RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: First they came for the Confederates... - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

First they came for the Confederates... Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is online   LongKnife 

  • Don't start none, won't be none.
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,690
  • Joined: 10-November 04

Posted 18 May 2017 - 08:56 AM

First they came for the Confederates...

American Thinker
Alan Wellikoff
May 17, 2017

Although a fight currently waged against metal and mortar, the glee attending the left's dismantling of New Orleans's Confederate statuary has taken on the stink of bloodlust. Down go the statues of Beauregard, Davis, and Lee; up come the cries for those of Jackson, Washington, and Jefferson to follow. Never mind who owned a slave and who didn't; among them were men who, at the certain risk of their lives, liberty, and sacred honor, brought about that document that's served to liberate mankind generally.

Perhaps ironically, it was 18th-century slaveholders among those now under attack who did more than anyone in history to end slavery. With human bondage now resurgent on certain parts of the world, one feels compelled to inquire what the Confederate monument destroyers are doing to abolish it. Google that, and you'll find that they have little argument with slavery as pursued by its third-world practitioners. This may be because the know-nothing ninjas of the regressive left regard slavery as less criminal than are those dead white males who established the right of all to freely pursue happiness. With that the case, it's not just a handful of old American icons who are to be laid low by the Caterpillar's blade; nor is it just that American history itself is slated to be reworked into a Spanish-language comic novella of Approved Ideology (bad as that is). Rather, it's that our Taliban-toadying leftists intend to reduce the Constitution and its Bill of Rights to the same rubble that the Bamiyan Buddhas now occupy.

It's in the pursuit of this aim that Beauregard's statue has fallen – for he and the others who are to follow now form the Constitution's guardians. To slander and revile them is to slander and revile it, and to physically strip them away from history and law is to do no other than expose it to the same fate.

Just as leftists hate the founders for their elevation of mankind to a state of freely functioning citizens, they hate the document created to codify the idea that principle rather than passion serves as the wellspring of liberty. The left is all about passion – mercurial, virtue-signaling, subjective, contradictory, hypocritical, and fashion-driven passion. Leftists might talk a good game, but in keeping with the Leninist doctrine of ends justifying means, they'll freely abandon whatever noble principle they espouse one day to accomplish some nefarious goal the next. That's how those who pretend to advocate for women and gays come to support Islamist doctrine; how those who pretend to advocate for free speech and non-violence become violent in free speech's denial; and how those who espouse equality before the law have come to have the most restrictive view of who is to be tolerated as most any of us have seen in a lifetime.

Read more

This is why you have to be careful what you wish for.
0

#2 User is offline   USNRETWIFE 

  • Tiki Barbie
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 14,215
  • Joined: 02-April 03

Posted 18 May 2017 - 09:27 AM

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y61/lindilu/18403561_1677250249237430_4963405873244571045_n_zpst0gxd5pu.jpg
0

#3 User is offline   stick 

  • The 'Little Genius' giving thanks
  • View blog
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 15,410
  • Joined: 24-November 03

Posted 18 May 2017 - 10:01 AM

It's as if leftists/progressives believe that NO ONE in the pre-1865 North were slaveowners. I don't see anyone wanting to tear down the Jefferson Memorial like they do the Southern General statues. Hey lefties, it was legal for EVERYONE to own slaves back then and both sides did (aka America). There was just more impetus from the North to do away with it as it would be a huge hit to the economic station of the South if they weren't able to utilize slave labor. I just laugh my butt off when I see ignorant lefties getting all indignant about SOUTHERN slavery icons with no care at all about the same in the NORTH.
0

#4 User is offline   firecoco 

  • Yes! We! Can!
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 14,190
  • Joined: 21-October 03

Posted 18 May 2017 - 10:39 AM

Do you know who else did this?....The Taliban....They started taking down and blowing things up they didn't like
0

#5 User is online   LongKnife 

  • Don't start none, won't be none.
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,690
  • Joined: 10-November 04

Posted 18 May 2017 - 10:58 AM

View Poststick, on 18 May 2017 - 10:01 AM, said:

It's as if leftists/progressives believe that NO ONE in the pre-1865 North were slaveowners. I don't see anyone wanting to tear down the Jefferson Memorial like they do the Southern General statues.

Which is the point of the article. Once they are done with the Confederacy, Jefferson and the rest are next. The South is simply an easy whipping boy to start with since the precedence has already been established. The frogs are in the water and they are turning up the heat.
0

#6 User is offline   stick 

  • The 'Little Genius' giving thanks
  • View blog
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 15,410
  • Joined: 24-November 03

Posted 18 May 2017 - 11:49 AM

View PostLongKnife, on 18 May 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

Which is the point of the article. Once they are done with the Confederacy, Jefferson and the rest are next. The South is simply an easy whipping boy to start with since the precedence has already been established. The frogs are in the water and they are turning up the heat.


Weeping.....
0

#7 User is offline   Joe the Pagan 

  • I'm a Whovian not a Dweeb
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,740
  • Joined: 02-November 03

Posted 18 May 2017 - 04:56 PM

I have heard a couple of times today people asking if this is another case of the Democrats trying to hide their racist past.

To quote Anne Coulter: The sins of the left became the sins of America. The sins of America became the sin of the Right.


