• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tea Party Favorites need a lesson in History?

She did nothing of the kind. The Founders should be credited with trying to bring an end to slavery by ending the Atlantic slave trade in 1808 and not allowing the southern states to count each slave in the Census, thereby, not allowing them a majority in the House so they could continue on with slavery. The majority of our Founders were against slavery and wanted it to be outlawed. It's a little ridiculous how so many Americans don't seem to know that.

If they were so against slavery and wanted it outlawed, then why didn't they do it when they wrote the gd constitution? Or how about not owning slaves themselves... lol
 
That's because Risk is a game of "World Domination".

If Risk was a game of "Race to capture a country" then you'd assume that it'd be reasonable to suggest the the first person who captured a country won.

Seriously, I'm not saying your version of what the Space Race can mean is incorrect. Its correct and a very, very americanized view of it. I'm simply stating that it is not an absolute truth and unquestionable definition as it is completely reasonable to also suggest the the "race to space" was the RACE to get to SPACE...not to get to the moon.

So Palin's view isn't American... :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
:lol: and you claim that Bachman doesn't know her history.

She doesn't. She's trying to give credit to JQA, who was dead long before slavery ended. He might have been against slavery, but "worked tirelessly and would not rest until slavery was no more" is nothing but BS.
 
All she's doing is dispelling the myth put forth by the left, that the founding fathers were nothing more than racist, wealth hoarding elitists. The fact that they established a government that would rapidly work to equality for all is proof that they did work tirelessly to end slavery. Did it happen immediately? No. but it also took 2 days to go 30 miles, so you can't expect the same amount of progress then as we do now.



Well, you started this quote with a lie. Palin referred to sputnik and only sputnik. But, if you want to know the truth, the USSR was the first nation to make a soft landing on the moon. It was unmanned and came 3 years before Neil Armstrongs first steps.



Republicans have disdain for education? Check out this chart: Party Affiliation Versus Education Level - The Quantum Pontiff

Democrats
Did not grad. high school: 32%
Grad. high school: 49%
Junior College grad: 4%
Bachelor's Degree: 10%
Graduate Degree: 5%

Republicans
Did not grad. high school: 19%
Grad. high school: 53%
Junior College grad: 5%
Bachelor's Degree: 17%
Graduate Degree: 6%

Saying the founders ending slavery is completely incorrect and a hilarious assertion...

"The fact that they established a government that would rapidly work to equality for all is proof that they did work tirelessly to end slavery."

They established the government, but they couldn't manage to give the slaves equality up front.. Instead they wrote a document that had to be amended long after they were dead, to end slavery, and you're giving them credit for ending slavery.

What's next? Give them credit for women's suffrage too?
 
Got to love it when the "moderates" of our forum post strawmen attacks that are baseless and chalked full of half-truths. :lamo
 
So Palin's view isn't American... :lamo:lamo:lamo

Well.. she does live near Russia, so maybe she's fond of them and shares their views... lol
 
All she's doing is dispelling the myth put forth by the left, that the founding fathers were nothing more than racist, wealth hoarding elitists. The fact that they established a government that would rapidly work to equality for all is proof that they did work tirelessly to end slavery.
Is that why they considered blacks 3/5 of a person? And, from what I have read, I don't see any sign that they worked tirelessly to end slavery. John Quincy Adams, who Bachmann credits for not resting until slavery was no more, was dead by the time of the Civil War. I guess you could say he was "resting" while slavery was still going on. Most of them owned slaves. Her whole statement was nothing more than BS.


Did it happen immediately? No. but it also took 2 days to go 30 miles, so you can't expect the same amount of progress then as we do now.
But Lincoln wasn't a Founding Father, so, I guess it took them all their lives, and still they didn't get it done. So much for Bachmann's BS.


Well, you started this quote with a lie. Palin referred to sputnik and only sputnik. But, if you want to know the truth, the USSR was the first nation to make a soft landing on the moon. It was unmanned and came 3 years before Neil Armstrongs first steps.
The USSR had several "firsts" in the Space Race, but the goal of the Space Race, was to put a man on the moon. That was first accomplished by the US, and that is why it is ridiculous to consider Russia's Sputnik as the winner. On top of that, she takes what Obama said about competing with the rest of the world, meaning education and research, and what does Palin have as a comeback? A bakery? Really, a bakery is what the US needs to get us back on track? That anybody takes this woman seriously is hard to comprehend.



Republicans have disdain for education? Check out this chart: Party Affiliation Versus Education Level - The Quantum Pontiff
What are you trying to prove? The chart that you provided shows the following:

Strong Democrats Graduate College 15.4 /total in ed 15.9
Strong Republican Graduate College 11.7 /total in ed 9.2

Not Strong Dem Graduate College 20. /total in ed 22
Not Strong Rep Graduate College 16. /total in ed 16.4

So, unless I'm reading it wrong, the Democrats show a stronger bend toward education.

Democrats
Did not grad. high school: 32%
Grad. high school: 49%
Junior College grad: 4%
Bachelor's Degree: 10%
Graduate Degree: 5%

Republicans
Did not grad. high school: 19%
Grad. high school: 53%
Junior College grad: 5%
Bachelor's Degree: 17%
Graduate Degree: 6%

And these figures show a date of 1990 from a blogger without a link to back them up? At least the chart on your link is from 2003
 
Tea Party favorites Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin took it upon themselves to critique the President's State of the Union Address and what they ended up doing was showing the country how under educated they really are when it comes to History.

Bachmann went on to give credit to the Founding Fathers for ending slavery. I guess because she wasn't around during the Civil War, she may think it didn't take place. Is that another Republican re-write of History?

Then Palin went so far as to give Russia credit for beating us to the moon? Obama rightly claimed our victory in Space when we were the only ones able to put men on the moon back in 1969 - but Palin rather than acknowledge our country's victory goes on to claim that Russia won the Space race! Then she claims that winning the space race caused Russia to collapse - only problem, it was 30 years later!

I know the Republicans seem to show a disdain for Education, as they favor Presidential candidates of the "folksy" type, and criticize as elitists anyone with Super Duper education, but isn't this going a bit too far? Really, is this the type of representation that the GOP wants? Or, does the GOP even acknowledge them as part of the Republican Party?


Bachmann Claims Founding Fathers Ended Slavery

Bachman is a moron


Hate defending Palin, but technically she is right.

USSR got the first satellite, first man, first woman, first living being and first manned space station in space.

The US got to the moon first.. wupti du.
 
The USSR had several "firsts" in the Space Race, but the goal of the Space Race, was to put a man on the moon. That was first accomplished by the US, and that is why it is ridiculous to consider Russia's Sputnik as the winner. On top of that, she takes what Obama said about competing with the rest of the world, meaning education and research, and what does Palin have as a comeback? A bakery? Really, a bakery is what the US needs to get us back on track? That anybody takes this woman seriously is hard to comprehend.

Err no. The goal of the space race was to put man in orbit.. the USSR won that. Because of this, the US with Kennedy had to put up a new benchmark to achieve and that was going to the moon, which the US won.

But the original space race was clearly won by the USSR.
 
She did nothing of the kind. The Founders should be credited with trying to bring an end to slavery by ending the Atlantic slave trade in 1808 and not allowing the southern states to count each slave in the Census, thereby, not allowing them a majority in the House so they could continue on with slavery. The majority of our Founders were against slavery and wanted it to be outlawed. It's a little ridiculous how so many Americans don't seem to know that.

I remember a time when revisionists on this board use to get banned. Instead we have mod members thanking the blatant Beck-anization of American history. I guess you have to say some crazy **** like 'the holocaust didn't happen' to get banned for revisionism nowadays.
 
Last edited:
Err no. The goal of the space race was to put man in orbit.. the USSR won that. Because of this, the US with Kennedy had to put up a new benchmark to achieve and that was going to the moon, which the US won.

But the original space race was clearly won by the USSR.

perhaps the first lap was won in the race
 
perhaps the first lap was won in the race

No.. the race to space was won by the USSR.. there is no amount of spin that can change that fact.

Now the race to the moon was won by the US, but that is not part of the "race to space" since that race was already lost and over.
 
If they were so against slavery and wanted it outlawed, then why didn't they do it when they wrote the gd constitution?

it would have destroyed the country; as it almost did 80 years later.
 
it would have destroyed the country; as it almost did 80 years later.

No.. because they were slave owners themselves and it was a way of life.
 
I'm wondering how many in here are mind readers? I only ask because it seems that both side of this discussion seems to be what the founding fathers intent was?
For anyone to “know” what the founding fathers thoughts were at the time, they would have to have some pretty awesome powers.

In reality all you are stating is opinions based on how you interpret what few facts there are. For example some of the FF owned slaves, therefore your reasoning is that they were for slavery. That may or may not be correct. I wonder of those that fill out the long form for your income tax, have taken deductions that you didn't meet the requirements for?? Can we assume then that you are a cheat, and think that defrauding the government is a good thing? Or should we assume that you are merely following the letter of the law, because it says you can deduct X amount? As one here stated, slavery at that time was a way of life, owning slaves, makes no clear definition if that person thought it to be morally wrong or right.

