NFL kneelers

[Pogo]

By calling them a separate nation, you support their legal argument and right to secession.


YOu just sided with the primary point of The Lost Cause movement.

They had every right to secession and the Union had every right to kick their ass and bring them back in the fold.

The The Lost Cause movement is another fantasy brought about by racist that still wish they could own other human beings. There was nothing brave and noble about the CSA, all they wanted was their slaves, and to most of us slavery is not noble...but maybe you disagree

the civil war was not about slavery, there was slavery in the northern states at that time. No one here is saying that slavery was right or moral, African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, do they have any responsibility? It is still going on today, do you give a shit?

Let's hear from the people of the time...

From the Mississippi Article of Secession...


"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union."

"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.

From Georgia...

"The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

From SC...

"We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection."

From Texas...

She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy.


But yeah, it was not about slavery!

the quotes are accurate, however the context was different. The issue was each state being able to decide for itself rather than the federal government dictating to them. You also refuse to address the FACT that slavery existed in the northern states, Lincoln's Illinois had slavery at that same time.

Wrong. Illinois abolished slavery by constitution in 1848.

You really want to derail a thread about the NFL and Jingo Parades and make it a thread about the Civil War? Why? Is the topic inconvenient? Are you afraid to join in the threads that actually ARE about the Civil War?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What you call a "symbol of regional pride" is nothing more than the flag of a nation that was an enemy of the United States no different than Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. There is no national pride in the waving of a flag of an enemy nation of the United States.

bullshit, the CSA was part of the United States. It was a civil war, not a foreign conflict. We are having a civil war in the USA today between the leftists socialists that want to destroy the country and the patriotic americans who want to save it. Sadly, you are part of the first group.

They left the USA and formed their own nation. Fuck you people are stupid, you do not even know your own country's history.

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

Gator is the one supporting the legal right to secession. Take it up with him. He brought it up.

Yes, I do. I support the legal right to secession and I support the legal right for the country being left to say "hell no" and then I support the legal right for them to fight it out.

 

[Pogo]

By calling them a separate nation, you support their legal argument and right to secession.


YOu just sided with the primary point of The Lost Cause movement.

They had every right to secession and the Union had every right to kick their ass and bring them back in the fold.

The The Lost Cause movement is another fantasy brought about by racist that still wish they could own other human beings. There was nothing brave and noble about the CSA, all they wanted was their slaves, and to most of us slavery is not noble...but maybe you disagree

the civil war was not about slavery, there was slavery in the northern states at that time. No one here is saying that slavery was right or moral, African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, do they have any responsibility? It is still going on today, do you give a shit?

Let's hear from the people of the time...

From the Mississippi Article of Secession...


"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union."

"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.

From Georgia...

"The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

From SC...

"We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection."

From Texas...

She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy.


But yeah, it was not about slavery!

the quotes are accurate, however the context was different. The issue was each state being able to decide for itself rather than the federal government dictating to them. You also refuse to address the FACT that slavery existed in the northern states, Lincoln's Illinois had slavery at that same time.

Wrong. Illinois abolished slavery by constitution in 1848.

You really want to derail a thread about the NFL and Jingo Parades and make it a thread about the Civil War? Why? Is the topic inconvenient? Are you afraid to join in the threads that actually ARE about the Civil War?

Here ya go Redfish --- I promised you a link, here's two.

This post is a pretty comprehensive summary of the Cult of the Lost Cause, its origins and purposes and effects, explained for a European. Starring "Silent Sam", Alexander Stephens, Julian Carr, the entire UDC and the complete remarks by Mitch Landrieu.

And this one has a nice picture of that infamous white power obelisk standing on Canal Street.

Other posts of course developed in their wake. Rather than try to pull this thread down meet me there if you think you can hack it and state your defense.

That goes for any of you history revisionists.

 

[Correll]

bullshit, the CSA was part of the United States. It was a civil war, not a foreign conflict. We are having a civil war in the USA today between the leftists socialists that want to destroy the country and the patriotic americans who want to save it. Sadly, you are part of the first group.

They left the USA and formed their own nation. Fuck you people are stupid, you do not even know your own country's history.

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

Gator is the one supporting the legal right to secession. Take it up with him. He brought it up.

