Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments

[Yousaidwhat]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Maryland has numerous monuments and Civil War era attractions.

I'm going to become an ass and demand every single reference to the Civil War be erased from Maryland history.

I've been calling and writing my Representatives demanding the removal of these racist monuments.

You're going to call to remove union monuments?

I was being sarcastic.

Why remove a few statues.

Let's just completely erase everything from the Civil War era.

Sounds rather silly, does it not.

 

[Avatar4321]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Maryland has numerous monuments and Civil War era attractions.

I'm going to become an ass and demand every single reference to the Civil War be erased from Maryland history.

I've been calling and writing my Representatives demanding the removal of these racist monuments.

You're going to call to remove union monuments?

I was being sarcastic.

Why remove a few statues.

Let's just completely erase everything from the Civil War era.

Sounds rather silly, does it not.

I thought you might have been. Hard to tell sometimes.

And yes it seems silly but if local communities want to remove monuments who am I to tell them no? It's their community. I just get annoyed when people outside my community try to interfere with us.

 

[Picaro]

How so? Detail. Be specific as to the enumerated power in conflict..

Don't be silly; he's never read the Constitution, and you know he can't. lol lol lol

That is why he hasn't answered the question.

Well, his only real hope is actually a wildly specious argument based on Article I, under the 'Necessary and proper' clause, not the Supremacy clause, and of course both the anti-Federalist Jefferson and the Federalist Madison definitively shot the option down of interpreting that clause remotely liberally enough to cover secession in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. But he is never going to get around the fact that clauses allowing the Federal govt. to use force to keep states in the union was specifically and emphatically rejected during the Constitutional Convention itself, and that's why there is no clause in the Constitution granting the Federal govt. that power, implied or otherwise, no matter how much noise he pulls out of his ass.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Maryland has numerous monuments and Civil War era attractions.

I'm going to become an ass and demand every single reference to the Civil War be erased from Maryland history.

I've been calling and writing my Representatives demanding the removal of these racist monuments.

You're going to call to remove union monuments?

I was being sarcastic.

Why remove a few statues.

Let's just completely erase everything from the Civil War era.

Sounds rather silly, does it not.

I thought you might have been. Hard to tell sometimes.

And yes it seems silly but if local communities want to remove monuments who am I to tell them no? It's their community. I just get annoyed when people outside my community try to interfere with us.

I have been to many of these sites while growing up.

I see it for what it is and was... History.

Maryland was a battleground State.

Families were split choosing sides.

 

[jknowgood]

No you claim you want to erase the racist history of the United states that also includes the civil rights ers. Affirmative action also since we are all created equal.

I have no interest in erasing any aspect of history as long as it's the truth.

You can't find one example of me ever saying or doing anything to the contrary.

You support taking down confederate monuments?

I support letting the authorities with the proper legal jurisdiction decide.

So you would support them if they took a MLK monument down?

Acknowledging authority and supporting or opposing specific actions aren't the same thing.

So you would have a problem with it?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

How is moving a statue from a public park to a museum "erasing history"?

Apparently, once the statue is taken down, every American forgets that Robert E. Lee ever existed.

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

 

[Slash]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Nice article buttercup. Hmm, are they actually "erasing" as the poll led them to believe or just moving them off gov't property? Are they erasing all history, or just that of enemies of war of the USA? Are you one of those left wingers that was buying into all these polls that Trump was going to lose the election too? Or the one that believes 82% of people today would approve of impeaching Trump? Or do you only follow and believe these polls when they tell you what you want to hear?


Also kid, don't forget the US is a representative democracy. They voted. Their elected representatives are taking action. Sorry, have to have your KKK parade elsewhere I guess. Don't worry, we'll find you a safe space to pout.

 

[Freewill]

A number of snowflakes in this forum have said that the voters should decide whether Confederate moderates should be taken down. It appears the voters want them left alone. ANTIFA and BLM are a small fringe, and they do not represent the will of the majority. Does anyone believe the left would desist in their attacks on these monuments if a referendum were held and the voters decided to all them to stay?

Voters Oppose Removing Confederate Monuments - Rasmussen Reports™

Four Confederate monuments were removed from New Orleans earlier this month following complaints that they celebrate racism, and now the city of Baltimore has plans to follow suit. But most voters oppose taking away these remnants of the past even if they are unpopular with some.

While proposals have been made to get rid of monuments such as the Jefferson Memorial and the carving on Stone Mountain in Georgia because they honor men who practiced or defended slavery, just 19% of Likely U.S. Voters think the United States should erase symbols of its past history that are out of line with current sentiments. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% oppose erasing these historical symbols. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.​

Maryland has numerous monuments and Civil War era attractions.

I'm going to become an ass and demand every single reference to the Civil War be erased from Maryland history.

I've been calling and writing my Representatives demanding the removal of these racist monuments.

You're going to call to remove union monuments?

I was being sarcastic.

Why remove a few statues.

Let's just completely erase everything from the Civil War era.

Sounds rather silly, does it not.

I was going to read my entire catalog of time- life books on the Civil War. But this whole discussion will save me the trouble. I will just wait for the reader's digest version. It should be much shorter after deleting all references to John Brown, Lincoln , the Quakers and the rest of the real racists. How the democrat party defeated racism and slavery should be an interesting read. Rev 2 I believe.

