Chumpettes: Do We Need To Get Rid Of This FDR Statue?

[Spurtacular]

https://www.nps.gov/thingstodo/images/FRDE1.jpg?width=950&quality=90&mode=crop

[ChumpDumper]

https://www.nps.gov/thingstodo/images/FRDE1.jpg?width=950&quality=90&mode=cropWhy do you want to get rid of it?

[Spurtacular]

Why do you want to get rid of it?

I'm asking you. Are you saying you have no reason to want to get rid of it?

[ChumpDumper]

I'm asking you. Are you saying you have no reason to want to get rid of it?I personally have no reason.

Do you want to get rid of it? Why?

Step up in your own thread or fold.

[Spurtacular]

I personally have no reason.

What are your personal reasons for wanting confederate statues removed?

[ChumpDumper]

What are your personal reasons for wanting confederate statues removed?derp folds.

Good luck!

[DarrinS]

That dog was racist AF. Take down the dog statue.

[ChumpDumper]

Trump supporters salty AF about confederate statues.:lol

[Spurtacular]

derp folds.

Good luck!

You're the one running from whatever your reasons are for wanting confederate statues taken down.

(DAF86 (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=11102) This is what he does).

[ElNono]

Definitely should... what he did with Jesse Owens was also disgusting...

[DarrinS]

Definitely should... what he did with Jesse Owens was also disgusting...

What's the story on that?

[ElNono]

What's the story on that?

After the 1936 Berlin Olympics, only the white athletes were invited to see and meet Roosevelt. No such invitation was made to the African American athletes such as Jesse Owens, who had won four gold medals. A widely believed myth about the 1936 games was that Hitler had snubbed Owens, something that never happened. Owens said that "Hitler didn't snub me—it was [Roosevelt] who snubbed me. The president didn't even send me a telegram". However, Hitler had left after Owens' first gold medal win and did not meet him. Subsequently, he did not meet with any of the gold medalists. Owens lamented his treatment by Roosevelt, saying that he "wasn't invited to the White House to shake hands with the President".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Franklin_D._Roosevelt

[DarrinS]

Meh, just take down ALL statues.

[Reck]

Meh, just take down ALL statues.

I dont understand why people get pissy about statuses. They're just a piece of rock. Do we really need them to feel good and reassured of whatever they represent?

[DarrinS]

I dont understand why people get pissy about statuses. They're just a piece of rock. Do we really need them to feel good and reassured of whatever they represent?


I don't care about statues. I understand they are inanimate objects, usually of dead people.

But, they make some people feel uncomfortable, or something.

[ChumpDumper]

You're the one running from whatever your reasons are for wanting confederate statues taken down.They were traitors to the US and killed Americans to preserve slavery.

Do you want to get rid of it? Why?

Step up in your own thread or fold.

[FrostKing]

I dont understand why people get pissy about statuses. They're just a piece of rock. Do we really need them to feel good and reassured of whatever they represent?
America already has nearly no heritage or traditions as it is. I think that is a big reason why this society is so dysfunctional.

[BSfromTX]

Definitely should... what he did with Jesse Owens was also disgusting...

True, I have heard some say Hitler showed him more respect.

[DarrinS]

America already has nearly no heritage or traditions as it is. I think that is a big reason why this society is so dysfunctional.

Uh, what?

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Poles

[Spurtacular]

So, not one Chumpette for removing the statue?

[ElNono]

So, not one Chumpette for removing the statue?

Don't keep track of your enemies list, am I a Chumpette?

[Reck]

So, not one Chumpette for removing the statue?

Post #14, you're welcome.

[SnakeBoy]

After the 1936 Berlin Olympics, only the white athletes were invited to see and meet Roosevelt. No such invitation was made to the African American athletes such as Jesse Owens, who had won four gold medals. A widely believed myth about the 1936 games was that Hitler had snubbed Owens, something that never happened. Owens said that "Hitler didn't snub me—it was [Roosevelt] who snubbed me. The president didn't even send me a telegram". However, Hitler had left after Owens' first gold medal win and did not meet him. Subsequently, he did not meet with any of the gold medalists. Owens lamented his treatment by Roosevelt, saying that he "wasn't invited to the White House to shake hands with the President".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Franklin_D._Roosevelt

Seems like the internment thing is a bit worse than that

[Spurtacular]

Don't keep track of your enemies list, am I a Chumpette?

