...except perhaps a tiny bit of Kansas...
A wee bit of Kansas is it?
The democrat slavers had been fighting for control of Kansas for ten years before they started their insurrection. That would probably explain why you have avoided mentioning Bloody Kansas up til now.
Oh, and I had already mentioned the obvious - the Texas government had allowed and encouraged slavery.
But carry on, carry on with your cotton-brained fantasies. Leave the real world to the adults.
Yeah, they might have gotten a few hundred slaves into Kansas to work that tiny little bit in South West Kansas where they can grow cotton today.
Nearly half a million in Mississippi, but that Kansas cotton would have really been super important or something.
I think i've explained this to you, but in case you didn't understand it the first half dozen times I mentioned it, I'll say it again. It's about political power in Washington DC, not about making profit from slavery in Kansas.
If Kansas allied with the slave state delegation, they could help them get laws that would share some of the tax burden with the Northern states. If Kansas went with the New York coalition, the laws that had the Southern states paying 73% of all the taxes in the nation would remain in place.
Or did you know about that? You don't like slavery, but how about tax slavery? Is it reasonable for one group of people to pay 73% of the taxes, while the other group, with 4 times the population, only pays 27% of the taxes?
Oh, and I had already mentioned the obvious - the Texas government had allowed and encouraged slavery.
If there was profit in it, the New Mexico government would have done exactly the same. I wouldn't think I would have to explain profit motive to people on a conservative website, but the reality of life is that profit will make things happen.
But carry on, carry on with your cotton-brained fantasies. Leave the real world to the adults.
What you have now is a cotton brained fantasy, and you more than most need to grow up and stop acting like a child. Do you think your name calling has any useful effect on my responses to you? Do you think you win an argument by calling people silly names?
Again, grow the f*** up. Your preference to use name calling in the place of argument doesn't impress me at all.
I don't think it impresses anyone else either.