Skip to comments.Perry Says He Opposes Texas Confederate Plate
Posted on 10/27/2011 7:50:45 AM PDT by izzatzo
Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Wednesday he was opposed to the state issuing a license plate featuring a Confederate battle flag, publicly declaring his position on the proposal for the first time.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans applied for the Texas plate but opponents have called it highly offensive to African-Americans. The group is a national organization open to the male descendants of any man who served honorably in the Confederate forces during the Civil War.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I live in Texas. Perry is lot like like Romneycare, worked OK within his state but not a good idea on the Federal Level. Perry has been making decisions for Terxas based on what is good for him nationally for at least the last couple of years. This is just another instance of that thought process.
I have no clue about that one. However, I'm glad he took this position. I don't want the state giving any type of recognition to the flag that symbolizes the Democrats' war on America which resulted in the deaths of over 600,000 Americans.
You can read the whole article by searching for it through google, then using that link.
Good grief, I guess they don’t teach history anymore, do they.
Did I say something that was incorrect?
Was the south run be democrats then? Yes. Did the Confederates launch an attack on an American base? Yes. Did over 600,000 people die as a result of that war? Yes.
If I misunderstood your comment, then I apologize.
-private, 10th Virginia Infantry
-sergeant, 49th Virginia Infantry (wounded 1st Manassas, wounded The Wilderness, captured Cedar Creek)
-private, 51st Virginia Infantry (died from disease 1863)
-private, 9th Virginia Heavy Artillery
Sic Sempre Tyrannis
Here’s where you are incorrect, the Democrats were pro states rights at the time, which happens to be the only issue that was transferred from the Democrat party to the Republican party eventually... The confederate soldiers were not involved in the politics of it. They were simply defending their homes. They weren’t some merry band of fighting democrats who went around waging war on anyone... And only about 1% of them even had family who owned slaves. So it had nothing to do with politics to most of those fighting, but everything to do with duty and honor.
You see, to many of the leaders, they weren’t waging war on an American base, they were defending against an invasion of a foreign nation....because they had already seceded.... Now, if you want to discuss the merits against secession, you may be on to something, but during that time period, the idea of the right of secession was a universal one....even the northern states recognized that right in the years prior when they, themselves, threatened to secede when legislation didn’t go as they wanted.... My point is that it is wrong to pin a motive on a group when history is clear that is not true...the confederates were not waging war on their own nation..., they were protecting from invasion and that led to war. If you read diaries of southerners and diaries of northerners at the time, you’ll see a huge communication gap between the two...not between governing officials, but regular people... Their understanding of the war and what it was about was completely different.