View PostLongKnife, on 18 May 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

Which is the point of the article. Once they are done with the Confederacy, Jefferson and the rest are next. The South is simply an easy whipping boy to start with since the precedence has already been established. The frogs are in the water and they are turning up the heat.


I always found it odd that the left will target the South and point out laziness, promiscuity and violence, but the same behavior in the African American community is not to be criticized. As Thomas Sowell pointed out the only difference between a redneck and a thug is skin color.
0

#8 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 16,864
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 19 May 2017 - 05:21 PM

View PostJoe the Pagan, on 18 May 2017 - 04:56 PM, said:

I always found it odd that the left will target the South and point out laziness, promiscuity and violence, but the same behavior in the African American community is not to be criticized. As Thomas Sowell pointed out the only difference between a redneck and a thug is skin color.


And Mr. Sowell, bless his heart, would be wrong. It takes work to be a (genuine) Redneck, the word originally coined to describe working-class southern whites (emphasis on the word "working") whose necks were sunburned from working in the hot southern sun all day. That's hardly in the same category as "thug".

DailyWritingTips.com: Better Use “Redneck” with Care


0

#9 User is offline   Joe the Pagan 

  • I'm a Whovian not a Dweeb
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,740
  • Joined: 02-November 03

Posted 19 May 2017 - 05:50 PM

View PostAdam Smithee, on 19 May 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

And Mr. Sowell, bless his heart, would be wrong. It takes work to be a (genuine) Redneck, the word originally coined to describe working-class southern whites (emphasis on the word "working") whose necks were sunburned from working in the hot southern sun all day. That's hardly in the same category as "thug".

DailyWritingTips.com: Better Use “Redneck” with Care





Would the old derogatory term cracker be better? Cracker does not mean whip cracker, but refers to a loud braggart. It can be traced back to a section of the Scott-Irish who settled in Appalachia. Alexis de Tocqueville talked about seeing laziness, promiscuity and violence behavior in the crackers of Appalachia. The Hatfields and McCoys were two cracker families.

If cracker is right then what term would you use instead of redneck?
0

#10 User is offline   Diamond369 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 9,425
  • Joined: 03-May 04

Posted 20 May 2017 - 09:08 AM

I may have a unique question and comment (or two) about the Civil War. As a black person, I believe that we in the US could actually learn about history from ourselves instead of being indoctrinated or have a piece of history go by the waste side. Most black people were slaves. Most white people neither were slave owners nor truly benefited financially from the enslavement of black people as many of them were poor. From what I gather, slavery was only one of many issues that played a role in why the US even have a Civil War in the first place. History is often won by the winners and I don't believe that history is that simple as black versus white. The issues of taxation, slavery, class, and racism all played a role meaning that there wasn't just one issue in place. The truly sad thing is that many of us have little idea how brutal slavery was and that the issue of class played in who fought for state's rights and the issue of slavery in the Civil War. No American should get over the past, but I believe we could all grown and learn from it. I also believe that taking down a flag or desecrating a monument will solve any issues either.

This post has been edited by Diamond369: 20 May 2017 - 09:08 AM

0

#11 User is online   LongKnife 

  • Don't start none, won't be none.
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,690
  • Joined: 10-November 04

Posted 20 May 2017 - 12:21 PM

View PostJoe the Pagan, on 19 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

If cracker is right then what term would you use instead of redneck?

"Honkie" comes to mind.
0

#12 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 16,864
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 20 May 2017 - 01:12 PM

View PostJoe the Pagan, on 19 May 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Would the old derogatory term cracker be better? Cracker does not mean whip cracker, but refers to a loud braggart. It can be traced back to a section of the Scott-Irish who settled in Appalachia. Alexis de Tocqueville talked about seeing laziness, promiscuity and violence behavior in the crackers of Appalachia. The Hatfields and McCoys were two cracker families.

If cracker is right then what term would you use instead of redneck?


Well, personally, I've always thought the term "White Trash" pretty much covers it. All the other terms I can thing of, MIGHT describe such a person but CAN also include persons that don't fit the stereotype for the label. (And I know a thing or two about "White Trash". Should I get out the family album?)

It's worth noting that part of the McCoy family moved to southern Indiana to get away from the feud. That's Mrs. Smithee's side of the family; Her great-grandmother's maiden name was McCoy. The real McCoy, so to speak.

Me? I'm a "Florida Cracker" which has a meaning all it's own :) And, as it happens, I'm also a Quaker. Legend has it that one of the origins of 'cracker' as a slur is that the original Spanish settlers of Florida used 'Quaker' as a slur against any non-spanish non-Catholic settlers and the spanish word for Quaker is 'cuaquero'. I'm not really sure I buy this version of it but, hey, it makes a good story.

Florida Cracker: Smile When You Call Me A Cracker, Stranger

"A Florida cracker usually has a rural upbringing, either on a farm or in a small town with plenty of woods and water for hunting and fishing and land for planting.

That's because a Florida cracker is self sufficient.

When modern civilization collapses, the Florida cracker will be hunting, fishing, trapping and growing his own food while the rest of us will be standing in line at the government owned grocery store with our ration stamps."


Well, if the zapato fits, I'll wear it.

This post has been edited by Adam Smithee: 20 May 2017 - 01:17 PM

0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users