Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Confederacy of the determined - (Southern heritage buffs vow "Confederate History Month")
WASHINGTON TIMES.COM ^ | APRIL 24, 2005 | Christina Bellantoni

Posted on 04/24/2005 6:08:20 PM PDT by CHARLITE

Southern heritage buffs vow to use the Virginia gubernatorial election as a platform for designating April as Confederate History and Heritage Month.

The four candidates have differing views on the Confederacy, an issue that has been debated for years in the commonwealth.

"We're not just a few people making a lot of noise," said Brag Bowling, a spokesman for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the oldest hereditary organization for male descendents of Confederate soldiers. "This is not a racial thing; it is good for Virginia. We're going to keep pushing this until we get it."

Each candidate recently shared his thoughts on what Mr. Bowling called a "litmus test for all politicians." Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine would not support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Former state Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore would support something that recognizes everyone who lived during the Civil War.

Sen. H. Russell Potts Jr. and Warrenton Mayor George B. Fitch would support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Many past Virginia governors honored the Civil War or the Confederacy.

In 1990, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, the nation's first black governor, a Democrat and a grandson of slaves, issued a proclamation praising both sides of the war and remembering "those who sacrificed in this great struggle."

Former Govs. George Allen and James S. Gilmore III, both Republicans, issued Confederate History Month proclamations. In 2000, Mr. Gilmore replaced that proclamation with one commemorating both sides of the Civil War -- a move that enraged the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Gov. Mark Warner, a Democrat, has refused to issue a gubernatorial decree on either side of the Civil War.

Mr. Kaine, another Democrat, would decline to issue a Confederate History and Heritage Month proclamation if he is elected governor, said his campaign spokeswoman, Delacey Skinner.

(Excerpt) Read more at insider.washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: 1865victory; abe; abelincoln; acknowledgment; bowling; campaign; civilwar; confederacy; confederatecrumbs; confederatehistory; confedernuts; confederwackos; cottonpickers; damnyankee; defeateddixie; dixie; dixiechixsrot; dixielast; dixielost; dixieslaves; dixieslavetraders; dixiesmells; dixiestinks; dixietrash; dixietrolls; dixiewankers; dixiexrates; flaggots; georgeallen; governors; honestabe; honoring; horsecrap; issue; jerrykilgore; kaine; kkknuts; klanthread; konfederate; koolaid; lincolnattackers; longlivetheunion; losers; markwarner; neoconfederate; nomoredixie; nonothings; pickettscharge; platationthread; politics; proclamation; reconstruction; roberteredneck; scv; segrigation; slaves; southernrabble; southernrats; southernslavers; southernwhine; southwhere; tallabe; traitors; unionfirst; unionistheone; unionists; unionvictory; victory; virginia; wardead; washington; yankeesforever; yankeeslavetraders; yankeez
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860, 861-880, 881-900 ... 2,261-2,279 next last
To: driveserve

I like your idea for placement!

(BTW, we celebrate the 4th too. We were in that war as well. Just so we're clear :p)

You need MORE days off though, which was my propsition. Take life slower. It's not going anywhere.

-Mac


861 posted on 05/04/2005 1:53:10 PM PDT by MacDorcha (Where Rush dares not tread, there are the Freepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 817 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861

Hear Hear!


862 posted on 05/04/2005 2:54:46 PM PDT by MacDorcha (Where Rush dares not tread, there are the Freepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

"They attempted to secede but failed. "

So the CSA never occured? huh. whoda thunkit? (aside from a DY.)


863 posted on 05/04/2005 2:56:13 PM PDT by MacDorcha (Where Rush dares not tread, there are the Freepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 829 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
After the fact doesn't count, o fount of Yankee wisdom.

All Supreme Court decisions are made 'after the fact'. For the court to issue a decision before the fact would be, well, unconstitutional.

864 posted on 05/04/2005 2:59:18 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola; stand watie

M.E"(I bet a number of people on here wish you could be taken back for a refund, or just returned..)"

Do elaborate. I'd like to know how you think your opinion measures up to the rest of us.

I bet it falls drastically short. Oct 29, 2004.


865 posted on 05/04/2005 3:05:24 PM PDT by MacDorcha (Where Rush dares not tread, there are the Freepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861; stand watie; All
TexConfederate1861, Thank you again for being a gentleman.


To stand watie: I will admit my remark could have be construed as a racial insult, although in no way was the one word comment intend to be a racial slur, but as another verbal dig. I also admit to not being P/C.


(If had I belonged to the Amalgamated Association of Morons, since being called one repeatedly, I would have been entitled to filed a grievance. I am now thinking of joining, nuff said :)

866 posted on 05/04/2005 5:15:18 PM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
[#855] Are you stupid, or just an imbecile? I assume you CAN read.

[#857] I think we should ALL try to be more civil on these threads, and I include myself as well.

Thanks for the laugh, even though I know you weren't trying to be funny.

Oh, and I missed your #819 could you repost it for me?

867 posted on 05/04/2005 6:26:48 PM PDT by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

With YOUR usual flair for insults, I find it hard to remain civil. You may also note in said post, that I included MYSELF!......


868 posted on 05/04/2005 7:00:32 PM PDT by TexConfederate1861 (Sic Semper Tyrannis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 867 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

To quote the scripture, mac: "He who is without sin, let HIM cast the first stone." Can YOU honestly say that you haven't been rude or insulting to me? NO. Nor can I say the same. It is time everyone cleans up their act. Myself included.


869 posted on 05/04/2005 7:06:10 PM PDT by TexConfederate1861 (Sic Semper Tyrannis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 867 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola; stand watie

A much appreciated gesture, I will try and restrain myself as well.

stand: I hope you will join us in the kumbaya circle:)


870 posted on 05/04/2005 7:08:23 PM PDT by TexConfederate1861 (Sic Semper Tyrannis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 866 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha

My life's not going anywhere. Thanks ;)


871 posted on 05/04/2005 9:22:37 PM PDT by driveserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 861 | View Replies]

To: driveserve

LoL. NP!

::newsflash::

driveserve's life is going nowhere. Updates on the never.

(Beats the heck outta this Michael Jackson BS.)


872 posted on 05/04/2005 9:25:01 PM PDT by MacDorcha (Where Rush dares not tread, there are the Freepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 871 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha

Just beat it?


873 posted on 05/04/2005 10:42:34 PM PDT by driveserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 872 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
I have no problem with what you said in #826,IF you put at the beginning of the post the following words: In my opinion, (opinions are like bellybuttons, as everyone has one!) like all too many others on FR, you have a habit of "making pronouncements" which are NOT factual & are backed-up by NOTHING except more blather & then expecting everyone to accept those UNsupported opinions as FACT.

The fact is that Lincoln is the single most important individual in the perservation of the Union.

That is why you Palo-Confederates hate him so much.

874 posted on 05/04/2005 11:04:06 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
I posted you several links to the evidence that gun-control began in the South not the North.

Now, you are well aware that you Southerners were not going to allow Blacks to have weapons-it would have made lynching them more difficult.

875 posted on 05/04/2005 11:07:02 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
This is off of the Second Amendment Foundation Website,

http://www.saf.org/

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Tahmassebi1.html

GUN CONTROL AND RACISM Stefan B. Tahmassebi*

That all such free Mulattos, Negroes and Indians . . . shall appear without arms[1]

INTRODUCTION

The history of gun control in America possesses an ugly component: discrimination and oppression of blacks, other racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and other "unwanted elements," including union organizers and agrarian reformers. Firearms laws were often enacted to disarm and facilitate repressive action against these groups.

The first gun control laws were enacted in the ante-bellum South forbidding blacks, whether free or slave, to possess arms, in order to maintain blacks in their servile status. After the Civil War, the South continued to pass restrictive firearms laws in order to deprive the newly freed blacks from exercising their rights of citizenship. (emphasis added)

876 posted on 05/04/2005 11:14:57 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
What are you talking about?

The fact that the South intended to form a slave republic?

Read the Confederate Constitution and see Negro slavery written right into the fabric of the Government built (as Andrew Stephens stated) on the fact of the inequality of the races.

This was the cornerstone of the slave republic, correcting the supposed 'error' of the Declaration of Independence that all men were created equal and thus, had a right to self-government.

I guess it was only coincidence that all the states of the fledging slave republic were slave states?

877 posted on 05/04/2005 11:26:33 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
The Confederate GOVERNMENT had not surrendered...therefore it was an act of WAR.

The war was over, and the only who did not know it was Davis.

Lee knew it.

Johnston knew it.

Davis wanted to go down like Hilter, and destroy the entire South with him.

Fortunately, Lee had no intention of seeing the entire South destroyed for a lost cause.

The war was effectively over when Lee surrendered.

878 posted on 05/04/2005 11:31:17 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 854 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
You are a sick individual. I have told you repeatedly in many posts, that slavery was and is wrong. Are you stupid, or just an imbecile? I assume you CAN read.

Really?

I have seen you attempt to defend it!

Now ofcourse, everyone is against slavery.

But that is because the slave republic was crushed in its infancy and its dreams of spreading Negro slavery throughout the Americas defeated by the determination of Abraham Lincoln.

He stated that this nation would not remain slave and free, and the slavers, knowing they could no longer control the government of the United States, intended to create a slave republic to spread whereever it could.

That was to be the cornerstone of the Slave Republic-slavery!

The only person that advocates fascism on this board is YOU. What I "weep" over is the loss of constitutional government, the loss of my family property in Georgia, (1500 acres of land) and the dishonor shown to my brave ancestors by ignorant types like yourself. You must be old John Brown re-born. You see a slaver behind every tree. My ancestor from Texas was a rancher! (in a non-agricultural area of Texas) Why do you suppose he fought? Not for slavery.......and that's for sure.

Read what the South was advocating.

Read what South Carolina was advocating.

Read what Calhoun had long advocated.

Read the Confederate Constitution.

The Southern slave states seceded in order to create their own slave republic, not hindered any longer by Northern abolitionists (as you called me) telling them that slavery was an evil that needed to be ended.

No, for the South of the post Calhoun era, slavery was a positive good, justified by the Bible itself (as some have argued on these threads).

The Paleo-Confederates have done a good job in white washing what they were for.

They have developed an entire cottage industry to push the myth that they were fighting for constitutional liberties.

In fact, they were fighting for the right to enslave the Negro, without any interference.

879 posted on 05/04/2005 11:44:20 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 855 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861

No, 1865 showed that SC had not left the Union, but was in a state of insurrection, that was put down.


880 posted on 05/04/2005 11:45:33 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Gal.4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860, 861-880, 881-900 ... 2,261-2,279 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

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