OK, My statue Stance Justified

13»

Replies

  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,878 Senior Member
    Again that is not the point. I know you like to tell black people what they should care about. I know, if you don't care about it, why should they, right? However the purpose of those statues was to remind them that in the eyes of their government, they are less. That is why they want them gone.

    They are just now figuring this out.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    This assumes that you think black folks (or anyone else for that matter) sit around thinking about the statues and the history behind them. It's more of left wing witch hunt is all it is.

    “I’m not going to waste my time worrying about these Confederate statues,” he said. “That’s wasted energy. You know what I’m gonna do? I’m gonna keep doing great things. I’m gonna keep trying to make a difference number one in the black community — because I’m black — but also [I’m] gonna try to do good things in the world. I’m not gonna waste my time screaming at a neo-**** who’s gonna hate me no matter what, and I’m not gonna waste my time worried about these statues that they’ve got all over the country.”


    So the proper response is to ignore the statues, Barkley was asked.


    “I’ve always ignored them!” he said. “Rick, I’m 54 years old. I’ve never thought about those statues a day in my life. I think if you asked most black people to be honest, they ain’t thought a day in their life about those stupid statues. What we as black people need to do: We need to worry about getting our education, we need to stop killing each other, we need to try to find a way to have more economic opportunity and things like that. Those things are important and significant. You know, I’m wasting time and energy [if I’m] screaming at a neo-****, or [saying] ‘Man, you’ve got to take this statue down.’


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/08/18/charles-barkley-im-not-going-to-waste-my-time-worrying-about-these-confederate-statues/?utm_term=.287350d36c8c

    So good, you found someone that thinks like you, therefore all those black people protesting, have no right to be offended I guess. I mean you are after all the final arbiter.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    Buffco wrote: »
    21st century goggles looking at 19th century constitutional growing pains.


    No even in the 19th century they were considered traitors.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    Let me ask, what is your stake in this, why is it so offensive to you that people don't want those statues honoring their oppressors standing in public squares?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,878 Senior Member
    Again why is this an issue now?
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • tim_stim_s Senior Member Posts: 1,868 Senior Member
    They have been always been offensive. Just nobody gave a **** what black people thought when they erected them.

    they gave a ****.....considering so many were erected in the jim crow & civil rights eras
    Fly Fishing in Maine - www.flyfishinginmaine.com
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,361 Senior Member
    Let me ask, what is your stake in this, why is it so offensive to you that people don't want those statues honoring their oppressors standing in public squares?
    No stake and it's not offensive to me. But like Buford asked...why all of sudden now after all of these years?

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,320 Senior Member
    Maybe now they think folks will start to listen?

    Sent from my SM-S907VL using Tapatalk
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    No stake and it's not offensive to me. But like Buford asked...why all of sudden now after all of these years?

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


    Why does that matter?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    Maybe now they think folks will start to listen?

    Sent from my SM-S907VL using Tapatalk

    Not NZ. If he is not bothered by them, then they have no right to complain.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Again why is this an issue now?


    Now that Confederate flags have been mostly taken down, this is the next logical step.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,361 Senior Member
    Why does that matter?

    Exactly. Why does it matter now in 2017?
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    No, why does it matter that this is coming out now? Should they have protested when they were erected and risked being lynched?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 9,689 Senior Member
    No even in the 19th century they were considered traitors.

    Robert E. Lee did not consider himself a traitor, he turned down the generalship of the Union Army, he was deeply convicted, and he was an honorable man. He lost. He recognized that. The winners write the history books. The outcome was an all powerful central gov't and diminished state gov'ts.

    He was not a traitor to Virginia. The Constitution was in it's infancy. Call him what you like, but he was anything but dishonorable.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    It's really difficult to say that men like Robert E. Lee or Jefferson Davis were traitors. The question of the ability of states to secede from the Union was hardly settled.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member
    Benedict Arnold did not consider himself a traitor either. I just finished reading Nathaniel Philbrick's Valiant Ambition. Its about Arnold, his relationship with Washington, his military campaigns and ultimately, his betrayal. A good read! I think this is the third Philbrick book I've written and I've really liked them all.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    It's really difficult to say that men like Robert E. Lee or Jefferson Davis were traitors. The question of the ability of states to secede from the Union was hardly settled.

    I like to throw the term around to rile Buffy but you do have a point. Ultimately I think they were traitorous but maybe don't deserve the term traitor if that makes any sense?
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    Buffco wrote: »
    Robert E. Lee did not consider himself a traitor, he turned down the generalship of the Union Army, he was deeply convicted, and he was an honorable man. He lost. He recognized that. The winners write the history books. The outcome was an all powerful central gov't and diminished state gov'ts.

    He was not a traitor to Virginia. The Constitution was in it's infancy. Call him what you like, but he was anything but dishonorable.


