# Flag Poll - Confederate Flag - Racist?



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

bobcat_fisherman said:


> Can anyone post a poll? I'm curious to see the numbers of who thinks its racist and who doesn't.


Okie dokie, here ya go.


----------



## ChuChu (Jan 23, 2010)

IMO...the flag itself is not racist. But the way some use it is racist.


----------



## sweenyite (Feb 22, 2009)

No... but like anything else, it will be used as such by some.


----------



## On Time Too (Dec 2, 2014)

It was not "racist" until about 20 years ago or so when some white supremecy groups adopted it. Think about it. It could NEVER HAVE been used in so many government places had the history been any other way!!


----------



## fastpitch (Oct 15, 2004)

The American Flag flew for approx 90 years before the Confederate Flag ever existed and slavery was outlawed. Is it racist?


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

simple minded people need something to blame

it is not racist


----------



## OnedayScratch (May 23, 2012)

My garage is racist. I'm not...


----------



## ShadMan (May 21, 2004)

Most whites from the South will say no.
Most blacks will say yes.
All Yankees will say yes. 

Does this really warrant a poll on a forum primarily composed of whites from the South?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

ShadMan said:


> Most whites from the South will say no.
> Most blacks will say yes.
> All Yankees will say yes.
> 
> Does this really warrant a poll on a forum primarily composed of whites from the South?


Bingo


----------



## five star (Sep 15, 2014)

Mississippi state flag.


----------



## teeroy (Oct 1, 2009)

I see 8 people are clueless


----------



## tx.fishead (Jun 4, 2005)

You know what the results of this pole SHOULD be, but some people choose to be offended by nearly anything. I would like someone who says it is racist to please explain to my dumazz.....how you came to that conclusion (and don't pull that yankee BS on me, I was born in Michigan)


----------



## ole blueduck (Dec 6, 2013)

Life is racist .


----------



## driftfish20 (May 13, 2006)

Can't we all just get along? Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jaysand247 (Aug 19, 2012)

In my opinion its not racist . But they can be offended by the flag as long as I can be offended by affirmative action .


----------



## SolarScreenGuy (Aug 15, 2005)

This flag is not racist. It is patriotic. This represents the willingness to stand up for states rights. The Feds have no bidness in the States bidness per the Constitution and that's why we had the Civil War. The feds will own us all, lock, stock and barrel if we do not insist on Constitutional Law!

Solar Screens, exterior Roll Down Shades, Plantation Shutters
Patio Cover Construction & Screen Enclosures
call Mike 713-446-3249

www.solarscreenguys.com


----------



## BullyARed (Jun 19, 2010)

OnedayScratch said:


> My garage is racist. I'm not...


Texas flag pointed the wrong way! So, you are Texist!


----------



## OnedayScratch (May 23, 2012)

BullyARed said:


> Texas flag pointed the wrong way! So, you are Texist!


It's like that for my fans....ya know, when the door is open and the ROCK starts! :dance: :shamrock: :dance:


----------



## BBCAT (Feb 2, 2010)

I don't think it's racist. But this a lost cause. In the current political environment it popular to appease the loud minority.


----------



## muney pit (Mar 24, 2014)

BBCAT said:


> I don't think it's racist. But this a lost cause. In the current political environment it popular to appease the loud minority.


Yep.


----------



## MB (Mar 6, 2006)

I find it odd that so many will so easily abandon their heritage for thoses who won't.

These same people that so easily abandon their heritage won't even fight for any digitny earned by thoses they are descendants of who had the courage not only to fight but to give their lives to defend the 10th ammendant of the United States.

While Isis is litteratly murdering people in horrible ways, taking over large areas of land in several differant country's overseas and destroying these peoples historical landmarks during a war of annihiliation where no one can stoped them without putting themselves at high risk of being killed ... Here in America it appears our elected officials have just laid down their guns and ran away. The people that elected them don't know what to do. The liberal media appears to have total control over the content and opinion of the brainwashed.

Remember this " The 4th of July is next " ... It's on their hit list. You will be called a Rasist for supporting the Anerican flag soon and then all our History will be blown up just like Isis is doing oversees. Common core will reprogram your children to believe those who faught against England for liberty were all Rasist slave owners and bad people we should forget them and condem all who think they were good including your parents and grang parents.

Wake up people before it's to late.

*MB*


----------



## rem44mag (Mar 17, 2010)

MB said:


> I find it odd that so many will so easily abandon their heritage for thoses who won't.
> 
> These same people that so easily abandon their heritage won't even fight for any digitny earned by thoses they are descendants of who had the courage not only to fight but to give their lives to defend the 10th ammendant of the United States.
> 
> ...


 Well said
Its not about racism Its about control over the people 
http://www.examiner.com/article/nat...rrakhan-we-need-to-put-the-american-flag-down


----------



## Bozo (Jun 16, 2004)

I don't want a Mexican or Mexican pride flag flying at any state capitol. Like it or not, the battle flag is synonymous with the Confederate States of America flag or a CSA pride flag. The CSA is a foreign country to the United States of America and should not be treated or given honor any more than the Mexican, French, British, Canadian or any other foreign countries flag would have here.


----------



## saltwatersensations (Aug 30, 2004)

Are white bed sheets racist?


----------



## mstrelectricman (Jul 10, 2009)

saltwatersensations said:


> Are white bed sheets racist?


Depends on how you wear em.


----------



## chunker59 (Jul 20, 2011)

Nobody cares if you guys want to fly that flag, they just don't want it flying over the state capitol building. Why is that so hard for some of y'all to understand?


