socialist and communist.

And that is actually what is happening today. It's a playbook they've used for a long time.

Today, they use the black BET to message out anti-police, anti-white messaging. And keep in mind, look at the people that are making the biggest noise. I can guarantee that they always have the same source: Black Entertainment Television, which is actually owned by white liberal Democrats, the Blackstones and Viacom, who have been messaging the black community for a long, long time to get them where they are today.

GLENN: So let me ask you about this: Here we have this police officer in Tulsa, who is first degree manslaughter. Going to be charged with that. And I don't know the situation anymore than anybody else does. I think every single shooting should be looked into.

BURGESS: Yes.

GLENN: But we also know black officers are much more likely to shoot and discharge their firearm than a white officer is. And we also know there has been an increase of, what is it? A 20 percent increase of violence and killings of -- of officers in the last year. And nobody seems to pay attention to that.

What you have is a situation to where the -- the officers -- black and white -- are going to be paralyzed with fear of doing anything, or they're going to get in trouble. And here's where I think the black community loses. If I'm a -- if I'm a cop and I'm called into a predominantly black neighborhood and, you know, there's something -- gunfire or something else. I'm thinking I'm saying, "I'm not going. I'm not going." Or if I go, I'm staying way away from this, because I don't want to be involved. I'm going to lose in this.

BURGESS: Well, you know, Glenn, the thing is, when you look at who has been hurt by this whole process, it is the black community. Not only -- and it's in a couple of ways. Not only for those innocent black -- those in the community that really do need the help and support. Because not only are the criminals -- the criminal element being empowered, encouraged. But you have again -- in this case, you have policemen who really want to do the right thing, but are afraid of not being backed up, not going in.

It is really a shame to see this dual process of division. And it comes down to one simple thing: This is why it's so devious, what's happening now.

We have a president who's been president for eight years. We have the second black attorney general after eight years. And it's interesting that the message that's being given to everybody -- America, is that the black race is truly inept. The black race cannot on its own stand up and best the black -- the white race, who has been their oppressors for 150 years. And this is why, when we disconnect ourselves from our past, our history, you have a narrative, in which now we are sitting back as victims, supposedly waiting for politicians and white legislators to give us the right and the power to do what every other culture has done in this country. That is to rise up, become the best we can be, and develop great successful people to lead status.

GLENN: You know, Burgess, we were doing -- we're talking to Burgess Owens. He's the author of Liberalism. We were talking about families and the destruction of families. We were doing a serial on it. And the black family was, you know, by 1960, the strongest family unit in the country. Now it is by far the weakest.

And the turning point, strangely, seems to be the Johnson administration and the Great Society. Have you ever done any research -- because we -- this piqued my interest.

Gee, that seems strange. And wait a minute, Johnson was a huge progressive racist. I wonder who wrote the Great Society bill. I wonder if there were these racist progressives in there that wrote this maybe even intentionally to tear the black family apart, knowing that it would disintegrate. Do you think there's anything to that?

BURGESS: Glenn, I'll tell you. It's interesting because I've done my history and done some research. At every point along the last 100 years -- and keep in mind, when I talk about the hundred years since 1865, the black race was doing so well. In other words, we were --

GLENN: Yep.

BURGESS: Again, we had 50 percent of black Americans that were part of the middle class. We had a the highest percentage of entrepreneurs. All those things. We had the strongest commitment to marriage.

Every single facet of change happened because of Democratic policies. Whether it was the Davis-Bacon Act, which took the entrepreneurs out of the marketplace, with the high unemployment or minimum wage now that keeps young teenagers from actually ever getting experience and work.

Look at those -- those young people who are rioting, looting, and stealing, think about it. You're looking at young men who are not working, who have no hopes -- have not been educated. Have no hopes of working. They're all walking around with their pants down to their knees, and they're upset because they can't get ahead or they don't have an opportunity. That's been all accomplished through a change of self-perception through the white liberals at BET and the policies of liberals that have stopped this from moving forward, like we had in the early '60s.

GLENN: We have something going on, the Ferguson effect. I mean, if it -- do you believe, Burgess, that if the president would have come out and said, "Hey, we're going to look into Ferguson. I'm not going to comment on this. But stop the rioting that's -- you're burning down your own city. Stop it." If he came out strong, do you think we would be in the situation we are in right now?

