"What To The Slave Is The 4th Of July?"

[IM2]

Your point only stands with you. You've lost the argument.

Do you think that being confident will hide the fact that you were unable to challenge my point at all, nor answer my question?


Only in your own little mind, fool.




i'm sure the millions of slaves he freed, were really hurt by him not being a 21 st century liberal.


How many millions of slaves have you freed, Mister Judge?

I've beat you t death over this issue fool Not only have I challenged your point but kats and I have debunked them. You've lost the argument conehead.

You see punk, you are the one unable to answer a question challenge anyone. You have yet to show us any anti white laws or policies.

Yet you can't answer either my point, nor my question to you.


YOu talk and spout and deflect and distract,

but you never answer my point, nor my question.

I know it, you know it, Kat knows it, anyone reading knows it.

The lefties might lie, because, lefties, but they know it too.

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

 

[Correll]

You pull the "race card" in practically every post that you put up.

"Mr. Anti White Discrimination"

LMAO at your idiocy.

Your pretense that you don't understand what the Race Card is, is noted and dismissed.


Mm, I will also call you an asshole for being so grossly dishonest and insulting me.

Excuse me for being done humoring you and your delusional horseshit.

If you're insulted by my frankness.....too fucking bad. You're not obligated to address me any further.

I was insulted by your blatant and uncalled for personal insult.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't notice that my Race Card meme was in response to a post that contained nothing but a uncalled for insult, and NOT a post that expressed disagreement on the topic?

Or are you just a dishonest lefty, playing stupid?

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

 

[IM2]

Your point only stands with you. You've lost the argument.

Do you think that being confident will hide the fact that you were unable to challenge my point at all, nor answer my question?


Only in your own little mind, fool.




i'm sure the millions of slaves he freed, were really hurt by him not being a 21 st century liberal.


How many millions of slaves have you freed, Mister Judge?

I've beat you t death over this issue fool Not only have I challenged your point but kats and I have debunked them. You've lost the argument conehead.

You see punk, you are the one unable to answer a question challenge anyone. You have yet to show us any anti white laws or policies.

Yet you can't answer either my point, nor my question to you.


YOu talk and spout and deflect and distract,

but you never answer my point, nor my question.

I know it, you know it, Kat knows it, anyone reading knows it.

The lefties might lie, because, lefties, but they know it too.

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

The thing about Lincolns election results was that only white males could vote.

Blacks had been slaves in the north before the civil war just like in the south.

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

Can we talk a little more honestly about freedmen who owned slaves? Many purchased family members, spouses and children. So to simply say free blacks owned slaves too is dishonest. On top of that there were so few of these freedmen who owned slaves that it's not really an issue. Something like a thousand or less is the actual count. Other than that I cannot disagree with what you have said.

 

[Correll]

The thing about Lincolns election results was that only white males could vote.

Blacks had been slaves in the north before the civil war just like in the south.

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

 

[Correll]

Do you think that being confident will hide the fact that you were unable to challenge my point at all, nor answer my question?


Only in your own little mind, fool.




i'm sure the millions of slaves he freed, were really hurt by him not being a 21 st century liberal.


How many millions of slaves have you freed, Mister Judge?

I've beat you t death over this issue fool Not only have I challenged your point but kats and I have debunked them. You've lost the argument conehead.

You see punk, you are the one unable to answer a question challenge anyone. You have yet to show us any anti white laws or policies.

Yet you can't answer either my point, nor my question to you.


YOu talk and spout and deflect and distract,

but you never answer my point, nor my question.

I know it, you know it, Kat knows it, anyone reading knows it.

The lefties might lie, because, lefties, but they know it too.

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

So, you claim. Yet when challenged, instead of cutting and pasting the post where you answered my point and my question, which would have humiliated me,

you instead did exactly as I predicted, ie you did NOT show me where you did that.


And the reason is as I said. Because we both know that you did NOT.


How can you have to lie like this to pretend to make a point, and not realize that that means you are wrong?

 

[IM2]

You pull the "race card" in practically every post that you put up.

"Mr. Anti White Discrimination"

LMAO at your idiocy.

Your pretense that you don't understand what the Race Card is, is noted and dismissed.


