Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Voters salute current flag (Georgia-GOP Purdue wins, Dem Barnes loses)
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 3/3/04 | Ben Smith

Posted on 03/03/2004 10:20:47 AM PST by Diddle E. Squat

Black and white voters across Georgia finally have a flag they can agree on.

The state's current banner, modeled after the first national flag of the Confederacy, won by a nearly 4-1 ratio Tuesday over its sole rival, a blue-and-gold banner that flew briefly over Georgia from 2001 until last year.

"I had heard," said Christy Myrick, 35, of Atlanta, "that if [the current] flag is chosen there won't be any more discussion and it will be over, finally."

That's the pitch top Georgia politicians and business leaders had made to voters in advertising and campaign calls in the days leading up to the balloting.

The argument over Georgia's state flag is at least two decades old. It started when African-American legislators first sought to strip the Confederate battle emblem from the banner. That emblem, the Rebel "X," dominated the state flag that flew from 1956 to 2001. Beloved by Confederate history enthusiasts as a heritage symbol, but reviled by blacks as racist, the 1956 flag was the reason the referendum was called in the first place.

Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue was elected in part on a promise he made to rural white voters that he would give them a chance to bring back the banner. His predecessor, Democrat Roy Barnes, who was upset by Perdue in 2002, forced the 1956 banner off Georgia flagpoles by ramming its blue-and-gold replacement through the Legislature in 2001.

In last year's General Assembly session, lawmakers then removed the 1956 flag as an option from Perdue's referendum bill and hoisted a brand-new one.

Some voters said they were deprived of a real choice.

"I think we should have been given a choice before Barnes ever changed it," said Don Rawls, 26, a Fayette County voter wearing a T-shirt that read: "Dixie — ole times are not forgotten."

Tuesday night, Perdue praised the referendum's results but placed responsibility for excluding the 1956 flag from the vote on the General Assembly.

"While I recommended that an additional choice be available to the people, the Legislature came to a different conclusion, and I respected their decision," said Perdue. "I believe the people chose a beautiful banner, which reflects our history and heritage."

Some voters used the flag referendum as an opportunity to take a swipe at Perdue for his handling of the issue. Others voted to honor Barnes, who got rid of the 1956 flag but lost the governor's office.

"Why? 'Cause I think a lot of him," said Ralph Bicknell, a 78-year-old Republican from Woodstock who voted for the Barnes flag out of respect for the former governor.

The Barnes flag included a ribbon of five postcard-sized mini-flags, including the 1956 Georgia flag.

"It's a good compromise," said Barnes, who voted for the flag he championed. "It shows all of Georgia's history."

All that separates Georgia's current flag from the first national flag of the Confederacy is the inclusion of the state coat of arms and the words "In God We Trust" inside its ring of stars. African-American politicians, however, said it is a far more acceptable symbol than the battle flag, which was appropriated by Ku Klux Klansmen after the Civil War.

But some voters said they made their choice purely on looks.

Jim Goodman of Woodstock said: "It looks better up a flagpole."

Staff writers Jill Young Miller, Laura Diamond, Doug Payne and Clint Williams contributed to this article.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Georgia
KEYWORDS: byrddeeplysaddened; dumbestheadlineever; georgiaflag
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: Diddle E. Squat
Can you post for me an article out of the Atlanta newspaper from 1956 that states that defiance was the reason the flag was changed?

Seems like all the "evidence" linking the 1956 GSF to segregation is pretty recent.

Why do you think that is?

And no, you did not not refute my original contention, wishful thinking on your part not withstanding, and you can get as simple as you want, and as unpleasant as you think you need to be to make whatever point you think you have. You cannot condemn one flag for flying over a state which practiced segregation for 8 years, but give another flag which flew over a nation which practiced slavery for 89 years a pass and remain intellectually consistent.

41 posted on 03/03/2004 2:35:11 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Yeah right, and next you'll claim that the poll tax was just a means of raising revenue?

That's why you flag obsessors have zero credibility.
42 posted on 03/03/2004 2:40:13 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat (AWB - 80% of the GOP voted against it, 80% of Dems voted for it, and you say there is no difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
I am not a "flag obsessor." I deny the allegation and confound the alligator.

Poll taxes have not been a subject of this conversation until you just now brought it up in an attempt to deflect attention from your inability to find any 1956-era admissions that defiance was the reason for the 1956 GSF and your discomfort with applying the same rules to the Stars & Stripes as you apply to the GSF.

Intellectual consistency is a bitch. Many people never trouble themselves with it.

When the NAACP and President Hillary declare the US Flag offensive, what logical argument will you have to defend it? The very creation of the flag itself was an act of defiance against our lawful King. And half of those old, dead, white dudes were slave owners.

Is slavery not more heinous than segregation?

43 posted on 03/03/2004 2:56:26 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Naw, you invoked a diversionary technique, and I threw it back in your face with a similar example. Are you really claiming that southern states attempting to change their flags in the civil war movement was not a defiant act tied to issues of segregation and civil rights?

If so, that is simply denial. I'm not going to waste time creating a thesis of refutation.
44 posted on 03/03/2004 3:01:03 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat (AWB - 80% of the GOP voted against it, 80% of Dems voted for it, and you say there is no difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Are you really claiming that southern states attempting to change their flags in the civil war movement was not a defiant act tied to issues of segregation and civil rights?

See post 32 above. Georgia did not have a state flag to change during "the civil war movement."

I'm not going to waste time creating a thesis of refutation.

I asked for contemporary, 1956-era evidence that the creation of the 1956 GSF was a defiant act tied to issues of segregation and civil rights.

You have provided none.

Your time is precious. Waste no more of it trying to convince me of things you cannot prove.

I believe I have made my point.

45 posted on 03/03/2004 3:12:44 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Yes, you caught a typo in my response, 'civil war movement' should be 'civil rights movement'.

So I'll repeat my post, corrected for that typo.



Naw, you invoked a diversionary technique, and I threw it back in your face with a similar example. Are you really claiming that southern states attempting to change their flags in the civil rights movement was not a defiant act tied to issues of segregation and civil rights?

If so, that is simply denial. I'm not going to waste time creating a thesis of refutation.

46 posted on 03/03/2004 3:17:14 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat (AWB - 80% of the GOP voted against it, 80% of Dems voted for it, and you say there is no difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup

First National, Stainless Banner (Second National), Third National

47 posted on 03/03/2004 3:27:51 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Apparently your time isn't that valuable.

Do you have any contemporary, 1956-era evidence that the pre-1956 GSF was changed in 1956 as a defiant act tied to issues of segregation and civil rights?

This is a simple, yes or no question.

If you do, post it.

48 posted on 03/03/2004 3:37:45 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:N5-iyUQ4RsIJ:www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2003/04/07/editorial3.html+1956+georgia+%22denmark+groover%22+segregation+%22flag%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

"Denmark Groover, the governor's floor leader in 1956, conceded 45 years later: "I'm positive that to some degree [the confrontation with the federal courts] was a motivating factor in myself and others." "

From the mouth of the man who sponsored the 1956 change. Something ever flag obsessor is by now aware of, yet still the ridiculous attempt at denial and feigned ignorance.

Now I'm done. You can try all the debate tricks you want, the truth is pretty obvious.


49 posted on 03/03/2004 3:53:24 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat (AWB - 80% of the GOP voted against it, 80% of Dems voted for it, and you say there is no difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Thank you.
50 posted on 03/03/2004 4:00:34 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Denmark Groover, the governor's floor leader in 1956, conceded 45 years later

Yes, the truth IS pretty obvious. What Denmark Groover says 45 years later is obviously NOT the contemporary, 1956-era evidence I have repeatedly asked you to provide. One might wonder whether good ole Denmark was lying in 1956, or in 2001. There was no politically correct constituency to suck up to in 1956.

Obviously, your failure to provide contemporary, 1956-era evidence clearly indicates the non-existance of such.

Which has been my contention all along.

It is good that you are done now.

If you really are.

51 posted on 03/03/2004 4:11:19 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (The Global War On Terror is not an episode of COPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
LYING is a REAL threat!

if we can't trust his word of honor (and that is PRECISELY what he gave us!) on this, why should we/you/anybody believe anything else he says?????

free dixie,sw

52 posted on 03/04/2004 8:12:58 AM PST by stand watie (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. -T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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