House drops Confederate Flag ban for veterans cemeteries

politico.com ^ | 6/23/16 | Matthew Nussbaum

[ColdOne]

A measure to bar confederate flags from cemeteries run by the Department of Veterans Affairs was removed from legislation passed by the House early Thursday.

The flag ban was added to the VA funding bill in May by a vote of 265-159, with most Republicans voting against the ban. But Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) both supported the measure. Ryan was commended for allowing a vote on the controversial measure, but has since limited what amendments can be offered on the floor.

[jmacusa]

In a pigs eye they would have freed them.

[jmacusa]

What flag was attacked on December 7, 1941? What flag was attacked on September 11, 2001? The flag you speak preserved the Union and bought about the end of the evil of slavery. The Stars And Bars fought to preserve that institution.

[jmacusa]

“but where to end this foolishness’’. Irony’s lost on you, huh dude?

[StoneWall Brigade]

Yes if the had the won war Slavery would have been over with it was already a dying institution at start of the war. Add the advancement of farm technology, and the religious reveals breaking out it would have ended in short, amont of time.

[jmacusa]

No, I didn’t ask if it would have ended. I asked would the South have freed them.

[StoneWall Brigade]

Of course they would have now let me ask you this why did Lincoln, allow Western Virginia aka (West Virginia) to enter the Union, as a Slave State? Now also why did even he allow Western Virginia to illegally secede to begin with?

[jmacusa]

The best answer: Political expediency. Northwestern Virginians were opposed to secession, the southern portion of the states populace wasn’t. Members of Linclon’s cabinet, like Seward were opposed to allowing West Va statehood because of the slavery question. Lincoln initially wasn’t opposed to slavery. He wanted to preserve the Union. To my question however it’s ludicrous to suggest that the South, having expended so much blood and treasure to win a war it started to preserve an economic system based on slave labor would then abandon that system.

[WarIsHellAintItYall]

For many weeks I have seen interesting comments here that are truly misleading.
My direct and indirect family ties date to the mid 1700s. They were engaged in ship building and finance. Some here would recognize names.
For decades following the use of the gin, the planters controlled their own cotton industry. Southern cotton was shipped directly from southern ports by its owners or brokers to the textile mills of England or Lowell.
During the three decade period before 1860, with our politicians action, our shippers forced the cotton trade to into our ships. First, the Navigation Acts authored by Congress at the turn of the century had established protectionist laws favoring our shipping over foreign interests.
Southrons were required by law to either use our ships for their shipping, or pay to the Treasury compensation for their use of foreign ships. Foreign ships were prohibited by law from engaging in coastal trade between US harbors. Federal law cut them out.
The laws highly discouraged southern boat builders from becoming involved in the shipping business by prohibiting their purchase of finished ships from overseas.
To our benefit and profit and with the aid of Federal laws, we came to dominate the carrying trade of the South.
As our trade in cotton increased, our financial people saw opportunity and began sending agents south to purchase all the cotton they could, and ship it on our packet ships to England and Europe. Direct purchase of cotton by the “factors” enabled the Southern growers to quickly turn a profit instead of waiting months for the cotton to be sold, and the money to return to them. But this benefit also cut their profits.
Business was business and our men in Washington ensured that we would have most of it.

[jmacusa]

All of this misses the fact that slavery was central to the Souths economy.

[WarIsHellAintItYall]

And, therefore, to the North.

[jmacusa]

Thankfully the Norths efforts ended it.

[wardaddy]

God bless ya

[PeaRidge]

How does a flag “fight”?

[DoodleDawg]

Yes if the had the won war Slavery would have been over with it was already a dying institution at start of the war. Add the advancement of farm technology, and the religious reveals breaking out it would have ended in short, amont of time.

Do you really believe that? What do you base it on?

[jmacusa]

Really? You’re that dumb?

[PeaRidge]

You answer a guest ion with an insult.

Says much about your heritage.

[PeaRidge]

He bases that on the facts facing slave owners of the time.

Slavery died out everywhere it existed in the Western Hemisphere of the reasons he cited.

Dates and locations for elimination of slavery:

Argentina (1813) Colombia (1814)

Chile (1823) Central America (1824)

Mexico (1829) Bolivia (1831)

Ecuador (1851) French and Danish colonies (1848)

Peru (1854) Uruguay (1842)

Venezuela (1854) Dutch Colonies (1863)

Puerto Rico (1873) Cuba (1886)

Brazil (1871-88)

All of this without bloodshed.

[jmacusa]

Son, you’re too stupid to be an idiot. Insult? I should think just being you insult enough.

[PeaRidge]

You are commenting your own assumptions. Reveals much of your willingness to be obviously ignorant.

Pick up a good book.

[jmacusa]

I’ve read plenty bozo and they all tell the same story: Your side started a war and lost it. As I said, are you really that stupid to go on carrying a torch for a lost cause? I guess you are.