Richmond is taking down Confederate statues: Is this the end for other Confederate memorials?

#2,151
#2,151
Franklin Pierce said:
Former President Donald Trump issued a statement Wednesday condemning the removal of a 131-year-old statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee in Richmond, Virginia, calling the Confederate commander "the greatest strategist of them all" and admiring the statue's artwork.

"Just watched as a massive crane took down the magnificent and very famous statue of ‘Robert E. Lee On His Horse’ in Richmond, Virginia," Trump wrote. "It has long been recognized as a beautiful piece of bronze sculpture. To add insult to injury, those who support this ‘taking’ now plan to cut it into three pieces, and throw this work of art into storage prior to its complete desecration.

Our culture is being destroyed…
— Former President Donald Trump​
Trump deplores removal of Richmond's Robert E. Lee statue
Click to expand...
Pretty sure to be the greatest strategist of them all your strategies would need to lead to victory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH
#2,153
#2,153
Franklin Pierce said:
Former President Donald Trump issued a statement Wednesday condemning the removal of a 131-year-old statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee in Richmond, Virginia, calling the Confederate commander "the greatest strategist of them all" and admiring the statue's artwork.

"Just watched as a massive crane took down the magnificent and very famous statue of ‘Robert E. Lee On His Horse’ in Richmond, Virginia," Trump wrote. "It has long been recognized as a beautiful piece of bronze sculpture. To add insult to injury, those who support this ‘taking’ now plan to cut it into three pieces, and throw this work of art into storage prior to its complete desecration.

Our culture is being destroyed…
— Former President Donald Trump​
Trump deplores removal of Richmond's Robert E. Lee statue
Click to expand...
What culture is being destroyed? What a moron
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostsheep, volfanhill, VFFL@THE BEACH and 1 other person
#2,156
#2,156
Weezer said:
Lee wasn't fighting for the preservation of slavery. He fought for Virginia. As was customary at the time, he identified more as a Virginian than an American. As time has progressed, we've drifted away from states' rights as the federal government has become bloated with powers it was never meant to hold. There were many reasons the Civil War was fought. Yes, slavery was a key issue, but it was not the only issue. To break it all down to just slavery is to ignore history.
Click to expand...

Yes, he chose to fight for Virginia, leave the U.S. Army and not defend the U.S. Constitution. He made his choice, no reason to honor someone who hates the Constitution and America.
 
#2,158
#2,158
VFFL@THE BEACH said:
Yes, he chose to fight for Virginia, leave the U.S. Army and not defend the U.S. Constitution. He made his choice, no reason to honor someone who hates the Constitution and America.
Click to expand...
You mean the Constitution that Abraham Lincoln was openly violating?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin Pierce, Rickyvol77, GroverCleveland and 1 other person
#2,163
#2,163
Vol737 said:
So where does that leave the leftist democrats today?
Click to expand...

No different than the radical right. Media loves to demonize both sides and people that lean one way just chug the kool-aid.

The fact is that Trump is just as much of a socialist as Trump. Marjorie Taylor Greene is just as crazy as AOC, just different flavors of crazy.
 
#2,164
#2,164
VFFL@THE BEACH said:
Please tell me you are no trying to quote the whole lincoln jailed journalists. Already debunked that rumor.

Last I checked the Constitution is still intact. The Confederacy lost.
Click to expand...

The war itself violated the Constitution. Since secession itself is not specifically mentioned in the U.S. Constitution it's a power that would fall to the states themselves under the 10th Amendment. Now, we could also discuss all the ways Lincoln violated the Constitution AFTER the war started, but the very act of war itself between the states was what I was referring to.

And yes, the Confederacy lost. That doesn't mean Lincoln didn't take a giant dump on the Constitution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#2,167
#2,167
VFFL@THE BEACH said:
No different than the radical right. Media loves to demonize both sides and people that lean one way just chug the kool-aid.

