Would Honest Abe and Washington get along?

Would Honest Abe and Washington get along?

Attached: C4675EDF-755E-40F4-B096-03A4924E9BD5.png (871x535, 735K)

Other urls found in this thread:

politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/feb/20/facebook-posts/did-george-washington-offer-support-individual-gun/
youtube.com/watch?v=DWEIL1pV2NE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Wasn't Washington a terrible leader?

Abe would probably ask a bunch of questions to try to be a better leader, while Washington would ask/be pissed about where the fuck his slaves are.

so probably not.

No.

Lincoln hated slavery and Washington was a brutal slave owner. Lincoln would try to convince him that ending slavery would help the country and Washington would probably call him a ye old soyboy cuck and say he’s destroying the white race.

Attached: A411EC35-7D59-4032-8F1B-6D7A21DB1E2A.jpg (1280x720, 87K)

And a terrible general.

he wouldnt be really popular nowdays

Attached: George-Washington.jpg?resize=657%2C437.jpg (657x437, 47K)

They would have slash yaoi with honest abe as a power bottom.

>One rebelled against a group telling them how to run their nation.
>One stopped the rebellion of a group who left because they were being told how to run their nation state.

lincoln wanted to send slaves back to africa so he is right there with the alt right

I love me my guns but I just looked it up and apparently he never said that.

Most 'quotes' you see imposed on images and posted online were never actually said.

>What is context?

Washington would probably be horrified if he knew that we finally created a stable 1st world country and people are still using arguments he made back when it was nothing but forests and savages to justify owning a weapon that can kill 50 people in less than 5 mins.

really? where did you look it up?
i thought the tree of liberty was a washington quote but turns out it was thomas jefferson

Lincoln believed they would be better off in colonized African land because conditions were so shit for them in the US. After some AAs disagreed with him on that, he never brought it up again. He was going to push for Black suffrage until Booth shot him.

i find it hilarious how when you look back at the founding fathers and pretty much every american figure in history it becomes really blatant how anti american the modern left is

Attached: file.png (757x512, 363K)

Typed it into google.

>We contacted Edward Lengel, editor in chief of the Papers of George Washington project at the University of Virginia. He said "there is no evidence that Washington ever wrote or said these words, or any like them." Lengel cautioned that it’s impossible to prove a negative, but he added that he’s "as certain as he can be" that the quote did not originate from George Washington.

I thought he wanted to make them work in factories.

Maybe sending slaves back to africa would've meant something at that point. Slavery was alive and well while Abe was president, so I imagine that you still had people fresh from Africa.

Difference is that now people might as well be from here. Africa isn't an african american's real home anymore.

Except the South seceded because they were butthurt about Lincoln winning despite him repeatedly saying he wouldn’t mess with their slaves.

Attached: 1350281355350.jpg (900x506, 66K)

also the whole government system is based on rome so thats probaly the most stupid thing i heard today
go look up any modern philosopher, there arent many are there?

>>One stopped the rebellion of a group who left because they were being told how to run their nation state.
>this is what Dixiefags actually believed
lmao Shouldn't have imported so many blacks, not industrialize, and attack first.

Lincoln did the Confederacy a service. Can you imagine how much a shit heap that country would be if left to their own devices?

>Typed it into google.
so you pulled it out of your ass

That quote is 100% legit, fuck you!

They made the Constitution amendable for a reason. They had the foresight to see that people in the future with their fancy flying carriages probably wouldn’t hold the same values as them. It doesn’t necessarily make those people anti-American.

If anything it’s retarded to expect people 200 years from now to have the same values as you.

im very aware of the massive gap in success between hard working modern african migrants in america, and well you know.

So you trust a random image from the net over a source that uses a direct quote from a person who studies the person it is quoting for a living?

Needs work. You need to drop the 50 people part, that gives it away.

>implying Washington wouldn't get with the times
Before he died Washington was switching out his Black slaves for Irish ones because it was less costly and the laws were less cumbersome when it came to non-Black slaves. Washington today would probably be all aboard using Mexicans as farm fodder.

>Just industrialise bro

The founding fathers were slave owning, middle aged white men. I could not care less about their ideal America and no one should pretend they had the right idea.

