PDA

View Full Version : Heritage Not Hate


Elvis
06-15-2008, 06:07 AM
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/Confederate_Flag.htm

Just want everyone to know that there is a good website that describes alot about the Rebel Flag and why it was created. I am not for or against anyone until they do something to me.. southerner or yankee.. you are yourself and that is all that matters to me. I am a southerner therefore I will fly my flag.. does it mean I hate northerners? No.. it doesnt.. it just shows that I have pride in where I live.
I hope truthfuly that my flag doesnt offend anyone, but it is my freedom to show pride in my place of living.
:coffee:

TroysBadDawg
06-15-2008, 08:19 AM
Save your confederate money the south will rise again. That is what my room mate at Boys Town always said and we had others of color in our house and we all got along.
It wasn't until about 15 years ago that I remember all of a sudden the Stars and Bars became something that some say stands for hatred. I think it was Louis Farrakhan that started that diatribe. It was him or the Rev. Jesse Jackson Or Rev. Al Sharpton none of whom have a church they preach in, to my knowledge. They preach to the media and the media listens and propagates what they say until it become a fact.
It was Lennon that said tell a lie long enough and soon people will believe it to be the truth.

The Stars and Bars is part of the of American history. An important part of American history that schools and people now want to disregard. People need to judge people by their actions and not their color or the clothes they wear or if they have Stars and Bars flying or The Gadsden Flag "Don't Tread On Me" (my personal favorite of historical flags)

Elvis
06-15-2008, 08:23 AM
Thank you Dawg.. very nice

millwalldavey
06-15-2008, 10:05 AM
PArdon me and not to start a fight... but GIVE ME A FRIGGIN BREAK!

Anyone flying a confederate flag north of the mason-dixon line and ESPECIALLY if you were born north of the mason-dixon line HAS NO SOUTHERN HERITAGE! Around here, the heavy duty racists all wear it and fly it. And the one who claim some kind of convoluted "heritage not hate" crap... well just stand around them a few minutes and listen to the n-bombs flying out of their mouth.

I'll continue to light em up!

I have German heritage... dont see me flying a swazi. Thats part of American history as well.

Godfather
06-15-2008, 03:37 PM
It wasn't until about 15 years ago that I remember all of a sudden the Stars and Bars became something that some say stands for hatred. I think it was Louis Farrakhan that started that diatribe. It was him or the Rev. Jesse Jackson Or Rev. Al Sharpton none of whom have a church they preach in, to my knowledge. They preach to the media and the media listens and propagates what they say until it become a fact.
It was Lennon that said tell a lie long enough and soon people will believe it to be the truth.


Not quite accurate. The segregationists flew the rebel flag to protest the civil rights movement and that's the group you can blame for saddling the rebel flag (unfairly) with the negative associations. look up when Southern state legislatures started flying it over the statehouse or incorporating it into the state flag.

I know a guy who lives near Baton Rouge and found a house he liked...until he went into the back yard and saw a giant Stars and Bars on the other side of the fence. He decided to buy a different house because he didn't want the owner of that flag for a neighbor--and the guy I know is a Southern good ole boy.

Godfather
06-15-2008, 03:51 PM
Here's an example--Georgia put the Confederate battle flag (which is not the same thing as the official flag of the CSA) on its state flag in 1956.

http://sos.georgia.gov/museum/html/georgia_flag_history.html

tony hipchest
06-15-2008, 05:05 PM
i say let the southerners fly their flag. its kinda cute, like brownsfans bragging about all their dominance of the past and hanging championship banners in their driveway. :yawn:

every region can be proud of its heritage. i can be proud of new mexicos "buffalo soldiers". and i can still rip on the texans who think they are their own country.

it woulda been interesting to see how things woulda worked out if the south woulda won their war. could they still run a slavery operation in the 21'st century? i doubt it. my feeling is that the south should be thankful of the yankees for not letting them foolishly leave the union and for saving them from themselves.

as far as flying the flag, the germans who rent MY airspace to train their air force pilots had 3 flags flying infront of their headquarters building. the us flag, german flag, and that of the state of new mexico.

we had to correct them because they tried to fly theirs at even staff with ours. they were forced to lower it even if it was just a few inches.

no flag flies higher than the stars and stripes in america.

if you dont like it, declare war and get your ass kicked once again. thats how i feel.

Godfather
06-15-2008, 07:59 PM
it woulda been interesting to see how things woulda worked out if the south woulda won their war.

We'd have had it made :sofunny:

SteelersMongol
06-15-2008, 10:15 PM
I guess the Confederate flag is better than friggin' Nazi flag.

U guys should've seen some of those idiots here that fly Nazi-like flags in my country. :doh: The thing is those guys think that it represents only nationalistic ideas. But I think it represents far more things than just nationalistic idea. Hatred & stupidity, to be exact.

I've seen cars with those flags, & people who used Nazi flag as their avatars. When I tried to argue with some of them online, they think they have the right to use them just because some of the early Mongols had used them, long before Hitler's nazis. :doh: What they don't understand is when those early Mongols used them it had different meaning into it. And now the swastika has whole different meaning in the eyes of the whole world thanks to Hitler. :banging:

Huge confusion over being nationalistic vs. patriotic. :mad:

vasteeler
06-16-2008, 06:35 AM
YEE HAW now all we need is Budwiser , NASCAR, loose a few teeth and hate every one whose not white. Thats what that flag means these days.

HometownGal
06-16-2008, 06:40 AM
I fly my Steelers flag in front of my porch. :tt02:

vasteeler
06-16-2008, 07:02 AM
I fly my Steelers flag in front of my porch. :tt02:

now that should be our national flag

Dino 6 Rings
06-16-2008, 08:37 AM
As long as it isn't a Crescent Moon I don't give a crap what kind of flag you fly as long as you have a United States of American flag flying higher.

but if you fly a Crescant Moon anywhere that I can see, I will take it as a declaration of war and will take action accordingly.

millwalldavey
06-16-2008, 12:24 PM
I've seen cars with those flags, & people who used Nazi flag as their avatars. When I tried to argue with some of them online, they think they have the right to use them just because some of the early Mongols had used them, long before Hitler's nazis. :doh: What they don't understand is when those early Mongols used them it had different meaning into it. And now the swastika has whole different meaning in the eyes of the whole world thanks to Hitler. :banging:



Yeah... the swastika was actually drived from a religious symbol and an ancient symbol representing peace. Funny that.

Steelerstrength
06-16-2008, 02:00 PM
I thought I would click on your link to see what the Confederacy was all about, and see why someone would be so proud to fly the flag. The Constitution for the Confederate States of America could not be clearer in what they stood for, belief beyond a doubt, and enforced as law.
Here are the sections that stand out in the reason for not flying the flag.
___________________________________________
We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity-invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God - do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America.
Article IV.
Section 2
3) No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.

Section 3
(3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
_________________________________________

Click on the words “negro slavery” to see a sketch of a slave auction. Then within the pages of “Harpers Weekly” click on the page entitled “Description of a Slave Auction”.

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-16-2008, 02:28 PM
Under some variation of the Stars & Stripes we have seen discrimination against Native Americans...Slavery and the subsequent discrimination against blacks...discrimination against women....against Japanese Americans during World War II.

All of these were the unfortunate growing pains of a country that had to become educated...that had to learn how to judge a person by the content of his heart and not the color of his skin.

I would die for that Flag...precisely because we have been given the latitude in this country to learn from our mistakes...We are putting aside our prejudices, not as a governmental mandate in which we dont change the heart and are forced into false acts regimented by law...but through genuine love of freedom that we want not only for ourselves but through the realization that it belongs to everyone.

The Confederate flag belonged to a group of people who cared very little about the issue of slavery (only 26% of families owned slaves)...and cared more about what they perceived as a Government that had overstepped his original intent and was infringing upon State rights (Wrongly, I believe...but that was their belief).

I hate prejudism with every fiber of my body and would give my life to defend the freedom of ALL men regardless of race or religion...but I dont care one bit about wether someone flies the Stars & Bars...Bigotry is in the heart, not on the cloth.

Godfather
06-16-2008, 03:15 PM
YEE HAW now all we need is Budwiser , NASCAR, loose a few teeth and hate every one whose not white. Thats what that flag means these days.

Hey now, don't knock Bud :tt03:

Steelerstrength
06-16-2008, 04:01 PM
Under some variation of the Stars & Stripes we have seen discrimination against Native Americans...Slavery and the subsequent discrimination against blacks...discrimination against women....against Japanese Americans during World War II.

