In an on-air response to the SOTU address, Sarah Palin, or as she is frequently referred to here "The MILF from the Frozen North," stated that not only did Russia win the "Space Race" but it alone was the cause for the collapse of the Soviet Union.....34 years later. President Ronald Reagan, were he alive, would likely take issue with that rather myopic view of events. In fact, that whirring sound you hear in the background is Reagan spinning in his grave! Despite Palin's perception that Katie Couric's question about her reading materials was a "gotcha moment," it does appear that world history has not been among them. Does the phrase "One small step for man..." ring a bell?
http://www.usnews.com/opini...a-sputnik-moment-jab
http://voices.washingtonpos...ird_sputnik_sto.html
http://www.politicususa.com/en/palin-sputnik

Meanwhile, back on THIS planet, Michele Bachmann (who Meghan McCain describes as "a poor man's Sarah Palin"....MEOW!!) very recently stated in a speech given before a GOP caucus in Iowa that the Founding Fathers "worked tirelessly to insure that slavery was no more" and were responsible for the eradication of the practice.....completely and blissfully overlooking that entire "3/5s of a person" declaration. They must have gotten quite tired indeed as slavery did NOT end in the US until the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was adopted in 1865! I wonder if she ever read about that little Civil War thing....
http://voices.washingtonpos...thews_had_me_on.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-b...etail?entry_id=81734
http://www.nydailynews.com/...avery_diversity.html

Both of these women are viewed as possible GOP presidential candidates in 2012. Let's hope their respective community colleges are offering certificate classes in American History.

Okay....let the "kill the messenger" festival begin!

[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 01-28-2011).]

quote Okay....let the "kill the messenger" festival begin!

You can bet on it.

------------------


Drive safely!

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 01-28-2011).]

The race for space was effectively the arms race, and yes, the arms race broke the Soviet Union.

The Founding Fathers did what they could to set the stage for the eventual end of slavery. At the time it was, I imagine, a very touchy subject. Just my opinion but I do believe slavery was on it's way out, the civil war simply accelerated it and as a side effect made the transition more volatile.

People who rush to judgement based on a statement they themselves do not fully understand or take a sound bite out of context usually have an agenda.

------------------
Dealing with failure is easy: work hard to improve. Success is also easy to handle: you've solved the wrong problem, work hard to improve.

quote Originally posted by DRA: The race for space was effectively the arms race, and yes, the arms race broke the Soviet Union. The Founding Fathers did what they could to set the stage for the eventual end of slavery. At the time it was, I imagine, a very touchy subject. Just my opinion but I do believe slavery was on it's way out, the civil war simply accelerated it and as a side effect made the transition more volatile.

Respectfully, both instances as you articulate them are tantamount to stating that the glaciers that crossed North America ions ago caused your basement to flood last week. The simple fact that the events follow each other chronologically does not justify a direct causative effect between the two.

Also, a great number of the Founding Fathers were themselves slaveholders, if memory serves me well.

Nice shot, though.

well, she'd know - she has much foriegn policy experience, with the Russia being right next door ya know.....

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Respectfully, both instances as you articulate them are tantamount to stating that the glaciers that crossed North America ions ago caused your basement to flood last week. The simple fact that the events follow each other chronologically does not justify a direct causative effect between the two. Also, a great number of the Founding Fathers were themselves slaveholders, if memory serves me well. Nice shot, though.

I'm quite aware that many of the founders of this nation were slave holders, a lot of people "owned" slaves during that time, all over the world, some societys still allow slavery on some level. Still does not change the fact that the birth of this nation and the path the founding fathers set us on pretty much insured that slavery could not survive indefinetly in America.

And it is my understanding that the cost of the arms race between the US and Soviets did indeed contribute more than a smidge to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Sputnik was a warning to the US tht they could deliver a nuclear weapon anywhere in the world, the space race was all about weapons delivery.

------------------
Dealing with failure is easy: work hard to improve. Success is also easy to handle: you've solved the wrong problem, work hard to improve.

quote Originally posted by DRA: I'm quite aware that many of the founders of this nation were slave holders, a lot of people "owned" slaves during that time, all over the world, some societys still allow slavery on some level. Still does not change the fact that the birth of this nation and the path the founding fathers set us on pretty much insured that slavery could not survive indefinetly in America. And it is my understanding that the cost of the arms race between the US and Soviets did indeed contribute more than a smidge to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Sputnik was a warning to the US tht they could deliver a nuclear weapon anywhere in the world, the space race was all about weapons delivery.

I dread falling prey to the tendency to "cut and paste" (forgive the intrusion, Avengador ) but perhaps it's appropriate in this instance. For the perusal of any interested parties, I'll include a link to this article as well though I'm certain a few well-spent minutes with a search engine would reveal many others. While to some it could and obviously does appear that a direct connection between the Space Race and the collapse of the Soviet Union could theoretically be perceived as one in the same, many historians take a somewhat contrary view.

As far as the matter of slavery in America is concerned, I personally view your specific interpretation of events as charitable at best.....considering, of course, that I have a definitive "dog in the hunt" as it were.

quote Fall of the Soviet Union In December of 1991, as the world watched in amazement, the Soviet Union disintegrated into fifteen separate countries. Its collapse was hailed by the west as a victory for freedom, a triumph of democracy over totalitarianism, and evidence of the superiority of capitalism over socialism. The United States rejoiced as its formidable enemy was brought to its knees, thereby ending the Cold War which had hovered over these two superpowers since the end of World War II. Indeed, the breakup of the Soviet Union transformed the entire world political situation, leading to a complete reformulation of political, economic and military alliances all over the globe. What led to this monumental historical event? In fact, the answer is a very complex one, and can only be arrived at with an understanding of the peculiar composition and history of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was built on approximately the same territory as the Russian Empire which it succeeded. After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the newly-formed government developed a philosophy of socialism with the eventual and gradual transition to Communism. The state which the Bolsheviks created was intended to overcome national differences, and rather to create one monolithic state based on a centralized economical and political system. This state, which was built on a Communist ideology, was eventually transformed into a totalitarian state, in which the Communist leadership had complete control over the country. However, this project of creating a unified, centralized socialist state proved problematic for several reasons. First, the Soviets underestimated the degree to which the non-Russian ethnic groups in the country (which comprised more than fifty percent of the total population of the Soviet Union) would resist assimilation into a Russianized State. Second, their economic planning failed to meet the needs of the State, which was caught up in a vicious arms race with the United States. This led to gradual economic decline, eventually necessitating the need for reform. Finally, the ideology of Communism, which the Soviet Government worked to instill in the hearts and minds of its population, never took firm root, and eventually lost whatever influence it had originally carried. By the time of the 1985 rise to power of Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union’s last leader, the country was in a situation of severe stagnation, with deep economic and political problems which sorely needed to be addressed and overcome. Recognizing this, Gorbachev introduced a two-tiered policy of reform. On one level, he initiated a policy of glasnost, or freedom of speech. On the other level, he began a program of economic reform known as perestroika, or rebuilding. What Gorbachev did not realize was that by giving people complete freedom of expression, he was unwittingly unleashing emotions and political feelings that had been pent up for decades, and which proved to be extremely powerful when brought out into the open. Moreover, his policy of economic reform did not have the immediate results he had hoped for and had publicly predicted. The Soviet people consequently used their newly allotted freedom of speech to criticize Gorbachev for his failure to improve the economy. The disintegration of the Soviet Union began on the peripheries, in the non-Russian areas. The first region to produce mass, organized dissent was the Baltic region, where, in 1987, the government of Estonia demanded autonomy. This move was later followed by similar moves in Lithuania and Latvia, the other two Baltic republics. The nationalist movements in the Baltics constituted a strong challenge to Gorbachev’s policy of glasnost. He did not want to crack down too severely on the participants in these movements, yet at the same time, it became increasingly evident that allowing them to run their course would spell disaster for the Soviet Union, which would completely collapse if all of the periphery republics were to demand independence. After the initiative from Estonia, similar movements sprang up all over the former Soviet Union. In the Transcaucasus region (in the South of the Soviet Union), a movement developed inside the Armenian-populated autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabagh, in the Republic of Azerbaijan. The Armenian population of this region demanded that they be granted the right to secede and join the Republic of Armenia, with whose population they were ethnically linked. Massive demonstrations were held in Armenia in solidarity with the secessionists in Nagorno-Karabagh. The Gorbachev government refused to allow the population of Nagorno-Karabagh to secede, and the situation developed into a violent territorial dispute, eventually degenerating into an all-out war which continues unabated until the present day. Once this “Pandora’s box” had been opened, nationalist movements emerged in Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, Byelorussia, and the Central Asian republics. The power of the Central Government was considerably weakened by these movements; they could no longer rely on the cooperation of Government figures in the republics. Finally, the situation came to a head in August of 1991. In a last-ditch effort to save the Soviet Union, which was floundering under the impact of the political movements which had emerged since the implementation of Gorbachev’s glasnost, a group of “hard-line” Communists organized a coup d’etat. They kidnapped Gorbachev, and then, on August 19 of 1991, they announced on state television that Gorbachev was very ill and would no longer be able to govern. The country went into an uproar. Massive protests were staged in Moscow, Leningrad, and many of the other major cities of the Soviet Union. When the coup organizers tried to bring in the military to quell the protesters, the soldiers themselves rebelled, saying that they could not fire on their fellow countrymen. After three days of massive protest, the coup organizers surrendered, realizing that without the cooperation of the military, they did not have the power to overcome the power of the entire population of the country. After the failed coup attempt, it was only a few months until the Soviet Union completely collapsed. Both the government and the people realized that there was no way to turn back the clock; the massive demonstrations of the “August days” had demonstrated that the population would accept nothing less than democracy. Gorbachev conceded power, realizing that he could no longer contain the power of the population. On December 25, 1991, he resigned. By January of 1992, by popular demand, the Soviet Union ceased to exist. In its place, a new entity was formed. It was called the “Commonwealth of Independent Republics,” and was composed of most of the independent countries of the former Soviet Union. While the member countries had complete political independence, they were linked to other Commonwealth countries by economic, and, in some cases, military ties. Now that the Soviet Union, with its centralized political and economic system, has ceased to exist, the fifteen newly formed independent countries which emerged in its aftermath are faced with an overwhelming task. They must develop their economies, reorganize their political systems, and, in many cases, settle bitter territorial disputes. A number of wars have developed on the peripheries of the former Soviet Union. Additionally, the entire region is suffering a period of severe economic hardship. However, despite the many hardships facing the region, bold steps are being taken toward democratization, reorganization, and rebuilding in most of the countries of the former Soviet Union.

