Posted on 12/24/2007 10:11:44 AM PST by wardaddy
Merry Christmas to you too!!! It’s snowing right now. Beautiful!
LOL....I just posted this because I thought his emancipation compensation argument was pretty wild for a POTUS candidate
didn’t think it would get many hits
I’m for Thompsonn myself but but sorta worried
and tobacco.
I’ve become convinced that Ron Paul is nuts. And I don’t say that lightly.
It was about cheap labor to pick cotton.
I hope that statement is meant as satire!
Merry Christmas! May you and yours have the best holiday season. Stay safe and warm and watch out for drunk drivers.
He said he’s 99.99% sure he won’t run but said he hates absolutes like that. He already promised his wife he wouldn’t.
Well, by the time the plantation owners actually *knew* they were going to lose their slaves, it was a bit too late then, wasn’t it? By the time that realization came around, it was 1864 and Bill “The Arsonist” Sherman’s Traveling Circus and Phil Sheridan’s Rolling House Party were solving the problem in their own special way.
The Federal government would have had to come in and say, “we’re going to pay you such-and-such for your slaves, and if you don’t sell, we’re going to seize them.” That simply WOULD NOT HAPPEN in 1861. It wouldn’t even be considered by all but the craziest abolitionists. That would have been a step that not only would have precipitated the WBTS, but it would have been a step that not even the population of the North would have been ready to support. Freedom for blacks was a tremendously radical concept in the 1860s, even among the supposedly “enlightened” folks in the Northeast. To radically overstep Federal power and break the Treasury to buy hundreds of thousands of slaves and free them was a concept that was way too far out there to even be considered.
}:-)4
99.9%? More like .9%, maybe.
This just begs for a response...
I voted for Perot, twice...And I'll vote for the next 'Perot' that steers us away from Nafta, the WTO, and the NWO...And if one doesn't run, I won't vote...
So as you can see, your Rino, or your anti-American globalist won't win again...
That's not my fault...That's your fault...
I voted for your last American embarrassment, twice...This time, you'll vote for my choice, or we'll all lose, again...
“It was about cheap labor to pick cotton.”
Yep. At least the cheap labor proponents then had to care and feed their own cheap labor, unlike the human commodity traders do today by getting the taxpayer to subsidize them.
The Constitution is the document that binds us together as one of many. Since it was ratified to replace the weaker Articles of Confederation I believe the founders did have in mind a unity that was harder to break than some would have it. Still I do see the validity of counter arguments.
I thought Lyndon Johnson was nuts but he was President, I thought the voters were nuts for electing Clinton but he was elected not once but twice.
Until he fulfills his ultimate destiny by getting Hillary elected. Then he’ll be trashed and savaged.
I could see a case being made under Article IV Section 4, intervening to ensure a state was guaranteed a Republican form of Government even though that Republican form of government likely voted to seceed. The argument would be that nefarious forces invaded the state gubermint, thus requiring a Federal response to protect the sheeple.
Perot to Clinton
If that is YOUR concern perhaps you will begin to take the ten term senator seriously. The MSM is under orders to sack RP because all the safe (owned) candidates are threatened by a constitutionist.
Attacks on RP reflect the lowest level of reason I have ever seen at freerepublic almost always including idiot, moron, or similar deep thought. Lets raise the level of debate just to make it interesting.
If you look at the slaves as property, which at that time they did, the U.S. government would have had to pay above market rates to buy the slaves. I doubt they would have had the cash to purchase them. In addition, since the Southern system of agriculture was dependent upon slave labor, and slavery was legal in the South, the slave owners would have simply bought more.
I've held back on regarding Ron Paul either way, frankly, despite all the vituperation directed his way on this website. I hadn't intended on voting for him, as he is clearly a fringe candidate who won't garner sufficient support to go anywhere. His shocking failure to understand even a simple market system as well as the fact that a "libertarian" would propose a government buy out just confirms my decision.
Um... That was more or less exactly RP's point. Perhaps you meant to say Russert needs to reread history?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.