Forgive The Caustic Tone; Of This Politic

On the revelation of a near half of centurion: knowing the liberties that certain segments of this population could exert in former years and would gladly do, if permitted in this generation. Would it not be the case that the predominant Anglo-Saxon community, formed from the top-tier Anglos, the mid-tier, mixed-up, Anglo-Saxon, and the darker Saxons, would see the very same "color" stratification, that the modern members of the African Diaspora has seen. Please find some old articles, from the late 1770s and early 1800s, in the New England States for a view of the shaft among differing "peoples", if one can be found, that has not been destroyed, in the modern rewriting of World History.

With this said, and the knowledge of the trickery, deceptions, and gamesmanship found in the modern "politic washingtonia", what might have been the nature of the hidden alliances formed among men entering in a "contract" that would result in the partition of an unknown potential "swag".

Would the Anglos have conspired with the goal of "the eventually elimination" of the Anglo-Saxon and Saxon? Would the Saxon have rolled that nightmare back up "Liberty's Hill"? And, the poor diametrically opposed and composed Anglo-Saxon, jostled hither and yon, philosophically. how would they align themselves?

And, a phrase heard louder than the "Famed Shot Heard around the World!". "We hold these truths to be self-evident"....And, human legacy... the tendency of Laban's children, having a genetically-determined, inherited, often expressed comparable emotional quotient through generations. And, C-Spans filibusterers on social reform, a offensive, obscene line item in the midst of legislation that must pass, plus the spins and "fine" usages of language. Did you grasp that? Is that "fine" of exceeding quality; of exacting, unique meaning; of an illegal nature; or of all four? Did you grasp that? Does a quantitative error exist in that statement? Are we talking a formalized logic? And inclusive or exclusive disjunction, subsets of such, and possible permutations of order, implying precedence and priorities? Does a fragment of a sentence invalidate the entire written entry? This is the sport of politic; a "American legatum".

And, the original primary premise both delimiting, deleting, deluding, or this diluting,  the document of dreams, implied but deferred, on the basis that "We [who were the original men discussing this] hold the following truths self-evident". Which statements were true, and in the "minds" of the Anglo-only, the Anglo-Saxon, Saxon-only, the "aspectual" cross-cutting cliques of cohorts, con-men, and cronies. Were any of them actually intended for any American citizen or was is simply a draft, that was politically-expedient for garnering "campaign" support. Pizza, anyone? Campaign promises before the first campaign. Should they actually be kept for anyone within these borders?

Anyone's society secure?

And, on the topic of common sense, it is and always will be predicated on the beliefs' which we have upon entering a discussion. This is the same rules for the rigid formal logic, supposedly used by the legal profession. The premises support its very conclusion(s), formally proven by rules of predicate calculus and propositional logic, such a hypothetical syllogism, modus ponens, and modus tollen. 

So, as Rod Parsely said, if we are not all riding in Rhonda's Accord, we will never arrive at the same destination.