BURGESS: I'd say, Glenn -- we can look back in history and look at a man who had the greatest opportunity in the history of mankind to bring our country together.

The reason why white Americans and blacks voted for this man was because of the promise of getting past race.

We have never been more divided. More -- we're now turning black people into racists. Unapologetic racists.

And when you start to do that -- first of all, the blessings that go with anyone who has that kind of spirit goes away, very big time. And we cannot have conversations -- real reasonable conversations about how to get past this, until we get past the judgment that we now have of color. And we've got even worse than that -- we're now judging people based on the color of the uniform they're wearing.

GLENN: Yeah.

BURGESS: Now blue is becoming a racist call. That's how we've gone.

GLENN: But I'm looking at the Ferguson effect, which says now, since Ferguson, murders in the 50 biggest cities in the US have spiked 17 percent in the black community, as a result of cops being unwilling or reluctant to go in and police neighborhoods because of the fear of being labeled a racist. 17 percent jump in -- in murders in those communities.

That is a -- the liberals have been the champion of those who are crying racism.

BURGESS: Well, the thing you want to add to that -- and you're absolutely right. This is common sense. In all of us -- when we do our job, at the end of the day, we want to be with our family. We don't want to go into any situation or we come out with not good a chance of coming out alive. At the end of the day, we're dealing with a empathy-free liberalism does not care about the end result. It just cares about stealings and its goals. And, at the end of the day, we have more blacks now being hurt in so many different ways. And this has been the history of the Democratic Party. And so I -- I really do hope -- and this is where I think we have a conversation now, that as a total country, blacks and whites, we really start to look and hold these people accountable who have overseen the black misery that has happened over the last decades now.

GLENN: Burgess Owens, Liberalism or How to Turn Good Men Into Whiners, Weenies, and Wimps. Thanks so much for being on us, Burgess. Appreciate it.

BURGESS: Thank you, Glenn. Look forward to the opportunity to talk more as we move this thing forward.

GLENN: You bet.

Featured Image: Charlotte NAACP President Corine Mack, left, and Pastor Charles Jacobs pray where a man was shot the night before outside of the Omni Hotel September 22, 2016 in Charlotte, NC. Protests began on Tuesday night following the fatal shooting of 43-year-old Keith Lamont Scott at an apartment complex near UNC Charlotte. A state of emergency was declared overnight in Charlotte and a midnight curfew was imposed by mayor Jennifer Roberts. (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

By July 9, 1776, a copy of the Declaration of Independence reached New York City, where British naval ships occupied New York Harbor. Revolutionary spirit and tension were running high. George Washington, commander of the Continental forces in New York, read the Declaration aloud in front of City Hall. The crowd cheered wildly, and later that day tore down a statue of King George III. They melted down the statue to make 42,000 musket balls for the ragtag American army.

America's separation from Great Britain was officially in writing. Now came the hard part.

The Declaration of Independence defines who we are, what we believe, and what we aspire to be. It is a mission statement. But no one said it would be easy to implement.

The Declaration was not simply an official announcement of our split from Great Britain. If it was just that, it could've been a lot shorter. It was also an announcement that we're starting a new company, and here's what we're basing it on. It didn't just declare independence — it declared principles. It declared how we were going to organize ourselves once we were out on our own, and it set up guardrails to help ensure we didn't end up like the country we were leaving in the first place.

The Founders set us up for success, but America is now fumbling it away, largely thanks to our dangerous drift from the original blueprints.

In our national discourse, it's hard to find agreement even on fundamentals like the Declaration of Independence anymore. There's no time for old-fashioned things like the Declaration when social media can fuel our outrage around the clock.

We have lost touch with our national DNA.

How often do we jump to outrage before we have any kind of perspective on a matter? In 2017, President Trump had only been in office for one month before over 100 activists rewrote a version of the Declaration of Independence, rewording it with Trump in the King George III role. Trump had been in office for a single month. The focus has shifted from unity to partisan winning at all costs. We have lost touch with our national DNA.

Our basic knowledge of the Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights is so weak that we don't have a clue how they relate to each other. As of late 2017, 37 percent of Americans could not name any of our First Amendment rights. And 33 percent of Americans could not name any branch of our government.

Here's another example of our painful misunderstanding. In a Psychology Today article written before the 2016 presidential election, Dr. Mark Goulston was trying to figure out a way to understand Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. This is what he came up with:

Trump represents the Declaration of Independence. Clinton represents the U.S. Constitution.

