Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, July 23, 2018

OTP 2018 July 23: How sports and American politics made each other

In January 1942, as the United States committed itself fully to World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt decided that baseball, then the national pastime, should sustain civilian morale during the lengthy struggle ahead. He implored its commissioner, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, to make sure the games went on, despite worldwide armed conflict. And so they did. Professional baseball players, Roosevelt argued, “are a definite recreational asset.”

Roosevelt did not extend that consideration to professional football players, whose sport did not register politically. As a result, the National Football League nearly shut its doors during World War II. So many players were called to serve that several franchises had to merge. In fact, the league didn’t take off until it closely associated itself with national politics. For the past half century, the intertwining of American football and politics has sustained both pastimes.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 23, 2018 at 08:42 AM | 1431 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: football, off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 6 of 15 pages ‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 >  Last ›
   501. BDC Posted: July 25, 2018 at 01:58 PM (#5715716)
Thanks, Davo, for posting that Current Affairs story on libraries in #488. The point you quoted is excellent: libraries are an amazing anomaly in the 2010s. And a resilient one. This is an issue very dear to me, as I have spent a lot of time as a volunteer supporter of my own public library in recent years, largely for reasons that Nathan Robinson gets at: not just because I read and love books, but because the library is a completely free and egalitarian public service, in an age of neoliberal pay-for-everything-you-use philosophies.

One thing that's helped libraries survive is that they register as prestige items in the local-government world. People involved in managing cities form more of a national, even international community than one might at first suspect. Cities are constantly comparing themselves to other cities, they draw on the same consultants, they subscribe to the same accrediting agencies and vie for the same awards and recognitions. One thing that even the most scorched-earth of Freedom Caucus types agree on is that to be "competitive," a city needs a library. This does not mean that all cities get good libraries, but they remain aspirations in a way that other social services don't. Support your local library!
   502. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:01 PM (#5715718)
I've never been a fan. She's a cheerleader. Her rooting interests align mostly with my own but I don't see her as a great thinker or anything. That she's the best the "left" can do is a bit sad.


Among the class of....whatever... she is - partisan opinion shows, let's say? - I'd put her well ahead of the class.

I.e., she's in the same bucket as Hannity, Beck, Lawrence O'Donnell, Tucker, Ingraham, O'Reilly, etc. I might be fine with saying it's a rare case where the whole bathwater can be tossed...

I doubt I've watched more than 90 minutes or so total of her (and probably most of that via online clips) in the last year or so, but IIRC -- what annoyed me most about her is the extensive leadup she always does to the point. As in - "let me provide you historical context, some supporting details, etc" for 10 minutes... and here's my 10 second point, which may or may not have much validity.

IOW - yeah, the Al Capone's vault returns.... The leadup goes on fooorrreeeever... for everything... and it's pretty rare that the whole thing deserved more than a minute or two.

One thing I will say for her, though - I think she's a pretty good interviewer (again, within the class of what she is). Whether same side or not - she seems to give the interviewee the floor to answer.

If it were me, I'd probably make her show all one-on-one interviews. She certainly approaches such with a partisan tilt - but her questions tend to be solid and she lets the guest talk. That's a rarity.
   503. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:04 PM (#5715721)

Stick to pedantry. The 3/5s compromise gave slave states increased political power, and that is how things played out until the Civil War. Slaves were property, with no vote, and thus with zero representation.

Yes. I am always dismayed when people claim the Constitution said that slaves were only 3/5 of a person. In fact, the Constitution was worse than that. Slaves still had no representation, but slaveowners effectively had representation worth 1 + 3/5 times the number of slaves they owned.
   504. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:08 PM (#5715723)
I had an uber-rightwing friend -- a would-be local politician, no less! -- calling for Obama's impeachment in 2014, I believe truly thinking that would clear the way for a President Romney.


Did he pull down his pants and scream slurs at Sacha Baron Cohen? Well alright then.
   505. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:09 PM (#5715724)
I doubt I've watched more than 90 minutes or so total of her (and probably most of that via online clips) in the last year or so, but IIRC -- what annoyed me most about her is the extensive leadup she always does to the point. As in - "let me provide you historical context, some supporting details, etc" for 10 minutes... and here's my 10 second point, which may or may not have much validity.


oh totally, it's the left wing version of Judicial Watch and Tom Fitton. Granted Fitton's fever dreams put hers to shame, but the general setup is the same.
   506. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:13 PM (#5715725)
Did he pull down his pants and scream slurs at Sacha Baron Cohen? Well alright then.


FWIW, I've watched both episodes so far but I tend to agree with the fairly lukewarm reviews...

There are clips that yes - are Borat-level funny. However, most of it is just so cringe-worthy that it's more sad than funny or (anger-inducing).

Plus, the Trump era has really reduced the concept of pulling down your pants and shouting N******, N******, etc to cutting room floor first takes of Trump.... basically, bonus content blooper reels.
   507. Greg K Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:17 PM (#5715727)
Thanks, Davo, for posting that Current Affairs story on libraries in #488. The point you quoted is excellent: libraries are an amazing anomaly in the 2010s. And a resilient one. This is an issue very dear to me, as I have spent a lot of time as a volunteer supporter of my own public library in recent years, largely for reasons that Nathan Robinson gets at: not just because I read and love books, but because the library is a completely free and egalitarian public service, in an age of neoliberal pay-for-everything-you-use philosophies.

One thing that's helped libraries survive is that they register as prestige items in the local-government world. People involved in managing cities form more of a national, even international community than one might at first suspect. Cities are constantly comparing themselves to other cities, they draw on the same consultants, they subscribe to the same accrediting agencies and vie for the same awards and recognitions. One thing that even the most scorched-earth of Freedom Caucus types agree on is that to be "competitive," a city needs a library. This does not mean that all cities get good libraries, but they remain aspirations in a way that other social services don't. Support your local library!

