Here’s one of those puzzlers. Why would you think that Mitch McConnell’s folk din’t own slaves? His folks are indeed long time southerners so you would sorta expect that somewhere down the line there were some slave holders, no?[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””] A new report reveals that the ancestors of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell owned slaves, casting the Kentucky Republican’s opposition to reparations for slavery under renewed scrutiny. Census records from 1850 and 1860 reveal that two of McConnell’s great-great-grandfathers, James McConnell and Richard Daley, owned in total at least 14 slaves — 12 of whom were female — in the years immediately preceding the Civil War, according to NBC News. [/perfectpullquote]
Hmm. How many great great grandfathers do you have? Assuming you’re not from West Virginia, 8. And what was the likelihood of a family being a slave owner?[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Closely related to Myth #2, the idea that the vast majority of Confederate soldiers were men of modest means rather than large plantation owners is usually used to reinforce the contention that the South wouldn’t have gone to war to protect slavery. The 1860 census shows that in the states that would soon secede from the Union, an average of more than 32 percent of white families owned slaves. Some states had far more slave owners (46 percent in South Carolina, 49 percent in Mississippi) while some had far less (20 percent in Arkansas).[/perfectpullquote]
Alabama being deeper South the higher numbers seem more likely. So, Mitch McConnell’s ancestry seems to have less slave owning in it than that of the average population. So, his opposition to reparations in what light then?