Teabagging Governor of Virgina Reinstates Racist Policy

[Accidental Martyr]

when I was younger, I thought the Confederate flag was cool. now I see it for what it truly is, a symbol of treason and racism.

I was the same way when I was a kid, mostly from being a "Dukes of Hazzard" fan . When I got older I realized what it was really a symbol of. It's amazing what a little education can do.

 

[Donal]

This really is one of those things that still tweaks me. I majored in history in college and ran into a lot of those Confederate apologist types. Which is really weird for a school in Harlem, but I digress.

It was friggin treason! How do they not see that? And why do they keep saying it had nothing to do with slavery?

One thing I enjoyed doing though, was responding every time they called it "the War of Northern Aggression" with "The War of Southern Treason."

 

[Darth Rotor]

when I was younger, I thought the Confederate flag was cool. now I see it for what it truly is, a symbol of treason and racism.

Do you know the difference between the stars and bars, and the confederate battle flag (blue cross of st andrew, red field) and which is a symbol of what?

Being that you are from New York, and willfully ignorant, I seriously doubt it.

I'd be more agreeable with your assessment if you specified the flag of the Confederate States of America as the symbol of racism and slavery. That's a pretty accurate assessment.

You are at least partly wrong about the treason.

At the time of the civil war, the federal government was nowhere near as strong as it is now, and states were far more powerful politically. (Lincoln had non-trivial struggles with the governors of various Union states, in raising troops and revenue. Bruce Catton did some nice writing on that in his various civil war books). Since the Constitution didn't preclude secession, in explicit language, at the time, it was not unreasonable for the states to take a Ninth and Tenth Amendment position and declare that they had reserved the right to secede. (The court case people often refer to as having more recently settled the matter of how legal secession is now is a post Civil War decision). That said, Lincoln was right to protect Federal property, being the head of the executive branch of the Federal Government, and so we see Fort Sumter ... Harpers Ferry ... and so on.

The Civil War was in many ways a Constitutional test, but I'll not derail into that, you can save it for the history sub forum.

DR

 

[GreNME]

Do you know the difference between the stars and bars, and the confederate battle flag (blue cross of st andrew, red field) and which is a symbol of what?

Actually, the flag that gets commonly waved today is essentially the Confederate Naval flag or the Tennessee Confederate Army flag, and the "battle flag" for the Confederates was actually a square and not a rectangle. So what? The flag that gets bandied about today is essentially a symbol of Southern aggression against the United States over the issue of slavery, embodied in its invocations of the Confederate military and the resemblance to the Confederate Battle Flag.


(good to see you again, by the way, DR)

 

[Darth Rotor]

Actually, the flag that gets commonly waved today is essentially the Confederate Naval flag or the Tennessee Confederate Army flag, and the "battle flag" for the Confederates was actually a square and not a rectangle. So what? The flag that gets bandied about today is essentially a symbol of Southern aggression against the United States over the issue of slavery, embodied in its invocations of the Confederate military and the resemblance to the Confederate Battle Flag.

Correction: Southern Secession. It was, of course, the War of Yankee aggression. (Note: both my parents are Yankees from Yankee states, as are most of the grandparents on Mom's side of the family).

You might want to read up on what Senator James Webb has to say about honoring those who served in the Confederate Army. I think he's a bit more eloquent than the pol under discussion.

DR

 

[daredelvis]

Do you know the difference between the stars and bars, and the confederate battle flag (blue cross of st andrew, red field) and which is a symbol of what?

How does this add to the discussion, other than being overly pedantic? Most conservations about the "Confederate flag" in the last 50 some odd years specifically relate to the confederate battle flag. Trotting out this distinction is akin to pointing out that the U.S. is a Republic, not a Democracy.

Being that you are from New York, and willfully ignorant, I seriously doubt it.

If only everyone could be willfully smart.

I'd be more agreeable with your assessment if you specified the flag of the Confederate States of America as the symbol of racism and slavery. That's a pretty accurate assessment.

Whereas the confederate battle flag is a symbol of just plain old racism since its re-adoption by civilians in the post WWII Jim Crow era.

