Comment: After this reply, I'm done, think whatever you want..

(See in situ)

After this reply, I'm done, think whatever you want..

Yes, it appeared you were either basing your misquote on emotion, or usually people that come in to make a point using misquotes are trying to push an agenda, that's simply the way things are, if that was not your intention I apologize.

I do have an agenda, it's called "Liberty for all."

Then there was a fact that you used historical knowledge based on three Hollywood movies as opposed to books written during the time, or books derived from others written from first hand accounts.

All three movies were based on books from first hand accounts. It takes 2 seconds to Google confirmation.

There is no need to rehash your misquote, as I had already showed what you stated versus what was actually said, and the difference is your statement made it appear as Bundy was declaring slavery was better for blacks, when in reality he was saying he "often wondered" if they would be better off. Big difference when dealing with the race bating media propaganda machine, so I assumed that you got your quote from them.

I never used the word "declared". I'd "never wonder" if having no liberties as a slave would be better than receiving a welfare check. I also think it's ridiculous for anyone to "often wonder" whether having no liberties is preferable to anything.

1. Here, let me show you where you had some doubt "per say".

It's "per se", not "per say".

2. His best response would have been not to talk to the NY times about race, unfortunately he did, so what he "should have said" has zero bearing on the discussion.

If you don't talk to the press, then they write what they want anyway and the fact that you refuse to answer tough questions. You have to talk to the press. He could have turned their questions into a positive and possibly killed their agenda to paint him a loon.

3. Unfortunately, it wasn't "cotton" or "picking" you had out of order, you changed the entire quote which is what the media is doing to demonize Bundy, while it may not have been your intent, that is the fact.

See, here's where you are acting like the media by suggesting my intent. I used an adjective "cotton pickin'" with a noun, "slaves" versus Bundy's quote of a noun and a verb, "as slaves, picking cotton." They mean the same, nothing more.

Had you been participating in the conversation or debate since we started you would have already read how many slaves returned to the very plantations they were freed from, so it matters not if you think death is better than slavery, the facts are the slaves returned with their families because they obviously thought it better to work the land then to die from exposure or starvation shows that they; unlike you, chose to work for the plantation owner than to starve to death. While it is very admirable that if you were a slave you would have chose death, it has zero bearing on factual evidence at the time nor the discussion at large.

This makes no sense. You meant former slaves.

After slavery, former slaves had some liberties. Masters were no longer masters. They negotiated with their former slaves to work the land in return for a share of the crops and a place to live. It became two parties entering a contract. That's a big difference than say, "get out there now and pick that cotton boy or I'll whoop you." I'm sure if I had a harsh master that beat me, I'd never enter a contract with him even after being free. I'd would have killed him, took as much wealth of his as I could gather, got on a horse and not looked back.

Former slaves didn't have to fear being punished for not doing as the master demanded and could leave when they could gather enough resources to venture out and explore other opportunities. The master didn't have to allow a former slave to stay on his land if they felt they weren't of value or feared them. That's very different than having no liberties as a slave.

Also, many former slaves returned to the planation because they were told they could get 40 acres and a mule on land they had worked as slaves. So, in a way, that was their "welfare" check though I'd say they earned it. However, many didn't end up getting that because federal and state reconstruction programs emphasized waged labor instead.

Bundy "often wondered" if they would have been better off if slavery had continued.

Your statement about 17-1800's slavery is confusing as no one, not even Bundy said slavery would be better than welfare, he stated he pondered if they would be better off, and no one so far as I have read has stated anything remotely close to supporting slavery over welfare, so I am still confused if you are debating yourself on this point, or are you trying to make a point? Did you follow the link to the book written about the time post slavery?

Bundy quote, "And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy?

I guess I take the word "slaves" to imply that one has no liberties, therefore, it's hard to imagine anyone that wonders such, values liberty and anyone that thinks it's reasonable for someone to wonder such, values liberties as well. What really blows my mind is someone that is fighting for his liberty against the federal government "wonders" whether being a slave, with no liberties is preferable to receiving a welfare check and people on a liberty-forum defending him for wondering such. It has nothing to do with race. Do you "wonder" if anyone would be better off without liberty? That is my point.

4. I am not sure that telling a woman that in fact her butt looks big in a pair of jeans is comparable to an elderly rancher that still talks as if were 1930. While the girl might be angry, the rest of the nation does not label him a sexist, a racist, or anything else.
I do understand what you are saying about things you shouldn't say which takes us back full circle to the statement: "saying things that you shouldn't say even if you believe it's true and thinking you're clever enough to talk your way out of it using some kind of egotistical pseudo-logic." or you could have simply said "being politically correct".

Might want to get some hearing aid batteries and glass cleaner so that you can hear what is actually said and read the text a little clearer, then you might be able to make a valid point.

I'm not sure what your point is there since you concede to understand my analogy of saying stupid things, whether you believe them to be true, is not always wise.

This whole back and forth between us is ridiculous. We're both liberty advocates. The only point I was making in my original post was that I, personally, would rather have a welfare check than have my liberties taken by force. No one can deny that many slaves were treated harshly. Just the fact that they had no liberties and were considered property would never make me "wonder" if I would be better off than receiving a welfare check. I'd rather die fighting for freedom than live as a traditional slave.