I Called Out Those Who Take Pride in the Confederate Flag, Here Are Some of Their Absurd Responses

confederate-flagSince the tragic shooting in Charleston, South Carolina that took the lives of nine African-Americans by a perpetrator who was clearly driven by racism, the debate over the Confederate flag still flying high over the State House has intensified. While most people I think rightfully view the flag as a symbol of racism, hate and slavery, there are still millions of Americans (especially in the South) who continue to cling to something that represents the biggest treasonous act perpetrated against this country in our nation’s history.


Because that’s what the Confederacy was – a group of traitors. They didn’t like what our Constitutionally-elected government was doing so they tried to form their own nation – then declared war against the United States.

Well, yesterday I wrote an article calling out those who claim the Confederate flag is just about “their heritage.” As expected, I got quite a few responses from these folks who, even though I provided ample evidence proving that this flag represented racism, still tried to claim that it’s just a symbol for “Southern heritage” or that it doesn’t represent racism.

So I thought I’d share a few of these responses with everyone, so you can judge for yourself whether or not their arguments hold water. I’ll put my response to them in bold print after each comment.

This flag does not in any way glorify racism at all, all the race baiters are looking for scapegoats to shift the blame on other things. The states that succeeded from the Union needed a flag to represent their Nation so what do we have from the “Confederate states of America?” The Confederate flag….so all of you morons shouting racism need to stfu and go after the real problems. – This person just exemplifies stupidity. 

I love how this is compared to a “Nazi flag.” Germans wave a German flag for German pride, not the Nazi flag. A confederate flag distinguishes north from the south. There is a huge difference.. With or without racism, human ownership yada yada. – Actually the reason why Germans don’t wave the Nazi flag is because most of them are ashamed of their past, unlike supporters of the Confederacy. To be honest, I’m not even sure where the “logic” is with this one

The flag does NOT represent racism! The stupid ass kkk took it and turned it into something of hate. That flag represents the southern cross. – I like how they completely ignore huge swaths of history to focus on the design of the flag as opposed to what the flag stood for. And here’s a question for this genius: Why do you think the KKK took this flag to represent their white supremacist beliefs? 

I have ancestors that enlisted during the Civil War for the South and while I do not know first hand what their stance on race or slavery was, I am proud of the service. I am proud in the leadership of Robert E. Lee, who openly stated his reasoning was State’s Rights over an oppressive central government. – This person is proud that their ancestors fought for the right for human beings to be owned as property, while many of those “pieces of property” were often tortured and murdered by these slave owners. Again, this would be like a German saying they’re proud that their relatives fought for Hitler and “German pride.” 

So I guess the Dukes of Hazard was a hateful show because the star of the show had a confederate flag on the roof and was called the ” General Lee “? Those Duke boys were never meanin’ no harm.. – I will just let this simple-minded idiocy speak for itself. 


Why is it okay for everyone, except southern people, to be proud of their heritage? Why do we not count? I’m seeing a lot of hate here, and it’s not the Confederate flag spreading it. – Here’s another rocket scientist who apparently doesn’t get that there’s a difference between being proud of where you’re from and honoring a symbol that stood for racism and hate. I’m proud to be from Texas (yes, it’s true), but that doesn’t mean I’m proud of what Texas stood for during the Civil War. 

This message is so full of $hit. The composer doesn’t know what she is even writing about she cannot even begin to understand. You can’t fix stupidity. – First, I’m a “he” not a “she.” Second, I love the elaborate details of this comment saying what was wrong with my article. This is essentially what you call someone who tells me I’m “full of sh*t” simply because they don’t like the truth that they’ve just been given. And I don’t think I really need to point out the irony of the end of their message. 

Keep your opinions to yourself. – This translates to: These facts don’t support what I want to be real, so please stop telling them to me. 

It’s just a flag. – And the swastika is just two oddly-shaped, intertwined and angled “S’s.” 