It's much the same with the 3/5 clause, was it expressly put in to reduce the power of the slave states? Or was it penned in so that at some future date it could help abolish slavery, 200 years after the fact, there is no way we can know with any degree of certainty, to know that, we would have to get inside the minds of the FF that penned that into our Constitution, only they knew why it was written into the Constitution. About the only thing we can deduce, is that the 3/5 clause wasn't written in to imply that slaves were less of a human then others, and even that no one can be “absolutely positive” of, even tho it seems that certain facts point away from that.

We have a written document, we can only read what it says, what the intent of what was written over 200 years ago can only be guessed at, forming your opinions on your interpretation what was written, is no more then that, your own opinion.

-chuckles- at least that is my opinion of all this.
 
Is that why they considered blacks 3/5 of a person? And, from what I have read, I don't see any sign that they worked tirelessly to end slavery. John Quincy Adams, who Bachmann credits for not resting until slavery was no more, was dead by the time of the Civil War. I guess you could say he was "resting" while slavery was still going on. Most of them owned slaves. Her whole statement was nothing more than BS.

Here's a little history lesson for you:

1780: Slavery abolished in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts
1784: Slavery abolished in Connecticut and Rhode Island
1792: Slavery abolished in New Hampshire
1793: Slavery abolished in Vermont
1799: Slavery abolished in New York
1804: Slavery abolished in New Jersey

Federal act prohibiting slavery in the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa authored by Rufus King, signer of the Constitution and signed into law by George Washington.

Benjamin Franklin freed all his slaves and became an ardent abolitionist.

Comments on slavery from the FOUNDING FATHERS:

“I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery].”
—George Washington

“[M]y opinion against it [slavery] has always been known… [N]ever in my life did I own a slave.”
—John Adams, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. President. The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1854), vol IX pp. 92-93. In a letter to George Churchman and Jacob Lindley on January 24, 1801.

“[W]hy keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil.”
—Charles Carroll, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Kate Mason Rowland, Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), Vol. II, pg. 231.

“As Congress is now to legislate for our extensive territory lately acquired, I pray to Heaven that they …[c]urse not the inhabitants of those regions, and of the United States in general, with a permission to introduce bondage [slavery].”
—John Dickinson, Signer of the Constitution and Governor of Pennsylvania. Charles J. Stille, The Life and Times of John Dickinson (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1898) p. 324.

“That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent as well as unjust and perhaps impious part.”
—John Jay, President of Continental Congress, Chief-Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Governor of New York. Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891), Vol. III, pp. 168-169. In a letter to Dr. Richard Price on Sep. 27, 1785.

“Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us who profess the same religion practice its precepts… by agreeing to this duty.”
—Richard Henry Lee, President of Continental Congress and Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Memoir of the Life of Richard Henry Lee and His Correspondence With the Most Distinguised Men in America and Europe (Philadelphia: H.C. Carey and I. Lea, 1825), Vol. I, pp. 17-19. The first speech of Richard Henry Lee in the House of Burgesses.

t ought to be considered that national crimes can only be and frequently are punished in this world by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slave trade, and thus giving it a national sanction and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all and who views with equal eye the poor African slave and his American master.”
—Luther Martin, Constitutional Convention Delegate. James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. III, pg. 211.

“Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity… It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men.”
—Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates From the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States, Assembled at Philadelphia, on the First Day of January, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four… (Philadelphia: Zachariah Poulson, 1794), p. 24. “To the Citizens of the United States.”

“Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law… The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all.”
—James Wilson, Signer of the Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court Justice. James Wilson, The Works of James Wilson, Robert Green McCloskey, editor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), Vol. II, pg. 605.

“It is certainly unlawful to make inroads upon others… and take away their liberty by no better right than superior force.”
—John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. The Works of John Witherspoon (Edinburgh: J. Ogle, 1815), p. 81, “Lectures on Moral Philosophy.”

There is little doubt that most of the founding fathers were very much against slavery, but knew that the country was fragile and it would take some time before it could be ended.
 
No.. because they were slave owners themselves and it was a way of life.

"They" weren't all slave owners. Many of our Founders did not own slaves and were VERY anti-slavery. Yes, it was a way of life which is why it was so darn difficult to get rid of it. That's why it required a war. I believe the Founders didn't want another war, which is why they compromised on the 3/5 clause.
 
Here's a little history lesson for you:

1780: Slavery abolished in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts
1784: Slavery abolished in Connecticut and Rhode Island
1792: Slavery abolished in New Hampshire
1793: Slavery abolished in Vermont
1799: Slavery abolished in New York
1804: Slavery abolished in New Jersey

Federal act prohibiting slavery in the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa authored by Rufus King, signer of the Constitution and signed into law by George Washington.

Benjamin Franklin freed all his slaves and became an ardent abolitionist.

Comments on slavery from the FOUNDING FATHERS:

“I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery].”
—George Washington

“[M]y opinion against it [slavery] has always been known… [N]ever in my life did I own a slave.”
—John Adams, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. President. The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1854), vol IX pp. 92-93. In a letter to George Churchman and Jacob Lindley on January 24, 1801.

“[W]hy keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil.”
—Charles Carroll, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Kate Mason Rowland, Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), Vol. II, pg. 231.

“As Congress is now to legislate for our extensive territory lately acquired, I pray to Heaven that they …[c]urse not the inhabitants of those regions, and of the United States in general, with a permission to introduce bondage [slavery].”
—John Dickinson, Signer of the Constitution and Governor of Pennsylvania. Charles J. Stille, The Life and Times of John Dickinson (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1898) p. 324.

“That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent as well as unjust and perhaps impious part.”
—John Jay, President of Continental Congress, Chief-Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Governor of New York. Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891), Vol. III, pp. 168-169. In a letter to Dr. Richard Price on Sep. 27, 1785.

“Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us who profess the same religion practice its precepts… by agreeing to this duty.”
—Richard Henry Lee, President of Continental Congress and Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Memoir of the Life of Richard Henry Lee and His Correspondence With the Most Distinguised Men in America and Europe (Philadelphia: H.C. Carey and I. Lea, 1825), Vol. I, pp. 17-19. The first speech of Richard Henry Lee in the House of Burgesses.

t ought to be considered that national crimes can only be and frequently are punished in this world by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slave trade, and thus giving it a national sanction and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all and who views with equal eye the poor African slave and his American master.”
—Luther Martin, Constitutional Convention Delegate. James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. III, pg. 211.

“Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity… It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men.”
—Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates From the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States, Assembled at Philadelphia, on the First Day of January, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four… (Philadelphia: Zachariah Poulson, 1794), p. 24. “To the Citizens of the United States.”

“Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law… The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all.”
—James Wilson, Signer of the Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court Justice. James Wilson, The Works of James Wilson, Robert Green McCloskey, editor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), Vol. II, pg. 605.

“It is certainly unlawful to make inroads upon others… and take away their liberty by no better right than superior force.”
—John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. The Works of John Witherspoon (Edinburgh: J. Ogle, 1815), p. 81, “Lectures on Moral Philosophy.”

There is little doubt that most of the founding fathers were very much against slavery, but knew that the country was fragile and it would take some time before it could be ended.


Excellent post. Thank you.
 
Here's a little history lesson for you:

Comments on slavery from the FOUNDING FATHERS:

“I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery].”
—George Washington

“[M]y opinion against it [slavery] has always been known… [N]ever in my life did I own a slave.”
—John Adams, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. President. The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1854), vol IX pp. 92-93. In a letter to George Churchman and Jacob Lindley on January 24, 1801.

“[W]hy keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil.”
—Charles Carroll, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Kate Mason Rowland, Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), Vol. II, pg. 231.

“As Congress is now to legislate for our extensive territory lately acquired, I pray to Heaven that they …[c]urse not the inhabitants of those regions, and of the United States in general, with a permission to introduce bondage [slavery].”
—John Dickinson, Signer of the Constitution and Governor of Pennsylvania. Charles J. Stille, The Life and Times of John Dickinson (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1898) p. 324.

“That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent as well as unjust and perhaps impious part.”
—John Jay, President of Continental Congress, Chief-Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Governor of New York. Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891), Vol. III, pp. 168-169. In a letter to Dr. Richard Price on Sep. 27, 1785.

“Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us who profess the same religion practice its precepts… by agreeing to this duty.”
—Richard Henry Lee, President of Continental Congress and Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Memoir of the Life of Richard Henry Lee and His Correspondence With the Most Distinguised Men in America and Europe (Philadelphia: H.C. Carey and I. Lea, 1825), Vol. I, pp. 17-19. The first speech of Richard Henry Lee in the House of Burgesses.

t ought to be considered that national crimes can only be and frequently are punished in this world by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slave trade, and thus giving it a national sanction and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all and who views with equal eye the poor African slave and his American master.”
—Luther Martin, Constitutional Convention Delegate. James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention, Max Farrand, editor (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. III, pg. 211.

“Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity… It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men.”
—Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates From the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States, Assembled at Philadelphia, on the First Day of January, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four… (Philadelphia: Zachariah Poulson, 1794), p. 24. “To the Citizens of the United States.”

“Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law… The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all.”
—James Wilson, Signer of the Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court Justice. James Wilson, The Works of James Wilson, Robert Green McCloskey, editor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), Vol. II, pg. 605.

“It is certainly unlawful to make inroads upon others… and take away their liberty by no better right than superior force.”
—John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration of Independence. The Works of John Witherspoon (Edinburgh: J. Ogle, 1815), p. 81, “Lectures on Moral Philosophy.”

There is little doubt that most of the founding fathers were very much against slavery, but knew that the country was fragile and it would take some time before it could be ended.


No coin has less value than the idle talk from the lips of a politician.

Or to put it another way... actions speak louder than words.
 
No coin has less value than the idle talk from the lips of a politician.

Or to put it another way... actions speak louder than words.

Maybe instead of guessing that they did nothing to help end slavery, you should actually research them. You obviously haven't based on your words. Educate yourself.
 
No coin has less value than the idle talk from the lips of a politician.

Or to put it another way... actions speak louder than words.

In case you didn't bother to read my post, there was a great deal of action taken to limit slavery by the founding fathers.
 
Maybe instead of guessing that they did nothing to help end slavery, you should actually research them. You obviously haven't based on your words. Educate yourself.

It's difficult to educate and open a mind that is already closed.
 
Tea Party favorites Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin took it upon themselves to critique the President's State of the Union Address and what they ended up doing was showing the country how under educated they really are when it comes to History.

Bachmann went on to give credit to the Founding Fathers for ending slavery. I guess because she wasn't around during the Civil War, she may think it didn't take place. Is that another Republican re-write of History?

Then Palin went so far as to give Russia credit for beating us to the moon? Obama rightly claimed our victory in Space when we were the only ones able to put men on the moon back in 1969 - but Palin rather than acknowledge our country's victory goes on to claim that Russia won the Space race! Then she claims that winning the space race caused Russia to collapse - only problem, it was 30 years later!

I know the Republicans seem to show a disdain for Education, as they favor Presidential candidates of the "folksy" type, and criticize as elitists anyone with Super Duper education, but isn't this going a bit too far? Really, is this the type of representation that the GOP wants? Or, does the GOP even acknowledge them as part of the Republican Party?


Bachmann Claims Founding Fathers Ended Slavery

Sarah Palin thinks Russia Won the Space Race



I wish we could all be as smart as the liberals.


 
Hate defending Palin, but technically she is right.

USSR got the first satellite, first man, first woman, first living being and first manned space station in space.

The US got to the moon first.. wupti du.

Actually she is not. The Space Race consisted of all of the space effort.
Russia was first to space, but were not able to reach the level of success that the United States did. We put men on the moon, our Flag is on the moon.

Like I said before, the Space Race was a marathon and not a sprint - Russia had many firsts in the Space Race, true, but for each of their firsts, the US would top them. The Space Race is made up of all of the efforts Russia competed with the United States and culminated with the goal of putting a man on the moon. We succeeded, Russia did not.

And because they did not follow the rules set up by the FAI, Russia's first man in space would not have qualified, but, they lied.


Wiki:
Under International Federation of Aeronautics (FAI) qualifying rules for aeronautical records, pilots must both take off and land with their craft, so the Soviets kept the landing procedures secret until 1978, when they finally admitted that Gagarin did not land with his spacecraft.



The success of this mission prompted President Kennedy to announce the goal of placing a man on the moon before the end of the decade.

John Glenn became the first American to orbit the Earth. This accomplishment was undermined by the fact that the Soviets had succeeded nearly one year earlier to orbit a man around the Earth. On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first person ever in space. He orbited the Earth once during his 108 minute flight and reached a maximum altitude of 203 miles. John Glenn's historic flight lasted 4 hours and 55 minutes. He orbited the Earth 3 times and reached a maximum altitude of 162.5 miles.
History of Space Flight



Also, from Wiki:

On 25 May, Kennedy announced his support for the Apollo program and redefined the ultimate goal of the Space Race in an address to a special joint session of Congress:"I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth."[54]
 
Back
Top Bottom