You are at least partly wrong about the treason.

At the time of the civil war, the federal government was nowhere near as strong as it is now, and states were far more powerful politically. (Lincoln had non-trivial struggles with the governors of various Union states, in raising troops and revenue. Bruce Catton did some nice writing on that in his various civil war books). Since the Constitution didn't preclude secession, in explicit language, at the time, it was not unreasonable for the states to take a Ninth and Tenth Amendment position and declare that they had reserved the right to secede. (The court case people often refer to as having more recently settled the matter of how legal secession is now is a post Civil War decision). That said, Lincoln was right to protect Federal property, being the head of the executive branch of the Federal Government, and so we see Fort Sumter ... Harpers Ferry ... and so on.

The Civil War was in many ways a Constitutional test, but I'll not derail into that, you can save it for the history sub forum.

DR

Just 'caus it may not have been treason is some people's opinion don't make it right.

Daredelvis

 

[ponderingturtle]

Correction: Southern Secession. It was, of course, the War of Yankee aggression. (Note: both my parents are Yankees from Yankee states, as are most of the grandparents on Mom's side of the family).

You might want to read up on what Senator James Webb has to say about honoring those who served in the Confederate Army. I think he's a bit more eloquent than the pol under discussion.

DR

Ok, but it is clear Texas is full of traitors. Moving into a country violating its laws and then rebelling so that you can introduce slavery into the area? Ah the reasons we will never forget the Alamo, and the terrorist(non state rebellion, so terrorist by many modern definitions) who died there.

 

[GreNME]

Correction: Southern Secession. It was, of course, the War of Yankee aggression. (Note: both my parents are Yankees from Yankee states, as are most of the grandparents on Mom's side of the family).

No need for correction, the South shot first (at Sumter), ergo the war of aggression started with the South.

You might want to read up on what Senator James Webb has to say about honoring those who served in the Confederate Army. I think he's a bit more eloquent than the pol under discussion.

I've got little to no respect for those who promote or celebrate Confederate History Month, and that's what the governor of VA was doing. If Webb was also doing that, then how eloquently he says it probably wouldn't make much difference to me.

 

[lomiller]

are we like the only country that allows states or districts to officially celebrate, using tax-dollars, previous attempts at rebellion and secession????

Not at all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Riel

I’m sure a great many countries can point to someone similar. What’s somewhat unique in this case is that rebellion honored was based on principles that are now considered reprehensible by almost everyone.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Ok, but it is clear Texas is full of traitors. Moving into a country violating its laws and then rebelling so that you can introduce slavery into the area? Ah the reasons we will never forget the Alamo, and the terrorist(non state rebellion, so terrorist by many modern definitions) who died there.

Sorry, you are mixing apples and oranges here, since Treason against the US wasn't the issue when General Santa Anna was around. But nice try at a joke, credit there. You might want to look at the Mexican constitution and laws of the time, which Stephen Austin, and others, traveled to Mexico City to protest were being overlooked and other wise not followed by various federal organs. He (and others) were tossed in jail for their troubles, for taking the effort at lawfully undertaking to redress a grievance within the system.

For dd: the pedantry charge is a fair one.

At GrenMe: it probably does not matter much to the average Virginian what you think of the Confederacy, it's part of their history, their cultural heritage, for better and worse. And thanks for the welcome back.

DR

 

[ponderingturtle]

Sorry, you are mixing apples and oranges here, since Treason against the US wasn't the issue when General Santa Anna was around. But nice try at a joke, credit there. You might want to look at the Mexican constitution and laws of the time, which Stephen Austin, and others, traveled to Mexico City to protest were being overlooked and other wise not followed by various federal organs. He (and others) were tossed in jail for their troubles, for taking the effort at lawfully undertaking to redress a grievance within the system.

And one of the grievances they had was that they were getting their property taken away from them just because slavery was illegal in Mexico. Yet they brought all these slaves with them.

 

[Darth Rotor]

And one of the grievances they had was that they were getting their property taken away from them just because slavery was illegal in Mexico. Yet they brought all these slaves with them.

Were that the only grievance, I'd find your jest/point far more relevant.

Animosity between the Mexican government and the American settlers in Texas (who were called Texians), as well as many Texas residents of Mexican ancestry, began with the Siete Leyes of 1835, when Mexican President and General Antonio López de Santa Anna abolished the Constitution of 1824 and proclaimed a new anti-federalist constitution in its place. The new laws were unpopular throughout Mexico, leading to violence in several states. War began in Texas on October 2, 1835, with the Battle of Gonzales.

Thanks for playing. Your appeal to the lawfulness of the Mexican leadership against whom the rebellion was directed scores you no points.

DR

 

[ponderingturtle]

Were that the only grievance, I'd find your jest/point far more relevant.


Thanks for playing. Your appeal to the lawfulness of the Mexican leadership against whom the rebellion was directed scores you no points.

DR

Ah so that slavery was illegal, and yet they still owned slaves, and legalized slavery as part of their rebellion are things that must all be ignored. Hell slaves fought at the Alamo and one left after his master was killed and lived.

 

[BenBurch]

Sometimes I begin to feel that the only major error at the end of that war was not executing all southern combatants...

 

[Freddy]

Sometimes I begin to feel that the only major error at the end of that war was not executing all southern combatants...

Somehow I doubt that would have done much to alleviate the hard feelings.

 

[332nd]

At GrenMe: it probably does not matter much to the average Virginian what you think of the Confederacy, it's part of their history, their cultural heritage, for better and worse. And thanks for the welcome back.

DR

I've never had much of a problem with that, (well, other than my abject horror at finding out that despite being North Carolina we were still part of the Confederacy but I was 5 or 6 then and I got over it) it's the Lost Cause stuff that I can't stand.

 

[dudalb]

I've never had much of a problem with that, (well, other than my abject horror at finding out that despite being North Carolina we were still part of the Confederacy but I was 5 or 6 then and I got over it) it's the Lost Cause stuff that I can't stand.

I am a Civil War Reenactor. (North, of course).
Tell me about it.
The Governor was a idiot. He should have just declared a "Civil War History Month".and not take sides.

 

[Region Rat]

Unless you can come up with another reason to celebrate the losing side of a war in which one side seceded from the Union to protect owning other people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/07/AR2010040704411.html

Isn't it painfully obvious that this is a political winner among the Teabaggers? The real question is why? Why would the far right approve of such a policy? Why would going backwards appear to them as progress? Why would doing this somehow propel this douchebag's career and make him some sort of Teabagging hero?

Ah, but cue the apologists. After all, there is nothing too vile, no break in the social compact, that Teabaggers will not excuse, minimize, or defend.

It seems to me that some people sure enjoy any opportunity to put "Teabagger" or "Teabagging" in their posts. I can almost hear Beavis going "huh, huh, huh, huh" in the background.

Now back to the discussion regarding how Republicans are all for slavery. We're all agreed, right?

 

[Accidental Martyr]

I am a Civil War Reenactor. (North, of course).
Tell me about it.
The Governor was a idiot. He should have just declared a "Civil War History Month".and not take sides.

I have shot video of several Civil War reenactments (I used to work for Public Television in Alabama). I'll never forget hearing a woman in Selma, Alabama tell her 6 or 7 year old son, "Look, here comes the Rebels! They're gonna go kill them Yankees!"

 

[Dragoonster]

I've got no problem with it. Like it or not it's part of Southern heritage. Plenty of racists will celebrate it by reminiscing on the good old slavery days, plenty of right-wingers will get dizzy with dreams of a new secession, plenty of others will just remember the events of the Civil War with a general Southern perspective. Not a big deal considering the hundreds of thousands killed in the war. I think that blood has earned the right to remember it on a "north-south partisan basis".

Then again I grew up in Virginia so was exposed to people without a racist bone in them who still found comfort or some sense of pride from the Confederacy. Their ancestors wore grey when they were killed, not blue, and they didn't fly a union flag. No harm in them remembering or acknowledging that they died as Confederates.