What was the largest treasonous uprising against the British government? The colonies rebelling? Those same colonies that kept slaves and refused to pay their taxes? Only 6% of people in states in the south owned slaves. I find you hypocritical that you praise the rebellious flag of the US and condemn the flag of the Confederacy. History was ever written by the victor. – I’m not really sure what the British have to do with the Confederacy. First, our Constitution established the United States, which is the country to which I’m loyal – as should all Americans be as well. And the point isn’t whether or not this nation supported slavery – it did – it’s that as we evolved and we were trying to rid ourselves of slavery, these states betrayed this country and started a war for the right to continue to own other human beings as property. And now there are millions of Americans who still honor the most well-known symbol of racism, hate and treason. 

I’ll end it there, but there were plenty more. And as you can see, there are quite a few people out there who will go to great lengths to defend the Confederate flag. They absolutely love twisting history, ignoring facts and making false equivalencies to support their ignorance about what this flag really represents – hate, racism, treason and one of the most deplorable and dark periods in American history. Hit me up on Twitter and let me know what you think.



Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Ellen H.

    A few years ago, out of curiosity, I decided to find and read as many secessionist documents as I could. I found seven or eight, and ALL of them mentioned within the first paragraph that they were seceding because they wanted to continue to have slaves. Consequently, the Civil War was about “States’Rights”, but the main “Right” they were fighting for was to continue to enslave African-Americans. So you can say “States’ Rights” all you want–just have the guts to admit which “Right” it was.

    • Andy Riley

      It was about the economy. In today’s dollars slaves were worth about $4 billion dollars.

      • FreshConrete

        So if the economy was based on slavery, what you are saying is : It was about slavery.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        What percent of $18 Trillion would that be?

      • Ellen H.

        So basically the Civil War was about slavery and the economy slavery allowed to flourish. So, yeah, the Civil War was about slavery.

      • glblank

        Not that simple but you are on point. Slavery was ingrained in every aspect of Southern society beyond just the economic. Southerners at one point saw that it could become a liability but could not come to terms to freeing slaves as they were afraid of retribution and amalgamation. Non slave holders feared that freed slaves would compete for whatever scraps of life were left to them and that one day they could improve their status by owning a slave. No matter how far down the socioeconomic scale they occupied, they were still above the slave. But yes, secession was about slavery, period and the war was over secession or what it really was; insurrection.

      • Vicki Brown

        Mississippi: “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. “

      • Vicki Brown

        South Carolina: “A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery.

      • Vicki Brown

        Louisiana: “The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery.”

      • glblank

        Slavery was about more than the economy. Southrons were fearful that if 4 millioin slaves were freed, they would rape their woman and compete with poor white trash; you know the ones who fought the war, for jobs

    • Vicki Brown

      The Atlantic found a few more… and printed them here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/what-this-cruel-war-was-over/396482/

      It takes a strong stomach to keep reading.

    • glblank

      I suggest reading the Cornerstone Address as well.

  • Kipco

    “States Rights” is bullshit because if you actually read the Articles Of
    Secession, they single out New York state’s law on allowing southern
    slave owners to travel to their state with their slaves. Basically their
    stance was “state’s right for me but not for thee”, especially if it
    stepped on their toes regarding slavery. Don’t let the revisionists fool
    you, the Civil War was totally about slavery and the Articles of
    Secession are very clear on the topic.

    • Greg Price

      The words of Lincoln himself say you’re wrong.

      Deal with it.

      • Michael Lindholm

        Let’s see how the lawsuit against Colorado brought by Oklahoma and Nebraska, over their pot legalization amendment to their State Constitution plays out. If the court rules in favor of Nebraska and Colorado, then Kipco’s “States Rights for me but not for thee” will most definitely apply.

        Most of us in the real world call things like that “double standards.”

      • Greg Price

        The situation in the US today is not the same as it was pre-CW. Rightly or wrongly, the right of secession has been narrowed down to a “mutual consent” basis by the Texas decision which is a standard that can never be met in real terms.

      • Kipco

        Lincoln did not compose the secession papers. The states willing to be traitors if it meant preserving slavery did and they are very clear.
        YOU fucking deal with it.

      • FreshConrete

        Deal with what?

        1. Every single one of the secession documents listed the right to partake in slavery as a cause for their treason.

        2. The “Articles of Confederation” listed 19+ times that the reason it was formed was to maintain the right to own slaves.

        You can deal with that!

      • glblank

        I believe you are thinking Ordinances of Secession. The Articles were the original American government replaced by the Constitution.

      • FreshConrete

        I stand corrected thank you.

      • glblank

        Which words were those professor?

      • Greg Price

        Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address, for one. Plus his many other well-documented statements on the issue of slavery, et al.

      • Tracy Lund

        Greg Price, the words your printing prove nothing.

        Deal with it.

      • Greg Price

        So Lincoln’s own words mean nothing then?

      • glblank

        If any man is for slavery, he should first have it tried on himself. A. Lincoln. If Lincoln didn’t give a shit, why the Emancipation Proclamation and pushing the 13th Amendment and opposition to popular sovereignty. Keep trying.

  • DaveMan50

    Narrow minds shorten critical parts. It was fought over the right to own a slave. Not just black slaves, Irish were the first slaves that built the rail road going west. Sure the cotton industry used blacks. The rail going east used Chinese, not as slaves but cheep labor. So lets get over that trivial deference. Once the war was over the flag should have been removed and outlawed. Now, like I said, the deep south is where we keep our really stupid people. If you are black, Why the hell stay there? Get the fu*k out. Stupid is as stupid does sir.

    • DaveMan50

      Quote from Forest Gump.

    • dsadlowski

      How do they move if poor and no funds to do so.

      You paying for their move.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        Undoubtedly. What’s new about that?

    • Greg Price

      DaveMan, tell that to Lincoln, who said in his first Inaugural:

      “Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that–

      I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the
      institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have
      no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

      Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

      Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States,
      and especially the right of each State to order and control its own
      domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is
      essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and enduranceof our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion byarmed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

      I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon
      the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution
      and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States
      when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause–as cheerfully to one section as to another.

      There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from
      service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:

      No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

      It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those
      who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution–to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause “shall be delivered up” their oaths are unanimous. ”

      and later he goes on to say:

      “It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a President
      under our National Constitution. During that period fifteen different
      and greatly distinguished citizens have in succession administered the executive branch of the Government. They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with great success. Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted.

      I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution
      the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not
      expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is
      safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its
      organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the expressprovisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself.

      Again: If the United States be not a government proper, but an
      association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as
      acontract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it?
      One party to a contract may violate it–break it, so to speak–but does
      it not require all to lawfully rescind it?

      Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition
      that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the
      history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the
      Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in
      1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was “to form a more perfect Union.”

      But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the
      States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.

      It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion
      can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.

      I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and Ishall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

      In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there
      shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.”

      From Lincoln’s OWN MOUTH: his aims were perpetuating the Union and collecting taxes.

      By the way, he was wrong on at least two points:

      1) NO government is “perpetual”. By that logic, we should still be subjects of the British crown. To condemn the South as insurrectionist is to condemn the US itself, which was born of the same actions and reasons.

      2) The Constitution DOES provide for secession. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments clearly state that:

      a) there are other rights not explicitly enumerated in the Constitutional document (Ninth Amendment)

      and

      b) those rights are reserved to the STATES, and then to THE PEOPLE [individual citizens]. (Tenth Amendment)

      Those two amendments were EXPLICITLY included in the Bill of Rights to stop the “it isn’t written in the Constitution” argument for power grabs.

      Stupid is as stupid does, Dave…next time do your homework before you shoot your ignorant mouth off.

      • Andy Riley

        You rock. Finally, someone who knows some history. Thank you.

      • glblank

        And it isn’t you little boy.

      • J. Barrett Wolf

        It’s always fun when the folks who argue that the government is their enemy and lying to them dredges up a political speech and uses it to deny other more accurate and more specifically applicable documents like the secession docs themselves.

        It’s called rationalizing. You’ve cherry picked a paragraph so you can deny a hundred pages.of facts.

      • Greg Price

        Since Lincoln STARTED said war, the war is about what he said it’s about. Slavery was still legal NATION WIDE at the time. If Lincoln was out to free slaves, he could have done so in the North at any time. He didn’t.

      • J. Barrett Wolf

        Amusing, since in the various states declarations of succession, the SPECIFICALLY mention that they want their slavery left alone.

        Examples…

        Georgia-
        “Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. ”

        Mississippi-
        “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world.”

        S. Carolina=
        “”Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States.

        These are just a few of those declarations. Find the whole lot at:
        http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

        And next time, try doing basic research before you take the incorrect word of Confederate apologists.

