Confederate statue removed from historic North Carolina courthouse

[Bush92]

Do you understand the ******* stupidity of a Nazi analogy, and pretending that 12 percent is the same as ******* ZERO POINT TWO percent?

I mean, I was talking to RW. He is the ******* moron that made that comparison, and stood by it. And that is the conversation you jumped into. If you want to comment on his ******* stupid post, then address his ******* stupid post.


I am discussing the rest of this issue, in the rest of this thread. THIS bit, is about the stupid shit you people say, and me calling you on it.

If you don't want to discuss how ******* stupid you libs are, when you just use buzz words, with no understanding of what the words actually mean, because you are ******* retarded,

THEN DON'T.

What you ******* don't ******* underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that ******* bad actors don't ******* all ******* work the same ******* way. Just because ******* Nazis ******* dealt in ******* genocide while ******* slaveholders ******* enslaved people, doesn't ******* affuckingfect the ******* fact that ******* Germany doesn't ******* hang up ******* statues and ******* monuments trying to ******* dilute and ******* sanitize and ******* whitewash the ******* inhufuckingmanity of their own ******* past, as do the ******* UDC edifices. ******* both of them lost their ******* wars, did they ******* not?

Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.

And you are doing the same stupid ******* thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.


My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is ******* stupid, and if you do that, then you are ******* stupid.



If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly ******* stupid you are.

NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.

The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".

The Confederates were all exonerated by President Johnson with very few exceptions- those who committed war crimes, as well as President Davis and General Lee.

And Lee and Davis were exonerated posthumously- Davis having his citizenship restored by Southern Honky Jimmy Carter.

Johnson was carrying on with Lincoln’s Plan (10% Plan) for reconciliation.

 

[Bush92]

Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?

The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.

As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.

Look at the Governors of Alabama.

You mean like George Wallace?

Exactly.

This George Wallace?

Nape. The George Wallace who was actually active in politics.

"I am having nothing to do with this so-called civil rights bill. The liberal left-wingers have passed it. Now let them employ some pinknik social engineers in Washington, D.C., to figure out what to do with it."

But your quote from much later in his life is an inspiring reminder that people can change. Thanks for that.

The Civil Right Act of 1964 was a violation of the 10th Amendment and interfered with private businesses. Liberals like to hold-up the biggest piece of shit Amendment passed by the radical Republicans after the war...the 14th. Most abused Amendment of the Constitution. 13th and 15th are fine. Bill of Rights over time has been selectively incorporated to the states. 14th is moot. Court didn’t need the 14th to do this.

 

[Bush92]

Let's just face the fact that slave owners were first and foremost immoral and lazy. Just hard to figure out which one was bigger.

Tocqueville made note of that when comparing slave-owning Kentucky with free state Ohio...just by crossing the Ohio River.

yes. Agrarian society versus industrial immigrant society.

 

[Bush92]

Do you understand the crimes and inhumanity that was done by the Confederacy.

Do you understand the ******* stupidity of a Nazi analogy, and pretending that 12 percent is the same as ******* ZERO POINT TWO percent?

I mean, I was talking to RW. He is the ******* moron that made that comparison, and stood by it. And that is the conversation you jumped into. If you want to comment on his ******* stupid post, then address his ******* stupid post.


I am discussing the rest of this issue, in the rest of this thread. THIS bit, is about the stupid shit you people say, and me calling you on it.

If you don't want to discuss how ******* stupid you libs are, when you just use buzz words, with no understanding of what the words actually mean, because you are ******* retarded,

THEN DON'T.

What you ******* don't ******* underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that ******* bad actors don't ******* all ******* work the same ******* way. Just because ******* Nazis ******* dealt in ******* genocide while ******* slaveholders ******* enslaved people, doesn't ******* affuckingfect the ******* fact that ******* Germany doesn't ******* hang up ******* statues and ******* monuments trying to ******* dilute and ******* sanitize and ******* whitewash the ******* inhufuckingmanity of their own ******* past, as do the ******* UDC edifices. ******* both of them lost their ******* wars, did they ******* not?

Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.

And you are doing the same stupid ******* thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.


My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is ******* stupid, and if you do that, then you are ******* stupid.



If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly ******* stupid you are.

NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.

The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".

There is no comparison to “National Socialist “ of Nazi, Germany and the free-market agrarian society of Antebellum South.

 

[Correll]

What you ******* don't ******* underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that ******* bad actors don't ******* all ******* work the same ******* way. Just because ******* Nazis ******* dealt in ******* genocide while ******* slaveholders ******* enslaved people, doesn't ******* affuckingfect the ******* fact that ******* Germany doesn't ******* hang up ******* statues and ******* monuments trying to ******* dilute and ******* sanitize and ******* whitewash the ******* inhufuckingmanity of their own ******* past, as do the ******* UDC edifices. ******* both of them lost their ******* wars, did they ******* not?

Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.

And you are doing the same stupid ******* thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.


My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is ******* stupid, and if you do that, then you are ******* stupid.



If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly ******* stupid you are.

NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.

The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".

The Confederates were all exonerated by President Johnson with very few exceptions- those who committed war crimes, as well as President Davis and General Lee.

And Lee and Davis were exonerated posthumously- Davis having his citizenship restored by Southern Honky Jimmy Carter.

--------------------------------------------------------------- And?

This has WHAT to do with the Lost Cause Cult?

But since you bring up Robert E.Lee, I think statues of him should be festooned with a placard reading, "General Lee specifically told us not to put this shit up, but we went ahead and did it anyway, which kinda demonstrates who has the agenda here".

What do you think? Too wordy?

Jeez, sounds like you are using Lee as a Moral Authority to support your argument, almost like there is more to him that "slavery, blah, blah, blah".


You just completely DEMONSTRATED, what I have been saying for 60 pages, you potted plant.

 

[Correll]

What you ******* don't ******* underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that ******* bad actors don't ******* all ******* work the same ******* way. Just because ******* Nazis ******* dealt in ******* genocide while ******* slaveholders ******* enslaved people, doesn't ******* affuckingfect the ******* fact that ******* Germany doesn't ******* hang up ******* statues and ******* monuments trying to ******* dilute and ******* sanitize and ******* whitewash the ******* inhufuckingmanity of their own ******* past, as do the ******* UDC edifices. ******* both of them lost their ******* wars, did they ******* not?

Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.

And you are doing the same stupid ******* thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.


My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is ******* stupid, and if you do that, then you are ******* stupid.



If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly ******* stupid you are.

NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.

The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".

RW, said nothing about that. YOu are putting words in his mouth. HE made a very general analogy between the two, and several other leftards jumped in to defend it.

This is the first of this excuse for it, anyone has mentioned.

I just pointed out how ******* stupid what they said was.

Actually I first brought it up WAY way back, and that was ALWAYS the point.

I'm sure it was addressed then. Right now, some leftards are making an even dumber argument, and that is the matter of discussion right here, right now. Try to keep up.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't know. Possibly. Or it could be that he thought that the "Invisible Empire" would have the power to protect him, even though most people were against the murder of children.


I suspect you don't know either. YOU are just assuming the worst, because of the hate in your heart.

It's ironic for someone supportive of the Con-federacy and the slavery of fellow humans to talk about the hate in others' hearts.

Only if you ignore the last 150 years of American history, where celebrating the valor of the Confederate fighting men, has been seen as harmless, even healthy regional pride, and understood to NOT be supporting the defeated institution of slavery.


It is not credible that you missed that, so why are you pretending to be unaware of it?

I would find it very hard to sleep at night celebrating the valor of con-federates who fought to enslave their fellow humans. Can we assume that you have no conscience tugging at YOU in that regard?

Normal people judge historical figures by the standards of their time. IT takes a very special person, to judge someone from another century by today's standards,


and an even more special person, to then have a hysterical hissy fit about it.

Actually it's quite easy to judge someone from another time period.......now we have all the info necessary to do so.

Actually, it is not that difficult to judge.........SLAVERY BAD

 

[Correll]

What you ******* don't ******* underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that ******* bad actors don't ******* all ******* work the same ******* way. Just because ******* Nazis ******* dealt in ******* genocide while ******* slaveholders ******* enslaved people, doesn't ******* affuckingfect the ******* fact that ******* Germany doesn't ******* hang up ******* statues and ******* monuments trying to ******* dilute and ******* sanitize and ******* whitewash the ******* inhufuckingmanity of their own ******* past, as do the ******* UDC edifices. ******* both of them lost their ******* wars, did they ******* not?

Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.

And you are doing the same stupid ******* thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.


My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is ******* stupid, and if you do that, then you are ******* stupid.



If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly ******* stupid you are.

NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.

The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".

The Confederates were all exonerated by President Johnson with very few exceptions- those who committed war crimes, as well as President Davis and General Lee.

And Lee and Davis were exonerated posthumously- Davis having his citizenship restored by Southern Honky Jimmy Carter.

And, as we can see, that was a big mistake.

I know you are upset that America healed it's wounds and want to do all you can to reopen them, and tear this nation apart, because you hate it, and it's citizens.

 

[Correll]

I don't know. Possibly. Or it could be that he thought that the "Invisible Empire" would have the power to protect him, even though most people were against the murder of children.


I suspect you don't know either. YOU are just assuming the worst, because of the hate in your heart.

It's ironic for someone supportive of the Con-federacy and the slavery of fellow humans to talk about the hate in others' hearts.

Only if you ignore the last 150 years of American history, where celebrating the valor of the Confederate fighting men, has been seen as harmless, even healthy regional pride, and understood to NOT be supporting the defeated institution of slavery.


It is not credible that you missed that, so why are you pretending to be unaware of it?

I would find it very hard to sleep at night celebrating the valor of con-federates who fought to enslave their fellow humans. Can we assume that you have no conscience tugging at YOU in that regard?

Normal people judge historical figures by the standards of their time. IT takes a very special person, to judge someone from another century by today's standards,


and an even more special person, to then have a hysterical hissy fit about it.

Actually it's quite easy to judge someone from another time period.......now we have all the info necessary to do so.

And reasonable people do it by the standards of their time, and assholes do what you are doing.

 

[rightwinger]

Duty,honor, and bravery are never “lost causes.”

Especially in the attempt to get slavery established in new territories.

Robert E. Lee was opposed to slavery and the Confederate Constitution condemned the international slave trade. The abolitionist that pushed the Dred Scott case to US Supreme Court were the ones that destroyed the Missouri Comprise line of 1820.

Lee owned slaves and fought a war to ensure they remained slaves. International slave trade had been banned in the US since 1805. The Confederacy didn’t need slaves from overseas. They had four million slaves and had no problem breeding their own

 

[Correll]

Shut your face anus.

Someone is turning all potty mouth

YOu fucktards do nothing but spew the most hateful slurs against good people, all day long and then are shocked when people respond to you, as you so richly deserve.


NOt only are you ******* assholes, but you are pussies about it.

Ah...and here we have the victimhood I've come to expect from you.

**** you.

Name-calling again. You don't handle things very well, do you?

This whole issue, is ginned up shit, to give fucktards like you, an thin excuse to smear good people with vile slurs.



So, insulting you back, is completely called for, you vile little piece of shit.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

If I was constantly on the wrong side of history all of the time -- I would be trying to revise it too....

But....historical facts kick neo-confederates in the ass so much, they have no choice but to try to rewrite history....

That is why they are called "Neo-Confederates" -- Neo meaning new....revised.....edited....kicked in the ass by history...

Southern Pride has been accepted in America, as harmless, even healthy regional pride and part of the larger American Patriotism and culture and heritage,


for over 5 generations.


You are the one trying to rewrite history, not US.

Southern pride is not neo-confederate revisionism.....

I am from the south ...and I have never felt that part of being proud of where I am from meant I had to embrace a system that wanted to see the enslavement of my ancestors...in fact, the way my ancestors persevered and ultimately defeated that confederate system is where I draw my pride from....

 

[Correll]

How do you know that suspect didn't expect punishment? He was probably a liberal, at the point in time the crime was committed, Alabama was solidly leftist

What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.

Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?

The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.

As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.

Look at the Governors of Alabama.

You mean like George Wallace?

What you want a statue for him now.

Just making the point that he was elected in the deep south, after he flipped on the segregation issue, with a base in the rural white poor.


Just another example of real history conflicting with the leftard fantasy that history was all about race.

 

[Correll]

1. Calling me a racist, just shows that you are a ******* retard.

So you call yourself a dumbass racist defender.

2. I understand the analogy far better than you. I just pointed out how ******* retarded it is, and how retarded you lefties are for making it or defending it. Note your complete inability to defend your analogy in any way.

It's nothing to defend, it is spot on Jackass.

Except when challenged on the specifics, you and your fellow loser RW, couldn't support your analogy at all.



YOU'VE LOST. YOU LOOK STUPID. EVEN MORE THAN NORMAL.

Says the fool who honors men that terrorized a people because of the color of their skin.

Link to support your latest stupid claim, or concede that it was just more shit from your face anus.

Where the **** have you been, oh that's right you skipped school in history class.

Got it. Just more shit from your face anus. You lose, ass face.

 

[Correll]

So you call yourself a dumbass racist defender.


It's nothing to defend, it is spot on Jackass.

Except when challenged on the specifics, you and your fellow loser RW, couldn't support your analogy at all.



YOU'VE LOST. YOU LOOK STUPID. EVEN MORE THAN NORMAL.

Says the fool who honors men that terrorized a people because of the color of their skin.

Link to support your latest stupid claim, or concede that it was just more shit from your face anus.

Where the **** have you been, oh that's right you skipped school in history class.

Or was brainwashed by the Lost Cause people.

You are welcome to try to support his moronic claim to, asshole.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

You have no idea of the racial views of folks from the south?

Do you think a system of Jim Crow (legal apartheid) just popped up out of nowhere despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??

Do you think black men who also fought for this country in that same world war were lynched and their racist murderers not even convicted despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??

You folks really twist yourself into pretzels to defend your confederate fetish

Correct. Support for such programs could have been very high. Or they could have relatively weak majorities. Or they could have been somewhat unpopular, but with a strongly motivated minority supporting them against a less motivated majority.


I don't know. I've never looked into the support that policy had at that time period, historically.


But regardless, I was asked something good about Southern Whites, and I gave one example, ie they helped a lot, in defeating HItler and the Nazis.


Do you want to address that fact, or are you just here to bog the thread down in mindless partisan race baiting pap?

Still playing dumb huh??

Ok....let's say there was a policy in the south that made it legal for black folks to go around and lynch and murder white women -- for no other reason than them being white women....they even nick name the policy Jane Crow...and on the rare occasion that someone is arrested for it -- the legal system insures that person gets off...

Obviously, it won't take a genius to deduce that most of the south would be against that.....

However, that is EXACTLY what the policy was in the south in regards to black men women and children-- that you some how claim you don't know much about....

Do you think this man would blow up a church killing four beautiful little girls and not expect legal punishment because he thought the white supremacist policy of Jim Crow wasn't popular??
View attachment 291796

How do you know that suspect didn't expect punishment? He was probably a liberal, at the point in time the crime was committed, Alabama was solidly leftist

What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.

Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?

As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.

Name one conservative who was on the front lines during the Civil Rights movement, putting their life on the line -- standing next to King??

William F Buckley? Goldwater? Jessie Helms? Who?

 

[Correll]

Exactly. Dimwingers deny their racist history.

Yea...200 years ago
We are not embracing the good ole days of slavery
You have to be Republican to do that

Shut your face anus.

Someone is turning all potty mouth

YOu fucktards do nothing but spew the most hateful slurs against good people, all day long and then are shocked when people respond to you, as you so richly deserve.


NOt only are you ******* assholes, but you are pussies about it.

Looks like someone is having a temper tantrum

Nope. Just insulting you back, and trying to rise to your level of vitriol.


I know you pussies think that you should be allowed to insult good people with the most vile insults, and be treated with kid gloves, because you are pussies,


but I don't play that game, you cowardly fucktard.

 

[rightwinger]

It all comes down to evolving views of the communities that have Confederate statues prominently displayed in their cities

In the early 1900s, those communities were solidly Jim Crow and erected monuments that enforced their views. Black members of the community who objected knew to keep their mouths shut

Today, Blacks and those unsympathetic to the Confederate cause have a voice in their community. They are asking that those statues be removed

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.

Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?

The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.

As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.

Look at the Governors of Alabama.

You mean like George Wallace?

What you want a statue for him now.

Just making the point that he was elected in the deep south, after he flipped on the segregation issue, with a base in the rural white poor.


Just another example of real history conflicting with the leftard fantasy that history was all about race.

When Wallace ran for president, why didn't he run as a Democrat??

Oh I remember...because he would have been rejected....

Can you tell me the liberal policies that Wallace ran on??

I really do get tired of having to slap the shit out of closet racists with facts...but I got time today.....

"But by the fall of 1968, George Wallace had pulled the major parties to the right" <<-- liberals don't pull both parties to the right do they??

"Republican presidential nominee Richard Nixon conceded the Deep South to him and came up with a “southern strategy” designed to appeal to white backlash over civil rights." <<-- Who were the ones pissed off at the civil rights movement?? Liberals or Conservatives??

"[Wallace] boasted of his crowd sizes; complained of “rigged polls” and accused the media of treating him unfairly, all while working to ensure the spotlight stayed on him." Like Trump....

His platform was very much conservative, instead of "Make America Great Again" -- Wallace named his campaign "Stand Up For America" -- and his supporters were known for saying things like “When George Wallace is elected president, he’s going to line up all these n-----s and shoot them,’’ Tom Turnipseed recalled. “I said, ‘Oh, hell no’ … this guy was dead serious.”

Stand Up For America: George Wallace's chaotic, prophetic campaign

We have seen this before...and we have also seen how folks like you will blatantly try to rewrite that history because once again, you are on the wrong side of it....sounds like a personal problem to me

 

[Polishprince]

When Wallace ran for president, why didn't he run as a Democrat??

Oh I remember...because he would have been rejected....

Can you tell me the liberal policies that Wallace ran on??

Actually, George C. Wallace ran for President 4 times, in 1964-68-72-76. Three times as a liberal Democrat and once as an independent.

And he was rejected all 4 times- regardless of what ticket he ran on.

Wallace's liberal policy was Racism and Segregation. The same ones that liberal icons like Clinton's mentor, J. W. Fulbright and Al Gore's father advocated. Wallace chose to run as a Democrat 3 times, because he knew that was the party where his support was at.