ADVERTISEMENT

bush says to take down the flag,

So according to the Constitution of the United States. South Carolina followed by others followed their rights and left the Union. Lincoln went to war to keep them from doing so, not because of Slavery, proven by his own words. Slavery was a moral way to justify his Tyrany
There's nothing about such a right in the Constitution, and no, the Tenth Amendment doesn't confer the right to secede. Lincoln went to war because a Union fort was bombed. The South lost the war. No point in trying to fight it 150 years later.
 
I doubt you can support the "because they're white" claim. Sure, it happens, but not every day. I hate to point out the obvious, but there are a lot more white people than black people. Not surprisingly, there's more white-on-white crime than black-on-black crime. It also wouldn't be surprising if there were more black-on-white crime than white-on-black crime. That's not an indication of more racial violence on the part of blacks.

Nothing is manufactured. If a white kid shoots up a black church and a picture is floated showing a Confederate flag on the kid's car, it's going to trigger the association that the KKK and others created a long time ago in some people who wouldn't normally give it any thought. If the flag's not on the kid's car, no uproar. Pretty simple.

Sure I can, just use google there's a ton of it, a guy pushes a woman in front of a train, another push a man into traffic...really a bunch of it, but it doesn't fit the media narative so you have to look it up. FBI stats show blacks murder whites at an 8-1 clip. They commit 56% of all violent crime, there's a reason they're profiled, because they commit a disproportionate amount of crime. But thats not PC do we really can't be discussing it..

The kid shooting up the church was the act of a loon loon. Its like white rapper.....rarely happens :D
 
Lol I can't believe people actually believe this noble southern seeking freedom from the tyranny of Lincoln BS. This is hilarious
 
There's nothing about such a right in the Constitution, and no, the Tenth Amendment doesn't confer the right to secede. Lincoln went to war because a Union fort was bombed. The South lost the war. No point in trying to fight it 150 years later.


You're right I stand corrected, its the Declaration .....Oh the Union fort was Bombed only after they refused to leave the facility.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security
 
Lol I can't believe people actually believe this noble southern seeking freedom from the tyranny of Lincoln BS. This is hilarious

You haven't really read much history have you? If Obama did what Lincoln did (he's close) you'd be calling for his impeachment.
 
being the confederate flag, on the grounds of the capital in Columbia,sc . this is a state issue and I didn't know bush lives in south Carolina . I know it is just his opinion, but wouldn't you think he would avoid that fight , being a former governor and claims to be for states rights .

all elephants and several donkeys cannot deny State's Right unless SCOTU gets stacked in bad way...
which way, it's tricky...
 
States' Rights to
Own Slaves
Practice Jim Crowe
Keep a racist symbol

It's been the same argument about the same subject from The First Conference in Philly in the 1770s.

SC's Governor is on board, as are Senator Graham, Romney and now Bush.
 
all elephants and several donkeys cannot deny State's Right unless SCOTU gets stacked in bad way...
which way, it's tricky...

This will be framed as a CIVIL RIGHT and The SCOTUS will strike down any right to display an ENEMY flag on government property.
 
States' Rights to
Own Slaves
Practice Jim Crowe
Keep a racist symbol

It's been the same argument about the same subject from The First Conference in Philly in the 1770s.

SC's Governor is on board, as are Senator Graham, Romney and now Bush.

no, I disavow each point;
1. Own Slaves: from beginning of History-Slaves.
2.Practice Jim Crow: just shake my head at the attempt. (damn).
3. the symbol is divisive, is it Racist!?

hit me...
 
You're right I stand corrected, its the Declaration .....Oh the Union fort was Bombed only after they refused to leave the facility.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security

The gist of That document is ALL MEN ARE RECREATED EQUAL. The rest is laying out their rights.
Are you of the opinion blacks are a separate species ?
If not you're lying to yourself and others by blowing past the critical point of our founding.
The south has always hid behind details while pretending to be too stupid to grasp the big picture.
 
no, I disavow each point;
1. Own Slaves: from beginning of History-Slaves.
2.Practice Jim Crow: just shake my head at the attempt. (damn).
3. the symbol is divisive, is it Racist!?

hit me...

You're an anachronism of the worst sort.
I hope you're enough of a human being to not burden your children or others with your long dead end thinking.
 

Oh, sorry, that really cool. But we're trying to have an adult discussion here. Thanks though, really funny stuff
 
The gist of That document is ALL MEN ARE RECREATED EQUAL. The rest is laying out their rights.
Are you of the opinion blacks are a separate species ?
If not you're lying to yourself and others by blowing past the critical point of our founding.
The south has always hid behind details while pretending to be too stupid to grasp the big picture.

Wrong place......I think its the democRAT underground boards ur looking for...Or John Stewart
 
States' Rights to
Own Slaves
Practice Jim Crowe
Keep a racist symbol

It's been the same argument about the same subject from The First Conference in Philly in the 1770s.

SC's Governor is on board, as are Senator Graham, Romney and now Bush.

Who is shocked that RINO's are onboard...except with Haily. But its about not being called racist. Just chicken shit stuff. You'd think by now ppl would be getting tired of that silly BS argument. Racist isn't what it use to be, today anyone who disagrees with a liberal is a racist. Its that simple
 
Who is shocked that RINO's are onboard...except with Haily. But its about n stateot being called racist. Just chicken shit stuff. You'd think by now ppl would be getting tired of that silly BS argument. Racist isn't what it use to be, today anyone who disagrees with a liberal is a racist. Its that simple

The sooner you run out of breath the better for my home state and decency everywhere. I know you, maybe better than you know yourself.
You're an angry backward racist. I just hope to God young people reject your thinking.
 