http://www.coldwar.org/arti...the_soviet_union.asp


edited for spelling error.

[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 01-28-2011).]

So if someone disagrees with you, then it is "...kill the messenger...".

I know you meant it as funny. Don't know if the subsequent post did/does.


Regarding your points, it seems to be YOU that is completely but not blissfully overlooking that entire "3/5s of a person" declaration. Indeed, many of the founders of the constitution were slave owners and believed in slavery. They didn't believe black people even counted as PEOPLE. Bachmann, I am sure, is making NO defense of those people.

They were trying to form a UNION. People had lots of different beliefs and viewpoints. It was highly contentious.

So the founding fathers Bachmann (I assume, I didn't read what she said and don't follow her. But her contention as you stated is correct) is referring to is those that DID work tirelessly against slavery. But they were working against a sizeable number of people that had their "industry" and finances BASED on slavery.

So in order to get a union, they couldn't get that blacks were a person with full rights. There would have been no union.


What you are ignoring is what a MONUMENTAL accomplishment it was that they even got the 3/5ths of a person declaration. That was the first COMPROMISE STEP to get the foot in the door toward continuing to work toward full acknowledgment that blacks were a person, in the first place, and then had the rights of all citizens.


You guys sit back in your comfortable 2011 lives with all the rights that you have, and sit back and criticize people without trying to understand what it was like over THREE HUNDRED years ago. A WOMAN couldn't even vote back then. Yeah. A WHITE woman.

Some courageous founders got 3/5s and you guys are sitting back and thinking what wimps and what compromisers. Completely overlooking what, in the 1700's, was a STAGGERING accomplishment.


