Abolish Eillish

[Hardcore troubadour 16,441]

4 hours ago, edjr said:

how about the land at foxwoods resort?

Lol. Not native land. 

[Meglamaniac 857]

10 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Cool story bro, but totally wrong.

The 1862 Homestead Act was only for citizens. Which slaves were not in 1862. I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

LOL

So no free slaves in 1862

thousands of slaves became free in 1862 America due to targeted legislative action and the advance of the Union Army. Key actions included the April 16, 1862, DC Compensated Emancipation Act freeing nearly 3,000 people in Washington D.C., and the Second Confiscation Act in July 1862, which liberated slaves belonging to Confederate owners. 

 

and every publication on the 1862 Homestead Act is wrong and you are right

 

WOW, can't make this chit up

[Meglamaniac 857]

And no it wasn't for Citizens only

 

While white settlers were the primary beneficiaries, the law allowed African Americans (including former slaves), women, and immigrants to claim 160 acres of land if they were citizens or intended to become citizens. 

[Fireballer 2,736]

16 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Cool story bro, but totally wrong.

The 1862 Homestead Act was only for citizens. Which slaves were not in 1862. I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

Uh, did the Homesteading Act stop at the end of 1862?

[Fireballer 2,736]

2 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

And no it wasn't for Citizens only

 

While white settlers were the primary beneficiaries, the law allowed African Americans (including former slaves), women, and immigrants to claim 160 acres of land if they were citizens or intended to become citizens. 

Not to mention thousands of black families took advantage of the Homestead Act after becoming, or intending to become, citizens when the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was passed.  The Homesteading Act was literally on the books for over 100 years.

[Meglamaniac 857]

1 minute ago, Fireballer said:

Not to mention thousands of black families took advantage of the Homestead Act after becoming, or intending to become, citizens when the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was passed.  The Homesteading Act was literally on the books for over 100 years.

But but but he can get deeper into it than that if you want

 

CRICKETS

 

[dogcows 1,614]

3 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

And no it wasn't for Citizens only

 

While white settlers were the primary beneficiaries, the law allowed African Americans (including former slaves), women, and immigrants to claim 160 acres of land if they were citizens or intended to become citizens. 

 

3 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Uh, did the Homesteading Act stop at the end of 1862?

Good lord, is history education in the USA really this crappy? Are we really doing this nonsense during Black History Month? Good lord. OK then fine let's do some history.

In 1862 black people could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.

Therefore, the initial homestead act in 1862 excluded black people. Because of this, there was another Homestead Act written in 1866 to try and remedy this situation, called the Southern Homestead Act. It specifically blocked discrimination of the homesteads based on color. The passing of the 14th amendment in 1868 theoretically opened up the original Homestead Act to everybody with former slaves now being granted citizenship. But the initial Homestead Act had no prohibition on discrimination based on color.... which takes us to 1876.

In 1876 the Southern Homestead Act was repealed and it was once again legal to discriminate on basis of color with regards to the Homestead Act.

We can get into the seizing of land from the very few black people who managed to get some during the brief period of time where they were allowed to if you want. But I hope these basic facts above can give you a start to understanding how off-base you are here.

[Meglamaniac 857]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

 

Good lord, is history education in the USA really this crappy? Are we really doing this nonsense during Black History Month? Good lord. OK then fine let's do some history.

In 1862 black people could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.

 

More complete BS, just stop, you're wrong

 

Not only could they intend to become citizens, many were

 

es, Black U.S. citizens existed in 1862, primarily as free Black people in Northern states, despite the 1857 Dred Scott decision ruling against their citizenship. In November 1862, Attorney General Edward Bates officially recognized the citizenship of free Black people, and the Union began enlisting Black soldiers following the Militia Act of 1862. 

[Hawkeye21 2,503]

WTF are you goofballs arguing about?  What does this have to do with Billie Eilish?  

[dogcows 1,614]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

WTF are you goofballs arguing about?  What does this have to do with Billie Eilish?  

I thought the first rule of Geek Club was never to stay on topic?

[Hawkeye21 2,503]

Just now, dogcows said:

I thought the first rule of Geek Club was never to stay on topic?

Lots of professionals here.

[Meglamaniac 857]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

WTF are you goofballs arguing about?  What does this have to do with Billie Eilish?  

Not a dang thing

It's about "stolen Land"

[Hawkeye21 2,503]

4 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Not a dang thing

It's about "stolen Land"

All land is stolen or conquered.  That's how the world works.

[Meglamaniac 857]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

All land is stolen or conquered.  That's how the world works.

Yes

[Hardcore troubadour 16,441]

She’s 24.  And sounds exactly like grown men on the left. 

[Fireballer 2,736]

9 minutes ago, dogcows said:

 

Good lord, is history education in the USA really this crappy? Are we really doing this nonsense during Black History Month? Good lord. OK then fine let's do some history.

In 1862 black people could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.

Therefore, the initial homestead act in 1862 excluded black people. Because of this, there was another Homestead Act written in 1866 to try and remedy this situation, called the Southern Homestead Act. It specifically blocked discrimination of the homesteads based on color. The passing of the 14th amendment in 1868 theoretically opened up the original Homestead Act to everybody with former slaves now being granted citizenship. But the initial Homestead Act had no prohibition on discrimination based on color.... which takes us to 1876.

In 1876 the Southern Homestead Act was repealed and it was once again legal to discriminate on basis of color with regards to the Homestead Act.

We can get into the seizing of land from the very few black people who managed to get some during the brief period of time where they were allowed to if you want. But I hope these basic facts above can give you a start to understanding how off-base you are here.

This is all great, but the fact is that the 1862 act remained on the books and was utilized by thousands of black families. Black families continued to utilize the 1862 act well after the Southern act dissolved. 

[dogcows 1,614]

11 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

This is all great, but the fact is that the 1862 act remained on the books and was utilized by thousands of black families. Black families continued to utilize the 1862 act well after the Southern act dissolved. 

It’s black history month. Take some time to look this up and see what really happened. About 1.6 million white families got land from this act and only a few thousand black families did.

Here’s a very brief overview if you just want to scratch the surface on this.

https://aeon.co/ideas/land-and-the-roots-of-african-american-poverty

[Meglamaniac 857]

20 minutes ago, dogcows said:

It’s black history month. Take some time to look this up and see what really happened. About 1.6 million white families got land from this act and only a few thousand black families did.

Here’s a very brief overview if you just want to scratch the surface on this.

https://aeon.co/ideas/land-and-the-roots-of-african-american-poverty

Wait wait wait, you told us all that

Westward expansion happened because the government gave people (only the white ones at the time of course) free land

Don't back track now

And perhaps you should take your own advise and 

 

 dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

Because you keep mentioning the 14 th as giving freed slaves citizenship, wrong again, it had nothing to do with freed slaves granted citizenship by the Lincoln admin in 1862 and everything to do with birthright citizenship for AA

 

It amazes me how someone can be so pompous in their replies and be so wrong

[Gepetto 1,534]

16 hours ago, dogcows said:

I guarantee you the Native Americans living in North America didn’t feel the same way you do when Europeans showed up centuries ago.

But enjoy your fantasy world where everybody agrees with you. It must be delightful.

You probably don't exist had the history with the Native Americans turned out different, yet here you support your ancestors own descendants extinction. 

idiot 

Maybe try understanding who you are and where you come from would be a good idea. 

Or are you not descended from Western Europeans?

[TimHauck 3,641]

31 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Wait wait wait, you told us all that

Westward expansion happened because the government gave people (only the white ones at the time of course) free land

Don't back track now

And perhaps you should take your own advise and 

 

 dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

Because you keep mentioning the 14 th as giving freed slaves citizenship, wrong again, it had nothing to do with freed slaves granted citizenship by the Lincoln admin in 1862 and everything to do with birthright citizenship for AA

 

It amazes me how someone can be so pompous in their replies and be so wrong

Do you think children of illegal immigrants should get citizenship through birthright? (Check yes or no)

[Fnord 2,805]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

WTF are you goofballs arguing about?  What does this have to do with Billie Eilish?  

Right? FFS!

[kcBlitzkrieg 30]

mmmm.....love her big ole tiddies 

[Meglamaniac 857]

24 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Do you think children of illegal immigrants should get citizenship through birthright? (Check yes or no)

Oh how cute, a little chihuahua nipping at my ankles

 

[dogcows 1,614]

57 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Because you keep mentioning the 14 th as giving freed slaves citizenship, wrong again, it had nothing to do with freed slaves granted citizenship by the Lincoln admin in 1862 and everything to do with birthright citizenship for AA

Sorry, what is your point?

The 14th amendment gave former slaves citizenship. I didn’t mention Lincoln at all.

My point stands. The homestead act did jack for black people and handed out millions of acres of land for free to white ones.

Thats the reality, not some revisionist history. Calling me pompous when you don’t know anything about the topic is hilarious. But carry on, put words in others’ mouths and get mad at them.

[Meglamaniac 857]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Sorry, what is your point?

The 14th amendment gave former slaves citizenship. I didn’t mention Lincoln at all.

My point stands. The homestead act did jack for black people and handed out millions of acres of land for free to white ones.

Thats the reality, not some revisionist history. Calling me pompous when you don’t know anything about the topic is hilarious. But carry on, put words in others’ mouths and get mad at them.

The point is you are wrong, multiple times in this thread

Westward expansion happened because the government gave people (only the white ones at the time of course) free land; all they had to do was physically get there and claim it (no small feat at the time).WRONG

The 1862 Homestead Act was only for citizens. Which slaves were not in 1862. I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.Wrong and Wrong

 

In 1862 black people could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.WRONG

Therefore, the initial homestead act in 1862 excluded black people WRONG

The passing of the 14th amendment in 1868 theoretically opened up the original Homestead Act to everybody with former slaves now being granted citizenship. WRONG

LOL, I'm not mad and these are your words so how can I put them in your mouth

But carry on, put words in others’ mouths and get mad at them.

LOL

And Calling me pompous, this is the very definition of Pompous

Cool story bro, but totally wrong, I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

 

Take the L and move on

 

 

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,441]

Dog Cows got schooled. But he thinks he’s right, so it won’t register.  His side are the good guys. 

[dogcows 1,614]

8 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

The point is you are wrong, multiple times in this thread

Westward expansion happened because the government gave people (only the white ones at the time of course) free land; all they had to do was physically get there and claim it (no small feat at the time).WRONG

The 1862 Homestead Act was only for citizens. Which slaves were not in 1862. I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.Wrong and Wrong

 

In 1862 black people could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.WRONG

Therefore, the initial homestead act in 1862 excluded black people WRONG

The passing of the 14th amendment in 1868 theoretically opened up the original Homestead Act to everybody with former slaves now being granted citizenship. WRONG

LOL, I'm not mad and these are your words so how can I put them in your mouth

But carry on, put words in others’ mouths and get mad at them.

LOL

And Calling me pompous, this is the very definition of Pompous

Cool story bro, but totally wrong, I can get deeper into it than that if you want, but I would prefer to allow you to dig deeper into the history of it yourself.

 

Take the L and move on

 

 

 

You can type “WRONG” in bold. It doesn’t make you right.

Are you claiming that slaves were considered citizens of this country prior to the ratification of the 14th amendment?

 

[Meglamaniac 857]

12 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You can type “WRONG” in bold. It doesn’t make you right.

Are you claiming that slaves were considered citizens of this country prior to the ratification of the 14th amendment?

 

Nope, that's not what you stated, stop trying to move the goalposts, you said

In 1862 black people ( notice no mention of slaves) could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.

There were absolutely Black US citizens in 1862 granted that citizineship by Lincoln

Seriously, just move on, you were wrong all over this thread

[dogcows 1,614]

12 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Nope, that's not what you stated, stop trying to move the goalposts, you said

In 1862 black people ( notice no mention of slaves) could not even "intend to become citizens" under the constitution of the United States and the judicial precedent of the time.

There were absolutely Black US citizens in 1862 granted that citizineship by Lincoln

Seriously, just move on, you were wrong all over this thread

You never heard of Dred Scott?

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dred-scott-v-sandford

If you’re unfamiliar with Dred Scott, here’s the relevant bit to this discussion,

Quote

 A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.

People of African descent were not citizens until the constitution was amended.

You’re welcome for the free history lesson.

[Meglamaniac 857]

6 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You never heard of Dred Scott?

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dred-scott-v-sandford

If you’re unfamiliar with Dred Scott, here’s the relevant bit to this discussion,

People of African descent were not citizens until the constitution was amended.

You’re welcome for the free history lesson.

JFC

I already covered this

Black U.S. citizens existed in 1862, primarily as free Black people in Northern states, despite the 1857 Dred Scott decision ruling against their citizenship. In November 1862, Attorney General Edward Bates officially recognized the citizenship of free Black people, and the Union began enlisting Black soldiers following the Militia Act of 1862. 

 

 

[dogcows 1,614]

3 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

JFC

I already covered this

Black U.S. citizens existed in 1862, primarily as free Black people in Northern states, despite the 1857 Dred Scott decision ruling against their citizenship. In November 1862, Attorney General Edward Bates officially recognized the citizenship of free Black people, and the Union began enlisting Black soldiers following the Militia Act of 1862. 

The militia act of 1862 didn’t confer citizenship.

And most states didn’t recognize or agree with the ruling of Bates.

You can play this game all day, as obviously there was a progression from Dred to the 14th amendment. 

What is your point though? 

[Meglamaniac 857]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

The militia act of 1862 didn’t confer citizenship.

And most states didn’t recognize or agree with the ruling of Bates.

You can play this game all day, as obviously there was a progression from Dred to the 14th amendment. 

What is your point though? 

That you are wrong, maybe next time lose the condescending BS responses and I wont mop the floor with your ignorance on the subject

[edjr 7,189]

remember when she was fat and “body positivity”

since ozempic all these frauds want to look better.

Weird, frauds

[dogcows 1,614]

4 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

That you are wrong, maybe next time lose the condescending BS responses and I wont mop the floor with your ignorance on the subject

You did no such thing, but your only point was to be right?

Geeezzzzz……  

[Meglamaniac 857]

Just now, dogcows said:

You did no such thing, but your only point was to be right?

Geeezzzzz……  

my point was that you were wrong and an a$$ about to boot

Gzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[dogcows 1,614]

Just now, Meglamaniac said:

my point was that you were wrong and an a$$ about to boot

Gzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Neither is true, but good try. Better luck next time

[Meglamaniac 857]

Just now, dogcows said:

Neither is true, but good try. Better luck next time

This entire thread says otherwise, might want to hide the evidence

[dogcows 1,614]

Just now, Meglamaniac said:

This entire thread says otherwise, might want to hide the evidence

Posting the word WRONG 50 times in bold is only evidence that you’ve got a condition of some sort…

[Meglamaniac 857]

5 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Posting the word WRONG 50 times in bold is only evidence that you’ve got a condition of some sort…

ok Mr. history teacher

[Engorgeous George 2,464]

Now do the Platt Amendment either from information you remember from high school history or from google which you pretend not to consult as you pretend you knew the information all along.

 

Me.  My history knowledge extends no further than what I remember of Mr. Hand from Fast Times at Ridgemont High.