(04-19-2018 11:31 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  took away $250,000 from the morons in Memphis for taking down statues of General Forrest and POTCS Jefferson Davis.

Wish it had been $2.5 Million

(04-19-2018 11:32 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 11:31 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  took away $250,000 from the morons in Memphis for taking down statues of General Forrest and POTCS Jefferson Davis.

Wish it had been $2.5 Million

Robert E. Lee not only never owned a slave - but was morally opposed to slavery while General Grant not only owned slaves, but hated blacks.

Yet one is a "hero".

Quote:In a famous letter to his wife, Lee wrote that "slavery as an institution, is a moral and political evil in any country."

Viewed in isolation, that seems like a pretty firm condemnation. However, in the same letter, he said that slavery was worse for white people than it was for black people and that it was necessary for black people to endure slavery, for now anyways, so that they might be civilized.

"The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their instruction as a race... How long their subjugation may be necessary is known and ordered by a wise Merciful Providence," Lee wrote.

In his will, Lee's father-in-law had asked that the family's slaves be emancipated after he died when "expedient and proper."

Lee, acting as executor of the wealthy man's will after he died, eventually complied, but not until after the slaves were kept in bondage long enough to right the financial ship of the plantation, which had fallen on hard times.

Lee owned slaves of his own before the Civil War, as late as 1852, and considered buying more even after that, according to Elizabeth Brown Pryor's biography, which is based on Lee's writings and correspondence.

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

(04-19-2018 12:08 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Lincoln:

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

So, should we team down the Lincoln Memorial? Of course not, tearing down statues is asinine.

Quote:“I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … I am not nor ever have 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 believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

(04-19-2018 12:20 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  So, to recap:

Memphis finds a legal route around the Tennessee Historical Commission (somehow populated by some members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans) which attempted to block the city’s choice to remove monuments of Jefferson Davis & Nathan Bedford Forrest. These statues weren't even erected during or after the Civil War, but during the Civil Rights Movement (1964) & Jim Crow era (1905) respectively, to try to make sure AA's remembered "their place."

Representatives from small towns in completely different regions/counties of the state don't like the fact that Memphis dared to decide for itself who to honor (or not honor) in its own parks, and handled it LEGALLY, so they decide to "punish" the city by withholding money for their budget. Not that the amount withheld will be life-changing - plans for the city's bicentennial will go on as planned, but it's simple-minded pettiness on part of the house to even suggest, much less approve this.

Tell you what - next time Dresden, Jonesborough, or Parkers Crossroads wants funding for something, how about we let the reps from Memphis make their budget decisions for them?

(04-19-2018 01:24 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  How is it the South went to war because they didn't want a federal government telling them what to do locally, yet it's ok for a state government to tell a local government what to do.

(04-19-2018 01:28 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 01:24 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  How is it the South went to war because they didn't want a federal government telling them what to do locally, yet it's ok for a state government to tell a local government what to do.

Correction. The North went to war. The South tried to succeed peacefully.

(04-19-2018 01:24 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  How is it the South went to war because they didn't want a federal government telling them what to do locally, yet it's ok for a state government to tell a local government what to do.

(04-19-2018 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 01:24 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  How is it the South went to war because they didn't want a federal government telling them what to do locally, yet it's ok for a state government to tell a local government what to do.

Apples to oranges comparison.

The states do not derive their power from the federal government, while local government does derive it's power from the state.

(04-19-2018 01:24 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  How is it the South went to war because they didn't want a federal government telling them what to do locally, yet it's ok for a state government to tell a local government what to do.

(04-19-2018 11:31 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  took away $250,000 from the morons in Memphis for taking down statues of General Forrest and POTCS Jefferson Davis.

Wish it had been $2.5 Million

(04-19-2018 02:09 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 11:31 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  took away $250,000 from the morons in Memphis for taking down statues of General Forrest and POTCS Jefferson Davis.

Wish it had been $2.5 Million

How dare they not venerate racism, white nationalism, slavery, and treason? LOL.

The money will be replaced and I hope they make the massacre of AMERICAN troops of color after surrendering by Forrest's troops at Ft. Pillow and the Ku Klux Klan a big part of the commemoration.

----

If you're wondering why African Americans reflexively vote against the GOP.....don't.

(04-19-2018 12:08 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Lincoln:

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

So, should we team down the Lincoln Memorial? Of course not, tearing down statues is asinine.

Quote:I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them.

(04-19-2018 02:47 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 12:08 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Lincoln:

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

So, should we team down the Lincoln Memorial? Of course not, tearing down statues is asinine.

So is taking quotes out of context to fit a narrative.

Quote:I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them.

Lincoln and a Constitutional duty, first and foremeost, to save the Union.

(04-19-2018 02:57 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 02:47 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 12:08 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Lincoln:

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

So, should we team down the Lincoln Memorial? Of course not, tearing down statues is asinine.

So is taking quotes out of context to fit a narrative.

Quote:I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them.

Lincoln and a Constitutional duty, first and foremeost, to save the Union.

With our without eliminating slavery. So, he admitted he would do it keeping slavery if he could. According to modern day SJW that's grounds for statue/memorial removal. Of course, most SJWs are totally ignorant of history and probably don't even know that little historical fact. My bet is even if you told them they would stick their heads in the sand and say, "yada yada yada". Most intellectuals know Lincoln used the Emancipation Proclamation, as a means to and ends to keep Europe from joining up with the Confederacy. I'm not saying ending slavery was wrong, not even close, just saying everything was done in a military context, not for some moral high ground, etc...

(04-19-2018 02:57 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 02:47 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 12:08 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Lincoln:

Quote:My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

So, should we team down the Lincoln Memorial? Of course not, tearing down statues is asinine.

So is taking quotes out of context to fit a narrative.

Quote:I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them.

Lincoln and a Constitutional duty, first and foremeost, to save the Union.

With our without eliminating slavery. So, he admitted he would do it keeping slavery if he could. According to modern day SJW that's grounds for statue/memorial removal. Of course, most SJWs are totally ignorant of history and probably don't even know that little historical fact. My bet is even if you told them they would stick their heads in the sand and say, "yada yada yada". Most intellectuals know Lincoln used the Emancipation Proclamation, as a means to and ends to keep Europe from joining up with the Confederacy. I'm not saying ending slavery was wrong, not even close, just saying everything was done in a military context, not for some moral high ground, etc...