Posted on 02/12/2007 7:40:34 PM PST by BnBlFlag
AUSTIN, Texas — The Civil War ended nearly 142 years ago, for most of the country anyway, but bitter battles over how zealously that war should be remembered are erupting in Austin, the Texas capital.
First, rock musician Ted Nugent wore a T-shirt featuring the Confederate battle flag — a banner sometimes employed by Southern white-supremacist groups — at the Jan. 16 inaugural ball for Texas Gov. Rick Perry, prompting criticism from civil-rights groups.
A few days later, the state's elected land commissioner, arguing for a more "balanced" view of history, marked Confederate Heroes Day — an official state holiday commemorating Gen. Robert E. Lee's birthday — by accepting a donation from the Descendants of Confederate Veterans for an archive-preservation project.
At the flagship campus of the University of Texas, officials said they soon will convene a committee to decide what, if anything, to do about four statues of Confederate leaders, including Lee and Jefferson Davis, that greet visitors at the main campus entrance.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
Ping!
"Jerry Patterson, the elected State Land Commissioner, marked "Confederate Heroes Day", an Official State Holiday.....".
So now it's controversial to observe an "Official State Holiday".
So should we ban Ford ,Chevy and Dodge Ram logos that are also on the back of these same pickups? Or should we just ban pickups altogether? Maybe just beer bottles?
bump
And the media wonders why Southerners overwhelmingly vote Republican!
Yes, that is what these two women appear to be saying.
Haven't we gotten past this racist thing? Oh, I forgot, it makes a lot of people a lot of money.
Yankees had slaves, and the Yankee flag flies over almost every government installation in the country. Is it next on the hit list? I have never owned slaves or enslaved anybody, but I am proud of my heritage. Southern by birth, Texan by the grace of God.
Thanks for posting, BnBlFlag.
Good stuff from Patterson.
couple more Flag bearers
But first, they should be required to make an extensive, televised apology to all the black people in this country for keeping their ancestors in chains for so long, right up into the 1960s when so many of them voted against federal civil rights legislation. In fairness, I think we should give them a year and a half to prepare for this, so they can do it right -- just before the 2008 presidential conventions.
Hey, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
That's a fact. And they were the first to enslave Africans. If memory serves, when the War Between The States broke out, it had only been about 15 years since the last New York slave had been freed.
Every time this flag is drug out and hits the MSM, it pounds another nail in the coffin of the conservative movement, labeling conservatives as bigots. The civil war is over. It's time to forgive, forget and move on.
Anyone have a way to page H. K. Edgerley? Now there's a hero.
Anyone who labels this flag as "racist" needs a History lesson. And, no, we're not giving it up! It's who we are.
Three of my GGrandfathers and a bunch of their Brothers fought under that flag. Some made it home in one piece and some of them didn't make it at all.
So don't tell us not to honor their memory. It ain't gonna happen.
The Leftists and anyone else who doesn't like it can "stick it where the sun don't shine".
Which was picked to pieces here.
And if you can't get him try H. K. Edgerton.
What are you here again to urinate on our ancestor's graves?
Thanks, what's what I get for posting at 5:50 a.m.
I believe it's H.K. Edgarton (or Edgerton) but I don't know how to contact him. He's a great guy and a wonderful speaker. I met him at a Southern Heritage rally in Austin.
He and Jerry Patterson spoke to over 1,000 people waving Confederate flags and singing "Dixie" on the grounds of our beautiful State Capitol. Surrounded by Confederate Monuments I might add.
The only reason the Confederate flag flew over slavery for just four years is because they lost.
The Confederacy seceded because Lincoln was going to limit the growth of slavery.
The Confederacy wrote Negro slavery into its Constitution.
The Civil War was about slavery, at least it was for the South, which wanted it to continue.
No. I'm here to keep you from pissing all over mine.
"St Andrew's Cross is Still a Flyin'".
http://shnv.homestead.com/andrewscross.html
Yes, slavery was wrong, but my ancestors were right for taking up the call to arms.
First, the reason that the South seceded was over slavery.
Second, the United States is not a foreign power.
The slave owners lost an election and did not want to see slavery limited and that is why they seceded.
They wrote the 'right' of Negro slavery right into their Constitution.
Those fighting for the Confederacy were fighting on the wrong side for the wrong cause.
And good for it. I have never wavered in my belief that this jihad against the rebel flag is ridiculous. If the people of Texas or South Carolina or Florida want to fly it then let them. The southern rebellion is a fact of life. It happened. It won't go away just because people get their shorts in a wad over reminders of it.
Reply to post #14
a great idea, you hit it right on the button.
Secession was about slavery. We would have not left the union if not for the fear that abolishment was on the horizon. That would have destroyed the southern economy immediately. The war was fought for a lot of reasons which protecting the right to slavery was a part. I have read many letters from confederate soldiers and slavery is hardly ever mentioned but in many cases a comment to tell "ol'Jim" "hello" is pretty common.
You know, the demorat party has done so much to, for black americans since the sixties. Government plantation comes to mind for a start.
I sure hope that Jerry Patterson will run for governor in the next election. He's a good man.
I hope he runs too. I wish he was Governor now!
Amen to that! However, we need to keep in mind that our present governor has nice hair--LOL!
"It's time to forgive, forget and move on."
Tell that to the race bating maggots in the Liberal camp.
A cartoonish over-simplification used to insult tens of millions of Americans.
Refreshingly original.(see: Pelosi, Chavez, PETA, etc...)
bttt
Right you are! A drugged flag is an unsafe flyer and it shouldn't surprise us when it slams into the MSM and everything else.
Robert E. Lee stated that his reason for fighting was to defend his people and his state, not to uphold the institution of slavery. He further stated that he disapproved of slavery. (The slaves on his property, btw, were owned by his wife.)
I don't see how these facts square with your contention that everyone fighting for the South was in it to preserve and extend slavery.
To Bledsoe, and many African Americans, the answer is no.
I am completely confident nearly all liberals would agree with "many African Americans".
And now for what I like to call the continual "lack of logical continuity" charicteristic of liberals: Tell me please, how the liberals in this country distain the war in Iraq but "support the troops"?
That's easy; they don't.
On the other hand, he said that it was good for them and that God would get around to freeing them in a thousand years or so.
The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild and melting influences of Christianity than from the storm and tempest of fiery controversy. This influence, though slow, is sure. The doctrines and miracles of our Savior have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small portion of the human race, and even among Christian nations what gross errors still exist! While we see the course of the final abolition of human slavery is still onward, and give it the aid of our prayers, let us leave the progress as well as the results in the hands of Him who, chooses to work by slow influences, and with whom a thousand years are but as a single day.
Lee's disapproval of slavery, much hyped by the Southron contingent, was tepid at best. In the same 1856 letter where he is said to condemn slavery he also calls it necessary and firmly opposes taking any steps, other than prayer, to hasten the end of it. As late as 1865 he was calling the condition of slavery "the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country..."
I don't see how these facts square with your contention that everyone fighting for the South was in it to preserve and extend slavery.
I don't think anyone is saying that. However, there can be absolutely no doubt that defense of the institution of slavery from what they saw as threats from the Republican administration was by far the single most important reason for the Southern Rebellion.
Wrong it was over taxes(protectionist tariffs) and Northern Aggressive policies that hurt the Southern economy. Its about power, and all the lies you quote about "its about slavery" will never hold water in the light of history. Look at Jefferson Davis' inagural speech - he does not talk about slavery, rather he mentions other factors. Lincoln wasn't about to let the South go, he wanted his tariffs, and he wanted to consolidate power in Washington in direct contravention to the Founder's belief in federalism - which by the way does include States Rights. You are deluded by the Lincoln cult, and just think - Lincoln was all about denying States Rights. He is in some pretty notorious company there - Lenin, Stalin, Bismarck, Hitler! Study history, not the lies the "official history cult" prints.
Since I'm not a Southern American (or any American) my opinion means little I'm sure, but it appears the men in the picture understand FREEDOM 100%.
Then why did the Declarations of Causes issued by the secession conventions barely mention tariffs (if at all), while giving a great deal of space to slavery? Why was South Carolina's message to the other southern states, asking them to leave the union and join them entitled, "The Address of the people of South Carolina, assembled in Convention, to the people of the Slaveholding States of the United States"?
Look at Jefferson Davis' inagural speech - he does not talk about slavery, rather he mentions other factors.
And 11 days later, speaking to the provisional confederate congress, he says,
In the meantime, under the mild and genial climate of the Southern States and the increasing care and attention for the well-being and comfort of the laboring class, dictated alike by interest and humanity, the African slaves had augmented in number from about 600,000, at the date of the adoption of the constitutional compact, to upward of 4,000,000. In moral and social condition they had been elevated from brutal savages into docile, intelligent, and civilized agricultural laborers, and supplied not only with bodily comforts but with careful religious instruction. Under the supervision of a superior race their labor had been so directed as not only to allow a gradual and marked amelioration of their own condition, but to convert hundreds of thousands of square miles of wilderness into cultivated lands covered with a prosperous people; towns and cities had sprung into existence, and had rapidly increased in wealth and population under the social system of the South; the white population of the Southern slaveholding States had augmented form about 1,250,000 at the date of the adoption of the Constitution to more than 8,500,000 in 1860; and the productions of the South in cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, for the full development and continuance of which the labor of African slaves was and is indispensable, had swollen to an amount which formed nearly three-fourths of the exports of the whole United States and had become absolutely necessary to the wants of civilized man. With interests of such overwhelming magnitude imperiled, the people of the Southern States were driven by the conduct of the North to the adoption of some course of action to avert the danger with which they were openly menaced.
So, any progress on explaining how Massachusetts "nullified" Jefferson's embargo two years before it was enacted? You said last week that you'd get back to me on that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.