QUOTE(turnea @ Mar 11 2008, 05:39 PM)

QUOTE(quick @ Mar 11 2008, 03:19 PM)

QUOTE(Dingo @ Mar 11 2008, 03:30 PM)

Questions for Debate:
1) What do you think Obama feels about America?
It's an odd question in a way. We don't ask Bush or Clinton what they feel about America.
As an aside, and the reason we do not ask Bush or Clinton this question: Obama has a Kenyan father; grew up through age 10 in Indonesia with an Indonesian, Muslim step-father; and his first book was a paean to his father's African heritage and carefully detailed the lives of his relatives in Kenya. Generally, our presidential candidates do not have such exotic connections.
Carry on....
Ah, we who?
What the nationality or religion of the man's father have to do with anything I cannot fathom.
America has always been a nation of immigrants and it's no shock that a child with a foreign parent might rise to the presidency. It's a no-brainer given our history.
No, "we" as this question mostly because of ideological bias and xenophobia...
Do carry on.
QUOTE(quick)
You would be correct, sir. I mean, unless the Federal govt wants to compensate the families of former slave holders for the lost value of the freed slaves, I would suggest the blood of over 600,000 dead in the Civil War pretty much paid all debts...
That's just illogical. No one called the dead of WWII reparations for the Holocaust.
There are many reasons to opposes slavery reparations, but that's a hollow one.
1) Causes of the Civil War--Here is what one of the famous CSA generals said about the causes of the war (you will recall, the South was the bellwether of the "states rights" argument which argued slavery was not really the cause of the war):
"Reminiscences Of The Civil War", (Chapter I)
By John B. Gordon, Maj. Gen. CSA
There is no book in existence, I believe, in which the ordinary reader can find an analysis of the issues between the two sections, which fairly represents both the North and the South. Although it would require volumes to contain the great arguments, I shall attempt here to give a brief summary of the causes of our sectional controversy, and it will be my purpose to state the cases of the two sections so impartially that just-minded people on both sides will admit the statement to be judicially fair.
The causes of the war will be found at the foundation of our political fabric, in our complex organism, in the fundamental law, in the Constitution itself, in the conflicting constructions which it invited, and in the institution of slavery which it recognized and was intended to protect. If asked what was the real issue involved in our unparalleled conflict, the average American citizen will reply, "The negro"; and it is fair to say that had there been no slavery there would have been no war."
While I can argue many "causes" of the war, no one with an engaged brain would argue that slavery was not
one of the main causes of the war. 2) In 1860, the value of slaves held exceeded the value of all real estate in the South. There were liberated without compensation to their owners. If the fifth generation descendents of black slaves think they are entitled to some compensation, then so are the fifth gen desc. of the slave owners, unless you want to argue that right of conquest permits the liberation of slaves without such compensation, which, if you do, means, well, the blacks were conquered and brought here, too. Get it?
And, of course, trying to determine who is entitled to what is a ludicrous experiment in futility and their are dozens of other arguments--limitations, lack of jurisdiction, inability to trace ancestries, etc., but you get the point.
If you support Obama's politics of unification, then the last thing you should support should be the radically disunifying concept of reparations.
3) If, then, one of the reasons the North fought was to liberate the slaves--and no one can deny this was one of the reasons for the war-- then all the death required to do so bought the slaves' freedom. This is an unavoidable conclusion. The price was paid 150 years ago with primarily white soldiers' blood.