Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCANA modifies Confederate flag policy;Maurice Offers 'Free Lunch' to SCANA Employees
WLTX ^ | 8/21/02 | WLTX

Posted on 08/22/2002 12:18:01 PM PDT by PJeffQ

SCANA officials are clarifying their position on the Confederate flag, even as Maurice Bessinger fires another volley against the company's policies.

A press released issued by SCANA Wednesday says the company has never banned the Confederate flag, or issued a ruling telling employees not to eat at certain restaurants.

CEO Bill Timmerman says the company's Code of Conduct tries to prevent divisive symbols which may harass other employees. Timmerman says as long as it's meant as heritage it would be okay for an employee to display a Confederate emblem while at work.

He also says employees can eat at Maurice Bessinger restaurants--just not in a company vehicle. He says it's in response to Bessinger's pro-slavery views.

In response, Bessinger released a press release Wednesday saying all SCE&G employees, the energy company that's a subsidiary of SCANA, could eat for free at his stores if they showed up in a company vehicle. If they bring their company identification, they can eat at half price.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: bessinger; confederate; dixielist; flag; maurice; scana; sceg; southcarolina
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-96 last
To: stainlessbanner
Maurice was just a good ol' boy in South Carolina until the PC patrol went after him. .... He is a true American, no a pro-slavery racist, like the media paints him.

In other words, he is just another hypocritical media hype-artist out for a buck. Sort of a cross between PT Barnum & a Grand Wizard.

51 posted on 08/22/2002 6:30:45 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
Let me know when Maurice refuses service to Johnnie Cochran.
52 posted on 08/22/2002 6:33:38 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

Comment #53 Removed by Moderator

To: ravinson
So Lincoln could free the slaves in areas he had no de facto control over? but not in areas he controlled?
Sounds like a convenient way not to have many of his officers go home...
54 posted on 08/22/2002 6:43:29 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
Free Lunch if you eat in his restaurant while driving a SCANA vehicle... you should have read it better
55 posted on 08/22/2002 6:44:16 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
a Grand Wizard? Since when did Robert Byrd enter into the equation?
56 posted on 08/22/2002 6:45:21 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner

The Slave Market, by Gustave Boulanger [b.1824 - d.1888]

57 posted on 08/22/2002 6:46:28 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle

Black Slaveowners
Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860

58 posted on 08/22/2002 6:52:19 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
Any paintings from modern-day Sudan kicking around?



59 posted on 08/22/2002 6:55:37 PM PDT by who knows what evil?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
Very good. And don't forget the slaveowning Indian tribes, and the role played by Africans as suppliers.
60 posted on 08/22/2002 6:56:14 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
And I could mention the corrupting influence of the slaveowning colonies on British Politics in the late-18th, early 19th Century, including the trade laws created to subsidize them, that had the effect of losing the North American colonies.
61 posted on 08/22/2002 7:05:11 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
So Lincoln could free the slaves in areas he had no de facto control over? but not in areas he controlled? Sounds like a convenient way not to have many of his officers go home...

The Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves as the Union Army liberated areas previously under Confederate control. The slaves in many areas not covered by the EP were already physically freed when the Confederate slaveholders abandoned their plantations and moved south.

Most members of the Union Army strongly supported Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and voted for him in huge numbers in 1864 to prove it. They were also very appreciative of the enemy intelligence information supplied by the liberated negros.

62 posted on 08/22/2002 7:08:20 PM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
The election in 1864 wasnt a referendum on the EP...

and did you cut and paste that section from somewhere else? or do you always use the word negros or are you usually more PC? (negroes is the correct spelling)...
63 posted on 08/22/2002 7:10:17 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
I think you have trouble believing that slavery was real. It was destructive: physically, economically and psychologically; and to everyone faced with it.
64 posted on 08/22/2002 7:14:50 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
I know it was real...

and I know that liberals who are moral relativists on every other issue under the sun always point out the wrongness of slavery universally (where are they on the other issues they insist on considering the context)?

You didn't answer whether "negros" is a term you use in conversation... or whether you lifted that paragraph from an older document on the web?
65 posted on 08/22/2002 7:18:18 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
The election in 1864 wasnt a referendum on the EP...