You're a hybrid at a minimum.

[Spurtacular]

Post #14, you're welcome.

Okay, that's one no vote and the rest present. :lol

[Reck]

Okay, that's one no vote and the rest present. :lol

How is that a no vote? I dont care one way or the other. It's a statue and I dont let it speak for me. I dont do worships.

[ElNono]

Seems like the internment thing is a bit worse than that

what's the story behind that?

[Spurtacular]

How is that a no vote? I dont care one way or the other. It's a statue and I dont let it speak for me. I dont do worships.

Oh, so present. Sorry. All Chumpettes voting present. :lmao

[ElNono]

I was unequivocal, but I guess I'm not a Chumpette, so :tu

[Spurtacular]

I was unequivocal, but I guess I'm not a Chumpette, so :tu

By all means, you count. Your yes vote is registered. Let the record be amended thusly.

[dbestpro]

Would you support a statue of Santa Anna at the Alamo?

[Spurtacular]

Would you support a statue of Santa Anna at the Alamo?

What American value(s) do you think he stands for?

[spurraider21]

why would we get rid of that statue?

[SnakeBoy]

what's the story behind that?

FDR couldn't get away with slaughtering innocent Japs on US soil so he just imprisoned all of them. Elsewhere in the world he just slaughtered them and called it a triumph of American values.

[ChumpDumper]

derp votes present in his own thread.

lol derp

[Blake]

:lol op is such an idiot

[Spurtacular]

why would we get rid of that statue?

Have you landed on an answer?

[ElNono]

FDR couldn't get away with slaughtering innocent Japs on US soil so he just imprisoned all of them. Elsewhere in the world he just slaughtered them and called it a triumph of American values.

Oh yeah, I thought you were talking Owens... yep, the Japan internment camps is a historical black eye on this country...

[Will Hunting]

FDR couldn't get away with slaughtering innocent Japs on US soil so he just imprisoned all of them. Elsewhere in the world he just slaughtered them and called it a triumph of American values.
He was also an anti-Semite if were being honest with ourselves. His daughter had no issue making overtly anti-Semitic comments and usually you get that from your parents. There were also train tracks Germany was using to transport Jews 5 miles off course from where a US bombing raid was happening and he made the affirmative decision to avoid them. IIRC bombing those tracks probably would have saved a couple hundred thousand Jews.

I’d be OK with taking his statue down if Japanese Americans were offended by it.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Definitely should... what he did with Jesse Owens was also disgusting...

Worst presidents in US history:

1) FDR - let the longest recession ever bleed and bleed and bleed and hemorrhage some more. "New Deal" policies only triggered stagflation and punished smart financial operators at the time. WW2 bailed out his old, tosb ass.

2) Lyndon Johnson - warhawk and spearheaded the left-wing neocon movement. Cost millions of U.S. young lives in a needless war. Imposed two-faced civil rights laws which our communities are still suffering from today. Redlined neighborhoods which perpetuated race riots. Cost the U.S. the upper hand in the Cold War and the Space Race which only Nixon (one of the better presidents despite being a bit of a cheater) restored for the U.S.

3) Carter - took a strong economy and completely fractured its foundation, causing stagflation and a bunch of government bailouts which hard-working, responsible Americans weren't able to qualify for. The worst kind of Keynesian economist. Completely screwed the pooch by doing nothing with Iran when he had the opportunity to lay down the hammer. Lost jobs by the millions and gas prices rose to $3.50+, if you could even find gas at all.

4) Obama - from the stimulus to the "Affordable Care Act", his laws and policies were straight garbage. Economy recovered extremely slowly until the back half of his second term. His policies were ludicrous and he and Hillary teamed up to make one of the worst war hawkish duos in modern history, completely tearing apart the stability in Libya and others, and initially supporting the jihadist Arab Spring. Completely screwed the pooch on ISIS and Iraqi/Syrian stability. Legalized gay marriage, which was probably good, but not marijuana, which arguably should have come first. Did not invade Syria and try to eliminate Assad, which was probably a good thing, but he sure thought about it. Largely had an easy job considering the dearth of hurricanes, pandemics and other disasters that didn't happen under his two-term regime.

