Colin Kaepernick, The National Anthem Is a Celebration of Slavery

So, Misssisippi went from being 93% Democratic in 1944 to being 87% Republican in 1964 due to the economy?

The Dixiecrats ran 6 years before that.

 

The problem is you think "family" then is what a family is today... it's not.

Many people then lived with other people who they had zero relation to, but you are still calling them a family.

Because you live in someone's barn doesn't mean you are a slave owner. Nice try though.

 

"This Union and its Government must be sustained at any and every cost. To sustain it, we must war upon and destroy the rebel forces–must cut off their supplies, destroy their communications . . . and produce among the people of Georgia a thorough conviction of the personal misery which attends war, and the utter helplessness and inability of their ‘rulers’ to protect them . . . If that terror and grief and even want shall help to paralyze their husbands and fathers who are fighting us . . . it is mercy in the end."

https://emergingcivilwar.com/2013/0...hermans-march-to-the-sea-a-war-crime-part-ii/
http://www.plpow.com/Atrocities_QuotesFromSherman.htm
http://civilwarodyssey.blogspot.nl/2011/03/behind-curtain-rape-and-other-horrors.html
http://conservative-headlines.com/2011/02/war-crimes-of-william-t-sherman/

Furthermore I've heard handed down through generations instances.

Back on topic:

 

I somehow doubt that there were so many people living in other people's barns that it could turn a 4% into a 49%.

 

Ohhhhh, nice one.

 

See my other post there was no abolition of slavery. There was a gradual phasing out by prohibiting slave trade in most northern states. Slaves stayed slaves, their children stayed slaves, but their children's children were born free. By the 1850s northern slaves had all died.

 

Yippee? Good lord.

 

Conclusions require evidence. On the subject of racism...yaint got none.

Mississippi went for George Wallace in 1968. His party? Democrat.

 

Well hey, you think you know everything don't you? Your link:

Legally, the last 40,000-45,000 slaves were freed in the last two slave states of Kentucky and Delaware[SUP][154][/SUP] by the final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution on December 18, 1865. Slaves still held in Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Washington, D.C., and twelve parishes of Louisiana[SUP][155][/SUP] also became legally free on this date.

Look at all those Union(northern) states where slaves still were in reality:
Delaware, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, Missouri, Kansas, even the capital of the Union.

 

Except for the fact that Barry Goldwater got 87% of the vote in a state that hadn't even come close to voting for a Republican since Ulysses S. Grant.

Just like Barry Goldwater, he opposed the civil rights act and believed that segregation was a state issue.

 

Its why the emancipation proclamation was specifically geared towards the southern states instead of freeing all slaves in the US. Plus, Lincoln knew that the proclamation meant nothing till the union army actually freed the slaves face to face. If Lincoln had set the proclamation to every state, the union wouldn't have an army, and the north would have lost its slaves.

 

If there was a war about it, it wasn't so natural.
So a group of people, got together to create this natural right. It didn't exist prior.

 

This is where the Libs get their info to push every day---from these far left loony sites. They regurgitate it verbatim. It's hilarious...

 

I'm not finding it so funny anymore.

 

Pathetic pap,that somehow and in some select circles, get's read.
I mean,at least a Fortune Cookie has some bright insights.
This is what happens in a society that has it too good.The easy life.
Let Blacks in this country stay in Africa for a few weeks.See how fast they
come running back.Faster than any Usain Bolt,is my prediction.
BTW ... what's stopping Blacks from going to Africa since they feel so
Oppressed here stateside.
Then again Blacks stateside think Cops are after them.
Blacks couldn't be more screwed up if they tried.

 

Kind of gives you pause about ignorant sanctimonious bastards from the north who think they actually freed their own slaves. They didn't they just stopped buying new ones.

And even after the north banned slave trade it was the north that profited most from the illegal Atlantic slave trade.

Here is the simple cycle of the Atlantic slave trade. Northern manufactured goods are shipped to Europe and sold. The ships then sail to West Africa where they use the profits from the sale of goods in Europe to buy their 'cargo' for the return voyage. After thd return voyage their human cargo was sold in South America, Central America, and the American South. New cargo was purchased this being raw commodities tobacco, cotton, and sugar. Those commodities were then taken back to the original ports of call and sold to the manufacturers with new manufactured good brought on for sale in Europe.. The cycle would then repeat.

Who do you think owned and ran this illegal operation? Who do you think owned the boats? Northern Aristocrats that's who. John Brown the founder of Brown University was the first person charged under the Slave Trade Act. And there were many more. Everyone in the north knew that the ships in their harbors were illegal slavers but they didn't say (*)(*)(*)(*). The northern economy was to dependent on the profits from the illegal slave trade.

- - - Updated - - -

Wars are usually fought in part to defend natural rights. One side wants your stuff you fight for your right to keep it.

 

I dont think anyone believes that they gave up ANY slaves of their own free will.

 

Again, it's some group of people claim certain things to be natural rights. If they are truly natural, there'd be no reason to fight for them. It would be inherent in every human, ie natural.
So the winner gets to choose what is natural or not.
Sounds to me like might make right.

 

Oooook. Is cussing at me necessary?

 

That is 2X you tried to link as the same as that dude.
I guess you really can't back up your claim.

If some rights are natural, then there is no need to fight for them. It is natural to every human and respected by every human.
Otherwise, they are rights afforded by, granted by, and enforced by some agency. Usually, gov't.

If someone takes it from you, then it is not yours. Unless you can take it back or have a legal backing, ie gov't, to get it back.
So without an enforcing agent, it looks like you agree, might makes right.

If you can show otherwise, please do so. Calling me names doesn't prove anything except you can't counter my argument.

 

Barry Goldwater founded the Arizona NAACP and supported the integration of the Phoenix public schools. If you believe Goldwater was a racist, I suggest you have to overcome quite a lot of evidence to the contrary. Perhaps you should start with evidence that his rejection of the 64 civil rights act was race motivated, rather than what he claims was an objection to the extension of federal power. After all, he did support other civil rights acts that came out before the one in 64.

 

What was the date and payment to South Carolina for land to build Ft. Sumter?

My point is states freely joined the operation aka the union

This is not particularly how I see this, but as they saw it.

They meaning the confederates. I have not put a lot of thought into me believing that view but plan to.

They knew Ft. Sumter was a third way fortification. This was a fort explicitly to defend South Carolina.

Not a place used to attack South Carolina. South Carolina as a state by a public vote, elected to sever their role and responsibility to the union.

While the union could lay claim to being repaid, the public in S. Carolina nevertheless did not want a union fort within the state of South Carolina. It would have been a terrible mistake to keep the union inside the confederacy.

Actually looking at the location of Ft. Sumter and the photos should inform you of a few things.

First, it was barely in reach of fire from shore. Cannon of that day were short range weapons. Today cannons can truly reach out and touch someone.

Maj. Anderson no doubt endured plenty of noise. But for his safety, he was right where he needed to be in order to not get hurt.

While true the South fired at the fort, it is not true people got injured due to the firing at the fort.

Also true is the death to humans and damage to property endured by the unlawful invasion by Abe Lincoln into Virginia. Virginia had not engaged in hostilities yet got invaded.

Again, the date and payment to South Carolina for purposes of Ft. Sumter since you wish to engage in this discussion?

Let me try to help you.
https://www.loc.gov/search/?in=&q=+fort+sumter+land&new=true

 

What fantasy world do you live in. You have to defend your rights. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

Barry Goldwater was not personally a racist, but that doesn't change the fact that he opposed the Civil Rights Act and believed that segregation was a state issue.

 

You seem to be losing it.
Were you not talking about natural rights?
What are natural rights?

If you have to defend a right, then it is not natural. And might will determine right. Or some agency, gov't, will determine it.