But yeah, sit back with your myopic 2011 viewpoint. But SHE is the one that was right. It was (not all by any means) many of the originators of the constitution that went completely against the ingrained culture they grew up in and had been established way of living for hundreds of years, and PLANTED THE SEED that OVER TIME was the foundation for the eradication of the practice. Yes, it took almost 100 years to completely accomplish it. Which to a person is a lifetime, but in historical context and considering the radical change to society and culture it was, is relatively short.

Blissfully overlooking. Hmmmph. Pot calling kettle.

Regarding Palin, it wasn't the "Space Race" ALONE that was the cause for the collapse. It was A contributing factor.


I don't even care about Palin or Bachmann. I do care about historical accuracy.

Back to the subject at hand.....Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and their most recent comments on both matters.

While reasonable parties can debate the "cause and effect" of both issues, do you think it appropriate or at the very least, well-considered, that a potential candidate for the presidency (or, in this specific instance, TWO of them) make such blanket declarations so easily open to, dare I say, academic and/or historical disregard?

In the early 80s I was watching a news report about the changing USSR.
When I saw a Russian girl with pink hair riding a motorcycle complaining about the government.
That is when I knew the government had lost control and its days were numbered.
It was the girl with the pink hair that brought down the USSR.
Some people just don't get there dues!

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Back to the subject at hand..... do you think it appropriate or at the very least, well-considered, that a potential candidate for the presidency (or, in this specific instance, TWO of them) make such blanket declarations so easily open to, dare I say, academic and/or historical disregard?

You mean like candidate Obama for 2012 ?

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: make such blanket declarations

Sure. Palin shouldn't have done it.

Bachmann's statement was factually correct. Well, I don't know if they worked "TIRELESSLY". And, again, it wasn't ALL the "founding fathers" that did it. Some were absolutely fighting AGAINST it. So I guess her "blanket declaration" was to use "founding fathers" as a blanket GROUP, when it was really only MANY of the "founding fathers".

Is THAT your beef?

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Back to the subject at hand.....Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and their most recent comments on both matters. While reasonable parties can debate the "cause and effect" of both issues, do you think it appropriate or at the very least, well-considered, that a potential candidate for the presidency (or, in this specific instance, TWO of them) make such blanket declarations so easily open to, dare I say, academic and/or historical disregard?

Kind of like when BO said there were 57 states and went on to win, BFD.
I still to this day I do not understand the lefts desire to attack any conservative woman who rises to any prominence.
They attacked Miss Rice constantly, one even calling her Aunt Jemima.
Do they go in the bathroom and jack off after the attacks?

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Back to the subject at hand.....Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and their most recent comments on both matters. While reasonable parties can debate the "cause and effect" of both issues, do you think it appropriate or at the very least, well-considered, that a potential candidate for the presidency (or, in this specific instance, TWO of them) make such blanket declarations so easily open to, dare I say, academic and/or historical disregard?

I don't see the academic or historical disregard.

The article you posted in fact supports the fact that the Soviet Union collapsed at least in part due to economic collapse brought on by the Space/Arms race.
Would there have been social unrest at the level they experienced if the people were not standing in line for a loaf of bread or a roll of toilet paper. If the money spent competeing with the US had been directed toward entitlements and freebies I somehow doubt the people of the soviet satelites would have been so quick to get out.

frontal lobe said pretty much the same thing I was saying about the slavery issue, although much more eloquently and with lots of big words. His spelling is also probably much better than mine! LOL

------------------
Dealing with failure is easy: work hard to improve. Success is also easy to handle: you've solved the wrong problem, work hard to improve.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Do they go in the bathroom and jack off after the attacks?

Wow..classy that.

Enjoy.

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Wow..classy that. Enjoy.

So are you calling it quits?
I was interested on your take on what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union if it wasn't due to massive spending on rockets and inability to meet the needs of the people due to the massive spending.
Was also curious what your take on the end of slavery in the US if it was not due to the values and freedoms set forth by the guys who had the nads to throw off british rule and who founded the nation.

Dont forget the "Smart Kids" while slamming the right.

The Chosen one: "57 States" and save gas by increasing the amount of air in your tires....

Hillary:
I am all for White Supremacy...

Nancy Pelosi: "We need to pass it first to find out what's in it." (Referring to Obamacare)

Two can play that game.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: They attacked Miss Rice constantly, one even calling her Aunt Jemima.

Wow. Classy that. (yes, the other comment was not classy. I'm not excusing that.)

I don't think conservative women should be exempt from criticism, just like a man shouldn't.

Here is the depth of the criticism today:

Ha! Palin said the space race was THE cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union, when it was only a big part of it. Wowwa. Zing. GOTCHA!

And Bachmann said the founding fathers worked tirelessly, when it wasn't ALL the founding fathers, and we have no indication of how hard they worked at it! Wowwa.


I would imagine that "3/5s of a person" thing would come across pretty insulting, UNLESS it is put in the perspective of that it WAS ZERO FIFTHS for HUNDREDS of years.

But, nope. No credit for that. Not good enough. This sentiment coming from the comfortable 2011 a.d. armchair.

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Wow..classy that. Enjoy.

Either that or a form of mental masturbation.

quote Originally posted by DRA: So are you calling it quits? I was interested on your take on what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union if it wasn't due to massive spending on rockets and inability to meet the needs of the people due to the massive spending. Was also curious what your take on the end of slavery in the US if it was not due to the values and freedoms set forth by the guys who had the nads to throw off british rule and who founded the nation.

and, dont forget a pointless war in Afganistan....
yes, I'd agree military spending was the main factor
and, dont forget, there are still those who think it was all Reagan.

but, to say that creating a satellite, the spark which lit the big bang of tech we enjoy today, is a bad thing, is a bucket of sillyness.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: Wow. Classy that. (yes, the other comment was not classy. I'm not excusing that.) I don't think conservative women should be exempt from criticism, just like a man shouldn't. Here is the depth of the criticism today: Ha! Palin said the space race was THE cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union, when it was only a big part of it. Wowwa. Zing. GOTCHA! And Bachmann said the founding fathers worked tirelessly, when it wasn't ALL the founding fathers, and we have no indication of how hard they worked at it! Wowwa. I would imagine that "3/5s of a person" thing would come across pretty insulting, UNLESS it is put in the perspective of that it WAS ZERO FIFTHS for HUNDREDS of years. But, nope. No credit for that. Not good enough. This sentiment coming from the comfortable 2011 a.d. armchair.

You have a point.......... wear a hat and no one will notice.

Seriously, I agree with the 2011 observation, a lot of the younger folks do not realize how young our Country is. If it didn't happen in the last 25 years it's ancient history.
According to my calculations we are due for a major "teachable moment", and if history is any indication...... it will not be a good one.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: I don't think conservative women should be exempt from criticism, just like a man shouldn't.

Neither do I, but when it resembles school boys making fun of one of the girls, that is when it is about a classy as my comment.
Still think it is some form of stimulation, mental or physical.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: but, to say that creating a satellite, the spark which lit the big bang of tech we enjoy today, is a bad thing, is a bucket of sillyness.

That remains to be seen!

So if Russia still has a space program in a year or two, and we don't (we'll be "renting" theirs instead), doesn't that mean they win the space race by default?

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: So if Russia still has a space program in a year or two, and we don't (we'll be "renting" theirs instead), doesn't that mean they win the space race by default?

For the short term, until we reboot ours soon after, and reveal the Starship Enterprise parked in Area 52...

Easy solution for the whole mess.
Get women out of politics, in fact. .don't even let them vote anymore. Repeal Sufferge

Things were going quite nicely until we let all these uppity women get involved

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: So if Russia still has a space program in a year or two, and we don't (we'll be "renting" theirs instead), doesn't that mean they win the space race by default?

Yup.
Funny, this "history" thing.
Moments never really quite "finish", do they?......

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Respectfully, both instances as you articulate them are tantamount to stating that the glaciers that crossed North America ions ago caused your basement to flood last week. The simple fact that the events follow each other chronologically does not justify a direct causative effect between the two.

Not exactly, Doni. The whole reason the space race began was because if they could put a satellite in orbit, they could put weapons up there as well. It became a race to demonstrate technological superiority as much as anything else, but it was precipitated on the basis of an arms race.

Also, the USSR beat the U.S. in the space race in virtually every goal until we landed on the moon. We were playing catch up through the 50's and 60's. Landing a man on the moon first was the only win we had, but it did win us the overall race.

On a side note, a search for "The MILF from the Frozen North" turns up exactly one hit - you.

Actually the Founding Fathers did work to finally ban the importation of slaves into the USA in 1807.

The 3/5 clause wasn't to devalue black slaves, it was to lessen the representation of the south (through the census and apportionment of representatives) so that they wouldn't have more votes. That was intended to make it easier to outlaw slavery.

Three-fifths compromise

The Three-Fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position.

The three-fifths compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:

"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."

This is yet another reason why i love this forum. Yet another history lesson. I hated history in school but somehow i like it here.

the people under red rule caused the fall of the USSR
the claim raygun had anything to do with it
is just a BIG LIE
SPUTNIK had zip to do with it too
nor did the debt that the the frozzen dizzy one babbled about
remember the reds government owned EVERYFREEKING THING

all the early rockets were military warbirds from the v-2 to the man carrying atlas and titian
and the military needed to test the rockets anyway
so cost was really not that much extra to send up the sputnik

the first non-military rocket was the Saturn moon rocket

quote Originally posted by ray b: the bear got one right on 3/5 of a person except he kind of skipped over 3/5 's rule giving no rights and while the law did devalue slaves in fact if not intent

And you skipped over the fact that it was a COMPROMISE. The abolitionists wanted slavery eliminated, but they knew that the south wouldn't accept it. Eventually, we had the civil war over this (and other issues, it wasn't entirely over slavery). They were trying to BUILD a country. The issue eventually divided the country.

quote Originally posted by Doni Hagan: Back to the subject at hand ..... do you think it appropriate or at the very least, well-considered, that a potential candidate for the presidency (or, in this specific instance, TWO of them) make such blanket declarations so easily open to, dare I say, academic and/or historical disregard?

How about factual disregard ?
"The police acted stupidly".

Being Canadian can I ask a question?

Is it true that the Republican Party was founded with the stated purpose of abolishing slavery?

This is what I've been told, but I am no student of American politics of the 19th Century

Arn

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: Being Canadian can I ask a question? Is it true that the Republican Party was founded with the stated purpose of abolishing slavery? This is what I've been told, but I am no student of American politics of the 19th Century Arn

It would seem so...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...arty_(United_States)

Founded in northern states in 1854 by anti-slavery activists, modernizers, ex-Whigs and ex-Free Soilers, the Republican Party quickly became the principal opposition to the dominant Democratic Party. It first came to power in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency and Republicans in control of Congress and the northern states. It oversaw the saving of the union, the destruction of slavery, and the provision of equal rights to all men in the American Civil War and Reconstruction, 1861-1877.[2]

Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican President (1861–1865).
The first official party convention was held on July 6, 1854 in Jackson, Michigan. The Republicans' initial base was in the Northeast and the upper Midwest. With the realignment of parties and voters in the Third Party System, the strong run of John C. Fremont in the 1856 Presidential election demonstrated it dominated most northern states. Early Republican ideology was reflected in the 1856 slogan "free labor, free land, free men."[3] "Free labor" referred to the Republican opposition to slave labor and belief in independent artisans and businessmen. "Free land" referred to Republican opposition to plantation system whereby the rich could buy up all the good farm land and work it with slaves, leaving the yeoman independent farmers the leftovers. The Party had the goal of containing the expansion of slavery, which would cause the collapse of the Slave Power and the expansion of freedom.[4] Lincoln, representing the fast-growing western states, won the Republican nomination in 1860 and subsequently won the presidency. The party took on the mission of saving the Union and destroying slavery during the American Civil War and over Reconstruction. In the election of 1864, it united with pro-war Democrats to nominate Lincoln on the National Union Party ticket.

Interesting how you all went from discussing Palin's opinion on the fall of Russia to our founding fathers and slavery..

From the original topic: I do agree with her that it was a key factor in their fall, but i don't know if i agree they won the "space race". I don't think either side really won that and it was more of a tie. But i can see how someone might feel it was won, by either side.