Charleston shooting.

[diver]

I couldn't disagree more, based on the facts we know. Secession hadn't happened before, or since.

Do you really believe that if Texas and Louisiana seceded from the Union today that there wouldn't be armed conflict?

Do you really think that if California and Oregon negotiated their own trade agreements with China and paid no tax monies back to our government on the transactions that ensued that our Government wouldn't forcibly put it to a stop?

Come on man

You are right. Secession hadn't happened before or since. What was the one thing that pushed it over the edge? Slavery. Why was it even an issue? Again, all the other things could have been worked out. The slavery issue, however, just could not be.

To reverse the argument on you, do you really believe a Civil War, with hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions in damages would have been fought only over the issues you have stated?

The idiot President we have right now won't do anything to stop ISIS from beheading Christians and anybody else they see fit. What makes you think he would stop Texas from leaving the Union?

 

[Troglodyte]

CMT will edit out all scenes including the General Lee from reruns of the Dukes of Hazard.

 

[bermudasteel]

You need to read up on your history. The South had legally per the Constitution seceded from the United States. Try this site out, it is very informative. The war started in 1861 at Ft. Sumter the Emancipation Proclamation did not happen till 1963.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/32e.asp

Sorry, but what you believe conflicts with actual History. You are suggesting that Southern Apologists have succeeded in re-writing history? All of those historians who have written about the Civil War from the North simply lost to those Southern apologists, accepted the South's narrative (despite living in the portion of the country that won the war), and have forever since kept their mouths shut about the "real truth?" Historians from Auburn, hypothetically, have silenced historians from MIT, Harvard and Yale? Come on brother

Let me ask you, if you were Abraham Lincoln (R), or a member of the North, then, or if you are a northerner now, which story would you prefer be written? A) We went to war to fight for the rights of enslaved African Americans, to abolish Slavery, or B) We went to war to protect our economic interests and force the South to buy our machinery.

Most would be JUMPING at the opportunity to say they fought for the more eloquent of the two issues. Yet history is written correctly, that it began around economics and secession. Slavery was a part of the mix, economically, and involving States Rights, but that's as far as it went until 1863.

Even Left-leaning PBS agrees. Nice little site with videos, btw: http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/causes-of-the-civil-war/

I think what he's saying is, "don't believe everything that you read or have learned in the past". The simple comment can be said on just about any event recorded in time---and because of "the love of the this FREEDOM" that everyone refers to---why is his opinion wrong?

But back to the topic at hand...

Why waste the time, money and resources on a trial? Why did the boy need a flak vest when being ushered to the police vehicle??? Sharpshooters delight - ruined by the courteous LEO's of SC...

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

You are right. Secession hadn't happened before or since. What was the one thing that pushed it over the edge? Slavery. Why was it even an issue? Again, all the other things could have been worked out. The slavery issue, however, just could not be.

To reverse the argument on you, do you really believe a Civil War, with hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions in damages would have been fought only over the issues you have stated?

The idiot President we have right now won't do anything to stop ISIS from beheading Christians and anybody else they see fit. What makes you think he would stop Texas from leaving the Union?

This is where you're being narrow-minded. Slavery was a part of the issue, as has eloquently been written prior. The North was manufacturing machinery that the South should have been buying. They wouldn't. They wanted slave labor. Was it really about wanting to keep black men in shackles? Or was it about not being forced to purchase machinery and change generations worth of the way they did business?

I do believe that a civil war would have been fought over the fact that the South was negotiating their own trade agreements with foreign countries, yes. There was no "compromise" that you speak of. Do I think the present President would fight a civil war if Texas seceded the Union? I have no doubt in my mind...not one bit...that he would. As it is, he is about to commence war operations in that state, next month.

Obama doesn't care about Christians in the least. Do you follow the news? He is a part of the war on Christianity. He doesn't care about ISIS. Hell, he funds and supports the Muslim Brotherhood.

Come on man

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I think what he's saying is, "don't believe everything that you read or have learned in the past". The simple comment can be said on just about any event recorded in time---and because of "the love of the this FREEDOM" that everyone refers to---why is his opinion wrong?

But back to the topic at hand...

