https://www.c-span.org/video/?...-monument-dedication

How things have changed. Strom Thurmond monument dedication.

A poll has been taken on Confederate monuments.

Q: Do you think statues honoring leaders of the Confederacy should:

A) Remain as a historical symbol.

B) Be removed because they are offensive to some people.

Of all polled:
62% said they should remain.
27% said they should be removed.

Party:
======
Republicans:
86% said they should remain.
6% said they should be removed.

Independents:
61% said they should remain.
27% said they should be removed.

Democrats:
44% said they should remain.
47% said they should be removed.

Race:
=====
White:
67% said they should remain.
25% said they should be removed.

African-American:
44% said they should remain.
40% said they should be removed.

Hispanic:
67% said they should remain.
24% said they should be removed.




Source (Page 11): http://maristpoll.marist.edu/w...,%202017.pdf#page=11

quote:

Originally posted by Cookster:
A pregnant black woman is their symbol of hope?! Interesting.

Statistically speaking, the odds against that baby making it out of the womb alive is much less than as compared to other minority ethnic groups and the Caucasian population in general.
__________

And if the baby survives, the bio parents won't be married (76% of the time).

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
The editor of Vice has called for Mount Rushmore to be dynamited and stated that Trump was only elected due to racism. No way they would show how the left instigated the riot.

Hmm, so Vice Media which is "primarily into youth and young adult-focused digital media" and is funded by Disney, Hearst, and private capital proposes blowing up Mount Rushmore. I can't distinguish that notion from the "cultural destruction" when the Taliban blew up the carved stone Buddhas, which is now "a frozen cultural crime scene". (The second URL is from NBC News and features a 2 minute video titled "Flashback: The Destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan".)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: rh,

It is beginning to dawn on some writers that Charlottesville was a setup:

http://www.americanthinker.com..._it_was_a_setup.html

I’m sick of hearing “moral equivalency”. It doesn’t matter. Nazi, fascist, Westboro, BLM, ACLU. You have the right to peacefully assemble. The message is irrelevant.

I am going to make the call to action again.

If you hear or see such politicol correctness bullshit, or this revisiononts lies and do not speak up at the time and call it out, then you are the problem.

Thge problem is not the "other side" of the truth doing what they do, it is the one who remains silent in the face of the lies.

If you think you are protecting your job, your livlyhood, your reputation, your friendships, you are fooling yourself more then the liars.

All the symbols these evil people are tearing down are "your Jewish stores on Krystalnacht", they are your "families" being hauld off in trains.

They are your villiages in Cambodia, Laos and elswhere being burned and your people being slaughtered in the killing feilds.

Yeah, call me a drama queen or whatever you want, but this shit will get worse before it gets better.

I would rather loose a job, freinds, and be cut off by some familiy than to have to resort to defense with violence if it gets to that point.

Now, look at history and give me one solid fact uf any nation, or society that has made the trip down the road we are heading and then stopped and came back without great loss and bloodshed.

Then think about being inconveniend, embarassed or chastised for stepping up and speaking out.

And, yeah, your doing it for twits like the lady that got ran over.

Some will get it, and some will make excuses.

But I have had my absolute fill of it.

I saw the cartoon below in the paper this morning.


It's bullshit. The KKK was not behind the (un)Civil War. The Confederate States were not behind the KKK. The KKK were a group of people, who assembled out of a belief and desire to fight against the reconstruction of the United States after the war. All such "changes" after wars, assimilations, reunifications or what have you experience such resistance. And often "good people" get draw in because a part of the "uprising" may give them "voice" for their own suffering and in such suffering their thinknign may not be wholly rational (your kids are starving and the new overlords are not dealing with the lack of food, but the rebels can get you a loaf of bread...).

So, tha cartoon is using the wrong person behind the "Battle flag", it should be something that represents the good and decent people of the South, who were fighting against the "Big Government" of the day, imposing with great duress and distress to the people's of the South, who saw the only two options as fight back, or be enslaved themselves.

If there ever were an issue of the war being about slavery, it was the fear of the Southern people being enslaved by the government that was elected to serve them.

The South was more like the original colonists fighting agains the King, than anything else.

The issue of "slavery" was an excuse and unfortunalty, several states of the South fell for the bait and made declarations against it.

As Solomon said; "There is nothing new under the sun...", the lies and excuses that one uses to maniopulate another are always with us.

I'll stop typing. The desire to create a wall of words is heavy...

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:


It's bullshit.

You are correct. But I wish I could use it, but expand it to add one more group: the radicals upset the Hildabeast lost. Same sentiment, same reactions.

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
It is beginning to dawn on some writers that Charlottesville was a setup:

http://www.americanthinker.com..._it_was_a_setup.html

I knew it was a setup from day one. Well, maybe day two.

If slavery wasn't the main reason for secession, why was slavery the subject of last-minute attempts to avoid secession, such as this one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crittenden_Compromise

Why did Alexander Stephens say that racial inequality was the cornerstone of the Confederacy?

http://teachingamericanhistory.../cornerstone-speech/

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place."

It's a very interesting speech: he admits that the Founders thought of slavery as an evil which would someday come to an end. But Stephens asserts that by the 1860s, racial inequality had been proven as a scientific fact. He compares it with laws of physics or medicine which at first were doubted by the experts.

quote:

"the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" ✡ I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Two of the best quotes I've seen in a while.

quote:

Originally posted by Dilettante:
If slavery wasn't the main reason for secession, why was slavery the subject of last-minute attempts to avoid secession, such as this one?...

They took the bait.


And thank you. (re; quotes) One other I came up with is: "Be True to the Truth".

We can lie to one another, we can lie to ouselves, but the Truth cannot be lied to. It's like dividing by zero. It just won't work.

quote:

Originally posted by Dilettante:
If slavery wasn't the main reason for secession, why was slavery the subject of last-minute attempts to avoid secession, such as this one?

You can tell your liberal colleagues have rubbed off on you. The Civil War was about states rights vs federalism. The issue that set the fire and brought the war sooner rather than later, just happened to be wealth redistribution. Remember, at the time, slavery was perfectly legal in the states that seceded. The federal government brought the war to the South by trying to say that their laws were superior to state laws.

Think of it this way: Today, a farmer in Colorado has 25,000 acres of crops. He has a fleet of 50 tractors which he uses to cultivate those crops. After the federal government (EPA) states that it is now illegal to use any petroleum powered vehicle (tractor), there is no way to economically cultivate those 25k acres. What is this farmer, and every other farmer in Colorado supposed to do? They can sit back and have their wealth redistributed or the state of Colorado can tell the feds to fuck off.

The Civil War was about nothing more than northern factories clamoring for more labor (hey there's a pretty good supply of cheap labor in the south), and using slavery as the hot button issue they used to light the fuse. Blacks in the north after the Civil War were treated horribly, paid nearly nothing, and were used in the most dangerous positions. Same thing is happening today with illegal immigration. So many people are too stupid to see what is going on right in front of them.

quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:


The Civil War was about states rights vs federalism.

Slaves, the right for people to own slaves. That's the right they chose to fight for. The south lost, fuck'em.

Comparing people to tractors is...wow.

Screw you, alptraum. Take your narrow-minded shit elsewhere.

quote:

Originally posted by alptraum:

quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:


The Civil War was about states rights vs federalism.

Slaves, the right for people to own slaves. That's the right they chose to fight for. The south lost, fuck'em.

Comparing people to tractors is...wow.

Yes, at that time and in that place people were analogus to tractors. Bought, sold and owned as tools for production. Is the thought repugnant, that goes without being said. It seems you are too emotional about the subject matter to follow a perfectly logical analogy. If you can't overcome your emotional reaction to the subject then you are not equipped to participate in the discussion and should probably sit this one out.

An entire region's economy was based on slavery. Abolishing slavery drastically upended that entire economy with the stroke of a pen. While slavery was at the center of the issue, the issue was in fact that the federal government, through regulatory action, drastically changed an entire region's economy without regard for those states rights. Just the same as would happen if the EPA today were to outlaw every common tractor. If you take away people's livelihood unilaterally, weather you agree with the moral underpinnings of how that living is made or not, you are likely to have a fight on your hands.

quote:

Originally posted by alptraum:

quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:


The Civil War was about states rights vs federalism.

Slaves, the right for people to own slaves. That's the right they chose to fight for. The south lost, fuck'em.

Comparing people to tractors is...wow.

Dude, you completely missed my point and that is this: something which was legal before (and highly invested in), suddenly becomes illegal. The economics alone drove most to the point of war.

You're wasting your time.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
You're wasting your time.

Sad to say: But I fear you're correct.

When you have people suggesting, apparently in all seriousness, that Mt. Rushmore should be dynamited and they're not immediately laughed-down, well... I think that signals rational discussion is a lost cause.

But we're wandering off the immediate point. Whether the War of Northern Aggression was fought over slavery, states rights, other issues, whatever, is almost inconsequential. We had a group of people wishing to express their Constitutionally-recognized right to express their views in a peaceable manner and another group initiate violence to prevent them from doing so.

Then, when the President of the United States steps up and notes, correctly, that there were two sides to the violence: He gets almost universally shouted-down by even people in "his own" party.

This is just wrong. Very, very wrong. Wrong in every sense and in every way.

Maybe there's a glimmer or two of hope, though. Hope such as LePage Aligns With Trump On Charlottesville As Polls Show Support For Preserving Monuments

You are very right, sigmonkey, as usual. It is necessary to speak up in every situation, every context. Something toxic is spreading across the land, as across Germany in the '30s. No one who sees it should remain silent.

The Civil War became "about slavery" when Lincoln framed it that way in the Emancipation Proclamation. The North had been doing very badly on the battlefield, losing major battle after major battle. Lincoln was waiting for a victory to issue the Proclamation. Antietam was no victory, or a Pyrrhic one at best, but he seized on the opportunity, especially because he thought that the idea of fighting to liberate slaves would play well in England, and he was courting England (which had been supporting the South). Lincoln made the war about slavery, he framed it that way for political reasons.

The issue of the rights of states was the central and driving issue. Only 5 of the Confederate states -- the cotton producers in the deep south-- relied on slaves, really needed them.

In 1860, Americans identified with their states far more than with the abstract concept of the "United States." To Lee, for example, who came from a family of patriots from the Revolution, and who had served with distinction in the Mexican War-- to him and to the other "rebels," the Federal government was running roughshod over the rights of states to exercise their independent rights. He was offered command of the Union Army. He chose allegiance to his state of Virginia.

Men who are being vilified now were some of the bravest, toughest, most idealistic men America has ever produced, or ever will produce. Nathan Bedford Forrest, for example. Schools named for him are changing their names. His monuments vandalized. And it is all pure ignorance and propaganda. Read a good biography of Forrest if you want to feel humbled and just in awe.

The Lincoln administration had never proposed to interfere with slavery where it existed. This position was very consistent. They were unwilling to let it expand. The "House Divided" speech (from a few years earlier) was about the possibility that slavery could become legal everywhere.