      • J. Barrett Wolf

        Amusing, since in the various states declarations of succession, they SPECIFICALLY mention that they want their slavery left alone.

        Examples…

        Georgia-
        “Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. ”

        Mississippi-
        “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world.”

        S. Carolina=
        “Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States.”

        These are just a few of those declarations. Find the whole lot at:
        http://www.civilwar.org/educat

        And next time, try doing basic research before you take the incorrect word of Confederate apologists.

      • glblank

        Gebus, you are so wrong. The Constitution IS perpetual. James Madison; the father of the Constitution declared secession to be illegal and there are no less than three SCOTUS cases to back him up. The 10TH Amend argument is revisionist bullshit. Sorry sonny, you are the dumb fuck here.

      • Evan McGarry

        couldn’t have said it better myself… especially everything after the word revisionist.

      • Greg Price

        James Madison did not and does not get to make those determinations.

        And I suggest you acquaint yourself with the historical accounts (REAL accounts not North-edited ones) about the legal status (both real and perceived) of secession prior and up to the CW. Best resource is “The South Was Right” by Kennedy and Kennedy.

      • glblank

        Greg, I guaranty that I top you in understanding American history, front to back. I read the Kennedy nonsense. I can make your argument better than you can. I prefer to do it right. As I said keep trying.

      • glblank

        So the person responsible for practically writing the Constitution has no say. Interesting. You forgot the decisions by SCOTUS. Texas v. White most specifically. Actually Greg, the best resource to support your end is Thomas DiLorenzo’s “The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.” As I said before, I can make your points better than you.

      • Marge Malmquist

        Greg Price, very impressed. You are the first intelligent person I have encountered here.

    • AmyHerrmann

      The difference is hardly trivial. Were you meaning to discuss indentured servitude? Words matter.

    • curmudgeon VN Veteran

      The democrat governed ghettos in the northern states are even worse. All liberal bleeding hearts should be dropped off in inner city Detroit or the South side of Chicago after dark.

      • Creeayshun Sighuntist

        seriously, just go shoot yourself. Do us all a favor. I’m being serious here, before you hurt somebody else.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        Seriously, do us all a favor and just lay your head in sh!t and die. Everyone is dumber just by having read the liberal crap you post.

    • Marge Malmquist

      DaveMan50 you have just made yourself the most stupid commentor here. You say “the deep south is where we keep really stupid people”. Just who are you to keep anyone. You have just shown a great deal of stupidity. If blacks live in the South maybe it is because they love it in the South. Don’t assume because blacks live in the South that they are stupid. I am white, I live in the south and I take a great deal of offense in that assumption. Where I live all people, for the most part, live together like civilized people.
      There is an old saying ‘If you are not part of the solution, you must be
      part of the problem” You are part of the problem.

  • Dana Mitchell

    The confederate flag is as much a symbol of terrorism to Black people as the nazi swastika flag is to Jews. If the white people that twist themselves into pretzels trying to argue that it is a state’s rights symbol or a symbol of their heritage they are just justifying their racism, whether conscous or subconscious. If you don’t think it is a symbol of terrorism, just ask the thousands of black people murdered and terrorized under it’s banner.

    • Evan McGarry

      Symbol of terror to those it oppressed, symbol of embarrassment to their respective countries. Remember, Hitler was just trying to turn the economy around after WW1. The South was just trying to make sure that blacks could still live in the south where their skin was more conditioned for the harsh sun rays. Seriously people… put the damn thing in a museum and for the love of everything that is Holy, actually teach kids that Slavery was a root cause of the bloody Civil War.

    • Marge Malmquist

      Dana Mitchell, can you support what you are saying with some facts. “If you don’t think it is a symbol of terrorism, just ask the thousands of black murdered and terrorized under it’s banner” Just what are you talking about. If it was the war, thousands were were killed, not just blacks. And you give not honor to blacks in the South who fought for the South.

  • Collin Goodsell

    It, being the Confederate flag, is a piece of cloth that to millions of our fellow human beings/Americans represents a time in our history where their great grandparents or other family members were treated as sub human. It is a painful reminder of when people were less than simply because of the color of their skin. It hurts them. If as a society we really think we are moving forward then remove it. If one of my children tells me that something I am doing hurts them I simply stop doing it. NO questions asked.