Why waste the time, money and resources on a trial? Why did the boy need a flak vest when being ushered to the police vehicle??? Sharpshooters delight - ruined by the courteous LEO's of SC...

Berm, I don't believe everything I read. But I'm also not naive enough to believe, in this world. that "Southern Apologists" got a blank check to "re-write" history and every other historian on Earth stood down and said - "Yeah, tell your version and we'll all shut up."

I do believe history, over time, has been twisted, in many instances. But in this case...wouldn't the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln be working their ***** off to re-write history, to say "We fought the Civil War to end Slavery, period"? Wouldn't the Democrats try to lay claim to the same feat? If one party could claim they "abolished slavery" they would. But the facts are in the way. Economics and secession were the root cause of the Civil War. Those are just the facts. Thank GOD that slavery became the epicenter and was abolished because of it. But to claim the war was started on slavery and slavery alone is naivety at best.

It's sad to say but there wasn't enough of a ground swell in the North to "save the black man" that started the war. No, it was sadly what most wars begin and end around - money.

 

[ark steel]

Baltimore and Ferguson aren't really comparable to Charleston. A police officer killing an unarmed person is not the same as a psychotic
killing individuals in a church.

It might surprise people, but I'm not sure Charleston was even racism. From my viewpoint the Charleston gunman has psychosis brought on by
low self esteem issues. He never got past the 9th grade and couldn't get or keep a job. He obviously was a defective human looking for a twisted
way to raise his self esteem. Most individuals in race supremacy organizations are low self esteem individuals looking to use their racial identification
to boost their self esteem by putting down the human attributes of others. Is that really racism or mental illness brought on by low self esteem?.

As for the confederate flag, it represents succession from the union and is a symbol that is anti-American flag. It isn't a racist symbol but rather
an anti-United States symbol. It took a United States to defeat Hitler and Communism and Americans should be proud of that and stand by the flag
that represents all 50 states. Congress should ban the Confederate flag from any state government usage. If you believe in free speech, allow the
commercial exploitation of the symbol, but ban it from state usage. Would we allow German government to fly a Nazi flag?

If we can get racism listed as a mental illness, do I get a disability check?

 

[diver]

Berm, I don't believe everything I read. But I'm also not naive enough to believe, in this world. that "Southern Apologists" got a blank check to "re-write" history and every other historian on Earth stood down and said - "Yeah, tell your version and we'll all shut up."

I do believe history, over time, has been twisted, in many instances. But in this case...wouldn't the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln be working their ***** off to re-write history, to say "We fought the Civil War to end Slavery, period"? Wouldn't the Democrats try to lay claim to the same feat? If one party could claim they "abolished slavery" they would. But the facts are in the way. Economics and secession were the root cause of the Civil War. Those are just the facts. Thank GOD that slavery became the epicenter and was abolished because of it. But to claim the war was started on slavery and slavery alone is naivety at best.

It's sad to say but there wasn't enough of a ground swell in the North to "save the black man" that started the war. No, it was sadly what most wars begin and end around - money.

What I find hard to believe is the connections you refuse to make. In one part of this thread you correctly state, I believe it was you, that it has been Southern Democrats that were the ones who brought back the Confederate flag. As we all know, and history and the press have whitewashed, is that Southern Democrats have been some of the biggest racists. After Reconstruction, it was Southern Democrats that took over the state governments down South. Knowing this, why is it such a stretch to believe that they had an influence over the way history was written? The press in this country has certainly been accommodating, asking only Republican candidates about the flag, and not candidates of the party that was responsible for it, for example.

We see examples of this all the time. Robert Byrd, WV, was lionized when he died. Liberal Democrat. At one time leader of the KKK. Why do you find it so hard to believe that this type of thing could be done with history? It would behoove the Southern cause to make themselves look as much the victims as possible, and minimizing the role of slavery as it pertains to the war helps that.

Never said slavery was the sole issue, anyway. But slavery is what caused those other issues to be such a problem. You are focusing on the syptoms of the disease. What was the main cause of all those symptoms? Again, slavery.

 

[diver]

How did it evolve that the Republican party is the party of racists when it was the party that freed the slaves? When it was the party that in 1964 got the Civil Rights Act passed when so many, again, Southern Democrats refused to go along with it?

History is written by those in power. Since the late 1870s, in the South, it has been some of the biggest racists in American history, Southern Democrats. Examples of this a littered all over the place among these people, if you are willing to look. And you have to look, because the press over the years has been dishonest.

 

[diver]

This is where you're being narrow-minded. Slavery was a part of the issue, as has eloquently been written prior. The North was manufacturing machinery that the South should have been buying. They wouldn't. They wanted slave labor. Was it really about wanting to keep black men in shackles? Or was it about not being forced to purchase machinery and change generations worth of the way they did business?

I do believe that a civil war would have been fought over the fact that the South was negotiating their own trade agreements with foreign countries, yes. There was no "compromise" that you speak of. Do I think the present President would fight a civil war if Texas seceded the Union? I have no doubt in my mind...not one bit...that he would. As it is, he is about to commence war operations in that state, next month.

Obama doesn't care about Christians in the least. Do you follow the news? He is a part of the war on Christianity. He doesn't care about ISIS. Hell, he funds and supports the Muslim Brotherhood.

Come on man

That's right. They wanted slave labor. Does it matter as to why they wanted it, or does it simply matter that they wanted it? And since they wanted it, for whatever reason, it makes the war, at it's core, about slavery.

We will just have to disagree. I feel the others issues would have been worked out if not for slavery. You don't. That's fine, but we will never agree on this and will just go round and round.

I think the Democrat party would be happy if Texas went away. Texas votes Republican. Texas is one of the reasons the Republican party is even viable anymore. Hell, if they could chop off the South, they would have their own little Garden of Eden.

By the way, ISIS doesn't only kill Christians. They have been killing other Muslims in mass as well. I just used Christians as an example. Obama does nothing about whoever is being killed.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

How did it evolve that the Republican party is the party of racists when it was the party that freed the slaves? When it was the party that in 1964 got the Civil Rights Act passed when so many, again, Southern Democrats refused to go along with it?

Because 100 years later Republicans are generally against affirmative action and generous lifetime welfare, things that the Democrats use to buy votes and keep loyal voters on the plantation.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I think the Democrat party would be happy if Texas went away. Texas votes Republican. Texas is one of the reasons the Republican party is even viable anymore. Hell, if they could chop off the South, they would have their own little Garden of Eden.

That's why Bomma wants to get as many immigrants into the country and voting Democrat. If they can flip Texas blue like they did California, we will never have another Republican President. This is the goal. Remember, it's all about electoral votes.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

What I find hard to believe is the connections you refuse to make. In one part of this thread you correctly state, I believe it was you, that it has been Southern Democrats that were the ones who brought back the Confederate flag. As we all know, and history and the press have whitewashed, is that Southern Democrats have been some of the biggest racists. After Reconstruction, it was Southern Democrats that took over the state governments down South. Knowing this, why is it such a stretch to believe that they had an influence over the way history was written? The press in this country has certainly been accommodating, asking only Republican candidates about the flag, and not candidates of the party that was responsible for it, for example.

We see examples of this all the time. Robert Byrd, WV, was lionized when he died. Liberal Democrat. At one time leader of the KKK. Why do you find it so hard to believe that this type of thing could be done with history? It would behoove the Southern cause to make themselves look as much the victims as possible, and minimizing the role of slavery as it pertains to the war helps that.

Never said slavery was the sole issue, anyway. But slavery is what caused those other issues to be such a problem. You are focusing on the syptoms of the disease. What was the main cause of all those symptoms? Again, slavery.

Nope, wasn't me that said that.

But again, if believing that SLAVERY was the cause of the Civil War helps you sleep at night, so be it. We all have our fairy tales.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

How did it evolve that the Republican party is the party of racists when it was the party that freed the slaves? When it was the party that in 1964 got the Civil Rights Act passed when so many, again, Southern Democrats refused to go along with it?

History is written by those in power. Since the late 1870s, in the South, it has been some of the biggest racists in American history, Southern Democrats. Examples of this a littered all over the place among these people, if you are willing to look. And you have to look, because the press over the years has been dishonest.

That isn't re-writing history. Democrats have openly said they are the party that has "changed" for the good, Republicans the party that have changed for the bad.

When LBJ signed the Welfare act, he established the Democratic party as the party that could do no wrong for eternity. That doesn't change history...

 

[ZonaBurgh]

That's why Bomma wants to get as many immigrants into the country and voting Democrat. If they can flip Texas blue like they did California, we will never have another Republican President. This is the goal. Remember, it's all about electoral votes.

Not sure I will see another R president in my lifetime. Tough to change the mind set of those now accustomed to sitting back and collecting free ****.

 

[bermudasteel]

I want to interject here and say that is the HEALTHIEST debate on SN in quite some time. Thanks for the views from both sides of the fence...

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Not sure I will see another R president in my lifetime. Tough to change the mind set of those now accustomed to sitting back and collecting free ****.

I think the future holds mostly what we have now, which is a Democrat President because the highly populated areas trend blue thus winning the electoral votes and a Republican House and Senate because most counties and Congressional districts trend red. For example Bomma won PA both times but the only counties that voted for Him were the ones around Pittsburgh, Philly, Erie, and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre. The rest of the state voted Republican. That deal could work okay if the Republican leadership had balls.

 

[Spike]

Not to worry Amazon.com is still selling rebel flags http://www.amazon.com/Confederate-Rebel-Flag-Printed-Polyester/dp/B000G2OYZE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435077528&sr=8-1&keywords=rebel+flags+for+sale

nope - ha ha - better check again

Walmart, Amazon, Sears, eBay to stop selling Confederate flag merchandise

(CNN)America's leading merchants have spoken: The Confederate flag is coming off the shelves.

Walmart, Amazon, eBay and Sears all announced bans on the sale of Confederate flag merchandise, amid an intensifying national debate over the use of the controversial flag

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/22/politics/confederate-flag-walmart-south-carolina/


----------------------------------------------

'Thank you for shopping at Amazon. Your attempt to purchase a Confederate flag has been updated and your racism will be provided to your local law enforcement.'


oh, you want more?


Warner Bros scraps Dukes of Hazzard car toys over Confederate flag controversy

Warner Bros. today announced that it was halting production of toys and replicas of the General Lee, the car from the Dukes of Hazzard, which famously bore the flag on its roof.

The company follows in the footsteps of retailers Amazon, Sears, eBay, and Walmart, all of whom elected to ban sales of the Confederate flag and its image this week

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/23/8836571/dukes-of-hazzard-car-toys-confederate-flag

-------------------------------

The South is dead


The Dixie Flag Company

We are currently sold out of Confederate Battle flags and will not sell them in the foreseeable future. We have sold this historic flag for 57 years, but in recent days it has drawn intense criticism and served to divide our country. We feel that we do not need to contribute to this division

https://www.facebook.com/DixieFlagCo

---------------------

Confederate flags removed from Alabama Capitol grounds on order of Gov. Bentley

After the battle flag – which is at the center of the controversy – was gone, workers began removing three other Civil War era flags.

They are the First National Confederate Flag, commonly preferred to as the "Stars and Bars;" the second flag is the Second National Confederate Flag, more commonly known as the "Stainless Banner;" and the last flag standing is the Third National Confederate Flag.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/06/confederate_flag_removed_from.html#incart_breaking

---------------------------------


Citadel leaders want Confederate flag moved from Summerall Chapel

http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/news/54881-citadel-leaders-want-confederate-flag-moved

------------------------

Purge them all!

 

[Rod Farva]

I want to interject here and say that is the HEALTHIEST debate on SN in quite some time. Thanks for the views from both sides of the fence...

Healthy maybe, but.............in SDS's post below lies the crux of the matter. Look at how many here have fallen into the debate about the flag. And I'm not denigrating anyone for doing so. It's an interesting subject on its own. And for the most part those involved in it here are pretty well thought out and intelligent people making very good points. But if such people get caught up in this debate for 9 pages what do you think is going on in general society? I'll tell you what....exactly what the government and the leftist media want.....a "debate" (more like a prelude to a pogrom) about a piece of cloth and its perceived "meaning" rather than simply calling evil evil.

Amazed at how people blame a piece of cloth, or a book, or words for someones wrong doings. Society is ******* stupid. So are our supposed leaders.


oh look! a squirrel....

You are right. Secession hadn't happened before or since. What was the one thing that pushed it over the edge? Slavery. Why was it even an issue? Again, all the other things could have been worked out. The slavery issue, however, just could not be.

To reverse the argument on you, do you really believe a Civil War, with hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions in damages would have been fought only over the issues you have stated?

I do. Lincoln's goal was the preservation of the Union. He stated as much. And I think the fact that the EP wasn't issued until well after the start of the war bears that out. But this is just my opinion.....I could be wrong and it almost becomes a philosophical debate. Whether or not secession was Constitutional is still debated....here's a great link regarding that.


http://www.historynet.com/secession

How did it evolve that the Republican party is the party of racists when it was the party that freed the slaves? When it was the party that in 1964 got the Civil Rights Act passed when so many, again, Southern Democrats refused to go along with it?

History is written by those in power. Since the late 1870s, in the South, it has been some of the biggest racists in American history, Southern Democrats. Examples of this a littered all over the place among these people, if you are willing to look. And you have to look, because the press over the years has been dishonest.

Your second para answers the question in your first. Perception is reality and a nation of disinterested Kardashian worshippers doesn't dig very deeply for truth.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Can't they just make General Lee toys without the flag on the roof?

 

[Spike]

Can't they just make General Lee toys without the flag on the roof?

No

But you can still get this campaign button

 

[Yinzerlyn]

CMT will edit out all scenes including the General Lee from reruns of the Dukes of Hazard.

So the show will be a minute long then.

 

[Spike]

The Purge! The Purge!

Harry Reid calls on leaders to reconsider UNLV mascot, nickname

LAS VEGAS (FOX5) - Speaking to reporters in Washington Tuesday, Sen. Harry Reid called on Nevada higher education officials to consider changing the University of Nevada, Las Vegas' mascot and sports nickname.

http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/2939...rs-to-consider-change-to-unlv-mascot-nickname

 

[Turd Ferguson]

So how far are we going to take this now? Not being smart ***....just wondering. You could say the South Carolina state police uniforms are grey and that's a trigger.

 

[diver]

Nope, wasn't me that said that.

But again, if believing that SLAVERY was the cause of the Civil War helps you sleep at night, so be it. We all have our fairy tales.

Thanks for the concern. I sleep well at night, and if I do lie awake on anything, it is not the reasons as to why a war was started almost 160 years ago.

What I do lie awake on the rare times it happens is this issue I have been trying to highlight. I have been using modern examples as well as trying to show that this has been going on for years. You cannot change history as it really happened, but as Farva said, you can certainly change the perception. I feel that is what happened right after Reconstruction as it pertains to the cause of the Civil War. Southern Democrats came to power and felt the need to make the South appear the victim. You cannot do that by acknowledging that slavery caused the war. You have to make it about the North's unfair treatment of Southern issues. I don't think this can be denied, because the perception is in fact that the Southern cause is the more sympathetic one. For example, I bet no one in Hollywood ever thought about making a TV show based in some fictional county in PA with two cousins running all around frustrating the local cops in a car called the "General Sherman."

Changing reality to perception continues, and it is going to tear this county apart, I am afraid.

 

[Spike]

So how far are we going to take this now? .

to the moon, alice


Rand Paul Backs Confederate Flag Removal, Calls It Symbol of Racism and Murder

“I think the flag is inescapably a symbol of human bondage and slavery, and particularly when people use it, you know, obviously for murder and to justify hated so vicious that you would kill somebody, I think that that symbolism needs to end. And I think South Carolina is doing the right thing."

http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/23/rand-paul-backs-confederate-flag-removal

-------------------------


San Diego lawmaker now wants to rename Robert E. Lee Elementary School

SAN DIEGO — A lawmaker called Tuesday on the San Diego Unified School District to change the name of Robert E. Lee Elementary School because of the namesake’s ties to the Confederacy.

http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/06/23/sd-lawmaker-wants-to-rename-robert-e-lee-elementary-school/