why isnt the left demanding FDR statues be removed ?

[marvin martian]

Why isn't the left abandoning the Party of Slavery - the Democratic Party?

The Party of slavery ended in humiliating defeat in 1865. In 1877 like the Phoenix, it started its' rise from the ashes and became the party of James Crow. That lasted until the Northern coalition of Dems and Reps defeated the South again with the Civil rights act of 1964. What rose from the ashes of that defeat became the Republicans we have today.

Suuuure it did...

View attachment 512336

It was the beer. Beer makes some people do funny things. Why do you hate beer?

It's up to the people of his state. I guess they like beer too.

No one doubts Democrat voters in Virginia love the KKK. Obviously.

Well yeah right up until they didn't, a few decades ago. You're livin in the past cowpoke.

The guy in the white sheet is the sitting governor, your fellow DemoKKKrat. Why does he still have his job? (that's a rhetorical question, the answer is because DemoKKKrats love the KKK).

 

[BlindBoo]

He was a man of great conviction to, which is why he lost the war of attrition. He felt that the morality of the South would win out on the Battlefield.

Lee was an advocate of Slavery

How does that equate to the morality of the south?

Many people in both the North and South justified the enslavement of what they were taught was an inferior race. Including Lee. Considering the agricultural nature of the South's economy, cheap slave labor was a necessity from the time the first colonist from Europe arrived.

Many people realized that slavery was just plain wrong

Lee should have been one of them

That's why the inferior race argument was taught. "We're really helping them..." to soothe the cognitive dissonance they may have felt.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why isn't the left abandoning the Party of Slavery - the Democratic Party?

The Party of slavery ended in humiliating defeat in 1865. In 1877 like the Phoenix, it started its' rise from the ashes and became the party of James Crow. That lasted until the Northern coalition of Dems and Reps defeated the South again with the Civil rights act of 1964. What rose from the ashes of that defeat became the Republicans we have today.

Suuuure it did...

View attachment 512336

It was the beer. Beer makes some people do funny things. Why do you hate beer?

It's up to the people of his state. I guess they like beer too.

No one doubts Democrat voters in Virginia love the KKK. Obviously.

Well yeah right up until they didn't, a few decades ago. You're livin in the past cowpoke.

The guy in the white sheet is the sitting governor, your fellow DemoKKKrat. Why does he still have his job? (that's a rhetorical question, the answer is because DemoKKKrats love the KKK).

View attachment 512674

Poor Hoss. He really hates beer.

 

[Polishprince]

FDR was a great, loyal American
Robert E Lee was not

That's what I don't get. What's so great about fighting WW2 with a transphobic Jim Crow Army?

Why didn't the men who stormed the beaches at Normandy look like ordinary Americans like RuPaul?

FDR had the authority to integrate the armed forces and embrace the LGBTQ community, but insisted on racist, sexist homophobia.

 

[Rogue AI]

Only black lives matter, when they catch brown children crossing our borders they throw them in cages, why would they care about yellow folks that were caged decades ago?

 

[Correll]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

 

[Correll]

My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.

Just reverse that logic. If we started judging based on times past, we would be putting up statues of O.J. Simpson and Bill Cosby.

I don't recall wife murder or whore mongering every being celebrated. Maybe tolerated, but not celebrated.

 

[BlindBoo]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

 

[Concerned American]

Was it not Truman who approved the use of atomic bomb?

Had to be tested on people.

 

[Correll]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

Calling it peaceful doesn't mean that they are not ******* with my life.

I mean, your position is that they can do what they want, as long as it is peaceful and democratic, right?

 

[BlindBoo]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

Calling it peaceful doesn't mean that they are not ******* with my life.

I mean, your position is that they can do what they want, as long as it is peaceful and democratic, right?

No I wouldn't characterize my position that way at all.

 

[Correll]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

Calling it peaceful doesn't mean that they are not ******* with my life.

I mean, your position is that they can do what they want, as long as it is peaceful and democratic, right?

No I wouldn't characterize my position that way at all.

My ancestors owned slaves. Or might have. So, doesn't that mean that if the majority votes to **** with my way of life, or my culture, you support it. As long as it is democratic and peaceful.


What part of that did I get wrong.


ALso, I'm guessing, but I bet if the "violence" is me fighting back, you still would support it, right?

 

[BlindBoo]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

Calling it peaceful doesn't mean that they are not ******* with my life.

I mean, your position is that they can do what they want, as long as it is peaceful and democratic, right?

No I wouldn't characterize my position that way at all.

My ancestors owned slaves. Or might have. So, doesn't that mean that if the majority votes to **** with my way of life, or my culture, you support it. As long as it is democratic and peaceful.


What part of that did I get wrong.


ALso, I'm guessing, but I bet if the "violence" is me fighting back, you still would support it, right?

So? There is no doubt mine did. They were slave traders when La. was purchased. There was a vote to take that business away,but there was never a vote to take their slaves away until after the war for Southern Independence failed. The South decided to leave the Union to protect the institution. If I were born in my family back then I probably would have supported the institution as well.

Your def. is to broad. It could be interpreted as the old tyranny of the majority

Violence is the last resort of the incompetent. I oppose violence unless it is in response to some incompetent asshole.....

