Does the Right really understand the meaning of the protests?

[ptbw forever]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Which side opposes and attacks proponents of things like white student unions?

Which side opposes fair divorce laws for men and fair compensation for the much more physical jobs that only men are expected to do?

Which side are nazis and white supremacists?

Which side shamelessly believes that white people are inherently morally inferior while embracing anti-whites of all stripes?

The premise of your question is dismissed.

Your "progressive" card is revoked.

 

[mamooth]

Which side shamelessly believes that white people are inherently morally inferior while embracing anti-whites of all stripes?

You got me. Which side? The right? I didn't think they did that, but if you're saying they do, I'll listen to your arguments.

 

[Correll]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Your poll is flawed.

YOu have no option that is not self serving for you.

THe answer is that we completely understand your desire to deconstruct and undermine America, and we reject your excuses.

 

[easyt65]

They also don't understand that its a right, guaranteed by our constitution and fought for by our military.

Funny how Democrats who have hated and bashed our military for years suddenly want to show a picture of and claim and use the military now in such a manner.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Just saw one of the Central Park Five. Remember, Trump called for them to be murdered after a false accusation that landed them in jail for over seven years.

He said Trump is uniting the country.

Against Trump.

Yup, remember that well.

"Much of the frenzied media coverage of what CNN dubbed “48 hours of turmoil for the Trump White House” has overlooked one rather crucial point: Trump doesn’t like being forced to denounce racism for the very simple reason that he himself is, and always has been, a racist.

Consider the first time the president’s name appeared on the front page of the New York Times, more than 40 years ago. “Major Landlord Accused of Antiblack Bias in City,” read the headline of the A1 piece on Oct. 16, 1973, which pointed out how Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice had sued the Trump family’s real estate company in federal court over alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act.

“The government contended that Trump Management had refused to rent or negotiate rentals ‘because of race and color,’” the Times revealed. “It also charged that the company had required different rental terms and conditions because of race and that it had misrepresented to blacks that apartments were not available.” (Trump later settled with the government without accepting responsibility.)

Over the next four decades, Trump burnished his reputation as a bigot: he was accused of ordering “all the black [employees] off the floor” of his Atlantic City casinos during his visits; claimed “laziness is a trait in blacks” and “not anything they can control”; requested Jews “in yarmulkes” replace his black accountants; told Bryan Gumbel that “a well-educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well-educated white in terms of the job market”; demanded the death penalty for a group of black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a jogger in Central Park (and, despite their later exoneration with the use of DNA evidence, has continued to insist they are guilty); suggested a Native American tribe “don’t look like Indians to me”; mocked Chinese and Japanese trade negotiators by doing an impression of them in broken English; described undocumented Mexican immigrants as “rapists”; compared Syrian refugees to “snakes”; defended two supporters who assaulted a homeless Latino man as “very passionate” people “who love this country”; pledged to ban a quarter of humanity from entering the United States; proposed a database to track American Muslims that he himself refused to distinguish from the Nazi registration of German Jews; implied Jewish donors “want to control” politicians and are all sly negotiators; heaped praise on the “amazing reputation” of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who has blamed America’s problems on a “Jewish mafia”; referred to a black supporter at a campaign rally as “my African-American”; suggested the grieving Muslim mother of a slain U.S. army officer “maybe … wasn’t allowed” to speak in public about her son; accused an American-born Hispanic judge of being “a Mexican”; retweeted anti-Semitic and anti-black memes, white supremacists, and even a quote from Benito Mussolini; kept a book of Hitler’s collected speeches next to his bed; declined to condemn both David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan; and spent five years leading a “birther” movement that was bent on smearing and delegitimizing the first black president of the United States, who Trump also accused of being the founder of ISIS."

Donald Trump Has Been a Racist All His Life — And He Isn’t Going to Change After Charlottesville

 

[Fenton Lum]

They also don't understand that its a right, guaranteed by our constitution and fought for by our military.

Funny how Democrats who have hated and bashed our military for years suddenly want to show a picture of and claim and use the military now in such a manner.

Pfffffffffffffffft, yeah, real americans are all about their military aren't they.

Weapons Money Intended For Economic Development Being Secretly Diverted to Lobbying

 

[ptbw forever]

Which side shamelessly believes that white people are inherently morally inferior while embracing anti-whites of all stripes?

You got me. Which side? The right? I didn't think they did that, but if you're saying they do, I'll listen to your arguments.

