>>59823883 Well as soon as the law is changed then he will be correct. >>59823912 I don't believe you >>59824001 I don't understand why it should be rated lower. I personally would have put it at mostly true, since the only thing under question is what he implied by all time
>>59824626 Context is important, Trump is referring to the number of people not employed, which is different from unemployment which only counts people who are actively seeking jobs. It should be marked as mostly true, but they conveniently ignored context.
>>59823588 >How is politifact wrong here the cartel is responsible for a large number of smuggled people going to the US, the government can't and won't stop them so basically we're playing minesweeper with the illegals coming in
Youre arguing with a marxist, his argument was "I dont believe you" that should have been your tipoff that hes not interested in the truth, only furthering his political agenda while avoiding real discussion of facts.
>>59824748 >Trump is referring to the number of people not employed, which is different from unemployment which only counts people who are actively seeking jobs desu i dont know why unemployment isn't referred to as the number of adults with a job because with the latter you can manipulate it how you liike
>>59822531 >LaPierre said "(Obama) endorsed a total ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of all handguns." Obama’s 1996 campaign for state Senate did endorse a state-level ban, on a questionnaire from which he has since distanced himself.
>>59829593 >but it was specifically about the states' right to practice slavery. No it wasn't Slavery was still legal in the union The South wasnt fighting for the right to keep slaves in the Union It was about preserving the Union
And the best part of the whole fucking shitshow is how they openly admitted to only listing statements 'that they thought were important' or whatever. So they list all the lies for people they don't like and none of the lies for the people they do like.
>>59829097 They're citing this page to show that majority of the refugees are female although it doesn't take into account any of the refugees in Europe. http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php
I've thought about starting something similar to politifact, but with pure objectivity with sources for each claim. But there's so much shit to fact check because of 24-hour news cycles, and Twitter, and all that shit, so I don't think I could man it myself.
>>59829593 No it wasn't about slavery. The South had no right to secede from the Union because it is illegal for any states to secede at all. Jefferson Davis tried to take their claim of secession to court so he could be tried as a traitor so long as he got to argue his case for why the South should be able to secede. They denied him that and then kept their soldiers at Fort Sumter which was in South Carolina which had seceded. They tried to resupply the Fort and that's when it escalated to conflict.
>>59829593 That must have been why there were fist fights amongst Congressmen while in session over the tariffs levied on the South and secessionist movements going back to the 1820s and 30s before abolitionism was even on the table. That must be why the south refused to ratify the corwin amendment which would have made it illegal for the Federal government to interfere with state level slavery. That must be why lead started flying only AFTER Lincoln placed a naval blockade agaisnt his own nation to enforce tariffs all but one Southern Congressman voted against but still passed due to the massive population difference in favor of the north. Documentary related http://www.ancreport.com/documentary/tariffs-the-road-to-civil-war/
>No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Article IV Section 3
>New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
>The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
That doesn't sound like it gives the states the right to secede at all.
However, and this is most crucial and most misunderstood part, THE NORTH APPOSED SLAVERY BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WANT BLACK PEOPLE IN THEIR SOCIETY.
The idea that Northerners were progressive and color-blind and basically modern day liberals is the worst myth to have ever disgraced our republic. The North wished to end slavery not out of some "compassionate" view that the slaves were poor oppressed people, but that they would never integrate into society and that they would bring strafe and disorder into their homogeneous, all white society. Northern states such as Ohio and Michigan had constitutions that in one sentence banned slavery, and in the next banned all Negros from permanent residency.
Basically, the Civil War was white people fighting other white people over the future of white people in America.
And It is the greatest irony that the much vilified South was a beacon of multiculturalism (abert with the whites at the top of the hierarchy) while the "virtuous" North was literally a solid ethno-state of mostly Northern Europeans.
Also, here are some quotes from "liberal" icon, Abe Lincoln:
>I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. >Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man. >In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers."
>>59830649 not him but I'll take a crack at explaining. nowhere in the constitution is it ever mentioned that a sate CAN'T leave the union, and nowhere is it mentioned that the federal government has authority or a state leaving. therefore the state and or people are the ones with authority over the decision to leave the union
>>59830924 Yes but it mentions that states cannot do all those things listed in the articles, by becoming their own country they broke those listed powers in the articles which are not protected by the 10th amendment because the 10th amendment is for powers that are not listed. Although secession is not listed all those other things are which are broken when it comes to secession.
You guys do realize that it was a whole big deal about the US becoming a country in the first place with the states because the states were so worried about giving up so many rights you know? And like I said, Jefferson Davis was going to go argue for being able to secede like you twats are trying to do but it never got that far because the North didn't let him.
>>59830891 >The Civil War was completely about slavery. >now let me list off reasons that aren't completely slavery and quotes from Lincoln about how it isn't about slavery
>load up politifact page >start editing the HTML to make some OC including Chris Christie "I've lost weight" Mostly True "Said aboard International Space Station." >delete the wrong HTML element and all my work vanishes instantly
>>59831236 >now let me list off reasons that aren't completely slavery and quotes from Lincoln about how it isn't about slavery
Did you even read my post?
Northerners did not like niggers. Thus they did like slavery since it would have brought niggers to their states.
