Trump is the best president since Lincoln.........................

[SmarterthanYou]

Who was stopped from seceding? The war didn't begin, and wouldn't have occurred, if the CSA hadn't committed an act of war. So, cite a constitutional violation that America actually committed against the south.

the 'lease' for sumpter was void the second that SC seceded. any rational entity would have done the same. the feds didn't believe they had to vacate, so they were forced. consider it another version of asset forfeiture.

And if a deed isn't subject to contract law, I don't know what is. That fort belonged to "we the people." If the south seceded tomorrow, they would not be in their rights to seize Yellowstone Park.

the hell they wouldn't.

 

[Airstrip One]

the 'lease' for sumpter was void the second that SC seceded. any rational entity would have done the same. the feds didn't believe they had to vacate, so they were forced. consider it another version of asset forfeiture.

the hell they wouldn't.

It was not a fucking lease. What do you think about the Muslim attack on the US consulate in Benghazi? Were they just evicting America from the lease?

Oh, and Yellowstone is in Wyoming. Why are you southerners so fucking entitled?

 

[Hesher]

You do realize that Booth was an actor, right?

Oh shoot! I forgot he was an actor like Reagan, Eastwood,Schwarzenegger,Bono and the reality show star Trump. But I'm not sure what point your'e trying to make.

 

[Airstrip One]

Oh shoot! I forgot he was an actor like Reagan, Eastwood,Schwarzenegger,Bono and the reality show star Trump. But I'm not sure what point your'e trying to make.

The actor in question shot a man who said this:

"I don't believe in a law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good. So while we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else."

When have you ever heard that those words uttered by anyone but a Republican?

 

[Teflon Don]

No, it would not have. Southerners were obsessed with slavery, which is why, having not even been threatened, they seceded, and then provoked a war (they were also not very intelligent).

And he violated the Constitution in ways I'm sure you can't describe.

Yes it would have. It was poor economics. The Industrial Age would have ended it.

Only 1% of southerners owned slaves.

I only wish Booth could have acted sooner. We should celebrate his birthday not Lincoln

 

[cancel2 2022]

Lincoln sucked and did more to violate our constitution than any other President. Slavery would have ended on its own accord like it did in countless countries. Lincoln didn't have to kill 500,000 citizens

But if you want to lionize him, feel fee

If they had seceded the British would have ensured that slavery was abolished. We had tremendous sway over their economy with regards to cotton, which was growing in importance in Egypt and India.

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists

 

[Airstrip One]

Yes it would have. It was poor economics. The Industrial Age would have ended it.

Only 1% of southerners owned slaves.

I only wish Booth could have acted sooner. We should celebrate his birthday not Lincoln

It was clearly not about economics to southerners, and most everyone with prospects in life lived under the belief (realistic or delusional), that they could one day save-up enough money to buy a slave, the way one might afford a house or a car.

Economically, southerners were willing to take on two massive opportunity costs - secession from America, and then a war with the industrialized opponent. Clearly, economics did not play a role at all when it came to the southern defense of slavery as an institution.

 

[Airstrip One]

If they had seceded the British would have ensured that slavery was abolished. We had tremendous sway over their economy with regards to cotton, which growing in importance in Egypt and India.

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists

See my above post about economics. Also, the south probably still hated the British more than they did Americans. They had agitated for war with Britain under Adams, and good relations with Britain had always been more of a Whig project than a Democratic one. I also find it amazing that you can have read about the south of the 1860s and found the people to have been in possession of even an ounce of reason. I mean, it's not as though their descendants of 2017 are known for their rational nature.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

500k people dead is peanuts in the long run compared to a divided nation.

you're the only one divided......somewhere between your ears......

 

[Airstrip One]

 

[tsuke]

It was clearly not about economics to southerners, and most everyone with prospects in life lived under the belief (realistic or delusional), that they could one day save-up enough money to buy a slave, the way one might afford a house or a car.

Economically, southerners were willing to take on two massive opportunity costs - secession from America, and then a war with the industrialized opponent. Clearly, economics did not play a role at all when it came to the southern defense of slavery as an institution.

cotton was their entire industry though. If you took away the slaves you left them with nothing economically.

 

[Airstrip One]

cotton was their entire industry though. If you took away the slaves you left them with nothing economically.

And yet people have been trying to convince us for decades that the slave market was drying-up, and that many already saw the writing on the wall.

 

[tsuke]

And yet people have been trying to convince us for decades that the slave market was drying-up, and that many already saw the writing on the wall.

eventually tractors and stuff would have made them not need slaves.

 

[Airstrip One]

eventually tractors and stuff would have made them not need slaves.

We're talking before the turn of the century, in most estimates.

 

[blackascoal]

As he saved America from Billary Cliton

Trump's approval just hit a 72-year low for a new president

TRENTON*-- A*new Gallup poll shows President Donald Trump's approval rating has fallen to just 37 percent -- lower than any commander-in-chief at this point in the first term since the polling company started tracking the issue in 1945.

The lowest presidential job approval ever recorded by Gallup was 22 percent, the public's assessment of Harry Truman's performance in February 1952, nearly seven years into his presidency.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/03/trumps_approval_just_hit_a_new_low_gallup_poll_fin.html

It took Truman 7 years to reach that low .. I'm betting that Trump goes lower in a couple more months .. if he's still in office.

There is your' "Best president since Lincoln." :0)

 

[blackascoal]

eventually tractors and stuff would have made them not need slaves.

They never NEEDED slaves.

 

[Sailor]

eventually tractors and stuff would have made them not need slaves.

It was the invention of the mechanized cotton gin that increased the use of slaves. What used to be slow to produce and expensive became much cheaper and faster to do. Cotton became more popular, textile mills demanded more of it, more farmers shifted over to growing cotton for the demand and profitability of it.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

slvery will not end until blacks stop voting for white demmycrats......

 

[blackascoal]

slvery will not end until blacks stop voting for white demmycrats......

Child-like ignorance.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Child-like ignorance.

That's a terrible label to apply to Blacks who vote for white demmycrats.