I've been spending a lot of time at the city library lately. Partly because I'm now living in a city where I don't have access to a university library. But also because the Toronto Reference Library is pretty great. I'm not really noticing a drop off in the quality of research.

Also, my girlfriend works for the Toronto Library, so I am legally obligated to sing its praises.
   508. DavidFoss Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:19 PM (#5715730)
Who was watching Maddow last night? Wasn't the whole Lanny-Davis/Cohen-Tape thing occurring on CNN at the exact same time?

You guys are silly. Like overreacting about a press-conference transcript is worse than the actual press conference itself.
   509. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:20 PM (#5715731)
FWIW, I've watched both episodes so far but I tend to agree with the fairly lukewarm reviews...


I'm not a fan of Baron Cohen's work, in general. I'm just noting that the bar for "so stupid that he couldn't be elected to the state house" is actually quite high.
   510. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:20 PM (#5715732)
The absolute worst interviewer is far and away Chris Matthews... just teeth-grinding, awful. Worse than even Shouty O'Reilly or Rephrase My Leading Question as a Statement Hannity.

He pointlessly interrupts with weird tangents, he schizophrenically veers from Answer the Question/I'll Answer it for You, he rarely seems to be even paying attention to what the person says.

Just completely terrible.
   511. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:22 PM (#5715733)
it's the left wing version of Judicial Watch and Tom Fitton.


I haven't seen Maddow in 18 months or more, but unless she's completely sold out to melodrama, this is an unfair comp. Maddow is a left wing and Democratic partisan. But she generally caches her arguments in some sort of reality based concept. That's far better than you'll get from the right wing nutters.
   512. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:23 PM (#5715734)
Stick to pedantry. The 3/5s compromise gave slave states increased political power, and that is how things played out until the Civil War. Slaves were property, with no vote, and thus with zero representation.
No; it gave slave states decreased political power. 40% less than if the framers hadn't included the 3/5ths compromise in there.

Did you have a son and name him John Galt Nieporent?
Wife wouldn't let me. But baseballchick always called my daughter Little Ayn.



EDIT: Of course, my math is wrong; since the slaveholding states didn't consist solely of slaves, they didn't lose 40% of their votes because of the compromise. They only lost 40% of the slave portion.
   513. DavidFoss Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:25 PM (#5715736)
He pointlessly interrupts with weird tangents, he schizophrenically veers from Answer the Question/I'll Answer it for You, he rarely seems to be even paying attention to what the person says.

That's his friendly interviews. :-) It's usually some print reporter who is just happy to be on TV and they just smile and nod while Matthews speaks. Some of them openly chuckle when they are cut off because they expect it.

His 'tough' interviews are often not bad. He doesn't have patience for talking points, so he'll cut people off and move on if they aren't answering his question. But mostly, I skip Matthews. The local news is on during that hour.
   514. Greg K Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:26 PM (#5715739)
MSNBC segments on Stormy Daniels vs MSNBC segments on the US war in Yemen, over the last year.

There seems to be absolutely zero room in the American market for international news that isn't easily comprehensible along partisan lines. I found that to be one of the interesting things about teaching international politics over the past two years.
   515. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:28 PM (#5715740)
Cringe has always been a huge part of Cohen's schtick - if you're not expecting it, you're not familiar with his work. Really, I do sort of agree it's not his best work (which is why I find Ali G by far his best character). But he does it a lot. Even if you're only familiar with the Boray movie - I cringed a lot.
   516. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:30 PM (#5715742)
Certainly children, women, convicts also got counted in the census, even though they didn't get to vote (in general).
   517. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:34 PM (#5715744)
I haven't seen Maddow in 18 months or more, but unless she's completely sold out to melodrama, this is an unfair comp. Maddow is a left wing and Democratic partisan. But she generally caches her arguments in some sort of reality based concept. That's far better than you'll get from the right wing nutters.


I'm not familiar with Fitton, but I think the point is really the caching problem...

I.e., it's perfect you use the word cache because on a different definition/technical level, effective caching is not always just more local client storage. Effective caching means, well, effective - as in, keep the objects at hand for functions that most need them.

She doesn't cache effectively.... she basically tries to dump the whole db to client.
   518. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:35 PM (#5715746)

The economic memory of lineages is ~12 generations. If we became genuinely colourblind* today, we'd reach economic (and presumably, social and whatnot) equality in 400~500 years.
That's insane. You think that people's economic status today correlates strongly with their ancestors' economic status from the year 1518? (Or, rather, you think economic differences from 1518 have just finally washed out?)
   519. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:36 PM (#5715748)
BTW - on another front, I never got around to posting them here - but Nate had an interesting series of tweets Sunday/Monday...

Specifically - calling into question Trump's alleged steadfast strength with 'Republican' voters... Starting basically here - but the key is:
I owe you a coke for your 429, but you owe me a coke for this. Hopefully with Nate saying it rather than me, it will finally sink in for people, though.
   520. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:41 PM (#5715750)
I had an uber-rightwing friend -- a would-be local politician, no less! -- calling for Obama's impeachment in 2014, I believe truly thinking that would clear the way for a President Romney.


Did he pull down his pants and scream slurs at Sacha Baron Cohen? Well alright then.


Not quite, but it was a near thing. I wouldn't have put it past him, I'll say that.
   521. Davo Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:41 PM (#5715751)
514–Thanks, Greg K, that’s an interesting take I hadn’t considered before. (Also explains why certain global wars do get some coverage in America. Israel-Palestine is (very roughly) a Red-Blue thing in America, for instance.)
   522. DavidFoss Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:42 PM (#5715754)
She doesn't cache effectively.... she basically tries to dump the whole db to client.

It's a feature. She's known for going on long tangents in the A-block. Depending on the day, those can be more entertaining than the rest of the show -- or they can feel like a frustrating waste of time.
   523. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:43 PM (#5715755)
Rachel Maddow is a storyteller who likes underreported information and postulating grand connections that come full circle at the end. Sometimes Maddow does this quite well, and exceptionally well for cable news. Her problem is that she's got five shows a week, but she doesn't have five perfect storytelling scenarios a week, but she DOES have an audience that wants their nightly story. She's excellent at making scripted material seem conversational. She has a compulsion about declaring that it has been an unusually news-heavy day and that her planned show has just been thrown off-kilter by big breaking developments right before air time. This would be more credible if she didn't say it every day.

Chris Matthews has a couple of attributes, one of which was mentioned above: he'll step on anyone who starts monologuing like Syndrome, and announce that they're merely spouting talking points. He also has a habit of repeating the same question three or four or five times when the guest is ducking answering it, just to reinforce that they're doing so. Matthews' crackpot analogies and references and digressions are a lot like Phil Rizzuto's: silly and random and sometimes incoherent, until he hits you with one that's dead-on inspired or revelatory. He's far too deep into the "politics = horse race" mentality; I don't think he can achieve an erection unless there's dramatic movement in this or that poll. He also has a Kennedy fetish and his safe word in the bedroom is undoubtedly "Camelot." He likes to remind viewers that he didn't support the Iraq War, which makes him the same kind of liar as Donald Trump.
   524. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:44 PM (#5715756)
Certainly children, women, convicts also got counted in the census, even though they didn't get to vote (in general).


But - there's a rational difference.

Setting aside getting into archaic social norms (i.e., agency of women in colonial America) - convicts/prisoners still have certain protections under federal law. The monies to maintain prisons - and to some extent, feed them - still has certain ties to federal spending disbursements.

Slaves were 'counted' - but they 'counted' purely and solely for purposes of representative power of their masters.

In a nutshell - women, children, even convicts - the argument could be made that they did not vote, their counting for census purposes was proper because the federal government provided certain rights and benefits to them, even if by proxy (i.e., male head of the household, etc).

There was no such corollary for slaves. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch. States had certain "slave codes" (most often not enforced and pretty damn meaningless for any reason other than pretending slavery wasn't what it was)... but unless someone can point me to something otherwise - there was no benefit, rights, even by the slimmest and most tangential of arguments, that they should have been counted by the census for the purposes of representation. None.

The slave states held a gun on the non-slave states and said give me a dollar.

The non-slave states offered 60 cents instead.

Period.
   525. zenbitz Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:46 PM (#5715759)
the economic memory of lineages is ~12 generations.


I would honestly like a citation here.
   526. Davo Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:47 PM (#5715760)
Though on the other hand, one weird trend that’s become hypernornalized in America is how QUICKLY we see nominally non-partisan events break down along tribal grounds. The Wikileaks/Putin ####, of course, but also WTF stuff like the Ebola outbreak and the Ghostbusters reboot. Like, ####, can’t we find some way to make supporting the Houthis be a partisan issue, if for no other reason than to get our handsomest news anchors to talk about all the dying Yemeni children?
   527. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:47 PM (#5715761)
The downtown library here was originally a department store bought by the city when it was abandoned for the new shopping mall, but with downtown now successfully "revitalized", the city wants to sell the whole block off for private development (and increased tax revenue). Did i mention the mayor is a real estate developer?

It's a big three-story brick building of mid-20th-century modern style, and fortunately there's opposition by a strong historical society that's the foundation of tourist dollars... though the only tourists visiting the site are the homeless.

And me, as it's within walking distance. About a dozen titles checked out at the moment. Pretty good collection with a decent budget for new non-fiction acquisitions.

Screw the mayor.
   528. zenbitz Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:48 PM (#5715762)
I think the 3/5ths of a person "argument" here is a strong candidate for pedantry Hall of Fame. Keep it up!
   529. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:48 PM (#5715763)
Ironically, the shopping mall is soon to bite the dust.
   530. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:49 PM (#5715765)
523

Rachel Maddow is a storyteller who likes underreported information and postulating grand connections that come full circle at the end. Sometimes Maddow does this quite well, and exceptionally well for cable news.


Right, but she's no Paul Harvey.
   531. zenbitz Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:50 PM (#5715766)
Re: Libraries.

Print is dead.
Egon Spengler, 1984
   532. BDC Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:51 PM (#5715769)
You think that people's economic status today correlates strongly with their ancestors' economic status from the year 1518?

I dunno. My ancestors in 1518 were Slovak peasants who owned three goats and a bedstead. I've managed to work my way up to owning a piano, a futon, and a flat-screen TV.
   533. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:51 PM (#5715771)
Ironically, the shopping mall is soon to bite the dust.


More fitting for the OTC thread than the OTP - but a few weeks back, for reasons I do not recall, I stumbled onto Deadmalls.com. There are entire youtube channels with 'tours' of dead malls (both closed and on their way to closing).

Oddly fascinating...
   534. Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:54 PM (#5715776)
I love Rachel Maddow. I can't watch her show...it makes my head spin...but I love her.
   535. zenbitz Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:57 PM (#5715778)
FWIW (the plural of anecdote is not necessarily data):

Given that I was just at a "Family Reunion" where nearest common ancestors stretched back 10-11 generations, it was quite remarkable how similar social class/education/background we all were. Almost all Lawyers, Engineers, Professors, Psychologists, Doctors (similar arguments can be made for other branches of my family, although it's hard to go back 10 generations). There is obviously a bit of self selection on family members who could afford to make random trip to Barcelona (from EU or US).

Note that generations were much more compressed pre-19th (20th?) century, the 10 generations only goes back to 1725 in my line of direct male antecedants.
   536. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 02:58 PM (#5715780)

Sure it is the will of the voters. It was that outcome based on the process in place, but that is ALWAYS the case. The process defines who gets to vote and how those votes are counted.
Of course. Which shows who wins. Which is a different concept than the will of the voters.¹
Just because only white males voted didn't make long ago elections not the will of the voters.
That's inanalogous. The vote of a majority of voters does indeed show the will of the voters, even if it doesn't show the will of the population.



¹I mean, I don't really like the phrase, as it implies that the voters have a single will. But I'm not nitpicking about that right now.
   537. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:00 PM (#5715784)

And capitalism offers absolutely nothing to correct this tragedy—because it can’t, because in fact capital has exacerbated the imbalance.
As the saying goes, capitalism spreads wealth unevenly, while socialism spreads misery evenly.
   538. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:03 PM (#5715787)
That's insane. You think that people's economic status today correlates strongly with their ancestors' economic status from the year 1518? (Or, rather, you think economic differences from 1518 have just finally washed out?)


So, aye, there's some nuance - today, about 50% of your economic status is inherited from your parents (if you're American), which, if we carried it back 12 generations, would only be 0.05%. But we also know that this rate correlations with income inequality, so it was certainly higher in the past. From 1518, it's probably showing up at more like the percent level.
   539. Greg K Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:03 PM (#5715789)
514–Thanks, Greg K, that’s an interesting take I hadn’t considered before. (Also explains why certain global wars do get some coverage in America. Israel-Palestine is (very roughly) a Red-Blue thing in America, for instance.)

There are some exceptions (or at least they seem like exceptions to me). For about five minutes last year the Rohingya seemed to have a high profile. But no one ever found a hook to the story. I guess the Republicans and Democrats never found anything to fight about.
   540. Morty Causa Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:04 PM (#5715790)
Some might hold that the assimilation of disparate groups in America, although painful, has been rather quick comparatively. Even for African-Americans. And it might have been quicker, they go on to say, if the groups in question didn't fight it. Indeed, there's a living to be made in fighting assimilation. Fifty years ago in my home state of Louisiana they were lynching the same class of people that the present governor and lieutenant governor right now urge in public service announcements to be sure and report it to them personally if they feel discriminated against. How long did the British and Irish go at it without rapprochement? The English Canadians and the French Canadians? The white South Africans and the black South Africans? The Israelis and the Arabs?
   541. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:04 PM (#5715792)
Print is dead.


It's still an incredible way to store knowledge, if you keep things dry. I will read google previews on a tablet, but even if they tear down the library, I could subsist largely on my own collection of less than 500 titles. Not that I know the actual number, even though it's all shelved. I'll shed books rather than store them.
   542. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:05 PM (#5715793)

Howie, I promise that nobody will dox you or call you an elitist snob if you learn to use the quote tab.
JFC. Donald Trump is on firmer ground in criticizing people for incivility and economic illiteracy than you are in criticizing people for being unable to understand how to use the quote tab.
   543. Greg K Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:07 PM (#5715796)
Like, ####, can’t we find some way to make supporting the Houthis be a partisan issue, if for no other reason than to get our handsomest news anchors to talk about all the dying Yemeni children?

It seems like Yemen could easily become a partisan issue. On the one side you've got the Saudis fighting the good fight against Iran's proxies, on the other (as you say) you've got a humanitarian angle.

Maybe the last few years have convinced Democrats that humanitarianism isn't a winning strategy.
   544. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:07 PM (#5715798)
JFC. Donald Trump is on firmer ground in criticizing people for incivility and economic illiteracy than you are in criticizing people for being unable to understand how to use the quote tab.


I would just like to point that while I am a quote tag proponent - the quote widget often leads to accidental usage of the code widget which tends to be the most common page break villain.

I also wish to register a tablet/phone complaint for how friggin' difficult it is to touch the right item.

...and I say this a quote tag proponent!
   545. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:10 PM (#5715800)

Yes. I am always dismayed when people claim the Constitution said that slaves were only 3/5 of a person. In fact, the Constitution was worse than that. Slaves still had no representation, but slaveowners effectively had representation worth 1 + 3/5 times the number of slaves they owned.
The problem is that this is looking backwards in time, rather than looking at the situation at the time. Most people couldn't vote in 1789, not just slaves. Women and children, of course. But non-property-owning-whites generally couldn't vote either.
   546. BDC Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:10 PM (#5715801)
Using
<blockquote
text
</blockquote
comes to the same as using the quote tag.
   547. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:12 PM (#5715804)

Certainly children, women, convicts also got counted in the census, even though they didn't get to vote (in general).
And non-citizens, too. (Of course, then they were all legal.)
   548. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:13 PM (#5715805)
Fifty years ago in my home state of Louisiana they were lynching the same class of people that the present governor and lieutenant governor right now urge in public service announcements to be sure and report it to them personally if they feel discriminated against.


Do I need to send 'em a copy of the Alton Sterling homicide?
   549. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:14 PM (#5715807)

Setting aside getting into archaic social norms (i.e., agency of women in colonial America) - convicts/prisoners still have certain protections under federal law. The monies to maintain prisons - and to some extent, feed them - still has certain ties to federal spending disbursements.
Uh, not in 1789. Or any time when slavery was legal.
   550. CheersUnusualPlays Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:14 PM (#5715808)
#507 - I love the Toronto Reference Library
   551. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:15 PM (#5715809)
You think that people's economic status today correlates strongly with their ancestors' economic status from the year 1518?

I dunno. My ancestors in 1518 were Slovak peasants who owned three goats and a bedstead. I've managed to work my way up to owning a piano, a futon, and a flat-screen TV.
And an air-conditioned baseball stadium!
   552. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:18 PM (#5715811)
The problem is that this is looking backwards in time, rather than looking at the situation at the time. Most people couldn't vote in 1789, not just slaves. Women and children, of course. But non-property-owning-whites generally couldn't vote either.


Yes, but again... those non-voters still theoretically (even practically/really) received some manner of protections and benefits by being counted, but not voting.

Slaves did not.

I'm sorry but at the federal level, for purposes of census and allocating representation - counting slaves, even partially, made about as much sense as also counting cows or chickens for the same purposes.