The quotes from Lincoln show that he wanted, like most Northerners, to deport their asses back to Africa before they, quote-on-quote: "constitute a threat to the national life... Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man."
If you have ever been to Baltimore or Philadelphia lately you would see that Lincoln was right.
Southern society was a complex hierarchy of many different races and cultures that were lived along side one another: Rich Whites (mainly brits), Poor Whites (mainly Irish, Scots), Mulattoes, Free Blacks, Enslaved Blacks, and some Hispanics and Indians, mostly concentrated in Texas and Oklahoma (yes there were Indians in the confederacy that owned slaves).
Just because there is clearly one racial group on top, does not mean that a society is not multicultural in the sense that different races and cultures exist in the same area under the same government.
>>59832235 >I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so
Literally saying he has no right to outlaw slavery in the Southern states. Lincoln wanting to ship blacks back to Africa =/= it being about slavery. Are you even reading your own shit?
>>59832603 >In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and in their places be, pari passu [on an equal basis], filled up by free white laborers.
Lincoln wanted to free slaves so he could ship them back to Africa and put real white americans back to work To Make America Great Again.
>Literally saying he has no right to outlaw slavery in the Southern states
It's called realpolitik you fucking double nigger.
>>59823730 It's just another form of white burden. We need to invent bullshit like "white privilege" to distract from Black Failure because to even name the problem requires admitting some inconvenient truths.
You're a fucking retard if you think the Civil War started because of slavery. You're a delusional piece of shit so I'm done wasting time on you when you won't even read. The South seceded because they wanted slavery. The War started because the North wouldn't allow them to secede. If you think Lincoln had all the power of starting the war just to ship slaves back you're a fucking dumbass that cannot be helped.
IF THE SOUTH SECEDING OVER SLAVERY CAUSED THE NORTH TO GO TO WAR THEN THE FUCKING WAR STARTED OVER SLAVERY!
I only said that LINCOLN wished to follow the advice of Jefferson, who advocated freeing the slaves and sending them back to Africa IF it could be done. That was not a casus belli for war with the south, and I never claimed it as such. Your reading comprehension skills are fucking terrible.
>>59833722 >IF THE SOUTH SECEDING OVER SLAVERY CAUSED THE NORTH TO GO TO WAR THEN THE FUCKING WAR STARTED OVER SLAVERY
Jesus fucking Christ. SECESSION WAS ABOUT SLAVERY THE WAR WAS ABOUT SECESSION THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT WAS ABOUT SLAVERY YOU FUCKING NIGGER LOVER!
The war could have possibly never happened if Jefferson was allowed to argue for secession and if the North would have just given up Fort Sumter (which was in the Confederacy). You are so fucking stupid it is unbelievable.
>>59822651 Bernie and Don are both right. Unemployment is high and growing, just masked by the way it's measured. We have the same problem in Australia. People are rejected enough times and they give up looking for work, which then means the government counts them as "not in the labour force" rather than "unemployed" - even though they would almost certainly accept a job if offered one today.
I suspect the website is just being harsher on Trump because he's a racist sexist shitlord etc. He's not my preferred candidate but he's more or less correct here and that should be acknowledged.
>>59834416 If you decide to just count whoever you like I'm sure it would be well over that. Like students in school who don't work, stay at home moms, niggers on welfare, people with disabilities, fat lazy people, retards, and all those then I'm sure its easily over 20% but that is a lot of shit because those people aren't trying to work.
>>59834038 The South would never have seceded if they thought that the current system wasn't hostile to slavery. Lincoln ran on a platform that, rhetoric aside, was very much anti-slavery. It's not a consequence that the first state seceded six weeks after he won the election by a wide margin.
>The war could have possibly never happened if Jefferson was allowed to argue for secession and if the North would have just given up Fort Sumter
You are a dense motherfucker if you believe that one of the most powerful countries in the world at the time would simple allow half of it's territory and the source of largest industry (textile production) to disappear. As soon as secession happened there was going to be war, no matter if Jefferson said it perfectly legal and had secession listed in the Constitution. Nation-states as a whole simply WILL NOT tolerant such loss of prestige, taxes, soft power, and power projection, especially when the Confederacy was so hopelessly outnumbered, outgunned, and outproduced by the North.
And Fort Sumner is meaningless. If the North had given up Fort Sumner, then it would have been another fort or another piece of land or a straight up invasion. To argue that giving up Fort Sumner would have avoided the Civil War is the same as saying that Poland giving up Danzig in 1938 would have avoided WW2.
>>59830891 >>59829593 No it wasn't you stupid fucks. It was more about federalism. The slavery may have been the issue that pushed it over the top but the south was more worried that the founding father's idea of federalism was being overthrown. Please learn your history.
The war was simple: North elects anti-slavery party. South secedes because of election. North fights South because of secession. North wins, North frees slaves. North & South still hates niggers though, keeps them segregated for next hundred years.
That's it. Literally guys, stop coming up with bullshit to glorify either the Confederacy or the Union. It's a complete disservice to history.
(Oh and btw The Confederate Constitution made no mention of legalizing secession and when a amendment was proposed to allow confederate states to secede legally it was defeated in the legislature with a general consensus of being a quote-on-quote: "dangerous idea".)
Thread replies: 141 Thread images: 40
Thread DB ID: 377421
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.