Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

I find it ironic and sad that blacks are indoctrinated to hate the constitution because it only counted black people as 3/5ths of a person when in fact, being counted 0% (yes 0%!) at the time would have avoided the mad dash by southern states to up their slave populations and limited (as much as possible) pro-slavery southern delegates to congress.

Who ever is nominated to run in 2012 as a referendum on the constitution better know the document and it's history inside and out. ...and what a great moment it would be to trap Obama into broaching the topic and correcting the record in a nationally televised debate.

1 posted on 11/27/2010 6:45:09 AM PST by Eddie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Eddie01

“blacks are indoctrinated to hate the constitution”

????


2 posted on 11/27/2010 6:46:26 AM PST by BiggieLittle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01
When a gov't any gov't can tax something your OWN then you don't own it the gov't does..

You're merely paying RENT on it..

i.e. Tax(lien, license, permit, ticket, penalty, fee) on any property or holdings..

3 posted on 11/27/2010 6:53:07 AM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

Interesting to note that many blacks (and whites) were indoctrinated to believe that the “good” North wanted to count all slaves, while the “bad” South wanted to only count 3/5. The truth of course, it was all about political power in Congress. The slavery issue was just one more tool in the battle for control.


5 posted on 11/27/2010 6:55:51 AM PST by ixtl (When people fear government, there is tyranny; when government fears people, there is liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

“blacks are indoctrinated to hate the constitution”

I thought everyone was. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard that it’s outdated and needs to expand with the times through judicial review. Tyrants in robes suplanted federalism long ago, and we just sat back and let it happen.


9 posted on 11/27/2010 6:59:44 AM PST by dajeeps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

It’s interesting what happens when morality and patriotism are set aside in the name of profit.

Slavery...outsourcing...”free trade”...


12 posted on 11/27/2010 7:08:41 AM PST by Yet_Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01
because it only counted black people as 3/5ths of a person

No, it did not. It counted free people of all colors as one person, and non-free people of all colors as 3/5s of a person.

13 posted on 11/27/2010 7:10:13 AM PST by Darth Reardon (No offense to drunken sailors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

trivia question.

in 1776, how many of the original 13 colonies
were slave colonies?

nyy bs gurz

answer in rot 13
http://decode.org/


14 posted on 11/27/2010 7:11:31 AM PST by Talf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia, seemed to have been one of the most earnest advocates of the Southern sentiment against slavery.

In 1777, being then a member of the Virginia Legislature, he brought in a bill which became a law, “to prevent the importation of slaves.” He also proposed a system of general emancipation, as a preliminary to which he introduced a bill to authorize manumission; this became a law. (Excerpts from the diary of H.C. Clark)

In these efforts he had the support and sympathy of the slave-holding States, who were overrun with slaves, that returned no adequate remuneration. At this period their numbers reached some 600,000, a part of whom were employed in raising tobacco and rice. The majority of them, however, were occupied in domestic farm-labor, producing no exportable values. Hence there was no profit in slavery at the South, while at the North it was even a greater burden. (Scraps from the prison table: at Camp Chase and Johnson's Island By Joseph Barbière)

Massachusetts had found it so unproductive that, in 1780, she abolished it in her own borders, but she did not cease for that reason to force it, by her importations, on the South.

In the Congress of the Confederation, the views of the North and South on the subject of slavery, founded on interests so antagonistic, frequently came into collision.

It was at this epoch, too, that Virginia, Georgia and other Southern States ceded to the Federal Government for the common benefit of all the States, their immense Western Territories. All the States were then slave-holding, and the idea that a man could not hold his slaves in any part of the territory of the United Stares, had never yet been broached.

On the contrary, the right to carry them everywhere was undoubted. The policy of Virginia, however, was manumission; and Mr. Jefferson, in 1784, prepared in the Congress of the Confederation a clause preventing slaves being carried into the said territories ceded to the United States, north of the Ohio river.

This was a part of the Southern scheme of manumission, which was meant as a check to the trading in Negro slaves, carried on by Massachusetts with unabated activity. This clause did not pass at the time, but in 1787, it was renewed by Nathan Dane, in the Federal Convention. The clause enjoining the restitution of fugitive slaves was then added and it passed unanimously.

By a unanimous vote, it became a vital part of the Federal Constitution, and without it, this compact could never have gone into effect. The slave trade carried on by the North became also the theme of much sharp discussion in the Convention. The North was not disposed, of course, to give it up, but with the South it had become an intolerable grievance. They had long and earnestly protested against it when carried on by the mother country, but their minds were now made up to break with the North rather than submit further to this traffic.