5) Reagan/Bush Sr. - Although the 80s were largely an era of good feelings, these policies of enabling and empowering global jihad as a proxy defense against Russia and the newly-hostile Iran (Carter's fault) ultimately led to a ten-year string of major jihadist attacks that ultimately culminated in 9/11 and the wars in the Gulf and Afghanistan. You can argue that Bush Sr. was somewhat worse because he lied about not raising taxes and not being a war hawk. Policed Iraq against Kuwait when the right move was to stand pat, since Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the U.S. -- but the mujahideen were.

[Will Hunting]

^musings of a conservative edgelord

[ElNono]

^musings of a conservative edgelord

Yeah, Andy is only good for the lols

[Millennial_Messiah]

Yeah, Andrew is only good for the truth bombs

Agreed

[Millennial_Messiah]

^musings of a conservative edgelord

I almost, almost, almost threw Wilson in there at #5 at the last minute, but I chose Reagan/Bush because I thought it was more relevant to today.

[ChumpDumper]

^musings of a conservative edgelord:lmao

[spurraider21]

Have you landed on an answer?
I don’t have good reason to take it down, so no.

You?

[Spurtacular]

I don’t have good reason to take it down, so no.

You?

So, imprisoning thousands of innocent Americans based on race isn't a good reason?

[Spurtacular]

I almost, almost, almost threw Wilson in there at #5 at the last minute, but I chose Reagan/Bush because I thought it was more relevant to today.

He should be #1. He's the one who signed the Fed into law.

[DMC]

Would you support a statue of Santa Anna at the Alamo?

How about a statue of Burger King at McDonalds?

[ChumpDumper]

Present.


Present.

[DMC]

Statues of people are stupid. In fact, the statue of David needs to go, David was definitely racist.

[Millennial_Messiah]

He should be #1. He's the one who signed the Fed into law.

& the federal income tax in lieu of federal property taxes.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Statues of people are stupid. In fact, the statue of David needs to go, David was definitely racist.

No, not because of that. Only because he has a small micro penis.

[Spurtacular]

Statues of people are stupid. In fact, the statue of David needs to go, David was definitely racist.

It's privately owned. It's a rich part of history as well. I don't see the problem.

[Spurtacular]

& the federal income tax in lieu of federal property taxes.

Never actually ratified by the states. The US government gives zero fucks about the Constitution.

[ChumpDumper]

Present.


Present.

[spurraider21]

So, imprisoning thousands of innocent Americans based on race isn't a good reason?
Are you voting present? I said i wouldn’t remove it

[Spurtacular]

Are you voting present? I said i wouldn’t remove it

I'm not for removing it.

Are you for removing Confederate statues?

[FrostKing]

Maybe they intend to use the metal from the statues to build those bridges

[spurraider21]

I'm not for removing it.
great so we agree :tu


Are you for removing Confederate statues?
yep

[ChumpDumper]

:lol derp's threads

[Spurtacular]

yep

And how do you see imprisoning Japanese as something worthy of having a statue while people fighting for states' rights are not?

[Blake]

No, not because of that. Only because he has a small micro penis.

Andy wants his statues to have huge penises

[ElNono]

And how do you see imprisoning Japanese as something worthy of having a statue while people fighting for states' rights are not?

seceding is not fighting for states right, derp... there are ways in a democracy to fight for states right, secession is not one of them.

[Spurtacular]

seceding is not fighting for states right, derp... there are ways in a democracy to fight for states right, secession is not one of them.

Go ahead and show me in the Constitution where it's prohibited.

[Reck]

So, imprisoning thousands of innocent Americans based on race isn't a good reason?

:lol

Pick a lane. You have issues with people who dont care about this issue one way or the other, issue with people who dont want it taken down and also take issue with people who say they want these statuses taken down.

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

:lol

Pick a lane. You have issues with people who dont care about this issue one way or the other, issue with people who dont want it taken down and also take issue with people who say they want these statuses taken down.

:lmao

:lol Chumpettes can't stay in the racist figures bad and don't deserve publc statues lane.
:lol Wreck

[BSfromTX]

& the federal income tax in lieu of federal property taxes.


Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act 1913 along with the federal income tax.

Not sure about federal property taxes.. County, yes

Would love to get rid of all Woodrow Wilson statues as well. Thanks progressives.

[DMC]

It's privately owned. It's a rich part of history as well. I don't see the problem.

Not privately owned and it was sarcasm.

[spurraider21]

And how do you see imprisoning Japanese as something worthy of having a statue while people fighting for states' rights are not?
Was one of the ugliest chapters in our nations history. A lot of former Presidents did ugly things. Many owned slaves and did nothing about it despite knowing it was wrong. Andrew Jackson green lit the slaughter of many native Americans. I don’t think we have to disown every figure because they did bad things.

Confederate statues are different because we are celebrating actual traitors who declared war against the US and provoked the war that killed more Americans than any other war in history for the right to own people as property.

No need to celebrate traitors who hated the United States.

[baseline bum]

Was one of the ugliest chapters in our nations history. A lot of former Presidents did ugly things. Many owned slaves and did nothing about it despite knowing it was wrong. Andrew Jackson green lit the slaughter of many native Americans. I don’t think we have to disown every figure because they did bad things.

Confederate statues are different because we are celebrating actual traitors who declared war against the US and provoked the war that killed more Americans than any other war in history for the right to own people as property.

No need to celebrate traitors who hated the United States.

Declared war against the US specifically in support of slavery. Locking people up of Japanese descent during the war and stealing their property was horrible, but that's nowhere near the level of slavery and genocide.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol derp defending treason and murdering US troops

[Reck]

:lol derp defending treason and murdering US troops

He thinks you get points for losing.

Makes sense. He thinks he's always winning when in reality he gets dunked on every day by everyone.

[Chucho]

LOL, people who want statues taken down while they advertise for the slavers they so ignorantly give their monies to.

Most Muricans have zero handle on how ignorant and hypocritical they are.

[Spurminator]

LOL, people who want statues taken down while they advertise for the slavers they so ignorantly give their monies to.

Most Muricans have zero handle on how ignorant and hypocritical they are.

This is quite a stretch to claim hypocrisy on.

[Spurtacular]

Most Southerners did not own slaves. They fought for their own autonomy.

[Spurtacular]

Was one of the ugliest chapters in our nations history. A lot of former Presidents did ugly things. Many owned slaves and did nothing about it despite knowing it was wrong. Andrew Jackson green lit the slaughter of many native Americans. I don’t think we have to disown every figure because they did bad things.

Confederate statues are different because we are celebrating actual traitors who declared war against the US and provoked the war that killed more Americans than any other war in history for the right to own people as property.

No need to celebrate traitors who hated the United States.

You can brush off imprisoning thousands of Japanese civilians because you feel like worse things were done. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

You can brush off imprisoning thousands of Japanese civilians because you feel like worse things were done. :lolTreason and murdering US troops is worse.

[BSfromTX]

Treason and murdering US troops is worse.

That still doesn't justify what was done though, does it?

[spurraider21]

You can brush off imprisoning thousands of Japanese civilians because you feel like worse things were done. :lol
i didnt brush it off. i called it one of the ugliest chapters in our nation's history

but FDR was never an enemy of the United States who declared war against the United States

[ChumpDumper]

That still doesn't justify what was done though, does it?I didn't say that it was justified.

[Spurtacular]

i didnt brush it off. i called it one of the ugliest chapters in our nation's history

Yet somehow worthy of a public statue in Manhattan.

[ChumpDumper]

Yet somehow worthy of a public statue in Manhattan.Better than traitors who murdered US troops.

Do you agree?

[Spurtacular]

Better than traitors who murdered US troops.

Do you agree?

Formal warring is not murder in the first place.

Also :lol at your whataboutism cos you can't be consistent.

[ChumpDumper]

Formal warring is not murder in the first place.

Also :lol at your whataboutism cos you can't be consistent.I'm very consistent.

Treason and murdering US troops -- no statues.

This entire thread is whataboutism. lol derp

[Spurtacular]

I'm very consistent.

Treason and murdering US troops -- no statues.

