Again you dodge the question. Sometimes a cigars is just a cigar and sometimes a racist is just a racist. I think it is very telling that you refuse to answer it.
“Again you dodge the question. Sometimes a cigars is just a cigar and sometimes a racist is just a racist. I think it is very telling that you refuse to answer it.”
It is telling that you continue to attempt to play the race and slavery cards against your idea opponents. It usually comes right after you have been embarrassed by one of your frequent gaffes.
For example, in your post 1376 you offer a seemingly exculpatory explanation for why slavery was enshrined into the United States Constitution.
You said: “ . . . from what I’ve read of the constitutional convention we would have lost Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina if the hardline anti-slavery founders had pushed the issue. And the founders were more concerned about a fractured America fighting amongst itself or being influenced or taken over by foreign powers. So they kicked the can down the road.”
It is probably true the original 13 slave states were more concerned about their own economic and political best self interest than ending slavery. But for you to embrace their rationale for keeping slavery and then use it as a basis to attack others for being “racist” . . . that doesn’t make sense to me.