During this presidential campaign, John McCain has been pretty selective in touting his reputation as a political maverick. But if he goes with either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge as a running mate, he’ll be living up to that label and asking a lot of the GOP base: Ridge is pro-choice. Lieberman is both pro-choice and a Democrat (or “independent Democrat,” as he calls himself, eight years after he was the latter half of the Gore-Lieberman ticket). And does anybody think it makes sense for McCain to announce his pick on his birthday, Aug. 29? Maybe he can curtail whatever post-convention bounce Barack Obama gets, but McCain also will be reminding voters that he’s 72. On that subject, the reporters covering McCain’s campaign should affirm or debunk reports that McCain “frequently forgets key elements of policies, gets countries’ names wrong, forgets things he’s said only hours or days before and is frequently just confused.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on ACORN stole election?
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- JWink on Will GOP contenders be nice to Obama?
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
163 Comments
“Well”, said McCain, “the GOP don’t have a choice, do they, muahahahahahaha”.
reports that McCain “frequently forgets key elements of policies, gets countries’ names wrong, forgets things he’s said only hours or days before and is frequently just confused.”
Gee sounds just like the guy we have in charge now.
“On that subject, the reporters covering McCain’s campaign should affirm or debunk reports that McCain “frequently forgets key elements of policies, gets countries’ names wrong, forgets things he’s said only hours or days before and is frequently just confused.”
—————
So the reporters covering McCain should confirm or deny ageist crap coming from the Obama camp. If it were true, wouldn’t they be reporting it themselves?
Just watch this thread. You will see the Obama/Democrat talking points regarding McCain’s age parroted.
” The reporters who have been covering him for the last decade know that there is virtually no public policy issue of note which McCain hasn’t made a 180 degree change of position on in the last half dozen years. An ideological shift of that magnitude is far from unprecedented. And such turnabouts or transformations can be a product of searching insights into the changing terrain of American governance. But two such shifts in the course of a decade strongly suggest either instability or opportunism” — from Rhonda’s link
The harder the arteries, the more likely the conservative conversion, and why not. People of this age already have a retirement plan and medical care paid for by the government. As I have written time and again — conservatism is the aging of America.
The pro-choice issue is overrated. I think the MSM is starting to believe their own hype.
McCain was FOR allowing the Confederate Flag to fly, before he was against it….
McCain was AGAINST the Bush tax cuts, before he was FOR them….
There are many others…. His handlers are just not doing too good with him right now…
McCain points a critical finger at Obama for having the ambition to be Pressident…. BUT, in his own Memoir, says that he TOO had the ambitiion to be president in 2000, because he was 62 years old, and only had one chance to do it… And it was his ambition…
Seems it was OK for him to say he had the ambition to be President… but NOT OK for Obama to have the same ambition…
What kind of flip-flopping is this??
What’s wrong with flying the Confederate flag? If it’s the race baiting crap, I’ll say that the North also owned slaves. And not all Southernor’s owned a slave either (or lynched anyone). There have been lynchings here in a “Northern” state…Wichita Kansas. The flag, to me and most other’s, symbolizes the idea of the people over the government.
“Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.”
————–
“An aide to Barack Obama says the candidate misspoke on Memorial Day when he told a group of veterans that his uncle was among the American troops who liberated the Auschwitz concentration camp.”
“It was Soviet troops that liberated Auschwitz, so unless his uncle was serving in the Red Army, there’s no way Obama’s statement yesterday can be true,” he said. “Obama’s frequent exaggerations and outright distortions raise questions about his judgment and his readiness to lead as commander in chief.”
—————
”
Where does Obama get that “hate crimes against Hispanic people doubled last year”–an alleged increase he blamed on “people like Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh ginning things up”? The latest FBI statistics I can find are from 2006, not last year. They show about a 14% increase from 2005, by my calculation. Even the Southern Poverty Law Center only claims
According to hate crime statistics published annually by the FBI, anti-Latino hate crimes rose by almost 35% between 2003 and 2006, the latest year for which statistics are available.
A 35% increase over four years is not “doubled last year.”
———————–
“In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12.
———————-
“We only have a certain number of them and if they are all in Iraq, then it’s harder for us to use them in Afghanistan.” The real reason it’s “harder for us to use them” in Afghanistan: Iraqis speak Arabic or Kurdish. The Afghanis speak Pashto, Farsi, or other non-Arabic languages.
————————
“Obama told a Portland crowd over the weekend that Iran doesn’t “pose a serious threat to us”–cluelessly arguing that “tiny countries” with small defense budgets can’t do us harm– and then promptly flip-flopped the next day, claiming, “I’ve made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave.”
——————–
I guess the left can blame McCain misspeaking on his age. What is their excuse for Obama.
For a Harvard graduate the man who would be prez doesn’t sound very up on his geography. He also has a real problem speaking at all unless he has a teleprompter in front of him.
I guess we have a couple of candidates with some challenges ahead.
Talk about a tightrope.
Placate the base and turn off the foul weather voters who might be inclined to vote for a maverick.
Make overtures to the foul weather voters who might be inclined to vote for a maverick and risk turning off the base.
There is a reason why both the “right wing wurlitzer” and McCain have targeted Obama so heavily for negative campaigning even before the convention: It’s really the only way to redirect attention from the candidate’s tightrope. Obama has a similar problem, but I think he has a little more room to maneuver (maybe almost too much room).
Joe would be an interesting choice. There is merit there for those of us sick of both parties.
Thread yesterday about how McCain might ‘grab the middle’ and beat Obama. I think the key will lie in his VP choice. Does he reach out and regain the maverick label? If so he might be able to get the ‘middle’ votes. However, if he placates the base with a Romney or similar I think he will look like ‘just another Republic’
I think that the majority of conservative voters have realized that this won’t be a one issue campaign. The base was very luke warm to McCain until they got to know the real Obama.
I think a Romney choice would be smart. He is a proven business man who would bring his economic knowledge to the mix. An area McCain has admitted to a weakness in.
Pleefer…. How do you feel about folks who fly the Flag of Mexico in front of their homes?? Or how about if they flew the Flag of Israel?? Or China??
The Confederate Flag was the symbol of a Foreign Nation, one sworn to defeat the USA… such as it was in 1861-1865… And YOU see nothing wrong with that??
Oh yea, BTW, “WE THE PEOPLE” IS the government!! And vice versa too…. The People OVER the government??? THAT would be Anarchy!!
I dont know if I really care a whole lot WHO McCain chooses (errr, the “campaign” chooses) to be the VP candidate….
I do however, care about who Obama chooses…
I think it is crucial to the next 4 – 8 years of our country’s future…
Oh yea, BTW, “WE THE PEOPLE” IS the government!! And vice versa too…. The People OVER the government??? THAT would be Anarchy!!
We are the masters of a servant government. Anglo-Saxon Common Law. And yes, We The People ARE and over the government.
Anarchy is the absence of any government.
Fly whatever flag you want, beneath our US flag.
And NOT in place of our Old Glory.
You see Canadian flags all the time flying in the U.S., and U.S. flags flying in Canada, and no one gives a damn, but let a Mexican fly a flag and you all go ape.
Let a Mexican flag fly above or in place of ours, damned right, I go ape.
“According to hate crime statistics published annually by the FBI, anti-Latino hate crimes rose by almost 35% between 2003 and 2006, the latest year for which statistics are available.
A 35% increase over four years is not “doubled last year.” — from an ok cut and paste
It took me five seconds to find this:
Hate crimes against Hispanic and disabled victims rose dramatically in Tennessee last year, leaving advocates for both groups concerned about the trend.
A recent Tennessee Bureau of Investigation report shows hate crimes rose 28 percent overall between 2006 and 2007, but those against Hispanics more than doubled and those against the disabled grew from 1 to 30. — http://www.patriciaebauer.com/2008/05/22/hate-crimes-rise-against-hispanics-people-with-disabilities/
Of course hate crimes are up against Hispanics; the right wing hate monger machine didn’t really get started on them until 2007.
No, anyone who defends the Confederate flag as a flag of ideals is buying into ridiculous propaganda. The enire issue of state’s rights came back to slavery and that is what the Confederate flag stood for. Those who flew the flag wrote into their constitutions their reasons for slavery. INTO THE CONSTIUTIONS OF THEIR STATES. Entire acts were created, states were created on the backs on free or slave…and the civil war was a long battle in the making between the rights of states to own slaves. There is NO way anyone can possibly try to turn this into something it isn’t…there is simply too much history.
“Let a Mexican flag fly above or in place of ours, damned right, I go ape.” — Pleefer
Pleefer: the left-wing right-tard. Just as there are no difference between the parties, there are few against whatever brand of hate monger you might be. May all your lunches be frankenfood.
“Anglo-Saxon Common Law.”
Pleefer?? Which parallel universe is it that you live in??? We dont live under Anglo-Saxon Common Law here….
WE THE PEOPLE are our government…. The people are not OVER the government, because WE ARE the government…. Basic High School government text books will tell you that….
Wel, Beber, I guess we might have some idea who at least one of those Right Wing Extremists I posted about a couple of weeks ago might be… :roll:
Well, anyway, this is the wrong thread for this kind of chatter….
I think we should leave this thread to all of the GOP folks….
Chas, you’re obviously too dumb to understand.
When you have a people that fears it’s government, there’s tyranny, when the government fears its people, freedom.
And yeah, I’m extreme. I’m extremely pissed.
Have you ever read anything besides your high school text books?
“If it’s the race baiting crap, I’ll say that the North also owned slaves. And not all Southernor’s owned a slave either (or lynched anyone).”
The North did own slaves, but while Illinois had banned slavery, they passed a law forbidding free slaves to come into the state. (They didn’t want them to take their jobs). Mighty “white” of them, huh?
Also, only about 10% of Southerners owned slaves. The slave was for the rich man.
Do you think for one minute the average Southern man would fight and die for the rich man to own a slave? 20% of military age men in the South died.
They weren’t fighting over slavery. They wanted Independence from the oppressive North.
Great idea. During the vp announcement the background music should be ‘Will you still need me, will you still feed me when I’m 74?’
Lieberman would be a good choice, he can correct mccain’s gaffes and carry a drool rag.
The truth pains pleefer(As he grabs his club and drags wife to bedroom)
fleettwood, a man of understanding.
Pleefer, you must not be smart enough to understand that PEOPLE and GOVERNMENT are one and the same thing in this country…. The Confederate Flag stands for “Treason” at the very least… and sedition…. and also for those who were so ANTI American, they left the USA to form their own COUNTRY — So, to fly that flag isnt what you would call very American…. in fact, ANTI-American….
NOW, do you possibly understand??? I am not the STUPID one here… YOU ARE!!!
I am not going to post any more about that subject on this GOP thread…
It has now become a sport to hunt liberals and gays
thanks to the vile filth from the right wing Rush,hannity,beck,savage,ingram,liddy,and the most guilty Fox news the media SS of the gop.
Ouch! You got me.
You all feel free to go on being your little hyphenated American, putting yourselves in your own little boxes. Selfish goofballs.
McCain was FOR allowing the Confederate Flag to fly, before he was against it….
Chas, you brought this whole thing up.
But again, you win. I am too stupid to remain on this blog.
Mccain was aganist the confederate flag before he was for the flag, however when he wrote his book after the election, he was once again against the confed. flag and said he’d sold out.
Would that be a flip/flop/flip?
Pleefer
Posted August 20, 2008 at 8:56 am | Permalink
Have you ever read anything besides your high school text books?
—————
Pleefer, actually Chas read the Gulag story by Solzhenitsyn where he saw the Cross in Dirt story that wasn’t there.
——————-
“Solzhenitsyn Biographer: Cross-In-Dirt Gulag Story Never Happened … “Nobody who’s read Gulag Archipelago knows that story,”
————————-
His credibility has a problem.
And jayhawk, I despise those media folks as well. Not that it’ll matter to a thought-giant like yourself.
“The Confederate Flag was the symbol of a Foreign Nation, one sworn to defeat the USA…”
You FAIL again, chas. They just wanted to be left alone.
Here is how President Jefferson Davis put it two weeks after the war started:
“We feel that our cause is just and holy; we protest solemnly in the face of man kind that we desire peace at any sacrifice save that of honor and independence; we ask no conquest, no aggrandizement, no concession of any kind from the States with which we were lately confederated; all we ask is to be let alone; that those who never held power over us shall not now attempt our subjugation by arms”.
Mccain is now leading obama by 5% in the reuters poll, the guy’s a cleberity, he’s the one, why hasn’t he been able to close the deal?
No he’s uber-credible, just axe him.
Peefer, I illustrated a McCain flip flop… YOU were the one who said you saw nothing wrong with the Confederate Flag… Cant you be even a slight bit honest here???
Uneducated and a racist nice combo Pleefer!!!
I think that some of our big government friends are missing the point of the civil war and the confederate flag here.
For an excellent, and I mean excellent read on the subject of north vs south, read “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.”
It is one of the best history books I’ve ever read. There are a ton of references in the back of the book to back up the facts put forward.
The civil war was fought because the south wanted to leave the union. They had every right to do so according to the constitution. Slavery only came to the forefront after it was certain that the north would win.
Lincoln could have cared less what happened to the slaves. I’ll read you all a quote from one of his speeches:
“I will say that I am not, nor have I ever been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not, nor have I ever been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I beleive will forever forbid the two races from living on terms of social and political equlity. And inasmuch as they can not so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favir of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Sorry big government, The South was right. They were the good guys, no matter how much you try to villify them.
Lincoln fought to save the union to consolidate it power, not for slavery.
The civil war was big government vs self-government.
Slavery would have eliminated itself, just like it did in Brazil.
DON’T CALL ME A RASCIST, JAYHAWK. YOU CAN CALL ME ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES TO YOUR SIMPLE MIND.
You’re the one that doesn’t believe that any minority can excel in this country without your help.
Damned right, objectivist.
To base a decision on whom to vote for on one issue, especially one not likely to change like abortion, is asinine. We had a pro-life president, conservative congress/senate, and a conservative supreme court. Nothing changed.
As per McCain’s VP choice, after his remark at Saddleback, I can’t see him picking a pro-choice candidate. There are too many idiots in the GOP that will throw him overboard for something as meaningless as that. What exactly is a VP going to do about abortion? Nothing of course.
Pmom,
To me the Confederate flag is a part of my heritage. My family is originally from Va. and were NOT slave owners. The reason they fought was that they wanted to live their lives as they saw fit without the government invading their land and homes and imposing their will on them. Now if you call that buying into propaganda then so be it. I call your point of view one sideded and bigoted
Pleefer
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink
Damned right, objectivist.
_________________________________________________
It’s not hard. Facts are the very thing that will break the elite power hold on this country. If we would all educate ourselves outside of what the system is brainwashing us with, there would be revolution by morning.
So what was your AXE comment about then if not the way some blacks say ask, RACIST comment period.
Anyone know the General Sherman of the North made a law allowing his soldiers to rape and pillage the towns the conquered in the south. Even the British and French were appauled by that sick piece of legislation.
The North had such a difficult time winning even with superior weapons and numbers because the South was fighting for something bigger than just slavery. They were fighting for their God given rights. I’d die fighting for my freedom.
It is better to be ignorant than to be educated on the wrong content.
So what was your AXE comment about then if not the way some blacks say ask, RACIST comment period.
Sounds pretty racist to me JayHawk. Seems to me mispronouncing the word ‘ask’ is not limited to one race. Why would you only refer to ‘blacks’? Maybe your ‘racist’ remark towards Pleef was more of a projection on your part?
Jesus WEPT! This thread reminds me of John Prine’s
“Grandpa Was A Carpenter” where the money line in the chorus is:
“He voted for Eisenhower ’cause Lincoln won the war”
Geez, now you know why southerners still refer to the Civil War as “the recent unpleasantness”….
“Anyone know the General Sherman of the North made a law allowing his soldiers to rape and pillage the towns the conquered in the south.”
That is such BS I can’t stand it. For one, he can’t pass laws. For two, he never even issued an order for such. You, sir, are an idiot.
Jayhawk, you reach.
Dolt.
I was born and raised in the South and always hear my family refer to it as the war of Northern aggression,which always seemed odd to me since the South fired the first shot,but you didn’t dare ask granny about that.
“…since the South fired the first shot…”
The North “fired” the first shot by re-supply the fort after they were told the consequenses of doing so. The North brought it on themselves.
It was a genius move by Lincoln.
Seems that some folks be afeared.
GOP trying to get Barr of Pa. ballot
By Dan Hirschhorn
Concerned that he could pull votes from U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a leading state Republican is trying to have Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr removed from the ballot in Pennsylvania, The Associated Press reports.
Barr, a former Republican Congressman, is expected by some to hurt McCain in the general election by drawing away disenchanted conservative voters, especially in Barr’s home state of Georgia.
http://www.politicker.com/taxonomy/term/13132
GOP leader seeks to push Barr off Pa. ballot
(AP)
A Republican Party leader filed court papers Monday aimed at getting Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr taken off the Pennsylvania ballot.
http://www.timesleader.com/news/ap?articleID=671029
That’s what I’ve heard it called all of my life (and I’m from Kansas). And the “North” is at it again.
Jayhawk I am from Oklahoma and my kids still give me grief because I say ‘axe’ ‘wrash’ and ‘wrastler’. I left the state over 20 years ago but some of it just hangs on. BTW I am white.
“the war of Northern aggression” or the war between the states is actually more correct than Civil war because a civil war denotes (the South) wanting to conquer the North. The didn’t want that.
“Anyone know the General Sherman of the North made a law allowing his soldiers to rape and pillage the towns the conquered in the south.”
That is such BS I can’t stand it. For one, he can’t pass laws. For two, he never even issued an order for such. You, sir, are an idiot.
_________________________________________________
I have always been one to admit a mistake. Upon rereading, it was not General Sherman, it was General Benjamin Butler.
Butler issued Order Number 28:
“As the officers and soldiers of the United States have been subject to repeated insults from the women calling themselves “ladies” of New Orleans in return for the most scrupulous non-interference and courtesy on our part, it is ordered that hereafter when any female shall word, gesture, or movement insult or show contempt for any officer or soldier of the United States she shall be regarded and held liable to be treated as women of the town plying her avocation.”
This was a “right to rape”. It showed women of the south to be nothing more than whores and prostitutes.
Care to call me an idiot again?
Here’s the real reason for the civil war.
http://www.sewanee.edu/faculty/Willis/Civil_War/documents/HammondCotton.html
All wars need a loftier reason than economics, but when boiled down to their essence are normally for economic reasons. Thus we get reasons as “God’s warriors”, “Democracy”, etc.
So what was your AXE comment about then if not the way some blacks say ask, RACIST comment period.
Sounds pretty racist to me JayHawk. Seems to me mispronouncing the word ‘ask’ is not limited to one race. Why would you only refer to ‘blacks’? Maybe your ‘racist’ remark towards Pleef was more of a projection on your part?>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How deep let me try to wrap my mind around it …
ok done.The context was that he was refering to obama thus talking about the black race you amuse me.
S P E C U L A T I O N
VS
N E W S – R E P O R T I N G
Whatsamatter Eagle? Can’t you dive deep into the voting records and history of both of the Presidential candidates, and do some IN-DEPTH news reporting of KNOWN FACTS?
Nope.
The Press would rather not (it can not) dive deep into any one subject. THAT would require investigative journalism.
Instead, we get Copy/Paste Crap from the AP.
Who cares who the VP is? Nobody votes for a VP. Just wait until the VP is actually announced, and then, you can REPORT THE NEWS, instead of reporting FANTASY.
What is Obama’s excuse?
McCain cleaned Obama’s clock on Saturday, in those “Saddleback” interviews.
Also, Obama makes stuff up and forgets stuff all the time.
Looks to me like McCain, at his age, is still much sharper than ZerObama.
The Direction of the Press
The press too, of course, enjoys the widest freedom. (I shall be using the word press to include all media). But what sort of use does it make of this freedom?
Here again, the main concern is not to infringe the letter of the law. There is no moral responsibility for deformation or disproportion. What sort of responsibility does a journalist have to his readers, or to history? If they have misled public opinion or the government by inaccurate information or wrong conclusions, do we know of any cases of public recognition and rectification of such mistakes by the same journalist or the same newspaper? No, it does not happen, because it would damage sales. A nation may be the victim of such a mistake, but the journalist always gets away with it. One may safely assume that he will start writing the opposite with renewed self-assurance.
Because instant and credible information has to be given, it becomes necessary to resort to guesswork, rumors and suppositions to fill in the voids, and none of them will ever be rectified, they will stay on in the readers’ memory. How many hasty, immature, superficial and misleading judgments are expressed every day, confusing readers, without any verification. The press can both simulate public opinion and miseducate it. Thus we may see terrorists heroized, or secret matters, pertaining to one’s nation’s defense, publicly revealed, or we may witness shameless intrusion on the privacy of well-known people under the slogan: “everyone is entitled to know everything.” But this is a false slogan, characteristic of a false era: people also have the right not to know, and it is a much more valuable one. The right not to have their divine souls stuffed with gossip, nonsense, vain talk. A person who works and leads a meaningful life does not need this excessive burdening flow of information.
Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic disease of the 20th century and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press. In-depth analysis of a problem is anathema to the press. It stops at sensational formulas.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html
okobserver
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink
Pleefer, actually Chas read the Gulag story by Solzhenitsyn where he saw the Cross in Dirt story that wasn’t there.
His credibility has a problem.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/08/gop-base-may-not-like-mccain%e2%80%99s-choice/#comment-405330
*********************************************
Pleefer
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink
No he’s uber-credible, just axe him.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/08/gop-base-may-not-like-mccain%e2%80%99s-choice/#comment-405334
*************************************************
Whiffed on that one scooter.
Wierd,
I wasn’t even thinking of Obama, this entire …er…conversation.
Yep Sol. And WE should all “be afeared” that the GOP is rat phucking the election. Again.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Banana_Republicans:_Block_the_Vote
Why does the GOP hate voting? And voters?
Why does the GOP hate voting? And voters?
Because, of course, the more people that vote, the more Diebold charges them for the fixed results!
Diebold will hand ohio to the gop once again nice point SolDevVB
“What is Obama’s excuse?”
Dammit Paul! Get with the program! If obama loses it will be… wait for it… ALL Hillary’s fault! Oh yeah, and maybe Bill’s too!
Obama had no business dignifying the jesus forum with his presence. He got what he deserved for thinking you could EVER reason with those people. Or thinking they would play fair. Or thinking he would sway any of their already made up minds.
Nice waste of time and resources to give status to a buncha wingnuts who should have no status in a “civil” election.
Everytime I saw the “civil forum” sign I had to laugh my ass off. I mean, it was sponsored by a church, held in a church and moderated by a preacher. WTF? Were they nervous that anyone thought it might be a religious forum and not a civil forum?
heheheheheh!
“Because, of course, the more people that vote, the more Diebold charges them for the fixed results!”
HEE HEE HEE HEEEEEEEE!
That’s a new one Sol, and a good one.
Bull. Just as the poor Christians sit here today and defend the rich corporations, the poor relied on the money slavery brought it, not only that, but they felt it was their RIGHT to be above blacks. They feared every aspect of losing that. Anyone who thinks the civil war was about anything else, it all led back to ONE THING: Slavery.
States rights to choose to own slaves. Yes I have read well past what highschool history taught, and you have been sucked into the propaganda, either that, or you’re just a racist trying to gain acceptance for what that flag means. It was Anti-American then, it’s anti-american now. It was pro-racism then, its pro-racism now.
By teh way, I just wanted to comment on how interesting the comments about anchor babies are- when one just won Gold for us at the Olympics, and those same ’ship em out’ folks are not saying a word about it.
Actually Pmom I saw that but didn’t think anyone here was interesting in wrestling. This young man put a lot of work into preparing for this match and I am proud of him. My grandson knows him.
But… I still don’t agree with the anchor baby bit. Somehow we have got to get a handle on the illegal immigration problem.
Not content with the Dumbsh!t-in-Chief we’ve had for the last for the eight years, the CONs insist on electing someone equally dumbsh!tty.
Hey, Christian Fundies, here’s all the proof you need that God is punishing us for our sins . . .
jayhawk61
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:59 am | Permalink
So what was your AXE comment about then if not the way some blacks say ask, RACIST comment period.
******************************************
Political_mama
Posted August 20, 2008 at 11:16 am | Permalink
…
or you’re just a racist trying
…
It was pro-racism then, its pro-racism now.
*********************************************
Anyone else seeing a pattern with the more liberal bloggers?
Add to that at least Monkey and probably JR as well, just don’t have links…
and those same ’ship em out’ folks are not saying a word about it.
Ship him/her the hell out. If they are not here legally, ship them the hell out.
Why do you support criminals PMom?
Political_mama
Posted August 20, 2008 at 8:34 am | Permalink
No, anyone who defends the Confederate flag as a flag of ideals is buying into ridiculous propaganda. The enire issue of state’s rights came back to slavery and that is what the Confederate flag stood for.
_____________________________________________
Another incredibly stupid post.
PM, you don’t know anything about Southerners, the South, or the Confederacy.
P-mama needs to go back and look at the nuggets of fact I brought to the conversation. Anyone linking the civil war directly to slavery has not looked beyond the scope of anything significant.
Big Government is wrong P-mama. You will soon see that your support of it was all in vain.
Political_mama
Posted August 20, 2008 at 8:34 am | Permalink
No, anyone who defends the Confederate flag as a flag of ideals is buying into ridiculous propaganda.
_________________________________________________
The propaganda here is that the civil war was about slavery and that the confederate flag stands for slavery.
The North had no moral authority to take away the South’s right to govern itself. That is why the south fought the North.
It was a huge power grab by the union to consolidate power. Lincoln could’ve cared less about the slaves.
If want to know what happened during the Civil War, ask McCain. He was there.
Sort of a dawn-of-civilization “happy face,” it was all the rage 6,000 years ago. Ancient Turks loved it. Tibetans wove it into their baskets and blankets. Navajos painted it in the sand and on their pottery. Norsemen engraved it on those funny helmets they wore, the ones with the Hagar the Horrible horns. It’s seen on the walls of prehistoric caves as a stylized representation of the bountiful sun. Sanskrit gave it a name, a combination of “su,” or good, and “asti,” to be; in other words, it means “well-being.”
Then Adolph Hitler came along, adopted the hooked cross (Hakencreuz) as a symbol of Arian purity or a cog in the machine that was to be a thousand year Reich, whatever, the point is: Hitler came along and ruined the swastika for all of us. Wear it now, or tattoo it on your forehead as Charlie Manson did, and most people will figure out you’re pretty much of a kook. No “bountiful sun.” No “well-being.” Kook, pure and simple. Not to mention: loser.
Which brings me to the Confederate flag.
A lot of people served with honorable intentions under that flag, including some of my ancestors. There was a story rolling around family reunions when I was a kid about a couple of great-great-uncles who discovered they fought against, and under, Old Glory and the Confederate battle flag against each other. There’s more evidence of a great-great-something who spent the years between 1861 and 1865 signing up with the Rebels at various encampments, then deserting when the battles got close. I suppose he had great war stories to tell, albeit second-hand.
There’s no indication at all in my genealogy that anyone in my family tree benefited directly from the “peculiar institution” of slavery. Nevertheless, when the time came to fight for farm and family, some of them took up arms, some of them bravely. Some of them under the stars and bars of the Confederate battle flag.
Then along came people like Edgar Ray Killen and ruined it for all. He ruined it for Robert E. Lee, who turned his back against the United States of America to fight for the Old Dominion of his native Virginia. Killen and his Ku Klux Klan adopted and distorted the stars and bars into a symbol of racist hatred.
The Confederate flag, if it ever did, no longer represents anything noble or quaint or honorable. Fly it, display it, wear it, salute it, worship it all you want — it’s your 1st Amendment right — but it brands you as a bigot. Justify, rationalize, cite history or tradition if you can, but hard as you try, the racists have co-opted that symbol for you and ruined it. And its representation brands you as a kook, simple, and a loser.
http://www.vw.vccs.edu/vwhansd/his269/myths.html
Someone’s thoughts on it.
Monkeyhawk,
With all of that…you seem like you can’t think for yourself.
Just like you have to live under what Bush has made America look like. Live with it, we can’t take it back, history has been written and we’ll never shake what has been done in our name under this administration.
Is that what you are talking about?
“Pleefer” — what the hell are you talking about?
You’re stating that a stigma was placed upon the swastika and the Confederate flag by evil people. Which implies that we have to live with that instead of taking those symbols back from those stigma’s.
And I’m saying that I’m not letting what our current admin is doing around the world define me. Much like me knowing that the Stars and Bars and swastika are ill represented.
Was I that vague?
“Pleefer” whines –
“Was I that vague?”
Actually, you were pretty specific when you attacked, “…you cannot think for yourself.”
Or did you misspeak?
Then, “Pleefer,” you went on with –
“You’re stating that a stigma was placed upon the swastika and the Confederate flag by evil people. Which implies that we have to live with that instead of taking those symbols back from those stigma’s.”
That’s exactly what I’m saying.
Or, more accurately, I’m observing the obvious.
The “evil people” have co-opted your cherished Stars and Bars.
Believe it or not, accept it or not, like it or not, it’s the truth.
Was I that vague?
Yes, but your second post was clear.
If I see a confederate flag in someone’s home, I’ll won’t presume their intentions are racist until they demonstrate it.
Unfortuately, those who have used it as a political statement in the 20th century have made their intentions all too clear.
People don’t even like the Keating seven, 5 time naval wreckage, likely not to finish his 1st term before being Mcsame as Reagan and making the Phil Collins music videos. McSame as Duhmya also the Grand Oil PARTY’S dilling everywhere buddy is sure to keep up with Iraq not paying for the war.Even more NO BID contracts with no work being done by his best lobbyists friends and Screw over Boeing to help his other Best lobbyist buds Northrop get the tanker deal. Oh not to mention cheating on 1st wife to get with the much younger and richer Cindy the BEER QUEEN!!
He’s got every bit as much baggage and dirty laundry as Bill Clinton!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shaddow, PLEASE!
IOKIYAAR
He could pick Lieberman and have four ‘Dems.’ in the presidential run off. Wouldn’t the RW love that.
“Butler issued Order Number 28:
This was a “right to rape”. It showed women of the south to be nothing more than whores and prostitutes.”
I am quite familiar with this order. One of the “insults” Butler was refering to was a lady dumping a Chamber pot out of her window on a soldier’s head. He was called “Spoons” Butler and Beast Butler for his hard ways. But nowhere in that order is the “right to rape”. You couldn’t rape a prostitute either.
You, sir, are still an idiot.
fleettwood
Posted August 20, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
“Butler issued Order Number 28:
This was a “right to rape”. It showed women of the south to be nothing more than whores and prostitutes.”
I am quite familiar with this order. One of the “insults” Butler was refering to was a lady dumping a Chamber pot out of her window on a soldier’s head. He was called “Spoons” Butler and Beast Butler for his hard ways. But nowhere in that order is the “right to rape”. You couldn’t rape a prostitute either.
You, sir, are still an idiot.
_________________________________________________
Good to see you are up on your history. I don’t claim to be a history genius, but I can hold my own. Please to tell me what the British Prime minister said about Butler’s Order 28?
Let me help you out:
“I will venture to say no example can be found in history of civilized nations till the publication of this order of a general guilty in cold blood of so infamous an act as deliberately to hand over the female inhabitants of a conquered city to the unbridled license of an unrestrained soldiery.”
I’m sure that the women were forcefully taken by the soldiers because they were lonely and needed someone to play five-card stud with. Give me a freaking break.
You aren’t gonna win this one chief. The North was wrong.
okobserver
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink
Pleefer
Posted August 20, 2008 at 8:56 am | Permalink
Have you ever read anything besides your high school text books?
—————
Pleefer, actually Chas read the Gulag story by Solzhenitsyn where he saw the Cross in Dirt story that wasn’t there.
——————-
“Solzhenitsyn Biographer: Cross-In-Dirt Gulag Story Never Happened … “Nobody who’s read Gulag Archipelago knows that story,”
————————-
His credibility has a problem.
============================================
You are one lying piece of CRAP… And you wonder why I call you Granny???
By the way. Keep up the name calling, it continues to keep me looking like the idiot and you my intellectual superior.
The Lord told us all to be humble. Heed those words.
objectivist:
#1) The prime minister was no where near New Orleans. He didn’t know what he was talking about.
Strike one.
#2) There was no “taking of women”.
Strike two
#3) “The North was wrong”
Making this war a right or wrong is wrong.
Yer out!
fleettwood
Posted August 20, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink
“The Confederate Flag was the symbol of a Foreign Nation, one sworn to defeat the USA…”
You FAIL again, chas. They just wanted to be left alone.
===========================================
Fleetwood…. Are you here arguing that the Confederate Flag was NOT the Flag of a Foreign Nation??? Are you arguing that the South was NOT trying to defeat the North in the FOUR YEARS of war??
It is terribly strange that in ALL of this, I have not mentioned ONE THING about racism…. Not ONE…. And yet, look where this has gone….
I started with a McCain Flip-Flop…. and you nut jobs (a significant aggregate) turn it into a Race War!!! Good grief…. no wonder we have so many problems in this country!!!
“one sworn to defeat the USA…”
Dear Mr. CAPITAL LETTER nut:
The South, I’ll repeat myself, only wanted to be left alone. If the North would have quit, the South would not have marched on Washington DC. They would have quit also. The South was sworn to defend their homeland, that is all.
Ummmm…. The South wasnt called REBELS for nothing…. They PULLED OUT of the Union…. They formed their OWN government… They broke the Constitution…. And you somehow dont see that as AGGRESSION???
They were ANTI-American…. And their FLAG was a symbol of a foreign nation, and a declared ENEMY of the Union!!
What is hard to grasp here??? The REBEL Flag is a symbol of ANTI-American…. It should not represent anything any different!!
Again, please note: I am not dealing with slavery, or racism, or anything of the sort!!
And, I will acknowledge that I have heard MANY non-black people use the word AXE when they mean ASK… I always took it as a sign of being under-educated… or just language deficient…. but not racist…
fleettwood
Posted August 20, 2008 at 3:08 pm | Permalink
objectivist:
#1) The prime minister was no where near New Orleans. He didn’t know what he was talking about.
Strike one.
#2) There was no “taking of women”.
Strike two
#3) “The North was wrong”
Making this war a right or wrong is wrong.
Yer out!
_________________________________________________
Fleet,
I’m not trying to argue right or wrong with you. I put nothing but facts out there. I am failing to see why you are trying to argue with me. There is no argument. I appreciate that you recognize that the South was not wrong like so many on here fail to realize.
Someone with your caliber of knowledge would be wiser to educate those who don’t understand what we know. Arguing with me about the finer points of the Civil War does none of us any good. It is pretty obvious that you and I are putting things up here that no one has the first clue about.
Help them understand, not someone who already gets it. It is good to talk with someone who doesn’t repeat the sentiments of others and actually can research a topic themselves. See you in the trenches.
“They broke the Constitution…. And you somehow dont see that as AGGRESSION???”
#1) They broke WITH the Constitution, but didn’t break anything IN the Constitution. If they did, pleased to be asking just what it was.
#2) When your wife broke off your marriage and left, that was not an act of aggression, it was an act of, “please chas, leave me alone”.
Chas
Posted August 20, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Permalink
Ummmm…. The South wasnt called REBELS for nothing…. They PULLED OUT of the Union…. They formed their OWN government… They broke the Constitution…. And you somehow dont see that as AGGRESSION???
They were ANTI-American…. And their FLAG was a symbol of a foreign nation, and a declared ENEMY of the Union!!
What is hard to grasp here??? The REBEL Flag is a symbol of ANTI-American…. It should not represent anything any different!!
Again, please note: I am not dealing with slavery, or racism, or anything of the sort!!
And, I will acknowledge that I have heard MANY non-black people use the word AXE when they mean ASK… I always took it as a sign of being under-educated… or just language deficient…. but not racist…
_________________________________________________
What Constitution have you been reading? The South had every right according to the Constitution to do what they did. They could leave the union and form there own government. That is the very essence of the Constitution.
“See you in the trenches.”
Sounds good.
Damned stupid Southern Wackos!!
Franklin
Posted August 20, 2008 at 10:39 am | Permalink
What is Obama’s excuse?
McCain cleaned Obama’s clock on Saturday, in those “Saddleback” interviews
_____
I watched those interviews and it depends on how one perceives both candidates prior to the interviews as to ‘who cleaned whose clock’.
BTW – doesn’t John McCain still use the sun dial for his clock?
Chas
Posted August 20, 2008 at 3:53 pm | Permalink
Damned stupid Southern Wackos!!
How Jesus like of you chas. Your paritioners should be proud.
Chas
Posted August 20, 2008 at 3:53 pm | Permalink
Damned stupid Southern Wackos!!
__________________________________________________
Good one Chas. Leave it up to facts to bring the name callers out of their shells.
What’s sad about all of this is that slavery would’ve taken care of itself if the government didn’t intervene. The invention of machinery would’ve made the slave obsolete. This is just one example though.
Back to the original premise of this thread; among the speculation that has abounded, both here to a limited degree and in the media at large, there doesn’t seem to be any serious discussion given to the potential running mate of Senator McCain being “pro choice” as being anything but a bluff, to 1)gauge reaction, and 2) show the public the maverick credentials.
“What’s sad about all of this is that slavery would’ve taken care of itself if the government didn’t intervene.”
That’s true. The South jumped the gun and 650,000 men died. The expansion of slavery was the fighting point and slavery wasn’t going to expand, even if it was allowed. In one western territory (New Mexico maybe) slavery was legal. There were less than a dozen slaves.
Ummmm — New Mexico didnt even become a State until 1912… I doubt that it even figured in to the Civil War…
Of course, the South is still fighting the “recent unpleasantness” even on this Blog!! ROFL!!! How UNAmerican can you Rebel supporters be here??? Go fly your stupid idiotic Rebel Flag… Put it all over your pickups, and cars…. Let us all know just WHO you are, so we can stay the hell away from a bunch of traitors!!!
the invention of the machines would not have made slavery obsolete, it would have simply put slaves in a different role. Just think of the industrial revolution and all that child labor.
Traitor’s eh? So everytime you berate Bushco, that’s treason?
Chas,
You apparently know zilch about our Constitution. Oh, you claim to have a grasp on it, but this whole disaster of a thread bemoans otherwise.
The whole point of the document is to allow WE THE PEOPLE to break away from and/or fight a tyrannical and oppressive government. The South obviously felt that their best interests weren’t being protected within that Federal Government at that time. Half of our country felt that those in Washington D.C. were kinda oppressive and tyrannical.
The three day Battle of Gettysburg had 50,000 deaths and casualties. That many people in three days? Obviously they were fighting for a little more than slavery.
And BTW, the most Southern I am, is being born in SOUTH Central Kansas.
You don’t mind shopping at Wal-Mart for all of those needful China-goods (made by slaves) do you?
Funny thing is, we are all descended from slaves, unless you can claim royalty.
This has all been quite interesting, and quite ridiculous.
I don’t often agree with Chas, MH, and P-mom, but:
Pleefer, if you don’t think the Civil War was about slavery, and in particular the extension of slavery in the West, you’re a fool. True enough, it was a political war, and there were serious economic reasons too. But slavery was the elephant in the room, the “peculiar institution” which drove the train, despite all the other justifications which have been touted over the years by those who cannot let the “recent unpleasantness” go.
Moreover, as MH has said, whatever the Confederate battle flag once meant, it is now the symbol of racism. This was not an issue in much of the south until the 1950’s – for most of the South’s post-Civil War history, the flag was not flown (except, of course, by the Klan). Why did it arise in the 50s? Because it was used as a rallying point for the “massive resistance” to school desegregation following Brown.
Whether there is a “Constitutional right to secede” is moot. That issue is closed, by force of arms. There is not. The union is indivisible, absent agreement by both “sides.”
Rally ’round the flag all you like, Pleefer. Run up all the justifications you can find. But bottom line, the use of that symbol brands you as a racist. And if you are a racist, you are indeed a fool.
“Ummmm — New Mexico didnt even become a State until 1912″
Please to be saying, excuse me. I did say, “In one western territory (New Mexico maybe) slavery was legal.” I did say territory and I did say “maybe”.
It was actually Nevada where it was, barely, legal. My point remains the same. The expansion of slavery was not going to work like the South had hoped.
There were battles in New Mexico. 1300 men died.
All for nothing, really. But they fought anyway.
I don’t even own a Confederate flag. I just refuse to let all of you Newspeak everything in this world.
And your “indivisible” crap amuses me. The pledge was written by Francis Bellamy a Christian SOCIALIST. I take nothing to heart that undermines my Constitution and especially words written by someone who would be championing China if he was a contemporary of ours.
I love my country, countrymen and Constitution and I don’t care too much for our government (or it’s mindless underlings).
I don’t care how you “brand me”. I’m no rascist and I don’t need to prove to any of you “thinker’s”.
To delude yourself into thinking the Civil War was not about slavery is the height of stupidity. Lincoln ran on a platform to block the expansion of slavery in US territories and these are the texts of the Declarations by the states of South Carolina, Texas, Mississippi and Georgia in response to his victory in the 1860 election. By their very own words:
Georgia’s Declaration wrote:
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.
With these principles on their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization.
For forty years this question has been considered and debated in the halls of Congress, before the people, by the press, and before the tribunals of justice. The majority of the people of the North in 1860 decided it in their own favor. We refuse to submit to that judgment, and in vindication of our refusal we offer the Constitution of our country and point to the total absence of any express power to exclude us. We offer the practice of our Government for the first thirty years of its existence in complete refutation of the position that any such power is either necessary or proper to the execution of any other power in relation to the Territories. We offer the judgment of a large minority of the people of the North, amounting to more than one-third, who united with the unanimous voice of the South against this usurpation; and, finally, we offer the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest judicial tribunal of our country, in our favor. This evidence ought to be conclusive that we have never surrendered this right. The conduct of our adversaries admonishes us that if we had surrendered it, it is time to resume it.
Mississippi’s Declaration wrote:
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.
South Carolina’s Declaration wrote:
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the *forms* [emphasis in the original] of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.
This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.
All of them are revolting, racist documents; using the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as a respectable façade for their grotesque beliefs.
Yes, Lincoln was a centrist. Yes, he didn’t advocate the outright banning of slavery in his presidential campaign. But the Southern states seceded because they wanted to continue slavery. And that’s what led them to fire on Northern troops in 1861.
The confederacy was founded on the belief that people could be held as property and the civil war was to defend that right. To call it anything but an abomination is revisionist history. Quit believing the words of racists who wish to find a noble cause in their fight. There wasn’t one.
I honestly can’t figure out why anyone would point to a mere few documents and say ‘this is what it was about”. It would be like saying 100 years from today that the Iraq war was because of our own immigration policies. Both issues being fought ferociously in congress at the same time, yet one does not necessarily reflect the other.
I offer exhibit A, the Compromise of 1850 and subsequent acts involving North, South, slaves and not. Returning of property (slaves) to their owners. The apologists have offered a few opinion pieces that by in large even, say the exact same thing. But you can read into it differently than you want to. Taxation…mostly had to do with ….GOODS MADE BY SLAVES. Kindof like…today, they’re taxing cigarettes so high in order to punish smokers
Lincoln was a centrist – the type of politician “independents” like some here claim to like. He ran a campaign that was a compromise between radical republicans who wanted abolition and slavery supporters who wanted the status quo to remain – he advocated no new slave states and to leave the existing states alone.
So that’s why he waited till later in the war. The center in the North shifted with the slavery supporting Republicans either defecting or being discredited due to the war. He shifted with the center.
As for why the war was fought, you seem to be refusing to read the Articles of Secession by the States of the Confederacy. The founding documents of the side that started the Civil War. They don’t argue for the abstract concept of states rights – they argue that their laws regarding slavery should continue unfettered and they use states rights as a method to that end. States rights was merely means, it was the end – slavery – that they fought for. They used the bible to justify slavery in churches, they used the Constitution to argue for slavery in courts and they used profit margins to argue for slavery in the markets. Different contexts, different means, same end.
You can make excuse after excuse for these evil scum, but I proudly exercise my right to disagree with every one you offer. Racist, dehumanising scum is what they were. And the fact that they had the gall – the shear and utter gall – to enlist the Declaration of Independence in their quest to continue such a moral stain on humanity is disgusting.
Am I on the right thread?
Was there some discussion on the republican candidates choice of VP, and how that might rub republicans the wrong way?
That may be a good thing. People who consider themselves republican need to take a check up, from the neck up. Look and see what prinicples remain on the party platform – and look and see if the republicans have voted and maintained those priniciples.
If not, maybe it is time for change.
Not the empty change promised by Obama. He can only give us more of the same.
Radical change. Ron Paul kind of change.
Make a statement that you really are tired of the same ole, same ole.
Why do you make it rascist?
White Slavery, what the Scots already know
by Kelly d. Whittaker
——————————————————————————–
A famous history professor stated that history was not a science but a continuing investigation into the past; a person’s conclusion is based on their own bias. This story will offer evidence that the Alba, Scots, Irish and Pics have been the longest race held in slavery. The reader will be responsible for their own bias pertaining to White Slavery.
