[NYSUN] Governor Haley of South Carolina, in calling in the wake of the murders at Charleston for the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of the state capitol, has taken a courageous step. It would be so at any juncture, but all the more so at the start of a presidential election in which she may yet figure and in which her party will need all the help it can get in the Palmetto state. All the better, too, that the governor was flanked by of the state's senators, Lindsey Graham ... the endangered South Carolina RINO... and Timothy Scott. Beware! Next time somebody's trolley jumps the track they'll want Fort Sumter, too...
It comes at an exceptionally affecting national moment. It is hard to imagine that there are one in a thousand Americans who have not been moved by the expression of love that the people of South Carolina have expressed for the congregation of the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. It would be enough were it simply a matter of condoling neighbors in the wake of the murders committed at the church. But given the history of South Carolina and the racism of the killer, it adds up to a historic moment.
Governor Haley made a point of acknowledging that not all those who see in the Confederate flag a symbol of southern patriotism are racists. She was equally forthright in acknowledging the offense the flag gives to so many others. After all, iterations of the treasonous tatter were flown by a confederacy that encompassed much of the slave empire. Millions in South Carolina and the rest of Dixie are horrified at the flag. Not to mention the offense it gives to those states that stood loyally with the Union cause.
Today the Democrats are trying to palm off the idea that the Confederate Flag is largely a cause of Republicans. No doubt the Republicans have waffled on this issue. Senator McCain got entangled in the confederate flag as recently as the 2008 election, and George W. Bush, too, though he wouldn't fly it over the capital at Austin. But so did the Democrats, including such figures as Governor Dean, the Vermont leftist who said as recently as a decade ago that he wanted to be the candidate of "the guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks."
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
...Would it be improper of me to ask if the Confederate flag still flies over Fort Sumter National Monument?
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/24/2015 7:37 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The South lost. Why have their flags ever been allowed? Or statues of their heroes? You don't see statues of Rommel or the Nazi flag in Germany.
That said, it's from 150 years ago - 5 or 6 generations - who should really care anyway? I suspect it's a red herring, and we should be looking carefully for something important being done while we're distracted by it.
One reason the monuments and flags were tolerated was in a spirit of reconciliation - "Yes, we fought, but there was bravery and courage on both sides and that should be honored." Keep in mind that as late as 1898, there was still real and serious concern over whether or not the South would step up to fight in the Spanish-American war. The fact that they did - and in great numbers - was to a considerable extent because they felt that even though they had been defeated, their bravery was honored and respected.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/24/2015 8:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Next, the flag of white privilege. You know which one that is. They took the pledge out of the schools years ago.
#9
This is a truly difficult subject. I agree with Glenmore that the media is distracting us, in my opinion from discussing how to keep weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill. The practical problem is that 2nd amendment supporters rightfully distrust federal and state governments.
As for the flag controversy, Northerners will never get it, and Southerners will never forget. I believe in freedom of speech and Federalism, so let a free market and the voters decide.
Members of my family have served in every war this nation has ever fought, plus the Texas Revolution,a albeit on the losing side of the Civil War. I honor them all.
> Remove Statue(s) of Jeb E. Davis.
> Remove statue(s) of Robert E. Lee.
> Stonewall???
> Rename US Army Forts = Mil Installations named after Confederate Commanders.
> Remove POTUS-but-Also-Slave-Owner Thomas Jefferson.
MORE LIKELY TO FOLLOW.
THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT LOUIS FARRAKHAN + THE BLACK PANTHER CAN CONTINUE TO CALL FOR BLACK REVOLUTION + VIOLENT REPRISALS AGZ "WHITEY", ESPEC THOSE WHOSE ANCESTORS OWNED BLACK SLAVES.
LEGAL SHARIA + ISLAMERIKA HERE WE COME.
Every Sub-Cultural or Alternatist agenda that the DemoLeft + aligned succeed in putting into law is a point in favor of Legal Sharia + Follow-on, AS EVERYTHING THAT SHARIA = ISLAMIC LAW ACCEPTS OR TOLERATES WILL ALREADY BE LEGAL IN OWG GLOBALIST AMERIKA SAVE FOR THE GUBMINT'S OFFICIAL STAMP.
Only real thing left to fight is the demand that Any Each + All Restaurants-Cafes in Amerika be turned into TACO BELLS ala Sly Stallone's
"DEMOLITION MAN".
D *** NG IT, CAN SOLYENT GREEN BE MADE FROM SOLYENT GREEN???
Michael Oren, Israel's former ambassador to the U.S., makes clear Barack Obama's naivete as a peacemaker, foreign policy expert, and diplomat, with drastic consequences -- not to Israel, to the U.S.
This is at Foreign Policy; you may need to register.
#2
This piece in Foreign Policy by Michael Oren is giving the lefties fits. Oren is a relatively centrist (and on some issues a leftist) fellow with heavy duty credentials, broad experience, literary ability and lots of friends (including Arabs and leftist University profs) and besides that, Oren supported Obama in 2008 (before Oren did the research that led to this article).
The fact that the article essentially says that the almost all the leftist middle east experts are fools is really important (and of course really infuriating to those leftists).
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/24/2015 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oren is a prmatist and historian (his Six Days of Ward is excellent!). An adult, dealing with Obama's entitled petulant children/staff
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/24/2015 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#4
pragmatist
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/24/2015 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
[DAWN] EVERYBODY wants to blame someone else -- nobody wants to take any responsibility. The chief minister of Sindh showed up in the provincial assembly yesterday only to demonstrate that he was totally unaware of what has been happening in the quiet provincial capital during the days he was away. Once the peak of the heatwave, that has caused more than 700 deaths in Bloody Karachi ...formerly the capital of Pakistain, now merely its most important port and financial center. It is among the largest cities in the world, with a population of 18 million, most of whom hate each other and many of whom are armed and dangerous... alone, appeared to have passed, the chief minister issued instructions to close "offices, schools and colleges". Never mind that it is summer holidays and schools and colleges are already shut. He blamed K-Electric, the city's power company, and its private management for failing to ensure the supply of uninterrupted power during the heatwave, accusing its private management of acting like businessmen, but said nothing about the dismal state of power supply in Sukkur and Larkana, the cities he had just come from, where power riots have been taking place for days and electricity supply is in the hands of state-owned corporations.
But Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah is not alone in issuing bizarre instructions and engaging in a blind blame game in the midst of a crisis. As power load-shedding in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[SenseOfEvents] ...There are some hard truths about the CSA. I am a Nashville native and grew up here. My family's roots in Middle Tenn. go back to just after the Revolutionary War. I have ancestral-family members who fought (and some died) for the CSA on both my mom's and dad's side (also for the Union on my dad's). Alexander Stephens, vice president of the CSA, was my wife's great-great grandfather's brother. My maternal grandmother's grandfather, CSA, has the singular distinction of being the only American POW, before or since, ever busted out of POW camp by his wife. He was never recaptured.
So I take no back seat to anyone for Southern heritage and upbringing.
Like probably most native Southerners of my generation, I was raised being taught that the real reasons for the Southern states' secession was to preserve states rights and that the northern economic lobby was choking the South's economy with high tariffs on Southern goods.
Slavery? Well, it was in the mix somewhere, but slavery was not the real reason for secession.
Just today I had to react to an article from a liberal (European Liberal: ie partisans of reducing State size) telling that the reason the South seceeded was high taxes. THis a myth invented when the CSA tried to have Euopean powers recognizing it: since public opinion prevented any European government showing any sympathy for the "defenders of slavery", the emmissaries of the CSA tried to present its cause as a revolr agaisnt abusive, high taxes (a second lie they had been going down and down since Andrew Jackson) and States rights.
And BTW: it was the was the war of Southern agression, it was the South that fired the first shots at Fort Sumter and that because Jeffersoin Davis felt that spirits were cooling, that the Deep South alone was going to nowhere and that soimething needed to be done in order to raly the High South.