----------



## g_mo (Jun 27, 2005)

The flag is no more racist, than a gun or knife is a weapon. It's all how it's used. I always chuckle when I pull into a certain county park and there is a sign that reads 'no weapons'. I think to myself, "well if I were to intentionally run someone over with the truck I'm entering the park in, then it's a weapon. Or if I were to strangle someone with the belt I'm wearing, then it's a weapon." The flag painted atop the General Lee is not racist, a gun in a display case that's never had a round chambered is not a weapon, a knife that's never been unsheathed is not a weapon. The list goes on and on.


----------



## mstrelectricman (Jul 10, 2009)

All I am paying attention to right now is that over 90% of us have a brain. The rest have been drinkin the koolaide!:rotfl:


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

chunker59 said:


> Nobody cares if you guys want to fly that flag, they just don't want it flying over the state capitol building. Why is that so hard for some of y'all to understand?


Then put it to a vote of the people who live there. The mob rule that has taken over this nation is revolting and not what this country is supposed to be about. The whole country seems to have lost its collective mind and common sense has died.


----------



## finkikin (Jul 8, 2011)

Not racist.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Is it racist? 
Depends on the intention of those that fly it. Some no, but for others obviously, yes. 

Is it a symbol of a divided country? Yes.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

Bozo said:


> I don't want a Mexican or Mexican pride flag flying at any state capitol. Like it or not, the battle flag is synonymous with the Confederate States of America flag or a CSA pride flag. The CSA is a foreign country to the United States of America and should not be treated or given honor any more than the Mexican, French, British, Canadian or any other foreign countries flag would have here.


 Under that logic, looks like we're going to have to take down the Texas flag too...


----------



## TrueblueTexican (Aug 29, 2005)

*Its a battle flag for gosh sakes*

Carried into a smoky loud fight between the aggression of the FEDERAL Gubmint and the secessionist south - carried so men on the line didn't over run their positions and get shot early --

Lay it on the ground and watch the blood run out from under it, listen to the malice as brother murdered brother, son shot his father, and the Feds were opposed - it was carried as an identity - not as a symbol of racism - its part of MY FAMILY HISTORY. I have pictures of great ,great , great uncles standing in full Confederate Uniforms on the courthouse steps of Pittsburgh Texas, with the battle flag and the Stars and Bars flying - I am SO TIRED of all this revisionist CRAPOLA fomented by the Gimmedat Nation !!!

First of all, this flag is NOT the "Confederate Flag." It is the "Battle Flag of Northern Virginia." This design, however, is the one most synonymous with the term, and the one used in various forms on many of the other flags that were flown by the Confederate States. It is also the one most hated by those who are completely and totally ignorant of what it stands for.

So take another look at the flag and answer this very simple question : Do you see a big letter "X" anywhere on the flag? The X is formed by the big, blue bands which are outlined with white trim.

Now take another look at the flag. On this big "X" there are thirteen white stars. Do you know what these thirteen stars represent? They represent the thirteen original, united colonies from which the United States began. Each one of these colonies had its own system of self government... until the start of 'northern aggression' when the northern states began trying to usurp authority over the southern states. This was the main cause of the Civil War.

Point of note : The thirteen stars on this flag appear to lie on the blue X... but in reality, the X lies on the stars, allowing them to shine through.

Now, I'd like to ask you a simple question : Do you remember from your grade-school years how the teachers would sometimes ask you to circle the right answers or picture on a work page, or to put an X on a picture or word or other item that didn't belong in a group? That is the same concept this flag is designed around; the stars are laid out in the pattern of an X, and the blue bands are put on the thirteen stars to show that the southern states no longer wanted to be a part of the union with the northern states. In simpler terms, the message of flag's design is simply this... CROSS US OUT of your Union! The southern states withdrew from the union in a movement called "secession," which led to the Civil War.

That is the only message this flag is sending!

That is all there is to it!


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

g_mo said:


> The flag is no more racist, than a gun or knife is a weapon. It's all how it's used. I always chuckle when I pull into a certain county park and there is a sign that reads 'no weapons'. I think to myself, "well if I were to intentionally run someone over with the truck I'm entering the park in, then it's a weapon. Or if I were to strangle someone with the belt I'm wearing, then it's a weapon." The flag painted atop the General Lee is not racist, a gun in a display case that's never had a round chambered is not a weapon, a knife that's never been unsheathed is not a weapon. The list goes on and on.


Say whaaaaaat? 
A gun or knife isn't a weapon? You should research the definition of weapon a little further. And when you do, be honest, even wildlife we take are considered "victims".
You would be wise to keep weapons (guns/knives) out of this silly argument. Because as it stands, if they agree to the relation you've provided above, then the BFoT would be considered a weapon of racism.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

This is just part of the concerted effort to wipe any mention of the concept that this country was founded as a relatively loose union of individual states, and operated like that up until after the civil war: The entire idea that states have any individual identity at all is anathema to the all-powerful federal government, who is of course here to help.


----------



## Bruce J (Jun 27, 2004)

If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


----------



## speckle-catcher (May 20, 2004)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


that's your opinion.

it's wrong, but it's your opinion.


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

X2 Bruce J. Amazing the amount of intellectual dishonesty that surrounds this subject. The south didn't succeed over slavery. LMFAO!


----------



## MikeV (Jun 5, 2006)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


It is amazing there are people as smart as you are who know the intent of so many people, almost all of whom you do not know at all. Did you learn that in school or did they cover that in one of obama's books?


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


 Better not dig too deeply into the history of the United States, either. You'll probably just run away in horror at the number of people that we've wronged over the years...

As long as we're just oversimplifying issues, that is..