 

[Correll]

After the war we kissed and made up and lived happily ever after.

Well legally they didn't charge them with treason. The New Republican tried to set up fair elections but in 1877 all federal troops finally left the south when the gave up Louisiana. The era of Reconstruction was over. Beginning the struggle of the former slave holding elite to regain power and set the stage for the Jim Crow era. They were accepted by most of the country so it depends on who "we' is.

The country as a whole.

Was that your only problem with my post?

The only point I disagree with enough to type something about it. The people wanted to get over it and get back to what was normal for them. I don't believe in judging the actions of past generations base on current day morals and norms.

Except that, that is what the anti-statue people are doing.

And pointing out that they kissed and made up, is not judging them by today's standards.

So, what are you even saying?

Feel free to search my posts on the subject of destroying those confederate statutes. It should be up to the voters or their representatives to either keep or remove them, not mobs or vandals.

When i said anti-statue people, I was talking about the voters, not the mobs.


My point stands. They are judging those past people by modern standards.


My question stands. What are you even saying?

Then you can vote to keep the statues if the chance arises and I'm okay with that. Just as I'm okay with someone who wants them removed from the public view, because morals have changed and those ideals of the old south are not as prevalent as they once were.

I was talking about the lawless mobs not the lawful process to keep or remove them.

So, you are ok with it, if I let people live their lives in peace, and you are ok with it, if other people DON'T let me live my life in peace.


GOt it.

I certainly don't agree that losing a vote to remove/keep a statue, any statue, from any perspective, a violent thing. I consider that a peaceful way to resolve the issue.

Calling it peaceful doesn't mean that they are not ******* with my life.

I mean, your position is that they can do what they want, as long as it is peaceful and democratic, right?

No I wouldn't characterize my position that way at all.

My ancestors owned slaves. Or might have. So, doesn't that mean that if the majority votes to **** with my way of life, or my culture, you support it. As long as it is democratic and peaceful.


What part of that did I get wrong.


ALso, I'm guessing, but I bet if the "violence" is me fighting back, you still would support it, right?

So? There is no doubt mine did. They were slave traders when La. was purchased. There was a vote to take that business away,but there was never a vote to take their slaves away until after the war for Southern Independence failed. The South decided to leave the Union to protect the institution. If I were born in my family back then I probably would have supported the institution as well.

Your def. is to broad. It could be interpreted as the old tyranny of the majority

Violence is the last resort of the incompetent. I oppose violence unless it is in response to some incompetent asshole.....

Saying "slave" is the justification for attacking the statue supporters. That's why.

And so, you support it if I choose to let others live their lives in peace, and you support it if others choose to NOT let me live my life in peace.

 

[Unkotare]

... until after the war for Southern Independence failed.

You mean The American Civil War.

 

[BlindBoo]

... until after the war for Southern Independence failed.

You mean The American Civil War.

Was it the "Battle of Bull Run" or was it the "Battle of First Manassas" that kicked off the real war.

I think it's the very same war. The South still lost.

 

[Concerned American]

Why would we want FDR statues removed? He was a socialist commie after all.

Yup..anybody who isn't a tin foil hat is considered a commie and socialist...by the same people who gladly take part in socialistic government programs like Social Security and Medicare.

You ignorant ****. I paid into SS for 50 years and I pay a Medicare premium out of my benefit every ******* month you parasitic asshole. It is no more a social program than going to the grocery store and BUYING your dinner. But you wouldn't know anything about that because you probably get your dinner courtesy of SNAP.

 

[HappyJoy]

Why would we want FDR statues removed? He was a socialist commie after all.

Yup..anybody who isn't a tin foil hat is considered a commie and socialist...by the same people who gladly take part in socialistic government programs like Social Security and Medicare.

You ignorant ****. I paid into SS for 50 years and I pay a Medicare premium out of my benefit every ******* month you parasitic asshole. It is no more a social program than going to the grocery store and BUYING your dinner. But you wouldn't know anything about that because you probably get your dinner courtesy of SNAP.

That's not true. For social security you're not getting your money back as that was paid out a long time ago. You're receiving funds from people who are currently paying into it. There are also survivorship benefits and benefits for people who have a disability who will never put in as much money as they take out. It is a transfer of wealth. Ya' little commie.

 

[billyerock123]

FDR interred 10s of thousands of Asian Americans and presided over a nation that was segregated ... so why isnt the left demanding statues to honor him be removed ?

the civil war was people killing people for their beliefs of slavery or no slaver... many people were killed ... the interment camps that you are trying to compare as being the same is pathetic at best ... but thats what you republicans do ... anything to make a point thats has nothing to do with the reason the Japanese were put into a interment camp ... none of them were dragged out and killed because they didn't like their points of view ... none...

 

[Colin norris]

FDR interred 10s of thousands of Asian Americans and presided over a nation that was segregated ... so why isnt the left demanding statues to honor him be removed ?

Because he was a socialist commie.

Which proves that it's really more about political ideology, and not race or racism.

This is pure Bolshevism.

Christ almighty your paranoid.
Ever thought if doing some research?