danielpalos
Verified User
lol. Your the only one who doesnt understand what im discussing here and how its relevant.
seems like right wing fantasy.
lol. Your the only one who doesnt understand what im discussing here and how its relevant.
Well you would be wrong friend.
Most Southerners were not slave owners anyway. Far and away the majority didnt own a slave.
They fought for States Rights and freedom from foreign (Washington DC) rule over their decisions and life's.
Limbaugh's a blowhard idiot. Turn him off. Listen to music.[/QUOTE
Yep... Since they had no skin in the game, smart politicians found something & convinced them that "states rights" was worth being killed for..![]()
join us and fight to free the slaves bill![]()
GOP fought to free the slaves then. Trump campaigned on freeing the slaves and sending them home now.
1) There's no such thing as state's rights, nor was their fiction mentioned in the various secession documents. Slavery was, and often was the only issue cited.
2) Most Americans are not homeowners, but most plan to be. Cost was the only object in the way for most southerners, who nearly all wanted to own slaves
so what; he actually ran business with H1b's.
lincoln owned slaves too (i think) but fought to free them![]()
Own vs rent.
Indentured servitude differs from slavery.
Yes, there is. For comparison and contrast, the South should have "harassed the Judicature" to secure eminent domain and reasonable compensation.
The Constitution only speaks of state's powers. Only people or persons have rights.