Confederate flag sets off debate in 2016 Republican class

[Publicus]

This Battle Hymn of the Republic vs Dixie song and music stuff is already in the thread if I'm not mistaken, but if it might be time again to post each side for the current posters then maybe that might be appropriate.

Regret however my lousy browser doesn't function properly, so here's the link to Johnny Cash singing the Battle Hymn.

https://youtu.be/hAMQE5QT10o

[jacky54]

Have we had Dylan singing Dixie yet? and him a liberal civil rights supporter!! But the 60's were more liberal in some ways than the nonsense of people constantly being 'offended' and 'outraged' all the time today, at very little.

[Scott]

Inflammatory, troll posts and replies removed.

Please stay on topic.

[MaxYakov]

So I guess they'll have to come up with a new state flag that would be acceptable to fly over state edifices.

I'm officially nominating this seemingly less obnoxious banner:

Edited July 9, 2015 by MaxYakov

[Publicus]

Mad Max the never sure flag concept man might yet become chuck.

[AYJAYDEE]

Where else in the world have gays had it better than in the USA either? Most historians believe former President James Buchanan was gay; and some think Lincoln was as well. The major religions of Islam, Christanity and Judiasm were all opposed to homosexuality and it wasn't accepted in many places. No reason to single out the United States for being hostile to gays.

nonsense, the american revolution had nothing to do with ending slavery. and yes many societies practiced it but they didnt go bragging to everyone else how they were the society of freedom and equality. its the hypocricy that brings down scorn on america. whites in america are being asked to be second class citizens?? lol

[MaxYakov]

Mad Max the never sure flag concept man might yet become chuck.

Errrrr ... shouldn't that be "chuck'd"?

[Merzik]

Where else in the world have gays had it better than in the USA either? Most historians believe former President James Buchanan was gay; and some think Lincoln was as well. The major religions of Islam, Christanity and Judiasm were all opposed to homosexuality and it wasn't accepted in many places. No reason to single out the United States for being hostile to gays.

nonsense, the american revolution had nothing to do with ending slavery. and yes many societies practiced it but they didnt go bragging to everyone else how they were the society of freedom and equality. its the hypocricy that brings down scorn on america. whites in america are being asked to be second class citizens?? lol

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical. The vast majority of our FF were outspoken abolitionists and opposed to slavery; including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samual Adams, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton , George Mason ..... and many others. They were born into a system of slavery and it is true that a few of these men owned slaves themselves such as Jefferson and Washington. Washington wrote:

" among his first wishes was 'to see some plan adopted, by the legislature by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.' He declared, ' I can clearly forsee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union.' Even Jefferson wrote, 'there is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity"

Freeing their slaves however was not as simple as it might seem to you. There were strict laws in place about slaveholders being responsible for freed slaves and made doing so a very difficult process. Not everyone in the colonies was on board with ending slavery and they feared a large population of free slaves. The revolutionaries were actually a minority of the colonial population and going up against the most powerful military empire in the world. Most agreed with George Washington that ending slavery should be a gradual process and that immediate and complete abolition just wasn't practical or possible at the time of the revolution. They are correct. Had they advocated an immediate emancipation of the slaves; the American Revolution would have surely failed. The odds against its sucess were already great and their gradualist approach was the only real possibility. They were well aware however of the need to end slavery in the future and it was indeed an important step it this direction.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2009/10/27/progressive-myths-about-the-founding-fathers-and-hating-whitey/

Edited July 10, 2015 by Merzik

[Publicus]

Where else in the world have gays had it better than in the USA either? Most historians believe former President James Buchanan was gay; and some think Lincoln was as well. The major religions of Islam, Christanity and Judiasm were all opposed to homosexuality and it wasn't accepted in many places. No reason to single out the United States for being hostile to gays.

nonsense, the american revolution had nothing to do with ending slavery. and yes many societies practiced it but they didnt go bragging to everyone else how they were the society of freedom and equality. its the hypocricy that brings down scorn on america. whites in america are being asked to be second class citizens?? lol

