Posted on 12/28/2023 12:51:50 PM PST by McGruff
After the former South Carolina governor spent Thursday morning explaining why she didn’t mention slavery as a chief cause of the Civil War at an event the previous evening, she was called on the carpet in the afternoon by a 9-year-old boy who questioned her decision to serve in President Donald Trump’s administration.
...
during her presidential campaign, Haley has argued that Trump would be ineffective in a second term due to the “chaos” he causes.
...
“Chris Christie thinks you’re a flip-flopper on the Donald Trump issue, and honestly, I agree with him. You’re basically the new John Kerry,” the child told Haley in the ski town of North Conway as the audience laughed. “How can you change your opinion like that in just eight years, and will you pardon Donald Trump?”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
You’re a fan of Icky Nikki?
RE: What does a nine-year-old kid know about John Kerry?
They know next to nothing about anything but entertainment.
Two fun facts:
1) John Kerry wears a whole head toupee. FR poster showed a closeup of the vinyl mesh foundation in a wind storm.
2) He married into a fortune of the Heinz ketchup and pickle multibillion empire. His wife said “I told John if I ever find out you are cheating on me I will maim you. I did not say I would kill you. Maim you.”
Attention seeking parents —mothers, mostly—put their kids up to things like trans-sex dress up, shouting out loudabout the climate, and “dissing” candidates.
It’s the intersection of mental illness and poor parenting.
That kis is right!
That kid is right. (I meant)
If he was brainwashed by far left parents wouldn’t he be praising John Kerry?
Except when that kid asked Trump if he was Batman. Trump was right to answer - “Yes. Yes I am”
Chris Christie introduced Trump at a rally in OKC. They are all flip flopping for themselves. None of them care about the voters. It’s how the game is played.
Yeah, LOL!
Just like Hamas, dems like their human shields, especially children.
Lurch looks like he’s already been ‘maimed’, but I think the wife has something more specific in mind.
Why do you say he was a Democrat plant? Was he in public school or was he homeschooled? Maybe like ConservaTeen (who is not a teen anymore), he could be interested in politics. ConservaTeen was because he saw us politicking, so never say that a kid is a plant.
The civil war may not have been about slavery for the north, but it sure was for the south. The average white citizen of the north was extremely racist and Lincoln could have never started to fight the Confederates if he made the war about slavery. In fact many slave states didn’t initially rebel. Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee joined after Beauregard opened fire on Fort Sumter. It was a response to Lincolns call for a draft to fight the south.
Even so, the slave states of Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland and Missouri did not join the Confederacy. How the hell could the war be to free the slaves? It simply couldn’t.
But for the south it sure the hell was. And here’s a great YouTube video talking about this exact topic.
“I think it’s disgusting that parents would get their 9-year-old trained monkey up in front of a crowd to diss a political candidate.”
It absolutely is disgusting. And you can be those loser parents are beaming with pride at what they did.
This reminds me of Jimmy Carter, while in office, saying that his nine-year-old daughter was worried about ‘nuclear proliferation’ as if a nine-year-old even knows what that is.
The dims simply keep stomping all over their reproductive organs. LOL
A very large percentage of Southern soldiers were Scots-Irish. Sons of migrants from the lowland Scotland who had a long and bitter history of oppression by the Church of England, and wound up in the southern Appalachians because they weren't wanted in the northern states either. These families had no connection to the rich Piedmont landowners who owned slave plantations. They fought because they hated being imposed upon by central governments of any stripe.
Read "Born Fighting" by Senator James "Jim" Webb. A real eye-opener.
So Southern Democrats were fine with Lincoln being elected? They were good with the first Republican (anti-Slavery) President?
>>>A very large percentage of Southern soldiers were Scots-Irish. Sons of migrants from the lowland Scotland who had a long and bitter history of oppression by the Church of England, and wound up in the southern Appalachians because they weren’t wanted in the northern states either. These families had no connection to the rich Piedmont landowners who owned slave plantations. They fought because they hated being imposed upon by central governments of any stripe.<<<<
The election of Lincoln was imposing what on the Scots_Irish? If they were poor they owned no slaves. How was Lincoln’s election going to be oppressive to them?
As far as I know it was the South’s fear that eventually the north would impose their will on the south in regards to slavery. And thus when an abolitionist was elected, they bolted. Lincoln’s initial thoughts on how to end slavery was to do it gradually and possibly compensating slave owners for their losses. Lincoln was adamant in his belief that slavery was wrong. But less sure on the best way to go about ending slavery. Candidate Lincoln was not in favor of immediate abolition.
During the war immigration continued to swell the ranks of the North with fresh military aged men. The North was able to not only build ships for it’s own navy, but to build ironclads for other countries. At the end of the war one of four southern men of military age was dead. And the south had zero compensation for the loss of their slaves. If you ask me, the Confederates have nobody to blame but themselves.
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.