This entire thread is whataboutism. lol derp

K. Tell us why a tyrant like FDR should have a public statue.

[ChumpDumper]

K. Tell us why a tyrant like FDR should have a public statue.Sorry, you started out asking if I think it should be removed.

I don't really care if they make statues for most people. I'm sure people have their reasons. I actively don't want statues of traitors who murdered US troops in placed of honor.

Pretty simple.

Do you understand?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Sorry, you started out asking if I think it should be removed.

I don't really care if they make statues for most people. I'm sure people have their reasons. I actively don't want statues of traitors who murdered US troops in placed of honor.

Pretty simple.

Do you understand?

Yes or no.

Formal war is not murder. You fail.

And you want public statues of some tyrants and not others, according to your political marching orders.

[ChumpDumper]

Formal war is not murder. You fail.

And you want public statues of some tyrants and not others, according to your political marching orders.

:lmao Posted from your face.Why are you quoting me from the cell service thread?

I don't want statues of traitors who murdered US troops in places of honor.

It wasn't a formal war. It was a rebellion.

Why do you want to venerate traitors, derp? List your reasons.

[BSfromTX]

I didn't say that it was justified.


You just won't condemn it by suggesting to remove an FDR statue?

[ChumpDumper]

You just won't condemn it by suggesting to remove an FDR statue?Nope. Sorry.

Which statues do you want removed and why?

Seems important to you now.

[BSfromTX]

Nope. Sorry.

Which statues do you want removed and why?

Seems important to you now.


Ha, just about all of them, including FDR. I really don't care either way, but if you feel like statues of confederates should be removed, then the case could be made for many others.

[ElNono]

Go ahead and show me in the Constitution where it's prohibited.

I didn't claim it's unconstitutional (even though the SCOTUS later on found in Texas vs White that it indeed is, but it's a distraction on a claim I didn't make), just that under a democratic system, secession is not how you fight for state rights.

Your state is represented along with others in Congress, that's the venue where you assert your grievances, not armed conflict.

[ChumpDumper]

Ha, just about all of them, including FDR. I really don't care either way, but if you feel like statues of confederates should be removed, then the case could be made for many others.If they are statues of traitors who murdered US troops, you got my vote.:tu

Where's your list of those that aren't confederates?

[BSfromTX]

FDR and Woodrow Wilson for starters. Killed thousands of US soldiers entering wars we had no business in.

[ChumpDumper]

FDR and Woodrow Wilson for starters. Killed thousands of US soldiers entering wars we had no business in.Sorry, that's Congress. You got a lot of names to compile from those.

[BSfromTX]

Sorry, that's Congress. You got a lot of names to compile from those.


Wow, you’re gonna split that hair? Sure, you win, those dudes didn’t want that war at all, huh?

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, you’re gonna split that hair? Sure, you win, those dudes didn’t want that war at all, huh?It's your list of statues, dude. You'll have to include anyone who volunteered for either war too. You'll need to take down the Marine Iwo Jima memorial in DC, etc.

Good luck.

[Spurtacular]

I didn't claim it's unconstitutional (even though the SCOTUS later on found in Texas vs White that it indeed is, but it's a distraction on a claim I didn't make), just that under a democratic system, secession is not how you fight for state rights.

Your state is represented along with others in Congress, that's the venue where you assert your grievances, not armed conflict.

Even though the authoritarian SC pulled shit out of their ass at a later date, I know.

Talk of succession was commonplace between 1776 and 1861. It was understood that secession was a viable option.

[spurraider21]

Even though the authoritarian SC pulled shit out of their ass at a later date, I know.

Talk of succession was commonplace between 1776 and 1861. It was understood that secession was a viable option.
this is derp's white flag

everybody knows... it's common knowledge... it's understood

[Spurtacular]

this is derp's white flag

everybody knows... it's common knowledge... it's understood

Look into the history if you don't believe me.

:lol Lite with the desperate jump in.

[spurraider21]

Look into the history if you don't believe me.

