Unpatriotic Dems In Virginia Erases Confederate Holiday

[Asclepias]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

 

[Correll]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds".

yet the dukes of hazard was a nation wide tv shit show. that means it was widely accepted.


crying "Wacism" like a retarded baby, does not refute my point, ie that the flag has been accepted by the nation as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride as part of the larger American Patriotism, for over 5 generations.


and only a retarded moron could not know that.

 

[Asclepias]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds".

yet the dukes of hazard was a nation wide tv shit show. that means it was widely accepted.


crying "Wacism" like a retarded baby, does not refute my point, ie that the flag has been accepted by the nation as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride as part of the larger American Patriotism, for over 5 generations.


and only a retarded moron could not know that.

" your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds". "

Most whites are inbred. Do you need more help?

 

[Correll]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds".

yet the dukes of hazard was a nation wide tv shit show. that means it was widely accepted.


crying "Wacism" like a retarded baby, does not refute my point, ie that the flag has been accepted by the nation as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride as part of the larger American Patriotism, for over 5 generations.


and only a retarded moron could not know that.

" your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds". "

Most whites are inbred. Do you need more help?

yes. i need to know how you can be as retarded as you are, and yet you are not illiterate.


do you have a helper monkey, to help you with your typing and spelling?

 

[Asclepias]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds".

yet the dukes of hazard was a nation wide tv shit show. that means it was widely accepted.


crying "Wacism" like a retarded baby, does not refute my point, ie that the flag has been accepted by the nation as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride as part of the larger American Patriotism, for over 5 generations.


and only a retarded moron could not know that.

" your claim was that the flag was only accepted by "inbreds". "

Most whites are inbred. Do you need more help?

yes. i need to know how you can be as retarded as you are, and yet you are not illiterate.


do you have a helper monkey, to help you with your typing and spelling?

Easy. Youre retarded and you have no concept what retarded means.

No I dont have any white people helping me with typing or spelling.

 

[Billiejeens]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

Sadly, that is false.

 

[Pogo]

That's a '69.

Lucky you.

I never did like that split grille. That's how I knew right away.

'68, in white. Get crackin'.

 

[Pogo]

Slaveholders preserved that slavery, not political parties. Once again for the non-sentient, NOBODY ANYWHERE, not here, not here when we were colonies, not in the West Indies, not in Colombia, not in Brazil, NOWHERE, ever needed a political party to engage in slavery. EVER. Slavery was an economic instrument, not a political one.

Moreover your grasp of linear time is flailing in the dark. The Democratic Party's domination in the South didn't even begin until AFTER the Civil War, not before it. Even in the election of 1860 the Constitutional Unionists (Whigs) won the states of Tennessee, Kentucky and the Confederate capital host, Virginia. And after that War, the latter was dominated not by the Democrats but by the Readjuster Party.

I keep telling you to break down and buy a history book so you won't look this clueless. I don't know why I keep giving you that advice since you're too dense to follow it.

My grasp of linear time is shining in th light. . The Democratic Party's domination in the South didn't even begin until AFTER the Civil War, not before it - that's what I said dummy.

You don't need a history book You need a reading comprehension course, and stop jumping to conclusions.

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

 

[protectionist]

That's a '69.

Lucky you.

I never did like that split grille. That's how I knew right away.

'68, in white. Get crackin'.

You get crackin. Plenty of junkyards around town.

 

[Asclepias]

How is one unpatriotic for opposing a holiday for a rebellion (that lost) against the United States?

OP is a ******* dumb ass

because the entirety of the confederacy was long ago assimilated by the greater American Identity.

they were part of us before, they failed to break away, and were re-assimilated.

you libs know it. that is why the same people that want to cancel the holiday, because of "rebellion against us" are the same anti-american scum that support the kneelers.

What kind of backwards, half-assed logic did you just shit out and call a valid argument?

You can **** right off with that bullshit. The south lost. If you still support the confederacy, you’re a ******* loser.

yeah, you said that. i addressed it.

what normally happens now, when people talk, is you either express agreement and thank me for teaching you something,


or you explain why you think my counter point was wrong.



simply reasserting your previous position, is what people do, when they know that have lost the argument, but are too dishonest to admit it.



thus, my argument is the winner.


the history of the confederacy was assimilated by America long ago. for over 5 generations it has been accepted as a regional part of the larger American Patriotism.


that is why it is the people that are so against the confederate flag are the same anti-american assholes who support the kneelers.

Ok, loser

for over 5 generations, the confederate flag has been accepted by America as a whole as a harmless symbol of regional pride.


it has only become an issue recently, and the same people that pretend to be so upset over the flying of the "rebellion" flag


are the same anti-american assholes who support the anti-american kneelers.



your choice to not even try to address my point, shows that you are the loser.


and that you know it.

The loser flag has only been accepted by inbreds that **** their sisters and retards.

explain the nation wide success of the tv show the dukes of hazard then, you racist ass.

Most whites are racist. Anything else you need help with?

Sadly, that is false.

Prove it.

 

[Pogo]

That's a '69.

Lucky you.

I never did like that split grille. That's how I knew right away.

'68, in white. Get crackin'.

You get crackin. Plenty of junkyards around town.



View attachment 370347 View attachment 370348

View attachment 370349 View attachment 370350

AGAIN two '69s. See the split grille?
Northeast and southwest look like '68s. But I said 'white'. Actually the SW one looks decent except for the hood.

 

[protectionist]

AGAIN two '69s. See the split grille?
Northeast and southwest look like '68s. But I said 'white'. Actually the SW one looks decent except for the hood.

Paint.

 

[protectionist]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

 

[Pogo]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

After Martin van Buren (who was from New York and not an active slaveowner) organized the Democratic Party there were seven more Presidents before Lincoln. Of those seven, four were from the South and all four were slaveowners. Of those four one was a Democrat and three were Whigs. Of the three from the North, two were Democrats and none were slaveowners.

 

[Billiejeens]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

So misinformed.

 

[Pogo]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

After Martin van Buren (who was from New York and not an active slaveowner) organized the Democratic Party there were seven more Presidents before Lincoln. Of those seven, four were from the South and all four were slaveowners. Of those four one was a Democrat and three were Whigs. Of the three from the North, two were Democrats and none were slaveowners.

So misinformed.

I know. That's why I'm here to help him. The ungrateful wretch.

 

[Correll]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

After Martin van Buren (who was from New York and not an active slaveowner) organized the Democratic Party there were seven more Presidents before Lincoln. Of those seven, four were from the South and all four were slaveowners. Of those four one was a Democrat and three were Whigs. One was a Democrat. Of the three from the North, two were Democrats and none were slaveowners.

err, the fact that something "existed" is not evidence that it did not "need to be preserved".


indeed, everything that is "preserved" has to have "existed" first.


your, well, not your statement. your statement is pretty clear.


your idea, or view of this aspect of the issue, is completely incoherent.

 

[Billiejeens]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

After Martin van Buren (who was from New York and not an active slaveowner) organized the Democratic Party there were seven more Presidents before Lincoln. Of those seven, four were from the South and all four were slaveowners. Of those four one was a Democrat and three were Whigs. One was a Democrat. Of the three from the North, two were Democrats and none were slaveowners.

err, the fact that something "existed" is not evidence that it did not "need to be preserved".


indeed, everything that is "preserved" has to have "existed" first.



your, well, not your statement. your statement is pretty clear.


your idea, or view of this aspect of the issue, is completely incoherent.

Par for the course.

 

[Pogo]

Then it's curious that you had to cut your own post out of the quote so it wouldn't show what I was responding to.

Roll tape.

The South has slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

And DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that.

I'll show it again now, >> I said it then. I say it now >> "DEMOCRATS in the south preserved that slavery for many decades after that."

That is, indeed, the same slop you posted before that already got shellacked. What are you, a masochist?

Slavery, for those of you who never went to school, was going on in both the north and the south. In fact the only state then extant which never had slavery was Vermont. So it didn't need to "be preserved" --- IT HAD ALREADY EXISTED since 1526, more than three hundred years before the Democratic Party was formed and more than 250 years before any parties were formed at all, BECAUSE, AGAIN --- no slave owner/trader has ever needed a political party to engage in it; it wasn't a political process.

Slavery didn't need action taken to be "preserved"; it needed action to be abolished.

After Martin van Buren (who was from New York and not an active slaveowner) organized the Democratic Party there were seven more Presidents before Lincoln. Of those seven, four were from the South and all four were slaveowners. Of those four one was a Democrat and three were Whigs. One was a Democrat. Of the three from the North, two were Democrats and none were slaveowners.

err, the fact that something "existed" is not evidence that it did not "need to be preserved".

Actually it is. You don't need to "renew" something that's already been going on for centuries, LONG before you even had a country or a government, like a friggin' driver's licence.

Holy SHIT that was a mindless post. You should get new writers. ******* post wasn't addressed to you in the first place there white knight.

 

[BreezeWood]

Virginia eliminates holiday celebrating two Confederate generals


Dems in Virginia show their hatred for the constitution and the patriotic spirit of America by once again attacking the Confederacy...This time they do it not be taking down a statue, or changing a state flag, they do it by eliminating perhaps the greatest American holiday aside from Independence Day and American Jesus' birthday....and that is....Confederate Day...

"The Virginia House passed a bill that would eliminate a holiday celebrating two Confederate leaders and instead make Election Day a state holiday. Lee-Jackson Day honored Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson...Now, Virginia will no longer observe Lee-Jackson Day as a state holiday, but they won't be one holiday short. Election day, which takes place nationwide on the first Tuesday in November, will become a state holiday, WTVR reports."

WTF?? A holiday for elections?? Once again, the party of slavery shows its ugly face..First you dems lost the Civil War and you lost your slaves...and even today, you Dems are losing more slaves (As in blacks) -- since they are leaving the Democrat plantation and voting for Trump.....and when blacks find out about Confederate Day being eliminated for Election Day -- I anticipate even more of them will be outraged and join the republican party in protest...

So now out of desperation, you want to dishonor the legacy of the 2 greatest abolitionist Democrats ever by doing something like this? Just to make it easier for more people (and by more people, I mean illegals and muslims) to vote in future elections by making election day a freaking holiday??

Remember this face....this is the America hating black racist that crafted this bill...State Senator Louise Lucas......This is the proof that the Democrat party, the party of slavery, the party against American values continues to attack and erase the very thing that made America great -- the Confederacy...
View attachment 305328

.

- and that is....Confederate Day

.
gone with the wind ...

good riddance and especially to those two lowlifes. lee & jackson.