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical. The vast majority of our FF were outspoken abolitionists and opposed to slavery; including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samual Adams, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton , George Mason ..... and many others. They were born into a system of slavery and it is true that a few of these men owned slaves themselves such as Jefferson and Washington. Washington wrote:

" among his first wishes was 'to see some plan adopted, by the legislature by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.' He declared, ' I can clearly forsee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union.' Even Jefferson wrote, 'there is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity"

Freeing their slaves however was not as simple as it might seem to you. There were strict laws in place about slaveholders being responsible for freed slaves and made doing so a very difficult process. Not everyone in the colonies was on board with ending slavery and they feared a large population of free slaves. The revolutionaries were actually a minority of the colonial population and going up against the most powerful military empire in the world. Most agreed with George Washington that ending slavery should be a gradual process and that immediate and complete abolition just wasn't practical or possible at the time of the revolution. They are correct. Had they advocated an immediate emancipation of the slaves; the American Revolution would have surely failed. The odds against its sucess were already great and their gradualist approach was the only real possibility. They were well aware however of the need to end slavery in the future and it was indeed an important step it this direction.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2009/10/27/progressive-myths-about-the-founding-fathers-and-hating-whitey/

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical.

Excepting the opening remark to the particular poster (who I'm confident can capably reply if he chooses) much of your post would not be disputed by many historians or scholars. It's your wrongheaded focus on trying to present all of the Founders as exclusively righteous.

The Southern colonies urged revolution and independence for reasons vastly different from the revolutionaries in Boston, Providence, New London, New York, Philadelphia, Trenton, Baltimore.

Britain had ended slavery and the fear in the slave holding plantation colonies of the South was that Britain would end slavery in the North American colonies. Southern aristocrats thus concluded independence from Great Britain was critical to maintain the plantation and slavery economy and its concomitant society, culture, civilisation.

.

Quote

However intoxicating the heady rhetoric of ‘rights’ and ‘liberty’ emanating from Patriot orators and journalists, for the majority of farmers, merchants and townsmen in Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia (the vast majority of whom owned between one and five negroes), all-out war and separation now turned from an ideological flourish to a social necessity. Theirs was a revolution, first and foremost, to protect slavery. Edward Rutledge, one of the leading South Carolina Patriots, was right when he described the British strategy of arming free slaves as tending "more effectively to work an eternal separation between Great Britain and the colonies than any other expedient could possibly be thought of.”

http://www.counterpu...o-save-slavery/

In 1772 the Chief Justice of the King's Bench in London had ruled an American slave brought by his American master "discharged" from the slave's status as chattel, the historic Somerset ruling. Slave owners in the American southern colonies of Great Britain went into a frenzy.

In 1775 amidst open talk of rebellion in the 13 colonies, Lord General Dunsmore presented a scheme to arm both free slaves the plantation slaves to rebel against their American masters. That was that.

It was in the North, in Philadelphia but in Boston especially which had been under British Navy siege since 1775 that taxation without representation and the Sons of Liberty flourished. In Virginia, meanwhile, Thomas Jefferson modified his original drafts of revolutionary documents, from "All men are born equally free and independent," to "All men are created equal" to satisfy the plantation owners huddled over him.

Plantation owners in the South rose up against the Brits during the American Revolution as well as against the North during the Civil War to save their slave economy. They succeeded in the former, failed in the latter.

Taxation might have taken some of their property; Somerset threatened to take it all.

https://allotherpers...f-slave-nation/

[AYJAYDEE]

Where else in the world have gays had it better than in the USA either? Most historians believe former President James Buchanan was gay; and some think Lincoln was as well. The major religions of Islam, Christanity and Judiasm were all opposed to homosexuality and it wasn't accepted in many places. No reason to single out the United States for being hostile to gays.

nonsense, the american revolution had nothing to do with ending slavery. and yes many societies practiced it but they didnt go bragging to everyone else how they were the society of freedom and equality. its the hypocricy that brings down scorn on america. whites in america are being asked to be second class citizens?? lol

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical. The vast majority of our FF were outspoken abolitionists and opposed to slavery; including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samual Adams, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton , George Mason ..... and many others. They were born into a system of slavery and it is true that a few of these men owned slaves themselves such as Jefferson and Washington. Washington wrote:

" among his first wishes was 'to see some plan adopted, by the legislature by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.' He declared, ' I can clearly forsee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union.' Even Jefferson wrote, 'there is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity"

Freeing their slaves however was not as simple as it might seem to you. There were strict laws in place about slaveholders being responsible for freed slaves and made doing so a very difficult process. Not everyone in the colonies was on board with ending slavery and they feared a large population of free slaves. The revolutionaries were actually a minority of the colonial population and going up against the most powerful military empire in the world. Most agreed with George Washington that ending slavery should be a gradual process and that immediate and complete abolition just wasn't practical or possible at the time of the revolution. They are correct. Had they advocated an immediate emancipation of the slaves; the American Revolution would have surely failed. The odds against its sucess were already great and their gradualist approach was the only real possibility. They were well aware however of the need to end slavery in the future and it was indeed an important step it this direction.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2009/10/27/progressive-myths-about-the-founding-fathers-and-hating-whitey/

lol! didnt notice them freeing their own slaves!! yeah, real men of principle!

[Usernames]

First, they came for the Confederate flag. Now, they're coming after the kimonos. https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/style/2015/07/07/mfa-backs-down-over-kimono-event-response-protests/lv9NHcnpW0lsRE77d9hvkI/story.html#comments

[chuckd]

Don't forget those nasty Washington Redskins.

[Merzik]

In Louisiana they are now attacking the Fleur de Lys ( French emblem found on New Orleans Saints helmets) because it too is somehow "racist" :

http://www.fdesouche.com/626693-debat-aux-usa-la-fleur-de-lys-est-elle-raciste

[Merzik]

Where else in the world have gays had it better than in the USA either? Most historians believe former President James Buchanan was gay; and some think Lincoln was as well. The major religions of Islam, Christanity and Judiasm were all opposed to homosexuality and it wasn't accepted in many places. No reason to single out the United States for being hostile to gays.

nonsense, the american revolution had nothing to do with ending slavery. and yes many societies practiced it but they didnt go bragging to everyone else how they were the society of freedom and equality. its the hypocricy that brings down scorn on america. whites in america are being asked to be second class citizens?? lol

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical. The vast majority of our FF were outspoken abolitionists and opposed to slavery; including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samual Adams, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton , George Mason ..... and many others. They were born into a system of slavery and it is true that a few of these men owned slaves themselves such as Jefferson and Washington. Washington wrote:

" among his first wishes was 'to see some plan adopted, by the legislature by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.' He declared, ' I can clearly forsee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union.' Even Jefferson wrote, 'there is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity"

Freeing their slaves however was not as simple as it might seem to you. There were strict laws in place about slaveholders being responsible for freed slaves and made doing so a very difficult process. Not everyone in the colonies was on board with ending slavery and they feared a large population of free slaves. The revolutionaries were actually a minority of the colonial population and going up against the most powerful military empire in the world. Most agreed with George Washington that ending slavery should be a gradual process and that immediate and complete abolition just wasn't practical or possible at the time of the revolution. They are correct. Had they advocated an immediate emancipation of the slaves; the American Revolution would have surely failed. The odds against its sucess were already great and their gradualist approach was the only real possibility. They were well aware however of the need to end slavery in the future and it was indeed an important step it this direction.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2009/10/27/progressive-myths-about-the-founding-fathers-and-hating-whitey/

lol! didnt notice them freeing their own slaves!! yeah, real men of principle!

It wasn't that easy. Slaveholders were held financially responsible for their freed slaves for life; a law written clearly to discourage this practice. This law and others made an immediate emancipation almost impossible for idealistic slave holders. Their gradualist approach was the only way to keep the revolution and later new country together. They were not alone. A generation later Abe Lincoln himself stated he would not have freed the slaves had it meant that the Union would dissolve. There were several Northern states threatening succession as well. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island had threatened secession as far back as James Madisons administration. In addition, the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware were threatening secession during the first half of the nineteenth century long before the southern states even considered such a thing. Maryland came very close. Lincoln had to send in troops to the Maryland state capital to prevent them from voting on the issue. Obviously he felt there was a good chance they would have voted to leave.