:lol Lite with the desperate jump in.
i'm familiar with the history. nothing to support what you're saying. at the time of ratification, new york specifically brought this up and demanded that language be included to reserve their right to secede/withdraw from the union. it was discussed at the convention and was rejected.

the articles of confederation called the union perpetual and the constitution specifically states it is creating a "more perfect union"

[Spurtacular]

i'm familiar with the history. nothing to support what you're saying. at the time of ratification, new york specifically brought this up and demanded that language be included to reserve their right to secede/withdraw from the union. it was discussed at the convention and was rejected.

the articles of confederation called the union perpetual and the constitution specifically states it is creating a "more perfect union"

Yea, and language saying states could not secede was rejected. Why? Because the Constitution wouldn't have been ratified if so.

Phraseology like a "more perfect union" was certainly an effort to invoke a national pride that was second to state pride thereto then.
You're stretching more than Reck's ass on a Saturday night to say it is some sort of express binding language against seccession though.

And all of this is a sidebar to the fact that secession was a prevalent narrative throughout the Nineteenth century leading up to the Civil War.

[spurraider21]

Yea, and language saying states could not secede was rejected. Why? Because the Constitution wouldn't have been ratified if so.

Phraseology like a "more perfect union" was certainly an effort to invoke a national pride that was second to state pride thereto then.
You're stretching more than Reck's ass on a Saturday night to say it is some sort of express binding language against seccession though.

And all of this is a sidebar to the fact that secession was a prevalent narrative throughout the Nineteenth century leading up to the Civil War.
certainly this "prevalent narrative throughout the Nineteenth century" can be documented for us here

[Spurtacular]

certainly this "prevalent narrative throughout the Nineteenth century" can be documented for us here

This book talks quite a bit about it if you're that interested.

https://www.amazon.com/Disease-Public-Mind-Understanding-Fought-ebook/dp/B00B3M3W7M/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2P1E8KW3YTFO3&dchild=1&keywords=disease+of+the+public+mind&qid=1592282332&sprefix=disease+of+the+publi%2Caps%2C242&sr=8-1

[ElNono]

This book talks quite a bit about it if you're that interested.

https://www.amazon.com/Disease-Public-Mind-Understanding-Fought-ebook/dp/B00B3M3W7M/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2P1E8KW3YTFO3&dchild=1&keywords=disease+of+the+public+mind&qid=1592282332&sprefix=disease+of+the+publi%2Caps%2C242&sr=8-1

Thanks for the book recommendation. Will put it on my reading list. :tu

[Spurtacular]

Thanks for the book recommendation. Will put it on my reading list. :tu

Why do you think this warrants sarcasm?

[ElNono]

Why do you think this warrants sarcasm?

Wasn't sarcasm at all... I like reading.

[Spurtacular]

Wasn't sarcasm at all... I like reading.

Okay. Well I give that book a thumbs up on the thumbs up / down scale.

It's not among the better historical accounts in my collection though.
But I've not read as much on the Civil War as other areas of history.
That particular one had a lot of stuff I haven't read elsewhere, such as
considerable depth into the other times the South came close to seceding.
And New England was talking about secession in their own right.
It overviews that some, too.

[ElNono]

Okay. Well I give that book a thumbs up on the thumbs up / down scale.

It's not among the better historical accounts in my collection though.
But I've not read as much on the Civil War as other areas of history.
That particular one had a lot of stuff I haven't read elsewhere, such as
considerable depth into the other times the South came close to seceding.
And New England was talking about secession in their own right.
It overviews that some, too.

Good stuff. Different times, for sure, but always lessons to learn from history.

[Blake]

Thanks for the book recommendation. Will put it on my reading list. :tu


Why do you think this warrants sarcasm?


Wasn't sarcasm at all... I like reading.

:lol derp so used to taking brutal hits that he doesn't know when someone is patting him on the head

[spurraider21]

This book talks quite a bit about it if you're that interested.

https://www.amazon.com/Disease-Public-Mind-Understanding-Fought-ebook/dp/B00B3M3W7M/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2P1E8KW3YTFO3&dchild=1&keywords=disease+of+the+public+mind&qid=1592282332&sprefix=disease+of+the+publi%2Caps%2C242&sr=8-1
so theres no way for you to document this prevalent narrative other than recommending a book?

[Spurtacular]

:lol derp so used to taking brutal hits that he doesn't know when someone is patting him on the head

He'd done it before, board cuck. What changed this time, I dunno. Who cares. I just know you want a w really badly.

