If you check your history, you'll find the 3/5 ths of a person element for slaves in the Constitution was a measure to ultimately END slavery.
*****************

How did this cause the end of slavery? Your explaination touched briefly on why there was a 3/5th compromise. Not any new info in regards to that. But nothing on how this caused slavery to end. Or that those involved in it had any intention of ending slavery. Madison was looking for a way to get the south to ratify the Constitution. This was the compromise to get it done.

Matthew McCallum:

YOU may have gotten the reference but the people that responded to Brian did not.

There is no attempt at mind-reading on my part - I specfically refer to Brian kind of wittily dropping a reference to tea-bagging and people in this thread responding to him thinking he was referring to something else.

Next:  The Secret Empire did not show Nixon's face on panel, however, it featured the leader of the empire occupying the Oval Office and when he was revealed, Cap was so shocked that his faith in America was shaken.  Who then are we supposed to think the leader was?  The White House Janitor?

Finally:  How would I feel if a Cap comic showed Obama as a Nazi or whatever example you used? 

Let's be REAL clear here - because this is where you missed my point:  I would not care for that because it would be OUT OF CHARACTER for the comic, which has long established roots as a book that only takes pokes at Republican Presidents.

That's how I'd feel and that's why I brought the point up.

There's a lot of crying and teeth gnashing about this, and frankly, it's not only nothing new, I'd go so far as to call it in character for the book.  What's more, it's a gross over-simplification and misunderstanding (on purpose or not; hard to tell with Republican Press Releases, frankly) to state that this story or any criticism of Tea-Baggers or other fringe lunatics is automatically "playing the race card"  As has been noted MANY times in this thread, the signs in the comic were based on real signs that tea-baggers carry when they're getting worked into a santorum, and frankly, there are much worse, much more sickening examples out there.

Google is your friend.

Not all tea-baggers are racist - no one says that.  No one believes that. The only place you hear that kind of talk is when the right wing corporate whore media is crying about their corporate sponsored events being criticized.  

Republicans are good at one thing - playing the victim card.

So, no.  No one is saying all tea-baggers are racist.  I, however, am saying that the tea-bagger movement is just the same old same old politics, and the participants either know the game they're playing or are dupes in the game. 

Awesome Irony Moment?  That's what the first "Tea Party" was, too!  That, too, wasn't honest citizens rising up against oppression, but rather the eliete business class convincing some drunken saps to do their dirty work for them to save them the burden of taxation.  Just like what's going on now. 

Have you been to a tea pary, Lee?  Have you spoken to the people involved, asked them about their concerns?  I imagine if you want some light shed on any inacuracies, a real live, actual tea party would be a good place to start.

Just click here and scroll down to find a group near you:

http://teapartypatriots.org/

Please get back to us, and let us know what you find.

I'm sorry, but when you have 8 years of a (white) blundering, inept Republican president who needlessly went back to war with Iraq (at considerable cost), alienated the rest of the world and handed out economic favors to his big business friends, it seems a bit strange that when a capable, intelligent (black) Democrat steps in to try his best to limit the extent of the crisis that started under the last guy's watch, and even gives out tax cuts in the middle of this to 95 percent of american families, he's the one who gets the protests.

A white guy fucks it up and nobody says a word throughout it all, then a black guy comes in and does a decent job of fixing it and there's  a mass movement practically shouting for him to be impeached for ruining their country.

I'm sorry, but even if we dismiss any association the Tea Party Peaople as such may have had with explicitly racist or offensive outbursts or placards at rallies, I think that the very fact that Obama is black has significantly lowered the threshold for protests against him, both from the Tea Party and Birthers (which we may treat as separate groups, though it is my impression that there are some significant overlaps).

I seriously think that no white president would be afforded this little respect, this little trust and with no white president would his actual accomplishments and policies have been ignored to such an extent by even his most vocal opponents.

White presidents get treated like The Boss. It may be a Boss you hate, but you still treat him like a Boss.  Obama gets treated like he's a servant or a janitor or some mid-level flunky.

I'm just waiting for people to start calling him George.

(edited for punctuation and emphasis)

Oh, I agree, it's not just his political opponents who seem to have a hard time getting over the fact that Obama is black, and thus might respond to him in ways where they subconciously treat him with less respect than if he was white.

Let me be clear, I don't think it's some form of conscious, Ku-KLux-Klan level virulent racism at work with the bulk of the Tea Party Movement. I do, however, think that on some level people across the political spectrum respond differently, with more unfounded skepticism and distrust of his intellect, his morals, his insight and his motives because they are somehow alienated or made uncomfortable by him being "different" in such an obvious way.

And I don't think people are necessarily aware of this "unfair response", and it is a difficult thing to acknowledge, if true. That subconciously  they're not giving this president the benefit of the doubt because they're scared of the black man.

A lot of people were made uncomfortable by JFK running for president, and that was just for being a catholic.

I know we're supposed to think of this as a "post racial" era, but we have to allow for the possibility that racial differences still make people very uncomfortable in ways they don't understand and acknowledge, even those who voted for Obama and who wouldn't think of themselves as racist in any way.