#2
Slavery? Well, it was in the mix somewhere, but slavery was not the real reason for secession.
The final note of that Civil War was the 13th Amendment. No amount of apologizing can cover that fact. It could not have happened in 1860, but damn well did happen in 1865. A blood payment that has long been forgot. I know the vast majority of people didn't have a slave, but neither did most Germans become members of the Nazi party either, but all fought damn hard. Tribalism is deep in human behavior.
#3
Slavery? Well, it was in the mix somewhere, but slavery was not the real reason for secession.
Slavery in there somewhere, yes. Too bad the North didn't recognize that "fact" and get with the cause and program of freeing slaves until Lincoln's emancipation proclamation. Freeing some, but not all slaves by the way. Not unlike the current regime's treatment of 'Red States' if my memory of history serves me correctly.
BTW, the Euro's were little different then than they are today. Financially defunct from their own internal misfortunes and squabbles. They sent a few volunteers and advisors. Tactics and weaponry were undergoing change. Not a bad idea to watch and learn at the expense of someone else's blood.
Slavery is blight on man, always has been, still is. Discussions of modern-day slavery are off limits however. No need to offend honorable faiths and followers.
Slavery was in the Constitution and Lincoln could _not_ abolish it. He_could_ and _did_ free slaves from the seceeding states through his powers to seize the assets of the enemy but he couldn't aboslish it in slave states that had remained loyal. About 13th Amendennt had he tried to push it in 1861 the Unon would have lost the wars and slavery would have perdured.
Second: At that time European were not finacially bakrupted. UK was the economic and financial superpower not the United Staes.
Third: AFAIK there were no european military advisors, there were observers but that is an old and persistent practice.
Fourth: Who cares about Lincoln or about European observers? Mr Sensing's text is about why the Southern States refused to accept the outcome of an election, then why they created the Confedertion and then why they started a war against the Union.
#6
See "What This Cruel War Was Over", mostly sourced from letters, north and south, from soldiers. They had slavery on their minds.
Point is, today, that, since we can trans our race and trans our gender, there's no right to argue with somebody who wants his own meaning in a symbol. You can have yours, he has his and you don't get to lecture him about his moral depravity in having a different meaning from you.
For most folks, as Ace says, the flag is a generalized EFF YOU. "Don't tell me how to think. Don't try to push me around. Don't tell me to get better mufflers on my Harley. EFF YOU" Nothing to do with slavery and precious little to do with the confederacy. Except, right or wrong, those were a bunch of tough bastards. Toughest army we ever fought.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
06/24/2015 9:55 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It's interesting that people who have no problem with what Edward Snowden did have the time to call Bobby Lee a traitor.
Posted by: Matt ||
06/24/2015 10:06 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Yes slavery was evil. However, slavery didn't kill 100 million in the 20th Century as the acolytes of socialism did. Both are fundamentally, plantation systems. Both have a ruling and servile class. There is very little middle.
The Trunks and conservatives are doing a Paleo of passing a golden opportunity to improve their position by playing this against the Left.
#11
Killing history does not undu past sins. Worse, it caters to political correctness / social Marxism. Concede this point and the rest of our conversations will about about what to ban, not whether to ban.
#12
Along the Ouachita River sits Monroe, Louisiana. The river separates one section of Monroe from the other. On Mardi Gras day you might be surprised to see the following parade. On one side of Monroe as you walk towards the bridge through the black neighborhoods you will see young people slinging crack. When you get to the other side of the river where the white neighborhoods are you can go in and have a beer in a tavern with the confederate flag on the wall behind the bar. Instead of the beads and costumes of Mardi Gras New Orleans style, you will be surprised to see units of men in grey throw back CSA uniform carrying the battle flag of the Confederacy.
Several hundred miles due West in the back country of Texas a group of white kids at a small state college held an "Aunt Jemima" party that soon attracted national news media attention and a lot of criticism. The college kid who put on the party apologized saying he had exercised poor judgment but that did not prevent him from being ambushed and severely beaten by black assailants one dark evening.