All of these were the unfortunate growing pains of a country that had to become educated...that had to learn how to judge a person by the content of his heart and not the color of his skin.

I would die for that Flag...precisely because we have been given the latitude in this country to learn from our mistakes...We are putting aside our prejudices, not as a governmental mandate in which we dont change the heart and are forced into false acts regimented by law...but through genuine love of freedom that we want not only for ourselves but through the realization that it belongs to everyone.

The Confederate flag belonged to a group of people who cared very little about the issue of slavery (only 26% of families owned slaves)...and cared more about what they perceived as a Government that had overstepped his original intent and was infringing upon State rights (Wrongly, I believe...but that was their belief).

I hate prejudism with every fiber of my body and would give my life to defend the freedom of ALL men regardless of race or religion...but I dont care one bit about wether someone flies the Stars & Bars...Bigotry is in the heart, not on the cloth.

26% or not, when you place your beliefs in the Constitution, that is precisely what you stand for. Otherwise, why have it written?

When someone chooses to fly that flag, how are we to know whether they are the "bigot" or the other?

Defending freedom and speaking out against bigotry, and it's symbols, are two very different actions.

revefsreleets
06-16-2008, 06:06 PM
On a lighter note (if that's even possible in this thread), I have a memory etched deeply in my mind from a drive I once took in Florida. I was driving east on route 50 heading from the west coast into Orlando, and I passed a scene to behold: A big red pick-up truck with a giant rebel flag (I mean this thing was like 4' X 6') mounted in the center of the bed of the truck flapping wildly in the breeze. There's no real question at all whether the driver of this particular truck would have been in the 26th percentile. Much to his chagrin (and my amusement), he was driving his own personal "General Lee" a little too fast for the very large, very not amused black State Highway patrolman who pulled him over. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that conversation...

As for the rest of the argument, we make laws now to protect the teeniest tiniest minorities very sensitive feelings in this country. If a symbol as controversial as the rebel flag pisses off as many people as it does (and I'd wager it's probably not just the 12-14% of African-Americans who are offended by it), then it needs to go. There are always other ways to display your pride and culture that won't piss off a ton of people.

Hawk Believer
06-16-2008, 06:31 PM
I have never bought the whole "it was about states' rights, not slavery" argument. What was the major "state rights" issue that led to the Southern succession? It was entirely about slavery and the fear that rich slave owners in the South and the related economy would be undermined in the future.

Many people forget that the Federal government never even outlawed slavery in the South until well after they rebelled. Lincoln had no intention of getting rid of slavery when he entered office; his priority was to save the Union. The Federal govenment had banned slavery in states that were to be admitted to the union, not to states that already allowed it.

So when I hear the state rights argument, I tend to ask what state right was at issues other than that of slavery and maintaining a slave based economy when the South abandoned the USA. Any takers?

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-17-2008, 07:34 AM
26% or not, when you place your beliefs in the Constitution, that is precisely what you stand for. Otherwise, why have it written?


Abortion is legal in this country...but I will NEVER "place my belief" in it, and it will never be "what I stand for". Your statement doesnt stand up to reason.


When someone chooses to fly that flag, how are we to know whether they are the "bigot" or the other?

You dont...you wont...pay more attention to the acts of bigots and less on their percieved "symbols".

Defending freedom and speaking out against bigotry, and it's symbols, are two very different actions

I think I made it very clear that i care enough to fight for freedom in this country...and my post most clearly spoke out against bigotry....so I'm not sure what your point is.

Simply put....If one has a problem with Prostitution on Main street of your town...and you want the prostitution to STOP on main street....It does very little good to change the name of the street to "Center" street.
Yes, technically there is no longer prostitution on Main street, but in reality you have changed NOTHING.
Banning "symbols" will only make bigots change the symbol...(changing Main street to Center street) it does NOTHING to change the heart and the mind.

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-17-2008, 08:22 AM
I have never bought the whole "it was about states' rights, not slavery" argument. What was the major "state rights" issue that led to the Southern succession? It was entirely about slavery and the fear that rich slave owners in the South and the related economy would be undermined in the future.

Many people forget that the Federal government never even outlawed slavery in the South until well after they rebelled. Lincoln had no intention of getting rid of slavery when he entered office; his priority was to save the Union. The Federal govenment had banned slavery in states that were to be admitted to the union, not to states that already allowed it.