The North then demanded compensation for the loss of this very thriving trade, and the South readily conceded it by granting them the monopoly of the coasting and carrying trade against all foreign tonnage. In this way it was settled that the Slave Trade should be abolished after 1808

(Do not ever discuss the ratification and the issue of slavery without mentioning this:) Without this important clause, the South would never have consented to enter into a Confederacy with the North. The Federal Constitution, with these essential clauses, having passed into operation, it became, henceforth, a certainty that the Slave Trade would finally expire in the United States at the close of 1808. This left it still a duration of nineteen years, and the North seemed determined to reap the utmost possible advantage from the time remaining.

The Duke de Rochefoucault-Liancourt, in his work on the United States, 1795, stated that “twenty vessels from the harbors of the North are engaged in the importation of slaves into Georgia; they ship one negro for every ton burden.”

Thus it is evident, that while New England was vigorously engaged in buying and selling negro slaves, Virginia, on the other hand, was steadfastly pursuing her theory of manumission.

A LETTER TO VISOUNT PALMERSTON, L.G., PRIME MINISTER OF ENGLAND, ON AMERICAN SLAVERY. HENRY WIKOFF

17 posted on 11/27/2010 7:28:40 AM PST by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

It was the South’s desire and advantage to count slaves as 5/5ths of a person (1 for those in Rio Linda).


19 posted on 11/27/2010 7:47:12 AM PST by H.Akston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01

Give me a break!!

Let me make it clear right up front: I am NOT a racist. I supported Herman Cain in his run for the Senate. And if he ever runs again, I would probably support him again (and he’s recently begun to talk about just that).

I also consider Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams two of the finest economists and minds extant today. In case you don’t know them, both are black.

Sowell, Williams and Cain – among others — have spoken out against those fellow blacks who castigate and vilify America for a slavery now long in our past. And ALL thinking men and women oppose the periodic calls for reparations. (When he ran, I supported Alan Keyes. I even spoke in his stead on the RTKABA at a Capitol rally and was asked to fill in for him on his radio show at the time. Sadly, while I still consider Alan a good man, I have had to rethink my support since he came out FOR reparations.)

The fact is that the modern descendants of slaves brought here in chains in admittedly miserable, soul-gutting conditions now calling for reparations need to remember something:

They should not only be glad to be in America, they should be glad to be ANYWHERE!

Had their ancestors NOT been brought OUT of Africa – many by Muslim slave raiders —the blood of those ancestors would have run into the earth over there several centuries ago, victims of the OTHER black tribes that captured them in one of the interminable tribal conflicts STILL ravaging that sad continent and these modern day would-be “plaintiffs” would not even exist.

And I would remind you that slavery is STILL practiced in parts of Africa (mainly by – American BLACK muslims LISTEN UP!! — MUSLIMS) and Asia today. How ironic that disgruntled American blacks are embracing a system that participated mightily in their initial bondage – and would, if Islam takes root here, probably put any who cling to their Christianity back INTO BONDAGE – or to the sword.

95% of the African slaves who were transported across the Atlantic went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions, and that less than 5% of the slaves who crossed the Atlantic went to the United States, it was remarkable that the vast majority of academic research, films, books and articles concerning the slave trade concentrated only on the American involvement, as though slavery was a uniquely American aberration.

And should the great-great-great grandchildren of SLAVE OWNING BLACKS also be subject to PAYING these reparations? If so, how do we find THEM?

And I have traced MY family back to the SLAVS. Although the term looks to be related to “slave,” depending on your source, it either means “glory” or “worshipper.” But my family research indicates that many of my of my ancestors LIVED lives of virtual slavery to some despot or other. Do I qualify for reparations? From whom?? And it begs a question: Are most of us now living here headed into a modern form off that servitude? But that’s a topic for another discussion.

The official US Census of 1830 lists 3,775 free blacks who owned 12,740 black slaves. Furthermore, the story outlines the history of slavery here, and the first slave owner, the Father of American slavery, was Mr Anthony Johnson, of Northampton, Virginia. His slave was John Casor, the first slave for life. Both were black Africans. The story is very readable, and outlines cases of free black women owning their husbands, free black parents selling their children into slavery to white owners, and absentee free black slave owners, who leased their slaves to plantation owners.
-”Selling Poor Steven”, American Heritage Magazine, Feb/Mar 1993 (Vol. 441) p 90

Of course, a full telling of Black History would not be complete without a recitation of the origin of slavery in the Virginia colony:
Virginia, Guide to The Old Dominion, WPA Writers’ Program, Oxford University Press, NY, 1940, p. 378

And the holier-than-thou Northern liberals are strangely silent on recent archeological evidence from NEW YORK CITY clearly tracing the financing of the slave trade to NORTHERN BUSINESSMEN!!