The contemporary left, idiot.

That is why all the Democrats want to pretend that only white people are racists and supremacists, while ignoring the hordes of non-whites who are equally or even more racist than the white supremacists that vote Democrat every year.

 

[easyt65]

Just saw one of the Central Park Five. Remember, Trump called for them to be murdered after a false accusation that landed them in jail for over seven years.

He said Trump is uniting the country.

Against Trump.

Yup, remember that well.

"Much of the frenzied media coverage of what CNN dubbed “48 hours of turmoil for the Trump White House” has overlooked one rather crucial point: Trump doesn’t like being forced to denounce racism for the very simple reason that he himself is, and always has been, a racist.

Consider the first time the president’s name appeared on the front page of the New York Times, more than 40 years ago. “Major Landlord Accused of Antiblack Bias in City,” read the headline of the A1 piece on Oct. 16, 1973, which pointed out how Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice had sued the Trump family’s real estate company in federal court over alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act.

“The government contended that Trump Management had refused to rent or negotiate rentals ‘because of race and color,’” the Times revealed. “It also charged that the company had required different rental terms and conditions because of race and that it had misrepresented to blacks that apartments were not available.” (Trump later settled with the government without accepting responsibility.)

Over the next four decades, Trump burnished his reputation as a bigot: he was accused of ordering “all the black [employees] off the floor” of his Atlantic City casinos during his visits; claimed “laziness is a trait in blacks” and “not anything they can control”; requested Jews “in yarmulkes” replace his black accountants; told Bryan Gumbel that “a well-educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well-educated white in terms of the job market”; demanded the death penalty for a group of black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a jogger in Central Park (and, despite their later exoneration with the use of DNA evidence, has continued to insist they are guilty); suggested a Native American tribe “don’t look like Indians to me”; mocked Chinese and Japanese trade negotiators by doing an impression of them in broken English; described undocumented Mexican immigrants as “rapists”; compared Syrian refugees to “snakes”; defended two supporters who assaulted a homeless Latino man as “very passionate” people “who love this country”; pledged to ban a quarter of humanity from entering the United States; proposed a database to track American Muslims that he himself refused to distinguish from the Nazi registration of German Jews; implied Jewish donors “want to control” politicians and are all sly negotiators; heaped praise on the “amazing reputation” of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who has blamed America’s problems on a “Jewish mafia”; referred to a black supporter at a campaign rally as “my African-American”; suggested the grieving Muslim mother of a slain U.S. army officer “maybe … wasn’t allowed” to speak in public about her son; accused an American-born Hispanic judge of being “a Mexican”; retweeted anti-Semitic and anti-black memes, white supremacists, and even a quote from Benito Mussolini; kept a book of Hitler’s collected speeches next to his bed; declined to condemn both David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan; and spent five years leading a “birther” movement that was bent on smearing and delegitimizing the first black president of the United States, who Trump also accused of being the founder of ISIS."

Donald Trump Has Been a Racist All His Life — And He Isn’t Going to Change After Charlottesville

I stopped reading at 'Trump doesn't like' because it is opinion, interpretation, and projection.

Whenever a liberal says 'this is what he thinks' in regards to a conservative 99% of the time it is an attack. Whenever a liberal says 'this is what he thinks or feels' in regards to a liberal 99% of the time it is a defense or justification of something said or actions taken.

It's just worthless...

 

[TemplarKormac]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

From all the riots and protests I've seen from the left over the past six or so years, I am compelled to ask if the left knows what the meaning of protests is/are.

 

[easyt65]

They also don't understand that its a right, guaranteed by our constitution and fought for by our military.

Funny how Democrats who have hated and bashed our military for years suddenly want to show a picture of and claim and use the military now in such a manner.

Pfffffffffffffffft, yeah, real americans are all about their military aren't they.

Weapons Money Intended For Economic Development Being Secretly Diverted to Lobbying

We were talking about, or at least I was, support for the military, not about misuse of government funds as you tried to distract and make this about.

The fact remains that liberals have more often attacked and not supported the military then they have supported them.

 

[Yarddog]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Does the Left understand the power of the first amendment? The KKK has currently less than 5000 members in the US when back in the 60s and beyond they numbered in the millions. They have their marches every year but year after year their numbers continued to drop. Any wonder why? Because normal Americans like us both Democrat and Republican heard what they have to say so we marginalize, reject and ignore them.