    You ask any Yankee, and they would say traitor. They ratified that constitution and agreed to those terms, the states did not have the right to secede. And even if they did, they were still traitors to the constitution they swore to defend from all enemies foreign and domestic.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Green Mt BoyGreen Mt Boy Senior Member Posts: 709 Senior Member
    Interesting take on the issue from a Vermonter who grew up in So. Carolina:

    https://vtdigger.org/2017/08/31/gus-speth-let-statues-mark-civil-rights-struggle/#.WalD8tEpChA
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    You ask any Yankee, and they would say traitor. They ratified that constitution and agreed to those terms, the states did not have the right to secede. And even if they did, they were still traitors to the constitution they swore to defend from all enemies foreign and domestic.

    Uh...no.

    First, there were many Northerners that didn't give a **** one way or the other, and plenty that were willing to let the South go its own way (e.g. the riots in New York). Many abolitionists were in favor of secession, that way freeing the North of the taint of slavery.

    Second, there's nothing in the Constitution that directly mentions secession...either way. The Articles of Confederation referred to free and independent states forming a union. The anti-secessionist constitutional argument is that the Constitution calls for a more perfect union.

    In 1869, secession was ruled illegal but that states could leave the union through revolt or consent of the states (basically, de facto recognition) similar to the states leaving Great Britain.

    There were reasons why no Confederate was ever brought up on the charge of treason. One reason was the federal government was afraid it might lose the case.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    The riots in New York were Irish Immigrants upset over the fact that wealthy New Yorkers could buy their way out of the draft.

    The Articles of Confederation are not the constitution and were replaced to form a stronger federal government.

    Lincoln felt strongly that we needed to avoid charging treason to avoid a continuing the war. It was done for reconciliation. There were many others that wanted to punish the southern states for their betrayal.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Green Mt BoyGreen Mt Boy Senior Member Posts: 709 Senior Member
    Lincoln felt strongly that we needed to avoid charging treason to avoid a continuing the war. It was done for reconciliation. There were many others that wanted to punish the southern states for their betrayal.

    That is true, and reflects the tragic irony of his assassination by a zealot for the Southern cause. In the context of the times Lincoln was the South's best friend. He was truly a remarkable person and in my opinion by far the best President the country has ever had.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,862 Senior Member
    There are some Reaganites that will be very upset with this post.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,361 Senior Member
    So lets continue to live in the past and apply that to today and tear down those **** statues!! All of them!!!
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    They rioted against the Draft. They weren't willing to fight even if the rich were drafted. They had no interest in the slaves (and saw them as potential labor competition if freed).

    Lincoln was dead and the Reconstructionists were in charge.

    You missed my point about the Articles. I was actually supporting your conclusion with the reference to a more perfect Union.

    Anecdotally, it was "Johnny Reb," not "Johnny Traitor."
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    There are some Reaganites that will be very upset with this post.

    It's OK if GMT thinks some other Republican president was the greatest ever.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 2,394 Senior Member
    As an aside, the proclamation by Andrew Johnson granting pardon cited participation in the rebellion. He did not grant pardon for treason.
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 2,341 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Uh...no.

    First, there were many Northerners that didn't give a **** one way or the other, and plenty that were willing to let the South go its own way (e.g. the riots in New York). Many abolitionists were in favor of secession, that way freeing the North of the taint of slavery.

    Second, there's nothing in the Constitution that directly mentions secession...either way. The Articles of Confederation referred to free and independent states forming a union. The anti-secessionist constitutional argument is that the Constitution calls for a more perfect union.

    In 1869, secession was ruled illegal but that states could leave the union through revolt or consent of the states (basically, de facto recognition) similar to the states leaving Great Britain.

    There were reasons why no Confederate was ever brought up on the charge of treason. One reason was the federal government was afraid it might lose the case.

    true, nothing explicit. But as Lincoln said in his first inaugural, Union implies perpetuity. You can't very well vote in an election and then secede if you don't like the result. As Lincoln said, you always retain the right of insurrection, but that is a remedy grounded in natural right and not in law. And of course the stronger power is free to try and prevent it. Which is what happened.

    Yes, the legal issue is not crystal-clear. Politically, however, the war definitively answered the question.

    As Comic notes, plenty of people were feeling vengeful. Lincoln, to his credit, wasn't one of them.
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 2,341 Senior Member
    This weekend I read a biography of Lincoln. During the peace talks, one of the confederates asked Lincoln if he believed the rebs were traitors. Lincoln allowed that he did. But the Reb was grateful, because he knew Lincoln wouldn't take it out on them.

    Interesting.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,724 Senior Member
    So lets continue to live in the past and apply that to today and tear down those **** statues!! All of them!!!

    You are saying not to live in the past, we have to move forward. In other posts you rant that we can't just whitewash history because we must remember it. Get your **** together, man. ;)
13»

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file