<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Emory President Ignites Furor over Slavery Reference</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 00:12:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/comment-page-1/#comment-4320800</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Todd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:14:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=179273#comment-4320800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Lincoln&#039;s war was (not) about slavery but money.&quot;  No substantiation.   Seems more like a libel against Lincoln &amp;  the original Republican party. 
 
I have considered that slavery should have been outlawed by the separate states instead by the Federal government.   There were abolitionists in the south. They had a voice.  I need to study the matter more.  Certainly some land owners would have opposed them by means fair &amp; foul.  Also a whole justification for slavery grew up that perverted science &amp; religion and thus society.  Still after abortion &amp; gay marriage, I think that it should be done state by state and not Deus ex-Machina by a judge or the Federal government.. 
 
&quot; was paying 85 to 90 percent of Federal revenues for which it got only about ten percent back&quot;   
 
That is either true or false. There can be no argument there unless records have been lost or destroyed in my opinion. 
 
 
&quot;At the end of the war its people were robbed of every thing which could be taken from them &quot; 
Often happens in war both ancient &amp; as recent as WW2 by all parties.  I certainly know some plantations were divided up along the Mississippi &amp; given to ex slaves.  Some allegedly had been abandoned.  That happens in war. Have not heard of confiscations. Not saying it did not happen. the only one I know of is Arlington Cemetery.  And that one does not bother me in the least. 
 
 
&quot;and moved North to fund the era of the Robber Barons.&quot; 
I think that corporations would grow &amp; consolidation would have taken place if the southern states had not existed ( If that geographical area had been covered by sea).  It is part of the nature of people &amp; businesses. 
 
Funding them? This is your weakest argument.  But it will have to be answered because you will repeatedly bring it up.  But if it is specious, people will look askance at you &amp; your future arguments 
 
Still slavery is &amp; was evil &amp; the longer it went on the worse the repercussions afterwards. How long would it have taken to end another way?  Would this have been better? ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;Lincoln&#039;s war was (not) about slavery but money.&quot;  No substantiation.   Seems more like a libel against Lincoln &amp;  the original Republican party. </p>
<p>I have considered that slavery should have been outlawed by the separate states instead by the Federal government.   There were abolitionists in the south. They had a voice.  I need to study the matter more.  Certainly some land owners would have opposed them by means fair &amp; foul.  Also a whole justification for slavery grew up that perverted science &amp; religion and thus society.  Still after abortion &amp; gay marriage, I think that it should be done state by state and not Deus ex-Machina by a judge or the Federal government.. </p>
<p>&quot; was paying 85 to 90 percent of Federal revenues for which it got only about ten percent back&quot;   </p>
<p>That is either true or false. There can be no argument there unless records have been lost or destroyed in my opinion. </p>
<p>&quot;At the end of the war its people were robbed of every thing which could be taken from them &quot;<br />
Often happens in war both ancient &amp; as recent as WW2 by all parties.  I certainly know some plantations were divided up along the Mississippi &amp; given to ex slaves.  Some allegedly had been abandoned.  That happens in war. Have not heard of confiscations. Not saying it did not happen. the only one I know of is Arlington Cemetery.  And that one does not bother me in the least. </p>
<p>&quot;and moved North to fund the era of the Robber Barons.&quot;<br />
I think that corporations would grow &amp; consolidation would have taken place if the southern states had not existed ( If that geographical area had been covered by sea).  It is part of the nature of people &amp; businesses. </p>
<p>Funding them? This is your weakest argument.  But it will have to be answered because you will repeatedly bring it up.  But if it is specious, people will look askance at you &amp; your future arguments </p>
<p>Still slavery is &amp; was evil &amp; the longer it went on the worse the repercussions afterwards. How long would it have taken to end another way?  Would this have been better? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 2Pak Prot</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/comment-page-1/#comment-4320674</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[2Pak Prot]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=179273#comment-4320674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If there had not been a compromise what would have happened? 
 
There would not be any United States.  &quot;Yay!&quot; effuses the American hating liberal. Well liberals are always one for cutting of their noses to spite their faces. 
 
What else would have happened? 
 
Well the southern states would have kept right on slaving.  Would slavery been abolished any sooner or later if we had gone down this road?  Don&#039;t know.  Neither do the liberals.  Perhaps one could do some simulation like the military does, wargames. But this is to predict what people would do under a slightly different set of circumstances.  Not sure that psychology is developed enough quite yet, but I think we have big enough supercomputers. 
 
Would Britain still have outlawed slavery in 1806 if there had been no United States?  Maybe not. Especially if the British had re-invaded the South. Follow the money.  It was for money that Britain forced opium on China.  It was for money that Britain enforced mercantalism on India &amp; proscribed by law the development of heavy industry.  Ask the Indians &amp; Chinese how they feel about that.   
 
Certainly, Britain though about invading &amp; taking over the U.S. in 1812 or taking advantage of the situation in 1860.  Certainly Britain was a democracy in the 18th &amp; 19th centuries. but that does not mean that every faction in said democracy wants to rule democratically. 
 
What did happen after the compromise? Well the importation of news slaves was made illegal. They were trying to get rid of the institution.  People honestly thought the institution of slavery would die out because of the economics. You can argue that. You cannot argue that there were attempts to stamp it out such the aforementioned barring of new importation of slaves.   
 
And yes there was a whole lot of kicking the can down the road.  The kicked the can down the road from the Atlantic coast, down the Ohio river valley past the Missouri Iowa state line &amp; into bleeding Kansas. 
 
And then everything blew up.  Kicking a can is like playing hot potato with a live grenade.  It is not smart.  You can argue that the original can kickers made out.  Did they? 200 years in a short amount of time. Maybe in a further 200 years the original can kickers have no patrimony of any sort.  
 
Still if there had been no compromise, would slavery had died you sooner or later? You don&#039;t know. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there had not been a compromise what would have happened? </p>
<p>There would not be any United States.  &quot;Yay!&quot; effuses the American hating liberal. Well liberals are always one for cutting of their noses to spite their faces. </p>
<p>What else would have happened? </p>
<p>Well the southern states would have kept right on slaving.  Would slavery been abolished any sooner or later if we had gone down this road?  Don&#039;t know.  Neither do the liberals.  Perhaps one could do some simulation like the military does, wargames. But this is to predict what people would do under a slightly different set of circumstances.  Not sure that psychology is developed enough quite yet, but I think we have big enough supercomputers. </p>
<p>Would Britain still have outlawed slavery in 1806 if there had been no United States?  Maybe not. Especially if the British had re-invaded the South. Follow the money.  It was for money that Britain forced opium on China.  It was for money that Britain enforced mercantalism on India &amp; proscribed by law the development of heavy industry.  Ask the Indians &amp; Chinese how they feel about that.   </p>
<p>Certainly, Britain though about invading &amp; taking over the U.S. in 1812 or taking advantage of the situation in 1860.  Certainly Britain was a democracy in the 18th &amp; 19th centuries. but that does not mean that every faction in said democracy wants to rule democratically. </p>
<p>What did happen after the compromise? Well the importation of news slaves was made illegal. They were trying to get rid of the institution.  People honestly thought the institution of slavery would die out because of the economics. You can argue that. You cannot argue that there were attempts to stamp it out such the aforementioned barring of new importation of slaves.   </p>
<p>And yes there was a whole lot of kicking the can down the road.  The kicked the can down the road from the Atlantic coast, down the Ohio river valley past the Missouri Iowa state line &amp; into bleeding Kansas. </p>
<p>And then everything blew up.  Kicking a can is like playing hot potato with a live grenade.  It is not smart.  You can argue that the original can kickers made out.  Did they? 200 years in a short amount of time. Maybe in a further 200 years the original can kickers have no patrimony of any sort.  </p>
<p>Still if there had been no compromise, would slavery had died you sooner or later? You don&#039;t know. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Poteet</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/comment-page-1/#comment-4320220</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lee Poteet]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:53:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=179273#comment-4320220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The comment that slavery would have continued on in the South without the War Against Southern Independence is a libel Lincoln&#039;s war was about slavery but money. The South, the richest part of the country by far, was paying 85 to 90 percent of Federal revenues for which it got only about ten percent back. Since words still have meaning to honest folk, there was no &quot;Civil War&quot; and the South for all practical purposes became and remains a colony whose states and people have been treated as lesser since. At the end of the war its people were robbed of every thing which could be taken from them and moved North to fund the era of the Robber Barons.. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The comment that slavery would have continued on in the South without the War Against Southern Independence is a libel Lincoln&#039;s war was about slavery but money. The South, the richest part of the country by far, was paying 85 to 90 percent of Federal revenues for which it got only about ten percent back. Since words still have meaning to honest folk, there was no &quot;Civil War&quot; and the South for all practical purposes became and remains a colony whose states and people have been treated as lesser since. At the end of the war its people were robbed of every thing which could be taken from them and moved North to fund the era of the Robber Barons.. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rocco</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/comment-page-1/#comment-4319397</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rocco]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=179273#comment-4319397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wagner should have read David Horowitz&#039;s  &quot;Black Skin Privilege&quot; prior to writing the essay! ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wagner should have read David Horowitz&#039;s  &quot;Black Skin Privilege&quot; prior to writing the essay! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cjk</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-d-tooley/emory-president-ignites-furor-over-slavery-reference/comment-page-1/#comment-4319034</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cjk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:53:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=179273#comment-4319034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Factual historical statements are met with hysterical, inane, vicious, destructive, ignorant, reactions. The people who exercise this unthinking stupidity are coddled, excused, and bowed to, absolutely disgusting. 
The truth is stomped down by hypocrites who then turn a pointing finger and accuse those still interested in speaking truthfully about race as cowards and racists on par with pedophiles. 
  
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Factual historical statements are met with hysterical, inane, vicious, destructive, ignorant, reactions. The people who exercise this unthinking stupidity are coddled, excused, and bowed to, absolutely disgusting.<br />
The truth is stomped down by hypocrites who then turn a pointing finger and accuse those still interested in speaking truthfully about race as cowards and racists on par with pedophiles. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 389/394 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-29 19:13:03 by W3 Total Cache -->