No, by that time it was a referendum, in part, on the 13th Amendment. The amendment had been passed out of the Senate and had passed the House, but not by enough votes to be sent to the states. Lincoln ensured that the 13th Amendment was added to the Republican platform of 1864, ran in part on his support for it, and helped get enough Republican congressment elected in November to ensure that the amendment passed out of the House in January 1865.

66 posted on 08/22/2002 7:21:20 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
I don't doubt that small slaveowning families MAY have been "kinder and gentler" just as some Roman slaves (in the days when household needs were manufactured right at home) were far better off than many of their peasant neighbors. But the death rates on the sugar colonies are horrifying to anyone, and were certainly not a result of daily face-to-face interactions with slaves. Surely the larger the plantation, the greater the degradation.
67 posted on 08/22/2002 7:24:43 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
You apparently are putting words in my mouth... or attributing thoughts to me that I have not had...

68 posted on 08/22/2002 7:25:39 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
The New England ship owners made a good bit of money transporting slaves ; slaves who were captured and sold by their fellow Africans. It seems that black Africans (especially Christians)are still being enslaved today (by blacks practicing Mohammedism , mostly).

Perhaps Farrakhan and his fellow travelers should cast their efforts eastward ?

69 posted on 08/22/2002 7:28:03 PM PDT by hoosierham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
The Reconstruction era was clearly a time when the winds prevailed for black empowerment in the South. It was only when Republican politics became so corrupt that "bloody-shirt" politics lost its moral appeal, and the sincerity of many (certainly not all) "converted" rebels gained currency, that Northerners forgot about blacks in the South.
70 posted on 08/22/2002 7:29:32 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham
Not sure about the reference to Muslims enslaving Christians, but New England shipowners certainly "aided and abetted" the slave trade -- DESPITE their shame in it.
71 posted on 08/22/2002 7:32:40 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
Then, you do NOT support the notion that slavery was somehow "good for the negro."
72 posted on 08/22/2002 7:34:02 PM PDT by Sparticle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
I don't support slavery.

I find it hypocritical for the PC crowd that is on the bandwagon of moral relativism and "consider the context" to single out slavery as one case to be absolutist...
73 posted on 08/22/2002 7:35:33 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
The election in 1864 wasnt a referendum on the EP...

Perhaps not entirely, but it certainly was a referendum on the way Lincoln had been managing the war, and the EP was viciously attacked by the Democrats.

and did you cut and paste that section from somewhere else? or do you always use the word negros or are you usually more PC? (negroes is the correct spelling)...

Sorry for the typo, but my comments are my own, and I use the word "negro" because that's what blacks were called in the 1860's.

74 posted on 08/22/2002 7:57:44 PM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: RikaStrom
How goes the battle?

We're winning. The people are waking up.

75 posted on 08/22/2002 9:42:55 PM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
Our conversation is in 2002...
not 1860... do you not see the irony in your usage of the term negro in this argument?
76 posted on 08/22/2002 10:09:40 PM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
Our conversation is in 2002... not 1860... do you not see the irony in your usage of the term negro in this argument?

No.

77 posted on 08/22/2002 11:59:07 PM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster; billbears; stainlessbanner; Twodees; Colt .45
Shuckmaster, have you seen this one yet?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
DISPLAY OF BATTLE FLAGS OF THE CONFEDERACY
119TH NATIONAL ENCAMPMENT OF THE
SONS OF UNION VETERANS OF THE CIVIL WAR
LANSING, MICHIGAN AUGUST 19, 2000

A resolution in support of the display of the Confederate Battle Flag.

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, condemn the use of the confederate battle flag, as well as the flag of the United States, by any and all hate groups; and

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, support the flying of the Confederate battle flag as a historical piece of this nation's history; and

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, oppose the removal of any Confederate monuments or markers to those gallant soldiers in the former Confederate States, and strongly oppose the removal of ANY reminders of this nation's bloodiest war on the grounds of it being "politically correct;" and

WHEREAS, we, as the descendants of Union soldiers and sailors who as members of the Grand Army of the Republic met in joint reunions with the Confederate veterans under both flags in those bonds of Fraternal Friendship, pledge our support and admiration for those gallant soldiers and of their respective flags;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War in 119th Annual National Encampment, hereby adopt this resolution.

Dated in Lansing, Michigan,
on this nineteenth day of August,
in the year of our Lord Two thousand.

