Students banned from Graduation because of the Confederate Flag

[fuckin crazy]

  Educate myself to what?  Your skewed version of American History?

To the facts pertaining to the conflict, rather than repeating the lies that you picked up in school, or through the media. Prove to me where my version of history is skewed. I learned the same shit you did, but I chose to look a little deeper.
 

I'd rather stick to what really happened.

I think that you know very little about the War Of Northern Aggression.

Most modern scholars agree that the southern states were within their legal right to voluntarily withdraw from the union that they voluntarily entered.

And as far as victory...what the hell are you talking about?

 The idiom "to the victor go the spoils", it is an old addage. I was mearly commenting that the victors also write the history books.

  Freedom for slaves and a united country. 

 Slavery wasn't an issue when the war began. That is more propaganda from the liars in the North, that started the conflict

In July 1861, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution, by a nearly unanimous vote, that affirmed that the North was not waging the war to overthrow slavery but to preserve the Union (Klingaman, Abraham Lincoln and the Road to Emancipation, pp. 66-70).

. . . in 1861 the North was fighting for the restoration of a slaveholding Union. In his July 4 message to Congress, Lincoln reiterated the inaugural pledge that he had "no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists." (Ordeal By Fire, p. 265)

  Maybe you can convince the people of Alabama to arm their trailers and grab their peashooters and ride proclaiming, "The South Will Rise Again".......eh but they're probably too busy banging their cousins and listening to Kid Rock or watching Larry The Cable Guy.

Your bigoted response is an indication of the weakness of your argument. I sure there are a few members of this forum that are from Alabama. I know that as a southerner, I take offense at your characterizations.

If want to learn something about slavery and the war, read this:
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/chamberlain.htm

There are many web sites, and books that make the case that the South was right in it's attempt at freedom. Using your failed logic, the US had no right to independence.

[Smoking Guns]

What is with the Alabama bashing?  Mississippi is the worst.

[D]

Bill, I think D is referring to the lovefest NBC, MSNBC, and CBS had with Obama in favor over Clinton.

I am talking National Media

he has had it a little tough as all candidates do but compared to Hillary he was treated like the 2nd coming.

It took a racist hate spewing preacher and still he wasnt attacked that negatively. I didnt hear anyone asking why it took that stuff to go public for him to quit.

then a second church he was a member of did the same thing?

But u dont hear it in the same negative tone u hear stuff. hell, Hillary's pant suits got more negative publicity than Obama.



Im just stating, if Obama were white, his political career would've been destroyed with that racist preacher stuff. U let a white candidate have a friend in the KKK and he is DONE.

U let a white candidate have a preacher that yells the N word and talks about blacks and that candidate is DONE

Obama gets a pass on a lot of stuff because the MEDIA are afraid of being labeled racist.

That is something u dont recover from and they are walking a thin line.

Sure he gets 'Some" negative but no where in the same stratosphere as Hillary. Its like they couldnt criticize Obama so they poured it all on Hillary.

[Smoking Guns]

Bill, I think D is referring to the lovefest NBC, MSNBC, and CBS had with Obama in favor over Clinton.

I am talking National Media

he has had it a little tough as all candidates do but compared to Hillary he was treated like the 2nd coming.

It took a racist hate spewing preacher and still he wasnt attacked that negatively. I didnt hear anyone asking why it took that stuff to go public for him to quit.

then a second church he was a member of did the same thing?

But u dont hear it in the same negative tone u hear stuff. hell, Hillary's pant suits got more negative publicity than Obama.



Im just stating, if Obama were white, his political career would've been destroyed with that racist preacher stuff. U let a white candidate have a friend in the KKK and he is DONE.

U let a white candidate have a preacher that yells the N word and talks about blacks and that candidate is DONE

Obama gets a pass on a lot of stuff because the MEDIA are afraid of being labeled racist.

That is something u dont recover from and they are walking a thin line.

Sure he gets 'Some" negative but no where in the same stratosphere as Hillary. Its like they couldnt criticize Obama so they poured it all on Hillary.

You make some good points.  Just like some white people are voting for Obama because he is black and feel if they don't like him they too would be labeled a racist.  HAHAHAHA  Kidding.

