Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments

[Picaro]

Lincoln was not an abolitionist, Lincoln offered command of the Union Army to Robert E. Lee first, ahead of anybody else, along with offers to many southern officers in lower positions as well, Lincoln and the Republicans' platform was aimed at keeping all black people out of the new territories, period, and Illinois and other mid-western states passed tougher Black Codes than they already had to begin with throughout the 1850's, just for starters, and in those states the North 'freed', blacks were herded into 'property camps' and left to die by the hundreds of thousands instead of being allowed to flee north, and in other states Lincoln ordered the 'freed' slaves to stay confined on their plantations and not be allowed to leave without written permission from their new masters; he also dictated their pay: $2 a month.

What CArbineer is whining about is Texas schoolbook reviewers insisting on real history being put in history books, and throwing out the lying nonsense his ilk wants in the books.

What fucking alternate universe did this history book come from? Lincoln and his party NOT ONCE ever took a position of keeping blacks out. Not once did ANY of their laws do anything to that respect. In fact his laws (Emancipation proclamation, freeing slaves in DC) made slaves free men which made sure they could go to ANY state they wanted.

Yes he tried to get Lee to lead his army. Lee said no and sided against the USA.

And you are talking about the contraband camps there. Where Union soldiers rather than return them to slavery called them "contraband of war" to get out of having to send them back? Hundreds of thousands died? What? Slaves were escaping to get TO these camps. They could join the Union Army if they wanted. They formed their own communities.


What kind of revision is this? How many books do you need to burn to get this version of history on top?

Ah, another Democrat who endorses lying to schoolchildren. How rare, whining about their revisionist drivel being edited and replaced with actual history. lol

 

[Picaro]

... and more. Without these Stalinist style tactics, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to get the Senate and Congressional votes they needed to pass such Acts as the Pacific Railroad Act and others. They also needed the slim contingent of remaining Whig abolitionists' votes, hence the much later sudden interest in 'the evils of slavery'.

This is amazing. So the Republicans... Which was a combination of the Free Soil abolitionist party, and former whigs which felt the whig party wasn't anti-slavery enough only adopted the interest in the "evils of slavery" to get the less anti-slavery whigs on board?

That's like in 150 years us hearing that Obama had to push Obamacare through to make the Republicans happy. It's that backwards of a view.




And the Pacific Railroad act was sponsored by a Whig who beat a Republican to win his seat. But somehow this bill was a Republican bill they had to sell the Whigs on?



You missed the line where Abraham Lincoln also invaded the South accusing them of having plans to build nuclear weapons, and that only an intercepted text message saved the union.

I mean if we are revising history, can we at least make it a little believable?

Rubbish. Try again, this time with less ridiculous spin. Apparently the idiot doesn't know the Republicans like Lincoln were Whigs, and were big fans of 'the American System' peddled by that Party and made it part of the Republican platform, which meant massive Federal welfare programs for their own states and the railroads, which of course also needed the 'Homestead Act' scams to go along with the free land they wanted to give away to the railroads, and getting the South to pay for it all while receiving none of the bennies. The Whigs didn't split over slavery, they split over graft and corruption, like all criminal gangs eventually do, squabbling over spoils.

 

[Papageorgio]

What I find crazy is that these white supremacist some think they will make America white, that is just plain nuts. The other thing I find nuts is that people actually the war was over racism. The issue was much more than that. The final straw was slavery, not racism. There many in the north that were racist, just as racist as many in the south, however the north didn't believe slavery was acceptable.

We have two sets of fools, those that claim whites are superior and those that think the Civil War and Confederate Flag were about racism.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What I find crazy is that these white supremacist some think they will make America white, that is just plain nuts. The other thing I find nuts is that people actually the war was over racism. The issue was much more than that. The final straw was slavery, not racism. There many in the north that were racist, just as racist as many in the south, however the north didn't believe slavery was acceptable.

We have two sets of fools, those that claim whites are superior and those that think the Civil War and Confederate Flag were about racism.

Enslaving black people is not racist?

Goddam that's funny

 

[NYcarbineer]

Confederate soldiers are recognized as American Veterans by Congress. When you desecrate one of their monuments, you are desecrating their memory. So have it. Enjoy your selfish self.

What about a monument to veteran Benedict Arnold?

If someone built a monument to anyone, you wouldn't find ME trying to tear it down. Like I already said. Apparently nobody wants to build a monument for him.

There's a monument honoring Benedict Arnold on the historical site of the Battle of Saratoga. A tribute to his part in that battle.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Apparently, once the statue is taken down, every American forgets that Robert E. Lee ever existed.

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

Thus you are putting to rest the cockeyed notion that somehow modern liberal Democrats are connected to 19th and 20th century Southern conservatives,

and instead you are pointing out that those Southern Democrat conservatives are in fact the political ancestors of modern day conservatism and the modern Republican Party.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Adolescent social justice warriors are finishing off what the Union couldnt finally ending the Civil War !!!

The days of Slavery and Oppression by Statues is coming to an end !!!! Lmfao

 

[NYcarbineer]

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

No, you're funny, and I don't mean "funny ha-ha". You're a fool.

 

[Papageorgio]

Confederate soldiers are recognized as American Veterans by Congress. When you desecrate one of their monuments, you are desecrating their memory. So have it. Enjoy your selfish self.