I'm willing to consider some obscure law or federal provision that I'm missing... but I believe children, women, convicts, non-land holders still benefited from - for example - the 8th Amendment. Slaves did not.
   553. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:20 PM (#5715812)
Slaves were property, not people. Capital, in fact, which could be borrowed against.
   554. Davo Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:23 PM (#5715813)
543- A big problem for Democrats re: humanitarian angle in Yemen is the obvious hypocrisy that would come with it. Dems have been almost as bad as Republicans when it comes to refugee resettlement; Yemen was one of the countries on the limited Travel Ban law approved by Obama in ‘15 (which was the basis for the hellish/punitive “Muslim Ban” that Trump authorized. (If I’m reading the data correctly, we admitted just 23 Yemeni refugees in 2016.)
   555. Davo Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:27 PM (#5715815)
It’s the problem that inevitably results from constantly conceding to the Right: pretty soon you have no values left.
   556. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:29 PM (#5715817)

Slaves were property, not people.
They were both. (Which is precisely why they did count in the census and for capitation tax purposes.)
   557. DavidFoss Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:31 PM (#5715818)
I'm willing to consider some obscure law or federal provision that I'm missing... but I believe children, women, convicts, non-land holders still benefited from - for example - the 8th Amendment. Slaves did not.

I think the issue is that the counting of non-voters gives more benefits to the *voters* of the district. The 3/5ths rule meant more congressional districts for slave states. Counting undocumented people in 2020 isn't going to have as large of an effect but it could affect the amount of funding that goes to certain areas. I don't know the specifics but cities with more residents might get more Federal aid for roads and schools, etc.
   558. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:32 PM (#5715819)
They were both. (Which is precisely why they did count in the census and for capitation tax purposes.)


Neither of which confers "personhood" onto them for any reason beyond benefit/cost of the owner.
   559. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:35 PM (#5715821)
supporting the Houthis


One should consider the Houthi like any other indigenous population fighting a war. They are not defenseless, and have been an aggressor in their fight. But this does not excuse the blockade of humanitarian supplies, and certainly not indiscriminate bombing of the civilian population. Nor US direct support in weaponry and logistics.

American-made bombs fuel anger

US Making War Worse
   560. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:36 PM (#5715823)
I think the issue is that the counting of non-voters gives more benefits to the *voters* of the district. The 3/5ths rule meant more congressional districts for slave states. Counting undocumented people in 2020 isn't going to have as large of an effect but it could affect the amount of funding that goes to certain areas. I don't know the specifics but cities with more residents might get more Federal aid for roads and schools, etc.


Sure...

Going back to 1789-1861 - one example might be the Cumberland Road. Whether you voted or not - the road was paid for by the federal government - and you could use it.

Slaves could not...
   561. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:36 PM (#5715824)
HAPPY NOW, ASSHOLES?

John Bolton: "The president believes that the next bilateral meeting with President Putin should take place after the Russia witch hunt is over, so we’ve agreed that it will be after the first of the year."
   562. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:38 PM (#5715826)
Bolton is a g-damned tool.
   563. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:39 PM (#5715827)
John Bolton: "The president believes that the next bilateral meeting with President Putin should take place after the Russia witch hunt is over, so we’ve agreed that it will be after the first of the year."


IOW - the President believes exactly what Russia told him a day or so ago :-)
   564. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:39 PM (#5715828)
Which is precisely why they did count in the census and for capitation tax purposes


Thus we circle right back to the 3/5ths compromise. The results were Southern political domination of the US up until the North threatened it enough to spark secession.
   565. zenbitz Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:42 PM (#5715830)
But I'm not nitpicking about that right now.


Who are you and what have you done with David Nieporent?
   566. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:43 PM (#5715835)
We demand a dollar!

Would you settle for 60 cents?

Fine.

Could we at least agree that the 60 cents we gave you be taxed at relatively tiny levels to go into the general fund?

You're really pushing!
   567. Swoboda is freedom Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:45 PM (#5715836)
I dunno. My ancestors in 1518 were Slovak peasants who owned three goats and a bedstead. I've managed to work my way up to owning a piano, a futon, and a flat-screen TV.


You had goats? When I was young, we had to lick the road clean with our tongue.
   568. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:45 PM (#5715838)
Neither of which confers "personhood" onto them for any reason beyond benefit/cost of the owner.


Sure, but that doesn't mean that women or children had personhood either. If one watched Canadian TV in the 80s, you'd know that Canadian women became people in 1929. "Person" gets used a lot in the American constitution to mean "man".
   569. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:46 PM (#5715839)
Bolton is a g-damned tool.


In every way. One should consider Russian acquiesence, if not consent, would be needed to attack Iran, and you can understand the neocon crew's current approach to Russia a bit better.
   570. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:48 PM (#5715840)
Howie, I promise that nobody will dox you or call you an elitist snob if you learn to use the quote tab.

JFC. Donald Trump is on firmer ground in criticizing people for incivility and economic illiteracy than you are in criticizing people for being unable to understand how to use the quote tab.


What on earth are you talking about?

The quote tab should always be used when quoting outside articles. Do we agree on that? That's what I was referring to with my comment to Howie.

What seems to bother you is that I also use it if I'm responding to a series of comments that I want to differentiate from each other. If person A is responding to person B, I'll sequence it like this:

Person B's comment

Person A's response

My response.

Geez, how complicated can you get?
   571. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:50 PM (#5715842)
Sure, but that doesn't mean that women or children had personhood either. If one watched Canadian TV in the 80s, you'd know that Canadian women became people in 1929. "Person" gets used a lot in the American constitution to mean "man".


I didn't say it did.

I am merely saying it is incorrect to lump women, children (non landholders, whatever) in with slaves.

Again... to make the argument for some partial counting of slaves for purposes of the census and consequent allocation of representation, you need to explain the difference between a slave and a cow under such an idea.

