If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTOP)   The city of Alexandria, VA is considering the repeal of an old law that forces it to name all North-South streets after racist traitors   (wtop.com) divider line 234
    More: Hero, Virginia City, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Dred Scott, Robert E. Lee, repeal  
•       •       •

7354 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 9:51 AM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



234 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-15 08:40:48 AM
Maybe they should just name all east west streets after Al Qaeda leaders instead.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-15 08:43:02 AM
Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.
 
2014-01-15 09:29:24 AM
You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-15 09:43:45 AM

Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.


They could have been.  President Johnson pardoned them (which obviously he wouldn't have needed to do if they weren't traitors).
 
2014-01-15 09:45:01 AM

ZAZ: Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


Hey, I like Alexandria. I also had no idea this was the law.

Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.


Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.
 
2014-01-15 09:48:40 AM
They should name them after fictional traitors.

Lando Lane

Cypher Court

Carter Burke Blvd.

Obadiah Stane St.

Peter Pettigrew Parkway

Alec Trevelyan Expressway
 
2014-01-15 09:52:57 AM
Everybody wait, I have to make some popcorn.
 
2014-01-15 09:53:07 AM
They should name one after Virginia's greatest son Oderus Urungus.
 
2014-01-15 09:54:59 AM

Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime


...I don't care where your sympathies lie, that's just a farking stupid argument. Hitler never got a trial, does that make him innocent of any crime?

/technically not a Godwin, don't even start.
 
2014-01-15 09:55:58 AM
Racist Traitor Losers, subby.
 
2014-01-15 09:59:06 AM
ZAZ


Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


It is not like they named then Niger Blvd, Chink St, or KKK Way. Yes the Civil war is somewhat of a black eye in American history but much to general public schools it was not all about the rights to slavery. I don't see how a military leaders name could be considered politically incorrect.
 
2014-01-15 10:00:06 AM
upload.wikimedia.org

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.
 
2014-01-15 10:00:22 AM
Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.
 
2014-01-15 10:00:48 AM
I want all my streets named after racist patriots, and no one else!
 
2014-01-15 10:02:29 AM

Gunther: Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime

...I don't care where your sympathies lie, that's just a farking stupid argument. Hitler never got a trial, does that make him innocent of any crime?

/technically not a Godwin, don't even start.


Technically, that is a Godwin, especially seeing as how Lee and Davis - far from killing themselves to escape punishment - went on with their lives.
 
2014-01-15 10:02:59 AM
For your lands! For your wives! For Virginia!

gcaggiano.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-01-15 10:03:44 AM

Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.


I travel the route as the Jim Crow flies.
 
2014-01-15 10:04:51 AM
I'm still irritated that the Seaport Inn became a freaking Starbucks. Progress!
 
2014-01-15 10:04:57 AM

scottydoesntknow: Lando Lane


That lane is getting worse all the time! But damnit if they dont have the smoothest Colt 45's this side of the galaxy
 
2014-01-15 10:05:58 AM
I think the law requiring it is stupid, but the act of naming a street after an important person or event in history isn't inherently wrong.  I live near a military base and every street in and around it is named after a battle or a ship, most of which had tons of Americans dying.  It's history, though, and it's always important to recognize it.
 
2014-01-15 10:07:15 AM

Baron Harkonnen: [upload.wikimedia.org image 409x557]

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.


Of course the average Libertarian will claim that racism had no role in why the confederacy was formed.
 
2014-01-15 10:07:31 AM
who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.
I live here, in Alexandria
if people don't give a shiat about king/duke street, or Washington for that matter
don't manufacture rage about others
there is no right to avoid being offended by something
 
2014-01-15 10:09:00 AM

nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.


Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.
 
2014-01-15 10:09:32 AM

natas6.0: who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.
I live here, in Alexandria
if people don't give a shiat about king/duke street, or Washington for that matter
don't manufacture rage about others
there is no right to avoid being offended by something


Does it really matter to you what the street names are?  Like, do you actually give a sh*t if they're named after Confederate generals or not?
 
2014-01-15 10:10:26 AM
Malcolm X-Pressway has a nice ring to it
 
2014-01-15 10:10:44 AM
So the streets are named after the founding fathers? Weird
 
2014-01-15 10:11:26 AM
Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?
 
2014-01-15 10:12:04 AM
Latinwolf:
Of course the average Libertarian will claim that racism had no role in why the confederacy was formed.

That's like suggesting the US House of Representatives is based on sextings pics of your penis to women who are not your wife because Anthony Weiner was a rep.
 
2014-01-15 10:12:21 AM

Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.



Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?

I guess maybe you wouldn't see it that way, if you deluded yourself into thinking that the confederates were on the right side of history.
 
2014-01-15 10:12:51 AM
it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.
 
2014-01-15 10:13:46 AM
With malice toward none, with charity for all
 
2014-01-15 10:13:51 AM

Farce-Side: natas6.0: who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.
I live here, in Alexandria
if people don't give a shiat about king/duke street, or Washington for that matter
don't manufacture rage about others
there is no right to avoid being offended by something

Does it really matter to you what the street names are?  Like, do you actually give a sh*t if they're named after Confederate generals or not?


What we have here is a good ole fashioned I-Don't-Give-A-shiat Off.  Continue to not giving a shiat, contestants, but at the same time make sure you maintain that rage!  Best of luck.
 
2014-01-15 10:14:50 AM
Wouldn't be such a problem if they could remember more generals than Lee and Jackson.
 
2014-01-15 10:15:04 AM

Chummer45: Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?


Do you mean like the American colonies against the English crown?
 
2014-01-15 10:15:32 AM

htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?


Uhhh Britain did consider them traitors. We don't, but they sure as hell did.
 
2014-01-15 10:16:12 AM

Lucky LaRue: Chummer45: Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?

Do you mean like the American colonies against the English crown?


I dont think that is what he was talking about, no.
 
2014-01-15 10:16:26 AM

Mateorocks: I'm still irritated that the Seaport Inn became a freaking Starbucks. Progress!


This.

That place was awesome.  The Thai place is very good, but just doesn't work with the Colonial era building.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-15 10:16:41 AM
htomc

The other definition of treason is making war on the United States, with the implicit restriction that it is only treason if one owes allegiance to the United States. If the attempted withdrawl of the Confederacy was invalid, the Confederates were still citizens and those who fought were traitors.

The exact defininition: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."
 
2014-01-15 10:17:16 AM
Dumb:

Random Anonymous Blackmail: I don't see how a military leaders name could be considered politically incorrect.


Dumber:

natas6.0: there is no right to avoid being offended by something


Dumbest:

htomc: How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country? Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?

 
2014-01-15 10:17:27 AM

Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.


No, this is a very BIG deal to some northern FARKers who every once in a while feel like we are supposed to kiss their asses because of the outcome of a war that ended 150 years ago that none of us fought in. AFAIAC, if folks want to change the street names, change them.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:02 AM

Lucky LaRue: Chummer45: Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?

Do you mean like the American colonies against the English crown?


The Declaration of Independence was a revolutionary document. By signing it, they were marking themselves as traitors to the English crown. If they lost, they would've been put to death.
 
2014-01-15 10:18:05 AM
The law is just trying to repeal the requirement of naming new streets after Confederate Generals, not rename any streets currently there. I think that (very unlikely) if any new streets are actually built in Alexandria, being allowed to name them whatever the fark they want rather than on some antiquated idea of southern pride is at least tolerable.

/doesn't prevent anyone from naming them after generals either...
 
2014-01-15 10:18:52 AM

Farce-Side: natas6.0: who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.
I live here, in Alexandria
if people don't give a shiat about king/duke street, or Washington for that matter
don't manufacture rage about others
there is no right to avoid being offended by something

Does it really matter to you what the street names are?  Like, do you actually give a sh*t if they're named after Confederate generals or not?



To be fair, most of the founding fathers held profoundly racist beliefs.  I think the difference is that they didn't fight a war over their states' "rights" to own people.

The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.
 
2014-01-15 10:19:22 AM

htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.


This is true, and our founders were indeed traitors to the British crown.  I feel their treason was justified by their oppression, but that doesn't make it any less so.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?

I must have missed the part where Tina Turner made war against the United States.
 
2014-01-15 10:20:31 AM

Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.


hdwallpaperdownloads.com

/Even funnier because some stupid Tea Party group used this image without knowing it was A) from a video game, and B) making fun of the entire concept
 
2014-01-15 10:21:13 AM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: ZAZ


Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


It is not like they named then Niger Blvd, Chink St, or KKK Way. Yes the Civil war is somewhat of a black eye in American history but much to general public schools it was not all about the rights to slavery. I don't see how a military leaders name could be considered politically incorrect.


For the same reason you won't find a Guderianstraße or Jodlstraße in Germany.
 
2014-01-15 10:21:40 AM
spicorama:  /modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Bold assumption.  I think the Northeasterners would "Have your confederacy, crackers.  BTW, your accounts are frozen, and anyone with double digits of teeth and a college degree*, the borders are open."

*Offer not valid for graduates of Liberty University or any other evangelical institution.
 
2014-01-15 10:24:34 AM

vpb: Maybe they should just name all east west streets after Al Qaeda leaders instead.


I think they should name east-west streets after civil rights leaders, and give those streets the right-of-way.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:18 AM

Nabb1: Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.

No, this is a very BIG deal to some northern FARKers who every once in a while feel like we are supposed to kiss their asses because of the outcome of a war that ended 150 years ago that none of us fought in. AFAIAC, if folks want to change the street names, change them.


Im sorry but other than to laugh and chuckle at online articles during lunch, most of us dont give a flying fark about the south or think about it at all... its a null topic of conversation.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:36 AM

Lucky LaRue: Chummer45: Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?

Do you mean like the American colonies against the English crown?



Yup.  Look, just because there are historical parallels doesn't mean that the south was on the right side of history in the civil war.  If they were fighting to abolish slavery, or to shake off a truly repressive government, then maybe you'd have a decent point. But the fact of the matter is that the south rose up in rebellion to defend its slavery-based economy.

And if you're asking me to defend the revolutionary war, you are barking up the wrong tree.  We tend to idealize the revolutionary war as something that it wasn't - a popular uprising against an oppressive government.  In reality, it was a rebellion drummed up by wealthy landowners in the colonies who were upset that they didn't have sufficient influence in the british political system.  I like American history too, but we should stop pretending that the revolution was this virtuous, pure, altruistic time in american history.  Most of the people in the colonies at the time of the revolution didn't particularly care - for them it was either be oppressed by the British, or be oppressed by the new U.S. government.   Do you think the average slave, indentured servant, or tenant farmer gave two shiats about the stamp act?
 
2014-01-15 10:26:00 AM
I didn't realize it was a law.  Well, I guess we could start renaming the streets after worthier people, but it would open up a can of worms.  Are we also going to rename Fort Bragg?
 
2014-01-15 10:26:46 AM

Baron Harkonnen: [upload.wikimedia.org image 409x557]

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.