The sooner you run out of breath the better for my home state and decency everywhere. I know you, maybe better than you know yourself.
You're an angry backward racist. I just hope to God young people reject your thinking.

Yawn, sure thing Hillary
 
Last edited:
Yawn, sure think Hillary

You bet sheet head.
How does it feel to be among a small dying breed, domed to the dust bend of history ?
I take great comfort in seeing your kind lose battle after battle till there's nothing of your way of thinking left in this world.
 
You bet sheet head.
How does it feel to be among a small dying breed, domed to the dust bend of history ?
I take great comfort in seeing your kind lose battle after battle till there's nothing of your way of thinking left in this world.

Hmm...my way of thinking holds the majority of Govs, state houses, state senates, House of Rep the Senate, most popular New Station Talk radio, .....yep a dying breed it is LOL. Does your mom still breast feed you?
 
Hmm...my way of thinking holds the majority of Govs, state houses, state senates, House of Rep the Senate, most popular New Station Talk radio, .....yep a dying breed it is LOL. Does your mom still breast feed you?

BS, you're no more a Republican than you are smart.
You have the worst of the old Dixie-crats without their partly redeeming populism.
 
You're right I stand corrected, its the Declaration .....Oh the Union fort was Bombed only after they refused to leave the facility.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security
Why should US forces have agreed to leave a US facility?

What was going on prior to TWBTS doesn't come anywhere close to what is described in the Declaration. The Declaration doesn't say if you happen to be on the losing end of an issue that you should just take your ball and go home.
 
Why should US forces have agreed to leave a US facility?

What was going on prior to TWBTS doesn't come anywhere close to what is described in the Declaration. The Declaration doesn't say if you happen to be on the losing end of an issue that you should just take your ball and go home.
it says they can leave the union . The fort was in SC. SC troops told them to leave they didn't. War was on, not a single person died in the attack. They Union troops escaped. It was done. But Lincoln decided to invade.
 
it says they can leave the union . The fort was in SC. SC troops told them to leave they didn't. War was on, not a single person died in the attack. They Union troops escaped. It was done. But Lincoln decided to invade.
The Declaration was written before the US existed, so it's not relevant. Only the Constitution and any laws and court decisions since its ratification are relevant.

It doesn't matter where the fort was. If it was a US fort, then SC had no right to order the troops their to leave and shelling it was an act of war, casualties or not.
 
The Declaration was written before the US existed, so it's not relevant. Only the Constitution and any laws and court decisions since its ratification are relevant.

It doesn't matter where the fort was. If it was a US fort, then SC had no right to order the troops their to leave and shelling it was an act of war, casualties or not.
Mass and Conn were going to leave...they changed their minds, there was no treat of war. Anyway. Thanks for the civil debate. Cheers
 
BS, you're no more a Republican than you are smart.
You have the worst of the old Dixie-crats without their partly redeeming populism.
Gotta go with Rolo on this one. The diversity in the GOP is real, legit and unpaid for. It'll grow too because many immigrants are coming here for the exact same reason our forefathers came. They don't want a handout, but they want the freedom and opportunity to be whatever they want. They've seen firsthand the results of corrupt Socialism. For the exact same reason unions are dying, the Dems will soon be in trouble. They are smug today, believing demographics favor them. No, they don't. Many Latinos are devout Catholics. That ain't good for the Dems.
 
There were riots and gun battles in the North because of Lincolns positions. So there's that. And it was clearly and economic matter

Mississippi

We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property.

Georgia

But they know the value of parchment rights in treacherous hands, and therefore they refuse to commit their own to the rulers whom the North offers us. Why? Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere.



Only to the ignorant,...which the KKK and the 1956 GL were. And again, why now? Simple, racial division benefits DemocRATS.

And if ppl allow it, well its just another nail in the coffin of These once Great United States, killed by the cancer of PC Liberalism.


Mississippians and Georgians call human beings "property". They can't even admit to the humanity of the people they enslaved and exploited. Nauseating.
 
First, the main opposition to slavery in the North was economic, not moral. The working man in the North feared the expansion of slavery not because of moral misgivings, but because they feared the depressive effect of slavery on wages. The expansion of slavery, geographically as well as the perceived future demand from industry is what fueled Northern opposition to slavery and even that was not deemed sufficient to start a war (Remember, the North invaded). Second, the vast majority of those that fought and died for the South never owned slaves. The notion that they fought and died for something in which they had no ability to participate is a bit far fetched. While the high level politics and rhetoric supports such, the grass roots did not and, as with most things, quite often one has to look past the people making the most noise to find the real drivers.

You don't know what you are talking about. The United States Army, Navy, and Marine Corps fulfilled their constitutional duty to put down an armed rebellion against the United States government and the US Constitution. The confederates were low-down traitors. They arrogantly thought they could overcome the overwhelming industrial and manpower superiority of the United States, and they failed utterly and decisively.
 
So according to the Constitution of the United States. South Carolina followed by others followed their rights and left the Union. Lincoln went to war to keep them from doing so, not because of Slavery, proven by his own words. Slavery was a moral way to justify his Tyrany

Can you cite the part of the US Constitution where it gives states the right to leave the Union? I can cite Article III, Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
 
Lol I can't believe people actually believe this noble southern seeking freedom from the tyranny of Lincoln BS. This is hilarious

There are quite a few neo-confederates on this site. The ancestors they worship did more harm to this country than Benedict Arnold or Timothy McVeigh.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT