Posted on 12/22/2020 7:29:00 AM PST by devane617
When Barbara Johns was just 16 years old, she led a walkout at her high school to protest poor and unequal school conditions. The moment is one that many historians believe helped launch the desegregation movement in the US. Now, Johns -- who died in 1991 -- will be memorialized at the US Capitol, replacing Virginia's statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Sorry, I know who my heroes are and none of them are traitors to this country or our military.
Robert E Lee was just that, a traitor.
But he did what he could to being the south and the north back together.
I have no problem with removing his statues because I believe they should have not existed in those locations in the first place. Even though he tried to correct himself later on, he still took arms against the United States Army, which he was a general of.
This has nothing to do with being “woke” or “political correctness”.
I believe the left is doing all of this for the wrong reason. They are right that he should be removed, however they believe his image oppresses minorities or whatever, that is bull. I think he should be removed because he lost and really wasn’t all that great to begin with.
Hopefully the statue ends up at a civil ware museum or park of confederate soldiers or whatever.
I hate to inform you, he lost the war.
YOUR AN IDIOT!
AND STUPID TO BOOT.
Try reading a little bit of REAL HISTORY, not the woke crap taught in schools now days.
Read all the history books you want, he still lost the war
So, let me see if I understand this?
Barbara Johnson rose up against her demoKKKrat masters in opposition to their anti-education (for black people) masters, and now she’s being honored by the even worse demoKKKrat masters (Coonman, blackface Northam) who are even worse than their 1940-1950-1960’s masters so that they will gladly accept the Communist (slave mentality) indoctrination for their’s and Virginia’s children.
How do you really feel?
An embarrassing nobody, and not even from Virginia. Doesn't represent Virginia in any sense.
You think this woman who is not from Virginia is a good representation of the state of Virginia? Isn't the statute supposed to be about Virginia somehow?
And none of the confederates were prosecuted for Treason, not even Jefferson Davis, who came the closest.
Why? Because Chief Justice Salmon P Chase told Federal prosecutors that they would lose in court everything they had won on the battle field.
They wisely dropped the case and let Davis go.
In my daily perusing of various news sources i've seen articles about them attacking Lincoln now.
Minimizing an enemy minimizes the men who vanquished an enemy.
The US Army names it's helicopters off of American Indian tribes. It does so to acknowledge them as great warriors.
“It’s almost like we need an electoral college system WITHIN the states. Each county could get one electoral vote.”
Excellent idea. I just wonder in what states and when, has that proposal been discussed?
Probably the same forces square off: mob majority rule vs. equal representation.
You may find this amusing.
https://veritasjournal.org/2019/03/12/karl-marxs-letter-to-abraham-lincoln/
The Republicans of that era were a lot closer to being Marxists than were the Democrats of that era.
You are quite mistaken about that. The North would have collapsed without US Federal laws artificially creating domestic markets for them at the expense of the Southern states. Without those protectionist laws, the South would have prospered massively, and the North would have fallen into bankruptcy.
You may not know this, but 60% of all the revenue produced by Southern slavery ended up on New York and Washington DC pockets.
That 60% going into the South instead of New York would have massively boosted their economy.
James Madison letter to Alexander Hamilton (which Hamilton then read to the New York ratification convention) 20 July 1788
Once again; you demonstrate your lack of historical knowledge or education.
Prior to the Civil War international agreements were put in the context of “the United States (are) in agreement”, as in the fact that all the “separate states” managed to agree upon an issue.
The primary point is that they are SEPARATE states who all agree for mutual support.
After the Civil War the terminology subtly changed to “the United States (is) in agreement”, as in a single political entity, rather than separate political entities joining together for mutual support.
ARE—IS; two very small words, but in 1860, two words that had tremendous impact in politics.
Robert E. Lee resigned his commission in the United States Army (after being offered command of all Union Forces) to return to his home state of Virginia, which at that time in history was considered a separate “political entity” of the larger United States, and to which he owed his first allegiance.
THEREFORE NOT A TRAITOR!
You are applying a 20/21’st century mind set to a problem that no longer exists.
Just remember “ARE—IS”.
You can try to “Billy (Blowjob) Clinton” the two words all you like, but in common parlance they both have very definite meanings.
He was given a trust and he betrayed that trust. They put him in charge of the CSS Planter. (Transport, not gunboat.) Apparently it was a mistake to trust him.
So when do we get to tear it down?
We won’t lose the second one.
He was anti-slavery. If you are going to criticize a man, you should at least get it right.
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.