>Go to rock concert
>Get "called backstage"
>No knowing WTF is up with that
Imagine being this naive. I mean, it doesn't make it right, but. Well; let's just say that taking your GF to a show like that is asking for it. I mean, what do you think Sammy Hagar was doing underneath the stage during Eddie's long assed solos?
OMG, Carl the Cuck has found his soulmate!
Daily reminder this man voted for Gus Hall; a communist.
Ron Perlman is a mistake.
/sigh
Born and raised in GA. Have gone back and forth on this (stupid) fucking subject. I've argued pro-south and pro-north. Both were wrong. One side was wrong because of the basis of the argument of their States' "rights" were based on the abuse of rights of others. The other side essentially waged an economic war against it's own neighbors (taxes and levies) to get in on those "gibs" from agriculture's success in trade with Europe – just to ease their transition into an industrial economy. In other words, the North needed a perpetual piggy bank to dip into while they were getting away from an agricultural economy that their population essentially outgrew.
Let's face it; "Slavery" and "State's Rights" became issues when it was politically expedient to both sides of the conflict. I'm weary of any candidate that wants to invoke any theory about the Civil War without recognizing, at a minimum, that both sides were wrong in the conflict. None of them will ever do that because it's too cerebral a concept. They only ever pick the North to argue for, as a result, because that's the "right and just" thing to argue for (which, altruistically, it correct).
Bonus points to persons that are not afraid to broach the subject of the Civil War; as long as they start with the factual statement that James Buchanan was the most ineffectual leader of this nation aside from Barack Obama. He literally did NOTHING to prevent the Civil War, and had ample opportunity to use the office of POTUS to serve as a dire warning of the cataclysmic events that were to become; as it was an obvious "next step".
Even more bonus points would be awarded to the person that has the stones to stand up and say that the "Right to Secession" is implied in the Constitution. Just because a document is ratified 90 years prior doesn't give it infinite hold over the will of the people's descendants, forever, until the end of time. Anyone that doesn't recognize that shouldn't be involved in a civics debate.
Anyone needing any reassurance that the war wasn't about State's Rights or Slavery need look no further than Abraham Lincoln's plethora of quotes regarding slavery and saving the Union with or without it, or the fact that the North (in large part) enacted a series of taxes and levies on the South's agricultural industry in an effort to rake in some of those profits they were experiencing as the North's economy was struggling to transition into an industrial one.