[Ohioan]

You have obviously bought the propaganda of the Left over the "Civil Rights" movement. You, also, obviously, collect uncomplimentary pictures of Police. Why?

You are also very, very confused as to what we fought in World War II. We were attacked, have you forgotten? We were defending the United States of America. But, since you seek to make a point about race and ethnicity, I suggest that you look a bit closer at Nazi Germany, as it will give the lie to your premise that the Communists would not have been able to corrupt U.S. race relations--or help other Socialists corrupt U.S. race relations--if there were not legitimate grievances.

Do you think that the German Socialists had a legitimate grievance against German Jews, industrious people, with above average intelligence, who had and were making major positive contributions to German Academics, Science, Music, and business? Or will you acknowledge that Hitler, employing a technique Marx had advocated in the 1840s, used the Jews as a scape goat to rally the hatred of people who wanted to blame someone else for their problems? The "Civil Rights" movement--and those on this thread who so hate the South--have used exactly the same technique against the traditional Southerners (whose States, interestingly, were the first in America where Jews were fully accepted into the mainstream of society).

When the far Left realized that "Class Warfare" was not working in America, they began to use race as a metaphor for Class, to turn the races against each other. To see the alternative, you might consider the address by Booker T. Washington at the Atlanta Exposition in 1895: Booker T. Washington. Had that wise and good man's counsel been followed, how much better off we would all be today, White and Black alike.

Brown vs. Board of Education was based upon Leftwing Sociology--such as Myrdal (a Swedish Socialist's) "American Dilemma"--and not on legal precedent. Even the radical reconstructionists, never expected anything that extreme. It has stirred up a great deal of problems in education, ever since. In my opinion, the Federal Courts should not be involved in local Education. Education, by its very nature is inherently local--and that goes for Congressional mandates, as to curricula and funding.

My opposition to the Fourteenth Amendment is based both upon its content and the method by which it was "ratified." I would have the same objection to the Fifteenth Amendment, but not the Thirteenth. In my opinion, suffrage should have remained where the Founding Fathers placed it, under the control of each State. That goes for the 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments, also. But that said, I have no expectation that the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th, are likely to be repealed at any time soon.

When you suggest that the Southern State Governments in the 1950s were controlled by the Klan, you demonstrate your ignorance. Are you suggesting that James Byrnes, former Supreme Court Justice and Secretary of State of the United States, who became Governor of South Carolina in 1950, specifically to fight the Federal attack on States Rights, was a Klansman? Or that the Harry Byrd organization in Virginia was controlled by the Klan? You prattle pure nonsense.

Again, you mentioned Nazi Germany. It is indeed an excellent example--if you once understand it--of what we should not have to see in America. Hitler's first act upon seizing special powers, in a contrived emergency, was to abolish the rights of the German States. States' Rights are our guarantee against monolithic Government in America. It is a pity that you cannot see that.

William Flax

[M. Espinola]

"You have obviously bought the propaganda of the Left over the "Civil Rights" movement. You, also, obviously, collect uncomplimentary pictures of Police. Why?"

What a typical pathetic nonresponse. The photos of the 'Klan cops' in question which you refused to issue comment, are from a website with a subsection entitled 'INTRODUCTION TO SEGREGATION IN THE SOUTH, 1961. (which never happened in your opinion) by David B. Fankhauser, Ph.D., Professor of Biology and Chemistry U.C. Clermont College, Batavia, Ohio.

"My opposition to the Fourteenth Amendment is based both upon its content and the method by which it was "ratified." I would have the same objection to the Fifteenth Amendment, but not the Thirteenth."

At least you clarified, as an 'American', your opposition to the Fourteenth Amendment. Really amazing you being so against due process & equal protection under the law, but then again if one apologies for both slavery & Southern segregation of the races, it's perfectly normal.

Why do you even bother linking anything stated by Booker T. Washington, when according to your views on constitutional amendments, the man would not be allowed to vote. Really pitiful.

I must conclude one of your core complaints relate to Section #3 of the the Fourteenth Amendment. The portion which reads '...to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.'

This part of Section #1 must be killing you: 'No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified three years after the end of the Civil War during July of 1868, guaranteed basic civil rights to all citizens. (Gezzz how horrible!)

Which grouping of American citizens should be denied basic civil rights in your opinion?

Since you stated equal opposition to the Fifteenth Amendment which race(s) would be restricted from voting?: 'The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

In Southern states, in place of the Fifteenth Amendment, for almost 100 years was Southern state instigated & enforced ultra-violent voter intimidation, and later also 'grandfather clauses' and 'poll taxes' in order to prevent some Americans from voting. Are you also proud of that portion of 'Southern history' and wish it was never altered?

In terms of the Nineteenth Amendment, do you believe the ladies should not be able to cast their votes either?

It's already been stated but for the record once again so everyone can view this, you favour a repeal of the Twenty Forth Amendment so Americans citizens would once again for forced to pay a 'poll tax'. Would this be another federal tax, a state tax or a combination of both?

Do you favour the voting age should revert to age 21? (Twenty sixth Amendment) Or, would any alterations or repeal of the Twenty Sixth Amendment only be applicable for those particular Americans 'allowed' to vote, under your guidelines?

"Are you suggesting that James Byrnes, former Supreme Court Justice and Secretary of State of the United States, who became Governor of South Carolina in 1950, specifically to fight the Federal attack on States Rights, was a Klansman? Or that the Harry Byrd organization in Virginia was controlled by the Klan? You prattle pure nonsense.

You wish it was "prattle" & "nonsense" as you defend another hero from the party of Robert 'KKK' Byrd. Let's read a Byrd quote:

"I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state.The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia."

And another Klan quot from 'The Byrd' you feebly attempt to defend:

"It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union"

In order to maintain the Southern vote FDR appointed Democrat Jimmy Byrnes, a notorious segregationist from South Carolina. Also appointed to gather votes in the Deep South, another 'former' member of the Ku Klux Klan, Democrat Senator Hugo Black of Alabama. You know as well as everyone else during Jim Crow nobody got elected senator in states like South Carolina or Alabama unless they shared the views of the Klan.

Your like minded pal 'stand watie' made the following observation: "A Secret History of the KKK", the NATIONAL HQ of ALL the various klan groups was CLEARLY identified as being in OHIO." (There has to be multiple reasons for that location)

"Again, you mentioned Nazi Germany. It is indeed an excellent example--if you once understand it..."

You have no idea with whom you are speaking.

The position you disgustingly hold on the Shoah is crystal clear when previously reviewing your 'Myth of the Holocaust'.

[steve-b]

The "Civil Rights" movement--and those on this thread who so hate the South--have used exactly the same technique against the traditional Southerners (whose States, interestingly, were the first in America where Jews were fully accepted into the mainstream of society).

Anybody who asserts that Jews were better accepted in Alabama than in New York is -- to be blunt about it -- smoking crack.