Alexander Stewart was herded off the Gildart in July of 1747, bound with chains. Stewart was pushed onto the auction block in Wecomica, St Mary’s County, Maryland. Doctor Stewart and his brother William were attending the auction, aware of Alexander being on that slave ship coming from Liverpool England. Doctor Stewart and William were residents of Annapolis and brothers to David of Ballachalun in Montieth, Scotland. The two brothers paid nine pound six shillings sterling to Mr. Benedict Callvert of Annapolis for the purchase of Alexander. He was a slave. Alexander tells of the other 88 Scots sold into slavery that day in “THE LYON IN MOURNING” pages 242-243.
Jeremiah Howell was a lifetime-indentured servant by his uncle in Lewis County, Virginia in the early 1700’s. His son, Jeremiah, won his freedom by fighting in the Revolution. There were hundreds of thousands of Scots sold into slavery during Colonial America. White slavery to the American Colonies occurred as early as 1630 in Scotland.
According to the Egerton manuscript, British Museum, the enactment of 1652: it may be lawful for two or more justices of the peace within any county, citty or towne, corporate belonging to the commonwealth to from tyme to tyme by warrant cause to be apprehended, seized on and detained all and every person or persons that shall be found begging and vagrant.. in any towne, parish or place to be conveyed into the Port of London, or unto any other port from where such person or persons may be shipped into a forraign collonie or plantation.
The judges of Edinburgh Scotland during the years 1662-1665 ordered the enslavement and shipment to the colonies a large number of rogues and others who made life unpleasant for the British upper class. (Register for the Privy Council of Scotland, third series, vol. 1, p 181, vol. 2, p 101).
The above accounting sounds horrific but slavery was what the Scots have survived for a thousand years. The early ancestors of the Scots, Alba and Pics were enslaved as early as the first century BC. Varro, a Roman philosopher stated in his agricultural manuscripts that white slaves were only things with a voice or instrumenti vocali. Julius Caesar enslaves as many as one million whites from Gaul. (William D Phillips, Jr. SLAVERY FROM ROMAN TIMES TO EARLY TRANSATLANTIC TRADE, p. 18).
Pope Gregory in the sixth century first witnessed blonde hair, blue eyed boys awaiting sale in a Roman slave market. The Romans enslaved thousands of white inhabitants of Great Britain, who were also known as Angles. Pope Gregory was very interested in the looks of these boys therefore asking their origin. He was told they were Angles from Briton. Gregory stated, “Non Angli, sed Angeli.” (Not Angles but Angels).
The eighth to the eleventh centuries proved to be very profitable for Rouen France. Rouen was the transfer point of Irish and Flemish slaves to the Arabian nations. The early centuries AD the Scottish were known as Irish. William Phillips on page 63 states that the major component of slave trade in the eleventh century were the Vikings. They spirited many ‘Irish’ to Spain, Scandinavia and Russia. Legends have it; some ‘Irish’ may have been taken as far as Constantinople.
Ruth Mazo Karras wrote in her book, “SLAVERY AND SOCIETY IN MEDEIVEL SCANDINAVIA” pg. 49; Norwegian Vikings made slave raids not only against the Irish and Scots (who were often called Irish in Norse sources) but also against Norse settlers in Ireland or Scottish Isles or even in Norway itself…slave trading was a major commercial activity of the Viking Age. The children of the White slaves in Iceland were routinely murdered en masse. (Karras pg 52)
According to these resources as well as many more, the Scots-Irish have been enslaved longer than any other race in the world’s history. Most governments do not teach White Slavery in their World History classes. Children of modern times are only taught about the African slave trade. The Scots do not need to be taught because they are very aware of the atrocities upon an enslaved race. Most importantly, we have survived to become one to the largest races on Earth!!!
White Slavery in America
The topic of this story is a sensitive one yet one of great importance. White slavery in America was real. There are many documents that verify the bondage, kidnapping and transporting of Brits to the Colonies as slaves. The importance of this story will help those who cannot find a ship passenger list on their ancestor. This story may not pertain to all who came to America that are not listed on ship passenger lists.
The Journal of Negro History #52 pp.251-273 states, “The sources of racial thought in Colonial America pertaining to slave trade worked both directions with white merchandise as well as black.”
Thomas Burton recorded in his Parliament Diary 1656-1659 vol. 4 pp. 253-274 a debate in the English Parliament focusing on the selling of British whites into slavery in the New World. The debate refers to whites as slaves ‘whose enslavement threatened the liberties of all Englishmen.’
The British government had realized as early as the 1640’s how beneficial white slave labor was to the profiting colonial plantations. Slavery was instituted as early as 1627 in the British West Indies. The Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series of 1701 records 25000 slaves in Barbados in which 21700 were white slaves.
George Downing wrote a letter to the honorable John Winthrop Colonial Governor of Massachusetts in 1645, “planters who want to make a fortune in the West Indies must procure white slave labor out of England if they wanted to succeed.” Lewis Cecil Gray’s History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to 1860 vol.1 pp 316, 318 records Sir George Sandys’ 1618 plan for Virginia, referring to bound whites assigned to the treasurer’s office. “To belong to said office forever. The service of whites bound to Berkeley Hundred was deemed perpetual.”
The Quoke Walker case in Massachusetts 1773 ruled that; slavery contrary to the state Constitution was applied equally to Blacks and Whites in Massachusetts.
Statutes at Large of Virginia, vol. 1 pp. 174, 198, 200, 243 & 306 did not discriminate Negroes in bondage from Whites in Bondage.
Marcellus Rivers and Oxenbridge Foyle, England’s Slaves 1659 consists of a statement smuggled out of the New World and published in London referring to whites in bondage who did not think of themselves as indentured servants but as “England’s Slaves” and “England’s merchandise.”
Colonial Office, Public Records Office, London 1667, no. 170 records that “even Blacks referred to the White forced laborers in the colonies as “white slaves.” Pages 343 through 346 of Historical Sketch of the Persecutions Suffered by the Catholics of Ireland by; Patrick F. Moran refers to the transportation of the Irish to the colonies as the “slave-trade.”
Ulrich B. Phillips, Life and Labor in the Old South explain that white enslavement was crucial to the development of the Negro slave system. The system set up for the white slaves governed, organized and controlled the system for the black slaves. Black slaves were “late comers fitted into a system already developed.” Pp 25-26. John Pory declared in 1619, “white slaves are our principle wealth.”
The above quotations from various authors are just the tip of the iceberg on the white slave trade of the Americas. People from the British Isles were kidnapped, put in chains and crammed into ships that transported hundreds of them at a time. Their destination was Virginia Boston, New York, Barbados and the West Indies. The white slaves were treated the same or worse than the black slave. The white slave did not fetch a good price at the auction blocks. Bridenbaugh wrote in his accounting on page 118, having paid a bigger price for the Negro, the planters treated the black better than they did their “Christian” white servant. Even the Negroes recognized this and did not hesitate to show their contempt for those white men who, they could see, were worse off than themselves.
Governments have allowed this part of American and British history to be swallowed up. The contemptible black slavery has taken a grip on people associated with American History. Yet, no one will tell of these accountings that are well established on to the middle 1800’s.
Slavery is not something to be proud of but it is a fact that happened to every country, kingdom and empire that has been on this earth. Each of us needs to search our hearts and find the answer to stop racial hatred. One place to begin; realize that the black race was not the only race in the last 400 years that was in bondage.
Need more?
Enough with the rascist crap already. You need to educate yourselves.
Yeah, those states probably did get used to the dividends of slavery, that was the foundation of this country.
It was wrong, dead wrong, but here we are now.
what does that have one lick to do with the confederacy or the civil war or the flag? I know that slavery among whites also existed but it did NOT exist under our constitution.
I’m sorry Pleef but practically every assertion you have made on this topic today has been soundly defeated. You don’t even have to own up to it that you bought into the propaganda, heck I almost did.
But I also am a lover of history and it didn’t take me long to realize that it was an attempt to dupe me.
I was attempting to show that slavery isn’t rascism. It’s elitism. While there are dimwit’s in the South that don’t realize that Jesus was not white or that mathematics wasn’t perfected by whites, not all folks that have a Confederate flag or don’t see the fuss about it (me) are rascist. That there was more at stake in the war than slavery. That the “elite” in the North were just as guilty and contributory to the war as any of the Southern “Gentlemen”.
If the Winter’s weren’t so long in the North, slavery would have been thriving just as long as it was in the South. A selling point for slaves was the “seasoned” slave imported from the Carribean and not directly from Africa. So the North paid a premium for not having to train and “hassle” with the “wild” ones coming in straight from their home. And what’s funny is that all of these folks (from the North and South) used Biblical teaching to justify the slavery, claiming that it was God who enslaved them and not their master’s.
But we can agree to disagree and I’ll stop kicking this dead horse.
“It was wrong, dead wrong, but here we are now.”
Too often, people (like pee brain Pee mom) look at the War between the States through present day glasses. That’s a mistake, but it happens a lot.
I haven’t taken the time to respond to her. I’ve dealt with that kind of “it’s all racists, South is bad, North is good” often enough.
I look at the war from a “scholar” type of approach. No glasses, no prejudices, no sides taken. Just the fact, maam.
Well if I didn’t think there was anything wrong with a burning cross in a black person’s yard, would that make it ok?
There were plenty of reasons the North could have used slaves. Think of here in Kansas, with all the crops to be harvested. Farming, Mining, Factory work, was not merely a product of the South.
There was more at stake than just slavery- however- that was the MAIN DRIVING FACTOR behind why the North and South were so divided. And no, the whites in the north didn’t want the blacks there either- they wanted them shipped back to Africa.
“Well if I didn’t think there was anything wrong with a burning cross in a black person’s yard, would that make it ok?”
See what I mean?
“There were plenty of reasons the North could have used slaves”
They did.
“they wanted them shipped back to Africa.”
That was a Lincoln plan that never got off the ground.
“There was more at stake than just slavery”
To repeat: The parties were agreed on slavery staying where is was. The disagreement was the expansion. See the Lincoln-Douglas debates. That’s what they were about. Douglas wanted “Popular Soverignty” where the people were allowed to vote on it. Lincoln said no, keep it where it is, but no expansion.
I think the South overplayed their hand.
I’m far from a huge history buff, but wasn’t the main problem between the North and South manufacturing? Or having to do with it and the growth of it?
Hey, I’m willing to listen to anyone who will teach gently. :)
As for the KKK, I’ve always thought the original reason it was formed was to keep Southern families safe from riff-raff, both black and white, who came into the South after the end of the war. It later grew into something else.
Linda, I believe you are right on the origins of the Klan…. It seems to have had somewhat honorable beginnings, but transformed into the White Supremacist organization it later became.
A current U.S. Senator, a former Supreme Court Justice, and possibly two former Presidents were allegedly members of the Klan….
Those would be Robert Byrd, Hugo Black, Warren Harding, and Harry Truman… That would of course, cry out for a link… For that I can offer:
Google.com Enter: “The History of the KKK”
Chas,
With all due respect your opinon on the Confederate flag is just that your opinon,trying to prove your point in all caps does not make your opinion more or less valid than mine. As for me I will continue to proudly dispplay the Stars and Bars undernaeath my American flag to remind me of my familie’s heritage, and if you don’t like it then well I guess that issue is on your side of the street not mine.
With all due lack of respect, Freebird, flying that thing anywhere NEAR Old Glory, says a whole lot about the projected feelings you have about your country… Before you go bashing on liberals or Dems, go look in the mirror, and see how much of an american YOU are, when you can fly a symbol that is ANTI-American along side of the stars and stripes….
And, dont you EVER come after me with your Right Wing trash talk again!! Cause when/if you do…. I will throw your Unamerican Flag Waving right back at ya!!
Good day to you!!
As I said Chas your opinion is no more or less of value than mine. Here is a thought try to be civil. BTW where did I say I was right wing? please point that out to me and I will make corrections.
I served the American flag Chas, and under that flag I have the right to freely express my opinons just as you do. The only difference I refuse to get my knickers in a knot
Oh and Chas please enlighten me on what my flying the stars and bars says about my patriotism? I would realy like to kknow since according to you I’m UnAmerican,I dare say I could say the same about you since you are one to deny a person’s right to free expression.
Chas,
Thanks for proving my point. It is people like you on the left AND the right that have this country so divided that I’m afraid we are on a long down hill run unless somethiing changes
Oh and one last thing,I apologize if my opinions upset you but they are just that I have no animopsity against you personally,in fact there are somethings I agree with you on and others not so much
The KKK became what it is today after the film “The Birth of a Nation”.
I think I know who Free is…and if it is who I think it is, he was banned from the SJ forum for his racist language.
He made all the same excuses for his flag, defended it defended it as not racist, and then when Obama got the nomination- he went on a racist tirade and everyone who defended the position with him was shocked.
And I sat there and said- I told you so.
enema you’re wrong. The attitudes before the civil war were nearly at a boiling point because the south were angry that the slaves were being allowed to stay instead of being shipped back. The tarrif thing was related to slavery and the goods manufactured by them. When Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin came out showing the horrors of slavery- that took the fence riders to a new level.
we can also learn lessons from the civil war- about where our jobs are located. We seem to have forgotten one side nearly lost because we had no ability to make items, all the suppliers were on one side and the factories were on the other.
P mom how is voicing an opinion about a flag racist? show me in my posts where I said one thing that was racist. BTW If you read your history you will find that Lincoln stated that if he could preserve the union with out freeing a single slave he would do so and b) the emacipation proclamation only appplied to slaves that as Lincoln said were in rebellion.
Oh,now I get it! Everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as it agrees with Chas and Pmom.
Pmom show me one racist tirade I have made either under my current nic or the one before log in which was Freebird.
I will be patiently waiting Pmom
So if you aren’t the poster who was kicked off the Salina board, then I’m wrong and will apologize. If you are, own up to it.
I will give this much my first name is Dwight
“enema you’re wrong. The attitudes before the civil war were nearly at a boiling point because the south were angry that the slaves were being allowed to stay instead of being shipped back.”
Wrong about what?
Are you saying the South wanted the slaves to be shipped back? That’s crazy talk.
The slaves that escaped to the North, you’re darn right they wanted them shipped back to their plantations.
and I guess that says it all doesn’t it Free. Won’t own up and won’t deny.
“The slaves that escaped to the North, you’re darn right they wanted them shipped back to their plantations.”
Of course they did. They owned them. Lincoln wanted to pay the slave owners and ship the slaves back to Africa. The plan didn’t fly.
when you can fly a symbol that is ANTI-American along side of the stars and stripes….
What could be more American than fighting a tyrannical federal government overstepping a state’s rights? Have you ever read the constitution?
P-Mama reads like a public school history textbook.
They say that the winners of the war get to write the history books. Good thing I know how to read both sides of the story and decide for myself.
Slavery would have taken care of itself. Look at countries like Brazil:
Slavery collapsed in Brazil after being abolished in the Brazilian state of Ceara in 1884. Slaves escaped to Ceara, and a fugitive slave law that was hastily passed was largely ignored. The value of slaves fell dramatically, and within four years the Brazilian government had acknowledged the reality of the situation by enacting immediate and uncompensated emancipation.
You see, secession would’ve actually helped the North and reduced the value of Slaves to the South. Not to mention invention of farm equipment and other innovations.
You big government people that praise them for their efforts fail to see how much damage they really do with their intervention.
You have in inject love and peace, you do not force it. Don’t ever try to argue with this law of nature.
Chas,Awfully quiet arent we?
I think I will find out where you preach and show up in my stars and bars t shirt that have the words heritage not hate on it and see how you behave i person