• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. South Carolina House Approves Bill to Remove Confederate Flag

Unicron said:
The like function is on the lower left of the posts.
Click to expand...

No, after the upgrade yesterday, it seems it is missing on some people's accounts.



Edited: thank you. I now see the icon.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
NO! Like I said, can't convince me there wasn't a lobbyist behind that move, since no one seemed to care about the flag before. Interesting though the NCAA kept boycotting SC over the flag, yet they won't go after Georgia whose flag is identical to the First National flag.
Click to expand...

Yes, people have been wanting con-fed flags down from Southern state buildings for decades.

You were probably too young for this...

Taking it off the State capital building in SC was a big deal back in 2000 -- it even factored a fair bit in the 2000 presidential debates?




The Dem Governor who signed the bill in 2000 to bring it down was elected in part because he was against flying it....this was an issue in the 90's there...

Then when it was finally brought down, one of the compromises was it was to go the a non prominent place in the back

The GOP run house made a to-do about it, and plucked it dead center in the front - in a giant *screw you* to those who brought it off the Capital dome.

And there's this:: "The NAACP launched the boycott in 2000 after a major political battle over whether to keep the flag on Statehouse grounds. The National Collegiate Athletic Association and the United Automobile Workers joined the Baltimore-based civil rights organization's boycott. The boycott has kept major conferences and sporting events out of South Carolina for the past 15 years. "

With flag down, NAACP mulls ending South Carolina boycott - CNNPolitics.com

It's been a long, long battle.
 
Paperview said:
Yes, people have been wanting con-fed flags down from Southern state buildings for decades.

You were probably too young for this...

Taking it off the State capital building in SC was a big deal back in 2000 -- it even factored a fair bit in the 2000 presidential debates?




The Dem Governor who signed the bill in 2000 to bring it down was elected in part because he was against flying it....this was an issue in the 90's there...

Then when it was finally brought down, one of the compromises was it was to go the a non prominent place in the back

The GOP run house made a to-do about it, and plucked it dead center in the front - in a giant *screw you* to those who brought it off the Capital dome.

And there's this:: "The NAACP launched the boycott in 2000 after a major political battle over whether to keep the flag on Statehouse grounds. The National Collegiate Athletic Association and the United Automobile Workers joined the Baltimore-based civil rights organization's boycott. The boycott has kept major conferences and sporting events out of South Carolina for the past 15 years. "

With flag down, NAACP mulls ending South Carolina boycott - CNNPolitics.com

It's been a long, long battle.
Click to expand...


I do remember that thanks. That's when the compromise was made to put it at the Confederate Memorial on Capitol grounds. People seemed to shut up then for a while. Now all of a sudden some mentally ill nutcase decided to kill 9 people for no reason whiners started crying again and spineless jelliyfish haley caved.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
No it was at the Confederate memorial in SC, until the fussy whiners cried too much and spineless jellyfish haley caved.
Click to expand...

I have no issue with the flag at memorials, cemeteries and such.
That said, it is a flag that was used to perpetuate a slavery based society.

Edit
If this is the flag at the capital grounds that was just removed, then it has no place as mentioned in earlier posts in-on govt building- Property.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
I do remember that thanks. That's when the compromise was made to put it at the Confederate Memorial on Capitol grounds. People seemed to shut up then for a while. Now all of a sudden some mentally ill nutcase decided to kill 9 people for no reason whiners started crying again and spineless jelliyfish haley caved.
Click to expand...

To the bolded, really, his reason has escaped you?
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
Its obvious thinking is not something you engage in sometimes. The "reason" was really NO reason. Those people did not do anything to him except exist. That is NO reason to murder them.
Click to expand...

Except they were black people, existing. He went there with intent. He brought a gun. Do you think he just sat there, went to scratch an itch, and 'accidentally drew and fired multiple times?'

He was a POS, he had a reason, he even said what it was. To start a race war.

You really need to think things thru.
 
Lursa said:
Except they were black people, existing. He went there with intent. He brought a gun. Do you think he just sat there, went to scratch an itch, and 'accidentally drew and fired multiple times?'

He was a POS, he had a reason, he even said what it was. To start a race war.

You really need to think things thru.
Click to expand...

Like I said, no real reason other than he was insane. Try to keep up.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
Like I said, no real reason other than he was insane. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...

Um, no. Insane people go on with their lives all the time and dont kill people. He had a motive (reason), intent, and managed to find the means.

Once again you ignore that he actually stated his reason. :doh

Btw, I doubt he's going to be found 'insane' legally.
 
Lursa said:
Um, no. Insane people go on with their lives all the time and dont kill people. He had a motive (reason), intent, and managed to find the means.

Once again you ignore that he actually stated his reason. :doh

Btw, I doubt he's going to be found 'insane' legally.
Click to expand...

He's obviously bonkers, that much was obvious
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
He's obviously bonkers, that much was obvious
Click to expand...

Flanked by the confederate war flag and a manifesto of racial hatred, he planed and executed 9 murders. You think this guys going to argue insanity, lol.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Golds gym has a history of subjugating Blacks?
Click to expand...

WWWWWWWWWWWWWhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The point went WAY over your head, completely. The point, which you missed, by miles, was that if you're gonna blame the Confederate flag for what this nut did because of a picture, then you might as well blame Gold's Gym because he was wearing a tshirt from there. In other words, so you will finally understand, STOP blaming inanimate objects for a mentally ill fruitcake!
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
WWWWWWWWWWWWWhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The point went WAY over your head, completely. The point, which you missed, by miles, was that if you're gonna blame the Confederate flag for what this nut did because of a picture, then you might as well blame Gold's Gym because he was wearing a tshirt from there. In other words, so you will finally understand, STOP blaming inanimate objects for a mentally ill fruitcake!
Click to expand...
Again, for the hard of understanding concepts, the concept is that Roof has a history of using symbols of subjugation of Blacks. I have no idea what you think Golds Gym represents nor how it related to his actions.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
You're so wrong its ridiculous. The Confederacy was not bonkers, as today's climate proves. The federal government was never supposed to be this large.
Click to expand...
That was not the founding principle, the founding principle was maintaining a slave system....which was bonkers.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Again, for the hard of understanding concepts, the concept is that Roof has a history of using symbols of subjugation of Blacks. I have no idea what you think Golds Gym represents nor how it related to his actions.
Click to expand...

Its not rocket science. Its just as stupid to blame a flag as it would be to blame a tshirt. Get it?
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
More like the state's right to remain a slave state without the feds trying to force them to change against their will
Click to expand...

Is it really that the fed was trying to force the south to do away with slavery in established slave states, or rather that they were attempting to halt the spread of slavery into the new U.S. Territories?

How was the fed trying to force the south to abolish slavery at the onset of the Civil War? Please be specific, because I'm extremely curious about this argument.

I do know that some northern states weren't cooperating fully with the fugitive slave act, and were charging fees for the return of run away slaves that ended up in their states. Is this what you mean by the unfair "tariffs" levied against the south? If not, what tariffs are you referring to?

Please answer specifically. I'm trying to understand your argument. If we need a history lesson, give us one. Preferably one rooted in some sort of documented historical fact. Thanks.
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
You're so wrong its ridiculous. The Confederacy was not bonkers, as today's climate proves. The federal government was never supposed to be this large.
Click to expand...

You don't think folks south of the Mason-Dixon Line have contributed to the size of today's government. Btw, what size was the government suppose to be. We always hear about limited government, but then both parties have gone to extremes to enlarge it. Not always, but often, the two parties just disagree on what aspects of the government to enlarge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom