Obama Leading Senate Dems to Slaughter

[deacon blues]

The NBA is predominantly populated by black players. It doesn't fairly reflect the white population percentage. Should we restructure the NBA to reflect race percentages in America or should we allow the best players to rise to the surface regardless of race? I don't want an NBA with less than the best of the best playing. I dont care what race gets the scholarship, I want the best student to get it. I don't care what the racial make up is of the fire department, I just want the best people for the job.

[deacon blues]

And your take on history is interesting. I watched a PBS documentary (not a right wing organization) in which the historians agreed that the Civil War, in spite of the claims of the Confederacy, was aboutnfreeing the slaves. The Confederates said it was about states rights, but what right were they fighting for? The right to own slaves! If you could ask thenslaves set free in the 1860s and I guarantee they would say that Mr. Lincoln and the Union Army emancipate them. And that freedom came at a heavy price. More Americans died in war than all others combined. Most of them white. You don't want to believe you owe your freedom to those men, but you do.

And thank God your ancestors came here, albeit against their will and under atrocious conditions. Because had they been left in Africa, I wonder how free you would be, how prosperous you'd be, what quality of life you'd have. Thank God you're an American regardless of how it happened. Even those considered poor here are in much better condition than a vast majority of the rest of the world.

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

And your take on history is interesting. I watched a PBS documentary (not a right wing organization) in which the historians agreed that the Civil War, in spite of the claims of the Confederacy, was aboutnfreeing the slaves. The Confederates said it was about states rights, but what right were they fighting for? The right to own slaves! If you could ask thenslaves set free in the 1860s and I guarantee they would say that Mr. Lincoln and the Union Army emancipate them. And that freedom came at a heavy price. More Americans died in war than all others combined. Most of them white. You don't want to believe you owe your freedom to those men, but you do.

And thank God your ancestors came here, albeit against their will and under atrocious conditions. Because had they been left in Africa, I wonder how free you would be, how prosperous you'd be, what quality of life you'd have. Thank God you're an American regardless of how it happened. Even those considered poor here are in much better condition than a vast majority of the rest of the world.

my ancestors came from spain. and lincoln said if he could preserve the union without freeing the slaves he would do it. i don't have the reference.

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

The NBA is predominantly populated by black players. It doesn't fairly reflect the white population percentage. Should we restructure the NBA to reflect race percentages in America or should we allow the best players to rise to the surface regardless of race? I don't want an NBA with less than the best of the best playing. I dont care what race gets the scholarship, I want the best student to get it. I don't care what the racial make up is of the fire department, I just want the best people for the job.

with the right education, people of all races would be qualified. current leadership is more than qualification, it is about cronyism and personal relations.

[Dedicated Mind]

quote by Lincoln from wikipedia

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.[9]

full article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham...ln_and_slavery

this proves that the freedom of slaves won the war, preserved the union and helped produce the greatness of america. lincoln didn't support freeing the slaves until 3 years after the start of the civil war. so your notion that white men died to free slaves is ludicrous and typical uninformed bias.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

quote by Lincoln from wikipedia full article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham...ln_and_slavery

this proves that the freedom of slaves won the war, preserved the union and helped produce the greatness of america. lincoln didn't support freeing the slaves until 3 years after the start of the civil war. so your notion that white men died to free slaves is ludicrous and typical uninformed bias.

DM - the Civil War was for various causes. IMO slavery was a big part of that, as was states rights and maintaining the Union.
I also remember the Lincoln quote and that was his main overriding cause - maintaining the Union.
Now, if we want to deal with realities, LBJ's great society did more to stop the economic advancement of black families than could ever have been done by the racist in the kkk.
The best way for kids to not be raised up in a poor, or economically disadvantaged, household, is for them to be raised up in a two parent home.
The unintended consequences of giving someone a hand up, has resulted in the breakdown of the family unit, first for blacks and now for whites.
Now, what is your overall point with going down this road?
We cannot go back and right the wrongs that were done to my ancestors or others ancestors.
So, again what is your point?

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

DM - the Civil War was for various causes. IMO slavery was a big part of that, as was states rights and maintaining the Union.
I also remember the Lincoln quote and that was his main overriding cause - maintaining the Union.
Now, if we want to deal with realities, LBJ's great society did more to stop the economic advancement of black families than could ever have been done by the racist in the kkk.
The best way for kids to not be raised up in a poor, or economically disadvantaged, household, is for them to be raised up in a two parent home.
The unintended consequences of giving someone a hand up, has resulted in the breakdown of the family unit, first for blacks and now for whites.
Now, what is your overall point with going down this road?
We cannot go back and right the wrongs that were done to my ancestors or others ancestors.
So, again what is your point?

you were the one who brought up affirmative action, and deacon brought up the civil war. I am just trying to provide perspective. I don't doubt that welfare has played a part in dividing families. i was defending affirmative action not welfare.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

you were the one who brought up affirmative action, and deacon brought up the civil war. I am just trying to provide perspective. I don't doubt that welfare has played a part in dividing families. i was defending affirmative action not welfare.

Since when have we ever stuck to a topic...

[deacon blues]

A little history lesson: Why was the Union threatened? Because Lincoln was elected in 1860 and he was against the spread of SLAVERY to new territories. His opponent in the election was Democrat Stephen Douglas who was a proponent of "popular sovereignty" the idea that local citizens should decide whether slavery should spread to new territories. His support of the Nebraska-Kansas Act of 1854 which undermined the previous Missouri Compromise helped him to garner the Democratic nomination. He was seen as someone who would allow slavery to spread, and since there was a new party, the Republican party formed on an abolitionist platform, the Southern States were hoping for a Douglas win. When Lincoln won the presidency it spelled the beginning of cessation of the southern states from the union. So, history is explicit that the cost of 600,000 American lives was because of slavery no matter how you want to slice it.

If the Southern States were threatening the Union because the sitting president was against the spread of slavery, how are you going to redefine history to say that it was about preserving the union? Why was the Union being threatened in the first place? S-L-A-V-E-R-Y.

Actually, you make the argument that white supremacists and a lot of southern revisionists make about the Civil War. They say it was about state's rights, not slavery. They recoil at the idea that the real issue was human trafficking and the inhumanity of forced labor on individuals.

[aegsm76]

DB - who are you talking to?