As a side note; the Commander of the Northern Army and future President Grant had slaves throughout the duration of the war. They were not freed by the Emancipation Proclamation and remained slaves until 1865. Grant notoriously made the remark that " good help was is hard to find these days" Robert E Lee freed his slaves before the war and expressed his opposition to slavery on many occaisions.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Merzik

[Publicus]

The Confederate battle rag was taken down by vote of the Republican controlled legislature of South Carolina on the recommendation of the governor who is also a Republican.

Maybe next thing we'll see is SC Republicans sitting at lunch counters with black people.

[Publicus]

You are sadly mistaken about our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution being hypocritical. The vast majority of our FF were outspoken abolitionists and opposed to slavery; including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Samual Adams, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton , George Mason ..... and many others. They were born into a system of slavery and it is true that a few of these men owned slaves themselves such as Jefferson and Washington. Washington wrote:

" among his first wishes was 'to see some plan adopted, by the legislature by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees.' He declared, ' I can clearly forsee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union.' Even Jefferson wrote, 'there is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity"

Freeing their slaves however was not as simple as it might seem to you. There were strict laws in place about slaveholders being responsible for freed slaves and made doing so a very difficult process. Not everyone in the colonies was on board with ending slavery and they feared a large population of free slaves. The revolutionaries were actually a minority of the colonial population and going up against the most powerful military empire in the world. Most agreed with George Washington that ending slavery should be a gradual process and that immediate and complete abolition just wasn't practical or possible at the time of the revolution. They are correct. Had they advocated an immediate emancipation of the slaves; the American Revolution would have surely failed. The odds against its sucess were already great and their gradualist approach was the only real possibility. They were well aware however of the need to end slavery in the future and it was indeed an important step it this direction.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2009/10/27/progressive-myths-about-the-founding-fathers-and-hating-whitey/

lol! didnt notice them freeing their own slaves!! yeah, real men of principle!

It wasn't that easy. Slaveholders were held financially responsible for their freed slaves for life; a law written clearly to discourage this practice. This law and others made an immediate emancipation almost impossible for idealistic slave holders. Their gradualist approach was the only way to keep the revolution and later new country together. They were not alone. A generation later Abe Lincoln himself stated he would not have freed the slaves had it meant that the Union would dissolve. There were several Northern states threatening succession as well. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island had threatened secession as far back as James Madisons administration. In addition, the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware were threatening secession during the first half of the nineteenth century long before the southern states even considered such a thing. Maryland came very close. Lincoln had to send in troops to the Maryland state capital to prevent them from voting on the issue. Obviously he felt there was a good chance they would have voted to leave.

As a side note; the Commander of the Northern Army and future President Grant had slaves throughout the duration of the war. They were not freed by the Emancipation Proclamation and remained slaves until 1865. Grant notoriously made the remark that " good help was is hard to find these days" Robert E Lee freed his slaves before the war and expressed his opposition to slavery on many occaisions.

Life has contradictions which means the bottom line question concerns one's basic and fundamental values, beliefs, actions that are over time defining and definitive of the person, society, country.

The South seceded from the Union and it lost. Slavery was abolished.

The Confederate flag worshipers continue to lose as they have lost since the South seceded and right up to the present. They don' learn. They simply become more intransigent and bitter. Their political correctness is wrongness through and through. Reactionary die hards and dead enders.

[chuckd]

In Louisiana they are now attacking the Fleur de Lys ( French emblem found on New Orleans Saints helmets) because it too is somehow "racist" :

http://www.fdesouche.com/626693-debat-aux-usa-la-fleur-de-lys-est-elle-raciste

Even the Freeburg Midgets aren't safe. The liberal left have gone absolutely berserk.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

First it's the Redskins, now it's the Midgets

By St. Louis Post-Dispatch (MO) July 11, 2015 6:45 am

FREEBURG -- According to legend, the inspiration for Freeburg High School's mascot

was born of a David-and-Goliath basketball game in 1922.