Mm, I will also call you an asshole for being so grossly dishonest and insulting me.

Excuse me for being done humoring you and your delusional horseshit.

If you're insulted by my frankness.....too fucking bad. You're not obligated to address me any further.

I was insulted by your blatant and uncalled for personal insult.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't notice that my Race Card meme was in response to a post that contained nothing but a uncalled for insult, and NOT a post that expressed disagreement on the topic?

Or are you just a dishonest lefty, playing stupid?

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

 

[IM2]

The thing about Lincolns election results was that only white males could vote.

Blacks had been slaves in the north before the civil war just like in the south.

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

No what that person said is supported plenty. What you claim, not so much.

 

[Correll]

Your pretense that you don't understand what the Race Card is, is noted and dismissed.


Mm, I will also call you an asshole for being so grossly dishonest and insulting me.

Excuse me for being done humoring you and your delusional horseshit.

If you're insulted by my frankness.....too fucking bad. You're not obligated to address me any further.

I was insulted by your blatant and uncalled for personal insult.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't notice that my Race Card meme was in response to a post that contained nothing but a uncalled for insult, and NOT a post that expressed disagreement on the topic?

Or are you just a dishonest lefty, playing stupid?

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

 

[IM2]

I've beat you t death over this issue fool Not only have I challenged your point but kats and I have debunked them. You've lost the argument conehead.

You see punk, you are the one unable to answer a question challenge anyone. You have yet to show us any anti white laws or policies.

Yet you can't answer either my point, nor my question to you.


YOu talk and spout and deflect and distract,

but you never answer my point, nor my question.

I know it, you know it, Kat knows it, anyone reading knows it.

The lefties might lie, because, lefties, but they know it too.

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

So, you claim. Yet when challenged, instead of cutting and pasting the post where you answered my point and my question, which would have humiliated me,

you instead did exactly as I predicted, ie you did NOT show me where you did that.


And the reason is as I said. Because we both know that you did NOT.


How can you have to lie like this to pretend to make a point, and not realize that that means you are wrong?

I'm not the one lying. I answered what I needed to answer and did so in the manner I chose to answer it.

You lost the argument and that's just how it is.

 

[Correll]

The thing about Lincolns election results was that only white males could vote.

Blacks had been slaves in the north before the civil war just like in the south.

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

No what that person said is supported plenty. What you claim, not so much.

I challenge you to show where it is supported that all of the votes that were split, that Lincoln did not win, were anti-lincoln votes that would have defeated him, if there were only two candidates, ie Lincoln and a pro-slavery candidate.

 

[IM2]

Excuse me for being done humoring you and your delusional horseshit.

If you're insulted by my frankness.....too fucking bad. You're not obligated to address me any further.

I was insulted by your blatant and uncalled for personal insult.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't notice that my Race Card meme was in response to a post that contained nothing but a uncalled for insult, and NOT a post that expressed disagreement on the topic?

Or are you just a dishonest lefty, playing stupid?

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

This leftie crap you speak of sows what kind of dumb ass you are. You got personally attacked because apparently katsteve got tired of your bullshit. He spent quite a long time trying to decently debate you. Now man up and stop crying.

 

[Correll]

Yet you can't answer either my point, nor my question to you.


YOu talk and spout and deflect and distract,

but you never answer my point, nor my question.

I know it, you know it, Kat knows it, anyone reading knows it.

The lefties might lie, because, lefties, but they know it too.

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

So, you claim. Yet when challenged, instead of cutting and pasting the post where you answered my point and my question, which would have humiliated me,

you instead did exactly as I predicted, ie you did NOT show me where you did that.


And the reason is as I said. Because we both know that you did NOT.


How can you have to lie like this to pretend to make a point, and not realize that that means you are wrong?

I'm not the one lying. I answered what I needed to answer and did so in the manner I chose to answer it.

You lost the argument and that's just how it is.

ANd still no post demonstrating what you claim.


Do you really think that I wouldn't notice that?

DO you think ANYONE reading this didn't notice that?

YOU noticed.


You, other lefties, might lie and pretend that they believe your lies, but you know the truth.


That's why you didn't even bother to try to find where you supposedly answered my point and my question.


Because you know that you are in the wrong.

