Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments

[jknowgood]

If they were actually serious about tearing down racist statues they would have started with the Lincoln Memorial.

In the case of the Lincoln Memorial, you are talking about Federal Public Property. That is the venue that allows the Lincoln Memorial to exist. The Federal property in question is the National Mall. It would take an act of Congress to remove it because it took an act of Congress to allow it in the first place. You have every right to petition the Congress and convince them to pass legislation that would jump through all the hoops needed to remove the Lincoln Memorial. Good luck.

A distinction without a difference, but of course the racist left isn't about morals, 'social justice', or fighting racism, it's just jealousy and a desire to be the slave masters themselves and put all the loot in their own pockets and do worse, is all; their real heroes are dictators like Idi Amin and Saddam Hussein, not Ghandi or MLK, so quit pissing on our legs and trying to tell us it's raining, because your fake 'outrage' isn't selling.

Something is very wrong with you if you see outrage in my post.

He just knows your true self.

 

[bodecea]

lol, the question wording cited the Lincoln Memorial as an example of the monuments to be gotten rid of...

...so essentially the poll found out that most Americans want to keep the Lincoln Memorial.

Yes, Democrats are exceedingly stupid and uneducated; we already know that, but thanks for the latest example.

Interesting, and deliciously Ironic, post.

 

[Picaro]

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.

And ban the NAACP and declare the Civil Rights Acts null and void as well.

 

[miketx]

Rasmussen? Hilarious! Cite something credible.

Nothing is credible to liberals that disagrees with them.

 

[Picaro]

lol, the question wording cited the Lincoln Memorial as an example of the monuments to be gotten rid of...

...so essentially the poll found out that most Americans want to keep the Lincoln Memorial.

Yes, Democrats are exceedingly stupid and uneducated; we already know that, but thanks for the latest example.

Interesting, and deliciously Ironic, post.

Glad you finally recognize yourself.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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'.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

local authorities who own the public property

Local authorities do not generally own public property.

So there's no such thing as 'city property' in any city?

It is owned by the city, not by individuals in authority.

If you can't communicate clearly, please don't.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Everything the ignorant hear seems ignorant to them because they are ignorant.

 

[bripat9643]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

IMHO it's State and Local question question, the people in the communities where the monuments in question are located should decide, after all it's the people in the local communities and the States that are affected by them and it's their property that's being used.

A national referendum on such questions would be an infringement upon State Sovereignty and isn't authorized anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, we're supposed to be a Republic not a Unitary Democracy.

Have you not heard?
Lincoln squashed "State Sovereignty", and the "Constitution" when South Carolina tried to leave the Union. A right granted to each state in the Constitution.

There is no right to secede in the Constitution and never was.

Sure there is. It's called the 10th Amendment. Even if it isn't explicitly spelled out, the lack of any provision preventing it means it is allowed. That's how contracts work, numskull.

 

[bripat9643]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

IMHO it's State and Local question question, the people in the communities where the monuments in question are located should decide, after all it's the people in the local communities and the States that are affected by them and it's their property that's being used.

A national referendum on such questions would be an infringement upon State Sovereignty and isn't authorized anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, we're supposed to be a Republic not a Unitary Democracy.

Have you not heard?
Lincoln squashed "State Sovereignty", and the "Constitution" when South Carolina tried to leave the Union. A right granted to each state in the Constitution.

There is no right to secede in the Constitution and never was.

Better read it again.............

I don't have to. I've won this argument so many times I feel like I should step back and let someone else here win it.

You have a vivid imagination. You've never won.

 

[bodecea]

They're going to replace it with an Al Sharpton statue. Calypso Louie Farrakan will be the keynote speaker at the dedication.

Sure they will, snowflake....sure they will.

 

[bodecea]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Maryland has numerous monuments and Civil War era attractions.

I'm going to become an ass and demand every single reference to the Civil War be erased from Maryland history.

I've been calling and writing my Representatives demanding the removal of these racist monuments.

Go right ahead....that is your right.

 

[jknowgood]

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.

 

[NYcarbineer]

local authorities who own the public property

Local authorities do not generally own public property.

So there's no such thing as 'city property' in any city?

It is owned by the city, not by individuals in authority.

If you can't communicate clearly, please don't.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Everything the ignorant hear seems ignorant to them because they are ignorant.

No, a big part of being intelligent is the ability to know ignorance when you see it.

A city is a government that governs a piece of property. Governments are made up of people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

IMHO it's State and Local question question, the people in the communities where the monuments in question are located should decide, after all it's the people in the local communities and the States that are affected by them and it's their property that's being used.

A national referendum on such questions would be an infringement upon State Sovereignty and isn't authorized anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, we're supposed to be a Republic not a Unitary Democracy.

Have you not heard?
Lincoln squashed "State Sovereignty", and the "Constitution" when South Carolina tried to leave the Union. A right granted to each state in the Constitution.

There is no right to secede in the Constitution and never was.

Better read it again.............

I don't have to. I've won this argument so many times I feel like I should step back and let someone else here win it.

You have a vivid imagination. You've never won.

You want to debate the right of secession or lack thereof of the states in the Union?

 

[bripat9643]

Have you not heard?
Lincoln squashed "State Sovereignty", and the "Constitution" when South Carolina tried to leave the Union. A right granted to each state in the Constitution.

There is no right to secede in the Constitution and never was.

Better read it again.............

I don't have to. I've won this argument so many times I feel like I should step back and let someone else here win it.

You have a vivid imagination. You've never won.

You want to debate the right of secession or lack thereof of the states in the Union?

Go for it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

I have no interest in erasing any aspect of history as long as it's the truth.

You can't find one example of me ever saying or doing anything to the contrary.

 

[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.

And ban the NAACP and declare the Civil Rights Acts null and void as well.

The petulant whining of the Alt-Right is so cute....or at least it would be....if you were all 3 year olds.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There is no right to secede in the Constitution and never was.

Better read it again.............

I don't have to. I've won this argument so many times I feel like I should step back and let someone else here win it.

You have a vivid imagination. You've never won.

You want to debate the right of secession or lack thereof of the states in the Union?

Go for it.

Argument #1. States that ratified the Constitution became bound to it. The Supremacy Clause forbids states from passing laws that contradict the Constitution.
No state can ever secede without violating the Supremacy Clause.

 

[Picaro]

Didn't see any MLK's or Gandhis on the right at that protest.

Last I heard they were both dead. Did some freak dig their bodies up and cart them around?

 

[Picaro]

Better read it again.............

I don't have to. I've won this argument so many times I feel like I should step back and let someone else here win it.

You have a vivid imagination. You've never won.

You want to debate the right of secession or lack thereof of the states in the Union?

Go for it.

Argument #1. States that ratified the Constitution became bound to it. The Supremacy Clause forbids states from passing laws that contradict the Constitution.
No state can ever secede without violating the Supremacy Clause.

Yes, you're just delusional. Thought so.