[Spurtacular]

so theres no way for you to document this prevalent narrative other than recommending a book?

Yea, I could research it on the internet. But that doesn't mean I want to take the time. I at least showed you if you want to know, one way.
Or did you just want a cheap w and still want a cheap w?

[spurraider21]

Yea, I could research it on the internet. But that doesn't mean I want to take the time. I at least showed you if you want to know, one way.
Or did you just want a cheap w and still want a cheap w?
i have no way of knowing that the book says what you claim it says, though, short of buying the book.

is there a synopsis or review/summary that will confirm that his book discusses the prevalent narrative throughout the 19th century that secession was a legal/legitimate maneuver?

its your claim and you are just throwing a book recommendation at me and essentially telling me to look it up

[Spurtacular]

i have no way of knowing that the book says what you claim it says, though, short of buying the book.

is there a synopsis or review/summary that will confirm that his book discusses the prevalent narrative throughout the 19th century that secession was a legal/legitimate maneuver?

its your claim and you are just throwing a book recommendation at me and essentially telling me to look it up

Good thing I'm not writing a college paper and don't need to include footnotes.

You should try to rise above your mentor's ploys, Lite.

I'm sure you could've confirmed this rather quickly on your own.

[spurraider21]

Good thing I'm not writing a college paper and don't need to include footnotes.

You should try to rise above your mentor's ploys, Lite.

I'm sure you could've confirmed this rather quickly on your own.
if it was really a widespread and prevalent narrative, yes, either you or i should have been able to confirm it quickly without needing me to look it up for you in a book that i dont own

[Spurtacular]

if it was really a widespread and prevalent narrative, yes, either you or i should have been able to confirm it quickly without needing me to look it up for you in a book that i dont own

The secession movements were quite public.

See, if this was about your intellectual curiosity and not a desperate pursuit for a tiny w, it might be another story.

[Blake]

The secession movements were quite public.

Obviously not.

[spurraider21]

The secession movements were quite public.

See, if this was about your intellectual curiosity and not a desperate pursuit for a tiny w, it might be another story.
quite public and yet the only way you've been able to "document" it is by referring to a single book published in 2013?

[Spurtacular]

Obviously not.

Even more public than your announcement that you're a cuckold.

:lmao Ankle Biter Blake

[Spurtacular]

quite public and yet the only way you've been able to "document" it is by referring to a single book published in 2013?

You get that tiny w yet?

[spurraider21]

You get that tiny w yet?
dont want a tiny w, i would rather continue the discussion. you giving me a link to purchase a book and saying "look it up" is ending the discussion

[Spurtacular]

dont want a tiny w, i would rather continue the discussion. you giving me a link to purchase a book and saying "look it up" is ending the discussion

It apparently wasn't the end of the discussion. You went spiraling.

[spurraider21]

It apparently wasn't the end of the discussion. You went spiraling.
your claim was that secession movements were quite public and was a prevalent narrative before the civil war. i asked you to support that statement and you sent me a link to a book and have offered nothing else in support.

the substantive discussion about secession has ended since that point

[Spurtacular]

your claim was that secession movements were quite public and was a prevalent narrative before the civil war. i asked you to support that statement and you sent me a link to a book and have offered nothing else in support.

the substantive discussion about secession has ended since that point

There never was a substantive interest, Lite.

Did you get your nothing w yet?

[spurraider21]

There never was a substantive interest, Lite.

Did you get your nothing w yet?
dont care for supposed tiny w's

how about you just send me some evidence of secession being a prevalent narrative before the civil war in your attempt to justify it's legality?

[Spurtacular]

dont care for supposed tiny w's

how about you just send me some evidence of secession being a prevalent narrative before the civil war in your attempt to justify it's legality?

Why don't you take five minutes to look for yourself if you're supposedly so interested?

