Posted on 06/04/2004 1:21:20 PM PDT by MikeJ75
GRAND BLANC - Bringing flags bearing the Confederate insignia to school could cost two Grand Blanc High School seniors their diplomas.
School administrators met Thursday to determine the fates of the two students and a third who was involved in an altercation sparked by the flags. School officials wouldn't announce the outcome of the meeting.
The Confederate flag has sparked a heated debate at the school about whether it's simply a symbol of the South or one of racial discrimination and slavery.
The two students who brought the flags to school Wednesday said there's nothing racist about the Confederate flag. They said it represents Southern pride, among other things, although one of the students said he wanted to apologize to peers who were offended.
(Excerpt) Read more at mlive.com ...
Yeah, Lefty, real familiar. You're channeling the discredited revisionists William Appleman Williams and Gar Alperovitz, who were apologists for Stalin and left slug trails wherever they went. You'd better get a better reading list; the one you've got is rotting your brain.
And you chastise me for cheap shots.
Yeah, because you do that -- you took a couple, and I nailed you. Trying to steal Ike for the revisionist camp isn't going anywhere, either -- Ike let a ton of contracts with the "military-industrial complex", he intervened in Lebanon and made a naval demonstration off Indonesia to chill the PKI -- that was seven years before Col. Suharto and his colleagues staged their coup and pogrom of the PKI, killing over 800,000 Communists.
Ike also supported the Greeks and the Turks in their stand against Russia and subscribed, via the CIA, the attempt to wrest the Ukraine from Soviet control. He also supported the doomed British attempt to oust Enver Hoxha from Albania (which was betrayed by "Kim" Philby), and he himself took care of Gustavo Arbenz in Guatemala.
You are confuted -- Ike was no McGovernite, no trimmer, no compromiser with the Communists as you suggest. He made John Foster Dulles his Secretary of State and embarked on a great tour of alliance-building: CENTO, SEATO, the Anzus Pact, and other regional-security arrangements were taken in hand to oppose the Communist International.
It was Eisenhower who dissevered South Viet Nam from the Communist-controlled North and delivered the South Vietnamese, Laos, and Cambodia, for 20 years, from the grasp of Ho's cadres of political thugs. Eisenhower also gave his imprimatur to the overthrow of Prime Minister Mossadegh in Iran, and the elevation of Shah Reza Pahlevi, to foil the plans of the Tudeh Party (the Communist Party) to take Iran into the Soviet bloc. Then, in his last years in office, he set in motion the plan that eventually became the Bay of Pigs.
Look elsewhere for American leaders who'll posthumously endorse your crayfishing agenda.
You're just saying that because of your need to defend The Rapist.
Jack Kennedy exposed himself to personal compromise with his affairs. So did everyone who took illegal campaign contributions, Lyndon Johnson's "walking-around money" (which is what I think Herman Talmadge's wife found in the famous shoebox that figured in her divorce proceedings -- the shoebox was stuffed with $100 bills, which "Humman" couldn't account for), or late-night electoral help from a gargoyle like Sam Giancana.
Kennedy was screwing a mob capo's favorite squeeze, for God's sake -- Judy Campbell was what they used to call in the 30's a gun moll, and the president was boffing her in the White House. Where is your sense of moral outrage? Your sense of political danger, and of these guys opening themselves to political intrigue? Clinton's presidency was wrecked by his philandering-and-worse, and that wasn't even the worst of it: rape, obstruction of justice, and perjury. They all flowed in a cascade from his personal life.
Eisenhower would not approve of G.W. Bush invading a weaker nation for no reason at all. If you think 9/11 was a reason then you are too stupid for words. If Eisenhower did find it necessary to invade a country, you can bet he would followed his military commanders advice regarding the assault. He would not have poopooed the Pentagon's suggestions. Ike also would make sure that the soldiers had what they needed during the campaign and he would not be paying outsourced private contractors (mercanaries) more than the soldiers are making and he definitely would not use them if it meant the soldiers serving would not have what they needed.
As I had said, what is done to monitor our enemies or protect our allies is one thing, whether it be with the CIA or the military. In WWII Stalin and the Commies were are allies. After WWII, Ike was not involved with Stalin and the Commies, but he was aware of the danger they posed and yes, he was as afraid of them having the bomb as they were of us.
