Baltimore: ALL Confederate Statues Have Now Been Removed

Post Reply New Topic

...How many of the original supporters of the states lynched or mauled somone racistly and were never punished for it? How many present- day pro-Cs were born because their killer/mauler ancestors got away with it? SUCH a " heritage " .
What's preventing the present-day pro-Cs from, after acquiring the disputed statues (which I have gone on record here as saying I don't support the total annialation of) and displaying them on private land? They could lead daily cakewalking and banjo sessions in front of them!

And some considered it traitorous to take up arms against their state and the people that lived there.
Slavery should have been abolished.it was a mistake our founding fathers allowed and later it had to be righted with blood on both sides.So if those forefathers hadn't allowed it,the war would have never happened.

Most Americans probably agree with you more then not on the issues. But it is the cockiness and condensation of a lot of left that is one reason Trump got in. I want him removed most of all because his "personality" is the exact opposite of what is required for the job and puts the world at risk of nuclear armoggedon. However I believe if the resistance succeeds one nightmare will be replaced by another. The left will be emboldened in thier belief that they are superior morally and intellectually. They will run rampent overcorrecting while gleefully rubbing it in the face of their opposition. People or organizations deemed racist, sexist or hater might be deemed terrorists. The continuing clashes in the street will be used as justification. People will get sick of it and a competent fascist will gain power and we would find out what real right wing authoritism is unlike Trump's realty show, snowflake version of it we got now.

And, why a CANADIAN is having rants about the U.S. president, et al., is beyond ME, anyway!!

Its a thorny issue.

Maybe the nation should take a breather for a few months before we rush headlong either preserving or getting rid of statues across the land.

But Chief Justince Taney is an exception.

That taking down his statue is long overdue is a no brainer.

No can deny that he needs to go immediately.

Oh, COOL----I've said / heard that quote, a million-and-one times, but could never remember who said it----and, I like it even MORE, now, cuz a woman said it; let's hear it, for the girls!! LOL (wink)

Taney was the guy who signed off on the Dred Scott decision----which basically precluded African-Americans from ever becoming citizens within the context of the ante-bellum United States.

The decision also provided authorization for Southern masters to retrieve their "property" from the North. Of course, this was part and parcel of the Compromise of 1850--but it provided more teeth for this provision.

Another racist Confederate statue has been vandalized in New Orleans: the statue of Joan of Arc! (I think she commanded an Alabama regiment at Little Round Top and owned a plantation full of slaves. Or something.)

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... ti_te.html

(Joan of Arc lived in France in the 1400s.)

You've got to be kidding!

Hint: It lives under a bridge and eats goats.

The legal lingo version of Tanney's "achievement" was to declare that "slaves are not citizens".

But he himself summed up his decision in one colloquial sentence: "No Negro has any rights that any White man needs respect".

To honor him with a statue is to honor that statement .


Honoring fallen soldiers of your state, even if they died for a questionable cause, is one thing.
But Tanney being honored is something else entirely IMHO.

Might be a sympathizer with the recent vandals of the Lincoln Memorial who were obviously retaliating against the vandals of the Confederate statues. Maybe they thought Joan of Arc was a Nineteenth Centurey American Abolishionist.

Or maybe the person just hates all Frenchies.

*I* can!!

Here's the thing, with Taney..... The first thing out of everybody's mouth, when talking-about Taney, is "Dred Scott", but the law-of-the-land, at-the-time, was that Negroes/slaves were NOT citizens----so, Taney upheld the LAW!!

Like I've said, before----when we know better, we do better; besides, he, from what-all I've read, was a very religious man, and thought slavery was evil, so he FREED his slaves!! Also, from what I've read, he was a FIERCE defender of INDIVIDUAL rights being covered by the Constitution. How could any of these things be wrong? He did his job, freed his slaves (that he had INHERITED, BTW), cuz he felt it was morally wrong to have them, and fought for people's rights.

Things like this, get misconstrued, all-the-time----and, instead of people researching, to make-up their OWN minds, about whatever, they just accept what they've always heard. A prime example of a long-held fallacy, IMO, is that "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was about a black man who betrayed his own people----when, in-fact, he helped some, escape, and died because of a beating he took, instead of carrying-out an order, to beat a fellow slave. It was because of Tom's GOODNESS, that his former owner freed all of his slaves, in Tom's memory----and, as he did so, he told them to remember Tom's sacrifice, and to be good people, like Tom was.

Some people don't wanna hear either of these narratives, though----cuz it doesn't fit their "Aww, poor black people", agenda.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid you're right----I can TOTALLY see this happening.....

Taney's personal decisions and choices in life didn't have a single effect on the whole country, regardless how good they might have been, while the reprehensible Dred Scott decision did.

NO!! He "signed off on" the MAJORITY decision that a slave could not sue the Federal Government----and, the reason for that, was because it was a law, that slaves were not citizens!!