Mitt Romney: Take Down the Confederate Flag Immediately

[wizardwatson]

What is my nefarious motive?


(A: To not rub salt in the wounds of others.)

Don't you think the U.S. flag "rubs salt" in the wounds of Native Americans? Do you support removing that?

If you're going to advocate something it has to be consistent, doesn't it?

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Don't you think the U.S. flag "rubs salt" in the wounds of Native Americans? Do you support removing that?

If you're going to advocate something it has to be consistent, doesn't it?

That's slippery slope. If family members of children killed by dgp's drone attacks also wanted removal of US flag, will US flag be disappeared.

 

[AuH20]

What is my nefarious motive?


(A: To not rub salt in the wounds of others.)

You're trying to placate others. I'm talking about the progs who want to enforce their will on the South as well as disparage the notion of state rights.

 

[jonhowe]

To those who believe the flag should be removed...if you drive through Georgia and a lot of the Carolinas, there are confederate flags all over the place in people's yards. Should public opinion demand those be removed as well? I mean, they are conceivably just as offensive, no?

They are somewhat less offensive, I'd guess, because it doesn't come with the implicit endorsement of "the state", but still offensive. That being said, I STRONGLY support people's right to be offensive. It is a vitally important right. Anyone suggesting a ban on any symbol is not someone you'll find posting here.

 

[jonhowe]

Don't you think the U.S. flag "rubs salt" in the wounds of Native Americans? Do you support removing that?

If you're going to advocate something it has to be consistent, doesn't it?

Yes, it does. At least most southerners agree that, while states rights are important, slavery was bad. Most Americans seem to still have no problem with the European genocide of the native peoples of 2 continents.

I'm in favor of not flying flags at all; I can't think of a good reason for them other than inspiring people to go to war. That being said, I'm also practical and realistic about these things; I don't expect to see the US flag retired.

 

[jonhowe]

You're trying to placate others. I'm talking about the progs who want to enforce their will on the South as well as disparage the notion of state rights.

Not trying to placate. Just advocating people not be needlessly rude to one another.

 

[AuH20]

Not trying to placate. Just advocating people not be needlessly rude to one another.

That's acceptable in my eyes, but I find it strange how this entire Roof situation immediately turned to the Confederate flag. It's almost like these activists don't care that Roof was on suboxone.

 

[wizardwatson]

Yes, it does. At least most southerners agree that, while states rights are important, slavery was bad. Most Americans seem to still have no problem with the European genocide of the native peoples of 2 continents.

I'm in favor of not flying flags at all; I can't think of a good reason for them other than inspiring people to go to war. That being said, I'm also practical and realistic about these things; I don't expect to see the US flag retired.

Well, lot's of people died fighting for that flag, not fighting for slavery. They have just as much right to fly that flag as the U.S. flag. And like I said further up in the thread, I support letting it fly just so people will learn the real story.

As long as slavery is viewed as "white shame" instead of "banker/business shame" people haven't learned their lesson. The powerful always use racial and religious demographic propaganda to hide themselves.

The war on terror is as much about terrorists as the civil war was about racism.

Of course racists and terrorists exist. But they are pawns. And for black people to focus on "white people need to own up to racism" is completely missing the source of their oppression.

The same people that started the Civil War were the same people that paid for the boats to bring them over here.

 

[Brett85]

To those who believe the flag should be removed...if you drive through Georgia and a lot of the Carolinas, there are confederate flags all over the place in people's yards. Should public opinion demand those be removed as well? I mean, they are conceivably just as offensive, no?

No, but that's a different issue. People have the 1st Amendment right to fly the Confederate flag on private property. This is just an issue about whether the Confederate flag should be flown on property owned by the government.

 

[jonhowe]

Well, lot's of people died fighting for that flag, not fighting for slavery. They have just as much right to fly that flag as the U.S. flag. And like I said further up in the thread, I support letting it fly just so people will learn the real story.

It's very hard for most people, myself included, to see the difference between fighting for that flag (which represented a new nation founded in order to maintain a way of life that included slavery) and fighting for slavery. Many Nazis weren't fighting for Hitler's ideology, but for their homeland. That doesn't mean it's fine and dandy to fly nazi flags (though, it should be legal).

You're totally right, though, about war and money.

That's acceptable in my eyes, but I find it strange how this entire Roof situation immediately turned to the Confederate flag. It's almost like these activists don't care that Roof was on suboxone.

Suboxone was likely what lit the match, but this guy was a powder keg. Most people don't yet know/understand how prevalent such drugs are in mass shootings so don't really care.

I think the fact that he was such a flag enthusiast (South Africa and Rhodesia on his shirt, a confederate one in his hand, and pics of him spitting on a US flag) is what has brought this issue to the fore. But it IS a little absurd how much attention it is getting.

 

[tod evans]

No, but that's a different issue. People have the 1st Amendment right to fly the Confederate flag on private property. This is just an issue about whether the Confederate flag should be flown on property owned by the government.

If you're not from SC then you have no say in what that states government does.

If you see one flying over your state capitol then you have cause to get all flustered.

This is absolutely not an issue for the feds. (Although it might spark a few states to buck a little)

 

[Carlybee]

No, but that's a different issue. People have the 1st Amendment right to fly the Confederate flag on private property. This is just an issue about whether the Confederate flag should be flown on property owned by the government.

If the majority of taxpayers want it to stay...what then? ( I don't know what that consensus is)
The government being of, by and for the people...presumedly.

 

[Pericles]

Hey look, another Yankee telling people in other states how to live! Over 150 years and some things are still the same.

This thread reflects sectional differences that persist to this day. One example:

“I speak to Cobb and he tells me he is a Georgian; to Floyd, and he tells me his a Virginian; to you, and you tell me you are a Carolinian. I am not a Michigander; I am a citizen of the United States.”
Secretary of State Lewis Cass for President Buchanan

Southerners have long considered the USA to be a collection of independent states, rather than one nation split into state administrative districts. Loyalty went bottom to top in order of priority. Northerners went the opposite direction - Loyalty first to the US and then down .....

Another observation - Southerners consider conflict nothing unusual, and Northerners consider conflict a failure of societal mechanisms. The Southern view - "Hey, there is going to be a fight! Which side do we take?" while the Northerners viewed the same situation as "A fight? What went wrong, and what does that have to do with us."

This observation came from a nurse who was in the Army in World War II.

 

[jonhowe]

If the majority of taxpayers want it to stay...what then? ( I don't know what that consensus is)
The government being of, by and for the people...presumedly.

Then it will likely stay. People should WANT it to come down because they're decent and care about their fellow South Carolinians.

If you're not from SC then you have no say in what that states government does.

If you see one flying over your state capitol then you have cause to get all flustered.

This is absolutely not an issue for the feds. (Although it might spark a few states to buck a little)

Again. Who is saying this is an issue for the feds? This is an issue of decency, not law or authority. It's offensive to a large segment of the public; the right thing to do is not fly it on state property.

 

[tod evans]

Again. Who is saying this is an issue for the feds? This is an issue of decency, not law or authority. It's offensive to a large segment of the public; the right thing to do is not fly it on state property.

Obviously people in SC feel differently.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

What is my nefarious motive?

Not nefarious but might be slippery slope motive. If family members/supporters of children killed by dgp's drone attacks also wanted removal of US flag, will US flags be disappeared from tax payers funded poles?

Sunday, November 11, 2012

No Drones Wisconsin

No Drones: Lars explains the upside down American flag

​

http://nodroneswisconsin.blogspot.co...side-down.html

 

[Carlybee]

Then it will likely stay. People should WANT it to come down because they're decent and care about their fellow South Carolinians.




Again. Who is saying this is an issue for the feds? This is an issue of decency, not law or authority. It's offensive to a large segment of the public; the right thing to do is not fly it on state property.

Moralize much? Who is to tell others what the "right" thing to do is? And if you don't think this isn't going to end up being a federal mandate, you haven't been paying attention to what has been happening at the federal level much.

 

[wizardwatson]

It's very hard for most people, myself included, to see the difference between fighting for that flag (which represented a new nation founded in order to maintain a way of life that included slavery) and fighting for slavery. Many Nazis weren't fighting for Hitler's ideology, but for their homeland. That doesn't mean it's fine and dandy to fly nazi flags (though, it should be legal).

You're totally right, though, about war and money.

Not picking on you, but to make a point...

NEWSFLASH

The flag currently flying represents slavery. And oppression. And war. And corruption. The Civil War didn't get rid of the plantation. It just moved the Afro's to the big house. The cotton fields got outsourced. Instead of cotton it's electronics, instead of whips it's suicide nets. All American's were purchased officially by their slaver bankers in 1913. Before that we were owned by proxy.

