Further inflamed sectional passions over the
institution of slavery and its future in the Republic.
Brooks, a <span>Democrat<span>, was an intense supporter of servitude and states' rights.
He is essentially associated with his May 22, 1856, ambush upon abolitionist
and Republican Senator Charles Sumner; Brooks beat Sumner with a stick on the
floor of the United States Senate in striking back for an abolitionist
subjugation discourse in which Sumner verbally assaulted Brooks' second cousin.</span></span>
All highlighted examples show how Herbert Hoover (1874-1964) believed that once the federal government started to take directly participate in the economic system the inevitable outcome would be the loss of freedom.
In the first and second examples he is saying that once the government starts to take part, it goes all the way into the private lives of individuals which would be an attack against the basis of freedom.
Hoover thought like this because for him freedom only exists in the private life when it's kept away and separate from the government.
The third and fourth examples have the same meaning as the priors only now he is talking specifically about economics. He believed the problem of the Great Depression should be figured out by private businesses and the government should only cushion the situation.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be the transcripts of deliberations between the Americans in the war room leading up to the invasion, although these are classified. </span></span>
The indians had to relocate
As a political philosopher, Jefferson favored the rights of states and a strictly limited federal government. This vision was contrary to that of John Marshall, who believed in the need for a strong and broad federal government, capable of resolving the conflicts of its people and guaranteeing the rights of its citizens.
