William Sullivan

From California's heart, I blog at thee.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

Turns out that the rumor about Christopher Nolan making the stupid decision to make Helen of Troy an African lady is true.

https://t.co/tCa95yaYtA

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

Your argument is anachronistic. . Lincoln was a “white supremacist,” by your logic. He said: “there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

He was against slavery, but that wasn’t the question that Lincoln was interested in solving in 1861, and you are kidding yourself if you believe he invaded the south to free slaves. That’s utter nonsense. It was to militarily coerce participation in the union of a state which no longer wished to be part of it, and which believed it had the same rights to self-determination as the Founders.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

I am not partial to that theory. The American Civil War was a result of 30 years of cold war and political posturing among states which believed themselves to be nation-states, in accordance with a voluntary union formed 85 years before.

Jefferson recognized in 1820 that the compromise represented battle lines. De Tocqueville noted the distinction between north and south in very practical economic and socioeconomic terms. The Lords and Commons and King were a distant memory when north and south began shooting at each other.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

So much more to it.

If you read the Constitution, at the very least, the Dred Scot decision was an open question. Even Lincoln gave grace to the Court for their decision, though he believed that they erred in judgment. What makes it a closed case now is the 13th and 14th, which came after the war.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

No, the South didn't want to "expand" slavery. If that were the case, the South would have pushed against the clause in the Constitution which outlawed the importation of slaves in 1808, or against the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 which allowed for eventual free states Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, etc.

The South pushed against the unilateral expansion of free states without equal annexation of slave states because after the Missouri Compromise of 1820, it was clear that it was a political battle line which determined the direction of the country. The South was losing political power at the federal level, and sought balance for its interests. There were pushes in the South for abolition, particularly in the early 19th century. In 1860, 2/3 of abolitionist group were Southern. Imagining that this was all about Southern white people wanting to keep black people enslaved at all costs is just a stupid modern fiction that, until 5 minutes ago, would have been recognized by most Americans since that time as just that - a stupid fiction.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

That’s silly. You can’t refute that Lincoln expressly told the country he would make it federally legal in 1861 in order to signal to the south that he wouldn’t ban slavery. Conversely, he did promise even stronger protective tariffs that would be painful to southern states. Maybe that was fairly important to the south?

https://t.co/Y53Ni4kyfi

Even still, you can’t argue that Lincoln invaded to ban slavery or free slaves, because that’s stupid. So you just commit to the ridiculous fairy tale that the north started the war to free the slaves and the south fought for nothing more than to keep them. Nonsense, but you lather, rinse, repeat.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

The war was only framed as ending slavery after Jan 1, 1863 when Lincoln issued the Proclamation in an effort to frame slavery as a core issue and prevent Euro intervention. That’s a fact. The rioters were simply responding to that signal in July 1863, as most had correctly assumed that Lincoln didn’t invade the South because he wanted to free the slaves - the latter suggestion being so stupid that no serious historian could ever take it seriously.

[Katie Pavlich @KatiePavlich]

“Proportional.”

Overwhelming response preferred.

[Wilfred Reilly @wil_da_beast630]

After Bosnia, Northern Ireland is literally the last Western country where I would try cutting off a citizen's head.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

@HelloFresh Enjoy the backlash - you’re disgusting and deserve every bit of the criticism against you right now.

[David Santa Carla 🦇 @TheOnlyDSC]

Watch this and you’ll understand why Karmelo Anthony didn’t leave after being asked 15 times.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

@martinez_j7902 Calm the fuck down, kid.

And the @hodgetwins beclown themselves by platforming this fuckin hick retard.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

Long overdue.

[Nick Sortor @nicksortor]

🚨 NOW: An Assistant US Attorney is now INSIDE the Los Angeles ballot processing center, as @USAttyEssayli announces MULTIPLE federal investigations into voter fraud in California

Expose it ALL and prosecute!

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

@NateSilver538 @joelpollak That’s because my state is a corrupt political cesspool that’s doing everything possible to run off productive citizens.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

@ratlpolicy I’m surprised he didn’t already have one. Well-deserved, great actor.

[Allie Beth Stuckey @conservmillen]

Imagine a post like this, but instead of referring to an unborn baby, he’s referring to his Down Syndrome toddler. Everyone would be aghast and enraged.

Yet the only differences between a toddler and an unborn baby are age and location. These aren’t reasons to kill someone outside the womb, so they don’t work as reasons to kill someone inside the womb, either.

No euphemisms or sympathetic language can mask the reality that killing a baby is brutal, painful, and evil.

People with special needs are no less valuable - and therefore no less deserving of life - than people without special needs.

Despite Jesse’s attempt to center this murder on his and his wife’s feelings, the truth is, in every abortion scenario, the primary - and typically only - victim is the baby. He or she deserves all of our sympathy and advocacy.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

You cannot claim that you’re aborting your Down syndrome child because you don’t want him to “suffer.” First of all, killing a child so they don’t suffer is psychopath serial killer logic. You’re on the same moral plane as Andrea Yates. Second, children with Down syndrome are famously some of the happiest people you’ll ever meet in your life. They are not in fact living in a state of perpetual torment. So what’s really happening is that you’re killing your child so that YOU won’t suffer the inconvenience of caring for him. This is about freeing yourself of your own perceived suffering. If you’re going to be a child killing sociopath, at least be honest about it.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

They think we are all stupid, but the truth is that all people witnessing what’s happening in CA fall into one of two camps.

There are those who know it’s fraud and correctly call it out, and those who know it’s fraud and lie about it because they support the fraud. That’s it.

[Tom Steyer @TomSteyer]

Donald Trump is not a fan of free and fair elections, but we already knew that.

California: We count every ballot. Thank you for your patience as we give democracy time to work.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

@4thOfJuly365 This kid deserved every bit of that, and more.

[William Sullivan @WillyJSullivan]

We can only hope.

[Seth Keshel @RealSKeshel]

All this BS in California is ensuring the Supreme Court kills the practice of counting late arriving mail ballots forever.