"What historcial claims did I make? I made my own opinions that you were offended by. Take them for what their worth. If you want to pay me for my time, I'll look up that information you seek for you if you really want historical references. I would have gladly taken the time to gather the information for free if I was treated with a bit more respect and sensarity."

Maybe that it is the biggest difference between us --- I only care about opinions that can be backed with historical references and fact. If you want to call the EP "watered down" or Congress' actions "inexcusable" or emancipation "anti-climactic" because that is how you "feel," then, frankly, so what? Without context and evidence to back up the strength of your opinions, they really don't offer much more than casual musings.

Good historical discussion is not about simply voicing random unsubstantiated thoughts, but expressing your perceptions of historical events, people, and issues according to available evidence. I shouldn't have to ask you to gather information to support your beliefs, you should already have it or be prepared to provide it when questioned.

Then again, maybe I ask too much. Trained historians come to expect this approach to history, but many people do not. This is a casual history discussion site, and perhaps should not be held to more serious standards. There are many other people on this site who provide information to support their ideas, so I don't think the problem is rampant.

In any case, you are of course free to discuss history however you would like. I would only suggest that you won't get too far asking others to pay you to research your own claims.