>you cant possibly know what the founding fathers meant for americas future
well, you cant possibly know what the founding fathers meant for americas future

To be fair, the one time the local populace disagreed with a tax the government raised to pay off war debts incurred from gaining independence and formed an impromptu militia Washington had to suppress it. I'm not entirely sure people just having guns can fight off an oppressive government if they aren't getting support from somewhere else to ensure they aren't immediately crushed. Personal defense is another matter that I won't get into.

i dont trust a coward who doesnt want to admit he researches the mary sue for fact checking

>A small group of immigrants who had the money and drive to travel across the world compared to an entire indigenous population

Bring up counter evidence then if you have it

Yeah, and looked who won?

nice but you really should have stopped watching the simpsons a long time ago
>migrating to a new continent with a different language and a higer standar of education is easy
they also do better than whites on average so there is that

So it’s moot to say the Left is anti-American because they don’t hold the same values as the founding fathers.

bring up evidence first if you want any counter evidence you moron

>Slavery was alive and well while Abe was president, so I imagine that you still had people fresh from Africa.

Importation of slaves had actually been banned since 1807 (Jefferson had banned importation in Virginia way earlier in 1778), the civil war wouldn't free slaves until the late 1860s, 60 years gap isn't exactly 'fresh from Africa'.

You'd be have been lucky to find people who could still speak the local languages with any fluency.

i dont know what they secretly thought the moment before dying but there is an important historical document that says exactly what they wanted at that moment
thats as objective as you can get

someone already did and you dismissed it with no counter evidence

do you mean the quote with no source?
you realize that acting like this gives you less credibility than just saying i heard a guy say it once?

>only source of quote is a picture with said quote attached
>Somone does some reasearch, according to scholars of the man behind the supposed quote, he never said it
>NUH UH THAT DOESN'T COUNT
Amazing

Because you are comparing a small group of people to a larger group you fucking brainlet.

In a pool of 10 African immigrants with 8 succesful ones, you have an 80% success rate.

In a pool of 5000 African Americans, with 2000 succesful ones that’s a 40% succes rate.

Don’t you see how things get skewed when you make a comparison like that? Especially in a Capitalistic society. Do you really expect 80% of AAs to be in the 1%?

Washington was nice to his slaves because he knew he couldn't set them free even though he wanted to" faggot.

I think he'd be more horrified if he knew that there are still people so fucking ignorant that they could make an argument like yours without batting an eye.

Attached: 1513281323919.png (407x416, 10K)

This is why I said they made the Constitution amendable. They knew their personal values would not hold up in the future and America would need to adapt with the times to survive. It’s why our country has the oldest active Constitution in the world.

the burden of proof is on you
plus you are witholding information on purpose, i really pulled my picture from google but you didnt pull your quote from there

Attached: washington welcomes lincoln to heaven.jpg (600x847, 82K)

>Because you are comparing a small group of people to a larger group you fucking brainlet.
so no study ever done is valid because only a full scale census can give you accurate results?
black american should do better anyways, how come some guy with fucking nothing coming from a right turn of shithole nowhere can do so much better than someone who had access to free american education for generations now?

Why do you keep samefagging his post? Are you that triggered by the truth?

I'm not him, but here's a source. politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/feb/20/facebook-posts/did-george-washington-offer-support-individual-gun/

>the burden of [proving a negative] is on you
That's not how it works, fucktard. Either prove that Georgey said it or admit that he may not have said it.

Goddamn you are stupid and missed the entire point of his post.

Statistically there are more successful AAs than African immigrants. So yeah they are doing better.

No. The founding fathers were ready to tear each other apart and George Washington played a major role in keeping them together.
Yeah... cant really argue here. But he got the job done so who cares.

Attached: 1488485959119.png (400x400, 166K)

>Washington would be pissed

He was generally chill other than short bouts of explosive Hulk rage from what I understand.

Attached: but not the british children.jpg (424x402, 45K)

>plus you are witholding information on purpose
google doesn't host the images you search for, a website does and you haven't given the source for it yet.

Attached: 'fact'.png (324x271, 5K)

>This is why I said they made the Constitution amendable.
that isnt an argument
they didnt made it amendable because they wanted anything there repelled, they did so because they aknowleged that in the future things could be different
you havent established a single way in which thigs are different or that difference justifies changing something
so far changes on the constitution have been made to give the army and the state more power over the american public, not to make anything better for anyone

Even if this quote is true it's irrelevant. Guns back then took a 20 seconds to fire a single shot.

>politifact
well, now i know why you didnt want to share that link

>so far changes on the constitution have been made to give the army and the state more power over the american public, not to make anything better for anyone

I think that African Americans might disagree with you.

you are still witholding information
im going to assume you read politifact too

a single bullet could still kill a man

You should probably fact check that one, user.

Why the fuck would that make it irrelevant?

i think some slaves where doing better than most blacks are doing now

>so far changes on the constitution have been made to give the army and the state more power over the american public

I don’t even know why I started arguing with you. Have you read any of our Amendments?

Attached: 88986E94-0DED-4457-BF5B-1AEA56C0DAB2.jpg (214x220, 14K)

Oh we’re being baited.