He tries to explain that Trump supporters are eager to declare their independence from the political swamp system. For the Constitution side of things, he wrote:

It [the Constitution] may have stood the test of time for so long because it was drafted following a long, costly and awful war that the founding fathers wanted to prevent from happening again. That intention possibly enabled them to create a document that was relatively free from special interests and personal agendas. [Hillary] Clinton is more like the Constitution than the Declaration of Independence and appears to be more about getting things done than declaratively taking a stand.

Besides being a completely bogus way to interpret Hillary Clinton, this comparison makes your brain hurt because it so fundamentally misunderstands the relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution. They are not rival documents.

He says the Constitution has stood the test of time because the founders wrote it to prevent another long, costly war. What? No. It stands the test of time because it was designed to protect the “unalienable rights" of the Declaration.

He goes on to say that we need a new Constitutional Convention because, “We may just need to retrofit it to fit modern times."

This is the primarily leftist idea that America is up against today — that the founding documents worked well for their time, but that they now need an overhaul. Progressives seem to live by the motto, if it ain't broke, fix it anyway. Rather than “fixing" things, however, when we understand the Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights as they already are, we discover that they still work because they're tied to universal principles, not a specific point in time.

Here's one way to think about the Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. The Declaration is our thesis, or mission statement. The Constitution is the blueprint to implement that mission statement. And the Bill of Rights is our insurance policy.

Aside from the practical business of separating from Great Britain, the gist of the Declaration is that humans have natural rights granted us by God, and that those rights cannot be compromised by man. The Constitution, then, is the practical working out of how do we design a government that best protects our natural rights?

The creation of the Constitution did not give us rights. The existence of our rights created the Constitution. The Constitution just recognizes and codifies those rights, clarifying that the government does not have authority to deprive us of those rights.

The Founders were extremely paranoid about corruption and abuse of power. They designed a system to avoid as much of that as possible.

The Progressive and postmodern idea that rich white guys founded America as an exclusive country club for enriching themselves doesn't hold water. If that had been their true intent, they seriously handicapped themselves with the emphasis on rights and the checks on power that they included in these three documents. Any honest reading of the Constitution, and of the massive ratification debates that dragged on in individual state legislatures, makes one thing very clear — the Founders were extremely paranoid about corruption and abuse of power. They designed a system to avoid as much of that as possible.

Still, this Declaration-Constitution-Bill of Rights-trifecta thing is just a conservative line, right? It's just something we say because we're stuck in the past and we're in denial about the new and improved, diverse, post-gender, postmodern America, right?

As the Declaration puts it, “let facts be submitted to a candid world."

In 1839, on the 50th anniversary of George Washington's inauguration as the nation's first president, the New York Historical Society invited former president John Quincy Adams to deliver a speech. As the son of John Adams, John Quincy wrote a speech about something near and dear to his — the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. He said:

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, are parts of one consistent whole, founded upon one and the same theory of government… it had been working itself into the mind of man for many ages… but had never before been adopted by a great nation in practice…

Even in our own country, there are still philosophers who deny the principles asserted in the Declaration, as self-evident truths — who deny the natural equality and inalienable rights of man — who deny that the people are the only legitimate source of power – who deny that all just powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed… I speak to matters of fact. There is the Declaration of Independence, and there is the Constitution of the United States — let them speak for themselves.

They can, and they do. They don't require any interpretation or updates because our inalienable rights have not changed.

Progressives and Democratic Socialists believe our rights come from the government, but the Declaration emphasizes that our rights are inalienable and are granted to mankind by God. By the way, we usually only use the word “inalienable" now when we're talking about the Declaration of Independence, so we often don't even understand the word. It means something that is not transferable, something incapable of being taken away or denied.

We don't know our founding documents anymore and we're witnessing the disastrous results of this deficiency. We've lost sight of what made the American Revolution so unique. It was the first time subjects who had colonized new lands, rebelled against the country they came from. Government by the people and for the people is a principle that changed the world. Most countries fall apart after their revolutions. We thrived because of the firm principles of the Declaration, and the protection of those principles in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It's a unique system with a remarkable track record, in spite of our human frailty. But this system is not inevitable — for it to continue to work, we must understand and protect it.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).