America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

You're referring to Clayton Bigsby the black blind raciest who divorced his wife when he found out he was black because he couldn't stand her being a Nxxxxr lover.

Dave Chappelle is a comic genius.

I heard Victor kept moving to progressively more liberal cities until his grasp of history was completely bereft of intellectual honesty.

Was wondering why you were trying to make cacman my roommate, then I remembered you got butt hurt because I'm of the opinion that BLM is a racist organization.

Or maybe it was the 99.999% requirement to gain membership to the KKK comment. Pretty sure this one went over your head, and here I thought you were smart n stuff.

Ya, any time man... to be honest, I just haven't been to war with you in a while, so was looking forward to a good troll-fest.

I don't believe I ever said they were equivalent, I only made the claim they are both racist organizations.

You do have me confused with someone else, as I moved away from the high altitude, not to it, admittedly it was pretty funny though.

There is just as much hate in an antifa heart as there is a white nationalist heart. They are both rotten but one is a media darling and campus sweetheart.

I have no time for either.

c-bidders are allowed to pass for pure white at 98.2%...perk of membership.

I call bullsh$t.
Who cares how much hate is in one group's heart? Seriously. Your statement is ridiculous.

Who cares if you think the antifa's hate the neo-nazis as much as the neo-nazis hate people who aren't white... one of these groups is neo-nazis.

It's bullsh#t equivalencies that got us in this mess.

It's like saying... man that hitler sucks... but I really think jews are harboring a lot of hate in their heart.

(programming note. I've been using the hitler/jew/nazi thing a lot in this thread. I'd like to say thank you to hitler for providing a benchmark to which all other horrible actions in the world can be compared/contrasted and with which one can harshly judge the equivocation of weak minded people.)

Did you see the video of the car attack teedubya?

Why is it that more than half getting ran over had clubs/bats in their hands?

I already gave you proof but you just want to argue Vic. I get it, and I see right through it.

Z - You gave a quote from Lincoln. Yet Lincoln didn't declare secession. Lincoln's motivation really isbt that relevant regarding the civil war... you know... because the states seceded. I gave you 5 or 6 examples of why they did that

The Libs are all about free speech, unless they disagree with it. Then, it is branded hate speech.

Read Shelby Foote's The Civil War. You can find several examples of you being wrong on the It Was About Slavery angle.

Are you sure about that? I'm not going to read a 3 volume "2,968-page, 1.2 million-word" book on the civil war written by a novelist, not a historian. So I'll just take your word on it that there's several examples proving me wrong.

....
....
oh...
no... no I'm not.

tell me the example and then I can decide if I'm wrong. there.... yeah that's right.

Oh.
As a freebie here's a selection from the Constitution of the Confederate states (ie what they were replacing the US Constitution with):
"4. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

"1. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any state of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property: and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."

"3. No slave or other person held to service or labor in any state or territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor: but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs, or to whom such service or labor may be due."

"3. The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states."


But they didn't care about it at all...
I mean... they just wanted to make sure it was mentioned three times in their constitution that it will never be denied to the... and had to throw in that any territory they conquered would become a slave territory.


But it wasn't in any way shape or form an important thing to that side.

Can you f'ing imagine... if they had won? They would have made new york a slave state.

How this doesn't bother you amazes me.

Ya know it's really not hard to figure out who's who and what's what here. The intellectual gyrations are interesting.

One thing I've learned in the eleven years I've known you, is facts will never changer your ideology.

Well they certainly aren't if you don't bother providing them.

I mean... I've provided a reasonably substantial bit of evidence. None of it hard to come by. But if this novel you reference quote's the confederate conventioneers private diary or something where he says "I hate slavery, but I have to use it as an excuse to secede so we can fight the evil alien invasion from mars in the open. I regret having to do this but the fate of the planet requires it" by all means, give me a page number and I'll look it up.

And seriously 8...
everything else being equal... you don't find it in the least bit disturbing that they would have made slavery legal across the entire nation if they had won. That isn't some wild claim. They put it in the constitution of the confederacy. Ignoring anything else, every single person in the confederate army was contributing towards an end goal which would have been to have slavery legal in every state they conquered.

We are not talking about a group that was misunderstood here. This is evil they were working to spread.

I'm kinda glad the Confederacy lost. I doubt if I'd be here otherwise, unless they needed someone to do the laundry or work in the stores or cook....and although I was born here more than 63 years ago, sometimes I'm treated like a foreigner, or made to feel like a subhuman... but it's still a great country... my country.


True story: when I was in the police academy in 1987, the Commander and Tac Sgts assigned all four of us Asians, from various squads, to do a 7-11 run to pick up snacks and coffee for the staff on days when we went to Los Alamitos Naval Air Base to do field exercises. We all went along with the joke, and called ourselves the Hop Sing contingent...

Hop Sing was one of the earliest Asian faces in a weekly TV show: he was the live-in cook for the Cartwright clan at the Ponderosa in the 60's western show Bonanza...

No... you're right. It was the fashion of the time in america, just like wearing an onion on your belt.

But one group was actively trying to keep that fashion going (like the dude who kept wearing the mullet way after it was done being cool... incidentally, he probably also supports the confederacy way after it's stopped being cool). The other side appeared to be changing (not necessarily because of anything "good" possibly just expedience and a shift in economics).

Seems pretty clear that if the south had won we would have had slavery across the entirety of the union and it would have persisted for some unknown period of time beyond when it did end.

That's simply sh%tty. There isn't a justifiable rationalization for that. They were on the side of wrong.

The south lost. We should have enslaved them. Yet the mamba pambys want to make sure they get to keep their little statues.

One of the cool things about us is we don't do that. The Marshall plan was brilliant and still effective although elements of the current admin sure hate it.

States rights was a slavery issue. And it went beyond status quo (Missouri Comprimise) to wanting expansion or at least potential for expansion (Kansas Nebraska act)

Again... it wasn't to free the the slaves but most certainly was about slavery.

It was like any other compromise governments make today. Trying to keep their people happy so they could get reelected and keep the country together. A civil war would be a mess. Look at Syria over seven years. Or Charlottesville over thirty minutes.

And yet only the great countries or rulers make those types of decisions. Ghengis Kahn did too. It's a hard leap of faith. One the south didn't appear to have.

Edit..... Oops your talking KN act. I was thinking not enslaving the south. Opportunity lost.

I miss where that fits MACS. It's my stupidity or the medium but I don't get it. Not trying to be a deke although it may be unintentional

It seems like a bit of a subject change. But I agree to an extent. Medicare and Medicaid have always been welfare for medical providers to provide coin for what was free care or barter.

Sure... would have become. But when?

Under any circumstance, if the south had won we would have slavery across a larger portion of the country for a longer period of time than we did.

That is an indisputably bad thing. (unless you're a fan of racially based slavery and the propaganda of the "inferior negro" which was baked into the documents of secession)...

Gov't/feds putting it's face in every aspect of our lives. I was expanding on Russ' point of over-reach. The gov't provides your basic needs and they pretty much own you...