Geez, Southerners turned into inbred hicks almost immediately.  That guy looks like he's subsisted on chewing tobacco for over twenty years.
 
2014-01-15 10:26:53 AM

Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.


Alright, then by that logic you shouldn't have a problem with them repealing the law that requires it, right?
 
2014-01-15 10:28:01 AM

mongbiohazard: Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.

Alright, then by that logic you shouldn't have a problem with them repealing the law that requires it, right?


Have no problem with that at all.  Repeal the law.
 
2014-01-15 10:28:05 AM

spicorama: Nabb1: Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.

No, this is a very BIG deal to some northern FARKers who every once in a while feel like we are supposed to kiss their asses because of the outcome of a war that ended 150 years ago that none of us fought in. AFAIAC, if folks want to change the street names, change them.

Im sorry but other than to laugh and chuckle at online articles during lunch, most of us dont give a flying fark about the south or think about it at all... its a null topic of conversation.


Oh, there are some folks here who show up to every single one of these and get all ITG about how the North should "march to the sea" again, like their corpulent asses would be anywhere near any real combat if that happened. It's pretty sad, I guess, but amusing much the same.
 
2014-01-15 10:28:43 AM

Lucky LaRue: Technically, that is a Godwin


No it isn't. I wasn't claiming the Confederates were wrong due to being similar to Hitler in some way, I was pointing out that "They escaped punishment, therefore they're innocent" is an idiotic argument. Plenty of people get away with committing crimes. Jack the Ripper was never caught, Kim Jong Il got weeks of mourning from the country he ruined post-death, Jimmy Saville molested hundreds of children and it was covered up, etc.

Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.


It's not the right, it's the South. Northern republicans don't have as much sympathy for them as Southern white democrats do.  Nobody wants to believe they were descended from the "bad guys", so people twist and contort history to be more palatable to them.
 
2014-01-15 10:30:01 AM

spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.


Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...
 
2014-01-15 10:30:31 AM

GORDON: nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.

Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.


Subby didn't call the descendants racist traitors, he was calling the people who actually waged the war - commanding legions of men to kill and die to protect slavery - racist traitors. That seems entirely reasonable, since those confederate leaders were in fact racist traitors. The whole "sins of the father" act is something your brought in yourself.
 
2014-01-15 10:31:25 AM

Adss2009: The law is just trying to repeal the requirement of naming new streets after Confederate Generals, not rename any streets currently there. I think that (very unlikely) if any new streets are actually built in Alexandria, being allowed to name them whatever the fark they want rather than on some antiquated idea of southern pride is at least tolerable.

/doesn't prevent anyone from naming them after generals either...


Exactly - it's not even that antiquated. The law dates from 1963, and the area was civil war crazy during the centennial of the war (my parent's high school yearbook from that time is chock full of civil war stuff -e.g., the 'senior superlative' photos were taken at the Bull Run battlefield)

I wonder if the law has had any effect in the last 50 years ...

/applauds the effort to remove anachronistic laws from the books
//descendant of Confederates
 
2014-01-15 10:31:32 AM

mongbiohazard: GORDON: nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.

Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.

Subby didn't call the descendants racist traitors, he was calling the people who actually waged the war - commanding legions of men to kill and die to protect slavery - racist traitors. That seems entirely reasonable, since those confederate leaders were in fact racist traitors. The whole "sins of the father" act is something your brought in yourself.


Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...
 
2014-01-15 10:32:09 AM
The politician who is pushing this, Justin Wilson, is a white guy who is a member of the NAACP.
Which begs the question: Why would a white guy be in the NAACP?
 
2014-01-15 10:32:21 AM
I work in Old Town and they mostly use royal titles as street names here.

Talk about traitorous!
 
2014-01-15 10:32:23 AM
So no more streets named after democrats huh?
 
2014-01-15 10:32:24 AM

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: I didn't realize it was a law.  Well, I guess we could start renaming the streets after worthier people, but it would open up a can of worms.  Are we also going to rename Fort Bragg?


I think we shouldn't rename anything except for streets and public institutions named after Forrest. We should just stop naming new thins after Confederates. America had a glorious history after the Civil War, including war heroes from World War II and Civil Rights leaders and activists.p
 
2014-01-15 10:32:58 AM

GORDON: Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything. That's probably racist to suggest that.


Worry not bro...down here in Dixie we are highly amused at all the "historians" on this site.  Threads with "Racist Traitors" in the subject are the modmins favorite subjects and are pretty much guaranteed to go green.

Besides, they do need *something* to get their jollies....what with the SEC whuppin' some serious northern ass year after year after year after year.
 
2014-01-15 10:33:04 AM

Gunther: Lucky LaRue: Technically, that is a Godwin

No it isn't. I wasn't claiming the Confederates were wrong due to being similar to Hitler in some way, I was pointing out that "They escaped punishment, therefore they're innocent" is an idiotic argument. Plenty of people get away with committing crimes. Jack the Ripper was never caught, Kim Jong Il got weeks of mourning from the country he ruined post-death, Jimmy Saville molested hundreds of children and it was covered up, etc.

Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.

It's not the right, it's the South. Northern republicans don't have as much sympathy for them as Southern white democrats do.  Nobody wants to believe they were descended from the "bad guys", so people twist and contort history to be more palatable to them.



Really?  You're going to argue that "southern white democrats" are the real confederate sympathizers? Maybe in the 1950s.  I guess it's predictable that you'd drag out this tired argument, where we pretend that the dixiecrats still exist and that the GOP's southern strategy never happened.
 
2014-01-15 10:33:40 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...


"History is written by the winners."
                                    -Shia Lebouf
 
2014-01-15 10:33:41 AM

GORDON: Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.


OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

/ Actually want Maryland to celebrate CHM
// We should put up a big banner on the Potomac facing Virginia that says YOU LOST! GET THE fark OVER IT!
 
2014-01-15 10:35:16 AM

CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?


I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.
 
2014-01-15 10:36:06 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...


Hey, one of my grandfather's came from Italy by way of Genoa in the 1920's, my Irish great-great-grandfather was conscripted into the Union Army right on the docks in New York, but somehow I bear personal responsibility to some of these Yankees around here.
 
2014-01-15 10:36:40 AM

Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.


I've lived in Texas and have never heard of it.

But it looks like something like that does exist. Wiki
 
2014-01-15 10:36:47 AM

Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.


Lee-Jackson day is a Virginia thing
 
2014-01-15 10:37:16 AM

Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.


Uh, Lee-Jackson Day is a real thing in Virginia. Just FYI.
 
2014-01-15 10:38:46 AM
So Washington was a traitor?  N./S. Washington Street is the main street that goes through Old Town Alexandria.  And the north/south street closest to the river is Union Street.
 
2014-01-15 10:39:42 AM

Nabb1: Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.

Uh, Lee-Jackson Day is a real thing in Virginia. Just FYI.


It is popular as well in rural Southern areas outside of Virginia, such as the Northwest corner of Georgia.
 
2014-01-15 10:39:43 AM

Nabb1: Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.

Uh, Lee-Jackson Day is a real thing in Virginia. Just FYI.



But celebrating Bruce Lee and Michael Jackson isn't racist!
 
2014-01-15 10:40:07 AM

Farce-Side: I think you just made that sh*t up. I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.


Oh, the Lee-Jackson Day is real, bro.

But it's Spike Lee and Samuel L. Jackson.

/runs from thread
 
2014-01-15 10:40:12 AM

Mateorocks: I'm still irritated that the Seaport Inn became a freaking Starbucks. Progress!



Agree.  They already had a Starbucks a few blocks up!  Miss the Seaport Inn.
 
2014-01-15 10:40:37 AM

ristst: Worry not bro...down here in Dixie we are highly amused at all the "historians" on this site.


I'm actually a historian. The Civil War really isn't my area of expertise, but after looking at primary sources, I see no reason why the term "racist traitor" isn't an accurate description of the Confederacy. They were literally the definition of racists, i.e. they thought that it was possible to establish a hierarchy of races, and they were traitors in that they waged war on their own country.
 
2014-01-15 10:41:23 AM
More mature countries relive separatist pasts with protests, riots, bombings, terrorism, and all that normal kinda stuff.

Americans try to rewrite their history instead. It's breathtaking. And I guess it takes less effort.
 
2014-01-15 10:41:31 AM

scottydoesntknow: Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.

I've lived in Texas and have never heard of it.

But it looks like something like that does exist. Wiki


So Confederate History Month is a recent thing.  Huh.  Never even heard of it, and I live in one of the states that apparently celebrates it, and have for the last 20-something years.
 
2014-01-15 10:42:02 AM

ZAZ: Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


I don't really care WHY you do it ....
 
2014-01-15 10:44:21 AM

nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.


Actually, there were a host of northerners who wanted to do exactly that.  Grant forestalled revenge through the terms of surrender he gave to Lee.

I know how things look now, but back then, the central government wasn't nearly as dominant and people didn't travel as much.  State governments were more influential in individual lives, and state loyalty was far stronger.  Most folks on both sides followed their state in opposition to their personal beliefs on slavery.  (In this case "most" means more than half; a whole lot didn't.)  The Civil War settled the question of which would be dominant, Federal or state.  Also, at the time "preserving the Union" was the major appeal; freeing the slaves was a marginal issue.

Things look very different with 150 years of perspective.
 
2014-01-15 10:44:59 AM

trickymoo: scottydoesntknow: Lando Lane

That lane is getting worse all the time! But damnit if they dont have the smoothest Colt 45's this side of the galaxy


I am altering the lane. Pray I don't alter it any further.
 
2014-01-15 10:45:14 AM

spicorama: /modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.


Nah, not even.  The modern civil war is ongoing, is quite bloody, and is waged on the gridiron.

FYI...the north is losing.  The SEC is whuppin some serious Yankee ass on a consistent basis.
 
2014-01-15 10:47:10 AM

Mr. Holmes: I want all my streets named after racist patriots, and no one else!


You're wrong.  We need to name them after non-racist traitors.

//Who wouldn't want to live on Edward Snowden Blvd?
 
2014-01-15 10:47:38 AM

ristst: spicorama: /modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Nah, not even.  The modern civil war is ongoing, is quite bloody, and is waged on the gridiron.

FYI...the north is losing.  The SEC is whuppin some serious Yankee ass on a consistent basis.


You're in denial. The SEC has been losing ground to Wall Street every day.
 
2014-01-15 10:48:28 AM

natas6.0: who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.


So are you trying to say "slavery really wasn't that big a deal" or just "I am a gibbering idiot"?
 
2014-01-15 10:48:56 AM

Chummer45: Really?  You're going to argue that "southern white democrats" are the real confederate sympathizers? Maybe in the 1950s.  I guess it's predictable that you'd drag out this tired argument, where we pretend that the dixiecrats still exist and that the GOP's southern strategy never happened.