The Freeburg squad, though small, played mightily. And, the story goes, a sportswriter dubbed the team The Midgets.

But almost a century later, Little People of America, a 6,500-member national group representing people born with dwarfism, is

demanding that the district change the mascot.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2015/07/11/first-its-the-redskins-now-its-the-midgets/?subscriber=1

[Publicus]

The right keeps on charging to the rear.

Right wing political correctness is now on a strong display so bring your friends over to the thread so all can take it in.

Right wing political correctness as demanded by the principals themselves, the same people who brought us the resurrected Confederate battle flag which has now been dismantled as it should be.

There's more right wing political correctness coming besides so there's still plenty of time to come on over. No ticket necessary, just come as you are so's nobody misses this precious stuff.

[Publicus]

In Louisiana they are now attacking the Fleur de Lys ( French emblem found on New Orleans Saints helmets) because it too is somehow "racist" :

http://www.fdesouche.com/626693-debat-aux-usa-la-fleur-de-lys-est-elle-raciste

Even the Freeburg Midgets aren't safe. The liberal left have gone absolutely berserk.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

First it's the Redskins, now it's the Midgets

By St. Louis Post-Dispatch (MO) July 11, 2015 6:45 am

FREEBURG -- According to legend, the inspiration for Freeburg High School's mascot

was born of a David-and-Goliath basketball game in 1922.

The Freeburg squad, though small, played mightily. And, the story goes, a sportswriter dubbed the team The Midgets.

But almost a century later, Little People of America, a 6,500-member national group representing people born with dwarfism, is

demanding that the district change the mascot.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2015/07/11/first-its-the-redskins-now-its-the-midgets/?subscriber=1

The right needs to respect what the objectified people themselves request.

Blacks insisted the word against them among other words ceased being used.

Gays instisted on respect in society's use of language.

Jews objected to the vast range of words used against them.

There are more groups and words in the soceity, as the post ironically attests.

Far right political correctness needs to be succeeded by a respect of the historically objectified.

[chuckd]

You must be the person sending out all those free invitations to come and hear Hillary make a speech.

Sounds exactly like what they have been doing to get some attendance for her campaign events..

[Publicus]

You must be the person sending out all those free invitations to come and hear Hillary make a speech.

Sounds exactly like what they have been doing to get some attendance for her campaign events..

You and I have discussed campaign crowd turnout (of any number) and its almost complete irrelevance to the outcome of a given election, so take some time to try to get some new material if you don't mind thx.

The post is a rehash of, well, a rehash.

[sgtsabai]

The right wing racist wacko's lost, again. Pure and simple. Let me add, to be right wing, you define yourself as racist and a whole bunch of other names. It has absolutely nothing to do with "pc". I'm as un pc as you can get, but I'm sure as hell not right wing. It is unbelievable that in this day and time any person with more than one working brain cell could defend the confederate battle flag as "heritage". I am proud of my southern upbringing, which was not racist, just as I am my time and brothers in the Corps. That does not mean I am proud of what the south did to human beings, continues to do to this day, nor am I proud of what the US government sent us to do in Vietnam. Big, big difference and pity those that don't have the brain power to understand.

[AYJAYDEE]

The right wing racist wacko's lost, again. Pure and simple. Let me add, to be right wing, you define yourself as racist and a whole bunch of other names. It has absolutely nothing to do with "pc". I'm as un pc as you can get, but I'm sure as hell not right wing. It is unbelievable that in this day and time any person with more than one working brain cell could defend the confederate battle flag as "heritage". I am proud of my southern upbringing, which was not racist, just as I am my time and brothers in the Corps. That does not mean I am proud of what the south did to human beings, continues to do to this day, nor am I proud of what the US government sent us to do in Vietnam. Big, big difference and pity those that don't have the brain power to understand.

thank-you

[lostoday]

The right wing racist wacko's lost, again. Pure and simple. Let me add, to be right wing, you define yourself as racist and a whole bunch of other names. It has absolutely nothing to do with "pc". I'm as un pc as you can get, but I'm sure as hell not right wing. It is unbelievable that in this day and time any person with more than one working brain cell could defend the confederate battle flag as "heritage". I am proud of my southern upbringing, which was not racist, just as I am my time and brothers in the Corps. That does not mean I am proud of what the south did to human beings, continues to do to this day, nor am I proud of what the US government sent us to do in Vietnam. Big, big difference and pity those that don't have the brain power to understand.

Right wing people are not all one way. People who use IE are not all stupid. People who use MSN as a home page are not all idiots. People who write about stereotypes especially negative stereotype of others are ignorant. Big difference between those of us who can think beyond labels and talking points that some wacko writes on some bogus font of internet wisdom.

Donald Trump is not a racist (I don't think); I think he is an opportunist looking for the racist vote. I don't think the black community today as a whole ever gave the Confederate flag much thought.

There is not really a fight against a flag; there is a fight against those who think the racists on the right outnumber the non racists in the right.

There are right wing racists and left wing racists; only the color of the racism changes.

[sgtsabai]

Perhaps all right wingers aren't racist, but all those that I knew in the states, and I knew far too many being from the south, certainly were and I see nothing but racism time after time from the right wing on the internet and hate radio. I've yet to meet a right winger that wasn't racist, although I've certainly heard them try (try being the operative word) try to explain how they weren't. Hmmm, the color changes, perhaps you would care to elaborate on that point. I would like to learn who on the left you think is racist against whom. You might want to try to read this from someone that was raised in the south. The author was born in SD, one of the most racist states I have ever been in, if you are American Indian. I was there with the Lakota in '73. https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/29/1374127/-What-Do-Conservatives-Want-When-They-Say-When-I-Want-My-Country-Back?detail=emailclassic . You are wrong, the flag is a symbol of hatred, slavery, oppression, and racism. It not about who on the right is racist and who isn't. Perhaps if there were any true conservatives left they would speak out against it, but not the right wing. With the exit of President Eisenhower, who btw was to the left of Obama, true conservatives left the house. Nixon, Regan, Cheney/Bush et all finished it off. Where has the clown car been in speaking out against Trump? I hear the sound of silence. Trump not a racist, oh give me a break, not a birther either, right?

[lostoday]

Racists on the left; Louis farrakhan, Al Sharpton. Google black racists for more. You aren't really trying to say that South Dakota is in the South are you? First the racists went after the Confederate flag and then the American flag.

Trump is playing the race card in the same manner that OJ Simpson did or Hillary Clinton did when her campaign was explaining why Obama won the 2008 Democratic primary in South Carolina.

"someone exploiting prejudice against another race for political or some other advantage. The use of the southern strategy by a political candidate is said by some to be a version of playing the race card, such as when former Senator Jesse Helms, during his 1990 North Carolina Senate campaign, ran an ad showing a black man taking a white man's job, intended as a criticism of the idea of racial quotas. The ad was interpreted by many people as trying to play to racist fears among white voters."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_card

[Publicus]

The political left of center in the USA has never constituted a danger or threat to the Constitution.

It has always been the political right in the United States that menaces the Constitution, from the slave owners of the Plantation economy and society in the South, to the KKK to McCarthyism, the John Birch Society, the National Rifle Association, to nutcase evangelicals who want to declare officially the USA is a Christian country; and many more on the radical extreme right.

The United States is not, never has been, a leftist society. It will never have or accept the Fabian socialism of the UK or even the democratic socialism of the west European left.

The one constant in the political-cultural history of the United States is the fending off of the political extreme right. The hauling down the Confederate Battle Rag from the South Carolina state capitol building grounds is yet another battle to harness and corral the far out extreme right, so I'll gladly take it and celebrate it.

The core challenge is that ideology is a brain disease and that it is the right wing of American society which has always had the fervor and fever of ideology as its defining characteristic. The opposite is pragmatism which the right cannot find because of its brainlock into ideology.

[Publicus]

The right wing racist wacko's lost, again. Pure and simple. Let me add, to be right wing, you define yourself as racist and a whole bunch of other names. It has absolutely nothing to do with "pc". I'm as un pc as you can get, but I'm sure as hell not right wing. It is unbelievable that in this day and time any person with more than one working brain cell could defend the confederate battle flag as "heritage". I am proud of my southern upbringing, which was not racist, just as I am my time and brothers in the Corps. That does not mean I am proud of what the south did to human beings, continues to do to this day, nor am I proud of what the US government sent us to do in Vietnam. Big, big difference and pity those that don't have the brain power to understand.

Right wing people are not all one way. People who use IE are not all stupid. People who use MSN as a home page are not all idiots. People who write about stereotypes especially negative stereotype of others are ignorant. Big difference between those of us who can think beyond labels and talking points that some wacko writes on some bogus font of internet wisdom.

Donald Trump is not a racist (I don't think); I think he is an opportunist looking for the racist vote. I don't think the black community today as a whole ever gave the Confederate flag much thought.

There is not really a fight against a flag; there is a fight against those who think the racists on the right outnumber the non racists in the right.

There are right wing racists and left wing racists; only the color of the racism changes.

only the color of the racism changes

The color of racism changes at the margins only. The color of racism in the United States remains white at its core and at its center. This has been the case for 400 years and it continues to be the case.

One of the easiest places to find racism in the USA is under the Confederate flag.

[lostoday]

The political left of center in the USA has never constituted a danger or threat to the Constitution.

It has always been the political right in the United States that menaces the Constitution, from the slave owners of the Plantation economy and society in the South, to the KKK to McCarthyism, the John Birch Society, the National Rifle Association, to nutcase evangelicals who want to declare officially the USA is a Christian country; and many more on the radical extreme right.

The United States is not, never has been, a leftist society. It will never have or accept the Fabian socialism of the UK or even the democratic socialism of the west European left.

The one constant in the political-cultural history of the United States is the fending off of the political extreme right. The hauling down the Confederate Battle Rag from the South Carolina state capitol building grounds is yet another battle to harness and corral the far out extreme right, so I'll gladly take it and celebrate it.

The core challenge is that ideology is a brain disease and that it is the right wing of American society which has always had the fervor and fever of ideology as its defining characteristic. The opposite is pragmatism which the right cannot find because of its brainlock into ideology.

You wrote, "The political left of center in the USA has never constituted a danger or threat to the Constitution." In 1935-36, the Court struck down eight of FDR's New Deal programs, including the National Recovery Act (NRA) and the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA). Public antijudicial sentiment intensified; many critics questioned the constitutionality of the concept of judicial review itself. As a result of this reaction, several constitutional amendments were introduced into Congress in 1936, including one that would require a two-thirds vote of the Court whenever an act of Congress was declared unconstitutional; another that would permit Congress to revalidate federal laws previously declared unconstitutional by repassing them with a two-thirds vote of both houses, and even one that would abolish altogether the Court's power to declare federal laws unconstitutional.

http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/separation-powers/

Sorry buy you are very wrong. Stop the nonsense. I doubt if any President attacked the constitution as much as FDR and he was the big daddy of liberals. The same percent of blacks are racists as white people but though the percent is the same the numbers change because of the totals of the population ethnicity. That's why it makes sense for Trump to play the race card and why the Democrats want illegal aliens to vote. It is not complicated; the Republicans want to win elections and steal your money and the Democrats want to win elections and steal your money. The Confederate flag is just a means to an end.

Edited July 13, 2015 by lostoday

[sgtsabai]

Right wing talking points, only, There is no defense of the Confederate Battle flag flying over government buildings. And exactly what was wrong with the New Deal? Remember it was the great USMC General Smedley Butler that blew the whistle of the RIGHT WING plutocrat coup. I believe you could say that was a credible threat from the right while in no way was the New Deal. You think the New Deal was bad, oh your true colors are showing. I don't know that Sharpton or Farrakhan are racist. I would suggest many of their comments come from have grown up in a white racist society. Did I suggest in anyway SD was in the south? No I didn't. I did say it one of the most racist places I have ever been if you are American Indian. The racists there are still white, just like the south only their racism is directed toward the Indians. One of the major problems with white racists is they can't even admit their racism to themselves but one of their favorite evasions is to try to turn the conversation to black racism.