Posted on 06/22/2015 3:37:38 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) – South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said Monday the Confederate flag should be removed from the grounds of the state capitol, reversing her position on the divisive symbol amid growing calls for it to be removed.
The Republican's about-face comes after nine black church members were gunned down, allegedly by a young white man who embraced the flag as a symbol of white supremacy.
"150 years after the end of the Civil War, the time has come," Haley said after rousing applause, surrounded by Democrats and Republican lawmakers. "That flag, while an integral part of the past, does not represent the future of our great state"
The flag has flown in front of the state capitol for 15 years after being moved from atop the Statehouse dome.
U.S. Sens. Lindsay Graham and Tim Scott, an African-American appointed by Haley, were standing with Haley during her announcement. When she finished, she hugged Scott and South Carolina's only other black congressman, Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn.
The announcement came after state lawmakers met urgently with each other and the governor.
The head of the Republican National Committee has also called for its removal.
Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida, both of whom are Republican and running for president, said that whether to remove the flag or not was an issue for South Carolinians to determine.
(Excerpt) Read more at latino.foxnews.com ...
Funny, the Constitution is even older than that, and Magna Carta 585 years older still (more or less), and just look how all those silly people refuse to accept modern "organic", "living" government, totalism, and despotism -- the spirit of the modern age, from the Paris Commune to the Third Reich to the neo-Soviet state of Vladimir Putin.
Come ON, people, get a modern grip on things! You'll feel ssoooo much better when you just ...... "let go."
</s>
That’s an ugly comment.
I believe the critics are ready to surrender your rights, not their own.
How so, FRiend? There were quite a few statements in my pro-South post. I can’t discern which one you take issue with. The liberty-loving, prosperous South is the economic engine that drives this Republic.
Yep...it's always been true that 'RATs cloak themselves in that flag. They despised Lincoln and to this very day, have an unhinged hatred for Reagan.
A black flag with a dollar sign? Maybe for the Ayn Rand cult.
What a bunch of damned cowards! Turn a light on something and they scurry like the cockroaches they are and run for cover.
And as for Ayn Rand, I think we're probably in agreement. Since she favored the slaughter of children and was no admirer of Reagan, I not a member of her cult at all. I've been in several tussles with FReepers about her. They seem to overlook her anti-life stand, stemming from her atheism. In short, Ayn Rand is dead to me...and has quite literally been that way since 1982. :)
The American flag represents a nation that once supported slavery. TAKE IT DOWN!
But keep waving the Mexican flag! A flag that represents one of the most corrupt governments on earth. And, keep waving that muslim flag, too! It represents nations that kill gays. Keep ‘em flyin’!
Every Lee County in America and every park and every city named after Civil War “heroes” will change their names within a year. That’s my bet.
I remember years ago a subdivision in Atlanta had streets named after characters in GONE WITH THE WIND. There was a big deal to get the names changed because they represented slavery. That was by the same kind of people who go to Atlanta and want to know where Rhett and Scarlett are buried.
One more thing and the I'll bid you a good night. While I don't care for Ayn Rand at all, like President Reagan, I greatly admire Calvin Coolidge who stated:
After all, the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world. I am strongly of opinion that the great majority of people will always find these are moving impulses of our life.
And that's why I strongly favor a regional flag that's emblematic of prosperity for the pro-business South. I can envision such a flag flying beneath the state flag on Southern capitol building sending this clear message:
Do you realize the logic of your position, that it constitutes a ban on some people's political and First Amendment rights?
That is not my position. The issue was a narrow one involving public display of the confederate Battle Flag on the capitol grounds.
My position was only that it was appropriate abd wise enough for the governor to endorse its removal due to the fact that it legitimately offended a significant percentage of the state citizenry, and that it was the flag of a vanquished military. Thus, the state did not need to be the one exercising its First Amendment rights with respect to it. There are plenty of other private interests that can do that.
So I never endorsed any ban of any kind, and I'm not at all convinced that the state of SC will enact any bans with respect to public display of the Battle Flag. I just think the political will to remove the flag now exists, and there's nothing too earth-shattering about that.
Narrow, shmarrow. Display of the CBF, display of the U.S. National flag, display of Our Miss Brooks or The Outlaw Josey Wales -- it's a principle.
You've given your inveterate, relentless, implacable enemies, guided by Communists, a ban on political and historical displays. The criterion? They don't like it.
They'll shove your reasonableness where the sun doesn't shine. Why? Because you've signaled you can be had.
The people organizing these things are predators. They'll take everything you have.
The Romans formalized that practice as damnatio memoriae, "damnation of memory". They defaced statues and inscriptions and removed every public reference to the "damned" person from view with a chisel, if necessary.
Easily accessible example: On the arch of Septimius Severus there is a dedicatory inscription (both sides, coming and going) to Septimius, of course, and also to his (surviving) son, Caracalla, who oversaw the completion of the arch in 211 or 212 AD. In the third or fourth line of the inscription there is a short line. This is what is left of an erased line that originally named Caracalla's murdered brother Geta as one of the dynasty celebrating the consecration of the arch. (One senator who made a joke about surnaming Caracalla "Geticus", "conqueror of the Getae", paid with his head.)
The short line is a mute reminder of the fact that Caracalla was a vindictive political mass murderer who practiced both mutilation of the bodies of his victims (a number have been found buried together in Britain ) and damnatio memoriae.
To the first point, buncombe. I explained above that this is all a put-up job engineered by the NAACP and the New York Times, a bunch of bloody-shirt-waving to spike up the black vote by showing black voters how they can empower black politicians to bullyrag, intimidate, and cow a bunch of gutless white businessmen and RiNO's, and humiliate The Man in a public kabuki theater of racist politics.
I pointed out that where the NAACP had neglected to be active and hateful, in Mississippi, black citizens had no such objections as have been alleged in the Carolinas, to legitimize the damnatio memoriae of the Confederate flag.
Your second point is that the Confederates lost -- so did the American militia, at Bunker Hill and later on Bennington (big time); and yet we still display those flags in their memory. I have both flags, and I'll be flying them in a few days.
Likewise the Alamo flag (yeah, I have one of those -- the real McCoy, Barrett Travis's Texian army pattern garrison flag that Sam Houston gave him). I'll fly that flag, too, and thumb my nose at the smoothly racist Castro brothers and their vitriolic guero-hating mother when I do so. Those people would get control of the Alamo, clean out the museum, and put an equestrian statue of Santa Anna in it. Like hell they will.
So I celebrate defeated armies and causes.
"Godda prollem wid dat?"
Joel Garreau, in his 70's book The Nine Nations of North America, examined in turn all the different regions of the continent, from his native Quebec to southern Florida and the Islands, to the eco-tree-hugging outdoorsy utopian West Coast. He recognized the Deep South and Upper South as a coherent region, extending north all the way to the Missouri River, southern Illinois, central Indiana, and southeastern Ohio -- and including parts of Oklahoma and most of Texas and Florida.
He began his description of the region with a visit to a German automobile factory in Mississippi, and there he found, in a brace of colors next to the flags of the Bundesrepublik and the United States, the flag of the South, which he remarked is almost startling in its warlike appearance and intensity and is recognized instantly around the world; it is the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, and none other.
Actually the Patriot Militia won the Battle of Bennington and eventually the entire Revolutionary War. Big difference in outcomes there.
So I celebrate defeated armies and causes.
"Godda prollem wid dat?"
Not at all, and you don't need your state government's participation in order to do so.
You see, there are many citizens of South Carolina who see the Confederate Battle Flag symbol very differently than you do.
Given that that's the case, it shouldn't come as a surprise that the state government at some point will decide not to antagonize a significant portion of its population by placing such a controversial symbol on public grounds at the state capitol which is supposed to represent all South Carolinians.
The Battle Flag can readily be displayed in any number of places, such as private citizens, businesses, historical societies, and the like.
Even if it stands for Southern Heritage to 2/3 of South Carolina citizens, there's simply no compelling need or reason for the state government to endorse a symbol which might stand for slavery and oppression to the other 1/3 of its citizens.
Who knows? Maybe one day it will be displayed on the state grounds again!
This is just not the end of the world.
“Nimrata Randhawa”
I had to look that up to see what your were talking about.
According to Wikipedia, she received endorsements from Romney, Palin, and ‘the Tea Party’ movement in 2010. I assume that’s true although wiki has been known to rewrite history a bit so as to conform to PC standards.
Sad day for SC. I don’t imagine much of the electorate will take this lying down. Nor should they, imo.
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.