Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

[Gabriel Reproba]

Friends, I got excited when I heard that the GOP would pass a law requiring Congress to start every day with a full reading of the second most Holy document in the world: The U.S. Constitution. I have discovered, however, that what was delivered is, as usual, not what was promised.

I had skipped work and settled in with my popcorn and cider to watch the event on CSPAN. I hung on every word, excited to hear our great GOP leaders read the document aloud on the floor of Congress. Almost immediately, however, and much to my dismay, I detected a problem. They LEFT PART OUT! Guess which part? That nancey-boy "No Writ of Habeas Corpus" rule? Wrong! All of Article Three (The Activist Judges Part)? Of course not! They left out the part about the value of Nigras.

Text NOT read from Article One Section Two:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

First they re-write Mark Twain by removing the words nigger and injun and now they want to rewrite history by denying that the three fifths provision ever existed? This is yet another example of the wussification of American politicians. At least the good old GOP had the guts to read the Constituion at all. I hear that when the Demon-crat Senate next convenes, they are going to open by burning a copy of the Constitution while reading Karl Marx's manifesto.

[Gabriel Reproba]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

Some people KNOW how to honor our heritage:

[Brother Scott]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

Had it not been for so called "slavery", American black negroes would still be running around in a loin cloth in the jungle hiding from lions and tigers. If anything, they should be thanking good God fearing Christians who brought them to this country. Today's black negroes would do well to take a lesson from their ancestors and learn to do a fair days work for a fair days meal!


And to get back on topic, this is just another case of the wussification of this country. I am thankful for the handful of strong conservative Christian women such as Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, and Michelle Bachman who make their male counterparts look like stepford wives.

Sometimes I think that I may be getting to progressive in thinking that it's OK for women to have jobs, wear regular pants and do something other than yard work, cook, and bear Christian children. But that's a sacrifice I may be willing to make in certain instances.

[Oakland "Reb" Griner]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

And what was wrong with the 3/5 valuation?

I find that to be EXTREMELY generous. And then they went and amended it all out to 100% anyhow. And we still have uppity negroidals and their lie-beral supporters too.

Sad day for the country . . .

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

And what was wrong with the 3/5 valuation?

I find that to be EXTREMELY generous. And then they went and amended it all out to 100% anyhow. And we still have uppity negroidals and their lie-beral supporters too.

Sad day for the country . . .

It's as if that period of our noble history it something we should forget ever happened.

It was a proud moment in history. We gave some status to a people who, until then, had no status. We made such an effort to get those Republican elected and now this!

[Ksevio]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

Well they had to pick one version to read. If they went with the original then we'd miss out on things like the 25th Amendment

[Gabriel Reproba]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

Well they had to pick one version to read. If they went with the original then we'd miss out on things like the 25th Amendment

There is ONE VERSION of the U.S. Constitution just like there is ONE VERSION of the Bible. The official version contains all the original text with all amendments added at the end. or have you never even read it? Seems Congress hasn't either!

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

They left out the part about the value of Nigras.

Text NOT read from Article One Section Two:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Brother Gabriel, perhaps you could look further into this. There are many of us here who have house nigras.

Whilst you are about it, there is this:

Iowa Territory was an organized territory of the United States from July 4, 1838 until Monday December 28, 1846 when the southeastern portion of it was separated to become Iowa, the 29th state. Now, at the time of the joining, there were Landovers (and may still be) in other states and territories.

This lead to confusion and when Iowa was formed, the first Governor of Iowa, James Clarke, (1812-1850) fought tirelessly to bring, what he saw as, a great Christian advantage to the State little knowing that it was already in Iowa - and no one pointed this out. So when the census of the new State was done, Landover was not included and never mentioned.

This omission could have been rectified but James Clarke died in a cholera epidemic on July 28, 1850 and Landover was forgotten and stayed unrepresented – which it found to be no disadvantage.

So without representation Landover paid no taxes to the Union and was self-governing. This meant that all laws passed in the name of Iowa, as described in the Act that brought Iowa into the Union, had no effect on Landover as no mention was made of it.

The next interesting part of history was the War of Northern Aggression. Minnesota and Iowa came out on the Union side but the Union never asked Landover. This was just as well for, bearing in mind God’s support of slavery, Landover had enjoyed excellent relations with the Confederacy under Jefferson Davis.

At 4:30 o'clock on the morning of April 12th, the Confederates, under General Beauregard, opened fire on Fort Sumter and the Civil War had begun. President Davis called for 100,000 troops to support the independence of the South and Landover.

On April 9, 1865 General Robert E. Lee surrendered the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia to Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant under terms written by the latter. It was perhaps excusable that the surrender terms did not include Landover.

Landover continued being at war with the Union until 1959, and might have continued longer had not the error been seen by the sharp-eyed Professor Jehoram Mordant of the history department of Landover Christian University.

After some discussion with the late Pastor Deacon Aaron Carver and some very prominent members of the then majority party of the administration (who were members of Landover Baptist Church), it was responsibly agreed that Landover should be integrated into the Union, and, when that integration was complete, peace should be declared on terms agreeable to Landover.

The process has taken some time and negotiations at the highest level continue and have slowly brought Landover into line with most (but not all, and with several provisos) of the present Federal and Union laws.[…]

[Jeremiah Abernathy]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

Disgusting.

The things lieberal apologists will do to try and seem politically correct. The fact that they'd try to hide this is just further proof of the blatant racism that's so rampant among the Demoncrats.

[Rev. Jim Osborne]

Re: Congress Skips Nigra Clause When Reading Constitution?!?!?!

And what was wrong with the 3/5 valuation?

I find that to be EXTREMELY generous. And then they went and amended it all out to 100% anyhow. And we still have uppity negroidals and their lie-beral supporters too.

Sad day for the country . . .

Exactly, brother! 3/5 is a majority of being a full human. I could see the lieberals and jigs getting upset if we said darkies were only like 1/10 of a person, but then again, they always have something to whine about when it comes to race relations.