Redneck Rampage (Georgia State Flag)

Amen to that, Mama.

I like what you say, unfortunately, there are FReepers who are really excited about this flag thing, and demand that the new governor follow through. According to them, it was precisely the flag issue that did the trick.

Methinks they might be trying to hijack the election results.

"The most tyrannical act of the pre-1860 federal government -by far- was the Fugitive Slave Act --the slave states LOVED federal power when it helped them."

You are starting to sound just like my American History 101 textbook. Which, I might add, is so far left that it makes the New York Times look like NewsMax.

Stick to the facts. The FSA allowed the involuntary recruitment of northeners to serve on posses to chase runaway slaves.

Since all the federal government basically did prior to 1860 was deliver the mail and collect less than $2 per capita in tariffs --before the FSA-- I think my statement will stand. Good on the publishers of your text book.

Did you know there were NO federal taxes of any kind prior to 1860?

Walt

I don't have to rewrite it.

In that sense Walt you are correct. You buddies Sandburg, Dubois, and McPherson have already done it. Is there anyway I could talk you into buying you a bus ticket back to the north again? I wouldn't want you so disheartened living in the evil South. Wait, no forget that. We're not like the north down here. You remember, barring blacks from living in their states.

Did you know there were NO federal taxes of any kind prior to 1860?

Total and utter BS. Ever hear of excise taxes, What about the "Whiskey Rebellion?" Of course you heard about them. You are just chosing to ignore them because you want to promulgate some sort of bizaire thesis. I understand that there is an opening in the Emory U. history department. Maybe you should apply for the job. There is sort of a tradition of making up your "facts" there. BTW sould we change the US flag because it represents racist laws today?

You have a point, but my take on what's happening is that people with a liberal axe to grind are publicizing the flag issue for a couple of reasons:

1. It salves their consciences in a weird sort of way, or at least means they don't have to reject their entire world view. They didn't lose because their philosophy and concept of government is bankrupt -- they lost because of the hostility of a bunch of knuckle-dragging, ignorant, hateful, racist, neo-Confederate yahoos. Yeah! That's it!

2. More importantly, if they can hunt out and publicize the few die-hards out there, then they may be able to sabotage Perdue's administration.

Certainly there are folks who believe that the flag issue carried the day. I believe they are unwise if they allow liberal Democrats to publicize their views for their own purposes.

I hate the new flag both because it is extremely ugly and because Barnes did a very improper thing in the way he handled the flag issue under cover of darkness, so to speak -- there should be a referendum as there was in Mississippi, and let the chips fall where they may.

Your posting your opinions as history and then claiming that I lie about it requires chutzpah worthy of a New Yorker.

Not true; I said you might just be ignorant.

All History with a capital "H" is interpretation. What matters is how valid the interpretation is, based on the facts.

I suggest that the Fugitive Slave Act was the most intrusive federal act prior to 1860. Among other things, it allowed magistrates empowered by the act to --involuntarily-- recruit citizens to serve on posses to chase escaped slaves.

If you can find another federal statute that is more intrusive than that, you need to provide that information. After all, there weren't that many federal statutes prior to 1860.

But you are not interested in a fair exposition of the actual historical record, because it conflicts with the neo-reb myth.

Walt

What did the pre 1954 flag look like? Was it in the mix?

No point in arguing with Walt. He's not going to change his mind. Even though the GA political situation has been explained to him many times in the past (I have done so myself, right after the election) he keeps hunting out garbage like this to post.

I remember your post from the previous thread; I thanked you for it.

And I don't take issue with what you said then, or now.

The article from CL was marked in the paper as a "rant". I think the author made some good points. Did Perdue supporters NOT wave CSA battle emblems/GA state flags? Did they no -claim- that the flag issue alone sank Barnes? Did Perdue NOT quote Dr. M.L. King to great laughter?

Walt

I can't get jazzed over a piece of cloth. The only one I personally hold dear is Old Glory.

There shall be no mercy.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.

"Jeff Berry is buying up confederate flags as fast as he can -- and burning them."

So what? We'll take his money and make some more. Then we'll chawl up sum tarbacky an spit in 'is eye.

Not true; I said you might just be ignorant.

Interesting. By definition anyone who disagrees with you is either lying or ignorant. Hmmm You state your opinion as a fact I suggest that the Fugitive Slave Act was the most intrusive federal act prior to 1860 and then believe that I'm lying or ignorant when I think you're wrong.

BTW Now I have two points that you haven't answered

Excise taxes and
Affirmative action

I'd say you were beginning to bore me with your shrill repetition that the civil war was primarily about slavery, southerners are ignorant rednecks etc, but you're not beginning to bore me. You've been boring me with your endless repetition of your closed minded opinions for a long time. And now I've broken my internal rule about getting into arguments with idiots, fanatics, drunks, and Jehovah's Witnesses. I really think you'd be happier living in NYC or NJ or maybe Silver Spring MD.

Technicaly slavery is still going on nowadays after due process of law against convicts. It is obvious that whoever comes around on the basis of nation building should be able to have recourse to forms of slavery or different status against those who come around on other basis.

What scares the sh!t out of liberals who do not want to abandon priviledges - even in order to defend the rights to life, family, survival and nation building - is that they would be slaves in another time. The very fact that the priviledge to a social life comes above the right of the unborn, goes a long way indicating the times we are living in, everything upside down. Now they go even further and not merely abolishing rights within their tight milieus, but they are imposing such order outside into other people's homes.

In the end we can hope that war enders and not war starters will prevail, and since liberals belong in the war starters and new order imposition, they will have to fail ultimately or face complete chaos - as we see happening in Israel where war starting terrorists are embraced by the left to their peril. Last but not least, while I do believe the North had a valid argument against the spread of slavery to other states and the continued slave trade, liberals do not even take that argument, quite the contrary, the liberals' argument stems solely on pushing their own agendas and priviledges of culture. LET US FACE IT, LIBERALS NEVER FOUGHT TO END SLAVERY AND WOULD HAVE NEVER WANTED TO FIGHT ALONGSIDE THE NORTH. They only start the trouble for others to fight over it.

The liberals' priviledged culture has no moral or rights basis. And their pretexted stereotyped association of the Southern heritage exclusively on slavery - and on a hate that marginaly existed, points only to their incestuous and priviledged relationships with a multicultural statehood, one not based on the protection of the industries of man with what he has, but one based on greed and maintaining a social state for its own sake - much like the Nazies promoted their social state for its own sake. Liberals are a revolution onto themselves, a house divided upon itself, where freedom is replaced by obsenities and other exhibition of priviledges and priviledged lifestyles above basic rights.

This thread article in which the brainwashed "author" names and calls Southerners with full force and without discussion just shows how obsenely exhibitionist they are, using only colors of currency to rally people around, whether it is in describing a so called black or a white South with respect to a flag and its historical currency meaning - one that points in no way to supremacism or slavery in its colors or deeper meanings, especially nowadays.

Liberals will be liberals, and their concern is not rights, their concern is priviledge to insult, slander, opinion make for sake of dividing people and start wars without having to end them. As upsetting as the Southern heritage may be to some, it is about time they used their wits to end the controversy with respect to the heritage instead of starting manufacturing artificial ones for consumption on the side, with slanders about "hicks" and "red necks" rampaging around.

Redneck rampage? Ah! Good thing they talk about rampage, because this article is a very liberal-rot rampage. It is difficult to defend or attack an abstract symbol or an allusion to Southern unity (unless the symbol is readily concrete such as the priviledge of the current liberal generation's utilitarian hammer and sickle or their "well-being" Nazi swastika), but liberals' concrete words make them perfect targets, hence theirs is a lost cause ultimately that can be chewed up.

What else then also to priviledge ourselves when they priviledge themselves so? After all we were born as a priviledged being created by G_d, being who then had to respect the right of G_d and fight against the priviledge seeking evil. The liberals' mixture of de-priviledging people they target and of priviledging themselves at the same time make them very much despicable beings. Southern heritage is a rally behind a unity, not a rally between divisions so that liberals can put themselves up on a pedestal, self crediting themselves for chest thumping, pointing fingers.

What else can this poor wretched people do after all, when they temselves should have been the slaves, and not necessarily the Africans that came on our shores? They can only try to divide the Africans from the Southerners, that is their sole source of power, total chaos and confusion. Time will tell however that liberals are right after all, Southern slavery is shameful in that it did not enslave the liberals instead. If they seek priviledges, then they will be treated with priviledges, just as a master priviledges the servant. Even blacks know that the South never made war on them but war on the tweed coat North. At the end of the day liberals seeking priviledges of rank - in times of peace in the tamed South - and an end to jurisdictional rights of Southern heritage are only asking for it. Because in war rank rules, in war war enders ultimately win, and in war those seeking priviledges are priviledged as a servant can only be priviledged by a master. Peace will hence require a world living under an army rule and another one living under jurisiditional peace and preservation of rights and peace as an interest - and not the fight to start wars for priviledges.

Behind Walt's rhetoric and cut and paste strawman defenses he constructs, I find it very ironic that he lives in the South!

A VERY few supporters of Perdue had the old Georgia flag out (not the Battle Emblem). They were heavily publicized by the media, which as I said has its own axe to grind.

As for the quote -- King himself quoted an old hymn that has been sung at camp meetings and revivals, black and white, since the Methodist wildfire burned through here back in the frontier days. He didn't OWN it - although the King family does try to copyright and license everything they can. And if you consider that there hasn't been a Republican administration or legislative majority in Georgia since the puppet government of Reconstruction, it's certainly apropos. King himself would probably have laughed at it, he was both a jovial and a pragmatic man -- but this new generation of civil rights types are absolutely, totally humorless.

Did you know there were NO federal taxes of any kind prior to 1860?

Total and utter BS. Ever hear of excise taxes, What about the "Whiskey Rebellion?"

Not a tax. If you didn't drink whiskey, you didn't pay a tax. There were no federal taxes prior to the ACW.

Two of the Whiskey Rebellion instigators were convicted of treason against the United States in 1795. President Washington pardoned them.

"Antebellum Americans had been one of the most lightly taxed peoples on earth. And the per capita burden in the South had been only half that in the free states. Except for tariff duties-which despite Southern complaints were lower in the late 1850's than they had been for more than 50 years- virtually all taxes were collected by state and local governments."

--Battle Cry of Freedom, James McPherson

You don't -know- the history, or you are willfully misrepresenting it.

Walt

I'd say you were beginning to bore me with your shrill repetition that the civil war was primarily about slavery...

The ACW -was- primarily about slavery.

Walt

Again, that is all very interesting. Thanks.

Walt

There was no "public referendum" when the flag was changed in the 50's. That change was made, and the old CSA emblem was adopted, as a "statement" by the Georgia legislature regarding what those legislators, (and by the way they were almost ALL Democrats) perceived to be a Federal intrusion into a "States Rights" issue at the time. Those legislators did, however, formally debate the issue prior to making the flag change.

King Roy took it upon himself to personally "undo" what those legislators did back in the 50's. He did this to in response to threats from the voices of a few prominent loud angry voices who threatened to organize "boycots" of the lucrative downtown Atlanta convention business. Such demonstations would have personaly financially hurt Barnes and some of his friends. He made an executive decision to change the flag without any legislative debate, or input from public opinion. The current flag was designed by a Barnes's family friend.

I really think you'd be happier living in NYC or NJ or maybe Silver Spring MD.

I've been all those places. Yuck.

Walt