Confederate Battle Flag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

Slavery was a "state's issue" too. And it led to the Civil War.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I encourage you to read Tony Horwitz's piece.

www.theatlantic.com/author/tony-horwitz
Confederates in the Attic should be mandatory reading in high school. Unfortunately, most of the morons proudly displaying this abhorrent symbol of racism (and treason) are chsllenged by the content of People Magazine. There is no moral equivalency with Revolutionary Flags as there is no recent corollary to Jim Crow. This, however, causes me consider the Tea Party's adoption of the Gadsden Flag in a new light. Does this mean that they oppose the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amenfmdnts and seek to reintroduce a form of indentured servitude?

The Tea Party's adoption of the Gadsden "Don't Tread On Me" Flag is thoroughly laughable. The Gadsden flag was based on Ben Franklin's famous design depicting the colonies as a snake cut into pieces, with the slogan "Join, or Die" which was advocating for a strong federal union of states, not the weak, decentralized or worse yet secessionist nonsense that the Tea Partiers constantly babble. That theme is again echoed in the 13 rattles on the snake's tail in the Gadsden flag, and the fact that the Gadsden flag was first carried into battle by FEDERAL troops, not fed-haters or "states rights" advocates....

It serves one thing - to put the Tea Party's utter ignorance of history on display, and just goes to show that they are all just relying on rhetoric and groupthink like brainwashed fools.

Scuse?

Liberasl really DO know how to re-write history!! The true story is below. Note how the PP twisted this, leaving out the individual liberty and freedom part. The fracture rattlesnake with Join or die you speak of was about defense of the colonies during the French and Indian War.

Full history here:

http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/gadsden.html

Furthermore:

The Gadsden Flag was birthed out of the Revolutionary period. It was a tumultuous time for the early Americans. Many had just escaped a life of tyranny in England and were fighting the long tentacles of the British who were insisting they continue to live under their thumbs. During the French and Indian war, Benjamin Franklin, seeing a need for unity among all of the colonies in order for the continued quest for individual liberty and freedom that they sought in America, drew a cartoon for a local paper, The Pennsylvania Gazette, depicting a rattle snake with the words Join or Die underneath it.


The rattlesnake became a great symbol for early America because it’s a reptile that just wants to be left alone. It will not attack unless it’s been threatened but once it’s been stepped on, it’s retaliation is deadly. They never surrender and if you engage them, you better be ready to die. The bands on the rattle represented the number of colonies, which is significant, because it’s the only part of the snake that can grow. And, when each band on the rattle stands alone it cannot be heard, but when it is joined by the other bands, it’s sound can be terrifying!


http://www.libertyjuice.com/2010/11/12/dont-tread-on-me-2/#

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

Slavery was a "state's issue" too. And it led to the Civil War.

And an amended Constitution. Which is how it's supposed to be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

[Anonymous]

^ +100
Attacking Fort Sumter was a criminal act, and was treasonous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

It isn't that simple. To really understand history you have to have an understanding of the time. And there is no way I can possibly explain the ruling in 1869, what it was about and the fact that the original 13 states, among other aspects, had been called by Jefferson...free and independent states. States rights was a powerful thing then and to understand that one has to go back to their Declaration of Independence and subsequent fear of their right to self determination being taken away by a powerful central government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

It isn't that simple. To really understand history you have to have an understanding of the time. And there is no way I can possibly explain the ruling in 1869, what it was about and the fact that the original 13 states, among other aspects, had been called by Jefferson...free and independent states. States rights was a powerful thing then and to understand that one has to go back to their Declaration of Independence and subsequent fear of their right to self determination being taken away by a powerful central government.

If they thought this was their legal right, they would have made the challenge in the courts and not gone straight to war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

It isn't that simple. To really understand history you have to have an understanding of the time. And there is no way I can possibly explain the ruling in 1869, what it was about and the fact that the original 13 states, among other aspects, had been called by Jefferson...free and independent states. States rights was a powerful thing then and to understand that one has to go back to their Declaration of Independence and subsequent fear of their right to self determination being taken away by a powerful central government.

If they thought this was their legal right, they would have made the challenge in the courts and not gone straight to war.

SC seceded in December 1960...the first shot wasn't fired until the Union troops hadn't left Fort Sumter and word came that Lincoln was sending ships, ostensibly to resupply, to the fort. Again, as to the issue of states rights and what they believed was their right why go to court? Would a war have broken out anyway? One would have to believe that the south was willing to invade the north...but consider that didn't happen early on and when it did it was a tactic designed to elicit response from the citizens in the north in hopes they would sue for peace...it is possible it wouldn't have been initiated from the south. Now, consider that Lincoln was determined to do whatever was necessary he might have provoked it by sending those ships.

BTW...that wouldn't have been the first time a president took an action, or inaction, designed to bring about a conflict.

I am not arguing that the south was right, nor that slavery was right, nor that what is considered to be the Confederate flag, even though it never was, should fly. I think it is the right of an American to fly it if they want to but not the right of any government entity to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

It isn't that simple. To really understand history you have to have an understanding of the time. And there is no way I can possibly explain the ruling in 1869, what it was about and the fact that the original 13 states, among other aspects, had been called by Jefferson...free and independent states. States rights was a powerful thing then and to understand that one has to go back to their Declaration of Independence and subsequent fear of their right to self determination being taken away by a powerful central government.

If they thought this was their legal right, they would have made the challenge in the courts and not gone straight to war.

SC seceded in December 1960...the first shot wasn't fired until the Union troops hadn't left Fort Sumter and word came that Lincoln was sending ships, ostensibly to resupply, to the fort. Again, as to the issue of states rights and what they believed was their right why go to court? Would a war have broken out anyway? One would have to believe that the south was willing to invade the north...but consider that didn't happen early on and when it did it was a tactic designed to elicit response from the citizens in the north in hopes they would sue for peace...it is possible it wouldn't have been initiated from the south. Now, consider that Lincoln was determined to do whatever was necessary he might have provoked it by sending those ships.

BTW...that wouldn't have been the first time a president took an action, or inaction, designed to bring about a conflict.

I am not arguing that the south was right, nor that slavery was right, nor that what is considered to be the Confederate flag, even though it never was, should fly. I think it is the right of an American to fly it if they want to but not the right of any government entity to do so.

So, your contention is that the North "started" the war by not vacating its forts fast enough. Well, isn't that a nice re-interpretation.

[Anonymous]

Ask Scalia:

http://cwmemory.com/2012/10/31/scalia-on-the-legality-of-secession/

[Anonymous]

Dixie forever!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dixie forever!

May she rest in peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Ah, the candidates positions and the law?

Here are the ones who to date have been too chickenshit to take a firm position on the Confederate flag:

Rubio
Santorum
Cruz
Huckabee
Jindal
Carson
Fiorina

Some, like Jindal, aren't even willing to admit Dylann Roof's massacre of 9 blacks was racially motivated.

What's a firm position to you? That it's racist? That it's not? That it's history? That it's the flag of the KKK?

It seems you simply want a parrot of your particular beliefs, otherwise they are 'chickenshit'.

Taking ANY POSITION AT ALL would be "firm" - that's something none of them have done... Just mealy-mouthed wishy washy stuff like "It's up to South Carolina" as though they have zero personal opinion on it, or "They should do the right thing" - while not telling us what they think "the right thing" is...

Really zero leadership or courage among any of the candidates in that list...

Most of the other GOP candidates weren't much better, most of them waited for Nikki Haley to say something first. No opinion? None whatsoever? You needed Nikki Haley to make up your mind for you?

Saying it's a state's issue is indeed a firm answer. It's also a correct one.

South Carolina was also the first state to secede from the United States of America. I guess you evidently must hate the USA too.

Contrary to Lincoln's position that it was, secession wasn't against the law. The SCOTUS didn't rule on it until 1869. Slavery was an abomination...but so many have little to limited, and even no knowledge, about what was and was not during that time.

The fact that SCOTUS ruled on it in 1869 does not make it legal in 1860. And frankly, Fort Sumter made it a war, secession or not.

It isn't that simple. To really understand history you have to have an understanding of the time. And there is no way I can possibly explain the ruling in 1869, what it was about and the fact that the original 13 states, among other aspects, had been called by Jefferson...free and independent states. States rights was a powerful thing then and to understand that one has to go back to their Declaration of Independence and subsequent fear of their right to self determination being taken away by a powerful central government.

If they thought this was their legal right, they would have made the challenge in the courts and not gone straight to war.

SC seceded in December 1960...the first shot wasn't fired until the Union troops hadn't left Fort Sumter and word came that Lincoln was sending ships, ostensibly to resupply, to the fort. Again, as to the issue of states rights and what they believed was their right why go to court? Would a war have broken out anyway? One would have to believe that the south was willing to invade the north...but consider that didn't happen early on and when it did it was a tactic designed to elicit response from the citizens in the north in hopes they would sue for peace...it is possible it wouldn't have been initiated from the south. Now, consider that Lincoln was determined to do whatever was necessary he might have provoked it by sending those ships.

BTW...that wouldn't have been the first time a president took an action, or inaction, designed to bring about a conflict.

I am not arguing that the south was right, nor that slavery was right, nor that what is considered to be the Confederate flag, even though it never was, should fly. I think it is the right of an American to fly it if they want to but not the right of any government entity to do so.

So, your contention is that the North "started" the war by not vacating its forts fast enough. Well, isn't that a nice re-interpretation.

Well,the troops in Charleston were pulled so why not Sumter. Is it not plausible that Lincoln knew that sending ships might provoke a reaction?