Posted on 09/30/2010 3:55:02 AM PDT by golux
The University of Mississippi has terminated its mascot, "Colonel Reb." The mascot, an archetypal Southern gentleman with a hat, cane, and a little bow-tie, is of course racist.
Affable, bearded and jaunty, with a bright costume that cleverly foiled his dark history on the plantation, Col. Reb, when he was alive, looked rather like that other infamous slave-driver, Col. Sanders, whose inscrutable and permanent smile these days (in markets where he still shows his face) offers only a faint clue as to the fortunes he's made in his long, post-war masquerade as a peddler of fried chicken.
"We just want it to be over," said one Mississippi student on the subject of Col. Reb's execution.
Watch your back, Sanders.
There is of course nothing sacred about a football mascot or a corporate brand, and nothing particularly sad about the disappearance of either one, except for the fact that now there is nothing left of Southern symbolism to erase.
(SNIP)
And now we learn that what legions of Americans consider to be a transcendent symbol of extraordinary military leadership and valor, states' rights, indefatigable heroism, enduring pride and strength in the face of terrible odds and calamitous defeat – the Confederate battle flag – is now officially deemed a symbol of hate by the U.S. armed forces. Prospective members of all branches of the armed forces who happen to have a "Confederate flag" tattoo are automatically rejected.
(SNIP)
When they once again encounter their ancestors, which I believe they will, how will so many Americans account for their feeble treachery?
Maybe, like the Mississippi student, they will say: "We just wanted it to be over."
I wonder what some of those old heroes might say in reply....
(SNIP)
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
My,my, but you are a drama llama. Forget your anti-depression meds again today?
I have absolutely no idea what that means, but, hell, I'll play:
Is your defense of obama's socialist utopia worth my life?
That's a simple question. Answer it, troll!
lol
you don't know jack about the South...just color and resentment
punishing the south forever will not bring the black man up the ladder
nosiree, keep dreaming
he got to do it for hisself
You didn’t answer the question there fore I won’t answer yours.
Again is my left worth defending the dead confederacy?
The second of course.
“My son went into a convenience store the other day wearing a cap with a Tennessee state flag on the front of it, and the black clerk told him it was racist and to take it off or leave the store.”
Your son should have called the clerk ignorant.
i reckon JR being in Fresno and all with Dixie long off his radar tolerates you and the rest of the klavern as a counterweight to unrepentant southerners...an animal he just doesn't know much about...no fault of his own...he and the Kali freepers have other issues clear and pressing
i could be wrong
and most of you guys (90%) cloak yourselves and several of you have over the years been caught with multiple usernames, acting as plants to shame the forum, been actual liberals like Whiskey Papa or worse...note it took years for the PTB here to ban Wlat when we all knew he was a lefty....another group planting racist crap here but posing as anti southern posters was a moderate black GOP gang from Maryland...and so it goes. To my knowledge none of the southern posters here belong to race based groups like some on the opposing side have been found to be in.
So when one makes claims about who they are when nearly all the other agitators here don't give any personal info does make you a target to check your veracity
which in your case was found ...well...suspect....
i’m not in this fight so much as some but the pattern is the same...nearly all race baiters here are some sort of minority themselves or married to one and have their own anti white bigotry or they are colluding agitators and none are culture war conservatives
this divide goes way past just Civil War arguments
I'm pretty open who I am here and scores know me personally, if one does that it helps to be honest
the crusade to destroy southern heritage is my enemy...so good to know who they are doncha think and if folks like you roll over for that then it's a short step to all sorts of other cultural rollovers which are already making it hard to deal with so many serious issues like black crime and Islamization and so forth
The south and Christopher Columbus are just the beginning in this war...brought to us from those who think America is just one big race crime. Fact is folks like ya'll can't handle objective candid truth about slavery, race and whatnot...it's too disturbing.
have a nice day
Anything coming from you is revisionist Southron myth, aka fantasy or fairy tales.
Do your worst, bluebelly.
With every post you make it seems like.
In other words it's a ridiculous question not worth an answer since the odds of someone like you getting off their backside and actually seceding are somewhere between zilch point shit and none.
So, based on your above statement, if the Southern states leave yours and obama's socialist utopia, we will gain your everlasting admiration?
Again, actually do something first and then ask me the question.
And for the record, right or wrong, agree or disagree, I will always have a certain level of respect for someone who has the courage to act on their convictions as opposed to those who do nothing but sit on their duff and talk about it.
I see it quite as the opposite then you. It is those that defend the confederate democrats who are really all from the same nest and are not conservative at all. We have even had multiple threads here in the past couple days were those defending the confederates were bashing conservatism and outright admitting to be libertarians.