I am still waiting to hear one.
   572. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:50 PM (#5715843)
568


"Person" gets used a lot in the American constitution to mean "man".


And ironically enough, "man" gets used a lot to mean "everybody."
   573. DavidFoss Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:51 PM (#5715844)
>>>Person B's comment

>>Person A's response

>My response.

Geez, how complicated can you get?


In extreme cases, I'll switch back to old usenet format. But I don't think I've ever had to add more than one '>'.

   574. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:52 PM (#5715845)
Nobody is going to "attack Iran". For starters the US would have a much harder time getting basing and air space permission for their sorties, and even if they did, you'd most likely see at least a few American birds shot down by the fairly sophisticated Iranian defenses. American won't fight a war without 100% air dominance anymore, and I'm not sure it will be easy to get in Iran.

The first US pilot perp-walked live on Iranian TV would be a massive coup for the Mullahs. I don't think even the belligerent Bolton would enjoy presenting that situation to his boss.
   575. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 03:59 PM (#5715850)
The first US pilot perp-walked live on Iranian TV would be a massive coup for the Mullahs. I don't think even the belligerent Bolton would enjoy presenting that situation to his boss.


His boss likes people who haven't been captured. This isn't an inference, it's an admission.
   576. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:00 PM (#5715851)
I am merely saying it is incorrect to lump women, children (non landholders, whatever) in with slaves.


Why?

Because it's devastating to my argument!

If women, children, etc. get no say, why is their existence giving certain men more say? Why would having eight children give me nine says, but not owning eight slaves?

Not me, obviously, as I own no land, and would be probably be in jail for miscegenation. (Edit: No, checking, in PA it was only illegal for whites to marry blacks. Phew.)
   577. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:00 PM (#5715852)
The Onion proves yet again the age-old comedy principle that if a "joke" is just a mean spirited attack, it's not a joke at all: Trump Bestows Medal Of Honor On John McCain’s Tumor
   578. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:10 PM (#5715859)
Why?

Because it's devastating to my argument!

If women, children, etc. get no say, why is their existence giving certain men more say? Why would having eight children give me nine says, but not owning eight slaves?

Not me, obviously, as I own no land, and would be probably be in jail for miscegenation.


Women and children could leave home. Own guns. If the husband/father died, the women/child could inherit the estates. The slave was part of the estate.

And as for miscegenation - I'd suggest reading about the US version of placage... slaves were sold - at higher prices - specifically as "fancy girls".

Again.

I can provide you plenty of examples where a woman or a child had protections, rights, benefits, etc that a cow did not.

I am still waiting for one single iota of difference between a cow and a slave.... excepting the fact the latter was counted in the census and determined allocation of representation.
   579. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:16 PM (#5715862)
Women and children could leave home. Own guns. If the husband/father died, the women/child could inherit the estates. The slave was part of the estate.


What would have happened if someone left their estate to a slave?
   580. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:25 PM (#5715869)
What would have happened if someone left their estate to a slave?


That slave would have no legal rights to the estate.

With all the lawyers, I presume there's some estate lawyer here with a fancy for historical probate law...

But - let's assume a master freed a slave in his will. That slave would still lack standing to receive the estate.

So, I imagine anyone not-a-slave would have pretty easily gotten a judgment to receive the estate.

Property cannot inherit property.
   581. BDC Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:34 PM (#5715873)
If women, children, etc. get no say, why is their existence giving certain men more say? Why would having eight children give me nine says, but not owning eight slaves?

They don't give you more say. It's still a republic, not a shareholders' meeting: one voter, one vote.

They do give your whole state more Congressional representation. And here, the concept (seeing it from the slaveholders' view) is that the voter is the head of a household. As with the ancient Romans, the whole household belongs to him, and women and children really are in some senses on a par with slaves. The social unit is the household, not the individual.

But of course at the federal level, counting only heads of household toward representation was going to greatly reduce the power of slave states, compared to those with a lot of yeoman farmers or city dwellers. Hence the need for compromise.

As zenbitz mentioned, this is all pretty pedantic, but it's interesting enough as pedantry. From the Yankee perspective, 3/5 of slaves overrepresented the South, and from the Southern perspective it underrepresented them. Hence it "worked" (for white guys) as a compromise.
   582. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:47 PM (#5715877)
In extreme cases, I'll switch back to old usenet format.


Agent did that indent #### for you.
   583. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:48 PM (#5715879)
Why would having eight children give me nine says, but not owning eight slaves?


Depends. Did you have the eight children with your clean, god fearing, white woman wife? Or were like, six of them from that sweet piece of slave ass you gots in the back room?
   584. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:55 PM (#5715884)
Rather long, though somewhat interesting, piece on trusts and probates in the pre-Civil War Shenandoah Valley.

Not sure it adds much - other than to say that even if a slave was freed in a will, that slaves freedom was actually still subject to dispensation of the estate.

I.e., if the debts of the estate exceeded the value of a slave/slaves freed, that slave was screwed. They got sold to settle the debts, freed by the will be damned.

It would seem that generally speaking - the (rare - looks like less than 5%) estates studied here that willed freedom to slaves had to also be pretty careful about doing it in a manner that actually ensured the slave's freedom. I.e., actually having to set up a trust to provide the freedom, requiring an administrator, etc. In some cases, the 'freed' slaves were also to be shipped back to Africa. In a couple of instances, the freed slaves were bequeathed some nominal money - and if I read it right, they actually had to... i.e., simply freeing a slave was -- I'll say it again...

Not unlike a farmer 'freeing' his cows. Well and good - except it would appear that probate law required you to create a mechanism for the cows not to just be roaming free.
   585. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 04:56 PM (#5715885)
And as for miscegenation - I'd suggest reading about the US version of placage... slaves were sold - at higher prices - specifically as "fancy girls".


Despite that fact that I'm engaging your obvious nonsense, I'm not a moron. Foolishness like "Women and children could leave home. Own guns." - which are both irrelevant, and rest between partially true and false.

The three fifths clause was an explicit recognition that they were people - and the same language gets used in fugitive slave bills, slave trade bills, and the like. While their actual rights varied from place to place, they did bring lawsuits, get charged with crimes, like a person, not like a cow. Other rights varied with place and time, since it was essentially a state institution - but murdering slaves was illegal in North Carolina after 1774, for instance (although like children, if you beat them to death because they were misbehaving you'd probably be okay - but State vs. Jarrott, for instance, found a slave not guilty of murdering a white guy on the grounds of self defence, because he was punished too hard - in Florida Joe (a person of color) was granted a retrial in Joe (a person of color) v. State on the grounds of inadequate council - something cows don't get, etc.).

   586. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:06 PM (#5715889)
From the Yankee perspective, 3/5 of slaves overrepresented the South, and from the Southern perspective it underrepresented them. Hence it "worked" (for white guys) as a compromise.


Knew I shouldn't link PBS NewsHour
   587. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:11 PM (#5715893)
One thing about the 3/5 compromise is how much it increased the voting power of individual (white, male) voters compared to their Northern peers. To take the extreme, South Carolina and Maine both had 8 electoral votes in 1860. That was about 1 electoral vote for every 37,660 free people in SC, and 1 for every 78,500 in ME. I don't know what percentage of the free population were eligible voters, but whatever it was, an individual South Carolinian had vastly more sway on the Presidential election than did an individual Mainer.
   588. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:11 PM (#5715894)

The three fifths clause was an explicit recognition that they were people - and the same language gets used in fugitive slave bills, slave trade bills, and the like. While their actual rights varied from place to place, they did bring lawsuits, get charged with crimes, like a person, not like a cow. Other rights varied with place and time, since it was essentially a state institution - but murdering slaves was illegal in North Carolina after 1774, for instance (although like children, if you beat them to death because they were misbehaving you'd probably be okay - but State vs. Jarrott, for instance, found a slave not guilty of murdering a white guy on the grounds of self defence, because he was punished too hard - in Florida Joe (a person of color) was granted a retrial in Joe (a person of color) v. State on the grounds of inadequate council - something cows don't get, etc.).


No.

Yes, I'm not a moron either.

Which means that I recognize the different between state and federal law.

The 3/5 compromise had no real meaning at the state level*. Its sole application was for purposes of allocating federal representation.

Yes, slave states had slave codes. Setting the rather... capricious, shall we say?... application of even those laws - that doesn't change the fact that we're fundamentally talking about a federal dispensation/allowance.

You need to provide me some federal level rights, protections, benefits that justify federal allocation of a slave as 3/5 a person. I see none above.

*Yes, yes - I imagine states ultimately used the same formula to create their own legislative districts... whatever.
   589. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:12 PM (#5715896)
That was about 1 electoral vote for every 37,660 free people in SC, and 1 for every 78,500 in ME.


So what you're saying is the Founders used the 3/5ths compromise so slave owning southerners could count them for House representation the way Wyoming uses cows today?
   590. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:17 PM (#5715902)
One thing about the 3/5 compromise is how much it increased the voting power of individual (white, male) voters compared to their Northern peers. To take the extreme, South Carolina and Maine both had 8 electoral votes in 1860. That was about 1 electoral vote for every 37,660 free people in SC, and 1 for every 78,500 in ME. I don't know what percentage of the free population were eligible voters, but whatever it was, an individual South Carolinian had vastly more sway on the Presidential election than did an individual Mainer.


Which, again - is why federal legislation, and even federal jurisprudence (by obvious virtue of Presidential elections and advise/consent for confirmations) was heavily tilted towards the south until 1861.

The simple fact is the south always got its way (or a hella closer to it) until the population of the north simply overwhelmed the population + cows... err... sorry, slaves of the south. And even then - technically, it wasn't even any law or court decision that cleaved the union. It was merely an instance where the President wasn't either pro-slavery or a 3/5 compromiser who was believed to have real lines in the sand, rather than continually willing to bargain the ransom down from a buck to 60 cents.
   591. BDC Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:18 PM (#5715903)
an individual South Carolinian had vastly more sway on the Presidential election than did an individual Mainer

Although, to get very pedantic here, the individual South Carolinian's vote had only an indirect impact, even as late as 1860. Throughout the whole antebellum period, presidential electors from South Carolina were chosen by the legislature, not by popular vote. SC was exceptional in this, as most states had gone over to popular vote long since (or like Virginia, always done so). Here's an interesting chart of appointment of electors by state.
   592. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:19 PM (#5715904)
So what you're saying is the Founders used the 3/5ths compromise so slave owning southerners could count them for House representation the way Wyoming uses cows today?


Not exactly.

That was already covered by the Connecticut Compromise.

Again...

Gimme a dollar!

How about if I just give you 60 cents?
   593. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:26 PM (#5715905)
As mentioned, the Compromise resulted in the slave states paying more taxes, and other considerations.

Slaves were property, complete with bill of sale, could be bought, sold, traded, and used as collateral.

They were money in the flesh. Ironically, a reason slaves in the US were cared for better than in the Caribbean.


A really sharp piece by Eric Foner on the end of the transatlantic slave trade. There's a lot of political nuance involved, how people take expedient positions with unintended consequences, and how even today, there's no national reconciliation and truth, largely due to that good ol' American Exceptionalism.

We still cannot face any ugly truths that call into question the American character, a huge part which is largely unacknowledged white supremacy. We have a Klan robe buried deep in the national closet.
   594. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:27 PM (#5715906)
Yes, slave states had slave codes. Setting the rather... capricious, shall we say?... application of even those laws - that doesn't change the fact that we're fundamentally talking about a federal dispensation/allowance.