 

[Freewill]

Apparently, once the statue is taken down, every American forgets that Robert E. Lee ever existed.

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Do you think that the fact that the election of an abolitionist president and the states immediately leaving the union is an indication that yeah, slavery was the primary cause?

 

[Slash]

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

I remember when we used to list those states rights. Good for us the South did in their articles of secession and congress.

They spoke of states not respecting their right to have escaped slaves returned when they ran to free states.
They spoke of new states not being allowed to choose if they wanted to be pro slavery or not.
They spoke of states having the final say in reopening the slave trade with Africa.

I can see why the revisionists like saying "states rights" instead of spelling them out.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Do you think that the fact that the election of an abolitionist president and the states immediately leaving the union is an indication that yeah, slavery was the primary cause?

More accurately, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 got the ball rolling.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

I remember when we used to list those states rights. Good for us the South did in their articles of secession and congress.

They spoke of states not respecting their right to have escaped slaves returned when they ran to free states.
They spoke of new states not being allowed to choose if they wanted to be pro slavery or not.
They spoke of states having the final say in reopening the slave trade with Africa.

I can see why the revisionists like saying "states rights" instead of spelling them out.

Slavery was infinitely bad, but had little to do with the language of the 10th Amendment.

 

[Slash]

Some of the first acts by the seceding states was to seize federal property within the states. That was as clear as violation of federal law as one could have.

That is true. They had already taken most of the US federal property and gold reserves. They attacked Fort Sumter because they wanted it. It had been ceded to the Federal gov't of the USA in perpetuity, and was legally US Federal property, just like Gitmo in Cuba. They were unhappy with it there, just like Gitmo in Cuba. We restocked it, just like we do with Gitmo in Cuba. They bombed it for 24 hours. I would hope if North Korea bombed our bases in Guam for a day straight we would call that an act of war as well.

 

[Thinker101]

Well, if the plan is to remove anything that has a racial overtone….Martin Luther King, Obama, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson…adios.

 

[Slash]

Well, if the plan is to remove anything that has a racial overtone….Martin Luther King, Obama, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson…adios.

I don't think so. More like removing everything from US government property of a rebellion that created the first country founded on the principles of chattel slavery and who spent it's entire existance killing American Soldiers.

We pulled all the King George statues after the Revolutionary war. When Benedict Arnold turned traitor, even though he was an American we didn't build him statues. We don't have any Hitler, or Osama Bin Laden statues on government property calling them misguided but courageous. Why these?

 

[Freewill]

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Do you think that the fact that the election of an abolitionist president and the states immediately leaving the union is an indication that yeah, slavery was the primary cause?

More accurately, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 got the ball rolling.

The following article makes it clear why Mississippi left the Union.

Now the question is, was the issue racism or economic. First of all who does a person hold another in bondage? They do so by having the thought that the one man is not a man at all. If the slave master's daughter was kidnapped and put into bondage do you think that the slave master would think that was something other then a crime? I certainly don't think so.

So until the black man was seen as a man, not cattle, slavery was to continue.

Mississippi Declaration of Secession

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

 

[Freewill]

Well, if the plan is to remove anything that has a racial overtone….Martin Luther King, Obama, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson…adios.

I don't think so. More like removing everything from US government property of a rebellion that created the first country founded on the principles of chattel slavery and who spent it's entire existance killing American Soldiers.

We pulled all the King George statues after the Revolutionary war. When Benedict Arnold turned traitor, even though he was an American we didn't build him statues. We don't have any Hitler, or Osama Bin Laden statues on government property calling them misguided but courageous. Why these?

Interesting, you are talking to folks that have Che' posters in their offices.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Apparently, once the statue is taken down, every American forgets that Robert E. Lee ever existed.

Quite possible, since history is no longer taught in the public school system.

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Slavery was THE issue. States rights were only relevant as they applied to the primary issue of slavery.

 

[NYcarbineer]

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Do you think that the fact that the election of an abolitionist president and the states immediately leaving the union is an indication that yeah, slavery was the primary cause?

More accurately, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 got the ball rolling.

The following article makes it clear why Mississippi left the Union.

Now the question is, was the issue racism or economic. First of all who does a person hold another in bondage? They do so by having the thought that the one man is not a man at all. If the slave master's daughter was kidnapped and put into bondage do you think that the slave master would think that was something other then a crime? I certainly don't think so.

So until the black man was seen as a man, not cattle, slavery was to continue.

Mississippi Declaration of Secession

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

I've posted that 10 times. These people are ineducable. that's why conservatism appeals to them.

 

[Freewill]

Find me all the public schools that do not teach American history, or teach American history while omitting the Civil War.

All of them. They teach revisionist crap, and a kindergarten version of that. Howard Zinn's nonsense is the primary model.

You're referring to this, for example?

How Texas is whitewashing Civil War history

Nope. That's not revision. Slavery was a catalyst in a fight over state's rights, not the primary issue.

Do you think that the fact that the election of an abolitionist president and the states immediately leaving the union is an indication that yeah, slavery was the primary cause?

More accurately, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 got the ball rolling.

Interesting that you brought up an act that dealt with slavery. Really pissed off the south that new states would be able to declare slave or not.