At the next rodeo attended by thousands, a once popular and very comical black rodeo clown put on an very entertaining performance only to be met with deafening silence at the end of the performance by the hundreds of spectators in the grand stands. A black bronc rider was helped off the bronc only to be tramped into the dirt by one of the white pickup riders who helped him off the bronc.
The outrageous cold blooded murder of innocent and good black Christians attending a bible study for racial reasons was pure evil. But so is the entitlement, lawless, special treatment attitude of many of a race that was set free at the cost on the battle field deaths of hundreds of thousands of white people.
As long as entitlement, disrespect and victim attitude is pervasive in the African American community the Confederate Battle Flag will remain a living symbol of discontent amongst pockets of Caucasian groups throughout the deep South of the US.
#16
IMO its both ridiculous + illogical to ban the Confederate flag but NOT the sale or use of Nazi or Cold War Commie-Soviet symbols as well.
> The US Civil War was a Constitutional issue over States Rights, not Slavery.
> AFAIK the great Majority of US Southerners + Soldiers were NOT Slave-Owners nor Plantation Owners.
> Negroes fought for the South = States Rights in organized armed Military, Guerilla Units as did Indians + Mexicans.
#2
Right vs. wrong sides of history determined afterwards. And they're not determined by the semi-illiterate vermin like the current "cognitive" elites.
#3
Right vs. wrong sides of history determined afterwards.
Yes, and offtimes rewritten by other "cogni-elites" to fit the desired narrative. If it was bullshi* in 1917, chances are it's still bullshi*, just new dividend harvesters bloviating.
[WEEKLYSTANDARD] America was going to have a national conversation about transgender issues, whether we wanted to or not. We're always having a national conversation about something or other. What would be nice would be a month or two of no babble.
Our cultural betters decreed we would. The perfectly named Vanity Fair deployed its considerable resources to present the coming out of Caitlyn--née Bruce--Jenner in what it took to be the most favorable and pleasing way possible. Jenner's upcoming reality show about the transition will no doubt be inescapable in a way that will make even the Kardashians in his family envious. "Caitlyn," back when she was "Bruce" won a bunch of Olympic swimming medals and appeared on the Wheaties box. Now, older but probably considerably less wise, he's dressing up in women's clothing, taking women's hormones, and is either about to or already has had his pee-pee chopped off. I'm trying to picture some poor archaeologist firing up the hard drive this has been stored on for eleven thousand years and trying to make sense of it.
Americans are not being asked to tolerate the former Olympian's choices, but to deny reality and accept that Jenner is fully a woman, biology notwithstanding. That's the set up.Then the punch line:
Now we find ourselves suddenly caught up in a different national conversation about identity, only this time it's causing our progressive overlords a great deal of pain. It recently emerged that Rachel Dolezal, the head of the NAACP chapter in Spokane, is in fact a white woman who has been using creative hairstyling and extravagant application of bronzer to present herself as African American. There's plenty of outrage. But Dolezal's defense of herself is surprisingly difficult to refute by the internal logic of identity politics: "I identify as black." The obvious question on everyone's lips: Why should we have to accept Jenner's declaration that he identifies as a woman if it's an affront for Dolezal to suggest she can be black? Why not? Ward Churchill and Elizabeth Warren identified as Injuns. Al Gore has been identified as a scientist.
Al Sharpton has been identified as a reverend. Barak Obama has been identified as a Constitutional Scholar. Brian Williams has identified as a war reporter.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/24/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just because I don't speak Cong makes me no less a Fred.
#2
and is either about to or already has had his pee-pee chopped off.
Caitlyn/Bruce has been saying she has no intention of altering her standard issue sexual equipment. Like much else that may change, but for the moment is etched in stone.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Lindsey Graham
[WEEKLYSTANDARD] America was going to have a national conversation about transgender issues, whether we wanted to or not. 