The goalposts, they run like my son on his first birthday. But that suggestion fundamentally misunderstands the early United States. Slaves didn't exist federally - the word didn't appear in the constitution until the 14th amendment.

Slaves weren't remotely equal as people (in principle, nor practice), but they weren't treated the same as cows in a lot of ways. And there were a lot of levels of "personhood" legally then, so slaves were (probably) the worst off - though Indians didn't get a great shake either - but it wasn't totally weird in a context where married women often couldn't own property, you were free to beat your kids to alleviate boredom, ...
   595. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:32 PM (#5715908)
And that's not to mention the Indian wars and the accompanying land grab... a lot of which still rightfully belongs by treaty to tribes that no longer exist.
   596. BrianBrianson Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:39 PM (#5715909)
Like - jeez - you don't need to approach history with the nuanced understanding of a three year old playing "Me Power Ranger, You Bad Guy". Two hundred years ago, being a person and being property weren't mutually exclusive ideas. If you lived in (much of the US, anyhow), black people were both people and completely property - women and children were people, but sort of property, white men were people but largely to entirely not property, etc. This idea that being a person meant you weren't property wasn't developed (nevermind the idea that personhood meant you were entitled to equality with other persons!). Demanding that historical people think the way you do is a foolhardy thing to do.
   597. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:45 PM (#5715911)
And that's not to mention the Indian wars and the accompanying land grab... a lot of which still rightfully belongs by treaty to tribes that no longer exist.


Who did the land belong to prior to that?
   598. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:48 PM (#5715912)
Demanding that historical people think the way you do is a foolhardy thing to do.


Even when they are right here participating in this thread.
   599. perros Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:52 PM (#5715914)
Who did the land belong to prior to that?


Israel
   600. Zonk WARRIORS ALONE! Posted: July 25, 2018 at 05:57 PM (#5715916)
The goalposts, they run like my son on his first birthday. But that suggestion fundamentally misunderstands the early United States. Slaves didn't exist federally - the word didn't appear in the constitution until the 14th amendment.

Slaves weren't remotely equal as people (in principle, nor practice), but they weren't treated the same as cows in a lot of ways. And there were a lot of levels of "personhood" legally then, so slaves were (probably) the worst off - though Indians didn't get a great shake either - but it wasn't totally weird in a context where married women often couldn't own property, you were free to beat your kids to alleviate boredom, .


I don't think I'm moving any goalposts.

The topic at hand was the 3/5 compromise. I'm following threads in response.

Like - jeez - you don't need to approach history with the nuanced understanding of a three year old playing "Me Power Ranger, You Bad Guy". Two hundred years ago, being a person and being property weren't mutually exclusive ideas. If you lived in (much of the US, anyhow), black people were both people and completely property - women and children were people, but sort of property, white men were people but largely to entirely not property, etc. This idea that being a person meant you weren't property wasn't developed (nevermind the idea that personhood meant you were entitled to equality with other persons!). Demanding that historical people think the way you do is a foolhardy thing to do.


No, I don't think I'm doing that either.

I've said - a couple of times now - that I'm fine with recognizing the 3/5 as a necessary evil... I'm fine with the idea that one can defend as a necessary thing to ratify the constitution, that ratification was necessary to prevent the nascent country from devolving into a failed confederation, and the resulting tilt of federal legislation and jurisprudence likewise following the similar suit tilt until the point that the nation was able to withstand and overcome a civil war... rather than the US essentially breaking into several smaller nations, who likely would have spent a good century fighting over who got to dispose which native tribes for which lands, etc.

Bad things can be necessary. Wrong things can contextualized.

If you want to suggest a further equation for census and resulting representation, fine... maybe non-voting landless should have counted for 4/5. Women 3/5. Children 2/5. Slaves 1/5. Whatever... perhaps an American caste system by law.

It's not even about good people and bad people - though there is certainly a good and bad.

I am just saying - again - the 'compromise' makes no sense for the purposes by which it was arrived. Slaves should not have been counted for purposes of allocating representation, in a vacuum, where it wasn't necessary for slave state ratification of the constitution.

Page 6 of 15 pages ‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(6470 - 1:58am, Jul 04)
Last: Mayor Blomberg

Newsblog31 MLB players, 7 staff test positive for COVID-19, or 1.2%
(4 - 12:12am, Jul 04)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT – NBA Revival Thread 2020
(460 - 11:55pm, Jul 03)
Last: If on a winter's night a traveling violation

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - Spring 2020
(353 - 11:39pm, Jul 03)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert

NewsblogAthletics To Trade Jorge Mateo To Padres
(8 - 11:23pm, Jul 03)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogAubrey Huff Says He Would Rather Die From Coronavirus Than Wear a Mask
(155 - 10:42pm, Jul 03)
Last: Mayor Blomberg

NewsblogWith baby on the way, Trout unsure if he'll play
(2 - 10:33pm, Jul 03)
Last: Zach

NewsblogBill James: Why We Need Runs Saved Against Zero
(175 - 9:30pm, Jul 03)
Last: TJ

NewsblogMLB teams can't identify players who test positive for coronavirus
(24 - 9:27pm, Jul 03)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

Newsblog'I got crushed': Chicago Cubs pitching coach Tommy Hottovy details harrowing COVID-19 battle
(21 - 8:56pm, Jul 03)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogBillionaire Mike Repole joins A-Rod and J-Lo’s bid for the Mets
(30 - 8:48pm, Jul 03)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogRob Manfred admits MLB never intended to play more than 60 games
(19 - 8:26pm, Jul 03)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogCubs' Jose Quintana hurt washing dishes, has surgery
(22 - 7:41pm, Jul 03)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogTigers sign Spencer Torkelson to record-setting bonus
(30 - 6:43pm, Jul 03)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogTigers are first MLB team with official gaming partner
(8 - 6:10pm, Jul 03)
Last: manchestermets

-->

Page rendered in 0.8248 seconds
46 querie(s) executed