House approves removing Capitol’s Confederate statues

Auld Phart

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Mar 3, 2013
81,975
43,339
2,605

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.

Do we care if the Democrats take down statues of former Democrats? As long as we all remember that they were ALL Democrats.
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
Tabled....Mitch doesn't even want this to reach the floor in any kind of way...
 
Stupidity run amok.....by the leader of stupid....

1595531321074.png
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.

Do we care if the Democrats take down statues of former Democrats? As long as we all remember that they were ALL Democrats.
and as long as we don't rename Army forts that were named after "Democrats"
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.


Chief Justice Taney wasn't a rebel, and remained on the Supreme Court until his death.

Sure, Taney was a bigot, is that the standard now? If you were bigoted, you get cancelled?
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.

Do we care if the Democrats take down statues of former Democrats? As long as we all remember that they were ALL Democrats.
and as long as we don't rename Army forts that were named after "Democrats"


A lot of people get offended by a lot of things. Do we, the American people have a right not to be offended?
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.

and what Fred Scott really decoded was free slaves had to be returned to the disgusting trash who owned them.
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.

and what Fred Scott really decoded was free slaves had to be returned to the disgusting trash who owned them.

Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.

How far back do you want to go with that 'treason' comment?
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
This must be the new math, 1, B, and choice *?

I choose the third choice: Laughed at by Mitch McConnell who then uses it to clean his shoes with.

Is this REALLY the most important thing Nancy's House has to worry about? Of course not, I get it. She knows the Senate will vote it down, so then she can claim the GOP are all racists.
 
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.
You can't really call it treason when the issue of whether a sovereign state's membership in the Union is voluntary was still an undecided legal issue.

And, given that no one was tried or convicted of treason, you can't really say they were guilty of treason.
 
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.
You can't really call it treason when the issue of whether a sovereign state's membership in the Union is voluntary was still an undecided legal issue.

And, given that no one was tried or convicted of treason, you can't really say they were guilty of treason.
Mary Surratt, convicted of treason and hanged in 1865

Recalculate.
 
and what Fred Scott really decoded was free slaves had to be returned to the disgusting trash who owned them.
Read it again, it went much further than that. Even removing the dicta, the main ruling was that Tanney said that the country from its inception held slaves a completely separate class, in this case they were not even "people", as in "we the people"
 
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.
You can't really call it treason when the issue of whether a sovereign state's membership in the Union is voluntary was still an undecided legal issue.

And, given that no one was tried or convicted of treason, you can't really say they were guilty of treason.
Mary Surratt, convicted of treason and hanged in 1865

Recalculate.

Surratt was convicted and executed for conspiracy in the assassination of Honest Abe Lincoln- not treason.
 

Including a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the 1857 Dred Scott decision that declared African Americans couldn't be citizens.

Which has better odds:

1. Being tabled in the Senate

B. Being voted down in the Senate.
Why would we keep monuments to people who committed treason.

and what Fred Scott really decoded was free slaves had to be returned to the disgusting trash who owned them.

Using your logic we should have put barry against a wall and shot him.
 
No aspect of history is without any retrospective fault. But you can’t apply today’s standards to other times in history. It’s totally unfair to legacy.
The real concern in all of this is the nefarious motive behind those who are in such a hurry to comprehensively censor history.
Fuck today’s democrats and their abject anti-American bigotry.
 

Forum List

Back
Top