<span>Missouri's request for statehood touched off a sectional crisis between the northern, non-slave states and the south, slave holding states. The crisis was whether Missouri and future states in general would become slave holding states or not.</span>
Nope, that's false. Latin wasn't very easy to spell.
In trying to make sense of FDR's domestic policies, historians and political scientists have referred to a "First New Deal," which lasted from 1933 to 1935, and a "Second New Deal," which stretched from 1935 to 1938. (Some scholars believe that a "Third New Deal" began in 1937 but never took root; the descriptor, likewise, has never gained significant currency.) These terms, it should be remembered, are the creations of scholars trying to impose order and organization on the Roosevelt administration's often chaotic, confusing, and contradictory attempts to combat the depression; Roosevelt himself never used them. The idea of a "first "and "second" New Deal is useful insofar as it reflects important shifts in the Roosevelt administration's approach to the nation's economic and social woes. But the boundaries between the first and second New Deals should be viewed as porous rather than concrete. In other words, significant continuities existed between the first and second New Deals that should not be overlooked.
C. the republic and empire both had a professional army