  • gordonsoderberg
    • Andy Riley

      Fine, but slavery was about the economy. Jeez. Take a look at the economics surrounding cotton, rice and other agriculture and slavery. And evidently the North had no trouble buying Southern cotton and shipping it to Great Britain.

      • The Cosmic Avenger

        Not to the slaves it wasn’t.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        You would have thought they would have wanted to move out of dependency by now wouldn’t you? There are still far too many of the Blacks living willingly on the democrat plantation of victimhood and many like Sharpton and Obama willing to take advantage of the fact.

      • FreshConrete

        All Sharpton can not represent a Nation of people as diverse 45 Million Americans. As for the “Welfare Queen” routine that makes you uneducated people feel so good about yourselves Newsflash! that myth has been debunked by a hundred studies again and again and again.

        “blacks comprise 22 percent of the poor, but blacks only take in 14 percent of government benefits. Conversely, whites make up 42 percent of the poor , but take in a disproportionate 69 percent of government benefits.” -Center of budget and policy priorities.

        We are not here to attack poor people wether they be black or white, and depency has nothing to do with you peddling lies that you tell yourself so you can feel good about your position on a socioeconomic ladder.

        http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/who-benefits-from-the-safety-net/?_r=1

      • Marge Malmquist

        I believe most every one making comments is stating self opinions and none are based on real fact.
        Everyone needs to move from 1860 to 2015. Stop being offended by anything and everything you don’t like. You all make me want to fly a Confederate flag.
        Get on with living today and do something to make today better for all.

      • Gary Miles

        Aaannd, there the bigotry is, right there.

      • glblank

        You are oversimplifying.

    • Helland

      And I send you this.

      The ‘Great Emancipator’ and the Issue of Race

      Abraham Lincoln’s Program of Black Resettlement

      By Robert Morgan

      While it is true that Lincoln regarded slavery as an evil and harmful
      institution, it is also true, as this paper will show, that he shared
      the conviction of most Americans of his time, and of many prominent
      statesmen before and after him, that blacks could not be assimilated
      into white society. He rejected the notion of social equality of the
      races, and held to the view that blacks should be resettled abroad. As
      President, he supported projects to remove blacks from the United
      States.

  • FreshConrete

    Why are people piddle paddling around it? the slaves had value, it was free labor, and no one wanted to pay said slaves. It was about slavery. I think that this argument only got this far because of the control of information before the internet age. now that information is more accessible if one claims that it was about “states rights” or “economy” they would be bombarded with facts. sometimes, from their own state’s secession documents or even the articles of confederation.

    • curmudgeon VN Veteran

      Those of us who never owned a slave nor whose families never owned any slaves are still paying for them today. It’s the taxpayer’s burden. Margaret Sanger might have had a point.

      • FreshConrete

        How are you or your family paying by removing a flag of Racism and Treachery from State grounds? What acute cost are you bearing?

        I believe you might be speaking of an entirely different topic, let us redirect.

        1. Initial argument was whether the confederate flag should be removed from official states grounds.

        2. Those who are against removal and cite “States Right” and “Heritage”, and “The Economy”

        3. Those who are for removal cite null on states rights per every single secession document, and most importantly “The articles of Confederation” amongst other things.

        Question is wether or not the flag represents oppression, i believe that it does, it always has and will never represent states rights as some claim. Taken to a national referendum every single one of those flags of treachery would be removed.

      • Marge Malmquist

        You have it wrong. You can go on thinking the Confederate flag represented racism but the stars and stripes is the flag that represented oppression. The oppression of the north is what really started the war. The north had money and armies and the south had none of either. Even so the north almost lost, and then proceded to destroy the South.

  • curmudgeon VN Veteran

    First thing I thought of when I heard that an insane moron killed innocent people in a church was that a gun and a rag were the root causes. Liberalism and it’s true agenda are both the cause of insane people running loose. Maybe we should return to the days where lunatics were locked up instead of running loose and electing democrats to represent them.

    • glblank

      How far up your ass can you get your head.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        Probably not near as far as yours is up Obama’s!

      • glblank

        So coward, were you a Fobbit or a REMF?