[GeorgeSteele]

If want to learn something about slavery and the war, read this:
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/chamberlain.htm

Interesting read.  Didn't care for his comments about how if the South was left alone to secede, today they'd be free to have Bible readings in public schools, post the 10 Commandments, maintain anti-sodomy laws and wear white hoods in public (OK, I made that last one up).  But it's probably a fair point to say that war would not have been avoided even if the Southern states that seceded agreed to abolish slavery -- though, what was the likelihood of that happening?  And would they have seceded if slavery was not an issue?

[Smoking Guns]

I think the South still gets discriminated against just like the SEC does in Football.  Everyone knows the the SEC is the best college football conference in the nation, but they also know over 135 years ago those states had slaves.  Seems like the media hates to admit when the best is from the SEC.  Its crazy actually.  Maybe there is a relationship.

[SLCPUNK]

It's a conspiracy against whites!

[polluxlm]

Even I have to call bullshit on that one. ^

[fuckin crazy]

If want to learn something about slavery and the war, read this:
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/chamberlain.htm

Interesting read.  Didn't care for his comments about how if the South was left alone to secede, today they'd be free to have Bible readings in public schools, post the 10 Commandments, maintain anti-sodomy laws and wear white hoods in public (OK, I made that last one up).  But it's probably a fair point to say that war would not have been avoided even if the Southern states that seceded agreed to abolish slavery -- though, what was the likelihood of that happening?  And would they have seceded if slavery was not an issue?

That is one man's speculation, and it has nothing to do with the points he mentions. All of the arguments for southern independence have been around since before the war.

Slavery was not an issue until 1863, and then it was used only as an instrument to punish the states that had seceded, but were not under occupation.

If the tyrant Lincoln really gave a damn about abolition, he would have included all slaves in his Emancipation Proclamation. That instrument was nothing more than a means to encourage slave insurrection, in an effort to create mayhem, and death upon the civilian population of the South

[fuckin crazy]

Too, had Booth not dispatched that disgusting man, he would've been remembered for his vile tyranny imposed on all Americans(northern citizens inclusive).

[GeorgeSteele]

If want to learn something about slavery and the war, read this:
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/chamberlain.htm

Interesting read.  Didn't care for his comments about how if the South was left alone to secede, today they'd be free to have Bible readings in public schools, post the 10 Commandments, maintain anti-sodomy laws and wear white hoods in public (OK, I made that last one up).  But it's probably a fair point to say that war would not have been avoided even if the Southern states that seceded agreed to abolish slavery -- though, what was the likelihood of that happening?  And would they have seceded if slavery was not an issue?

That is one man's speculation, and it has nothing to do with the points he mentions. All of the arguments for southern independence have been around since before the war.

Slavery was not an issue until 1863, and then it was used only as an instrument to punish the states that had seceded, but were not under occupation.

If the tyrant Lincoln really gave a damn about abolition, he would have included all slaves in his Emancipation Proclamation. That instrument was nothing more than a means to encourage slave insurrection, in an effort to create mayhem, and death upon the civilian population of the South

Trying to avoid el strawman, but you didn't answer the question directly. So let me ask again -- if slavery was not an issue until 1863 are you therefore saying that they would have seceded even if the abolition of slavery was not a concern?  And what was the likelihood of the South abolishing slavery on its own?

[fuckin crazy]

Well, it is a strawman. Abolition was not a concern at the outset of the conflict.

Of course, the south would have ended slavery at some point. It was the southern states that tried, in vain, to prohibit the slave trade. Most people aren't aware that it was northern merchants and shipping companies that made money on the trade,and they vehemently opposed any restriction of their business.

Virginia was the first state to prohibit the introduction of slaves into it's territory.

The Confederate Congress was the first body to try and attempt the abolition of slavery, though it was defeated.

Here is a scholarly thesis that looks at the legality of secession:

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S LEGAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SECESSION

by James Ostrowski*

Paper delivered at the first-ever academic conference on secession--"Secession, State, and Economy", sponsored by the Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama, held at the College of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, April 7-9, 1995.

[Perfect Criminal]

This is interesting to say the least.  I have never heard anyone who had a huge problem with Lincoln.  As a matter of fact, he is widely considered the greatest president of all time.  The USA is as great a place as it is today because he decided to fight for the union and won.  We are just not a world power divided.  The end justifies any means or reasons given up front.  The man is a fucking hero.  

I hate stero types, but you definately fall into one my friend.  The typical southern who thinks the war is still being fought.  Sometime you just need to be humble in defeat.

