(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:32 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:30 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  So no answer as to how statehood for DC benefits for the rest of the country.

Gotcha

How does NC statehood benefit the rest of the country. I suppose it helped prop slavery up for a while, if you'd like to count that. I wouldn't

Nice try, but NC was one of the original colonies.

Ok..what about Mississippi? WTF have they ever done except rebel and abuse whatever power they've been granted?

The Mississippi River was a big draw. It was as important then as interstate highways are now.

So was the Potomac. Try again

(11-11-2016 03:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:32 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:30 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  How does NC statehood benefit the rest of the country. I suppose it helped prop slavery up for a while, if you'd like to count that. I wouldn't

Nice try, but NC was one of the original colonies.

Ok..what about Mississippi? WTF have they ever done except rebel and abuse whatever power they've been granted?

The Mississippi River was a big draw. It was as important then as interstate highways are now.

So was the Potomac. Try again

Not the same at all. The potomac separates two states already, it isn't nor was it the sole possession of DC.

Try again.

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

(11-11-2016 03:32 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:30 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Again, don't like DC being a state, then roll Wyoming into South Dakota or Utah or Montana.

The problem is that 40 million Blacks get zero opportunities to elect a Senate candidate where they are the majority. 40 million people live in 21 white dominated states with FORTY TWO Senators.

Look, we have small states. We have states with less population. What we don't have are Black majority states.

So no answer as to how statehood for DC benefits for the rest of the country.

Gotcha

How does NC statehood benefit the rest of the country. I suppose it helped prop slavery up for a while, if you'd like to count that. I wouldn't

Nice try, but NC was one of the original colonies.

Ok..what about Mississippi? WTF have they ever done except rebel and abuse whatever power they've been granted?

Mississippi gave us Ray mabus lol and that crooked Hillary surrogate from pascagoula jennifer palmieri. So I agree. Nothing.

(11-11-2016 03:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

Very easy... Has more than 60,000 people...check

Okay...You're a state.

(11-11-2016 03:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

Very easy... Has more than 60,000 people...check

Okay...You're a state.

Okay, and what are the benefits to the rest of the states?

200,

I'd be glad to. Just tell me which criteria were used to scrutinize each of the current 50 states.

(11-11-2016 03:46 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  200,

I'd be glad to. Just tell me which criteria were used to scrutinize each of the current 50 states.

You will have to do a little searching on your own for that. It's a little vague, but I'm sure if you want to prove your point, you will put in the time and effort.

I did search. Best I can find, the only reason was if you had enough population.

(11-11-2016 03:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

Very easy... Has more than 60,000 people...check

Okay...You're a state.

Has no significant arable land to support its citizens' need for food. Not a state.

Population does not make a city worthy of Statehood any less than the ability to feed itself should.

(11-11-2016 03:49 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I did search. Best I can find, the only reason was if you had enough population.

Took me about 15 minutes to find the 'general guidelines' that were used way back when. It did vary a bit state to state since there isn't a formal process, but one common theme was the benefit provided to the existing states.

What is the benefit for the other 50 states if DC were to become a state?

(11-11-2016 03:49 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

Very easy... Has more than 60,000 people...check

Okay...You're a state.

Has no significant arable land to support its citizens' need for food. Not a state.

Population does not make a city worthy of Statehood any less than the ability to feed itself should.

So lets get rid of Wyoming. It imports food. Just roll it into Montana.

49R - yeah, that won't work. Many states net import food.


200,

Perfect! That gives you a 100% subjective criteria, allowing you to approve or deny any statehood request for any reason you dream up.

(11-11-2016 03:57 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:49 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 03:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R,

So you're saying that you can't think of an actual reason that DC doesn't meet the definition of a state?

Why don't you tell us why DC should be considered as a state under the same scrutiny that other states were admitted?

Very easy... Has more than 60,000 people...check

Okay...You're a state.

Has no significant arable land to support its citizens' need for food. Not a state.

Population does not make a city worthy of Statehood any less than the ability to feed itself should.

So lets get rid of Wyoming. It imports food. Just roll it into Montana.

I would assume Wyoming was added for it's natural resources.

(11-11-2016 03:58 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  49R - yeah, that won't work. Many states net import food.


200,

Perfect! That gives you a 100% subjective criteria, allowing you to approve or deny any statehood request for any reason you dream up.

Congress, not me. Since it seems you and Tom need things explained on about a 1st grade level, I'll put it another way. Statehood for DC would have to benefit the rest of the states.

Please list the benefits to the rest of the states.

So let's say DC becomes a state and elects 2 black Senators. Will those black Senators represent DC or will they represent blacks in say, Alabama? I would say that if they don't represent the people who sent them to DC, on the Metro I guess, then they will not be in office long.

Of course this is all academic as DC will become a state right after Harry Reid becomes a Republican. So in the mean time I'm going to go outside and try to deflect the rays of the sun back into space. I've got a little piece of foil here to help me. I'm sure it will work.

(11-11-2016 04:01 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  So let's say DC becomes a state and elects 2 black Senators. Will those black Senators represent DC or will they represent blacks in say, Alabama? I would say that if they don't represent the people who sent them to DC, on the Metro I guess, then they will not be in office long.

Of course this is all academic as DC will become a state right after Harry Reid becomes a Republican. So in the mean time I'm going to go outside and try to deflect the rays of the sun back into space. I've got a little piece of foil here to help me. I'm sure it will work.

What happens if DC were a state and they elected a white dude?

(11-11-2016 04:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 04:01 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  So let's say DC becomes a state and elects 2 black Senators. Will those black Senators represent DC or will they represent blacks in say, Alabama? I would say that if they don't represent the people who sent them to DC, on the Metro I guess, then they will not be in office long.

Of course this is all academic as DC will become a state right after Harry Reid becomes a Republican. So in the mean time I'm going to go outside and try to deflect the rays of the sun back into space. I've got a little piece of foil here to help me. I'm sure it will work.

What happens if DC were a state and they elected a white dude?

I'm sure someone would declare racism.

(11-11-2016 04:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 04:01 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  So let's say DC becomes a state and elects 2 black Senators. Will those black Senators represent DC or will they represent blacks in say, Alabama? I would say that if they don't represent the people who sent them to DC, on the Metro I guess, then they will not be in office long.

Of course this is all academic as DC will become a state right after Harry Reid becomes a Republican. So in the mean time I'm going to go outside and try to deflect the rays of the sun back into space. I've got a little piece of foil here to help me. I'm sure it will work.

What happens if DC were a state and they elected a white dude?

It would because a majority of black people wanted that candidate.

(11-11-2016 04:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 04:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-11-2016 04:01 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  So let's say DC becomes a state and elects 2 black Senators. Will those black Senators represent DC or will they represent blacks in say, Alabama? I would say that if they don't represent the people who sent them to DC, on the Metro I guess, then they will not be in office long.

Of course this is all academic as DC will become a state right after Harry Reid becomes a Republican. So in the mean time I'm going to go outside and try to deflect the rays of the sun back into space. I've got a little piece of foil here to help me. I'm sure it will work.

What happens if DC were a state and they elected a white dude?

It would because a majority of black people wanted that candidate.

If we are going to ever get past race, why would we segregate ourselves politically by race like the do in the middle east?