Yes, I do. I support the legal right to secession and I support the legal right for the country being left to say "hell no" and then I support the legal right for them to fight it out.

If the SOuth had the right to secede, then the North was obligated to pull out it's troops from the territory of the new nation.


And the Lost Cause is correct that the war was an unjust war of conquest.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They left the USA and formed their own nation. Fuck you people are stupid, you do not even know your own country's history.

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

Gator is the one supporting the legal right to secession. Take it up with him. He brought it up.

Yes, I do. I support the legal right to secession and I support the legal right for the country being left to say "hell no" and then I support the legal right for them to fight it out.

If the SOuth had the right to secede, then the North was obligated to pull out it's troops from the territory of the new nation.


And the Lost Cause is correct that the war was an unjust war of conquest.

You are missing the fact that the North also had the right to defend their sovereign nation from being ripped apart. You seem very confused on what having the right to do something means.

We had the right to spread out across this vast country taking it for ourselves. Those that were here before us also had the right to try and stop us. In the end the one with the most might had their right prevail.

The lost cause can only be correct if you agree that the institution of slavery needed to be defended and should still be legally practiced today...which I assume you do

 

[Redfish]

By calling them a separate nation, you support their legal argument and right to secession.


YOu just sided with the primary point of The Lost Cause movement.

They had every right to secession and the Union had every right to kick their ass and bring them back in the fold.

The The Lost Cause movement is another fantasy brought about by racist that still wish they could own other human beings. There was nothing brave and noble about the CSA, all they wanted was their slaves, and to most of us slavery is not noble...but maybe you disagree

the civil war was not about slavery, there was slavery in the northern states at that time. No one here is saying that slavery was right or moral, African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, do they have any responsibility? It is still going on today, do you give a shit?

Let's hear from the people of the time...

From the Mississippi Article of Secession...


"A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union."

"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.

From Georgia...

"The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

From SC...

"We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection."

From Texas...

She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy.


But yeah, it was not about slavery!

the quotes are accurate, however the context was different. The issue was each state being able to decide for itself rather than the federal government dictating to them. You also refuse to address the FACT that slavery existed in the northern states, Lincoln's Illinois had slavery at that same time.

Wrong. Illinois abolished slavery by constitution in 1848.

You really want to derail a thread about the NFL and Jingo Parades and make it a thread about the Civil War? Why? Is the topic inconvenient? Are you afraid to join in the threads that actually ARE about the Civil War?

I did not derail the thread, just followed the derailment.

As to the assholes that refuse to stand for the national anthem, f#@k em. They are being paid millions to play a game for our entertainment, put them on the street to make their protest without their outrageous incomes.

 

[Redfish]

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

Gator is the one supporting the legal right to secession. Take it up with him. He brought it up.

Yes, I do. I support the legal right to secession and I support the legal right for the country being left to say "hell no" and then I support the legal right for them to fight it out.

If the SOuth had the right to secede, then the North was obligated to pull out it's troops from the territory of the new nation.


And the Lost Cause is correct that the war was an unjust war of conquest.

You are missing the fact that the North also had the right to defend their sovereign nation from being ripped apart. You seem very confused on what having the right to do something means.

We had the right to spread out across this vast country taking it for ourselves. Those that were here before us also had the right to try and stop us. In the end the one with the most might had their right prevail.

The lost cause can only be correct if you agree that the institution of slavery needed to be defended and should still be legally practiced today...which I assume you do

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued. What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

 

[Redfish]

bullshit, the CSA was part of the United States. It was a civil war, not a foreign conflict. We are having a civil war in the USA today between the leftists socialists that want to destroy the country and the patriotic americans who want to save it. Sadly, you are part of the first group.

They left the USA and formed their own nation. Fuck you people are stupid, you do not even know your own country's history.

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

90% of the people demanding the removal of statues in NOLA do not even know who these people were, what they did, or what the believed. BTW, now that the statues are down, crime is still rampant and the mayor and city council remain incompetent.

just to show the ignorance of this, they wanted to take down Andrew Jackson in Jackson square. They didn't know that he had nothing to do with the civil war and was a hero of the revolutionary war against King George. But he was an old white guy so "take him down". downright stupid.

