Historic Negativity Towards US Gov.

dukeanthony

New Member
lets be adults and not caps lock what we have to say, a part of being a meber on riu is being minimum age of 18, the last time i seen someone type like that i was in 5th grade, you're not 9 are you?
Come back in 9 years, have a nice day.
Oh and no need to apologize; your foolery is automatically forgiven.
seriously your contention that the founding fathers were against slavery ranks you right up there with the one of the stupidist motherfuckers i ever met on the internet

sPEAKING OF 9 YEAR OLDS
tHAT WAS ABOUT THE AGE i LEARNED OF THOMAS JEFFERSON AND SALLY HEMMINGS

HIS SLAVE
YOU FUCK
 

tryingtogrow89

Well-Known Member
seriously your contention that the founding fathers were against slavery ranks you right up there with the one of the stupidist motherfuckers i ever met on the internet

sPEAKING OF 9 YEAR OLDS
tHAT WAS ABOUT THE AGE i LEARNED OF THOMAS JEFFERSON AND SALLY HEMMINGS

HIS SLAVE
YOU FUCK
You should have paid more attention rather than focus on someone owning a slave learn about the slave first, learn about what took place back then, you dont know what you are trying to say and that is clear.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
You should have paid more attention rather than focus on someone owning a slave learn about the slave first, learn about what took place back then, you dont know what you are trying to say and that is clear.
i do not know where you get your education saying the founding fathers allowed slavery, they didnt believe in slavery.
STFU
Just say your wrong and move on
The Founding Fathers owned slaves
So just shut your fucking pie hole
 

tryingtogrow89

Well-Known Member
Yes
You in?
Many were opposed to slavery, some were not. And nobody cares that they owned slaves...that was a way of life 200 years ago. The left continually tries to demean and degrade our founding fathers by pointing out that they owned slaves. Who cares, it was acceptable in that time, it is unacceptable in this time...things change over time...a "progressive" should understand this. It also used to be acceptable to beat your wife back in those days, so should we say everyone who lived 200 years or more ago was evil? No, that wouldn't make sense.many (not all) of the Founders did not approve of slavery and actively worked to do away with it... Including Jefferson.Everyone in the 1700's had slaves, even some freed slaves became slave owners.Sally Hemmings was a golddigger.What difference does it make?

Yes they owned Slaves.

But so did a-lot of people back then.

How is this even remotely relevant?
It is said that less than 1/3 of the founding fathers were slave owners, and its he says she says.
Thomas Jefferson his views on slavery were complex, and changed over the course of his life.

 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
Thank you for being forward with me. I am slowly developing a profound respect for you but when you post childish stuff I call it questionable, that is my concern.

With that said you talk to me in a condescending tone and I don't not appreciate it, I will give you all due respect that you give me. Now I've stated that so I am clear.

Look bud, you are obviously thinking and thinking hard, I admire that, I don't believe I will always have this exact same mindset, I will always choose integrity over popularity but I know I will alter my belief system as I get more into life and explore it's traverse of realities. What I can't stress enough is that I do not believe Obama's economic or foreign plans will work even if he didn't have the troubles of a stalled congress in a constant stalemate.

I believe the America needs to base it's economy on manufacturing and providing real tangible goods and stop allowing the 1% to dictate what happens to 99% of the money. I believe in an America that stands for liberty and humanitarian values which weighs it's decisions towards other countries with scrutiny and stops letting corporate CEO's and any company that has something to gain off of America at war. Whether it's through providing goods and services to war efforts or the re-allocation of resources, there is money to be made by someone. It's wrong to have these driving our military presence throughout the world.

Did that come out clearly?

I want America to focus on it's infrastructure, bring manufacturing back here, and to show the rest of the world that we as Americans can still compete and advance the technology of the world for the hope of a greater future. I'm talking about EVs, revamping the national highway system, revamping the power grids of the US, investing in solar, wind, and nuclear energy and advancing our technology, we should be in the forefront of new technology!

I firmly held the belief (for about a decade) that the US was on its way to the gutter. There are plenty of challenges facing our country - no fuckingdoubt about it. Most of them are self-imposed, IMO. Domestic politics is a damncircus. I was beating the drum about energy/oil, 9/11, etc, at a time when itwas REALLY unpopular to do so. Everyone thought I was bat-shit crazy. Itconsumed me. My awakening is a rather recent experience, but it shatteredeverything I held to be true. There are some certain TRUTHS that are immutable,and when put into context and fully understood, are undeniable. They are ugly,and yet exquisite. Contemptible, but cherished.

The US is not heading down a gutter anytime soon. As far as our return tomanufacturing glory days...it may be a long way off. But, when it comes to preeminencein the world, we are going no where...it benefits no one to have the US becomea failed nation. No country can fill our void, and no country would want to.

I would honestly say that the biggest obstacle my generation facesinternally is the demographic bitch-slap we are on the receiving end of fromthe baby boomers. THAT is where solidarity can help us, and possibly unite us(the boomers have FAILED, period). But, mark my words: WE will carry the burdenof the country on our shoulders, receiving less for doing more every year afteryear.
 

hazyintentions

Well-Known Member
I think they have failed to unite the country in any tangible way. That's my point.
I concur, while this nation will never be perfect because perfection is in the eyes of the beholder I think the "baby boomer" generation was given too much and allowed the federal government to sqaunder our power and wealth in this world away due to mis-action/non-action.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
In 1784, five years before he became president of the United States, George Washington, 52, was nearly toothless. So he hired a dentist to transplant nine teeth into his jaw–having extracted them from the mouths of his slaves.

His slaves' ownership of dogs also troubled and economically threatened George Washington. They apparently trained the animals quite well. "It is astonishing to see the command under which their dogs are," Washington commented to his manager Anthony Whiting in 1792. Although the slaves probably kept the dogs ostensibly for hunting, both men felt that they used the dogs during "night robberies" to round up Mount Vernon sheep, which they then sold to certain outside "receivers." Washington and Whiting also feared that dogs might kill the sheep. Washington eventually ordered Whiting to decide which dog or dogs to keep on each farm, then kill all the others. Afterward, "if any negro presumes under any presence whatsoever, to preserve, or bring one into the family. . .," Washington proclaimed, "he shall be severely punished, and the dog hanged." Washington was not the only plantation owner to resort to such drastic measures; Thomas Jefferson, on at least one occasion, ordered the destruction of all dogs belonging to his slaves, while permitting his overseer to retain a pair for his own use. At least one of the condemned dogs was hung as a disciplinary warning to the Monticello slaves.
 

tomahawk2406

Well-Known Member
In 1784, five years before he became president of the United States, George Washington, 52, was nearly toothless. So he hired a dentist to transplant nine teeth into his jaw–having extracted them from the mouths of his slaves.

His slaves' ownership of dogs also troubled and economically threatened George Washington. They apparently trained the animals quite well. "It is astonishing to see the command under which their dogs are," Washington commented to his manager Anthony Whiting in 1792. Although the slaves probably kept the dogs ostensibly for hunting, both men felt that they used the dogs during "night robberies" to round up Mount Vernon sheep, which they then sold to certain outside "receivers." Washington and Whiting also feared that dogs might kill the sheep. Washington eventually ordered Whiting to decide which dog or dogs to keep on each farm, then kill all the others. Afterward, "if any negro presumes under any presence whatsoever, to preserve, or bring one into the family. . .," Washington proclaimed, "he shall be severely punished, and the dog hanged." Washington was not the only plantation owner to resort to such drastic measures; Thomas Jefferson, on at least one occasion, ordered the destruction of all dogs belonging to his slaves, while permitting his overseer to retain a pair for his own use. At least one of the condemned dogs was hung as a disciplinary warning to the Monticello slaves.
tryingtogrow..............THATS A BURN!
 
Top