I think you misunderstand me. Obviously the GOP is far, far fonder of the confederates than the Democrats, but even amongst the GOP, there aren't many sympathizers in the North. You don't see these kinda laws getting proposed by GOP state senators in New Jersey. Confederate worship in the South crops up in the most astonishing places - I've heard politically liberal southerners opine that the war was fought over "States Rights" and that the union army was far less honorable in the war.

I assume it's just what you get taught as historical fact if you go to school in some places.
 
2014-01-15 10:49:10 AM

Arkanaut: Mr. Holmes: I want all my streets named after racist patriots, and no one else!

You're wrong.  We need to name them after non-racist traitors.

//Who wouldn't want to live on Edward Snowden Blvd?



It has an amazing Neighborhood Watch program.
 
2014-01-15 10:49:15 AM

ristst: spicorama: /modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Nah, not even.  The modern civil war is ongoing, is quite bloody, and is waged on the gridiron.

FYI...the north is losing.  The SEC is whuppin some serious Yankee ass on a consistent basis.


What does the Securities and Exchange Commission have to do with football?  The only thing the SEC seems to do to Yankee bankers is kowtow to them.
 
2014-01-15 10:49:42 AM

rebelyell2006: Nabb1: Farce-Side: CheatCommando: OK. But in return could we end things like "Lee-Jackson Day" and Confederate History Month at least?

I think you just made that sh*t up.  I've lived in the south my entire life and have never heard of these things being celebrated.

Uh, Lee-Jackson Day is a real thing in Virginia. Just FYI.

It is popular as well in rural Southern areas outside of Virginia, such as the Northwest corner of Georgia.


Yep. There is a reason I have a certain ignorant moron on ignore, and I was just reminded of it.
 
2014-01-15 10:53:15 AM

HeartBurnKid: htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

This is true, and our founders were indeed traitors to the British crown.  I feel their treason was justified by their oppression, but that doesn't make it any less so.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?

I must have missed the part where Tina Turner made war against the United States.


www.donegaldollop.com

I guess she needed to know the way home.
 
2014-01-15 10:53:35 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: mongbiohazard: GORDON: nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.

Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.

Subby didn't call the descendants racist traitors, he was calling the people who actually waged the war - commanding legions of men to kill and die to protect slavery - racist traitors. That seems entirely reasonable, since those confederate leaders were in fact racist traitors. The whole "sins of the father" act is something your brought in yourself.

Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...


Washington and Jefferson didn't fight against the US for the Confederate rebellion.
 
2014-01-15 10:54:40 AM
How about they leave them alone and stop trying to be revisionist historians?
 
2014-01-15 10:54:44 AM

scottydoesntknow: Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.

[hdwallpaperdownloads.com image 850x531]

/Even funnier because some stupid Tea Party group used this image without knowing it was A) from a video game, and B) making fun of the entire concept


That's Poe's Law Potato for you.
 
2014-01-15 10:55:46 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...


Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.
 
2014-01-15 10:56:14 AM

edmo: How about they leave them alone and stop trying to be revisionist historians?


The only people revising history are the Neo-Confederates.
 
2014-01-15 10:56:31 AM

CheatCommando: Yep. There is a reason I have a certain ignorant moron on ignore, and I was just reminded of it.


Awww, now my feels are hurt.
 
2014-01-15 10:57:16 AM

edmo: How about they leave them alone and stop trying to be revisionist historians?


You need to RTFA
 
2014-01-15 10:57:49 AM

Gunther: Chummer45: Really?  You're going to argue that "southern white democrats" are the real confederate sympathizers? Maybe in the 1950s.  I guess it's predictable that you'd drag out this tired argument, where we pretend that the dixiecrats still exist and that the GOP's southern strategy never happened.

I think you misunderstand me. Obviously the GOP is far, far fonder of the confederates than the Democrats, but even amongst the GOP, there aren't many sympathizers in the North. You don't see these kinda laws getting proposed by GOP state senators in New Jersey. Confederate worship in the South crops up in the most astonishing places - I've heard politically liberal southerners opine that the war was fought over "States Rights" and that the union army was far less honorable in the war.

I assume it's just what you get taught as historical fact if you go to school in some places.



Oh yeah I'll agree with that.
 
2014-01-15 10:58:46 AM
In all the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers, surely there was  onenamed "Martin L. King" or something like that, right?
 
2014-01-15 10:59:33 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.


On behalf of all the millions of Southerners who have not in their lives presently done anything in the name of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest, let me extend my heartfelt sympathies for any personal damage you may have suffered under the names of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest as a result of some of our less enlightened citizenry. If you feel this insufficient, and feel hostilities should be renewed, go ahead and mount your invasion. I certainly won't say that you didn't give us fair warning.
 
2014-01-15 10:59:40 AM

varmitydog: The politician who is pushing this, Justin Wilson, is a white guy who is a member of the NAACP.
Which begs the question: Why would a white guy be in the NAACP?


Probably for the same reason there were white abolitionists and there are male feminists and straight gay-rights advocates.  I'm not sure, but I would guess it has something to do with being insufficiently selfish and myopic.
 
2014-01-15 11:01:46 AM

mongbiohazard: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: mongbiohazard: GORDON: nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.

Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.

Subby didn't call the descendants racist traitors, he was calling the people who actually waged the war - commanding legions of men to kill and die to protect slavery - racist traitors. That seems entirely reasonable, since those confederate leaders were in fact racist traitors. The whole "sins of the father" act is something your brought in yourself.

Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...

Washington and Jefferson didn't fight against the US for the Confederate rebellion.


I never said they did. They're still racist traitors though :)
 
2014-01-15 11:02:29 AM

ciberido: varmitydog: The politician who is pushing this, Justin Wilson, is a white guy who is a member of the NAACP.
Which begs the question: Why would a white guy be in the NAACP?

Probably for the same reason there were white abolitionists and there are male feminists and straight gay-rights advocates.  I'm not sure, but I would guess it has something to do with being insufficiently selfish and myopic.



"Why would anyone care about people who they don't know or who aren't exactly like them?"
 
2014-01-15 11:03:35 AM

edmo: How about they leave them alone and stop trying to be revisionist historians?


How about you read the article before posting?
 
2014-01-15 11:03:40 AM
Everyone who critisises government is a traitor
 
2014-01-15 11:03:40 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.


Who the fark are Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest?
 
2014-01-15 11:04:19 AM

htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?


Robert E. Lee took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic.  And when it came time to order people to kill American soliders, Lee did most of the ordering.  He was America's biggest traitor.
 
2014-01-15 11:04:32 AM

Nabb1: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.

On behalf of all the millions of Southerners who have not in their lives presently done anything in the name of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest, let me extend my heartfelt sympathies for any personal damage you may have suffered under the names of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest as a result of some of our less enlightened citizenry. If you feel this insufficient, and feel hostilities should be renewed, go ahead and mount your invasion. I certainly won't say that you didn't give us fair warning.



That's a good start, but the South needs to apologize for a whole bunch of stuff.  It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress.  The South is why we can't have nice things.
 
2014-01-15 11:06:09 AM
They should name the streets after famous prostitutes. After all, those women in Alexandria probably did more to damage the war effort for the North than any of the Confederate generals, through spreading various nasty illnesses. There were at least 75 brothels in that town.
You might have, say Lilly Three Holes For Three Dollars Lane, the Fat Martha Expressway, and Back-Door Beula Toll Road.
 
2014-01-15 11:11:05 AM
You guys know the Civil War is over, right?
 
2014-01-15 11:11:34 AM
Confederate history is supposed to be the same history as the rest of the country, except from the point of view of the sore losers.

/let go of your hate
//or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery
 
2014-01-15 11:12:35 AM
 
2014-01-15 11:13:41 AM

natas6.0: there is no right to avoid being offended by something


Okay?

So stop acting so offended that you need to change your racist traitor street names.
 
2014-01-15 11:16:29 AM
Change the name of every street named after a Confederate, and every town, every sports team, every school from elementary to university, every landmark, every person, every dog, every stock car. Erase all traces of the unfortunate incident. That'll fix it.
 
2014-01-15 11:18:01 AM
I think the interesting aspect of this story is that it is evidence of Virginia picking up a more blue tint electorally.
 
2014-01-15 11:18:11 AM
The funny thing is that nobody would care about this stuff if there wasn't a group of morons in the south who still view the confederacy in a positive light.
 
2014-01-15 11:19:16 AM
" .. after racist traitors .."

So, Subby, you're saying every North-South street will be named Obama?
 
2014-01-15 11:19:56 AM

Chummer45: The funny thing is that nobody would care about this stuff if there wasn't a group of morons in the south who still view the confederacy in a positive light.


Location: Michigan


lol
 
2014-01-15 11:20:51 AM
name the street after the rev martin luther king jr. that'll improve the neighborhood.
 
2014-01-15 11:22:32 AM
Seems like every town in the south has a "Martin Luther King Blvd". How come no "John F. Kennedy Blvd" or holiday???? He was assassinated too, you know.
 
2014-01-15 11:22:40 AM
Sooo, most of you guys won't be happy till all the streets are named after Martin Luther King? Not that there's anything wrong with naming a street after Martin Luther King; I just think it'd be a little confusing to have 20 streets named after the guy.

Maybe they can vote on names they like, or vote to keep it the same. I think the number of people that would vote for no change would surprise you guys.

Do you know how much paperwork is required for moving these days? And what if a clerk in the office forgets to delete the old information? I imagine some people might be paying the taxes on 2 houses, instead of one.

/ it's just a freaking street name; it's not exactly the Nathan Bedford Forest Memorial Burning Cross, or something
 
2014-01-15 11:22:44 AM
Chummer45

It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress. The South is why we can't have nice things.
Yeah if only the south could elect intelligent, dignified folks like other places
thegrio.files.wordpress.com
NY's pride

3.bp.blogspot.com
Massachusetts silver spoon:
DUI Manslaughter, Rape party, Stumbling into women's rooms with only a T-shirt on.


newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com
Massachusetts golden shower boy:
His boy toy ran a prostitution service from Frank's residence that specialized in "young" men.

www.upl.co
Fred Richmond NY House of Representatives
Arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election-before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

www.upl.co
Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.
rapists stick together.

Shall we go on?
 
2014-01-15 11:22:54 AM
or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?
 
2014-01-15 11:23:58 AM

legion_of_doo: name the street after the rev martin luther king jr. that'll improve the neighborhood.


Heh, I was driving my 75-year-old grandfather to a doctor's appointment a few years ago. He's one of those "I must read all signs while driving" senior citizens. Anyway we're going along and all of the sudden he says "Mulk boulevard? What the fark's a Mulk?" I was really puzzled until I saw the exit for MLK Blvd.
 
2014-01-15 11:24:42 AM
Psshhh, and leave it to the Southerners to pretend that everybody gives a crap about their sportball games. You're winning what now? Oh, that thing that comes on the television once a week? That's nice.

/guess it's easier than reading a history book
 
2014-01-15 11:24:43 AM

ciberido: scottydoesntknow: Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.

[hdwallpaperdownloads.com image 850x531]

/Even funnier because some stupid Tea Party group used this image without knowing it was A) from a video game, and B) making fun of the entire concept

That's Poe's Law Potato for you.


Poetato, if you will...
 
2014-01-15 11:24:51 AM
A better law would be to force Virginia to rename any streets that change at an intersection, especially ones that require a right or left turn to stay on the same named street.

Or forbid naming all the streets the same thing except for the type and then write the type really small since thats the part you actually need to know, I'm looking at you Fair Lakes Pkwy, Blvd, Cir
 
2014-01-15 11:25:53 AM

Chummer45: Nabb1: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.

On behalf of all the millions of Southerners who have not in their lives presently done anything in the name of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest, let me extend my heartfelt sympathies for any personal damage you may have suffered under the names of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest as a result of some of our less enlightened citizenry. If you feel this insufficient, and feel hostilities should be renewed, go ahead and mount your invasion. I certainly won't say that you didn't give us fair warning.


That's a good start, but the South needs to apologize for a whole bunch of stuff.  It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress.  The South is why we can't have nice things.


Yes, the South has inflicted some bad things upon the country. We have also inflicted some great food, a distinctly American cuisine, Delta blues, jazz, literary giants, SEC football, thousands of miles of beaches, and girls in sundresses.
 
2014-01-15 11:26:53 AM

Nabb1: Chummer45: Nabb1: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.

On behalf of all the millions of Southerners who have not in their lives presently done anything in the name of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest, let me extend my heartfelt sympathies for any personal damage you may have suffered under the names of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest as a result of some of our less enlightened citizenry. If you feel this insufficient, and feel hostilities should be renewed, go ahead and mount your invasion. I certainly won't say that you didn't give us fair warning.


That's a good start, but the South needs to apologize for a whole bunch of stuff.  It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress.  The South is why we can't have nice things.

Yes, the South has inflicted some bad things upon the country. We have also inflicted some great food, a distinctly American cuisine, Delta blues, jazz, literary giants, SEC football, thousands of miles of beaches, and girls in sundresses.


Don't forget Honey Boo Boo.
 
2014-01-15 11:27:06 AM
natas6.0- who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.


ciberido-So are you trying to say "slavery really wasn't that big a deal" or just "I am a gibbering idiot"?

I need to use the word 'gibbering' more often

getting bent that those mean old southerners had slaves
is ignoring the history of the north.
The bullshiat isn't in a failure to condemn slavery
the bullshiat is in a willful ignorance of one one and damning the other

maybe if I use simple language you'll understand
..I don't like timmy because he hit joe a long time ago
but mark did the same thing
..yea, but mark seems nicer
 
2014-01-15 11:27:16 AM

OnlyM3: Chummer45

It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress. The South is why we can't have nice things. Yeah if only the south could elect intelligent, dignified folks like other places
[thegrio.files.wordpress.com image 850x566]
NY's pride

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x293]
Massachusetts silver spoon:
DUI Manslaughter, Rape party, Stumbling into women's rooms with only a T-shirt on.


[newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com image 315x275]
Massachusetts golden shower boy:
His boy toy ran a prostitution service from Frank's residence that specialized in "young" men.

[www.upl.co image 220x252]
Fred Richmond NY House of Representatives
Arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election-before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

[www.upl.co image 220x298]
Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.
rapists stick together.

Shall we go on?



Hah.  I love that all of your examples have absolutely nothing to do with policy - you know, the thing that we elect politicians to enact?  You probably voted for George W. Bush because you actually believed that he would "restore honor and dignity to the white house."
 
2014-01-15 11:28:01 AM

doubled99: or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?



You should probably read the constitution when you get a chance.
 
2014-01-15 11:28:05 AM

doubled99: or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?


You would have been tarred and feathered in 1860. Or shot. Southerners did not like the anti-slavery crowd.
 
2014-01-15 11:29:15 AM

Nabb1: Chummer45: Nabb1: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: spicorama: it's ok, for the people that still believe all that bullshiat, it's a constant reminder of how they got they ass kicked.

/modern civil war would be bloody but the north would win again.

Who is the "they" that got their asses kicked? You know all the people who fought in the civil war are dead, right?

I'm a southerner, but my family didn't even come to America until the 1880's...

Because nothing was ever done in the South in the name of Jeff Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest, after the Civil War.

On behalf of all the millions of Southerners who have not in their lives presently done anything in the name of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest, let me extend my heartfelt sympathies for any personal damage you may have suffered under the names of Jeff Davis or Nathan Bedford Forrest as a result of some of our less enlightened citizenry. If you feel this insufficient, and feel hostilities should be renewed, go ahead and mount your invasion. I certainly won't say that you didn't give us fair warning.


That's a good start, but the South needs to apologize for a whole bunch of stuff.  It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress.  The South is why we can't have nice things.

Yes, the South has inflicted some bad things upon the country. We have also inflicted some great food, a distinctly American cuisine, Delta blues, jazz, literary giants, SEC football, thousands of miles of beaches, and girls in sundresses.



I'm not say it's all bad.  It's primarily right wing southern politics that I take issue with.
 
2014-01-15 11:30:18 AM
Oh wow, I was expecting this to be a law from the 1860s, but no it's from 1963. Stay classy, Virginia.
 
2014-01-15 11:30:30 AM

hausman007: A better law would be to force Virginia to rename any streets that change at an intersection, especially ones that require a right or left turn to stay on the same named street.

Or forbid naming all the streets the same thing except for the type and then write the type really small since thats the part you actually need to know, I'm looking at you Fair Lakes Pkwy, Blvd, Cir


We won't even bring up Arlington.  Every other street is 23rd something (st., rd., ln.) Sometimes the street stops at one intersection, only to pick up a block or two away.
 
2014-01-15 11:31:59 AM
The war continues.
 
2014-01-15 11:32:46 AM

rebelyell2006: doubled99: or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?

You would have been tarred and feathered in 1860. Or shot. Southerners did not like the anti-slavery crowd.



Also, it's funny how selective conservatives are when it comes to "states' rights."  Like when the GOP tried to pass a law requiring all states to honor concealed pistol licenses from other states.  Or when the GOP tried to pass a law to invalidate California's regulations regarding the humane treatment of farm animals.

Before you get on your high horse and say "YEAH BUT LIBERALS LIKE STATES RIGHTS WHEN THE STATES ARE PASSING LIBERAL STUFF!"  Remember that I'm not the one defending policies by invoking "states' rights."
 
2014-01-15 11:32:48 AM

Chummer45: I'm not say it's all bad. It's primarily right wing southern politics that I take issue with.


As do I, quite often. There is a certain duality to the South that one must endure to live here.
 
2014-01-15 11:33:21 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: natas6.0: there is no right to avoid being offended by something

Okay?

So stop acting so offended that you need to change your racist traitor street names.


This X 1000
 
2014-01-15 11:34:21 AM

Nabb1: Chummer45: I'm not say it's all bad. It's primarily right wing southern politics that I take issue with.

As do I, quite often. There is a certain duality to the South that one must endure to live here.


I could see that.  Hell, at the end of the day it's not that different from the dynamic in Michigan.  A decent amount of northerner rhetoric tends to be just as racist and ignorant of history as the pro-confederate rhetoric.  Same shiat, different form.
 
2014-01-15 11:36:47 AM
or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?


You should probably read the constitution when you get a chance.



why? it's pretty much just for show now
 
2014-01-15 11:37:53 AM
ciberido: varmitydog: The politician who is pushing this, Justin Wilson, is a white guy who is a member of the NAACP. Which begs the question: Why would a white guy be in the NAACP?

Probably for the same reason there were white abolitionists and there are male feminists and straight gay-rights advocates. I'm not sure, but I would guess it has something to do with being insufficiently selfish and myopic
.

The white abolitionists is easy to understand, folks being against slavery on religious and moral grounds. And straight gay-rights advocates are weird, but understandable. But male feminists? Being a pussy whipped man is nothing to be proud about.

No, I figure the guy is just a professional politician pandering for the black vote in Alexandria. And like most politicians pandering for votes, this will cost the taxpayers. They renamed a street down here on Panama City Beach Florida after some crooked politician and it cost the city about 35K in new signs for the renamed road. And that was 15 years ago and this guy wants to do it on a much larger scale.

Either that, or he's the gentrified version of this:
media.urbandictionary.com
 
2014-01-15 11:41:13 AM

Chummer45: Nabb1: Chummer45: I'm not say it's all bad. It's primarily right wing southern politics that I take issue with.

As do I, quite often. There is a certain duality to the South that one must endure to live here.

I could see that.  Hell, at the end of the day it's not that different from the dynamic in Michigan.  A decent amount of northerner rhetoric tends to be just as racist and ignorant of history as the pro-confederate rhetoric.  Same shiat, different form.


And, much like the north, there is often a large difference between living in a large city as opposed to some small backwater burg. And some cities are more conservative than others, of course, but places like New Orleans, Atlanta, Charlotte, Charleston tend to have a different vibe. And then there are college towns like Athens, or enclaves like Asheville. You just have to seek those places out.
 
2014-01-15 11:41:45 AM

Latinwolf: Baron Harkonnen: [upload.wikimedia.org image 409x557]

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.

Of course the average Libertarian will claim that racism had no role in why the confederacy was formed.


One reason for the Abolition movement is that a large number of the white folk up north did not want slaves moving up there to escape slavery.

/Some were truly concerned about the plight of slaves.
//Others were NIMBY
 
2014-01-15 11:42:26 AM

doubled99: or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?


You should probably read the constitution when you get a chance.


why? it's pretty much just for show now


True.  why bother learning about a document when you can just defend what you imagine it to be.
 
2014-01-15 11:42:32 AM
To be fair, they should name all East West streets after slaves, lynch victims and non-white rape victims.

That would meet the "fair and balanced" commentary requirements according to which there are two and only two possible point of views--the deranged paranoid fantasies of the right and a feeble rebuttal from a tame liberal on a leash.
 
2014-01-15 11:44:05 AM
They should name all the east-west streets after cities Sherman torched.
www.sfmuseum.net
'I hate avenues" - WT Sherman
 
2014-01-15 11:44:08 AM

Clemkadidlefark: " .. after racist traitors .."

So, Subby, you're saying every North-South street will be named Obama?


Zombie Red Skelton frowns upon your not-funniness.
 
2014-01-15 11:45:52 AM
The My Little Pony Killer: natas6.0: there is no right to avoid being offended by something

Okay?

So stop acting so offended that you need to change your racist traitor street names.


it makes no sense to generate butthurt over people who represented
slavery in the south 140 years ago
and completely ignoring that it was done by the heroes of america also
I don't like the duality of stupid by choice.
 
2014-01-15 11:46:30 AM

ThighsofGlory: Change the name of every street named after a Confederate, and every town, every sports team, every school from elementary to university, every landmark, every person, every dog, every stock car. Erase all traces of the unfortunate incident. That'll fix it.


lol I was going to write something to this effect, with a little less snark.

I'll just say I have lived in here my whole life (spent my early years in Alexandria) and I still love driving up Rt 1 (Washington St.) past the Appomattox statue (Confederate soldier) and watching the road open up to a straight line toward the Washington Monument. It's an experience and makes you think, I'll just say that.

The rebel flag flying derpers are something else though. Can't say I have any appreciation for that.

but fwiw my family only got here 50 some years ago, so I couldn't be butthurt by Civil War history even if I wanted to.
 
2014-01-15 11:49:14 AM
Duke Street still sucks.
 
2014-01-15 11:49:34 AM
Did the "racist traitors" have a hand in building the city of Alexandria?  I could see naming streets after them if they were citizens or if they help fund public projects in the city.
 
2014-01-15 11:53:44 AM

Marquis de Sod: Malcolm X-Pressway has a nice ring to it


Yeah that is real nice, I guess its alright to name a street after a guy that said that all whites are devils...which is exactly what Malcolm X and the nation of islam said..
 
2014-01-15 11:54:32 AM
Hell, I *live* in the Northern Virginia DC suburbs.  I was under the impression that the law required Every. Last. Thing. - road, development, building, doghouse, outhouse - to have "Lee" in the name somewhere.
 
2014-01-15 11:55:45 AM

brantgoose: To be fair, they should name all East West streets after slaves, lynch victims and non-white rape victims.

That would meet the "fair and balanced" commentary requirements according to which there are two and only two possible point of views--the deranged paranoid fantasies of the right and a feeble rebuttal from a tame liberal on a leash.


They should change the E-W to civil rights leaders, and the N-S to hip-hop stars.
I have no valid reason for doing this.
I just want to hear what some cletus has to say when he finds out he lives at the corner of Old Dirty Bastard Court and Louis Farakhan Avenue.
 
2014-01-15 11:57:26 AM

atomicmask: Marquis de Sod: Malcolm X-Pressway has a nice ring to it

Yeah that is real nice, I guess its alright to name a street after a guy that said that all whites are devils...which is exactly what Malcolm X and the nation of islam said..


For the entertainment value, alone.
 
2014-01-15 11:59:21 AM
Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.
 
2014-01-15 12:00:35 PM

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Hell, I *live* in the Northern Virginia DC suburbs.  I was under the impression that the law required Every. Last. Thing. - road, development, building, doghouse, outhouse - to have "Lee" in the name somewhere.


I think you're confusing some of that with the Asian population presence here.
 
2014-01-15 12:04:15 PM

hausman007: Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.


There is no singular interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah (I-75 to Macon, then I-16 to Savannah), but as a Savannah resident, I don't have a problem with this.  Sherman spared Savannah, and left us with the beautiful city we have today.
 
2014-01-15 12:07:41 PM

Farce-Side: hausman007: Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.

There is no singular interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah (I-75 to Macon, then I-16 to Savannah), but as a Savannah resident, I don't have a problem with this.  Sherman spared Savannah, and left us with the beautiful city we have today.



He spared Savannah?

Sherman is dead to me.
 
2014-01-15 12:07:57 PM
True.  why bother learning about a document when you can just defend what you imagine it to be.

I keep a copy of the original in my wallet and read it daily to remind myself of it's glory.
.
Where do you keep your copy, commie???
 
2014-01-15 12:10:26 PM

Snarfangel: Farce-Side: hausman007: Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.

There is no singular interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah (I-75 to Macon, then I-16 to Savannah), but as a Savannah resident, I don't have a problem with this.  Sherman spared Savannah, and left us with the beautiful city we have today.


He spared Savannah?

Sherman is dead to me.


Presented it to Lincoln as a Christmas present.
 
2014-01-15 12:11:19 PM

htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?


If they wanted to form their own separate country without being traitors then they should have either 1) won the war to actually form a separate country or 2) actually secede from the nation. The Constitution has no provisions by which a state may secede, so currently no state may secede. In order to do so an Amendment to the Constitution would need to be made that either said a) "South Carolina et al are no longer a states of the United States of America" or b) define a process by which a state may leave. The South did not do this so the Confederate States of America never actually left the nation. Hence traitors
 
2014-01-15 12:11:54 PM

Snarfangel: Farce-Side: hausman007: Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.

There is no singular interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah (I-75 to Macon, then I-16 to Savannah), but as a Savannah resident, I don't have a problem with this.  Sherman spared Savannah, and left us with the beautiful city we have today.


He spared Savannah?

Sherman is dead to me.


Maybe they welcomed him like they welcomed the British when they sailed in during the Revolution.
 
2014-01-15 12:14:51 PM

Nabb1: Snarfangel: Farce-Side: hausman007: Let's make a deal, you can go ahead naming any streets you want after Confederate generals as long as the interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah is called the William T. Sherman Memorial Expressway.

There is no singular interstate that leads from Atlanta to Savannah (I-75 to Macon, then I-16 to Savannah), but as a Savannah resident, I don't have a problem with this.  Sherman spared Savannah, and left us with the beautiful city we have today.


He spared Savannah?

Sherman is dead to me.

Maybe they welcomed him like they welcomed the British when they sailed in during the Revolution.


The Confederate General in charge fled rather than fighting or surrendering, and the Mayor of Savannah at the time asked Sherman not to burn his city and destroy the property of the citizenry in exchange for allowing the Union troops to stay there and rest before moving up through the Carolinas.
 
2014-01-15 12:17:20 PM

scottydoesntknow: They should name them after fictional traitors.

Lando Lane

Cypher Court

Carter Burke Blvd.

Obadiah Stane St.

Peter Pettigrew Parkway

Alec Trevelyan Expressway


neverendingapplause.gif
 
2014-01-15 12:26:21 PM
Here's a Virginian they can name a street after:

upload.wikimedia.org

This guy deserves a street named for him in Atlanta
upload.wikimedia.org

Just celebrating my non traitorous heritage
 
2014-01-15 12:27:38 PM
Gosh, that law dates from 1963? I wonder what was going on then to cause the all-white city council to want to venerate the Confederacy so long, hard and deep?
 
2014-01-15 12:31:03 PM

mbillips: Gosh, that law dates from 1963? I wonder what was going on then to cause the all-white city council to want to venerate the Confederacy so long, hard and deep?


Lovings v Virginia started in 1959 (thanks to the Farker who gave me that date the other day) and the Supreme Court decision came out in 1967.
 
2014-01-15 12:35:59 PM

Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.


LINCOLN Once he surrenders, send his boys back to their homes, their farms, their shops.
GRANTYes sir, as we discussed.
LINCOLN Liberality all around. No punishment. I don't want that. And the leaders - Jeff and the rest of `em - if they escape, leave the country while my back's turned, that wouldn't upset me none. When peace comes it mustn't just be hangings.


/yeah, yeah. its from a movie.
 
2014-01-15 12:37:36 PM

mbillips: Gosh, that law dates from 1963? I wonder what was going on then to cause the all-white city council to want to venerate the Confederacy so long, hard and deep?


Keep going....
 
2014-01-15 12:45:27 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: mongbiohazard: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...

Washington and Jefferson didn't fight against the US for the Confederate rebellion.

I never said they did. They're still racist traitors though :)


Traitors against whom?  The king of England?
 
2014-01-15 12:50:43 PM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: ristst: Worry not bro...down here in Dixie we are highly amused at all the "historians" on this site.

I'm actually a historian. The Civil War really isn't my area of expertise, but after looking at primary sources, I see no reason why the term "racist traitor" isn't an accurate description of the Confederacy. They were literally the definition of racists, i.e. they thought that it was possible to establish a hierarchy of races, and they were traitors in that they waged war on their own country.


Right.  Because the Civil War happened because Virginia invaded Maryland waging war on the U.S. (or that only happened in '62 after ''Murrica invaded Virginia 30-40 times.)
 
2014-01-15 12:55:51 PM
I just wish every other road in NoVA wasnt named Lee.
 
2014-01-15 12:58:02 PM

Ambitwistor: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: mongbiohazard: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Interesting that streets named after the racist traitors Washington, Jefferson, etc... are still fine...

Washington and Jefferson didn't fight against the US for the Confederate rebellion.

I never said they did. They're still racist traitors though :)

Traitors against whom?  The king of England?


Yes. Jesus, I wasn't being cryptic.
 
2014-01-15 12:58:22 PM

Chummer45: OnlyM3: Chummer45

It's the primary voting block that keeps electing idiots to congress. The South is why we can't have nice things. Yeah if only the south could elect intelligent, dignified folks like other places
[thegrio.files.wordpress.com image 850x566]
NY's pride

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x293]
Massachusetts silver spoon:
DUI Manslaughter, Rape party, Stumbling into women's rooms with only a T-shirt on.


[newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com image 315x275]
Massachusetts golden shower boy:
His boy toy ran a prostitution service from Frank's residence that specialized in "young" men.

[www.upl.co image 220x252]
Fred Richmond NY House of Representatives
Arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election-before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

[www.upl.co image 220x298]
Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.
rapists stick together.

Shall we go on?


Hah.  I love that all of your examples have absolutely nothing to do with policy - you know, the thing that we elect politicians to enact?  You probably voted for George W. Bush because you actually believed that he would "restore honor and dignity to the white house."


I'm reminded of my stepsister telling me that she voted for Bush because "he is for families." You can't reason with people like that.  The stupid runs too deep.
 
2014-01-15 01:03:59 PM

Gunny Highway: mbillips: Gosh, that law dates from 1963? I wonder what was going on then to cause the all-white city council to want to venerate the Confederacy so long, hard and deep?

Lovings v Virginia started in 1959 (thanks to the Farker who gave me that date the other day) and the Supreme Court decision came out in 1967.


Exactly. You look at any local law "honoring our glorious dead" in the South, and you'll usually find it was enacted by a segregationist government during the civil rights era. See the Georgia state flag, etc.
 
2014-01-15 01:07:11 PM

OnlyM3: Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old.


That's just called "courtin'" where I come from.
blog.constitutioncenter.org
 
2014-01-15 01:13:56 PM

Missicat: hausman007: A better law would be to force Virginia to rename any streets that change at an intersection, especially ones that require a right or left turn to stay on the same named street.

Or forbid naming all the streets the same thing except for the type and then write the type really small since thats the part you actually need to know, I'm looking at you Fair Lakes Pkwy, Blvd, Cir

We won't even bring up Arlington.  Every other street is 23rd something (st., rd., ln.) Sometimes the street stops at one intersection, only to pick up a block or two away.


Or Glebe.

And don't forget that for every street there's an "Old [street name]" version, just in case you thought you knew where you were going.

But hey, stay on topic. The Civil War wasn't about slavery. It was about States' Rights.

States' Rights to own Slaves, that is.   Herman Goerring Strasse and Hideki Tojo Blvd, FTW!
 
2014-01-15 01:29:12 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: ZAZ


Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


It is not like they named then Niger Blvd, Chink St, or KKK Way. Yes the Civil war is somewhat of a black eye in American history but much to general public schools it was not all about the rights to slavery. I don't see how a military leaders name could be considered politically incorrect.


In Memphis TN, there is a giant equestrian statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest in a city park. I've always wondered what Memphricans thought of having such a blatant middle finger extended to them.
 
2014-01-15 01:38:46 PM

Fano: In Memphis TN, there is a giant equestrian statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest in a city park. I've always wondered what Memphricans thought of having such a blatant middle finger extended to them.


I bet the Kickstarter for a replacement statue of Forrest's descendant Forrest Gump would hit its target inside a day.
 
2014-01-15 01:40:03 PM

Baron Harkonnen: Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.


He looks like the kid from deliverance.
 
2014-01-15 01:48:58 PM

ZAZ: Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


DO note that this law came into effect in 1963.  Can you think of any OTHER things that happened that year and the one immediately prior?   And you wonder why we consider Confederate symbols to be coded racist messages?  It's because the racists started it.

Just like not too long ago the offical name of the Martin Luther King's Birthday Holiday in Va was "Lee-Jackson-King Day"   why?  Because fark you, that's why.
 
2014-01-15 01:58:57 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: ZAZ


Next step, raze the city so they can start over with politically correct street names.


It is not like they named then Niger Blvd, Chink St, or KKK Way. Yes the Civil war is somewhat of a black eye in American history

but much to general public schools it was not all about the rights to slavery. I don't see how a military leaders name could be considered politically incorrect.

 Wrong Sir! False! The civil war was EXACTLY about Slavery, and everything else it was supposedly about is revisiont window dressing:

Declarations of Secession:
Georgia
[Copied by Justin Sanders from the Official Records, Ser IV, vol 1, pp. 81-85.]
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

Mississippi
[Copied by Justin Sanders from "Journal of the State Convention", (Jackson, MS: E. Barksdale, State Printer, 1861), pp. 86-88]
A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
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. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

South Carolina


[Copied by Justin Sanders from J.A. May & J.R. Faunt, *South Carolina Secedes* (U. of S. Car. Pr, 1960), pp. 76-81.]
Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union
The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.
And now the State of South Carolina having resumed her separate and equal place among nations, deems it due to herself, to the remaining United States of America, and to the nations of the world, that she should declare the immediate causes which have led to this act.

Texas
[Copied by Justin Sanders from E.W. Winkler, ed., *Journal of the Secession Convention of Texas*, pp. 61-66.]
A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union.
The government of the United States, by certain joint resolutions, bearing date the 1st day of March, in the year A.D. 1845, proposed to the Republic of Texas, then *a free, sovereign and independent nation* [emphasis in the original], the annexation of the latter to the former, as one of the co-equal states thereof,
The people of Texas, by deputies in convention assembled, on the fourth day of July of the same year, assented to and accepted said proposals and formed a constitution for the proposed State, upon which on the 29th day of December in the same year, said State was formally admitted into the Confederated Union.
Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated Union to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?
 
2014-01-15 02:05:49 PM

Paris1127: ciberido: scottydoesntknow: Chummer45: The right wing has developed an imaginary idea of what the founding fathers and the confederate leaders stood for, which they constantly hold out as a way to justify adhering to regressive beliefs.

[hdwallpaperdownloads.com image 850x531]

/Even funnier because some stupid Tea Party group used this image without knowing it was A) from a video game, and B) making fun of the entire concept

That's Poe's Law Potato for you.

Poetato, if you will...


Thank you.   This is now stuck in my head all day:

31.media.tumblr.com

I return to you the favor.
 
2014-01-15 02:09:17 PM

natas6.0: natas6.0- who didn't have slaves? The north had 'em, the south had 'em
Northerers committed horrible atrocities during the war.

ciberido-So are you trying to say "slavery really wasn't that big a deal" or just "I am a gibbering idiot"?

I need to use the word 'gibbering' more often

getting bent that those mean old southerners had slaves
is ignoring the history of the north.
The bullshiat isn't in a failure to condemn slavery
the bullshiat is in a willful ignorance of one one and damning the other

maybe if I use simple language you'll understand
..I don't like timmy because he hit joe a long time ago
but mark did the same thing
..yea, but mark seems nicer


Ok, so instead of BSABSVR we now have BSABSVSlavery.  Got it.
 
2014-01-15 02:31:46 PM
it does not seem like he is seeking to change streets already named so i have no issues with this and can't see why any one else would,
 
2014-01-15 02:32:54 PM

ristst: GORDON: Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything. That's probably racist to suggest that.

Worry not bro...down here in Dixie we are highly amused at all the "historians" on this site.  Threads with "Racist Traitors" in the subject are the modmins favorite subjects and are pretty much guaranteed to go green.

Besides, they do need *something* to get their jollies....what with the SEC whuppin' some serious northern ass year after year after year after year.


SEC is college sports, right?
 
2014-01-15 02:51:04 PM

Nabb1: Farce-Side: Meh.  As a Southerner, who give a f*ck?  I'm not more or less likely to drive down Robert E. Lee parkway than William Tecumseh Sherman Blvd. simply because of the name.

No, this is a very BIG deal to some northern FARKers who every once in a while feel like we are supposed to kiss their asses because of the outcome of a war that ended 150 years ago that none of us fought in. AFAIAC, if folks want to change the street names, change them.


I bash the south probably more than most. Not because I hate all southerners, but because a lot of the most vocal southerners are the ones waving the stars and bars talking about pride an heritage of a war they fought and lost over the right to own other human beings.

It's hard not to dislike people who took a morally reprehensible idea picked a fight over it, lost, and are now somehow proud of it. I realize it is a tiny minority of southerners who feel this way, but I feel the rest of you could do a much better job of telling these idiots to shut up and sit down.
 
2014-01-15 02:51:21 PM

GORDON: nmrsnr: Or, they were pragmatists that realized that starting the process of getting back to a peaceful relationship is better served by having the leaders tell their men it's over and getting back to normal lives, rather than executing hundreds if not thousands of (now) citizens.

Maybe.... just maybe.... calling the family members of southerners "racist traitors" even though we are several generations removed from the actual action is possibly not the best way to bring America together.

Not that I am suggesting anyone should lead by example or rise above pettiness or anything.  That's probably racist to suggest that.


LOL SHUT UP GORDON
 
2014-01-15 02:53:50 PM

rebelyell2006: doubled99: or at least stop pretending that cries of "states rights" have nothing to do with slavery


I'm all for states' rights over federal government
However, I oppose slavery. Crazy, huh?

You would have been tarred and feathered in 1860. Or shot. Southerners did not like the anti-slavery crowd.


Plus, the Fugitive Slave Act was one of the most anti-States' Rights laws in history, but was loved by the south.
 
2014-01-15 03:07:33 PM
rwdavis:
If they wanted to form their own separate country without being traitors then they should have either 1) won the war to actually form a separate country or 2) actually secede from the nation. The Constitution has no provisions by which a state may secede, so currently no state may secede. In order to do so an Amendment to the Constitution would need to be made that either said a) "South Carolina et al are no longer a states of the United States of America" or b) define a process by which a state may leave. The South did not do this so the Confederate States of America never actually left the nation. Hence traitors

It is true that the Constitution had no procedure in place for secession, but isn't that and a host of other rights and privileges directly implied by the 10th Amendment?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...), the general political philosophy of the time was that the States or the People could do pretty much anything that wasn't explicitly reserved to the Federal government.  At the time, there was no law or decision that gave the Feds the power to keep a State from seceding; the Supreme Court case that ruled unilateral secession as unconstitutional wasn't decided, conveniently, until 1869.   Even Pres. James Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln, argued that the Federal government didn't have the constitutional power to stop them.   So, it's rather problematic to say that what the Confeds did was "illegal" since at the time, there was nothing but a mass of different opinions and no settled, clear law.

Although it isn't explicit law, the Declaration of Independence gives philosophical support, that "...whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness...".   They may indeed have been racist jerks, but it is equally true that a sudden cessation of slavery would have had dire economic consequences even without the war- an economic fact of reality that the abolitionists didn't seem to care about.  When the slaves were suddenly freed from bondage at the end of the war, many plantations immediately collapsed- and along with them, the food and housing that the former slaves -did- have.  Freedom wasn't easy for a lot of them.

Might things have been different if the Feds had embarked upon some plan to compensate the slave owners as had been done in other countries, or otherwise economically wean them away from it?  Of course, there is also the problem that racial superiority/slavery was a matter or religion in the South (maybe Hitchens was right!).  Ironically enough, the institution of slavery was likely doomed anyway; the industrial revolution at the time was rapidly replacing man-power intensive work and would have made it unprofitable, sooner or later.   And, that institution certainly did need to go away; it just seems like the way it was done turned out to be the worst, hardest possible way of doing it.
 
2014-01-15 03:14:55 PM

TheSheriffIsNear: LOL SHUT UP GORDON


upload.wikimedia.org
Wut?
 
2014-01-15 03:19:35 PM

NavyBlues: Right.  Because the Civil War happened because Virginia invaded Maryland waging war on the U.S. (or that only happened in '62 after ''Murrica invaded Virginia 30-40 times.)



www.learnnc.org
Um... the state of South Carolina proudly admits to starting the war by bombarding Ft. Sumter.

Which was a fort owned by the Government of the United States, manned by soldiers of the United States Army.

upload.wikimedia.org

This guy did the exact same thing.
 
2014-01-15 03:26:52 PM

Chummer45: I love that all of your examples have absolutely nothing to do with policy - you know, the thing that we elect politicians to enact?


I thought we elected politicians to say NO to the other side because nana-nana-boo-boo.  And to get very rich while in office.  And to spew forth mountains of derp.

But enacting policy?  What policy?  When?  Where?  I don't recall a whole lotta policy (if any at all) being enacted by anyone in Washington.
 
2014-01-15 03:35:35 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Psshhh, and leave it to the Southerners to pretend that everybody gives a crap about their sportball games. You're winning what now? Oh, that thing that comes on the television once a week? That's nice.

/guess it's easier than reading a history book


Why don't you run a national poll where you query the population in this country on the relevance of their weekly sportball games vs. how many give a huge rat's ass that southern cities have streets named after confederate soldiers.

Get back to me with those results, yeah?

/and you're saying southerners are poor losers?
//hystericallaughter.jpg
 
2014-01-15 03:39:14 PM

htomc: o instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...),


Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.
 
2014-01-15 03:54:17 PM

impaler: htomc: o instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...),

Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.


I'm included to agree with you here, but at least that State government is a wee bit closer and a c-hair more accountable than the distant Federal government.  There's some wisdom to keeping power no further from those affected by it, than absolutely necessary.
 
2014-01-15 03:55:24 PM

htomc: impaler: htomc: o instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...),

Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.

I'm included to agree with you here, but at least that State government is a wee bit closer and a c-hair more accountable than the distant Federal government.  There's some wisdom to keeping power no further from those affected by it, than absolutely necessary.


s/included/inclined/

/stupid autocomplete
//stupid button
 
2014-01-15 04:20:39 PM

impaler: Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.


Legalized pot.

Of course, most of the "states rights" Repubes can't stand that, so they want the feds to step on Colorado and Washington.
 
2014-01-15 04:24:58 PM

htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?


Tina Turner isn't trying to prevent Midwest farmers from sending crops down the Mississippi, or attacking US military installations.
 
2014-01-15 04:48:53 PM

maddogdelta: impaler: Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.

Legalized pot.

Of course, most of the "states rights" Repubes can't stand that, so they want the feds to step on Colorado and Washington.


Good point.

Naming a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right isn't hard.

Naming a "State's right" that self-professed "States' rights advocates" support, that isn't the State taking away an individual's right is impossible.
 
2014-01-15 04:51:04 PM

Baron Harkonnen: [upload.wikimedia.org image 409x557]

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of racial equality]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.  -Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States of America.


He needed a better tailor; those are some ill-fitting clothes.
 
2014-01-15 04:52:48 PM

maddogdelta: impaler: Name a "State's right" that isn't the State taking away an individual's right.

Legalized pot.

Of course, most of the "states rights" Repubes can't stand that, so they want the feds to step on Colorado and Washington.


When proggies were using the "tenther" epithet (as if wanting to uphold a constitutional amendment is some kind of mental derangement) I would ask them if they were tenthers when it comes to medical marijuana. You know when they hear "states' rights" they accuse the proponent of wanting to bring back slavery and Jim Crow, but when it's about something they like, well that's different.
 
2014-01-15 04:58:35 PM
Another type of state right that could be used to enforce individual rights would be a state refusing to enforce certain federal laws or even blocking federal actions. There is a movement afoot in Utah to get the state to deny water rights to the NSA datacenter being built there. If they don't have water to cool their computers they can't do what the NSA does, at least not there.
 
2014-01-15 05:03:26 PM
Let those poor, pathetic, Southerners have their Civil War generals' names on signs.  If that makes them feel better about their lame little lives, why should we begrudge them?

/living in Alexandria on one of those north-south streets,  and getting a kick out of this.
//and this doesn't explain why one of the best neighborhoods in the city is on a north-south street named Union Street...
 
2014-01-15 05:03:49 PM

Chummer45: Lucky LaRue: You would think, subby, that if the Confederates were traitors, then at least their leaders would have been judged guilty of the crime.  Maybe, though, the Federalist were just too stupid or too timid to take that kind of action, though.


Isn't fighting an armed insurrection against your own government kind of the definition of traitor?

I guess maybe you wouldn't see it that way, if you deluded yourself into thinking that the confederates were on the right side of history.

"The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms has justly been considered the palladium of the liberTies of a republic, since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

-Joseph Story, 1833
Or just maybe they were exercising the rights granted them in the 2nd amendment because they felt the government was becoming oppressive. Personally don't care either way but as a history major both of the main ideas of why the war was fought are wrong on some lvl.
 
2014-01-15 05:15:43 PM

htomc: rwdavis:
If they wanted to form their own separate country without being traitors then they should have either 1) won the war to actually form a separate country or 2) actually secede from the nation. The Constitution has no provisions by which a state may secede, so currently no state may secede. In order to do so an Amendment to the Constitution would need to be made that either said a) "South Carolina et al are no longer a states of the United States of America" or b) define a process by which a state may leave. The South did not do this so the Confederate States of America never actually left the nation. Hence traitors

It is true that the Constitution had no procedure in place for secession, but isn't that and a host of other rights and privileges directly implied by the 10th Amendment?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...), the general political philosophy of the time was that the States or the People could do pretty much anything that wasn't explicitly reserved to the Federal government.  At the time, there was no law or decision that gave the Feds the power to keep a State from seceding; the Supreme Court case that ruled unilateral secession as unconstitutional wasn't decided, conveniently, until 1869.   Even Pres. James Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln, argued that the Federal government didn't have the constitutional power to stop them.   So, it's rather problematic to say that what the Confeds did was "illegal" since at the time, there was nothing but a mass of different opinions and no settled, clear law.

Although it isn't explicit law, the Declaration of Independence gives philosophical support, that "...whenever any form of government becomes destructive t ...


I would argue against.

The Constitution is very explicit in its procedure for admitting a state to the union.  And generally speaking, laws or powers that weren't specified relied upon English common law.

But there was no precedent for a part of a nation seceding, except, perhaps, the Declaration of Independence - which isn't exactly law.  Yet even if it established a precedent of taking up arms when grieved, it's important to note that that was within the context of an English system whereby the colonies, without representation, did not have rights.  That's vastly different than saying you have a vote, but in a democracy, you can be outvoted.

Assuming that states could, nontheless, leave the union on whatever terms they felt like would be counterintuitive to the stronger federal government the Constitution established.

In which case, no right to secede.
 
2014-01-15 05:40:42 PM

htomc: rwdavis:
If they wanted to form their own separate country without being traitors then they should have either 1) won the war to actually form a separate country or 2) actually secede from the nation. The Constitution has no provisions by which a state may secede, so currently no state may secede. In order to do so an Amendment to the Constitution would need to be made that either said a) "South Carolina et al are no longer a states of the United States of America" or b) define a process by which a state may leave. The South did not do this so the Confederate States of America never actually left the nation. Hence traitors

It is true that the Constitution had no procedure in place for secession, but isn't that and a host of other rights and privileges directly implied by the 10th Amendment?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...), the general political philosophy of the time was that the States or the People could do pretty much anything that wasn't explicitly reserved to the Federal government.  At the time, there was no law or decision that gave the Feds the power to keep a State from seceding; the Supreme Court case that ruled unilateral secession as unconstitutional wasn't decided, conveniently, until 1869.   Even Pres. James Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln, argued that the Federal government didn't have the constitutional power to stop them.   So, it's rather problematic to say that what the Confeds did was "illegal" since at the time, there was nothing but a mass of different opinions and no settled, clear law.

Although it isn't explicit law, the Declaration of Independence gives philosophical support, that "...whenever any form of government becomes destructive t ...


Except there was a lot of stuff in the Constitution about who was a member of the Union and how one might join so it stands to reason that membership in the Union is a Federal matter. Even then, a "Screw you guys, we're going home!" tactic is certainly the wrong way to do it. The Federal government had assets in all of the Southern states that needed to be either returned or paid for (military assets like Fort Sumter and guns and Federal lands like post-roads). Citizenship and a thousand other matters of state needed to be resolved.
 
2014-01-15 05:58:20 PM

maddogdelta: NavyBlues: Right.  Because the Civil War happened because Virginia invaded Maryland waging war on the U.S. (or that only happened in '62 after ''Murrica invaded Virginia 30-40 times.)


[www.learnnc.org image 850x501]
Um... the state of South Carolina proudly admits to starting the war by bombarding Ft. Sumter.

...and the rest of the story...

The fort in which a Federal garrison had occupied for months after SC declared secession, despite repeated calls for it to be evacuated by the government of SC.   It is true that cadets from the Citadel fired the first shots, but in response to what?   Attempts by the Feds to reinforce it with troops and supplies.  They were clearly provoking a fight, and SC took the bait.

Which was a fort owned by the Government of the United States, manned by soldiers of the United States Army.

...
a Federal installation for which SC offered to compensate the Fed government, in the same way that the Confederacy offered to pay compensation for all such Federal installations in the south.  These offers were ignored.

As for those soldiers, they were fired upon for 34 hours before agreeing to surrender and leave- the only death occurred from a misfiring cannon during a 100-gun salute.  The Confeds allowed them to leave peacefully, then managed to hold the fort throughout the entire length of the war despite prolonged attacks.  What will you find at Ft. Sumter today?  A big marble monument to the Union soldiers who held the fort for all of 34 hours.  What do you find in recognition of the rebel soldiers who held it to the very end?  Nothing, nada, zip.
 
2014-01-15 06:20:14 PM
rwdavis:
Except there was a lot of stuff in the Constitution about who was a member of the Union and how one might join so it stands to reason that membership in the Union is a Federal matter. Even then, a "Screw you guys, we're going home!" tactic is certainly the wrong way to do it. The Federal government had assets in all of the Southern states that needed to be either returned or paid for (military assets like Fort Sumter and guns and Federal lands like post-roads). Citizenship and a thousand other matters of state needed to be resolved.

But the Constitution was lacking clear language on secession, other than the 10th Amendment- which does function as the universal otherwise() clause.  It seems odd that the Constitutional Convention in Boston didn't at least consider issues of secession, given the many compromises they had to make (mainly over slavery, kicking that can down the road...) to even form the union in the first place.

As for the assets- the Confederacy did in fact offer to make restitution for all Federal property.   They offered to set up payments to cover their share of the national debt at the time.  They offered free access to the Mississippi for Northern States.  One of Jefferson Davis' first acts in office was to send a delegation to Washington to establish peaceful relations.   They were ignored; Lincoln wanted his little war, and he got it.  What might this country be like today if this had been handled diplomatically?   Might the map look the same way it does today?  Maybe.

Slavery was the big, #1 issue for the South.  But it wasn't so much for the North- their main rallying cry was "to preserve the Union".   But how, and at what price?   Having been to many of the VA battlefields, I can't help but wonder, "why did it have to happen this way?"   Maybe neither side was right in what they did, and as usual, the average little-guy ended up paying for it in blood.
 
2014-01-15 06:46:01 PM

htomc: What do you find in recognition of the rebel soldiers who held it to the very end?  Nothing, nada, zip.


Good. Scum.

Not really a feat to hold a fort when you're surrounded by your confederates.
 
2014-01-15 06:46:13 PM

htomc: What might this country be like today if this had been handled diplomatically? Might the map look the same way it does today? Maybe.


Maybe not. Maybe the CSA expanded into Mexico and Central America, maybe Cuba.
 
2014-01-15 07:22:52 PM

impaler: htomc: What do you find in recognition of the rebel soldiers who held it to the very end?  Nothing, nada, zip.

Good. Scum.

Not really a feat to hold a fort when you're surrounded by your confederates.


Actually, not exactly true.  The Union naval blockade of the South was quite successful and a major factor in their inability to sustain the war.  Ships in Charleston Harbor had to be very careful in how they slipped in and out.   The fort was exposed to frequent and sustained bombardment from Union gunboats throughout the war, and even repelled one large amphibious assault.   Toward the end, Union soldiers captured smaller forts around it and used them to fire into it from those land positions.  Despite all that, they held.  Whatever your opinion of Southern soldiers, weaklings they weren't.
 