What about a monument to veteran Benedict Arnold?

If someone built a monument to anyone, you wouldn't find ME trying to tear it down. Like I already said. Apparently nobody wants to build a monument for him.

There's a monument honoring Benedict Arnold on the historical site of the Battle of Saratoga. A tribute to his part in that battle.

So, what do any of us care? I certainly don't. I think both extreme sides are being stupid. People on the extreme left and right are mentally crazy. Tear it down, leave it up, it doesn't make a difference in anyone's world and it changes nothing those extremist will still think stupid, you can't change that. You can't reason with extremist on the left or right.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

No, you're funny, and I don't mean "funny ha-ha". You're a fool.

I was amused at you having to throw yourself under the bus in order to cling to the myth that liberal Democrats ran the South in 1860.

 

[Papageorgio]

What I find crazy is that these white supremacist some think they will make America white, that is just plain nuts. The other thing I find nuts is that people actually the war was over racism. The issue was much more than that. The final straw was slavery, not racism. There many in the north that were racist, just as racist as many in the south, however the north didn't believe slavery was acceptable.

We have two sets of fools, those that claim whites are superior and those that think the Civil War and Confederate Flag were about racism.

Enslaving black people is not racist?

Goddam that's funny

I knew it would fly way over your head, most things do. You seem to be stuck on stupid.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Confederate soldiers are recognized as American Veterans by Congress. When you desecrate one of their monuments, you are desecrating their memory. So have it. Enjoy your selfish self.

What about a monument to veteran Benedict Arnold?

If someone built a monument to anyone, you wouldn't find ME trying to tear it down. Like I already said. Apparently nobody wants to build a monument for him.

There's a monument honoring Benedict Arnold on the historical site of the Battle of Saratoga. A tribute to his part in that battle.

So, what do any of us care? I certainly don't. I think both extreme sides are being stupid. People on the extreme left and right are mentally crazy. Tear it down, leave it up, it doesn't make a difference in anyone's world and it changes nothing those extremist will still think stupid, you can't change that. You can't reason with extremist on the left or right.

You think it's extremely stupid that people oppose white supremacy?

btw, did anyone notice that Trump agreed with ME yesterday on one point? He said that the fate of the statues should be left up to whichever government, local, state, federal, they fell under the jurisdiction of.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

No, you're funny, and I don't mean "funny ha-ha". You're a fool.

I was amused at you having to throw yourself under the bus in order to cling to the myth that liberal Democrats ran the South in 1860.

Your use of the word liberal is in error, as usual.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What I find crazy is that these white supremacist some think they will make America white, that is just plain nuts. The other thing I find nuts is that people actually the war was over racism. The issue was much more than that. The final straw was slavery, not racism. There many in the north that were racist, just as racist as many in the south, however the north didn't believe slavery was acceptable.

We have two sets of fools, those that claim whites are superior and those that think the Civil War and Confederate Flag were about racism.

Enslaving black people is not racist?

Goddam that's funny

I knew it would fly way over your head, most things do. You seem to be stuck on stupid.

How can the Civil War NOT have been about racism?

 

[NYcarbineer]

By your emphasizing the importance of states rights in the causes of the Civil War, and the South being on the pro-states rights side,

and states rights being a major core value in American conservatism,

you are acknowledging that the South - while being mostly Democrat by party - was also conservative.

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

No, you're funny, and I don't mean "funny ha-ha". You're a fool.

I was amused at you having to throw yourself under the bus in order to cling to the myth that liberal Democrats ran the South in 1860.

Your use of the word liberal is in error, as usual.

Your brain in its entirety is in error, as always.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I'm "emphasizing" nothing. The Constitution is pro-states rights. It's an American thing, not a conservative thing.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

So now conservatives do not support states rights any more than liberals do.

Goddam that's funny.

No, you're funny, and I don't mean "funny ha-ha". You're a fool.

I was amused at you having to throw yourself under the bus in order to cling to the myth that liberal Democrats ran the South in 1860.

Your use of the word liberal is in error, as usual.

Your brain in its entirety is in error, as always.

Quite the response. You're not smarter than a 5th grader, as is well known.

 

[Geaux4it]

Tolerance is a word the anti-left ignore

On Tucker last night there was a historian who commented on what is happening today. He said the statue assaults have nothing to do with the Civil War or slavery. It's about political control. He compared the movement to that of Stalin, Mao, Taliban, etc. where at first you tear down monuments, then start burning books then eventually go after people.

Again, where does it end? If every Civil War statue was removed would the alt-left be satisfied? If not, what more would have to be done?

-Geaux

 

[bodecea]

The Robert E Lee statue is on city property and the ELECTED city council voted to remove.

So the poll has already been taken.

You do know if you really want to erase history, you will need to remove MLK monuments next? I mean if you really want to be consistent.

You learn history in books, not by gawking at statues.

By your 'reasoning' the city of Charlottesville should be required to put up a statue of U. S. Grant, because the absence of one is 'erasing history'.

No you claim you want to erase the racist history of the United states that also includes the civil rights ers. Affirmative action also since we are all created equal.

How is moving a statue from a public park to a museum "erasing history"?

Apparently, once the statue is taken down, every American forgets that Robert E. Lee ever existed.

It's the same problem of short term memory lose that requires christian symbols all over the place all the time........or else they forget.