- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 32,516
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
That 3/5ths intent was about representation, but you have admit that it was also used by certain people who actually believed in racial superiority and objected to giving slaves their freedom.
Q
Personally, I'd prefer to lose a dozen states, all of them South of I-40. But, other than that, I'm not the one griping about the government doing its job like you wingnuts.
I haven't decided yet. But the goal would be for it to eventually be eliminated.
oh,.....that same old tired line.....where is chuck71 when you need him, to witness this?
Thank you for showing that you have no idea what you are talking about either.
oh i was seen, its just your usual, MO...[MODE OF OPERATION]
what are you talking about?
i dont understand what you mean?
and others you use.....just ask chuck71, he has already pointed it out.
do you want me to make you look bad again.....yes or no...?
If you had a point - you would have made it.
And just to let you in on the joke - I used to teach sixth graders my first year of teaching so i know darn well about the silly type of YES OR NO YOU HAVE TO SAY ONE OR THE OTHER tactics such children use.
I was onto you from the start of your question EB. :roll:
False. Congress passed it legally, the president signed it into law and SCOTUS ruled it constitutional.
Obviously you're not going to listen to facts. You are stuck in your fantasyland. Bye.
now you are simply muttering nonsense, much like a homeless man on a street corner. When 3/3 of the branches of government approved something, and when the majority of the people voted to reelect 2/3 of them, then you are simply a malcontent grumbling from the outside while looking in. In other words: no one takes you serious.For the purpose of evaluating this unconstitutional law it does not matter that tyrants passed it into law and other tyrants upheld it. They will all get what is owed them eventually. There is no basis in the Constitution. The acts of each of these tyrants do not make Obamacare any less tyrannical. Nor can their acts make an unconstitutional law any more constitutional.
See my comment above. Homeless men rambling on street corners always say they can see what others can't--promising doom in on the horizon.Nor can I help that many of you cannot see what is transpiring or somehow believe that you can escape the fate of this nation. You are what you are and nothing I say will change you. I just wish I could be present when you realize, too late, that you approved of your own destruction.
Our Leftist enemies, oops, friends, believe that declaring slaves to count as 3/5ths of a person for determining the number of representatives, increased the South's political power. I cannot understand such thinking. Instead it lowered the count and reduced the south's proportional representation. It was intended to do so to prevent the spread of slavery. To admit as much would somehow diminish their dislike of the nation and its founding. We cannot have that.Wow, so the Constitution says what you want it to say? Please provide for us the clause in the Constitution that "defines Blacks as 3/5ths of a person"
Bush, who is a Republican from Texas, increased the size of government. Obama, OTOH, has reduced it.I live in a state that if it were a nation would be around number 11 in GDP and one that is quite sustainable on its own but I don't propose nor support secession nor do I support the massive Central govt that apparently you do. Wonder how that will change however if a Republican was in the WH and what exactly were the cries when Bush was in power about the excessive power of the Federal Govt?
False. See aboveFortunately only people like you believe that a govt. that has created a 17 trillion dollar debt is doing its job and apparently that is 40% today. What I have seen from you is someone who really doesn't understand the history of this country nor the foundation that made this country great and it wasn't liberalism. Rather telling how people like you have no concept as to the role of the Federal Govt.
Our Leftist enemies, oops, friends, believe that declaring slaves to count as 3/5ths of a person for determining the number of representatives, increased the South's political power. I cannot understand such thinking. Instead it lowered the count and reduced the south's proportional representation. It was intended to do so to prevent the spread of slavery. To admit as much would somehow diminish their dislike of the nation and its founding. We cannot have that.
I am not surprised that you do not. You are not a serious person.now you are simply muttering nonsense, much like a homeless man on a street corner. When 3/3 of the branches of government approved something, and when the majority of the people voted to reelect 2/3 of them, then you are simply a malcontent grumbling from the outside while looking in. In other words: no one takes you serious.
The doom is already here. Just because it has not yet harmed you does not mean that your turn will not come. Given that you believe it is a good thing I wish twice as much of it upon you as upon the rest of us.See my comment above. Homeless men rambling on street corners always say they can see what others can't--promising doom in on the horizon.
i give you praise any way, because you knew there were, i believe Washington had whites slaves working for him.
as to whites being counted has 3/5ths i have not researched this.
but remember that the 3/5ths is not about racism, its about taxes and representation.
people dont want to pay taxes, but they want as much representation as they can get.
No. They would have been counted as whole people for representation. You are mistaken. But I can be convinced. Show me from the historical arguments.Counting people who are not allowed to vote as 3/5ths a person helped the South who would otherwise not have been allowed to count the slaves at all.
This is at least the second time I have asked you what you proposed to do with a so called "problem" that you identify in the American system. Both times you really have nothing to offer.
Counting people who are not allowed to vote as 3/5ths a person helped the South who would otherwise not have been allowed to count the slaves at all.
The 3/5th's were for negroes for the purpose of the census Indians not at all. Women were not allowed to vote, but were counted s people.
I have always Lincoln's "all men are created equal" as being the biggest lie ever by a politician.
haymarket, you have a bad reputation on the forum, many people know it.
you have no ability to answer simple questions with one word.
do you want me to make you look bad again.....yes or no...?
Did you not see my proposed solution? It was to eliminate the program.
If you had a point - you would have made it.
And just to let you in on the joke - I used to teach sixth graders my first year of teaching so i know darn well about the silly type of YES OR NO YOU HAVE TO SAY ONE OR THE OTHER tactics such children use.
I was onto you from the start of your question EB. :roll::wink:
here you are in 358
that is what kids do EB. You have to answer yes or no. And the whole time you sit back thinking you have won some great victory because if I say YES - then you jump up and down in glee claiming that I just admitted you already have made me look bad. And if I say NO you still jump up and down claiming that I am a coward and no longer want to look bad and just admitted that I did.
Its rather easy to see through EB and anybody who ever taught sixth graders can see it a mile away. :roll:
But it certainly exposes what you think are clever tactics in debate.
And speaking of debate - I did so for two years in college and nobody ever tried to pull silly kid stuff like that. Nobody.
hmmmmm. only a re-post of post 381
You missed the new material..... go back and read it again..... and truth does not need to change.
No. They would have been counted as whole people for representation. You are mistaken. But I can be convinced. Show me from the historical arguments.
truth, hmmmmm. i never saw with you....since your constantly dodging, it cant apply itself to you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?