At the height of his remarkable boxing career, Muhammad Ali (born Cassius Clay), once declared “I’m glad my great-grandpa got on that boat.”

And speaking of ancestors, my paternal grandmother’s daddy joined with the 80th Ohio Volunteer Infantry early in the War Between the States (reupped twice) and fought on the Union side at Chickamauga, Vicksburg, Jackson then joined up with Sherman for that infamous march to the sea through Georgia. My wife’s great-great grandpappy ALSO fought for the Union. While I revere the memory of my ancestors, inasmuch as that conflict was less about slavery than it was the economic exploitation and abuse of the South by the North, I fear they MAY have been on the wrong side.

Author Robert Hitt Neill tells of attending a Tennessee Mountain Writer’s Conference years ago with several other authors. Among them was Alex Hailey, celebrated author of “Roots.” Watching a TV news show, a group of them watched a demonstration in a Southern state against the “Rebel” flag incorporated into that state’s flag. The very next report covered a famine in Africa. Graphic images showed dead bodies, starving children with distended tummies and runny noses and dying people covered with flies, too weak to brush them away.

Mr. Hailey intoned in a low, serious voice, “Every time an American black sees a story like that, they should find a Confederate flag and kiss it.” He then pointed to the TV screen and continued, “Because these would be me and my descendants, except for American slavery. I thank God that my family and I are here instead of there.”

Next problem!
Dick Bachert


22 posted on 11/27/2010 8:11:56 AM PST by Dick Bachert (11/2 was a good start. Onward to '12. U Pubbies be strong or next time we send in the libertarians!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01
blacks are indoctrinated to hate the constitution

Blacks hated the Constitution because of their belief that the Constitution promoted slavery.

Even after the most prestigious black leader told the Negros that the Constitution was not an instrument for slavery they allowed themselves to be persuaded otherwise.

To this very day and in spite of all the evidence to the contrary the majority of black people in America choose to remain ignorant on the subject of the Constitution and slavery .

Frederick Douglass held the view that the Constitution was a slave document … until he read it. Then Frederick Douglass, the escaped former slave, self-taught author and editor, and leading abolitionist orator, said, "Take the Constitution according to its plain reading," he challenged the Rochester Ladies Anti-Slavery Society on July 5, 1852, in Rochester, New York. "I defy the presentation of a single pro-slavery clause in it." In fact, Douglass told the crowd gathered to hear his Independence Day address, "Interpreted as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a glorious liberty document." Douglass echoed this point in his Independence Day address, asking, "if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it?"

Fredrick Douglass also warned black people to never vote for Democrats.

Excerpts from Frederick Douglass speech delivered at the annual meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania December 3-4, 1863

While we had in this State a majority of but 15,000 over this pro-slavery Democratic Party, they have a mighty minority, a dangerous minority

Your Democracy will clamor for peace, and for restoring the old order of things, because that old order of things was the life of the Democratic Party. "You do take away mine house, when you take away the prop that sustains my house," and the support of the Democratic Party we all know to be slavery. The Democratic party is for war for slavery; it is for peace for slavery; it is for the habeas corpus for slavery; it is against the habeas corpus for slavery; it was for the Florida war for slavery; it was for the Mexican war for slavery; it is for jury trial for traitors, for slavery; it is against jury trial for men claimed as fugitive slaves, for slavery. It has but one principle, one master; and it is guided, governed, and directed by it. I say that, with this party among us, flaunting its banners in our faces, with the New York World scattered broadcast over the North, with the New York Express, with the mother and father and devil of them all, the New York Herald, [applause,] with those papers flooding our land, and coupling the term Abolitionist with all manner of course epithets, in all our hotels, at all our crossings, our highways and byways and railways all over the country, there is work to be done — a good deal of work to be done.

I believe this speech came to be known as the “Our Work is Not Done” speech.

27 posted on 11/27/2010 9:37:23 AM PST by MosesKnows (Love many, Trust few, and always paddle your own canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Eddie01; Michael Zak
CSA Vice President Alexander H. Stephens, Cornerstone speech -- "...last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the 'rock upon which the old Union would split.' He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact." -- March 21, 1861

29 posted on 11/27/2010 10:46:22 AM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson