For Every Confederate Soldier Statue They Remove, Put Up 10

[bodecea]

Where are the memorials for the British soldiers that fought in the War for Independence?

In Britain.

Well, there your are...!

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

 

[there4eyeM]

Where are the monuments for the American Royalists that fought for King George?

 

[bodecea]

"Southerners had also discussed secession in the nation’s early years, concerned over talk of abolishing slavery. But when push came to shove in 1832, it was not over slavery but tariffs. National tariffs were passed that protected Northern manufacturers but increased prices for manufactured goods purchased in the predominantly agricultural South, where the Tariff of 1828 was dubbed the "Tariff of Abominations." The legislature of South Carolina declared the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 were "unauthorized by the constitution of the United States" and voted them null, void and non-binding on the state.

"President Andrew Jackson responded with a Proclamation of Force, declaring, "I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed." (Emphasis is Jackson’s). Congress authorized Jackson to use military force if necessary to enforce the law (every Southern senator walked out in protest before the vote was taken)."

The war was about the feds superimposing their laws over state laws, when they clearly had no constitutional authority to do so. They had the support of the NORTH, because the NORTHERN manufacturers benefited TREMENDOUSLY from such tyrannical interference and control of resources.

Secession | HistoryNet

What does it feel like to be so easily played...again and again and again and again?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Where are the monuments for the American Royalists that fought for King George?

Tories were heroic conservatives...and yet where are the Memorials to the Victims of the Slavery Holocaust .............

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

In Britain.

Well, there your are...!

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

 

[rightwinger]

Well, there your are...!

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

I don't see Democrats defending their memorials......only Republicans

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

I don't see Democrats defending their memorials......only Republicans

Hiding your Democrat memorials (yes, yours. Point out those that do not depict Democrats) and trying to rewrite the narrative won't change the history of your party. Too many of us have original source material.

 

[bodecea]

"Southerners had also discussed secession in the nation’s early years, concerned over talk of abolishing slavery. But when push came to shove in 1832, it was not over slavery but tariffs. National tariffs were passed that protected Northern manufacturers but increased prices for manufactured goods purchased in the predominantly agricultural South, where the Tariff of 1828 was dubbed the "Tariff of Abominations." The legislature of South Carolina declared the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 were "unauthorized by the constitution of the United States" and voted them null, void and non-binding on the state.

"President Andrew Jackson responded with a Proclamation of Force, declaring, "I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed." (Emphasis is Jackson’s). Congress authorized Jackson to use military force if necessary to enforce the law (every Southern senator walked out in protest before the vote was taken)."

The war was about the feds superimposing their laws over state laws, when they clearly had no constitutional authority to do so. They had the support of the NORTH, because the NORTHERN manufacturers benefited TREMENDOUSLY from such tyrannical interference and control of resources.

Secession | HistoryNet

YES, WE SAW THAT IN THE DECLARATION OF SECESSION RIGHT? TARIFFS? LMAOROG


YOUR LINK:

The Abolition Movement, and Southern Secession

Between the 1830s and 1860, a widening chasm developed between North and South over the issue of slavery, which had been abolished in all states north of the Mason-Dixon line. The Abolition Movement grew in power and prominence. The slave holding South increasingly felt its interests were threatened, particularly since slavery had been prohibited in much of the new territory that had been added west of the Mississippi River. The Missouri Compromise, the Dred Scott Decision case, the issue of Popular Sovereignty (allowing residents of a territory to vote on whether it would be slave or free), and John Brown‘s Raid On Harpers Ferry all played a role in the intensifying debate. Whereas once Southerners had talked of an emancipation process that would gradually end slavery, they increasingly took a hard line in favor of perpetuating it forever.

Secession | HistoryNet


Let's see. 1860 minus 1828 is 32 years.

So according to you, it took 32 years for them to secede because of the Tariff of 1828?

LOWEST TARIFF SINCE 1816??? LOL

Actually, one of the Northern states tried to secede decades before, for the same thing only with a different *excuse*.

So yes, that's kind of what I'm saying. It was just another instance of federal government overreach. It has been going on since we created our government. And every time it happens, the government grants itself more authority.

Which is of course what the civil war is all about.

"Following ratification by 11 of the 13 states, the government began operation under the new U.S. Constitution in March 1789. In less than 15 years, states of New England had already threatened to secede from the Union. The first time was a threat to leave if the Assumption Bill, which provided for the federal government to assume the debts of the various states, were not passed. The next threat was over the expense of the Louisiana Purchase."

Secession | HistoryNet

I am glad you have progressed from the stupid memes and posters to the less neurotic and simpleminded, but still hysterical, font action.

Secession didn't cause the war...it was your stupid secessionists firing on a Federal Installation that wasn't doing them any harm.

 

[bodecea]

Well, there your are...!

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

Seceding Democrats? The Democrat Party only won one state in the election of 1960. (Dark green....Missouri)

 

[bodecea]

Well, there your are...!

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

How many of your "seceding Democrats" are still alive?