People who get upset about stupid crap like a flag, as I said, miss the point. Sure the Nazi flag is shameful, but only because Germany lost. If they'd won, it would no doubt be a symbol of freedom and righteousness. The American flag IS THE NAZI FLAG.

I repeat.

THE AMERICAN FLAG IS THE NAZI FLAG.

You must apply justice to the whole earth and do triage with respect to who actually is oppressed the most. It isn't American blacks, it isn't the gays, it isn't Israeli Jews. When we pander to these pet issues of our closest neighbors we only do the Nazi's work for them. You must strike the root. Every time you don't and you pander you only create more dissonance.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Let's be honest. Demands to take down the Battle Flag have more than to do with smashing any remaining vestiges of defiance that still exist in the South than any perceived offenses.

Bingo. Anyone who thinks politicians are deeply, personally, offended by slavery and therefore want to remove the flag needs to stop huffing glue.

They simply don't like it because it's a reminder that, once upon a time, people actually resisted the federal leviathan.

That's what the whole "history" of the civil war is about - giving the federalist cause moral cover via the slavery issue.

It's no different than any other nonsense war propaganda.

How some of you support the Confederacy is beyond me. Slavery and the Confederacy is the antithesis to liberty. You also don't have to be a supporter of Abraham Lincoln and the north to realize how awful the Confederacy was.

Does the same apply to the founders and the first war of independence?

Or, for that matter, virtually every society in human history prior to the mid 19th century?

Are they all to be unconditionally condemned because they had slavery?

We cannot recognize something pro-liberty and valuable in, say, ancient Greece, Rome, or the Venetian Republic - since they all permitted slavery?

It's not true that the Civil War was entirely about slavery, and that the north was fighting to free the slaves and the south was fighting to preserve slavery. Obviously it's far more complex than that. But neither is it true that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery as some claim. The truth is more nuanced and is somewhere in between. The north didn't use slavery as a reason for fighting the Civil War until near the very end of the war, and it's not likely that the north in the beginning wanted to fight the war in order to end slavery. At the same time, the south did indeed secede from the union mostly to preserve slavery, as they stated in their written documents detailing why they wanted to secede.

Secession was not at all about preserving slavery. The slavery question was a source of tension between North and South, but - since secession would obviously have undermined rather than helped preserve slavery - the preservation of slavery was not the material goal which the South hoped to achieve by seceding. That material goal was, rather, to escape the Morrill Tariff. Eliminating most tariffs was the first item of business for the South after secession. And that, incidentally, is why the Lincoln decided to invade the South and turn peaceful secession into war - to reimpose the tariff. Lincoln says this explicitly in his inaugural - he will invade the South to collect the tax. And so he did.

Why had South Carolina nearly succeeded in 1828 (hint: not about slavery)?

And why did New York City nearly succeed in 1861 along with the South (hint: not about slavery)?

And why did Lincoln endorse the Corwin amendment (hint: not because he was an abolitionist!)?

...and many other facts which make a mockery of the thesis that slavery was the cause.

See the thread I linked earlier, where all this is documented at length from primary sources.

Yeah, people on this forum are defending the views of people who are most likely the same people who booed Ron in the SC GOP debate for saying that our government should follow the golden rule in foreign policy.

The South of today bears virtually no resemblance to that of 1861.

The people there are the biological descendents of the confederates, but their religion, culture, and ideology are totally changed (much for the worse).

 

[AuH20]

Mike Church's Response On Facebook. Whoa!

I will spare all of you the agony of watching South Carolina descend into a satire of moral courage by beating up on a 2 ft x 4 ft rectangular piece of poly-cotton dyed with Indigo and scarlet ink. Logic dictates that flags are inanimate objects that are neither racist nor sexually active. Cloak yourself in one that blasphemes against the beauty of God's creation called the rainbow and you are a Saint. Cloak yourself, nay get within a city block of another [flag] that honors and distinguishes the graves of 450,000 men, women and children killed in an UnJust war and you are "symbol of hate". I have a suggestion for the phony sympathizers outraged at the "loss of black life" (a genuine tragedy). Find an abortion clinic near you to weep and demand an end to the killing of innocent life of ALL races and the monsters that perpetrate the crimes, no flag is needed.