Arlington has asked Virginia to rename Jefferson Davis Highway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I'm only an asshole toward backward racists.

Unlike you who's stuck being a full-time backward racist.

Where have I said anything that would deem me a racist? I think perhaps it is you who may have an issue with certain groups of people.

Your support for the racist Confederacy and its racist President Jefferson Davis. By the way, you DO know that the CSA Constitution specifically added language making it illegal to pass any law repealing slavery?

CSA Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

See, here is where you are wrong and show your true colors. No where did I give or show support of Davis's views of slavery. You, in your own bigoted way, came up with that conclusion. I'm merely pointing out his historical significance.

There's a big, and very important difference between being a racist, neoconfederate bigot (you) versus not tolerating bigotry (everyone else here).

Are you proposing all slave owners should be stripped of their historical significance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

What a totally lameass argument. Dude, median household income for Arlington County where they want to change the signs is $101,000. That means they aren't people who are going to go hungry if they have to change a few road signs.

So because median income is 101K, there is no poor in Arlington County? What about South Arlington, where the 'riches' don't want their kids to go to school?

Must to correct the record, there are plenty of wealthy families in south Arlington who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure there are. But we are not referring to them. I am referring to the poor families that could be helped with the money that would be used to change a sign.

You are referring to some imaginary oppressed poor white southern folk walkin' barefoot to school in Arlington after spendin' all night threshin' corn or sumpin'.

Look, everyone here knows you are full of shit.

I'm referring to the poor black and hispanic population that liberal claim they are in support of. Spending money to change the sign to show support of a racial group rather than spending that money on the same racial group to help lift them out of poverty - it's the liberal way.

False premise, this was already addressed above - there is no "either street signs or feed the poor" argument for you to make here as Virginia municipalities continually replace signs every so many years regardless, and all municipalities over 3,500 people are required, per VA DOT standards to do so. The money is already in the budget to replace them regardless of whether they say "Jefferson Davis Highway" or something different.

But thanks for playing.

Does replacing those signs feed, clothe and educate poor black folk? How is renaming signs tangibly helping them?

So you don't support any government spending that doesn't help feed, clothe, and educate poor black folks?

I don't support idiocy specifically designed to allow people to feel good about themselves without any tangible benefit to the individuals they claim to be helping.

I don't claim to be helping poor black folk by supporting this. I'll be totally selfish and say that I'm supporting my middle class black child, and his middle class white classmates, who would like to grow up in a world that makes sense.

Do you feel better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is fantastic news! I got hives the first time I realized the real name for Route 1 and that I was driving on it! Now let's get rid of that damn "Appomattox" statue in honor of Robert E. Lee in the middle of Washington Street in Old Town.

Bless your heart, you little Yankee bitch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

What a totally lameass argument. Dude, median household income for Arlington County where they want to change the signs is $101,000. That means they aren't people who are going to go hungry if they have to change a few road signs.

So because median income is 101K, there is no poor in Arlington County? What about South Arlington, where the 'riches' don't want their kids to go to school?

Must to correct the record, there are plenty of wealthy families in south Arlington who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure there are. But we are not referring to them. I am referring to the poor families that could be helped with the money that would be used to change a sign.

You are referring to some imaginary oppressed poor white southern folk walkin' barefoot to school in Arlington after spendin' all night threshin' corn or sumpin'.

Look, everyone here knows you are full of shit.

I'm referring to the poor black and hispanic population that liberal claim they are in support of. Spending money to change the sign to show support of a racial group rather than spending that money on the same racial group to help lift them out of poverty - it's the liberal way.

False premise, this was already addressed above - there is no "either street signs or feed the poor" argument for you to make here as Virginia municipalities continually replace signs every so many years regardless, and all municipalities over 3,500 people are required, per VA DOT standards to do so. The money is already in the budget to replace them regardless of whether they say "Jefferson Davis Highway" or something different.

But thanks for playing.

Does replacing those signs feed, clothe and educate poor black folk? How is renaming signs tangibly helping them?

So you don't support any government spending that doesn't help feed, clothe, and educate poor black folks?

I don't support idiocy specifically designed to allow people to feel good about themselves without any tangible benefit to the individuals they claim to be helping.

I don't claim to be helping poor black folk by supporting this. I'll be totally selfish and say that I'm supporting my middle class black child, and his middle class white classmates, who would like to grow up in a world that makes sense.

Do you feel better?