More than half of today's KKK groups formed in the last three years in the US

This is why they should not be violently opposed in the streets. There was no reason to, and by doing so you actually recruit more of them because you make them feel oppressed. They are damned by their own speech.

But instead the radical elements on your side are trying to paint Trumps base as Racists, KKK, White supremists in the majority. Pushing the constant drumbeat of white guilt, telling kids they are oppressors because of the color they were born, its no wonder now you have seen the KKK double in number in the last few years.

What you dummies don't realize is their brand was on the way out. they were going to become extinct like the dinosaurs. Kids today would rather have gotten along except for everyone constantly being told about and beaten over the head about their race.

Racial differences are the tool politicians use to get votes with, they are really not so concerned about the casualties they leave behind because they live in a bubble, constantly reinforced by the also brainwashed LW media that supports and coddles them.

as far as groups like the KKK goes, they should also be protested using the rules of the First amendment. This is one of the things that is supossed to make us different from places like Somalia.

 

[mamooth]

Does the Left understand the power of the first amendment?

Yes. That's why we always fight so hard to defend it. It's also why the right fights so hard to censor speech that criticizes them.

The KKK has currently less than 5000 members

But their sympathizers number in the tens of millions, and many are highly placed in the Republican Party.

This is why they should not be violently opposed in the streets.

They should be violently opposed in the street when they violently attack peaceful protestors, which they just did. Those people who bravely fought off the Nazis are heroes.

 

[Darkwind]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Indignation or outrage does not infer upon you or anyone the exclusive access to being right. It just makes you indignant and/or outraged. It also does not infer upon them the right to dismiss others.

You have no sound or reasonable argument for taking them down. The acts and crimes have already been committed, and the deeds recorded.

So, pardon Me if I don't give in to your impotent rage at not being allowed to be unoffended.

 

[Yarddog]

Does the Left understand the power of the first amendment?

Yes. That's why we always fight so hard to defend it. It's also why the right fights so hard to censor speech that criticizes them.

The KKK has currently less than 5000 members

But their sympathizers number in the tens of millions, and many are highly placed in the Republican Party.

This is why they should not be violently opposed in the streets.

They should be violently opposed in the street when they violently attack peaceful protestors, which they just did. Those people who bravely fought off the Nazis are heroes.

Defend it??? are you high on something? Democrats well, at least the extremists who drive the party, don't allow people with opposing viewpoints to assemble, speak or have a rally without being shouted down.
didn't you even read my post?

You mean the heroes who created a conflict with a few hundred people who came from all over the country to protest some statue incident. If they would have just let them have their march, exercize their first amendment right, then you wouldn't have a dead woman and others injured right now. The streets are no place for violence.

If the Unite the Right people got out of hand, then the police could have done their job and arrested them. but that wasn't the plan was it?

People need to stop making excuses for violence in our streets and neighborhood unless you want to see more Americans fighting each other in public. That is WHY we have a first amendment. So people dont have to riot to have their voices heard.

Do you have any comprehension at all???

 

[BluesLegend]

Liberal douchebags top priority is to be offended by 100+ year old statues. Liberal douchebags are not offended by poverty, lack of jobs, hundreds of minorities murdered in their inner cities, illegals raping US citizens, no the top issue 100+ year old statues offending them.

/SARCASM

 

[deanrd]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Mitch and Paul want tens of millions of Americans to suffer and die without healthcare.
Republicans work to move the wealth of the nation to the top 1%.
Voter suppression.
Lies.
Republicans almost destroyed this country under Bush. Now they want to finish the job under Trump.

If Trump wasn't trying to destroy this country would he be doing anything differently?

No, you stick with what works.

 

[deanrd]

Liberal douchebags top priority is to be offended by 100+ year old statues. Liberal douchebags are not offended by poverty, lack of jobs, hundreds of minorities murdered in their inner cities, illegals raping US citizens, no the top issue 100+ year old statues offending them.

/SARCASM

You said:

Liberal douchebags top priority is to be offended by 100+ year old statues. Liberal douchebags are not offended by poverty, lack of jobs, hundreds of minorities murdered in their inner cities, illegals raping US citizens, no the top issue 100+ year old statues offending them.

U.S. has record 6 million job openings, even as 6.8 million Americans are looking for jobs

Statues to traitors who tried to destroy this country. Your heroes I'm sure.

Poverty? As in mostly white Appalachia, the most poor part of the nation?

Lack of jobs? They problem is that your kind wants high paying jobs that require only a 6th grade education.