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

bjones2571 said:


> X2 Bruce J. Amazing the amount of intellectual dishonesty that surrounds this subject. The south didn't succeed over slavery. LMFAO!


 They didn't succeed at all. They lost the war, remember?

Meanwhile, you should really actually look into some history as to just why they did decide to secede.. The "only slavery" narrative pretty much falls apart the more you look into it.


----------



## whiskey1 (May 8, 2014)

bjones2571 said:


> X2 Bruce J. Amazing the amount of intellectual dishonesty that surrounds this subject. The south didn't succeed over slavery. LMFAO!


You're only amazed because of your own lack of intelligence regarding the history of the flag.


----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.



Educate yourself. History books, the media, the school systems, etc abound in falsehoods and inaccuracies of Confederate/Southern history.




> _*MYTH*_ - *The War of 1861 - 1865 was fought over slavery.*
> _*FACT*_ - *Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, "Why not let the South go in peace?" To which he replied, "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?" Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.
> 
> *​
> ...


*
*


----------



## Ox Eye (Dec 17, 2007)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


That's ignorance of the facts talking. The civil war had nothing to do with slavery. It was about trade parity. Southern states were largely agrarian , while the Northern states were mostly into manufacturing. And, although the Industrial Revolution has come to the states, it began in Europe and those countries were miles ahead of the US in quality machinery. For that reason the southern states were trading their products for European products. Northern states didn't like that, so the feds tried forcing the Southern States to buy from Northern states by levying ridiculously high import and export tariffs. This went on for some time, even though the Southern states complained. Finally reaching their limit, they seceded. The war between the states was launched by the North for no other reason than the almighty dollar. They wanted it. The firing on Ft. Sumpter was just an excuse. The Civil war was two years running before any talk of "freeing the slaves" was mentioned. And the Emancipation Proclimation only effected the South. The war was over and done with before any slaves were freed in the North.

Not for nothing was the war between the states called the War of Aggression in the South. That's what it was. And the Confederate Flag is respected because it represents State's Rights and the people who fought for them. Period!


----------



## Ox Eye (Dec 17, 2007)

An added thought: Mostly large land owners and the well-to-do had slaves. The average joe could not afford them. But, as with most wars it was the average joe that fought on the battlefields. Only the ill informed would believe the average joes would willingly lay down their lives for no other reason than protecting the rich man's property. It was for something a tad more personal and important.


----------



## reload56 (Apr 6, 2012)

w_r_ranch said:


> Educate yourself. History books, the media, the school systems, etc abound in falsehoods and inaccuracies of Confederate/Southern history.
> 
> 
> [/FONT][/B][/SIZE][/FONT]


These "facts" are highly misleading and take small tidbits of info and blow them up to appear to be more convincing. Anyone who has been paying attention the last 40 years can see the confederate flag has become a symbol of racism.


----------



## Wygans (Jan 22, 2014)




----------



## Bruce J (Jun 27, 2004)

Ox Eye said:


> ...The civil war had nothing to do with slavery...


Oh, okay. You go with that.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

rulen.com provides almost no citations for the claims posted. You can't find the text, or even the date, of the Lincoln address to the "Virginia Compromise Delegation" anywhere considered even remotely historically accurate. It's like one site made the claim and others keep repeating it citing each other. 

Why even post such drivel. Really, does anyone actually believe this garbage? Is this what is considered "educating" yourself? Sad that some try to pass this off as fact. Almost as sad as the fools that believe it. 

Do people actually put faith into websites that provide no proof of their claims? Its like turning to the nationalreport.com for "facts". Pathetic.

Can't say I'm surprised. Heck, this garbage is getting to be the norm around here. I dare say facts have lost out to willful ignorance for a few of the regulars. This stuff is getting ridiculous.


----------



## Mr. Saltwater (Oct 5, 2012)

A long but very informative read on what the "Civil War" was really about.

http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/southernside.htm


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

reload56 said:


> These "facts" are highly misleading and take small tidbits of info and blow them up to appear to be more convincing. Anyone who has been paying attention the last 40 years can see the confederate flag has become a symbol of racism.


Sorry, but we can't just fold up our history and pack it away because some bunch of yahoos appropriate one of the symbols of that history. Under the same auspices, you'd need to do away with the American flag as well:










It's also well represented at anti-immigration rallies (thus called racist), Washington Redskins games (thus called racist), the Republican National Convention (thus called racist), and the Obama White House (thus certainly racist)... Willing to give it up because it has been misappropriated by some for their own twisted views? Me neither...


----------



## Gemini8 (Jun 29, 2013)

dwilliams35 said:


> Sorry, but we can't just fold up our history and pack it away because some bunch of yahoos appropriate one of the symbols of that history. Under the same auspices, you'd need to do away with the American flag as well:
> 
> It's also well represented at anti-immigration rallies (thus called *racist*), Washington Redskins games (thus called *racist*), the Republican National Convention (thus called *racist*), and the Obama White House (thus certainly *racist*)... Willing to give it up because it has been misappropriated by some for their own twisted views? Me neither...


 Hey if "they're" going to play the game, I guess that salty goodness that holds such delightful pleasures of assorted cheeses, spreads & dips otherwise known as a cracker will have to be renamed to something more politically appropriate such as a soda wafer. Heaven forbid we offend someone with the name or <gasp> have a picture of one on the box.

I have no words for the madness that our nation is in. History cannot be erased. People who are trying to do this are just as evil as that four initial terrorist group ....smdh


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

Time to take down the American flag and all crosses since the KKK uses them to promote racial dissension and hatred. They obviously stand for hatred and racism.


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

You guys are unbelievable. How about you go to the horse's mouth for why the south seceded. I'd highlight the relevant parts but I'm on my phone. Give it a read and tell me there's nothing about slavery in there.
DECLARATION OF THE IMMEDIATE CAUSES WHICH INDUCE AND JUSTIFY THE SECESSION OF SOUTH CAROLINA FROM THE FEDERAL UNION.

The People of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D. 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.

And now the State of South Carolina having resumed her separate and equal place among nations, deems it due to herself, to the remaining United States of America, and to the nations of the world, that she should declare the immediate causes which have led to this act.

In the year 1765, that portion of the British Empire embracing Great Britain, undertook to make laws for the government of that portion composed of the thirteen American Colonies. A struggle for the right of self-government ensued, which resulted, on the 4th of July, 1776, in a Declaration, by the Colonies, â€œthat they are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; and that, as free and independent States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.â€

They further solemnly declared that whenever any â€œform of government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government.â€ Deeming the Government of Great Britain to have become destructive of these ends, they declared that the Colonies â€œare absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.â€

In pursuance of this Declaration of Independence, each of the thirteen States proceeded to exercise its separate sovereignty; adopted for itself a Constitution, and appointed officers for the administration of government in all its departments â€” Legislative, Executive and Judicial. For purposes of defense, they united their arms and their counsels; and, in 1778, they entered into a League known as the Articles of Confederation, whereby they agreed to entrust the administration of their external relations to a common agent, known as the Congress of the United States, expressly declaring in the first article, â€œthat each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right which is not, by this Confederation, expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled.â€

Under this Confederation the War of the Revolution was carried on, and on the 3d September, 1783, the contest ended, and a definite Treaty was signed by Great Britain, in which she acknowledged the Independence of the Colonies in the following terms:

â€œArticle 1.â€“ His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz: New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be FREE, SOVEREIGN AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that he treats with them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.â€

Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: the right of a State to govern itself; and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted. And concurrent with the establishment of these principles, was the fact, that each Colony became and was recognized by the mother Country as a FREE, SOVEREIGN AND INDEPENDENT STATE.

In 1787, Deputies were appointed by the States to revise the Articles of Confederation, and on 17th September, 1787, these Deputies recommended, for the adoption of the states, the Articles of Union, known as the Constitution of the United States.

The parties to whom this Constitution was submitted, were the several sovereign States; they were to agree or disagree, and when nine of them agreed, the compact was to take effect among those concurring; and the General Government, as the common agent, was then invested with their authority.

If only nine of the thirteen States had concurred, the other four would have remained as they then were â€” separate, sovereign States, independent of any of the provisions of the Constitution. In fact, two of the States did not accede to the Constitution until long after it had gone into operation among the other eleven; and during that interval, they each exercised the functions of an independent nation.

By this Constitution, certain duties were imposed upon the several States, and the exercise of certain of their powers was restrained, which necessarily implied their continued existence as sovereign States. But, to remove all doubt, an amendment was added, which declared that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. On 23d May, 1788, South Carolina, by a Convention of her people, passed an Ordinance assenting to this Constitution, and afterwards altered her own Constitution, to conform herself to the obligations she had undertaken.

Thus was established, by compact between the States, a Government, with defined objects and powers, limited to the express words of the grant. This limitation left the whole remaining mass of power subject to the clause reserving it to the States or to the people, and rendered unnecessary any specification of reserved rights.

We hold that the Government thus established is subject to the two great principles asserted in the Declaration of Independence; and we hold further, that the mode of its formation subjects it to a third fundamental principle, namely: the law of compact. We maintain that in every compact between two or more parties the obligation is mutual; that the failure of one of the contracting parties, to perform a material part of the agreement, entirely releases the obligation of the other; and that where no arbiter is provided, each party is remitted to his own judgment to determine the fact of failure, with all its consequences.

In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert, that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused for years past to fulfil their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its 4th Article, provides as follows:

â€œNo person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.â€

This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio river.

The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the general government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these states the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the state government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constitutional compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which this Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be â€œto form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.â€

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assumed the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of Slavery; they have permitted the open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the Common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the Common Government, because he has declared that that â€œGovernment cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,â€ and that the public mind must rest in the belief that Slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the subversion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons, who, by the Supreme Law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its peace and safety.

On the 4th March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced, that the South shall be excluded from the common Territory; that the Judicial Tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

The Guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.

Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error, with the sanctions of a more erroneous religious belief.

We, therefore, the people of South Carolina, by our delegates, in Convention assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, have solemnly declared that the union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the nations of the world, as a separate and independent State; with full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

That last one was kind of long, so how about an excerpt:

Speech of 3/21/1861 by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederacy. ..

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. *The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the ***** in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.* Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the â€œrock upon which the old Union would split.â€ He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. *Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error.* It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the â€œstorm came and the wind blew.â€

*Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the ***** is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. *This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the ***** is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side, complete throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly planted; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enlightened world.


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

An excerpt from Jefferson Davis' Farewell speech on floor of US Senate 

It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi to her present decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man was bornâ€”to use the language of Mr. Jeffersonâ€”booted and spurred to ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equalâ€”meaning the men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to families, but that all stations were equally within the grasp of each member of the body politic. These were the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for which they made their declaration; these were the ends to which their enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it that among the items of arraignment made against George III was that he endeavored to do just what the North has been endeavoring of late to do â€“ to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration announced that the ******* were free and equal, how was the Prince to be arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the colonies to sever their connection with the mother country? When our Constitution was formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for there we find provision made for that very class of persons as property; they were not put upon the footing of equality with white menâ€”not even upon that of paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste, only to be represented in the numerical proportion of three-fifths.

Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when you deny them, and when you deny us the right to withdraw from a Government which thus perverted threatens to be destructive of our rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our independence, and take the hazard. This is done, not in hostility to others; not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own pecuniary benefit, but from the high and solemn motive of defending and protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our duty to transmit unshorn to our children.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Absolutely nothing. It was NOT seen as a sign of racism until after WWII when the KKK started using it and it became associated with the idiots in the KKK....which are a disgrace to white people with even a smidgen of intelligence. The people up North felt the same way about "******" as the people in the South .. and sadly the dehumanizing of the race went on way past the WBTS on both sides. It wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights .. the right may have been over slaves .. but it wasn't slaves themselves, it was the North telling the South what they could and couldn't do. We all know what the Declarations say, why even bring that up??!!?? The dang flag isn't even the Confederate flag, its a battle flag aka Rebel flag. The Confederate flag was the Stars and Bars.


----------



## bjones2571 (May 2, 2007)

I brought all that up, because of the posts above which tried to say that the civil war wasn't about slavery...which is absolutely false. 

And to say that it wasn't about slavery because "it was about the states right to have slavery" is well, not an argument. It's the same **** thing. It was about slavery.

Whether it was a battle flag or the flag of the Confederacy, it has been used as a symbol of racist oppression for over 70 years (using your dates). I think that's long enough to discredit any benefit it may have had in "celebrating the heritage" (that heritage being slavery and treason) of the Confederacy. You don't see Germans celebrating their relatives by flying swastikas, do you?


----------



## Gemini8 (Jun 29, 2013)

bjones2571 said:


> I brought all that up, because of the posts above which tried to say that the civil war wasn't about slavery...which is absolutely false.
> 
> And to say that it wasn't about slavery because "it was about the states right to have slavery" is well, not an argument. It's the same **** thing. It was about slavery.
> 
> Whether it was a battle flag or the flag of the Confederacy, it has been used as a symbol of racist oppression for over 70 years (using your dates). I think that's long enough to discredit any benefit it may have had in "celebrating the heritage" (that heritage being slavery and treason) of the Confederacy. You don't see Germans celebrating their relatives by flying swastikas, do you?


You might want to take all that fecal matter spewing from your mouth back north of the Mason/Dixon Line. The point that is trying to be made is not what it may or may not symbolize. The point is that our society has become so pussified and political correctness has been crammed down our throats so much that NOTHING is sacred anymore. I for one am tired of our government, media, society or whomever trying to tell us to walk on eggshells because someone may be offended. No one has the right to tell me what I should or should not be offended by. We are supposed to have a right to freedom of speech, religion, and free thinking, but that is rapidly being whittled away, not unlike Germany under a certain leadership not so long ago in history. But unfortunately, bleeding hearts are too worried about some body's poor little feelings being hurt or offended. History cannot be erased or rewritten to fit someone's agenda.


----------



## owens33 (May 2, 2007)

all those slavers were from boston. we need to shut down brown univ and burn all those pretty houses on Martha's vineyard. to say the north was pure and the south was evil is revisionist. 
also, we never had a civil war. the south did not attempt to take over the fed gov, they peacefully seceded from what was advertised as a voluntary union. apparently that was a lie. kinda like our bill of rights today.


----------



## Blk Jck 224 (Oct 16, 2009)




----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

Spirit said:


> And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Absolutely nothing.


Deny & deflect, it's what they do... it's all they got.


----------



## MB (Mar 6, 2006)

owens33 said:


> all those slavers were from boston. we need to shut down brown univ and burn all those pretty houses on Martha's vineyard. to say the north was pure and the south was evil is revisionist.
> also, we never had a civil war. the south did not attempt to take over the fed gov, they peacefully seceded from what was advertised as a voluntary union. apparently that was a lie. kinda like our bill of rights today.


Yep ... The 1st African that wound up in the new Americas was first sold by Africans to europeans on the African coast ... Then brought to the 13 colonies and resold in Boston ...Also ... The last African brought to the 13 colonies was sold in Boston.

Knowing this fact of history its obious to anyone who seeks the truth who the 1st slave owners / traders were... They were Africans which by the way are still engaging in slave ownership today 6/26/2015.

*MB*


----------



## Bruce J (Jun 27, 2004)

Gemini8 said:


> You might want to take all that fecal matter spewing from your mouth back north of the Mason/Dixon Line. The point that is trying to be made is not what it may or may not symbolize. The point is that our society has become so pussified and political correctness has been crammed down our throats so much that NOTHING is sacred anymore. I for one am tired of our government, media, society or whomever trying to tell us to walk on eggshells because someone may be offended. No one has the right to tell me what I should or should not be offended by. We are supposed to have a right to freedom of speech, religion, and free thinking, but that is rapidly being whittled away, not unlike Germany under a certain leadership not so long ago in history. But unfortunately, bleeding hearts are too worried about some body's poor little feelings being hurt or offended. History cannot be erased or rewritten to fit someone's agenda.


Classy start to that one, Gemini.

The whole point is that the flag symbolizes the confederacy, and when you fly it you are advocating for those principal beliefs, and chief among them is slavery, whether you think you're doing that or not. You can deny and deflect all you want, but that's the symbolism of the flag. If you'd rather not be associated with that symbolism, then don't fly it.

On the other hand, if you feel so strongly about displaying your advocacy of the confederacy that you're going to fly the flag no matter what anyone feels about it, that's your choice. Each of us chooses to draw the line somewhere when it comes to offending other people with our words or actions.