The fact is that Trump is just as much of a socialist as Trump. Marjorie Taylor Greene is just as crazy as AOC, just different flavors of crazy.
Click to expand...

Lol, you trump is a socialist?
 
#2,172
#2,172
0nelilreb said:
View attachment 393539
View attachment 393540
ok ..Democratic Socialist then
Click to expand...

First of all, I am not a bernie supporter. However, the absolute trash that you post means that you will believe anything and everything stupid. This in part is why our country is in trouble, this stupidity.

The first section does not have any truth. The second only takes a snippet of a response at a debate.

Reguardless, drumpf handed out millions in handouts. So, yes, both are democratic socialists.
 
#2,173
#2,173
Weezer said:
The war itself violated the Constitution. Since secession itself is not specifically mentioned in the U.S. Constitution it's a power that would fall to the states themselves under the 10th Amendment. Now, we could also discuss all the ways Lincoln violated the Constitution AFTER the war started, but the very act of war itself between the states was what I was referring to.

And yes, the Confederacy lost. That doesn't mean Lincoln didn't take a giant dump on the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Haha so your argument is the U.S. violated the Constitution because states that succeeded had some perceived protections under a country they left?

This is the problem with the revisionist history of the civil war. Bottom line is the succession states voluntarily chose to leave the U.S. and thus became an enemy of the U.S. Then the confederacy lost the war. There is nothing romantic about this idea.

Due to my ancestry, I can register as a son of the confederacy but probably never will. I respect the choice my ancestors made, however, they made the wrong choice and lost. Robert E. Lee was not a monster but made the wrong choice. At the end of the day he chose to be an enemy of the U.S. and the Constitution.
 
#2,174
#2,174
VFFL@THE BEACH said:
First of all, I am not a bernie supporter. However, the absolute trash that you post means that you will believe anything and everything stupid. This in part is why our country is in trouble, this stupidity.

The first section does not have any truth. The second only takes a snippet of a response at a debate.

Reguardless, drumpf handed out millions in handouts. So, yes, both are democratic socialists.
Click to expand...

Point out the parts that aren’t true, in what I posted .
 
#2,175
#2,175
VFFL@THE BEACH said:
Haha so your argument is the U.S. violated the Constitution because states that succeeded had some perceived protections under a country they left?

This is the problem with the revisionist history of the civil war. Bottom line is the succession states voluntarily chose to leave the U.S. and thus became an enemy of the U.S. Then the confederacy lost the war. There is nothing romantic about this idea.

Due to my ancestry, I can register as a son of the confederacy but probably never will. I respect the choice my ancestors made, however, they made the wrong choice and lost. Robert E. Lee was not a monster but made the wrong choice. At the end of the day he chose to be an enemy of the U.S. and the Constitution.
Click to expand...
They didn't choose to be an enemy of the U.S. They chose to leave the Union, just as they had chosen to join it. They no longer felt their needs were being served so left to form their own confederacy. Nothing in the Constitution prohibited that. If you know the history of this country, then you know each of the original states were concerned about protecting their own "rights" as individual states. It's why the 10th Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights. No state wanted to surrender governance of itself to other states.

Lincoln didn't give a damn about states' rights. He believed in a powerful federal government. He unilaterally decided that states could not secede from the Union, a power that was not granted him by the Constitution. And he went on to violate the Constitution in multiple ways.

None of that is "revisionist" history. True revisionist history is what the victors, in this case the Union, preach to make themselves look better.

Also, I doubt you would find anyone on here who would support slavery. Not only was it time for it to end, it should never have existed. But, unfortunately, it did, and nothing we do can erase it from history. And it's a horrible truth that slavery was the key "right" the South was fighting for. But even with that said, it boils down to the Constitution made it a state's right at the time, and wouldn't be changed until after the war. So it is accurate to say the Civil War was fought over both slavery and states' rights.

Our federal government was never meant to be the bloated monster it has become. This was not the vision of our Founding Fathers. States were meant to be freely governed by their citizens and not ruled over by a strong federal government or one another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top