[fuckin crazy]

This is interesting to say the least.  I have never heard anyone who had a huge problem with Lincoln.  As a matter of fact, he is widely considered the greatest president of all time.  The USA is as great a place as it is today because he decided to fight for the union and won.  We are just not a world power divided.  The end justifies any means or reasons given up front.  The man is a fucking hero. 

I hate stero types, but you definately fall into one my friend.  The typical southern who thinks the war is still being fought.
 Sometime you just need to be humble in defeat.

Still torching those strawmen I see. I don't think anyone thinks the war is still being fought. Some of recognize the illegality of the North's aggression.

Only in the North is that tyrant Lincoln revered. He was a military despot ... nothing more. Dig a little deeper, and you will see his brutal ways.

He won the election, but only received 40% of the electorate.

He employed much of the same tactics as Bush, but he used them on Americans. Both North,and South.

[fuckin crazy]

As a child growing up, I was told of the horrors that Union armies inflicted upon my relatives, and I tell my kids those same stories. It is repeated countless times all throughout the South.

I really can't blame Northerners for wanting to forget the murder and rape they inflicted upon the Southern people.

[GeorgeSteele]

Well, it is a strawman. Abolition was not a concern at the outset of the conflict.

Of course, the south would have ended slavery at some point. It was the southern states that tried, in vain, to prohibit the slave trade. Most people aren't aware that it was northern merchants and shipping companies that made money on the trade,and they vehemently opposed any restriction of their business.

Virginia was the first state to prohibit the introduction of slaves into it's territory.

The Confederate Congress was the first body to try and attempt the abolition of slavery, though it was defeated.

Here is a scholarly thesis that looks at the legality of secession:

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S LEGAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SECESSION

by James Ostrowski*

Paper delivered at the first-ever academic conference on secession--"Secession, State, and Economy", sponsored by the Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama, held at the College of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, April 7-9, 1995.

If slavery was not a concern at the outset of the conflict, why did they secede?

Whether they had a right to secede is one thing, but I'm just skeptical about their motives for seceding.  I find it hard to believe that it had more to do with tariffs and what not rather than slavery.  Especially considering the "Cornerstone Speech" made in 1861 by Alexander H. Stephens, the Vice President of the CSA: 

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76

"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery?subordination to the superior race?is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."   

[fuckin crazy]

That is how all white people thought then. Even the abolitionists didn't harbor thoughts of equality.

People who quote Stevens rarely mention that Lincoln shared his views on racism.

. . . anything that argues me into . . . [the] idea of perfect social and political equality with the negro is but a specious and fantastic arrangement of words, by which a man can prove a horse chestnut to be a chestnut horse. . . . I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. (Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1832-1858, New York: The Library of America, 1989, edited by Don Fehrenbacher, pp. 511-512)

and

I will say, then, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way, the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters of the free negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry white people. I will say in addition, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which, I suppose, will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality, and inasmuch as they cannot so live, that while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man. (Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1832-1858, p. 751)

Further

Douglas in the 4th debate:

 say to you in all frankness, gentlemen, that in my opinion a negro is not a citizen, cannot be, and ought not to be, under the constitution of the United States. . . . I say that this government was established on the white basis. It was made by white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and never should be administered by any except white men. (Fourth Lincoln-Douglas Debate: Douglas' Reply, in Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1832-1858, p. 673)

Lincoln's response:

"in point of mere fact, I think so too" (The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume 2, edited by Roy P. Basler, Rutgers, 1955, p. 281, as quoted in Bennett, Forced Into Glory, p. 306)

[Atillla]

You guys still whining about some boys waving a silly flag?

If you believe in freedom of expression, you will not forbid anyone to fly any flag, including  this one which makes you look like a trailer trash hill billy 

But I still think these boys should be beheaded with a short rusty knife for posing like that in the picture 

[fuckin crazy]

... including  this one which makes you look like a trailer trash hill billy 

Maybe to those unfamiliar with southern culture. I don't fly the Southern Cross anymore because of it's corruption by some bigots. However, I proudly display the Stars and Bars.

[Smoking Guns]

... including  this one which makes you look like a trailer trash hill billy 

Maybe to those unfamiliar with southern culture. I don't fly the Southern Cross anymore because of it's corruption by some bigots. However, I proudly display the Stars and Bars.

Stupid question.  Is stars and bars in your sig and southern cross the confederate flag?