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        You served? Amazing. Take a head shot?

      • Gary Miles

        To bad you didn’t, you bigoted shitbag.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        One thing about you mentally handicapped liberals is that you’re always exhibiting class. Low class with poor educations lacking in adverbs and adjectives and vulgar, but classy. Low class, but classy at that. None of you ever cared enough for your country to volunteer and serve. You do deserve contempt from those of us who did.

      • Gary Miles

        Hey, fuckwad. I spent four and a half years in military service during Desert Storm, so you can just shove you lack-witted, limp-dicked, slime-sucking, ignorant opinions so far up your racist ass the sun will never see them again.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        You are one classy guy. No education usually causes someone to be as vulgar as you. You are the poster child for why openly homosexuals should not have been allowed to serve. Take advantage of the G. I. bill and perhaps you can learn a few adjectives and adverbs and clean up your language so you don’t sound like a ghetto crawler.

      • glblank

        Ahhh… REAR ECHELON MOTHER FUCKING COWARD. Knew it.

      • glblank

        You are one retarded coward.

    • Jim Valley

      What a pile of crap this is!

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        You are probably one of them.

    • Melanie Mills

      You can thank your republican Reagan for that.

      • curmudgeon VN Veteran

        Did he feel sorry for you liberals? Probably thought you were merely retarded instead of full out crazy.

  • Rob f

    Even when someone states, as Robert E Lee did, what the war or the flag represent to them you claim to ” know ” what they really think.
    This is the classic liberal, ” progressive ” attitude. You think your so much smarter than everyone else so let you do our thinking for us.
    By the way whatever you think of the flag this used to be a free speech country. It’s easy to defend free speech when you agree with it the challenge is letting those you don’t agree with have their rights protected. Where should I send my books for you to burn?

    • Evan McGarry

      Robert E. Lee owned slaves and fought for a cause that wanted to preserve the right to have slaves. Explain to me that is honorable, only an idiot would have a stance such as you. The Confederacy is an embarrassment to American culture. You have a right to be a terrible person, but our society has a right to call you out on your cowardice. Say what you mean to say, tell us what you really think. Your racism hides behind your fear, just because you don’t wear a hood does not conceal your real feelings. Actions speak louder than words brother, saying what Robert E. Lee did and doing what Robert E. Lee did are not comparable.

  • Evan McGarry

    It pains me (embarasses me too) but the south won the war if you ask me. it’s 150 years later and we’re still acknowledging the stupid Battle Flag of Northern Virginia as “Heritage not Hate”. Segregation existed for another 100 or so years after the war. This flag should not just come down because it is hurtful to black people. This flag should come down because it is an embarrassment and hurtful to all people. My marriage (interracial) would not be legal if the Confederacy had their way. Racism cannot be conquered until everyone opposes it, not just those it directly attacks. White people need to get enraged by the injustice, and history needs to be taught accurately. The flag makes me angry and I will refuse to let an idiot southerner tell me it’s the heritage not hate bullsh*t. This should not be accepted today and people everywhere should call them out on this. In the words of the great Indiana Jones, “It belongs in a museum!”

  • Lizzard Smith

    For me it is so simple, I know that answers here go from the deciduous to the devine but my answer has nothing to do with states rights or enslavement and racisim. If you see me flying “old suspenders” it simply means that I was born in Fla., raised in Ga. Wild Eyed Southern Boy! Its only ‘ meaning ‘ was rebellion in general. Hell, when I left Georgia our state flag was 23 the battle flag. Thats ok, I’ll make a stencil for the Confederate States flag. Few remember it and for me the meaning is the same. It is a symbol that reminds me of home, nothing else. But thats me, you may see it differently so your results may vary.

  • Anonymous

    I am reading comments from raging faggots who know nothing about what they write

  • Anonymous

    Act like a nigger and we will call you a nigger, it’s a free country, niggers who don’t think so are about to meet their Waterloo

  • Steven Michaels

    My history is a little fuzzy… didn’t the Southern sates attack the United States and wouldn’t that be considered treason?

  • Stan Jones

    Here’s a bit of information for the confederate flag defenders to chew on :
    avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp
    avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp

  • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

    The only Confederate flag that still matters is the flag of surrender!