Illegals raping US Citizens? Did you get that nonsense from Trump?

Do you guys practice stupid or have any clue what you are talking about?

 

[OKTexas]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

I'm impressed you put so much effort in such idiocy. You snowflakes want to boil the reasons the south succeeded to a singular issue, that's simply a lie. The vast majority of the people who fought for the south never owned a slave and were tired of northern economic aggression and policies. Some went on to be very successful business people and contributed greatly to their communities. Houston is one example where former southern officers did this and now are purging the city of their names without regard to their post war contributions. Lincoln simply violated the primary founding principle, that free men ought to be able to govern themselves and destroyed that principle with the iron fist of tyranny. You seem to forget many of the northern states were also slave holders.


.

 

[Nosmo King]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

Does the Left understand the power of the first amendment? The KKK has currently less than 5000 members in the US when back in the 60s and beyond they numbered in the millions. They have their marches every year but year after year their numbers continued to drop. Any wonder why? Because normal Americans like us both Democrat and Republican heard what they have to say so we marginalize, reject and ignore them.

More than half of today's KKK groups formed in the last three years in the US

This is why they should not be violently opposed in the streets. There was no reason to, and by doing so you actually recruit more of them because you make them feel oppressed. They are damned by their own speech.

But instead the radical elements on your side are trying to paint Trumps base as Racists, KKK, White supremists in the majority. Pushing the constant drumbeat of white guilt, telling kids they are oppressors because of the color they were born, its no wonder now you have seen the KKK double in number in the last few years.

What you dummies don't realize is their brand was on the way out. they were going to become extinct like the dinosaurs. Kids today would rather have gotten along except for everyone constantly being told about and beaten over the head about their race.

Racial differences are the tool politicians use to get votes with, they are really not so concerned about the casualties they leave behind because they live in a bubble, constantly reinforced by the also brainwashed LW media that supports and coddles them.

as far as groups like the KKK goes, they should also be protested using the rules of the First amendment. This is one of the things that is supossed to make us different from places like Somalia.

How does the KKK conform to the clause in the first amendment stating "peaceably assemble" when they come packing heat?

 

[Nosmo King]

It seems to me that the Right wears blinders where the meaning of the protests over confederate memorials is concerned. They seem to have a political agenda used as a template when they gauge the movement to remove confederate memorials.

Some want to argue that past presidents and statesmen who held slaves are just as culpable in the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the Union as those in the confederacy.. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin have been cited as examples of slave owners whose monuments and memorials worthy of removal just as the confederate leaders may or may not be worthy.

The difference is, and this is the salient point, the confederacy was formed to preserve state's rights. And, in particular, a state's right to permit its citizens to hold, beat, abuse, sell and buy human beings as labor without pay.

Confederate leaders raised their swords in open defiance in order to destroy the United States of America. Inarguably an so act of treason.

Many of these confederate monuments were erected during the darkest days of African American repression otherwise known as the era of Jim Crow. While proclaimed free, African Americans were not free to excerise their right to vote, own property or live in peace and security. African Americans lived every day with the threat of mob violence should they merely fail to step out of the way of a White person. If they had the temerity to whistle or cat call at a White woman. If they did not comply with senseless rules of segregation by sitting anywhere on a municipal bus or a lunch counter.

Monuments dedicated to the confederacy were built ostensively as a commemoration of southern heritage. But to the Black citizens of the south, they were built as warnings not to step out of line, to remember their proper place, to not become 'uppity'.

Does the Right understand that level of indignation? Does the Right respect all the rights extended to all the citizenry?

Whenever a group petitions to enjoy all the rights all Americans are to enjoy, which side on our political spectrum provides the resistance? Civil rights were opposed by the Right. Women's rights were opposed by the Right. Gay rights are opposed by the Right.

Anybody else see a pattern here?

I'm impressed you put so much effort in such idiocy. You snowflakes want to boil the reasons the south succeeded to a singular issue, that's simply a lie. The vast majority of the people who fought for the south never owned a slave and were tired of northern economic aggression and policies. Some went on to be very successful business people and contributed greatly to their communities. Houston is one example where former southern officers did this and now are purging the city of their names without regard to their post war contributions. Lincoln simply violated the primary founding principle, that free men ought to be able to govern themselves and destroyed that principle with the iron fist of tyranny. You seem to forget many of the northern states were also slave holders.


.

When did the Union fire on Ft. Sumpter? Did Lincoln give the order?