 

[rightwinger]

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

I don't see Democrats defending their memorials......only Republicans

Hiding your Democrat memorials (yes, yours. Point out those that do not depict Democrats) and trying to rewrite the narrative won't change the history of your party. Too many of us have original source material.

Yes...the correct term is history.......150 years ago
It is today's REPUBLICANS that are celebrating that history and demanding that it be honored

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

Seceding Democrats? The Democrat Party only won one state in the election of 1960. (Dark green....Missouri)

View attachment 128404

You might want to look more closely at your map.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You think you made a point but you didn't.

Nobody from the south is heading to NYC to tear down the Bull, or to DC to unseat Lincoln, or whining about how those statues represent OPPRESSION to them.

Do you maintain that every utterance of every politician accurately sums up not only the truth of every situation, but the viewpoint of the masses?

A tyrannical government used the slave issue to exert illegal authority over the states. Just as a tyrannical government today uses environmental and homo issues to exert illegal authority over the states. They pick an issue that will create a divide, and they ride it.

IF you were to bother to read, you would notice that the Articles of Secession for EVERY ONE of the treasonous states that formed the Con-federacy stated slavery and the preservation of slavery as a prime reason for secession. You gonna deny that too?

Those seceding Democrats were real shitheads, eh?

It seems they're trying again. But now they seek to replace their lost black-to-white slavery with the slavery of all to The State.

How many of your "seceding Democrats" are still alive?

There's a new group.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Confederate soldiers’ statues are being removed all over the South. For in New Orleans, one in Virginia. More in Florida. But these are all on public land, in city squares. There is no attempt to remove any statues (or even flags) from private property. People can fly flags or display statues in their front yards, in full view, if they wish to. Some people here in Tampa, Florida already do.

So if the do-gooders really want to make Confederate statues an issue, let’s make it one for them. For every Confederate soldier statue they remove, let’s put 10 more up. They remove 10, we put up 100. They remove 100, we put up 1000.

Before you know it, you won’t be able to drive 2 blocks without seeing a reminder of the Confederacy and the people who fought for it. The do-gooders will wish they never came up with this idea. And yeah, there’s always airplanes with skywriting and message trailers.

Now, as for the politics, I can sympathize with black folks being uncomfortable with glorification of the nation that supported slavery. And maybe the flags representing that (partially) could be a bit over the top. Maybe that statue of Jefferson Davis also.

But the removal of soldiers’ statues is not acceptable. Jefferson Davis was a politician who led the Confederacy. And the Confederate flag represents that nation and its politics. But soldiers don’t make laws. They don’t prescribe policy. They follow orders and risk their lives (and often lose them) in wars. It’s just not right to remove soldiers’ statues and dishonor them in the process. They take them down….put more up.

Put up whatever you want Cracker. You`re not getting your slaves back.

Who wants their slaves back, damned things are expensive to feed...oh, wait...

 

[gallantwarrior]

A monument to the Confederacy which represents 40% of their population

Where do you find these?

 

[candycorn]

The sense of revisionism I used was the second below.

From Merriam-Webster:
Definition of revisionism

1. 1: a movement in revolutionary Marxian socialism favoring an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary spirit
   
   
2. 2: advocacy of revision (as of a doctrine or policy or in historical analysis)

Good for you.
Obviously this discussion is beyond your capabilities.

He's administering to you a masters class in effectively making an argument.

 

[bornright]

Should the Statue of Liberty be taken down because of the French American War?

 

[bornright]

Should all statues of Martin Luther King Jr be taken down since Al Sharpton says things are not good in this racist country which means MLK lost.

 

[bornright]

Should the statues of the men that fought at the Alamo be taken down because they did lose in that battle?

 

[jillian]

Confederate soldiers’ statues are being removed all over the South. For in New Orleans, one in Virginia. More in Florida. But these are all on public land, in city squares. There is no attempt to remove any statues (or even flags) from private property. People can fly flags or display statues in their front yards, in full view, if they wish to. Some people here in Tampa, Florida already do.

So if the do-gooders really want to make Confederate statues an issue, let’s make it one for them. For every Confederate soldier statue they remove, let’s put 10 more up. They remove 10, we put up 100. They remove 100, we put up 1000.

Before you know it, you won’t be able to drive 2 blocks without seeing a reminder of the Confederacy and the people who fought for it. The do-gooders will wish they never came up with this idea. And yeah, there’s always airplanes with skywriting and message trailers.

Now, as for the politics, I can sympathize with black folks being uncomfortable with glorification of the nation that supported slavery. And maybe the flags representing that (partially) could be a bit over the top. Maybe that statue of Jefferson Davis also.

But the removal of soldiers’ statues is not acceptable. Jefferson Davis was a politician who led the Confederacy. And the Confederate flag represents that nation and its politics. But soldiers don’t make laws. They don’t prescribe policy. They follow orders and risk their lives (and often lose them) in wars. It’s just not right to remove soldiers’ statues and dishonor them in the process. They take them down….put more up.

poor white supremacist.

losers don't write history.... you're a loser. *shrug*