And in my opinion the confederate democrats were not conservative as well but were libertarian or even more libertine in their ideology. They obviously had no problem being against the Constitution being that wanted to secede from it and usurp the power delegated in the Constitution to the United States. This is not much different than many radical left-wing groups who call for revolution.
Shortly after the civil war the confederate veterans formed a new political party called the People party which was overtly socialist in nature and which then was absorbed by the confederate rebel democrat party. This of course then lead us to the progressive democrats and a continued disdain for the Constitution and a continued rebel mentality. Both the confederate democrats and the progressive democrats were known to operate through terrorist means with groups such as the KKK.
Even during the Marxist counter culture of the sixties libertarians marched side by side with Marists with the rebel spirit against the United States. The libertarians also side with the Marxist on many issues such as perversion rights (or sexual liberation) and terrorists rights such as Ron Paul does very vocally.
As I said I see it as the opposite of you. It is the confederate rebel mentality that is not conservative and that seems to align itself with the progressive Marxist democrats all of the time.
well you got that part correct
Yes, let's explore that letter shall we? Lee continued: "I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy. This influence though slow, is sure. The doctrines & miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years, to Convert but a small part of the human race, & even among Christian nations, what gross errors still exist! While we see the Course of the final abolition of human Slavery is onward, & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power, we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who sees the end; who Chooses to work by slow influences; & with whom two thousand years are but as a Single day.
Better off in slavery? Slavery was merely a 'painful discipline' that they were undergoing that must be good for them since it was preparing them for 'better things'? And if it lasted another 2000 years then that was alright with Lee since it was in the hands of God and man should not interfere.
Does that sounds like a man who believed slavery was "a violation of Natural Law" to you? It sounds like someone whose opposition to slavery was tepid at best and non-existent at worst.
And much later...
In full post rebellion revisionist bloom. But let's see what Lee was saying about slavery in January 1865, mere months before he surrendered:
"Considering the relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and an enlightened public sentiment, as the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country, I would deprecate any sudden disturbance of that relation unless it be necessary to avert a greater calamity to both. I should therefore prefer to rely upon our white population to preserve the ratio between our forces and those of the enemy, which experience has shown to be safe. But in view of the preparations of our enemies, it is our duty to provide for continued war and not for a battle or a campaign, and I fear that we cannot accomplish this without overtaxing the capacity of our white population."
Calling slavery "the best that can exist between the white and black races" does not sound like someone who rejoiced at its end.
There’s that Pharisaical Yankee sanctimony bubbling up again. After the war was over, do you recall which Union states welcomed the newly freed slaves? Hint: There weren’t any. Every northern state without exception rushed to enact laws inhibiting the settlement of blacks.
Incorrect but regardless, look how the Southern states treated their newly freed citizens? Every one passed black laws designed to return the freed blacks to a condition as closely resembling slavery as possible.
Do you not know the difference between voluntary colonization, which Lincoln supported, and forced deportation, which was claimed? Lincoln supported colonization, nobody is disputing that. Many people did. Robert Lee paid passage to Liberia for some of his former slaves in the 1840's or 50'. That is a far cry from rounding them up, forcing them on ships and sending them back the same way their ancestors got here. As was claimed Lincoln advocated.
There are many other examples of Lincoln's attitudes towards blacks. Although he abhorred slavery as an institution, the idea that Lincoln was some champion of equal rights is a joke.
Is it? This is from one of his 1858 debates with Stephen Douglas:
"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the 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. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence-the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects-certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."
I would defy you to present a quote from a single Southern leader prior to the rebellion who would go on record as saying blacks deserved any rights at all, much less place them on the same level as a white man. Two years before this, a Southern Chief Justice of the Supreme Court had ruled that a black man had no rights period and were not and could never be citizens. Two years later here's Lincoln saying they have the same basic, God-given rights as a white man. What Southerner was out there agreeing with him?
A badge of honor so far as I'm concerned.
I always knew you were a damn libtard!!!
BAN HIM!!!!!!!
How do you support that claim? Because, if indeed you can, it's quite possible that you can get me permabanned from FR.
As I said in a previous post, do your worst, bluebelly.
Get you banned? Perish the thought! What would I do for entertainment?
I think its the north that wants to keep fighting the Civil War. They aren't content with just winning.
Because the store clerk just had to be a "Yankee"? Really, it sounds like that's an internal Southern matter. Some Southerners (mostly African-American) aren't so crazy about the Confederate flag (or anything that looks like it to them), so don't saddle Northerners with that.
And how do you come to the conclusion that "its the north that wants to keep fighting the Civil War." If enough people start walking around with Mexican or German or Japanese or Soviet flags on their clothing, the rest of us are going to wonder what's going on and what's wrong with you. If you're the one's wearing those symbols on your clothing, you're the one's who can't put the past behind you.
Thanks for the background info. that’s interesting!
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.