 

[IM2]

The thing about Lincolns election results was that only white males could vote.

Blacks had been slaves in the north before the civil war just like in the south.

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

No what that person said is supported plenty. What you claim, not so much.

I challenge you to show where it is supported that all of the votes that were split, that Lincoln did not win, were anti-lincoln votes that would have defeated him, if there were only two candidates, ie Lincoln and a pro-slavery candidate.

I challenge you to show me anti white laws and policies.

 

[IM2]

I've answered all of what I needed to answer. You lost.

I challenge you to show where you answered the point and the question I was referring to.


This is rhetorical, because we both know that you did NOT answer them, and that you are too dishonest to admit that.


YOu can now post some bullshit to prove me right, AGAIN.

(hint: the way to prove me wrong is to post a quote of you answering my question and point)

I've answered what was needed to be answered.

So, you claim. Yet when challenged, instead of cutting and pasting the post where you answered my point and my question, which would have humiliated me,

you instead did exactly as I predicted, ie you did NOT show me where you did that.


And the reason is as I said. Because we both know that you did NOT.


How can you have to lie like this to pretend to make a point, and not realize that that means you are wrong?

I'm not the one lying. I answered what I needed to answer and did so in the manner I chose to answer it.

You lost the argument and that's just how it is.

ANd still no post demonstrating what you claim.


Do you really think that I wouldn't notice that?

DO you think ANYONE reading this didn't notice that?

YOU noticed.


You, other lefties, might lie and pretend that they believe your lies, but you know the truth.


That's why you didn't even bother to try to find where you supposedly answered my point and my question.


Because you know that you are in the wrong.

You can keep trying this but you got the answer you are going to get.

I know I am right.

 

[Correll]

I was insulted by your blatant and uncalled for personal insult.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't notice that my Race Card meme was in response to a post that contained nothing but a uncalled for insult, and NOT a post that expressed disagreement on the topic?

Or are you just a dishonest lefty, playing stupid?

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

This leftie crap you speak of sows what kind of dumb ass you are. You got personally attacked because apparently katsteve got tired of your bullshit. He spent quite a long time trying to decently debate you. Now man up and stop crying.

Nothing you said has anything to do with what occurred.


If you call a lefty on his crap, and don't let him get away with bullshit to cover his inability to answer any real challenge, sooner or later, and generally sooner, his or her or it's response will be to personally attack you.


The Race Card is the most common attack.


Your lies are meant for only the willful of dupes.

 

[Correll]

Which increases the impact of the fact that he won, so bigly. TWICE.


Unless you are arguing that blacks, if they could have voted would have been slavery supporters?


MMMM?!

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

No what that person said is supported plenty. What you claim, not so much.

I challenge you to show where it is supported that all of the votes that were split, that Lincoln did not win, were anti-lincoln votes that would have defeated him, if there were only two candidates, ie Lincoln and a pro-slavery candidate.

I challenge you to show me anti white laws and policies.

So, you dropping that claim that the previous posters claims were well supported?

Cause when I asked to see the supposed "support" you tried to change the subject.

You certainly did NOT show any posted "Support".


And you were pretty quick on your reply...

I'm thinking that you did not even try to find that supposed support, because you KNEW that it would not be there.


Hence, your attempt at distraction, by changing the subject.


How much does it freak you out that I won't fall for you bullshit tactics?

 

[IM2]

What I sm is direct AND honest. That's why you are complaining to me, a complete stranger that you are :"insulted" by something that I said. I have no reason to not say what I whatever I choose to say to you.

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

This leftie crap you speak of sows what kind of dumb ass you are. You got personally attacked because apparently katsteve got tired of your bullshit. He spent quite a long time trying to decently debate you. Now man up and stop crying.

Nothing you said has anything to do with what occurred.


If you call a lefty on his crap, and don't let him get away with bullshit to cover his inability to answer any real challenge, sooner or later, and generally sooner, his or her or it's response will be to personally attack you.


The Race Card is the most common attack.


Your lies are meant for only the willful of dupes.

And when a right wing nut gets his ass hammered they keep demanding people answer questions they have already answered claiming they never answered them and if they don't answer them make claims of how the person is a lefty who is caught in a lie.

 

[Correll]

I am complaining because you insulted me with a bullshit insult.