[spurraider21]

Why don't you take five minutes to look for yourself if you're supposedly so interested?
i have, and couldnt find any evidence of it being a prevalent view. since its your claim, i just assumed you'd be able to support it in a way that didnt require me to go to the bookstore

[Spurtacular]

i have, and couldnt find any evidence of it being a prevalent view. since its your claim, i just assumed you'd be able to support it in a way that didnt require me to go to the bookstore

:lol Doubling, tripling, quadrupling down compulsively like your mentor.
:lol I found this in one search in under a minute (first link I clicked on, even)...

https://www.historynet.com/secession


First Calls for Secession

Following ratification by 11 of the 13 states, the government began operation under the new U.S. Constitution in March 1789. In less than 15 years, states of New England had already threatened to secede from the Union. The first time was a threat to leave if the Assumption Bill, which provided for the federal government to assume the debts of the various states, were not passed. The next threat was over the expense of the Louisiana Purchase. Then, in 1812, President James Madison, the man who had done more than any other individual to shape the Constitution, led the United States into a new war with Great Britain. The New England states objected, for war would cut into their trade with Britain and Europe. Resentment grew so strong that a convention was called at Hartford, Connecticut, in 1814, to discuss secession for the New England states. The Hartford Convention was the most serious secession threat up to that time, but its delegates took no action.

Southerners had also discussed secession in the nation’s early years, concerned over talk of abolishing slavery. But when push came to shove in 1832, it was not over slavery but tariffs. National tariffs were passed that protected Northern manufacturers but increased prices for manufactured goods purchased in the predominantly agricultural South, where the Tariff of 1828 was dubbed the "Tariff of Abominations." The legislature of South Carolina declared the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 were "unauthorized by the constitution of the United States" and voted them null, void and non-binding on the state.



I can understand why you're painfully ignorant about this all. Our public indoctrination system doesn't want the average lemming to understand such intricacies.

[spurraider21]

:lol Doubling, tripling, quadrupling down compulsively like your mentor.
:lol I found this in one search in under a minute (first link I clicked on, even)...

https://www.historynet.com/secession



I can understand why you're painfully ignorant about this all. Our public indoctrination system doesn't want the average lemming to understand such intricacies.
thanks for actually continuing the discussion :tu

as to the post, great, it came up twice. no action ever taken. nothing to indicate the legality or constitutionality of secession.

in the first instance, a convention was held where apparently some members mentioned it. apparently wasn't taken very seriously, as the convention concluded with a report identifying what changes the participants wanted enacted. secession was not among them.

here's what happened after the second instance


President Andrew Jackson responded with a Proclamation of Force, declaring, "I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed." (Emphasis is Jackson’s). Congress authorized Jackson to use military force if necessary to enforce the law (every Southern senator walked out in protest before the vote was taken). That proved unnecessary, as a compromise tariff was approved, and South Carolina rescinded its Nullification Ordinance.

so we have 2 situations where secession was mentioned, at no point were any steps taken towards an actual secession, so its hard to use those as evidence of secession being a legitimate option or legal under the constitution

[Spurtacular]

thanks for actually continuing the discussion :tu

:lol "Discussion"

You were just doing a Chumpian tactic that backfired. Stop demanding links as a means of tiny w's. It's pathetic.

[Spurtacular]

as to the post, great, it came up twice. no action ever taken. nothing to indicate the legality or constitutionality of secession.


Well, those were the two times with the most ground swell of support, probably. I wouldn't be hasty to oversimplify.

[Spurtacular]

nothing to indicate the legality or constitutionality of secession.

There's no clause in the Constitution prohibiting secession. That inconvenient truth along with the history of both north and south believing in it as a measure bitch slaps you.

[Spurtacular]

in the first instance, a convention was held where apparently some members mentioned it. apparently wasn't taken very seriously, as the convention concluded with a report identifying what changes the participants wanted enacted. secession was not among them.

You really should read that book before you ignorantly cling to that notion too hard.

[ChumpDumper]

So some dudes were wrong for 100 years. Not unusual for the US.

[Spurtacular]

So some dudes were wrong for 100 years. Not unusual for the US.

:lol The nothing chime-in.

[Spurtacular]

...

State vetoes / nullification and secession are separate issues, Philo.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol The nothing chime-in.Not much to say. Why do you want to venerate the traitors?

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/104929644_905966649908376_67709103472752561_n.jpg? _nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=BbNB5tBxz1cAX-HN3v9&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=ec0d9fc6c1f8a4e2913b820614dad279&oe=5F17F1F1