What is wrong with using Politifact to support this argument? What issues are there, specifically, with this source?

ITT: comic book nerds debate American history like they’re experts.

Shitposters will always bitch about using reliable sources, but heaven help you if you dare to question the unparalleled wisdom of Infowars or American Thinker...

I'm not him and I'm also pretty certain Washington never said the quote in question here, but politifact is a very biased website. The entire point of the article goes out of it's way to somehow suggest Washington's actions during the Whiskey rebellion made him anti gun.

Attached: Bias.png (684x989, 309K)

You need to read more history dude. Though Washington owned slaves he believed that it was necessary to end the practice and had willed that his slaves should be emancipated upon his and his wife's death. Slavery was a complex issue and most of the founders were well aware of how inhuman it was. Unfortunately the nation's economy depended on it and most reasoned it was better to have a nation that flubbed its ideals rather than one that stood on them but couldn't continue to exist.

Actually, that quote only dates as far back as Bernie Mac

youtube.com/watch?v=DWEIL1pV2NE

>this site is biased
>I'm not going to explain why, it just is

you tell me, you where afraid of admiting it
funny how fact checking websites became a popular thing when everyone started talking hillary clintons charges and acussations, as far as i know social media has been thing during the entire presidential run of obama and facebook had to fire staff for meddling in favor of her
i can call you out but i cant stop you from being a moron who trusts those websites so we both lose

Yeah but a musket cant mow down bunch of kids
I did. Muskets takes ~1 min to fire 3 shots (protip: dont talk about the Puckle Gun. That thing was deemed a failure so it actually supports anti-gunner arguments)
How was Washington suppose to know that people would use the 2nd amendment to mow down kids in 20~21st century?

Attached: 1477467993077.jpg (387x278, 18K)

What do you think?

Washington = handsome middle/high class land owner
Lincoln = 4/10, lower class and rural

>Yeah but a musket cant mow down bunch of kids
a dead man is still a dead man

Is this a Russian bot?

Mediabiasfactcheck says that Politifact is as unbiased as possible, and has a high factual reporting value.

Besides, the Politifact article is demonstrating that Washington was most likely NOT anti-gun, but very likely felt that the power of the central government shouldn't be challenged or undermined by civvies with guns.

There was also the Girandoni air rifle. Which the founders actually fucking loved, it was just too expensive to adopt as a service rifle. The founders were well aware of repeating arms. Christ these were guys that advocated for citizens owning private warships.

I still can’t believe there are people who unironically watch Alex Jones.

There are so many stories of people who personally knew him saying the dude is just acting. Korey Coleman of Spill.com used to shard a studio with the man. He said the same shit about Jones.

>Mediabiasfactcheck
That's a very biased website dontchaknow?

>the Politifact article is demonstrating that Washington
there is no value on that article, ven the op was ashamed to admit to using it as a source

So are youYou can end it right now by providing evidence, but I've seen this tactic before:Scrutinizing counter evidence while providing every excuse not to hold the same standard for yourself and posting none

Wrong, Lincoln only adopted the "abolish slavery" to the North's cause because Brittain was ready to side with the South (since they relied on them for cotton) once the North propagated the abolishment of slavery Brittain wanted absolutely nothing to do with the South.

I remember when that comic first came out. A bunch of anons were salty as fuck.

i can take the thumbnail

I'm not talking about the Puckle Gun. There were other early repeaters around the founding of the United States. The point isn't that they were viable or widespread at the time, the point is that the founding fathers were A) aware of their existence, and B) intelligent enough to extrapolate that firearm technology would continue to evolve and advance. What you are suggesting is that the founders had no foresight whatsoever.

As another user mentioned, it was also legal to own artillery, shipboard or otherwise. The intentions of the founding fathers and the phrasing of the 2nd Amendment could not possibly be any more clear. Weapons getting more advanced does not suddenly mean the capacity for tyranny on the part of the government is somehow diminished; quite the opposite in fact.

Attached: Freedom of the Press.jpg (621x1024, 88K)

So did the military ones, which was the point. The people have to be the militia, everyone who votes is a citizen-soldier armed by himself like in ancient greece.

Oh, I can well imagine...

Slave owner vs a man who was a renown street fighter

i never claimed it was impossible for it to be a fake quote
what actually happenned
>here is quote
that quote is fake
>really? where did you read that?
i dont want to tell you
>why?
i dont want to tell you, fuck you, prove me wrong

then some random guy drops a link to everything democrats say is true becase i said so.com

Might as well ban speech because we didn't predict radio or the internet, like we gave up the 4th for digital docs.