78 posted on 08/23/2002 4:40:56 AM PDT by CWRWinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: **South_Carolina
SC Bump
79 posted on 08/23/2002 6:24:16 AM PDT by PJeffQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
Maurice is the man! GO MAURICE!!!!!!
80 posted on 08/23/2002 7:18:59 AM PDT by Scholastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
if ALL southrons KNEW what our sacred flag of dixie REALLY means, we southrons would be marching to the sound of the freedom drums again!

the CSA flag= LIBERTY for ALL southrons.

free dixie,sw

81 posted on 08/23/2002 9:37:51 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: PJeffQ
EXACTLY!

for our hero-martyrs & the CSA's sacred flag,sw

82 posted on 08/23/2002 9:39:27 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PistolPaknMama
WELL SAID!

for a FREE dixie,sw

83 posted on 08/23/2002 9:41:34 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: CWRWinger
The policy makers at Walmart are greedy PC, commie, pinko scum.

Yes they are. Did you know that Hillary Clinton was once on the WalMart board?

84 posted on 08/23/2002 2:30:12 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
Wht do you insist on refighting the war everytime anyone mentions the Confederacy? There's something wrong with you, boy.
85 posted on 08/23/2002 2:31:52 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
Wht do you insist on refighting the war...

No reason to refight it -- the freedom fighters won.

86 posted on 08/23/2002 3:28:33 PM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
Hillary Clinton was once on the WalMart board?

No, but I had heard the Klintons were involved in helping WalMart in exchange for use of WalMart's distribution system for government purposes which I cannot verify.

87 posted on 08/23/2002 4:51:13 PM PDT by CWRWinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
walt,N-S & rav are TRUE BELIEVERS in the correctness and morality of the great BLOODSPILLER/TYRANT/WAR CRIMINAL "Abe the first" of the USA. NOTHING will open their eyes to the TRUTH;NOTHING!

they are even foolish & blind enough to believe that our ancestors were fighting for something other than LIBERTY for the southland. can you imagine a literate person that cannot figure that out?

free dixie NOW,sw

88 posted on 08/24/2002 9:22:35 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
the majority of slaves sent to the western hemisphere were prisoners of war OR war booty as a result of the tribal wars in 18th & 19th century Africa.

those who were NOT sold into slavery were KILLED;therefore, perhaps "slavery was good for the negro" who was NOT KILLED?

while slavery was a hideous evil, it certainly would beat stoning,crucifixion,beheading or being beaten to death with sticks.

free dixie,sw

89 posted on 08/24/2002 9:34:30 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Sparticle
NOBODY has trouble realizing what slavery was.

what damnyankees, damnfools & useful idiots can't figure out is that chattal slavery was NOT a major cause of the WBTS; rather, FREEDOM for dixie WAS/IS the goal of southrons.

the TRUE CAUSE is STILL about LIBERTY from the hatefilled, arrogant, hateful, racist,anti-semitic, socialist,statist,imperialist DAMNYANKEES! nothing more, nothing less.

free the south,sw

90 posted on 08/24/2002 9:39:44 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
Seek help, boy. You'll be biting people next.
91 posted on 08/24/2002 10:19:04 AM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
They're socialists. Ravingon even tried to tell me that Freddy Douglass was a "libertarian". Anybody who buys the BS that bunch has swallowed is a candidate for a rubber room.
92 posted on 08/24/2002 10:21:32 AM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
NOPE. they are NOT nuts.

sadly, i have come to the belief that they are PROPAGANDISTS, whose only mission in life is covering up the truth and DECEIVING the naive.

free the southland,sw

93 posted on 08/24/2002 10:27:50 AM PDT by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
Seek help, boy. You'll be biting people next.

I'm doing just fine without any help, and I'd shoot some Confederates anytime but I wouldn't want to bite them for fear of catching the insidious disease that so disables their minds that they equate slaveholding with freedom.

94 posted on 08/24/2002 2:17:11 PM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
and I'd shoot some Confederates anytime

With what? Liberals are scared of guns. Don't go around expressing the desire to shoot people or you'll be among the banned.

95 posted on 08/25/2002 5:26:20 AM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ravinson
I'd shoot some Confederates anytime

Have you lost it?! Paranoia.

96 posted on 08/25/2002 7:35:06 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-96 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson