Posted on 08/28/2017 7:32:14 PM PDT by SJackson
“Unite the Right” was a bad choice of names for the anti-Semitic rally that occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia, over the weekend. The movement has nothing to do with conservatives and is the result of the left’s continued efforts to change history.
The Grand Old Party is the party that was formed with the sole purpose of ending slavery. It is the party that delivered Abraham Lincoln and fought for the end of slavery. One-hundred years later, it was the party that cast the votes for the Civil Rights movement and later for the rights of women to vote. It’s not the party that’s about to give it all back because of a few extremists claiming to be conservatives.
The problem with the alt-right, is just that. They are an alternative to conservatism, and clearly not a good one. They loosely espouse their misaligned values based on the premise they claim to embrace the Constitution. If you are truly someone who embraces the Constitution, you would understand the rule of law rather than the rule of man.
Democratic Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signor was quick to point out that the violence in his city was the fault of President Donald Trump. He should consider that the other three fingers were pointing back the other direction. Once again, the liberal policies of erasing history ignited a flame that wasn’t necessary to light.
The city voted to eliminate its horrible ties to the past of siding with the slave owners during the Civil War. The city voted to rename Lee Park to Emancipation Park and, ultimately, the removal of a statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee. While there still are groups like the Klu Klux Klan who may view Lee as a crusader, they also are missing the opportunity to teach future generations that it was Lee who surrendered at Appomattox to Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.
There are numerous problems with Signor’s position to eliminate American history’s ugly side. Signor’s Democrats fail to recognize that statues and monuments are not all about the glory side of any debate. Lee was an American soldier who decided to defend his state rather than side with the Union. Lee ended up on the wrong side of history. His battles serve as lessons to the other side of history and the war wasn’t entirely about slavery.
Lee’s decision to defend the South, rather than defend the Union, was strictly based on his belief in states’ rights. Lee’s family was pro-Union and his decision to fight for the South wasn’t based on his support of secession, it was based on his belief he needed to defend his home state. Lee’s family home was seized by the Union and turned into Arlington National Cemetery. If we are going to continue eliminating our past, then how do we deal with the more than 400,000 buried with honors at this site?
There is no justification in promoting any effort that supports one race over another. The frustration of so many people is that “equal” is no longer “equitable.” It has become one person’s rights over another’s.
The progressive movement believes that you have to create privileged opportunities for people of race, sex, or any other so-called diminished class. This liberal push has created inequities among average Americans trying to vie for opportunities in the same place. It doesn’t matter to the average person if you are black or white; it matters that everyone is given the same opportunity. Creating that opportunity based on skin color is not equitable for anyone looking for the same leg up.
If the left wants to continue to erase America’s conflicted past when it comes to race, they will bring the country back to a time of racial ignorance the KKK seemingly enjoys. When KKK Supreme Leader David Duke ran as a Democrat in 1988, he was rejected by everyone on the left (he did, oddly enough, win the New Hampshire Vice Presidential primary). In 1992, he ran as a Republican. Duke won zero delegates in the attempt. His position is clearly not populist.
Duke also has tried to tie events in Charlottesville to President Trump’s presidential victory, but even that attempt is failing.
History is our only evidence that supports our laws against racism. The rule of law over rule of man must prevail, but won’t if we continue to erase the evidence.
The problem with the alt-right, is just that. They are an alternative to conservatism, and clearly not a good one.
Is the “ALT RIGHT” an actual organization, or is it a term made up by the left, to give them a boogeyman, a strawman, whom they can say they are fighting against?
Exactly. Democrats want to hide their history.
One-hundred years later, it was the party that cast the votes for the Civil Rights movement and later for the rights of women to vote. It’s not the party that’s about to give it all back because of a few extremists claiming to be conservatives.
Some factual errors here. Women got the right to vote in all states via the 19th amendment, in 1920. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed in 1964. How does it follow that they voted “later” for the right of women to vote??
The Left is convinced that nationalism is the reason Trump won (America first; border wall; protect our jobs; protect our nation; make NATO pay; etc etc.)
The point of the statues coming down is all part of the attack on our national history and identity. Kneel for the National Anthem because America is evil and always has been. it was evil from its inception (say the Leftists) - racist, classist, murderous.
Though they started with Civil War figures, they’ve moved to Washington and Jefferson. The goal is to destroy any positive feelings we have for our American history and country.
That clears the way to open borders, globalism, one world government. The rulers will be elites - judges and post-democracy (democracy is unreliable and messy) forms of government where national borders are wiped out.
That’s the goal and the statue destroying is just one symptom.
There were many civil rights bills after the Civil War. Suffrage came after.
I agree if he’s referring to the 1964 bill, suffrage came well before that.
“Is the “ALT RIGHT” an actual organization”
No. But it is a term that they originated. It wasn’t a media made-up term.
Who is the “they” who originated the term “Alt Right”? Who does this term refer to?
For all the news coverage, and talking head programs I heard, I have yet to hear anyone say who exactly the Alt Right is.
I know Hillary mentioned it a time or two in her campaign, then dropped reference to it. Apparently it didn’t poll well in her focus groups.
He’s not talking about the Civil Rights Act, he was talking about the civil rights movement which started at least as early as Benjamin Franklin.
The movement for black civil rights preceded that of women.
There is a web site if you really care.
The Grand Old Party is the party that was formed with the sole purpose of ending slavery. It is the party that delivered Abraham Lincoln and fought for the end of slavery. One-hundred years later, it was the party that cast the votes for the Civil Rights movement and later for the rights of women to vote.
Well, where am I wrong? I don’t understand. He’s talking about the Republican party. That party was formed in 1854, long after Ben Franklin’s day. Roughly 100 years later brings us to the Civil Rights movement of the ‘50s and ‘60s, climaxing in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Maybe not, but darn few will survive their party platform. Stink eye not included.
I do not go boating with democrats knowingly ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l69WZhjxs_g&list=RDVorr7ni7sNM&index=28
If they whitewash enough history we can say that slavery never happened. Is that what they want?
Women got the right to vote in 1920. The first Civil Rights vote (that I’m aware of) came in 1956 during, and with the help of, the Republican Eisenhower administration. It suffered defeat by elements of the Democrat party.
“That clears the way to open borders, globalism, one world government. The rulers will be elites - judges and post-democracy (democracy is unreliable and messy) forms of government where national borders are wiped out.”
This reeks more and more of meddling by George Soros, the mad Hungarian (Sorry Mr. Hrabosky).
The correct description is “redwashing” history
If they destroy their history, then “we” don’t have to give them food stamps, welfare, reparations, etc....because their grievances don’t exist any more.
I keep being told that “the parties switched” and now we’re the racist, slave owning bigots.
Pretty sure they actually believe that.
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.