2014-01-15 07:26:56 PM

ToastmasterGeneral: htomc: rwdavis:
If they wanted to form their own separate country without being traitors then they should have either 1) won the war to actually form a separate country or 2) actually secede from the nation. The Constitution has no provisions by which a state may secede, so currently no state may secede. In order to do so an Amendment to the Constitution would need to be made that either said a) "South Carolina et al are no longer a states of the United States of America" or b) define a process by which a state may leave. The South did not do this so the Confederate States of America never actually left the nation. Hence traitors

It is true that the Constitution had no procedure in place for secession, but isn't that and a host of other rights and privileges directly implied by the 10th Amendment?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So instead of thinking that the States couldn't do anything unless they had permission from the Feds (which is rather modern thinking, one unfortunate outcome of that war...), the general political philosophy of the time was that the States or the People could do pretty much anything that wasn't explicitly reserved to the Federal government.  At the time, there was no law or decision that gave the Feds the power to keep a State from seceding; the Supreme Court case that ruled unilateral secession as unconstitutional wasn't decided, conveniently, until 1869.   Even Pres. James Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln, argued that the Federal government didn't have the constitutional power to stop them.   So, it's rather problematic to say that what the Confeds did was "illegal" since at the time, there was nothing but a mass of different opinions and no settled, clear law.

Although it isn't explicit law, the Declaration of Independence gives philosophical support, that "...whenever any form of government becomes destru ...


static3.wikia.nocookie.net
"No backsies"
 
2014-01-15 07:39:15 PM

htomc: ; Lincoln wanted his little war, and he got it.


I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark here; you went to a Southern high school, right?

You can try to convince yourself that Lincoln was a bloodthirsty tyrant and Jefferson Davis was a reasonable, war-averse diplomat if you want, but the facts do not bear that out. Seven states declared they were seceding before Lincoln even took office, for god's sake. Rather than attempt a diplomatic solution to the Fort Sumpter crisis, Jefferson Davis gave orders to the army that the fort be captured. The various declarations of secession aren't exactly the most peace-loving documents ever written.
 
2014-01-15 08:00:26 PM

maddogdelta: TheSheriffIsNear: LOL SHUT UP GORDON

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269]
Wut?


While we're at it, we should rename all of our Army posts after American heroes instead of racist traitors, or if we're going to keep naming them after those that fought and killed Americans, at least we could update them with more modern names.

Fort Lee could become Fort Osama bin Laden
Fort Bragg could be Fort Adolph Hitler
Fort Gordon could be Fort Ho Chi Minh
Fort Benning could be Fort Kaiser Wilhelm
Fort Hood could be Fort Saddam Hussein
Fort A.P. Hill could be Fort Kim Il Sung

Makes just as much sense as naming them after 19th century enemies that killed Americans.
 
2014-01-15 08:34:38 PM

Gunther: htomc: ; Lincoln wanted his little war, and he got it.

I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark here; you went to a Southern high school, right?


Irrelevant to the facts.

You can try to convince yourself that Lincoln was a bloodthirsty tyrant and Jefferson Davis was a reasonable, war-averse diplomat if you want, but the facts do not bear that out. Seven states declared they were seceding before Lincoln even took office, for god's sake. Rather than attempt a diplomatic solution to the Fort Sumpter crisis, Jefferson Davis gave orders to the army that the fort be captured. The various declarations of secession aren't exactly the most peace-loving documents ever written.

Lincoln's hands certainly weren't clean, and the way he suspended habeas corpus, jailed dissenters, shut down newspapers, confiscated property and even threw elected officials into prison simply for disagreeing with him, is pretty good evidence that something foul was afoot.

The South at least made attempts to play nice, but their raison d'être was equally poisonous; they made it quite clear that the institution of slavery, ingrained into Southern society as it was, was -the- reason for secession.  Even the hypocritical "states rights" arguments they made ultimately boiled down to "because slavery".  I have no more respect for that petty, corrupt theocracy than I do for the corrupt tyranny brewing in the North.  However, whether secession as it happened was legal at the time is certainly a matter of debate.  I would agree that it was done for entirely the wrong reason.  Northern abolitionists were quite right to point out the hypocrisy of fighting for a "freedom" in order to inflict tyranny.

But get the facts straight.  It is true that those States seceded before Lincoln took office.  But it happened after he was elected.  They knew what was coming, Lincoln made that quite plain and clear.
Despite the bluster of Calhoun and others in the south, they must have realized that a primarily agrarian South couldn't prevail against a heavily-industrialized North in outright conflict.  It's really incredible the South was able to do as well as they did militarily.

A peaceful way of resolving the Fort Sumter problem was in fact tried.  Aides from Gen. Beauregard met directly with Anderson, the Union commander at Fort Sumter; Anderson offered only conditions the aides considered "manifestly futile".  Only after that was attempted did the bombardment began in earnest. Yes- the southern govt did want the union soldiers out, and did let them out when Anderson realized his situation was untenable- something he should have known before the initial parlay, as Fort Sumter was incomplete and poorly-stocked, hence the reinforcement attempts.
 
2014-01-15 09:04:59 PM

HeartBurnKid: htomc: Traitors?  What did they do to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States?  They just wanted their own separate country- just like the colonists did to the British less than a century before.  Granted, their reasons might not have been quite as honorable, but they did essentially the same thing.

This is true, and our founders were indeed traitors to the British crown.  I feel their treason was justified by their oppression, but that doesn't make it any less so.

How were they any more "traitors" than any person who leaves the US and becomes a citizen of another country?  Does this mean that Tina Turner should now be subject to the death penalty?

I must have missed the part where Tina Turner made war against the United States.


Stop the halfwit bickering and rename your street after Tina Tuner!

/Sheesh!
 
2014-01-15 09:34:30 PM

htomc: Lincoln's hands certainly weren't clean, and the way he suspended habeas corpus, jailed dissenters, shut down newspapers, confiscated property and even threw elected officials into prison simply for disagreeing with him, is pretty good evidence that something foul was afoot.


All stuff that happened after the war was well underway. We can argue about whether it was justified or not, but it doesn't point to him being any sort of warmonger.

htomc: The South at least made attempts to play nice, but their raison d'être was equally poisonous; they made it quite clear that the institution of slavery, ingrained into Southern society as it was, was -the- reason for secession.  Even the hypocritical "states rights" arguments they made ultimately boiled down to "because slavery".


I'm mildly impressed you're willing to admit that. The "states rights" BS is one of the more absurd rationales given for the war, considering the utter disdain the South had for the rights of Northern when it came to stuff like the Fugitive Slave Act.

htomc: Despite the bluster of Calhoun and others in the south, they must have realized that a primarily agrarian South couldn't prevail against a heavily-industrialized North in outright conflict


It was generally believed at the time by many Southerners that they wouldn't have to win the war, they'd just have to show they were willing to fight it and the North would back down. It's kinda similar to WW1 in that respect - nobody wanted a war but everyone assumed the other guy would back down first. The South thought the North lacked the resolve for a war, the North thought the South didn't have the infrastructure to fight one.
 
2014-01-15 10:22:07 PM

htomc: Might things have been different if the Feds had embarked upon some plan to compensate the slave owners as had been done in other countries, or otherwise economically wean them away from it?  Of course, there is also the problem that racial superiority/slavery was a matter or religion in the South (maybe Hitchens was right!).  Ironically enough, the institution of slavery was likely doomed anyway; the industrial revolution at the time was rapidly replacing man-power intensive work and would have made it unprofitable, sooner or later.   And, that institution certainly did need to go away; it just seems like the way it was done turned out to be the worst, hardest possible way of doing it.


Oh, you mean something like what Lincoln tried to do in 1849?
 
FNG [TotalFark]
2014-01-16 01:07:09 AM
I live in Alexandria on land once owned by Robert E. Lee, should I move?

It's near impossible to change anything within city limits as it is designated an "historical" city.  And that's fine with me.
 
2014-01-16 02:58:10 AM

FNG: I live in Alexandria on land once owned by Robert E. Lee, should I move?


Land once owned by Robert E. Lee

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-16 10:04:28 AM

FNG: I live in Alexandria on land once owned by Robert E. Lee, should I move?


Nah, but you probably should take down the stars & bars.
 
2014-01-16 10:21:02 AM

GORDON: Latinwolf:
Of course the average Libertarian will claim that racism had no role in why the confederacy was formed.

That's like suggesting the US House of Representatives is based on sextings pics of your penis to women who are not your wife because Anthony Weiner was a rep.


Okay smart ass, show me a Libertarian who will admit that racism played a role, because I have yet to find one on Fark.
 
2014-01-16 11:53:21 AM

htomc: The fort in which a Federal garrison had occupied for months after SC declared secession, despite repeated calls for it to be evacuated by the government of SC


How does that make it any less Federal Property?

  

htomc: .a Federal installation for which SC offered to compensate the Fed government,


Which the Federal government didn't agree to. If you offer your neighbor $1Million for his house, and he says he's not selling, you don;'t have the right to shoot him.


 As for those soldiers, they were fired upon for 34 hours before agreeing to surrender and leave- the only death occurred from a misfiring cannon during a 100-gun salute.

doesn't matter.  You shoot at us, we shoot back.  SC declared itself a separate country, then declared war, They sowed their wind, they reaped their whirwind.
 
2014-01-16 01:54:06 PM

varmitydog: The politician who is pushing this, Justin Wilson, is a white guy who is a member of the NAACP.
Which begs the question: Why would a white guy be in the NAACP?


So you didn't know that the very reason that  people who try to claim that the KKK and NAACP are the same get labeled as "morons" is that because the KKK only allows white people while the NAACP allows everyone.  Guess what group you just put yourself in by saying that?
 
2014-01-16 04:24:11 PM

Arkanaut: Mr. Holmes: I want all my streets named after racist patriots, and no one else!

You're wrong.  We need to name them after non-racist traitors.

//Who wouldn't want to live on Edward Snowden Blvd?


I'd be proud to live on a street honoring Snowden. He is a patriot and a hero.
 
2014-01-16 06:05:53 PM

Captain Horatio Mindblower: Arkanaut: Mr. Holmes: I want all my streets named after racist patriots, and no one else!

You're wrong.  We need to name them after non-racist traitors.

//Who wouldn't want to live on Edward Snowden Blvd?

I'd be proud to live on a street honoring Snowden. He is a patriot and a hero.



Plus, you can always tell your boss, "You know, I would love to come to work, but we're Snowden."
 
2014-01-16 08:08:04 PM

HeartBurnKid: FNG: I live in Alexandria on land once owned by Robert E. Lee, should I move?

Nah, but you probably should take down the stars & bars.


I was surprised to learn recently that the flag commonly called 'the confederate flag" was never the flag of the Confederacy. And that the CSA did have a flag called "the Stars and Bars", but that wasn't it. To put it simply, if it has any diagonal lines, it isn't the Stars and Bars.
 
Displayed 234 of 234 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report