Terrorist scumbag caught & See how evil he is.

[webexplorer]

Many people on both side parties (Rep and Dem) will being to voice out to impeach Bush for many reasons. This will probably come out this year.

For Heath, I am afraid that you have been brainwashed for too long. You have studied too hard in the wrong path to support Republicans. I don't hate Republicans. A few of them are good. Did you know that George Bush Sr. signed and created ADA law? The original idea for the ADA that came from a Governor (sorry I forgot which state) that convinced him to sign it because his brother is deaf? That Governor is Democrat. Isn't that interesting?

 

[Teresh]

The confederate flag is a part of America's history and its narrow minded people that want to always associate it with racism. What about George Washington, he owned slaves, we celebrate his birthday. Are you going to start to boycott that next?

The main difference (and this is what you don't understand) is that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the other (several) slave holders that were involved in the formation of this nation did not think slavery was good or acceptable. Call it hypocrital, but the founding fathers all believed, perhaps naively, that slavery would be done away with within 20 years of the ratification of the Constitution. There's a reason there's no direct mentioning of slavery in the original Constitution, the reason being that they didn't want something as ugly as slavery tarnishing the document.

There are no statements on record of any politician or elected official from the South ever endorsing slavery until 1820, which, as you may recall, was when the cotton gin was invented. Up until that point, slavery was largely considered a necessary evil. After that, however, the Southern economy started to depend on slavery, which inevitably led to the Civil War.

Saying 'George Washington owned slaves, so it must be OK!' is completely idiotic and completely forgoes his opinion on the subject, as does saying that Jefferson or others were slaveholders.

Maybe Washington was a hypocrite for his personal beliefs, but most of the founding fathers were hypocritical about something. Indeed, most people are hypocritical about something anyway.

 

[mlkshkgrl]

The main difference (and this is what you don't understand) is that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the other (several) slave holders that were involved in the formation of this nation did not think slavery was good or acceptable. Call it hypocrital, but the founding fathers all believed, perhaps naively, that slavery would be done away with within 20 years of the ratification of the Constitution. There's a reason there's no direct mentioning of slavery in the original Constitution, the reason being that they didn't want something as ugly as slavery tarnishing the document.

There are no statements on record of any politician or elected official from the South ever endorsing slavery until 1820, which, as you may recall, was when the cotton gin was invented. Up until that point, slavery was largely considered a necessary evil. After that, however, the Southern economy started to depend on slavery, which inevitably led to the Civil War.

Saying 'George Washington owned slaves, so it must be OK!' is completely idiotic and completely forgoes his opinion on the subject, as does saying that Jefferson or others were slaveholders.

Maybe Washington was a hypocrite for his personal beliefs, but most of the founding fathers were hypocritical about something. Indeed, most people are hypocritical about something anyway.

Fist of all I never said it was okay so back off! You think the confederate flag only supports slavery so you think anyone who flies it is a racist no matter what their own belief is about the flag. But yet its okay still to celebrate George Washingtons birthday, a man who owned slaves, just because he didnt find slavery acceptable but still practiced it? My whole point was that if the flag should be done away with for supporting slavery as you imply then so should celebrating his birthday for simply participating in the act.

 

[Teresh]

Fist of all I never said it was okay so back off! You think the confederate flag only supports slavery so you think anyone who flies it is a racist no matter what their own belief is about the flag. But yet its okay still to celebrate George Washingtons birthday, a man who owned slaves, just because he didnt find slavery acceptable but still practiced it? My whole point was that if the flag should be done away with for supporting slavery as you imply then so should celebrating his birthday for simply participating in the act.

Your point is invalid. In the case of Washington's birthday, we're celebrating a man who was a slaveholder, and at that, one who was not happy about it, as opposed to the confederate flag, which is a simple endorsement of slavery.

The only major reason for succession was that issue--any other stated reasons for succession were inconsequential comparatively. In particular, it was the fact that Abraham Lincoln was elected with no votes from the South, and that the new Republican government was full of people who would actively try to limit or eliminate slavery, and they had a majority in the Senate. The 'writing was on the wall', as it were, and that was the reason for succesion.

The difference between Washington's birthday and the confederate flag is the former celebrates a man's life and achievements, and the latter represents and condones a lot of different ideas, one of which is slavery.

 

[Endymion]

After that, however, the Southern economy started to depend on slavery, which inevitably led to the Civil War.

I do not want to interrupt an interesting discussion on American History, but I do want to mention that the Civil War was not only a product of the slavery debate. The Civil War was about the South seceding from the North, something that involved many other factors. In fact, many combatants said they considered slavery irrelevant for their personal justification.

Conversely, there would have been no war without slavery. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 created what has been called Popular Sovereignty. Individual states were granted the right to decide whether to outlaw slavery or not. That sparked a huge firestorm across the country and without doubt triggered some crucial events.

 

[Mookie]

Many people on both side parties (Rep and Dem) will being to voice out to impeach Bush for many reasons. This will probably come out this year.

For Heath, I am afraid that you have been brainwashed for too long. You have studied too hard in the wrong path to support Republicans. I don't hate Republicans. A few of them are good. Did you know that George Bush Sr. signed and created ADA law? The original idea for the ADA that came from a Governor (sorry I forgot which state) that convinced him to sign it because his brother is deaf? That Governor is Democrat. Isn't that interesting?

Webexplorer, you created a few errors. No body is so perfect so I am gladly to help you...

1. That was U.S. Senator Tom Harkin whose deaf brother passed away last year.

2. President Ronald Reagan asked his successor to sign the ADA bill at the end of his second term for a personal favor. I think Senator Bob Dole who sponsored Client Assistant Program Act in 1970s told both Presidents to support it.

 

[RedFox]

The confederate flag is a part of America's history and its narrow minded people that want to always associate it with racism. What about George Washington, he owned slaves, we celebrate his birthday. Are you going to start to boycott that next?

He did have slaves, but thought it was inhuman, so he stopped buying any more and treated the slaves he had humanly. He hoped that it would fade away. He didn't try to get rid of it outright to avoid dividing the nation. He did prohibt it in the Northwest Territory. His will freed his slaves after he died. His wife also freed hers.

 

[Mookie]

The main difference (and this is what you don't understand) is that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the other (several) slave holders that were involved in the formation of this nation did not think slavery was good or acceptable. Call it hypocrital, but the founding fathers all believed, perhaps naively, that slavery would be done away with within 20 years of the ratification of the Constitution. There's a reason there's no direct mentioning of slavery in the original Constitution, the reason being that they didn't want something as ugly as slavery tarnishing the document.

There are no statements on record of any politician or elected official from the South ever endorsing slavery until 1820, which, as you may recall, was when the cotton gin was invented. Up until that point, slavery was largely considered a necessary evil. After that, however, the Southern economy started to depend on slavery, which inevitably led to the Civil War.

Saying 'George Washington owned slaves, so it must be OK!' is completely idiotic and completely forgoes his opinion on the subject, as does saying that Jefferson or others were slaveholders.

Maybe Washington was a hypocrite for his personal beliefs, but most of the founding fathers were hypocritical about something. Indeed, most people are hypocritical about something anyway.

I reside close to Mount Vernon home about 3 miles. I have learned alot about it.

Before you accuse good old President George Washington, you may need to re-read American history. He never purchased slaves but it was his wife's first husband who owned the slaves. He did still not believe to own slave business but he respected his wife's business. I understand that it might have damaged his great honorable reputation.

He already wrote the will for him and his wife in case of the deaths. After his death, his wife still managed her Mount Vernon home business in a few years or so. Until her Martha Washington’ death, Robert Lee promised the wishes of George and Martha Washington to let every slave earning a freedom from the Mount Vernon home. The slaves finally earned their great freedoms. Did you know that the African family's last name was Washington...

Keep in mind that General George Washington promised to the black men joining the America revelation paramilitary for earning a freedom from the slaves…

 

[webexplorer]

Webexplorer, you created a few errors. No body is so perfect so I am gladly to help you...

1. That was U.S. Senator Tom Harkin whose deaf brother passed away last year.

2. President Ronald Reagan asked his successor to sign the ADA bill at the end of his second term for a personal favor. I think Senator Bob Dole who sponsored Client Assistant Program Act in 1970s told both Presidents to support it.

Oh, you are definitely right. Thank you for correcting my info.

 

[Taylor]

The difference between Washington's birthday and the confederate flag is the former celebrates a man's life and achievements, and the latter represents and condones a lot of different ideas, one of which is slavery.

Regardless of the reasons, was he still not a slave owner?

The above quote is like saying the Swastika is a sign of hatred but Adolph Hitler should be celebrated because of all his accomplishments for the German people and his achievements. So...he had a few flaws....

Obviously I do not agree with the above statement and am playing devils advocate. Something to also keep in mind during the time of slavery, regardless of anyone's thoughts, is that it was an accepted practice at the time and was not illegal. 30 years from now, abortion may be completely illegal and despised, but it is accepted today (hopefully my point is coming across). I believe the abortion debate today is much like the slavery debate back then.

And, no matter what anyone thinks about the confederate flag, people still have the right to fly it and display it if they choose. I love the fact that people will say Republicans are taking away everyone's rights in one sentence are then telling others how they are supposed to live their life and what others what one should or should not believe in.

 

[pek1]

The confederate flag is a part of America's history and its narrow minded people that want to always associate it with racism.

I have no problem with the First Amendment, so you then, as a southerner, would have no problem if I exercised mine and burned the confederate flag? After all, Hitler would have loved it.

 

[Taylor]

I have no problem with the First Amendment, so you then, as a southerner, would have no problem if I exercised mine and burned the confederate flag? After all, Hitler would have loved it.

I can't answer for the other members (and I could care less about the confederate flag...I too have negative beliefs about it), but why not burn the flag? You have every right to do so...have at it. Just don't burn your fingers and remember to burn the flag OUTSIDE of your house.

BTW, maybe you didn't see my previous post but I'm still looking for sources that say Republicans want to lock all deaf people into state institutions.

 

[mlkshkgrl]

I have no problem with the First Amendment, so you then, as a southerner, would have no problem if I exercised mine and burned the confederate flag? After all, Hitler would have loved it.

If that is what you want to do with a flag then do it. It has no affect on me either way. I guess if what you are asking is if it would insult me then the answer is no. But I would have to chuckle at the thought of you doing it because it would be a waste of money. And after the flames die out and all you have are ashes, the fact still stands that the union jack, confederate, and POW MIA flags will still be flying proudly outside of my home.

 

[Teresh]

I reside close to Mount Vernon home about 3 miles. I have learned alot about it.

Before you accuse good old President George Washington, you may need to re-read American history. He never purchased slaves but it was his wife's first husband who owned the slaves. He did still not believe to own slave business but he respected his wife's business. I understand that it might have damaged his great honorable reputation.

He already wrote the will for him and his wife in case of the deaths. After his death, his wife still managed her Mount Vernon home business in a few years or so. Until her Martha Washington’ death, Robert Lee promised the wishes of George and Martha Washington to let every slave earning a freedom from the Mount Vernon home. The slaves finally earned their great freedoms. Did you know that the African family's last name was Washington...

Keep in mind that General George Washington promised to the black men joining the America revelation paramilitary for earning a freedom from the slaves…

I never made any accusations of former President Washington. I'm simply discussing the implications of a detail someone else decided to entire into the discussion. Read and understand the thread and what is being discussed before you start addressing people and making audacious comments that don't make any sense.

Regardless of the reasons, was he still not a slave owner?

Yes. And Dick Cheney's company happens to be getting a ton of contracts in Iraq. No one is perfect. That said, doing something that you believe to be morally wrong is not the same as doing something that is morally wrong and you think to be acceptable.

The above quote is like saying the Swastika is a sign of hatred but Adolph Hitler should be celebrated because of all his accomplishments for the German people and his achievements. So...he had a few flaws....

I think Hitler should be celebrated for some things. His regime committed untold atrocities, yes, but it is unquestionable that WWII fixed the downward spiral in global economics and politics that had occurred as a result of the stock market crash in the US by forcing people to work together selflessly against what could be believed to be absolute evil. Had Hitler not risen to power, the US, even under Roosevelt's New Deal precedent, would not have recovered from the depression by 1950. I do not believe in anything the Nazis stood for at the time (nor what they stand for now), but I do think that Hitler's actions along with his party had a very drastic affect on world policy, which is precisely what they wanted to do, although the outcome was different than they expected.

30 years from now, abortion may be completely illegal and despised, but it is accepted today (hopefully my point is coming across). I believe the abortion debate today is much like the slavery debate back then.

Eh, abortion isn't it. The gay rights thing is comparable to the civil rights movement, but abortion really isn't comparable to many other movements as its a "right" whose necessity is dubious and which is not supported by very many peopl except for a very vocal minority. Most people think abortion should be legal, but most people also think that abortion is wrong and would never get an abortion themselves.

And, no matter what anyone thinks about the confederate flag, people still have the right to fly it and display it if they choose.

Absolutely. I chide people for being idiots or bigots all the time. I can't, and shouldn't, attempt to restrict their right to be that way so long as they are not causing or inciting harm to me. Now, white hoods are another story... I think people should be allowed to burn the US flag. I don't like seeing it, and I certainly hope no one I know would be that against the country, but I think that any attempt to abridge that right is absurd.

 

[Taylor]

The reason I compared it to abortion is because abortion is legal at this time and is *somewhat* socially accepted. 30 years from now, it could be considered a horrible, evil act (much like we think of slavery today). Imagine 30 years from now, we have a female president but had an abortion back in 2002. People may think of her as evil at that time, but when she had the abortion, it was legal and somewhat accepted. I was comparing that to the George Washington owning slaves issue we were discussing. No matter how evil and horrible slavery is now, in George Washington's time, it was a legal and accepted practice. I don't think he can truly be faulted for owning slaves at that time...does that make better sense?

 

[Teresh]

The reason I compared it to abortion is because abortion is legal at this time and is *somewhat* socially accepted. 30 years from now, it could be considered a horrible, evil act (much like we think of slavery today). Imagine 30 years from now, we have a female president but had an abortion back in 2002. People may think of her as evil at that time, but when she had the abortion, it was legal and somewhat accepted. I was comparing that to the George Washington owning slaves issue we were discussing. No matter how evil and horrible slavery is now, in George Washington's time, it was a legal and accepted practice. I don't think he can truly be faulted for owning slaves at that time...does that make better sense?

I understand your analogy better now, but I still don't completely agree with it.

 

[Taylor]

I understand your analogy better now, but I still don't completely agree with it.

 

[pek1]

If that is what you want to do with a flag then do it. It has no affect on me either way. I guess if what you are asking is if it would insult me then the answer is no. But I would have to chuckle at the thought of you doing it because it would be a waste of money. And after the flames die out and all you have are ashes, the fact still stands that the union jack, confederate, and POW MIA flags will still be flying proudly outside of my home.

It's your confederate flag being burned, just before I wipe my butt with it.