Posted on 12/28/2006 11:31:38 AM PST by peggybac
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- The new president of the University of Texas says he will appoint a panel to decide what to do with four bronze statues on the Austin campus that honor confederate leaders and have drawn complaints for several years. William Powers Jr., who took over as president this month, said the advisory committee would look into concerns about the statues, which include likenesses of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States, and Gen. Robert E. Lee. "A lot of students, and especially minority students, have raised concerns. And those are understandable and legitimate concerns. On the other hand, the statues have been here for a long time, and that's something we have to take into account as well," Powers said in Wednesday's Austin American-Statesman. The university's previous president, Larry Faulkner, wrote an open letter to the campus more than two years ago saying the statues convey "institutional nostalgia" for the Confederacy and its values. "Most who receive that message are repelled," Faulkner wrote. Statuary on the Austin campus has grown more diverse over the years, partly as a result of student-led efforts. A student fee raised funds to install a statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in 1999. Also in the works are statues of Hispanic labor leader Cesar Chavez and Barbara Jordan, the first black woman from the South elected to Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
No, the solution is federalism, where the central government only performs those actions necessary on a national scale, leaving the subdivisions to govern themselves as they see fit on all other matters.
Socialists, leftists and their ilk are the only ones suited to a central gov't in the USA. The rest of us would simply like to be left alone. We'll do our part, meanwhile, leave us the hell alone.
We don't. The DoEd would be one of the first departments abolished if I were President.
"I have an idea. How about, since this is an educational institution, they have a few classes on HISTORY!"
Would you bother to attend?
Sneaky little jab by a sneaky little guy. If you want to debate history I have a right hook that is devastating.
I see you're a newbie. Good luck. Your face may be incinerated before you can blink. LOL!
Sneaky little jab by a sneaky little guy. If you want to debate history I have a right hook that is devastating."
Shall we send your threat off to the moderator?
Or is that just a sneaky little punk statement?
I'll leave it at that for now but you ought to put a sock in it and put off the drinking binge til later:)
You have no business here. Go away. You can't debate and you are a smithereen.
Let's drop it jack.
You cannot debate with me any more than I can with you.
Debate requires some modicum of respect and restraint and you seemingly cannot even take the least bit of ribbing without trash talk.
Post to others and I'll do the same (for now)
You don't have a clue how to conduct yoursel on this board. Since you are surrendering, I'll back off. Go to the nursery.
No. We don't drop it here just because you can't hack it. Get with the program.
"No. We don't drop it here just because you can't hack it. Get with the program."
Yes child ... we will drop it as I just don't think I'm going to take orders from the likes of you in this lifetime.......but feel free to petulantly ramble on as it speaks volumes about your character:) See you around unless you aren't around.
Fine. What we have conversed about for the last 30 minutes is your lack of conversation. Typical. If you have an inkling about what we are doing here it would be good for you to spout that now. Otherwise, you are exposed as an off. Or a goof.
And if you want to attack forever, as many have, I will enjoy watching from a distance. I'm going to go out on my deck, smoke a cigar, and enjoy my destruction of a newbie who should learn patience and tactics. And then I'm going to bed and read. LOL!!
I agree that we are presently overly centralized. However, if the theories of government expoused by the secessionists had triumphed, which they very nearly did, "we" would not have been committed to WWII, as we would have been split into at least two nations by the 1940s, perhaps more, with a very good chance that "the American nations" would have been on opposite sides of the world wars of the 20th century.
For that matter, a North America focused on its internal conflicts would very probably have spent large sums on a local arms race, in which armies not navies would predominate. Neither American country would have turned its attention outwards, annexing Hawaii, which would have been instead taken over by one of the other Powers, probably Britain, but perhaps Germany.
In a world where the South won the WBTS, it is indeed quite likely that Pearl Harbor would not have happened.
Did not millions of Americans die in a war ostensibly fought to end slavery in the US? Of course, for the record, it was the United States and Britain that led the world in abolishing slavery.
The North's objective for the first couple of years was preservation of the Union, not ending slavery. Here is a resolution of the US House of Representatives from July 22, 1861:
Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, That the present deplorable civil war has been forced upon the country by the disunionists of the Southern States now in revolt against the constitutional Government, and in arms around the capitol; that in this national emergency, Congress, banishing all feelings of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country; that this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States; but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution, and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States, unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.
The Senate passed a resolution with substantially the same wording on July 25, 1861.
Not yet, but they are presently ahead.
So then do we agree that the American Revolution was unjust?
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.