The way you write of Eisenhower, you make it sound that he began viet nam. I would like to know what data you have reviewed to obtain your facts. I am not so closed minded that I would find a suggested reading list an insult.
As to JFK - again - he is dead and gone - you are one of those who can slam dead people with no hesitation, yet, should anyone say anything bad about your icons (Reagan) you flip your lid. Again, what he did in is private life (just as what you did or do in yours) is of no concern to me. I referenced him for purposes of example and I say again, what JFK did in those 3 days in October, his restraint and his caution and reason saved the world. If GW were prez then, we would have been in a nuclear war by end of day 1, he has no restraint, he hasn't a clue what the word reason means and I bet when he drives, he runs all yellow lights. I would not be here writing this if he was Prez in the 60's, we all would be dead.
How you hate to face the truth. GW did not serve in the war, he has no idea what it involves. He is no military leader, let alone national leader. The U.S. is in a precarious position as a result of the "war" and our homeland is not protected. As a wise and sage man, how can you defend his actions in Iraq?
I am not saying we should be a pacifist nation with no military. I believe our military is essential and that the benefits paid to our soldiers need to be re-examined and brought in line with the wages consistent with living. I don't believe outsource private contractors should make $100,000.00 a year, tax free, for serving next to our soldiers. You need to look at the outsourcing wastes, the privatizatin that is going on now. GW & his admin see to it that their private companies and their cronies private corps get revenue, at a cost to our military. Build the military, make it mighty, just don't invade on lies, use it to protect our homefront, not endanger it.
Base closings should never be heard again in our nation. The V.A. hospitals should not be closed, they should be prperly funded, renovated and improved. The military should not have to pay taxes, Veterans medical benefits should be reinstated. GW has no concern for the veterans and/or our military.
Get a grip -- your world will not come to an end if you recognize that GW is not Reagan and he is bringing dishonor and peril to our nation.
essentially NOTHING in your post is anything other than anti-southern, baseless PROPAGANDA from the most extreme, leftist fringe of the poison-ivy league schools.
perhaps you belong over on DU?????
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
This happened in a town called Grand Blanc? (Great White)
as you can imagine, i was watching all the cable news channels carefully that night! and was ELATED/PLEASED!
free dixie,sw
i have an (TREASURED) official US War Dept. poster, circa 1943, which has crossed US & CSA flags on it, with the legend:
JOIN THE ARMY & HELP THE SOUTH WIN THE WAR!
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
;besides DUELS were fought ONLY between GENTLEMEN!
;
;thus, NO duel!
Sir, I stand corrected.
;-)
It doesn't sound like you know what those principles were, much less the principals who articulated them. Any liberal version of revolutionary history that has been articulated in the last 50 years is at least 35% buncombe. You'll have to learn to recognize the mythology that has been inserted into the historical record in the interest of "building socialism". Sorry about that, but it's true. Anyone who talks about national this and national that and the overarching authorship of elite amalgamators and centralizers is channeling Hamilton-worship, which is a necessary antecedent to Lincoln-worship and the cult of the nation-state and socialism. These values were foreign and inimical to Americans of the first two centuries, and if you and your classmates are not being taught that, then you're being inseminated with lies that the inseminators hope will grow into mass political action that will make their causes great at the expense of American liberty.
Acquaint yourself with these ideas, and you'll have an idea what it was like to be a real American, once upon a time:
American exceptionalism
American liberty (not Florentine liberty, or French liberte', or Roman libertas, or the rights of Englishmen -- all, all different, very different)
Manifest Destiny (if they taught you that it was a moral crudity practiced by racist slugs, throw your books away: your teachers are your enemies)
The American Experiment
Limited Government
Subsidiarity
The Social Contract/Compact (the words don't mean exactly the same thing -- if they didn't teach you this, demand a refund)
Express Delegation
Residual Sovereignty and Ultimate Sovereignty
The People (who are the People?)
The Militia (who are the Militia? And why can't they be used in foreign wars?)
Distribution of Power and Consent
Gateways of Consent
This is not a syllabus or an outline. It's just a safety check to see whether your education was indeed an education, or whether it was just a long propaganda preparation for a life of slavery under the heel of the State, "building Socialism" (make that, "sunny new tomorrows") for people who don't give a rat's ass about you.
Think about it.
Old wise one, I challenge you to go back and study the Revolutionary War and our founding fathers reasons for fighting it.
One, I'm not old. I only look old. Two, I did.
Liberals, our founding fathers were liberals and I proudly stand by them as a liberal, believing in the values and principals upon which our nation was built.
The Founders were eighteenth-century liberals, who are called conservatives today. Learn the difference, since you are obviously blissfully unaware of one, thanks to the treacherousness of your professors.
Your clever quips do not respond to the obvious questions that are out there.
This isn't cartoon time, and it ain't funny. It's as real as real gets. How you see your government determines what the New Class cabal can do to you. What you'll take, is what you'll get. Think that's funny?
How has the “war” in Iraq strengthened our nation? How can the “powers that be” claim to support our troops in one breath, yet pass laws that take away veterans benefits, give the profits of this war to private contractors through outsourcing and restore power to the same political power they “overthrew” in Iraq? Remember it was Dubya who announced the mission was over a year ago. Yet, we remain, our soldiers continue to die and the people of Iraq continue to know terror and abuse at our hands.
I don't defend Dubya's budget priorities. Those priorities are made in office towers on Fifth Avenue in Midtown Manhattan by money-runners and the people they work for. One of these days, the terrorists will deploy a WMD in Scarsdale or The Hamptons, and the rich people will suddenly come to Jesus on national defense. Historically, they've hated it -- it cost too much.
The GOP is one grand pyramid scam.
If you knew what you were talking about, you would address the subject not in the language of current Buzzflash invective, but with language that shows that you've read someone who knows what he's talking about.
For an introduction to the two wings of the GOP by someone who respected one wing of it as long as it was agreeably losing to the DemonRats, and who utterly hated the other (to which I belong), read Chapters 3 and 5 of The Making of the President 1964, about Barry Goldwater's great challenge and overthrow of the Mugwumps of the Eastern industrial and financial elite, who had ruled the Republican Party without interruption since 1856.
Then let's talk, if you're still interested.
<Kerry-for-President drivel filtered>
Secession is leaving the room. Secession is excusing yourself, standing up, and walking out. Free men do that. Only a straw boss would object. Start analyzing these situations a little better.
That's a crappy link you provided about Wolfowitz and contrary to your continuous assertions that Al Qaeda and Iraq had nothing to do with each other or 9/11, what administration officials have said is they don't have proof.
The links between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein go back over 10 years and even the Clinton administration said during the later part of the 90's that OBL had agreed not to attack Iraq in exchange for WMD training.
In the 90's the mainstream media wrote hundreds of articles about the world's alarm at the growing relationship between the two men. It's so interesting to see the leftists now pretend they don't know what they once knew.
Many links between OBL and Hussein are detailed here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127451/posts
Our way of life is based on liberty and freedom, with no built-in guarantee of not being offended. You are mistaken about Americanism. (But I would agree with you that bin Laden isn't a part of anything American.)
You, and others, seem to be confusing flags with convictions and beliefs. The same illogic has been unable to stem the growth of gangs by enacting dress codes, and for the same reasons.
In fact, a somewhat related imposition of government will, albeit on a much larger scale, was involved in the root causes of the War Between the States. My grandmother used to tell me, almost daily, "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still." So, what do you really gain by this force of government?
secession is treason if it involves attacking a military base - leave the room if you like, leave the country, go ahead, but in leaving don't think you can overthrow the entire household just to claim the room back.
Ahhh - here you are.
The DNC plant. The troll. The man who runs from arguments. The man who can't marshall his facts enough to make a halfway decent argument.
You can run but you can't hide. You left a lot of friends on this thread.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1148281/posts
This guy -- curious311 -- is a troll. I mean, really, read post#67. Also, read his posts here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1148281/posts
I though FR was going to be cracking down on trolls.
Anyway, by all means, flam away at "curious311" -- a bona fide troll.
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.