Were the americans more freer after the American Revolution

[Skiz]

the pointy hat crowd no longer exists.

You've never been to Texas.

[bigboab]

J2 meant the hats are pointy, not the heads.

[Busyman]

Yes, yes that was covered. They were slaves. In fact slaves regarded as being human either.

So uhh...were the slaves freer?

Hi Busy. Did you mean 'In fact slaves were not regarded as being human either'.

If so, I am sure that was the case. Reading between the lines of various publications I am under the impression that coloured people are still treated like this. Especially in some areas of the south.

No there are no more slaves.

Also, kudos for the sentence in bold. You used sentence context to easily figure out my obvious (and accidental) omission. I'm sure your parse wasn't defied either.

[Busyman]

Hi Busy. Did you mean 'In fact slaves were not regarded as being human either'.

If so, I am sure that was the case. Reading between the lines of various publications I am under the impression that coloured people are still treated like this. Especially in some areas of the south.

Thank you, Robert.

I am inclined to grant him every opportunity to address his own faux pas, but he seems oddly attached to these periodic malaprops and is loathe to give them up easily.

Contrary to popular belief, there are no slaves left, and, while there are several pockets of extreme ignorance wherein are found people with skinheads and wrong ideas, the pointy hat crowd no longer exists.

The pointy hat crowd doesn't exist? Have you been living in a cave?

(pockets of extreme ignorance)

[j2k4]

the pointy hat crowd no longer exists.

You've never been to Texas.

The Klan still wears the hats?

Last white-goods-on-parade I saw was in Forsythe County, Georgia, just outside of Cumming, in about 1978.

I'm quite sure the Klan still exists, here and there, and I wouldn't be surprised they were in Texas.

Their numbers are dwindling, I'm sure, and they in no way constitute the norm.

There will still be a Klan remnant a century from now, too.

So what?

[j2k4]

Also, kudos for the sentence in bold. You used sentence context to easily figure out my obvious (and accidental) omission. I'm sure your parse wasn't defied either.

Then you revel in willful ignorance just for me?

I'm touched.

[Busyman™]

Also, kudos for the sentence in bold. You used sentence context to easily figure out my obvious (and accidental) omission. I'm sure your parse wasn't defied either.

Then you revel in willful ignorance just for me?

I'm touched.

Making up revelment is not your strong point. You're as transparent as the meat behind your eyes.

[j2k4]

Then you revel in willful ignorance just for me?

I'm touched.

Making up revelment is not your strong point. You're as transparent as the meat behind your eyes.

Gee whiz, you've stumped me again.

How do you do it.

[Busyman™]

Making up revelment is not your strong point. You're as transparent as the meat behind your eyes.

Gee whiz, you've stumped me again.

How do you do it.

Revelment is there just for you.

For the stumption.

[j2k4]

Gee whiz, you've stumped me again.

How do you do it.

Revelment is there just for you.

For the stumption.

Ah.

Your gibberish is intentional, then.

Well done.