YOu are not honest. YOu are a lying shitbag. (that was me insulting you BACK, with the difference that my insult is true)


YOur pretense that there is a cause and effect between being insulted and you being truthful is moronic.

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

This leftie crap you speak of sows what kind of dumb ass you are. You got personally attacked because apparently katsteve got tired of your bullshit. He spent quite a long time trying to decently debate you. Now man up and stop crying.

Nothing you said has anything to do with what occurred.


If you call a lefty on his crap, and don't let him get away with bullshit to cover his inability to answer any real challenge, sooner or later, and generally sooner, his or her or it's response will be to personally attack you.


The Race Card is the most common attack.


Your lies are meant for only the willful of dupes.

And when a right wing nut gets his ass hammered they keep demanding people answer questions they have already answered claiming they never answered them and if they don't answer them make claims of how the person is a lefty who is caught in a lie.

i'm not demanding you answer it.

You said you already answered it.


I asked for you to show me where you did that.


And you have been playing games since then.

 

[IM2]

Lincoln was a totally regional candidate that didn't win one southern state in 1860. If there hadn't been so many candidates opposing him and splitting the anti-Lincoln vote, he wouldn't have won so "bigly". In 1864, only the northern states voted (because, of course, the south was still in rebellion. But, the election was in doubt and McClellan looked like he would win until Sherman took Atlanta, marched to the sea and turned north into South Carolina, which doomed the Confederacy and tipped the election to Lincoln.

I would hope, however, that we can all agree that most blacks would not have supported slavery. However, as some freedmen owned slaves, they MIGHT have supported slavery.

The nation was split into two regions, the North and the South. Lincoln won the region that represented the majority of the nation.

Your assumption that all the votes that were split would have been anti-Lincoln votes in there was only two candidates is unsupported.


That the bloodiest war in US history was a political issue is not surprising.


That it was a SURVIVABLE political issue for Lincoln is a massive testimony to how anti-slavery the nation as a whole was.

No what that person said is supported plenty. What you claim, not so much.

I challenge you to show where it is supported that all of the votes that were split, that Lincoln did not win, were anti-lincoln votes that would have defeated him, if there were only two candidates, ie Lincoln and a pro-slavery candidate.

I challenge you to show me anti white laws and policies.

So, you dropping that claim that the previous posters claims were well supported?

Cause when I asked to see the supposed "support" you tried to change the subject.

You certainly did NOT show any posted "Support".


And you were pretty quick on your reply...

I'm thinking that you did not even try to find that supposed support, because you KNEW that it would not be there.


Hence, your attempt at distraction, by changing the subject.


How much does it freak you out that I won't fall for you bullshit tactics?

I'm not dropping anything. You were been shown supporting evidence long ago that Lincoln was losing until the north won a key battle in the war.

 

[IM2]

He spoke the truth to you and you can't take it. You're sitting behind a computer telling a black man how he should be grateful to whites for his freedom, telling him how whites fought against racial discrimination when they were practicing it, and then making a claim of a entire nation being anti slavery along with a president that you claim ran only on an anti slavery platform when he did not and you expected that black man to say thank you?

Loon.

I expect lefties of any race or color to attack me personally when they can't refute my political points.

WHich is what kat did.

Which is what you just did, shit head.

(that was me insulting you back, The difference is that my insults are true)

This leftie crap you speak of sows what kind of dumb ass you are. You got personally attacked because apparently katsteve got tired of your bullshit. He spent quite a long time trying to decently debate you. Now man up and stop crying.

Nothing you said has anything to do with what occurred.


If you call a lefty on his crap, and don't let him get away with bullshit to cover his inability to answer any real challenge, sooner or later, and generally sooner, his or her or it's response will be to personally attack you.


The Race Card is the most common attack.


Your lies are meant for only the willful of dupes.

And when a right wing nut gets his ass hammered they keep demanding people answer questions they have already answered claiming they never answered them and if they don't answer them make claims of how the person is a lefty who is caught in a lie.

i'm not demanding you answer it.

You said you already answered it.


I asked for you to show me where you did that.


And you have been playing games since then.

No you are the one playing games. I answered your question and am under no obligation t go back and show you where I answered it because you claim something.