A world that makes sense is not a world that is so sensitive to slight, that one must remove and/or whitewash anything that might be perceived as offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

And God forbid the working class folks have any pride in their state history. They need to be indoctrinated with the social justice Warriors' mantra 24/7.

Union soldiers who signed up to fight in the Civil War were also "working class folks" - they were farmers, laborers, factory workers, et cetera. As such, the Confederacy is in no way unique to or a symbol of working class folks. So spare the bullshit about working class folks.

And many of the northern soldiers joined the Union forces because agitators whipped them into a frenzy that their jobs were going to be taken by emancipated slaves. They had no wish to free the slaves but to keep them in the south and away from their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I'm only an asshole toward backward racists.

Unlike you who's stuck being a full-time backward racist.

Where have I said anything that would deem me a racist? I think perhaps it is you who may have an issue with certain groups of people.

Your support for the racist Confederacy and its racist President Jefferson Davis. By the way, you DO know that the CSA Constitution specifically added language making it illegal to pass any law repealing slavery?

CSA Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

See, here is where you are wrong and show your true colors. No where did I give or show support of Davis's views of slavery. You, in your own bigoted way, came up with that conclusion. I'm merely pointing out his historical significance.

You are still glorifying a racist who brought the country to war and caused the deaths over 620,000 Americans over slavery.

Are you proposing all slave owners should be stripped of their historical significance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

What a totally lameass argument. Dude, median household income for Arlington County where they want to change the signs is $101,000. That means they aren't people who are going to go hungry if they have to change a few road signs.

So because median income is 101K, there is no poor in Arlington County? What about South Arlington, where the 'riches' don't want their kids to go to school?

Must to correct the record, there are plenty of wealthy families in south Arlington who send their kids to public school.

I'm sure there are. But we are not referring to them. I am referring to the poor families that could be helped with the money that would be used to change a sign.

You are referring to some imaginary oppressed poor white southern folk walkin' barefoot to school in Arlington after spendin' all night threshin' corn or sumpin'.

Look, everyone here knows you are full of shit.

I'm referring to the poor black and hispanic population that liberal claim they are in support of. Spending money to change the sign to show support of a racial group rather than spending that money on the same racial group to help lift them out of poverty - it's the liberal way.

False premise, this was already addressed above - there is no "either street signs or feed the poor" argument for you to make here as Virginia municipalities continually replace signs every so many years regardless, and all municipalities over 3,500 people are required, per VA DOT standards to do so. The money is already in the budget to replace them regardless of whether they say "Jefferson Davis Highway" or something different.

But thanks for playing.

Does replacing those signs feed, clothe and educate poor black folk? How is renaming signs tangibly helping them?

So you don't support any government spending that doesn't help feed, clothe, and educate poor black folks?

I don't support idiocy specifically designed to allow people to feel good about themselves without any tangible benefit to the individuals they claim to be helping.

I don't claim to be helping poor black folk by supporting this. I'll be totally selfish and say that I'm supporting my middle class black child, and his middle class white classmates, who would like to grow up in a world that makes sense.

Do you feel better?

A world that makes sense is not a world that is so sensitive to slight, that one must remove and/or whitewash anything that might be perceived as offensive.

What "makes sense" about putting up with offensive shit and suffering fools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

And God forbid the working class folks have any pride in their state history. They need to be indoctrinated with the social justice Warriors' mantra 24/7.

Union soldiers who signed up to fight in the Civil War were also "working class folks" - they were farmers, laborers, factory workers, et cetera. As such, the Confederacy is in no way unique to or a symbol of working class folks. So spare the bullshit about working class folks.

And many of the northern soldiers joined the Union forces because agitators whipped them into a frenzy that their jobs were going to be taken by emancipated slaves. They had no wish to free the slaves but to keep them in the south and away from their jobs.

You're just flailing wildly and making shit up. That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Why would they go to war to emancipate slaves if they were supposedly so worried about the slaves that they were going off to emancipate taking their jobs? Logic really isn't your strong suit, is it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good LORD. Do you know how fortunate you have to be for this and other 'racist' issues to be such a big deal to you. How much money does it cost to make these changes, and wouldn't that money be better served helping poor citizens in that county/town/state?

Liberal idiocy.

Idiocy? Bullshit. Street signs get replaced all the time, it's not some "great expense." Most street signs get replaced roughly every 10 years regardless of name changes because they get weathered, lose reflectivity, get damaged, stolen, whatever.

And suddenly you want to help poor citizens when you didn't give a shit about them before the sign thing came up? Typical right wing hypocrite. People like you only care about the cost of things, but cannot understand the value of anything.

Again, do you understand that people who have very little don't pay these things much attention because they are too busy trying to survive? Y'all need more to do.

And God forbid the working class folks have any pride in their state history. They need to be indoctrinated with the social justice Warriors' mantra 24/7.

Union soldiers who signed up to fight in the Civil War were also "working class folks" - they were farmers, laborers, factory workers, et cetera. As such, the Confederacy is in no way unique to or a symbol of working class folks. So spare the bullshit about working class folks.

And many of the northern soldiers joined the Union forces because agitators whipped them into a frenzy that their jobs were going to be taken by emancipated slaves. They had no wish to free the slaves but to keep them in the south and away from their jobs.

Oh brother! That one takes the cake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I'm only an asshole toward backward racists.

Unlike you who's stuck being a full-time backward racist.

Where have I said anything that would deem me a racist? I think perhaps it is you who may have an issue with certain groups of people.

Your support for the racist Confederacy and its racist President Jefferson Davis. By the way, you DO know that the CSA Constitution specifically added language making it illegal to pass any law repealing slavery?

CSA Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

See, here is where you are wrong and show your true colors. No where did I give or show support of Davis's views of slavery. You, in your own bigoted way, came up with that conclusion. I'm merely pointing out his historical significance.

You are still glorifying a racist who brought the country to war and caused the deaths over 620,000 Americans over slavery.

His racist views on slavery are the most notable thing about him and what he stood for. Showing support for Jefferson Davis is the same as showing support for his racist views. His views cannot be separated or rationalized away.

Are you proposing all slave owners should be stripped of their historical significance?

[Anonymous]

Indeed; what *do*we do about Washington and Jefferson under our new standard of "worthy" ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I'm only an asshole toward backward racists.

Unlike you who's stuck being a full-time backward racist.

Where have I said anything that would deem me a racist? I think perhaps it is you who may have an issue with certain groups of people.

Your support for the racist Confederacy and its racist President Jefferson Davis. By the way, you DO know that the CSA Constitution specifically added language making it illegal to pass any law repealing slavery?

CSA Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

See, here is where you are wrong and show your true colors. No where did I give or show support of Davis's views of slavery. You, in your own bigoted way, came up with that conclusion. I'm merely pointing out his historical significance.

You are still glorifying a racist who brought the country to war and caused the deaths over 620,000 Americans over slavery.

His racist views on slavery are the most notable thing about him and what he stood for. Showing support for Jefferson Davis is the same as showing support for his racist views. His views cannot be separated or rationalized away.

Are you proposing all slave owners should be stripped of their historical significance?

I propose not honoring the ones who were responsible for tearing the country apart and causing hundreds of thousands to be slaughtered as part of their foul agenda to not only keep the institution of slavery in place, but to expand it into the western territories - that's precisely what the leadership of the CSA and Confederate army did. Their place is in a textbook as instigators of civil war, as racists, and ultimately as losers, presented historically and accurately in that context.

If your notion was to suggest we equate "slave owners" and thus ban Washington or Jefferson also because they were also slave owners, sorry, you are totally barking up the wrong tree - Washington and Jefferson never did anything even remotely as vile as what the conspirators of the CSA did.

[Anonymous]

^ Washington and Jefferson weren't going around proposing that the entire economy of the United States be built off of the exploitation and suffering of slaves as the CSA was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for them. Anything nova can do to at least seem less racist and backwards is a good step.

Being solidly blue is a step right, moron?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I'm only an asshole toward backward racists.

Unlike you who's stuck being a full-time backward racist.

Where have I said anything that would deem me a racist? I think perhaps it is you who may have an issue with certain groups of people.

Your support for the racist Confederacy and its racist President Jefferson Davis. By the way, you DO know that the CSA Constitution specifically added language making it illegal to pass any law repealing slavery?

CSA Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

See, here is where you are wrong and show your true colors. No where did I give or show support of Davis's views of slavery. You, in your own bigoted way, came up with that conclusion. I'm merely pointing out his historical significance.

You are still glorifying a racist who brought the country to war and caused the deaths over 620,000 Americans over slavery.

His racist views on slavery are the most notable thing about him and what he stood for. Showing support for Jefferson Davis is the same as showing support for his racist views. His views cannot be separated or rationalized away.

Are you proposing all slave owners should be stripped of their historical significance?

maybe just the ones who tried to shoot and kill us in order to preserve slavery.