The point was to weed out hate speech and make unpopular beliefs illegal. They appear to have succeeded roundly. Now it's just a matter of making sure hate speech and unpopular beliefs only apply to things you don't like.
I would fully expect the latter of the two. It seems to be the modis operandi of the DC political machine these days. If they truly wanted that information, they'd raid NSA databases to retrieve that information (assuming the SoS and other key members of Congress weren't on an exempt list). I fully expect that (like 9/11) the information was available, but the actionable intelligence was not compelling enough to devote the resources. Then, like everyone else playing MMQB, there's a lot of railing against about what we should have done long after the fact for the sake of political gains. IMO, it is much more likely that the real reason that the Clintons don't want this released is because of their damning knowledge of their Foundation financials and its clear violations in the wake of it. The claim of administrations "wanting transparancy" should make anyone laugh to the point of vomiting anymore.
While we're reminiscing about heart-strings and scare tactic PSAs, does anyone remember the one about the father and daughter walking in a wasteland wearing gas masks? She was asking about what happened to all the oxygen, and her dad told her that we cut down the rainforest.
I'm bigger on the spending issue than the taxing issue in DC at the moment. Doing a flat tax that doesn't favor anyone and closes all the loopholes would be a great start in my opinion. Doing a fixed VAT for only new goods would be even better. Either one would involve placing trust in DC not to alter the rates... that's pure fantasy. It's every bit as much fantasy to think that DC would take in extra monies and spend them responsibly. Of the two evils, I choose the lesser.
Because.... the Democratic party did such an incredible job this last go around? From what I can tell, they did what the last administration did, but doubled down on the bailouts. Do you honestly see that big of a difference between the two parties in DC right now?
I don't liken the whole of the US economy to being like Greece, but I do liken Greece to be much like a number of states within the US. Comparatively, the US is abundant in resources and ready-built infrastructure. However, we have squandered major opportunities and future resources to fix a lot of that crumbling infrastructure when we opted to bail out private companies rather than re-invest in updating the power grid, roadways, telecom, etc. This is a symptom of de-incentivizing production in favor of political maneuvering with myriad root causes. ECU is spot on when he is telling us that the next series of bubbles is going to be fiscally catastrophic.
There was quite a bit more at play when one considers the proxy fighting of Britain and France in this entire process. In this day and age, I don't think you'll get any argument for the merits of slavery. However, to lionize one side in an effort to re-write history is an invitation to take away the opportunity to learn from it from those that may draw important parallels in the future.
It's no secret that Lee was hard on everyone (soldier and slave alike) under his command. It was only when he was with Jackson that he was considered the gentler of the two.
You are correct in bringing up a singular point about slavery that I've heard no one else speak of. The quickest way to destroy a culture is to break up their families. Much like the soldiers under Lee's command, slaves were conscripted rather than brought in of their own volition.
Now. What happened after five years' time? Did Lee hold to his word?