If it's being a "bleeding heart" to dislike the symbol of slavery, then count me in. I've lived virtually my whole life in the south and voted republican, and I believe that this is an issue of common decency and respect for others and not a geographical or libreral/conservative one.


----------



## Outearly (Nov 17, 2009)

Bruce J said:


> Classy start to that one, Gemini.
> 
> The whole point is that the flag symbolizes the confederacy, and when you fly it you are advocating for those principal beliefs, and chief among them is slavery, whether you think you're doing that or not. You can deny and deflect all you want, but that's the symbolism of the flag. If you'd rather not be associated with that symbolism, then don't fly it.
> 
> ...


Eloquent, and accurate for me as well.


----------



## mstrelectricman (Jul 10, 2009)

Still over 90%. Carry on.Hahahahahaha!!


----------



## prokat (Jul 17, 2010)

White bed sheets being pulled from store shelves soon!!


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Discussions about race are always emotional because people (black and white) from different parts of the country don't view racism from the same perspective. 

My observation from traveling all over the USA, is that racism is different in the north and the south.

In the North, people love the race but hate the individual.

In the South, people love the individual but hate the race.

One is just as bad as the other.


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

OK my 2 cents. Being Black and 54 years of age I never paid much attention to the confederate flag. The dukes of hazard was one of my favorite shows where the car was called the General Lee and again I never associated the flag with hate. Like one post said earlier, some point in time a hate group started using the flag and has made this issue worse. Does the flag bother me, some what it does, because of what it's used for. No one can erase slavery and yes there is a lot that get's stirred up on the inside at times when these types of issues are discussed. The bible says "we must forgive one another." I stand on that scripture knowing no one can unscramble eggs but we can move forward. My prayer is like another post said, "Can't we all just get along?" It's sad to say this country is going down hill, spending time worrying and trying to appease people (which you never will) about issues like this. My focus as an American, is on the blood, sweat, and tears that our soldiers of all ethnic backgrounds have fought and are still fighting for this great country we live in. Sorry I don't hate racist people, white, black, red,or any color. I choose not to associate with them because of what they stand for. "God bless America."


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

Bruce J said:


> Classy start to that one, Gemini.
> 
> The whole point is that the flag symbolizes the confederacy, and when you fly it you are advocating for those principal beliefs, and chief among them is slavery, whether you think you're doing that or not. You can deny and deflect all you want, but that's the symbolism of the flag. If you'd rather not be associated with that symbolism, then don't fly it.
> 
> ...


What you're apparently missing here is "common decency and respect for" the people for whom that flag is NOT simply a symbol of slavery and/or racism. There's people in this country who hold dear their own heritage, which may have very well included someone who fought for the Confederacy not as a single-minded defense of the institution of slavery, but simply as a defense of the principles that the United States was supposed to have been built on, which were abandoned by the North in the interest of self-enrichment. People back then were still citizens of their state: the "United States" was simply a coalition of individual states put together for the common goals: Just like Robert E. Lee: a very patriotic citizen of the United States, but "So Virginia goes, so shall I". The south was not, as the common "progressive" narrative of today tries to frame, nothing but fervent anti-abolitionists: As Lee himself said, "Mr. Blair, I look upon secession as anarchy. If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South I would sacrifice them all to the Union; but how can I draw my sword upon Virginia, my native state". Secession was an agonizing decision for many if not most, but the defense of one's native state was the primary consideration of the day: that stands in contrast to today, where the identity of the individual states has been by design watered down by those who want to consolidate all power and authority into a central federal government. When I think of the ranks of my ancestors that fought under those flags, I don't think of slavery: I think of honor, sacrifice, and loyalty to their state in the face of terrible adversity and personal moral and physical struggles. Is my opinion of that flag, and my personal characterization of the meaning thereof somehow less important or valid than that of a bunch of people from up north who have simply bought into an incorrect narrative about the goals and motives of the Confederacy?


----------



## Flippin' Crazee (May 14, 2015)

BBCAT said:


> I don't think it's racist. But this a lost cause. In the current political environment it popular to appease the loud minority.


Exactly! I don't get it though, how does the minority always get their way over the majority?


----------



## mstrelectricman (Jul 10, 2009)

Post # 69 got green.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

mstrelectricman said:


> Post # 69 got green.


From me too.


----------



## waterspout (May 21, 2004)

I know many blacks that say no! it's a mindset and a reason to beach! I think the NAACP is. bla bla bla! ignorance! I'm not racest at all. all breeds have bad. but this is really stupid! I can take a pic with a preacher then go on a killing spree doesn't make preachers bad! always blaming something or someone else.


----------



## Mad Mike (Dec 28, 2005)

K Man said:


> OK my 2 cents. Being Black and 54 years of age I never paid much attention to the confederate flag. The dukes of hazard was one of my favorite shows where the car was called the General Lee and again I never associated the flag with hate. Like one post said earlier, some point in time a hate group started using the flag and has made this issue worse. Does the flag bother me, some what it does, because of what it's used for. No one can erase slavery and yes there is a lot that get's stirred up on the inside at times when these types of issues are discussed. The bible says "we must forgive one another." I stand on that scripture knowing no one can unscramble eggs but we can move forward. My prayer is like another post said, "Can't we all just get along?" It's sad to say this country is going down hill, spending time worrying and trying to appease people (which you never will) about issues like this. My focus as an American, is on the blood, sweat, and tears that our soldiers of all ethnic backgrounds have fought and are still fighting for this great country we live in. Sorry I don't hate racist people, white, black, red,or any color. I choose not to associate with them because of what they stand for. "God bless America."


Excellent post!


----------



## Lagunaroy (Dec 30, 2013)

You can't make it up!

Memphis mayor wants to dig up Confederate General and his wife.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarne...s-to-dig-up-dead-confederate-war-general.html


----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

waterspout said:


> I think the NAACP is. bla bla bla! ignorance!


NAACP = *N*ational *A*ssociation of *A*lways *C*omplaining *P*eople


----------



## speckle-catcher (May 20, 2004)

Lagunaroy said:


> You can't make it up!
> 
> Memphis mayor wants to dig up Confederate General and his wife.
> 
> http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarne...s-to-dig-up-dead-confederate-war-general.html


a black mayor...go figure.


----------



## Lagunaroy (Dec 30, 2013)

Oh my, now we are traitors also.

Sharpton says so. This ought to make your day.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015...acism-lynching-slavery-and-a-flag-of-treason/

Hmmm, not gonna wait till 5 today!


----------



## Chuck06R1 (Apr 7, 2015)

Lets just offend everyone at once shall we?


----------



## Lagunaroy (Dec 30, 2013)

Chuck06R1 said:


> Lets just offend everyone at once shall we?


Lol, you missed me I am transracial cajun *******!


----------



## Chuck06R1 (Apr 7, 2015)

Lagunaroy said:


> Lol, you missed me I am transracial cajun *******!


Sorry, didn't mean to leave you out.


----------



## el dorado (Jul 26, 2010)

The flag is an inanimate object, incapable of feelings, including racism. Human beings can attach whatever symbol they want to their own prejudices. It has nothing to do with the symbol, racism lives in peoples thoughts, hearts, words and actions.


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

Chuck06R1 said:


> Lets just offend everyone at once shall we?


Not sure what the jews did to deserve to be on that, but to each his own, I guess.


----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

Bruce J said:


> If you fly the flag, you are sending the message that you are an advocate of the society which fought for slavery, plain and simple. You can try to rationalize it by saying that's not your intention, whether true or not, or that you're all about states' rights, but no one who sees the flag knows your intention. If you want to be perceived as a slavery advocate, then fly the flag proudly. But don't pretend it's not offensive and divisive to many.


Again, you need to educate yourself...


----------



## mstrelectricman (Jul 10, 2009)

Chuck06R1 said:


> Lets just offend everyone at once shall we?


Sorry man! Smooth outa green for today. Will someone please...


----------



## wet dreams (May 21, 2004)

Whats next cotton balls, CVS might as well start cleaning the shelves..


----------



## Mrschasintail (Dec 8, 2004)

The pure hypocrisy and total ignorance of some is incredible!


----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

reload56 said:


> These "facts" are highly misleading and take small tidbits of info and blow them up to appear to be more convincing. Anyone who has been paying attention the last 40 years can see the confederate flag has become a symbol of racism.


They are not misleading at all, they are accurate.

As far as your "paying attention the last 40 years" goes, it was addressed specifically in the last part of the post. 


> _*MYTH - *_The Confederate Flags are an symbol of Aryan, KKK and hate groups.
> 
> _*FACT*_*- Quite the contrary. These despicable organizations such as the KKK and Aryans have taken a hallowed piece of history, and have plagued good Southern folks and the memories of fine Confederate Soldiers that fought under the flag with their perverse agenda. IN NO WAY does the Confederate Flag represent hate or violence. Heritage groups such as the SCV battle daily the damage done to a proud nation by these hate groups. The SCV denounces all hate groups, and pridefully boast HERITAGE - NOT HATE. * ​


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Accurate?



Game-Over said:


> rulen.com provides almost no citations for the claims posted. You can't find the text, or even the date, of the Lincoln address to the "Virginia Compromise Delegation" anywhere considered even remotely historically accurate. It's like one site made the claim and others keep repeating it citing each other.
> 
> Why even post such drivel. Really, does anyone actually believe this garbage? Is this what is considered "educating" yourself? Sad that some try to pass this off as fact. Almost as sad as the fools that believe it.
> 
> ...


----------



## 535 (May 23, 2004)

of course, he got it off the innerwebs!


----------



## w_r_ranch (Jan 14, 2005)

Yes, accurate. Snopes??? You know better...


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

It took a couple of casts, but I knew you would bite.

Snopes?, nope. I challenge anyone here to provide the full text of "Lincolns address to the Virginia Compromise Delegation"

You can't. All you will find are a bunch of websites making claims about a quote with zero historically credible citations. They all link back to each other without providing a shred of evidence.

You were fooled into thinking nationalreport.com was a legitimate news site just like you are being fooled by rulen.com. To claim that the kkk does not use this flag as a symbol is laughable.


----------



## SharkBait >*)\\\><( (May 16, 2012)

surprisingly allot of yall are seeing whats going on now


----------



## Ox Eye (Dec 17, 2007)

bjones2571 said:


> I brought all that up, because of the posts above which tried to say that the civil war wasn't about slavery...which is absolutely false.


What you went to great lengths to provide, details, in part, why the South chose to secede. Not a single word of it speaks to the reasons for the Civil War. At the time those words in the 1st. and 3rd. articles were penned, it had not yet begun! And, in the 2nd, it was still months in the future.


----------



## Lagunaroy (Dec 30, 2013)

Ox Eye said:


> What you went to great lengths to provide, details, in part, why the South chose to secede. Not a single word of it speaks to the reasons for the Civil War. At the time those words in the 1st. and 3rd. articles were penned, it had not yet begun! And, in the 2nd, it was still months in the future.


Oh them **** pesky facts. Green to ya!


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

SharkBait >*)\\\><( said:


> surprisingly allot of yall are seeing whats going on now


Well tell us the rest of it.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Well tell us the rest of it.


el oh el, x2. this should top everything we've read as of yet!


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

SharkBait >*)\\\><( said:


> surprisingly allot of yall are seeing whats going on now


 yep, and we've just been anxiously waiting for you to come in here and attribute it all to aliens and the illuminati.


----------



## ChuChu (Jan 23, 2010)

Let's offend everyone at once......


----------



## RRbohemian (Dec 20, 2009)

Does anyone believe that the American Indian is offended by the US Flag? And if so, should that be removed from all govt buildings? What is the % of American Indians to Blacks in this country? So it's perfectly fine to remove the Confederate Flag since a certain group of people are offended by it but not remove the US Flag since the same argument can be made against it? Also, how many Indians were killed by the US govt vs blacks killed by the kkk? Think if the South had won the Civil War, would American Indians today be calling for the removal of the US Flag?


----------



## ChuChu (Jan 23, 2010)

Now NASCAR has banned the flag.

http://news.yahoo.com/nascar-ban-confederate-flag-fans-board-200429031.html


----------



## dwilliams35 (Oct 8, 2006)

ChuChu said:


> Now NASCAR has banned the flag.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/nascar-ban-confederate-flag-fans-board-200429031.html


 Well, they've always had a problem with moving to the right...


----------



## pocjetty (Sep 12, 2014)

owens33 said:


> the south did not attempt to take over the fed gov, they peacefully seceded from what was advertised as a voluntary union. apparently that was a lie. kinda like our bill of rights today.


You are correct. The South did not go to war with the United States or the federal government. They seceded... just over 80 years after the United States essentially seceded from England. "When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another..."

You would think that the United States would have been sensitive to the fact that they began in much the same way as the Confederacy. Lincoln had openly stated that he did not think that blacks were equal to whites, nor that they could ever live together as equals. He stated in a letter that he had decided to endorse abolition, rather than lose the southern portion of the country. He didn't WANT an end to slavery - he just saw it as a means to an end.

That is simple, recorded history. You can deny it - just stick your head in the sand. Ignore the records. Ignore Lincoln's own words. Create your own reality.

This flag issue isn't about feelings or justice. It's about who gets to be on top. We've reached a tipping point, and they are flexing their new-found power. Anyone who thinks it's going to stop at this flag is as naÃ¯ve as the ones who insist the Civil War was about slavery. It was about power. So is this.


----------



## ChuChu (Jan 23, 2010)

http://www.examiner.com/article/wal...ith-confederate-flag-makes-one-with-isis-flag


----------



## peckerwood (Jun 9, 2012)

Got to ban the Rebel battle flag because it offends some,but it's ok to burn the American Flag in the streets protesting!!!!!!!!! I'm offended by that,but it means doodly squat because I'm a white,Southern,Conservative,male.


----------



## MB (Mar 6, 2006)

MB said:


> Yep ... The 1st African that wound up in the new Americas was first sold by Africans to europeans on the African coast ... Then brought to the 13 colonies and resold in Boston ...Also ... The last African brought to the 13 colonies was sold in Boston.
> 
> Knowing this fact of history its obious to anyone who seeks the truth who the 1st slave owners / traders were... They were Africans which by the way are still engaging in slave ownership today 6/26/2015.
> 
> *MB*


Be careful where you get your history from ... Apparently I was't careful enough so I'll be the first to admit when I'm wrong about something, and boy was I ...

What I found was the truth and more revealing about slavery in out country than anything I've ever been taught in school, seen in movies, or heard from anyone ever in my 57 yrs.

Read the short story below about the first person to be legally declared a slave for life ... Worked as an indentured servant for a free black man from Africa ( Anthony Johnson ) and became the 1st legal slave for life. The first legal black slave ( John Casor ) was owned by a black man not a white European man ...

Both were originally from Africa ....

Who knew ...

http://www.historyinanhour.com/2011/03/08/the-first-slave-john-casor/

*MB*


----------



## tigerhead (Jun 17, 2005)

Whether or not the confederate flag is "racist" or not, is a really complex question. I have always loved the flag because I always thought it was cool looking and because it represented southern pride. But having said that, I was raised in a relatively non-racist environment and never really related that flag to a white vs black thing. I think most Texans probably feel similar. Now I can tell you from experience, that when you get over to Alabama and Mississippi, that may not be the case. The level of racism associated with the flag can be much different. 

I have come face to face with high ranking members of the KKK twice in my life and I can assure you that, in that group, racism and the confederate flag are synonymous. So imho, the truth is that no flag or any other inanimate object, can be racist. But, where southern racism is still prevalent, you can expect to see that flag displayed. Case in point, I saw a car that was set on fire during a KKK rally once. I didn't attend the rally but viewed the aftermath in the woods the following day. There was an effigy of a black man in the front seat of the car and a rebel flag painted on the door. Granted, that was a long time ago, and those types of rallies are probably not happening as much these days, but I'm sure that level of racism still exists in some peoples hearts. The incident that happened in Vidor not too many years ago was probably fueled by that level of racism.

So to be fair I would have to say that, yes, the flag can certainly be categorized as a racist symbol. Not by me, maybe not by you, but by some. By some as a sign of how they believe, and by others as a sign of how they are looked down on, or even hated. Unfortunately, banning the flag won't change peoples hearts. But if I was Jewish, I wouldn't want the **** flag to ever be displayed again. Perspective is a real b**ch! God bless America!


----------



## Retired Hunter (Jun 28, 2005)

When they going to try and remove the one from my arm? Just remembered, I am retired, think I will start me a flag shop! Demand should be high!!


----------

