Stunts Backfire on Ron DeSantis

For Rhonda(credit to Dest) it's like , If there isn't a problem .....create one.

DeSantis declares Florida not seeing ‘mass’ migration in defense for going to Texas for immigrants

Criticizing "Biden" for "flying these people all over the fruited plain," Republican Governor Ron DeSantis defended his scheme to go into Texas to take asylum-seeking immigrants, round them up, and send them to Martha's Vineyard by stating there is not "mass" migration into Florida.

"The problem is is we're not seeing mass movements of them into Florida so you end up with a car of maybe two, and if you know that that's illegal and there's someone that's kind of smuggling then committing crimes then you can do arrests," DeSantis told reporters at a news conference Tuesday. "There have been drug seizures. "

"That's not effective enough to stop the mass migrations. They're just coming in onesie-twosies."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1572285073814061057
 
Tsing Tao said:
He stated that people really had problems with slavery after the revolutionary war. And he was right, that's when the anti-slavery movement really picked up.
More...


I think there was anti slavery before and during the war but England was still in charge and people were mainly focused on independence. As the war came to a close, all of the anti slavery sentiment was expressed as the people now had to decide on their self governance. Even Tom jefferson himself wrote and spoke out against slavery but we all know that was still for bigoted reasoning.

But it was such a devisive issue it had to be tabled in order to get any agreement on the Articles of Confederacy and the Constitution.

The interesting thing is most of the people fleeing religious persecution landed in Virginia - Pennsylvania strip and formed the heart of the abolitionist movement while the wealthy from Europe who came to plant drove the increase in the slave trade.

However the 1619 goes a little overboard in recounting history. There are always fringes of people pushing their version of history so that will never end. If it is a historical opinion or viewpoint then it should be reserved for history college majors to explore different viewpoints.

Slavery was actually discussed for the Declaration of Independence but left out because it would not keep the South with their movement and Northerners in shipping needed the trade.

Our history is fascinating politically
 
Last edited:
The 1619 Project had argued that slavery was one of the primary motivations for the colonies to seek independence from Britain, as the colonists wanted to protect their right to own slaves which they felt was under threat from the anti-slavery attitudes of the British.

I do disagree with this because when Jefferson wanted to put anti-slavery into the Declaration of Independence it was edited out before the final draft. Both the south and north were benefitting from slavery and no way the main cause of independence was to remove that instutution.

All the proof you need is that when the colonies became independent, slavery continued for another 100 years haha.
 
El OchoCinco said:
I think there was anti slavery before and during the war but England was still in charge and people were mainly focused on independence. As the war came to a close, all of the anti slavery sentiment was expressed as the people now had to decide on their self governance. Even Tom jefferson himself wrote and spoke out against slavery but we all know that was still for bigoted reasoning.

But it was such a devisive issue it had to be tabled in order to get any agreement on the Articles of Confederacy and the Constitution.

The interesting thing is most of the people fleeing religious persecution landed in Virginia - Pennsylvania strip and formed the heart of the abolitionist movement while the wealthy from Europe who came to plant drove the increase in the slave trade.

However the 1619 goes a little overboard in recounting history. There are always fringes of people pushing their version of history so that will never end. If it is a historical opinion or viewpoint then it should be reserved for history college majors to explore different viewpoints.

Slavery was actually discussed for the Declaration of Independence but left out because it would not keep the South with their movement and Northerners in shipping needed the trade.

Our history is fascinating politically
More...

slavery has been an issue since Moses told the pharaoh to "free my people".

Ironically enough, the African slave trade began in part due to a Catholic priest objecting to the enslavement of indigenous tribes. He felt blacks were "better suited" for the job. He ended up regretting that decision. It was seen as a church blessing to go forth and chain blacks up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolomé_de_las_Casas

El OchoCinco said:
The 1619 Project had argued that slavery was one of the primary motivations for the colonies to seek independence from Britain, as the colonists wanted to protect their right to own slaves which they felt was under threat from the anti-slavery attitudes of the British.

I do disagree with this because when Jefferson wanted to put anti-slavery into the Declaration of Independence it was edited out before the final draft. Both the south and north were benefitting from slavery and no way the main cause of independence was to remove that instutution.

All the proof you need is that when the colonies became independent, slavery continued for another 100 years haha.
More...

There is a school of thought that believes Jefferson left out slavery because the 13 colony alliance was on shaky ground to begin with (what with all those loyalists against it). Being critical of slavery would've alienated the southern colonies who relied heavily on it for their economy.
 
Last edited:
Cuddles said:
slavery has been an issue since Moses told the pharaoh to "free my people".

Ironically enough, the African slave trade began in part due to a Catholic priest objecting to the enslavement of indigenous tribes. He felt blacks were "better suited" for the job. He ended up regretting that decision. It was seen as a church blessing to go forth and chain blacks up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolomé_de_las_Casas



There is a school of thought that believes Jefferson left out slavery because the 13 colony alliance was on shaky ground to begin with (what with all those loyalists against it). Being critical of slavery would've alienated the southern colonies who relied heavily on it for their economy.
More...


Funny how once independence was granted those Virginians swallowed their tongue on slavery...we know why northerners did...
 
LacesOut said:
So it was an issue for America before the country was founded? How is that?
More...

what are you saying..we dont study history before the colonies became independent?

It was an issue from the beginning in the 13 colonies however it was not the reason the colonies.demanded independence as 1619 claims.
 
El OchoCinco said:
what are you saying..we dont study history before the colonies became independent?

It was an issue from the beginning in the 13 colonies however it was not the reason the colonies.demanded independence as 1619 claims.
More...
I’m saying it has nothing to do with America before independence, yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top