APS: What's in a name? (Washington-Lee)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep pushing name changes liberals. Totally erase our forefathers. It’s this kind of crap that got us Trump.

Whatever, deplorable. No one cares what you think. We are just counting the days until you all shrivel up and die.

Dear lord you are simple.
I’m a democrat. A Democrat that likes to win elections. Perhaps you haven’t noticed, they have consequences.

The GOP can keep all of the “very fine people”. No thanks.

That’s been great for great for the Supreme Court. Simple simple simple.

The deplorables will never ever vote D. Don’t waste your effort there. There are plenty of people who stayed home for the last election and many more new voters coming of age. And moving from PR. They are the future.

All immigrants aren’t democrats. You don’t win people over with your mentality. It’s fine to stand for something, but APS isn’t serving all
Of the kids equally. Its incredibly segregated. When the democrats shouting about this also take a stand for integrated schools... sigh. Why bother?

They aren’t. But they are the future. If Ds need to pay attention to anyone, it’s them and young people. Screw the old, selfish pricks who want to “keep the South alive!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why is there so much opposition to changing the name of Washington-Lee HS?

Because a lot of people still respect General Lee. What's so hard about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Raise your hand if you'd change your name because someone didn't like it. If not, STFU.

I’m sure that many students there today would like to change the name of their school. They don’t want to celebrate someone who fought the US to preserve slavery.

Keep drinking the kool aid. It wasn't about slavery.

Of course it was. Put down your moonshine.

Not PP but it wasn’t as simple as slavery- as I’m sure you know slavery was prevalent well above the Mason Dixon Line.

BS. It was all about slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why is there so much opposition to changing the name of Washington-Lee HS?

Because a lot of people still respect General Lee. What's so hard about that?

Because it’s 2018 and we don’t like people who fight for slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep pushing name changes liberals. Totally erase our forefathers. It’s this kind of crap that got us Trump.

They were awful people. Not sorry that offends you.

No they weren’t. They were people of their time. You offend me. They don’t.

Lee was way worse. He was a traitor!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Raise your hand if you'd change your name because someone didn't like it. If not, STFU.

I’m sure that many students there today would like to change the name of their school. They don’t want to celebrate someone who fought the US to preserve slavery.

Keep drinking the kool aid. It wasn't about slavery.

What history books are you reading? It absolutely was about slavery. The only reason we kept it together during the revolution was we had a common enemy...Great Britain. But, there were the cracks from the very beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why is there so much opposition to changing the name of Washington-Lee HS?

Because a lot of people still respect General Lee. What's so hard about that?

Because it’s 2018 and we don’t like people who fight for slavery.

Read more history about Lee. He is not really to be respected. Even after the war he never really got it.

[Anonymous]

So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why is there so much opposition to changing the name of Washington-Lee HS?

Because a lot of people still respect General Lee. What's so hard about that?

Because it’s 2018 and we don’t like people who fight for slavery.

Who are we? Many people still like General Lee despite the fact he fought for the South. Do you accept that people can have different opinions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

What do you think it was about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

You were the one brainwashed by your VA textbooks. The rest of us have critical thinking skills. It was about preserving the Southern economy, and protecting the rights of wealthy property owners. Not coincidentally, both things were dependent upon chattel slavery. So yes, it was about state's rights to self-govern and individual's rights to own other human beings as property, aka, it was about slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

The winners write history, that's how this works. When you were governed by fellow losers, the "history" reflected the loser's perspective. The victors are reclaiming what is rightfully theirs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

You were the one brainwashed by your VA textbooks. The rest of us have critical thinking skills. It was about preserving the Southern economy, and protecting the rights of wealthy property owners. Not coincidentally, both things were dependent upon chattel slavery. So yes, it was about state's rights to self-govern and individual's rights to own other human beings as property, aka, it was about slavery.

And now the good white folk of north Arlington protect their property values through school segregation and housing policy. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much ignorance here. It wasn't about slavery. Enjoy being brainwashed!

You were the one brainwashed by your VA textbooks. The rest of us have critical thinking skills. It was about preserving the Southern economy, and protecting the rights of wealthy property owners. Not coincidentally, both things were dependent upon chattel slavery. So yes, it was about state's rights to self-govern and individual's rights to own other human beings as property, aka, it was about slavery.

Actually, Lee's motivation for resigning his commission was based on his loyalty to the state of Virginia, so it wasn't all about slavery, to Lee. He made it clear that he was against secession, and only resigned his commission once Virginia actually seceded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Raise your hand if you'd change your name because someone didn't like it. If not, STFU.

I’m sure that many students there today would like to change the name of their school. They don’t want to celebrate someone who fought the US to preserve slavery.

Keep drinking the kool aid. It wasn't about slavery.

What history books are you reading? It absolutely was about slavery. The only reason we kept it together during the revolution was we had a common enemy...Great Britain. But, there were the cracks from the very beginning.

Why did 4 slave holding states fight for the union?