Haha. Links?

Is that Civil War submarine still there btw?

don't think so. where was it?

 

[Toro]

Kneeling is so dumb.

Rather than kneeling and pissing off all of your customers, hold signs up for the issue you are supporting.

 

[Redfish]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

My point is that the left uses a false narrative about US slavery as a political argument, which is totally invalid based on actual history, and the fact that most of the south belonged to the democrat party in those years.

The civil war was a terrible chapter in our history, we need to understand how it happened so that it doesn't happen again, the unbiased facts should be taught in schools, with full context about what people believed in those days, not by today's standards.


Was it about slavery? only partially. States rights vs federal dictates was the bigger issue.

I do believe it is disingenuous to discuss early American slavery without also discussing and condemning slavery that exists today.

 

[Redfish]

Kneeling is so dumb.

Rather than kneeling and pissing off all of your customers, hold signs up for the issue you are supporting.

and do it on your own time, not while you are being paid to play a game.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

My point is that the left uses a false narrative about US slavery as a political argument, which is totally invalid based on actual history, and the fact that most of the south belonged to the democrat party in those years.

The civil war was a terrible chapter in our history, we need to understand how it happened so that it doesn't happen again, the unbiased facts should be taught in schools, with full context about what people believed in those days, not by today's standards.


Was it about slavery? only partially. States rights vs federal dictates was the bigger issue.

I do believe it is disingenuous to discuss early American slavery without also discussing and condemning slavery that exists today.

The only state right they were fighting over was slavery.

Would not condemning slavery period cover then and now? Why does one need to point out they condemning slavery today and in the past?

 

[Redfish]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

My point is that the left uses a false narrative about US slavery as a political argument, which is totally invalid based on actual history, and the fact that most of the south belonged to the democrat party in those years.

The civil war was a terrible chapter in our history, we need to understand how it happened so that it doesn't happen again, the unbiased facts should be taught in schools, with full context about what people believed in those days, not by today's standards.


Was it about slavery? only partially. States rights vs federal dictates was the bigger issue.

I do believe it is disingenuous to discuss early American slavery without also discussing and condemning slavery that exists today.

The only state right they were fighting over was slavery.

Would not condemning slavery period cover then and now? Why does one need to point out they condemning slavery today and in the past?

for the last time, states rights was the issue, slavery was the symptom.

and yes, we should condemn all slavery, and stop using the fact that 4% of American were slave owners in a period of our history, stop using that piece of history to drive a wedge between us. We are allowing forces that want to destroy this country to divide us. We need to wake up and understand the threat that we all face if we let these divisions persist.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

My point is that the left uses a false narrative about US slavery as a political argument, which is totally invalid based on actual history, and the fact that most of the south belonged to the democrat party in those years.

The civil war was a terrible chapter in our history, we need to understand how it happened so that it doesn't happen again, the unbiased facts should be taught in schools, with full context about what people believed in those days, not by today's standards.


Was it about slavery? only partially. States rights vs federal dictates was the bigger issue.

I do believe it is disingenuous to discuss early American slavery without also discussing and condemning slavery that exists today.

The only state right they were fighting over was slavery.

Would not condemning slavery period cover then and now? Why does one need to point out they condemning slavery today and in the past?

for the last time, states rights was the issue, slavery was the symptom.

and yes, we should condemn all slavery, and stop using the fact that 4% of American were slave owners in a period of our history, stop using that piece of history to drive a wedge between us. We are allowing forces that want to destroy this country to divide us. We need to wake up and understand the threat that we all face if we let these divisions persist.

For the last time, had there been no slavery, there would have been no civil war. We need to quit romanticizing the country that fought against this one for the right to own another human being.

These divisions are being driven from the highest levels, the last 3 presidents did all they could do to keep the divisions a wide as possible, and the partisan hacks on both sides are gleefully playing along. We are being divided because a divided populous is easier to control

 

[Redfish]

totally wrong. except for the part about might makes right. No one here has ever said that slavery was right or should be continued.

But that was the point of the civil war and the CSA that so many people here admire.

What I find with you on the left is that you never mention black on black slavery that is going on today in Africa, or the enslavement of women under Islam, or the fact that African blacks sold other African blacks into slavery, or the fact that American indian tribes enslaved the members of other tribes that they captured.

in your small minds the only slavery in history was that engaged in by 4% of people in the southern states (and most northern states) of the USA.

In a discussion about the CSA and the civil war you want to talk about slavery that is going on today, good try at deflection but i am not going to bite.

My point is that the left uses a false narrative about US slavery as a political argument, which is totally invalid based on actual history, and the fact that most of the south belonged to the democrat party in those years.

The civil war was a terrible chapter in our history, we need to understand how it happened so that it doesn't happen again, the unbiased facts should be taught in schools, with full context about what people believed in those days, not by today's standards.


Was it about slavery? only partially. States rights vs federal dictates was the bigger issue.

I do believe it is disingenuous to discuss early American slavery without also discussing and condemning slavery that exists today.

The only state right they were fighting over was slavery.

Would not condemning slavery period cover then and now? Why does one need to point out they condemning slavery today and in the past?

for the last time, states rights was the issue, slavery was the symptom.

and yes, we should condemn all slavery, and stop using the fact that 4% of American were slave owners in a period of our history, stop using that piece of history to drive a wedge between us. We are allowing forces that want to destroy this country to divide us. We need to wake up and understand the threat that we all face if we let these divisions persist.

For the last time, had there been no slavery, there would have been no civil war. We need to quit romanticizing the country that fought against this one for the right to own another human being.

These divisions are being driven from the highest levels, the last 3 presidents did all they could do to keep the divisions a wide as possible, and the partisan hacks on both sides are gleefully playing along. We are being divided because a divided populous is easier to control

Not sure about that. without the slavery issue there were still economic issues where the northern states were trying to destroy the economy of the south. I don't know if there would have been a war, and neither do you. Nice academic discussion, but of zero value here.

as to your second paragraph, I agree completely.

 

[Pogo]

They left the USA and formed their own nation. Fuck you people are stupid, you do not even know your own country's history.

yes, the states of the CSA wanted to establish a new country when the northern states tried to impose their will on them and destroy the economy of the south, it was not about slavery, it was about a central government trying to take away states rights. Its you who does not know history, dude, and its you who is displaying partisan stupidity here. BTW, Lincoln was a republican and Jeff Davis was a democrat, just for shits and giggles, because it actually means nothing

Oh shit --- this dood bought the whole Lost Cause textbook and swallowed whole. We did this to death in the Lost Cause threads but since you're in the right place why don't you tell the class about that obelisk at the foot of Canal Street that stood there for decades commemorating white supremacy and the White League? Why don't you post Mitch Landrieu's commentary on removing it and the other markers? Why don't you meet us in those Lost Cause threads and try to sell it there? I'll give you a link.

90% of the people demanding the removal of statues in NOLA do not even know who these people were, what they did, or what the believed. BTW, now that the statues are down, crime is still rampant and the mayor and city council remain incompetent.

just to show the ignorance of this, they wanted to take down Andrew Jackson in Jackson square. They didn't know that he had nothing to do with the civil war and was a hero of the revolutionary war against King George. But he was an old white guy so "take him down". downright stupid.

Haha. Links?

Is that Civil War submarine still there btw?

don't think so. where was it?

Used to be right in front of the Cabildo.

 

[Pogo]

Kneeling is so dumb.

Rather than kneeling and pissing off all of your customers, hold signs up for the issue you are supporting.

and do it on your own time, not while you are being paid to play a game.

And let that game BE a game without the intrusions of fake-patriotism puppet shows.

 

[Reasonable]

Kinda crazy how we spent an entire season off when not one NFL player had a protest or an event. Now that the season is starting they get involved. If you can’t actually spend your own off time protesting it’s not even serious to them. It’s a worthless protest. You can’t be so emotionally investing in something you won’t do on your own time.

Still against the 1st amendment I see, like 45.

How is that being against the first amendment? You do realize the amendment was created so that government could not stop us from free speech, not the NFL, don't you?

You’re a full fledged idiot. The 1st was created so all Americans could have free speech something your president is working daily to curtail and then do away with. That you turn a blind eye to this shows you’re part of the problem not the solution.

 

[Reasonable]