So when I hear the state rights argument, I tend to ask what state right was at issues other than that of slavery and maintaining a slave based economy when the South abandoned the USA. Any takers?

I am a history buff...my great great grandfather fought for the north and was wounded at Fort Donaldson but rejoined his company for the siege of Vicksburg. Lincoln never freed the slaves until two years into the war..but there were technically three reasons that the south formed its own government.

CULTURAL—The people of the North and South found it very difficult to agree on social and political issues bhecause of cultural differences..The North was mainly an urban society in which people held factory jobs....The South was primarily an agricultural society in which people lived in small villages and worked on farms and plantations.

ECONOMIC---The North was a manufacturing region and its people favored tariffs that protected factory owners and workers from foreign competition. Simply put, the south was being taxed pretty heavily on the cotton that was being sent to the North and there was major tariffs on cotton sold to foreign countries. The Southerners opposed tariffs that would cause prices of manufactured goods to increase. and the Planters were concerned that England may stop buying cotton from the South if tariffs were added.

CONSTITUTIONAL—A major conflict was states’ rights versus a strong central government. This conflict predated the Civil War by generations...in fact prominant Virginians such as Patrick Henry voiced concerns about the make up of the central Government as it was being formed...He was adamant about State rights over that of the Federal government and that same sentiment was prominant in the South up until the South formed the Confederate States. Southerners felt that they had the power to declare any national law illegal. Northerners believed that the national government’s power was supreme over the states.

Now...that being said...There is no doubt that from an economic point of view there were some Landowners that were petrified of losing their workbase if Slavery was abolished...but since only 26% of the southern families were slaveowners...this issue didnt affect the average southerner as much as the other issues.
You also have to take into consideration that alot of the more rural southerners were relatively self-sufficient and could have probably cared less about the mechanics behind government politics...but once the south formed its own government and war started...they would have considered the Northern Forces an invading army..and would have taken up arms out of a "sense" of duty.

MasterOfPuppets
06-17-2008, 08:41 AM
Now...that being said...There is no doubt that from an economic point of view there were some Landowners that were petrified of losing their workbase if Slavery was abolished...but since only 26% of the southern families were slaveowners...this issue didnt affect the average southerner as much as the other issues.
You also have to take into consideration that alot of the more rural southerners were relatively self-sufficient and could have probably cared less about the mechanics behind government politics...but once the south formed its own government and war started...they would have considered the Northern Forces an invading army..and would have taken up arms out of a "sense" of duty.so thats what my history teacher babbled about for a whole semester??? :scratchchin: i just learned more in one paragraph, then i did in 9 weeks.......:applaudit:

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-17-2008, 09:08 AM
so thats what my history teacher babbled about for a whole semester??? :scratchchin: i just learned more in one paragraph, then i did in 9 weeks.......:applaudit:

Please send your tuition fee of $1,200 to:
College of LLT
PO Box 123
Bloomington IL, 61701

Steelerstrength
06-17-2008, 01:20 PM
Abortion is legal in this country...but I will NEVER "place my belief" in it, and it will never be "what I stand for". Your statement doesnt stand up to reason.




You dont...you wont...pay more attention to the acts of bigots and less on their percieved "symbols".



I think I made it very clear that i care enough to fight for freedom in this country...and my post most clearly spoke out against bigotry....so I'm not sure what your point is.

Simply put....If one has a problem with Prostitution on Main street of your town...and you want the prostitution to STOP on main street....It does very little good to change the name of the street to "Center" street.
Yes, technically there is no longer prostitution on Main street, but in reality you have changed NOTHING.
Banning "symbols" will only make bigots change the symbol...(changing Main street to Center street) it does NOTHING to change the heart and the mind.

This is not about you, LLT. This is about the very first Constitution of the Confederate States. The recognizable significance of this document clearly represents the full intent of those in power, and those they represented. The language is precise as to what they forcefully believed with their hearts "...in the favor and guidance of almighty God."

And, you did indeed speak out against bigotry. No applause neccessary. But, once again, this is not about you. This is about someone actively and consciously choosing to fly a flag that incites hatred, racism and bigotry, and they know it.

I have no disagreement with any of your argument. Just a different perspective that required clarification. :thumbsup:

MasterOfPuppets
06-17-2008, 01:43 PM
This is about someone actively and consciously choosing to fly a flag that incites hatred, racism and bigotry, and they know it. you can pluck the feathers off a rooster, but thats not goin to stop it from waken you up at dawn, and it'll grow new feathers.

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-17-2008, 01:51 PM
you can pluck the feathers off a rooster, but thats not goin to stop it from waken you up at dawn, and it'll grow new feathers.

BINGO!!!

Banning a bigots flag would be the equivelant of me forcing the ACLU into taking their signs down. It doesnt change their agenda and doesnt change their beliefs...

If I want a bigot to change what can I do?

In the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes :
The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye: The more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract.

Call out a bigots ignorance and watch them scurry into the shadows. Take away their flag and they remain ignorant....without a flag.

TroysBadDawg
06-17-2008, 02:36 PM
but if you fly a Crescant Moon anywhere that I can see, I will take it as a declaration of war and will take action accordingly.

I will join your army!

AS I said previously, The Gadsden Flag "Don't Tread On Me" (my personal favorite of historical flags) and I do fly that flag at my home. http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/images/gadsden-flap.gif

This image is the Culpeper minuteman flag which I want to get.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51P7XW1GAJL._SL500_AA280_.jpg

That and the first official Navy flag that is still flown today over the oldest commissioned navel ship afloat. The First Navy Jack is enjoying renewed popularity these days thanks to an order from the Secretary of the Navy that directs all U.S. Navy ships to fly the First Navy Jack for the duration of the War on Terrorism. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/Naval_Jack_of_the_United_States.svg/250px-Naval_Jack_of_the_United_States.svg.png

TroysBadDawg
06-17-2008, 02:40 PM
i say let the southerners fly their flag. its kinda cute, like brownsfans bragging about all their dominance of the past and hanging championship banners in their driveway. :yawn:


And Steeler fans bragging about one for the thumb, when neither teams fans actually won anything, it was the team that did it. But then, they were in the past also weren't they? ooops hijacking the thread so sorry but had to stand up for the Browns.

BTW it is Browns Fans. LOL

millwalldavey
06-17-2008, 02:44 PM
you can pluck the feathers off a rooster, but thats not goin to stop it from waken you up at dawn, and it'll grow new feathers.

Thats why I do what I do. Cant fly it anymore once its burned! Buy another one, we'll burn another one!

tony hipchest
06-17-2008, 04:05 PM
And Steeler fans bragging about one for the thumb, when neither teams fans actually won anything, it was the team that did it. But then, they were in the past also weren't they? ooops hijacking the thread so sorry but had to stand up for the Browns.

BTW it is Browns Fans. LOLyes. but unlike the one for my thumb (2005), the Confederate States of America and the Browns championships are from the 1800's. :applaudit:

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-17-2008, 04:12 PM
yes. but unlike the one for my thumb (2005), the Confederate States of America and the Browns championships are from the 1800's. :applaudit:

LMAO!!!!!:thumbsup:

Preacher
06-17-2008, 05:11 PM
yes. but unlike the one for my thumb (2005), the Confederate States of America and the Browns championships are from the 1800's. :applaudit:


Game...

Set....

Match!!!


:rofl:

TBD... Sorry.. but that one gets marked up for TH...

and I am not biased at all!!!

TroysBadDawg
06-17-2008, 10:57 PM
Excuse me but 1964 is a far cry fom the 1800's and that was a NFL Championship.

Part of the Art Modell mistake. The Steelers were lucky not to get him.

But that aside, it was still a championship wasn't it, so was 1946 thru 1950 then 1954, 1055, and 1964 then it became the Superbowl, same thing ... a Championship with more glitter and glitz but a Championship all the same. Now count them, 8 championships with 7 Division titles from 1950 to 1962, I guess that only leave room for both thumbs the way some count for championships. All the finger have been taken.

But again I fifn't play on any of those teams, so I truely can't claim the Championship.

It reminds me of when I played football and the fans ran around yelling "We're Number One." The team is number one not the fans, they don't take the hits, the bruises lose the blood and leave it all on the field.

Well some fans may leave it in the parking lot maybe in the car or along side the road, but they didn't play the game is all I am trying to say.

Did that make it any clearer? Our wins and your are all in the past, tomorrow is another day, some things change some things take time to change. It is like a pendulum, it swings one way then another, it happens to all teams. Does anybody remember the 60's?

tony hipchest
06-17-2008, 11:03 PM
Excuse me but 1964 is a far cry fom the 1800's and that was a NFL Championship.

Part of the Art Modell mistake. The Steelers were lucky not to get him.

But that aside, it was still a championship wasn't it, so was 1946 thru 1950 then 1954, 1055, and 1964 then it became the Superbowl, same thing ... a Championship with more glitter and glitz but a Championship all the same. Now count them, 8 championships with 7 Division titles from 1950 to 1962, I guess that only leave room for both thumbs the way some count for championships. All the finger have been taken.

But again I fifn't play on any of those teams, so I truely can't claim the Championship.

It reminds me of when I played football and the fans ran around yelling "We're Number One." The team is number one not the fans, they don't take the hits, the bruises lose the blood and leave it all on the field.

Well some fans may leave it in the parking lot maybe in the car or along side the road, but they didn't play the game is all I am trying to say.

Did that make it any clearer? Our wins and your are all in the past, tomorrow is another day, some things change some things take time to change. It is like a pendulum, it swings one way then another, it happens to all teams. Does anybody remember the 60's?my bad. :dang:

i shouldve stated that the browns championships and the confederate were all from the civil war era...

semantics aside, the confederate and their flag are not having a revival, and clearly a thing of the past.

much like a certain franchise :tt02:

Preacher
06-18-2008, 01:39 AM
Excuse me but 1964 is a far cry fom the 1800's and that was a NFL Championship.

Part of the Art Modell mistake. The Steelers were lucky not to get him.

But that aside, it was still a championship wasn't it, so was 1946 thru 1950 then 1954, 1055, and 1964 then it became the Superbowl, same thing ... a Championship with more glitter and glitz but a Championship all the same. Now count them, 8 championships with 7 Division titles from 1950 to 1962, I guess that only leave room for both thumbs the way some count for championships. All the finger have been taken.

But again I fifn't play on any of those teams, so I truely can't claim the Championship.

It reminds me of when I played football and the fans ran around yelling "We're Number One." The team is number one not the fans, they don't take the hits, the bruises lose the blood and leave it all on the field.

Well some fans may leave it in the parking lot maybe in the car or along side the road, but they didn't play the game is all I am trying to say.

Did that make it any clearer? Our wins and your are all in the past, tomorrow is another day, some things change some things take time to change. It is like a pendulum, it swings one way then another, it happens to all teams. Does anybody remember the 60's?
Ah...

But there IS a major difference. The Steelers won their championship when they had to be better than all the other teams in the old NFL AND AFL.

See, there were more teams, a merged league, more competition, thus, a different type of championship...

You truly can't claim to be the best if there is another league out there that also has a champion.

And before that... well heck, anyone can be champions of a 4 team league!!!! :poke:

Hawk Believer
06-18-2008, 02:17 AM
I am a history buff...my great great grandfather fought for the north and was wounded at Fort Donaldson but rejoined his company for the siege of Vicksburg. Lincoln never freed the slaves until two years into the war..but there were technically three reasons that the south formed its own government.

CULTURAL—The people of the North and South found it very difficult to agree on social and political issues bhecause of cultural differences..The North was mainly an urban society in which people held factory jobs....The South was primarily an agricultural society in which people lived in small villages and worked on farms and plantations. Yes, there were cultural differences for sure. The most offensive cultural development for Southerners prior to the Civil War was the rise of a very fervent Abolisionist movement in the North.

ECONOMIC---The North was a manufacturing region and its people favored tariffs that protected factory owners and workers from foreign competition. Simply put, the south was being taxed pretty heavily on the cotton that was being sent to the North and there was major tariffs on cotton sold to foreign countries. The Southerners opposed tariffs that would cause prices of manufactured goods to increase. and the Planters were concerned that England may stop buying cotton from the South if tariffs were added.
Yes, a Southern state did consider succeeding because of tarriffs. But that was back in the 1830s and wasn't an issue during the Civil War.

Back in 1928 he government had made poor decisions regarding tariffs decades before the Civil War. The "Tariff of Abominations" was poorly concieved and tried to favor Northern Industrialists too much. It hurt many industries like boat bulding in the North as well as plantation economies. B that was back in the 1830's. South Carolina almosted succeeded at that time in protest of this economic policy, but rebellion was averted during the Nullification Crisis when the tariff was emasculated.

Tarriffs were not a significant issue in decades after in relation to the War. If you read the delarations of Succession that were published by a few of the Confederate states, they make very little mention of economic issues (unrelated to slavery) and focus almost exclusvely on slavery issues. All the final attempts in government by Northerners and Southerners to avert succession focused on the slavery issue, not tariffs or economic policy.


CONSTITUTIONAL—A major conflict was states’ rights versus a strong central government. This conflict predated the Civil War by generations...in fact prominant Virginians such as Patrick Henry voiced concerns about the make up of the central Government as it was being formed...He was adamant about State rights over that of the Federal government and that same sentiment was prominant in the South up until the South formed the Confederate States. Southerners felt that they had the power to declare any national law illegal. Northerners believed that the national government’s power was supreme over the states.

Yes, the nation has been debating state vs. federal rights since the Founding Fathers were duking it out over the issue. But what was the particular issue that got the South so fired up about states rights that they succeeded? It was slavery of course. They were mad that the Federal government was outlawing slavery in new states primarily and feared that the government might some day have the audacity to say that black people may actually be men and are endowed with certain unalienable rights...

Now...that being said...There is no doubt that from an economic point of view there were some Landowners that were petrified of losing their workbase if Slavery was abolished...but since only 26% of the southern families were slaveowners...this issue didnt affect the average southerner as much as the other issues.
You also have to take into consideration that alot of the more rural southerners were relatively self-sufficient and could have probably cared less about the mechanics behind government politics...but once the south formed its own government and war started...they would have considered the Northern Forces an invading army..and would have taken up arms out of a "sense" of duty.

I don't buy the 26% argument. So 1 out of 4 Southerners was a slave owner. (serious question here - Did that sample include slaves themselves?) The mega-rich slave owners (a small number of that 26%) owned most of the slaves. But they were regarded almost as patricians and wielded an incredibel amount of power and influence over a largely uneducated and deperatly poor white population. Just because a person didn't own a slave didn't mean that he didn't rely on the fruits they bore to improve his quality of life. To suggest that the average Southerner didn't percieve the institution of slavery as a key component of his or her quality of life seems pretty revisionist.

The plantation owners also did a masterful job of reducing potential class conflicts between themselves and poor whites. By working side by side with "average" Southerners on Slave Patrols, the engendered a perception of egalitarianism and unity with their numerous poor white neighbors and reinforced a stable class structure that placated the lower class whites by ensuring they were not on the bottom of the social rung. By use of devices like Slave Patrols, the upper class was able to direct potential animus from white people towards the slave or black population.

One of the biggest arguments for suggesting that Slavery was the primary reason the Civil War was fought comes from Alexander Stephens, the former Vice President of the Confederacy. He gave "The Cornerstone Speech" when he introduced the Confederate Constitution. Its got its name from his declaration therein saying that:
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea (from Jefferson's suggestion that slavery was wrong); its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.]

Stephens then goes on to say.....
The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.
So I guess when I hear the people who led the Rebellion stating that they succeeded because of slavery, I am more prone to trust their declarations than apologists who would prefer to see it differently.

BTW, I hope I am not conveying a tone of nastiness with this response LLT. I realize its hard to have a reasonable debate regarding potentially charged issues like these without a someone getting into ad hominem attacks. I like history too and look forward to seeing you and other people attack what I said here in the hopes I will learn something new.:drink:

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-18-2008, 08:17 AM
BTW, I hope I am not conveying a tone of nastiness with this response LLT. I realize its hard to have a reasonable debate regarding potentially charged issues like these without a someone getting into ad hominem attacks. I like history too and look forward to seeing you and other people attack what I said here in the hopes I will learn something new.:drink:

No problem...you are not coming across as "nasty"...but let me clarify my stance before we debate...

There is no doubt the the State Governments of the South had a vested interest in the institute of slavery...I wont argue that the governments and their Declarations of Secession were very openly pro-slavery....but I contend that they were using the slavery issue as proof that the Federal Government was infringing upon State rights.


The Governments of the south would have NEVER been able to secede from the Union based on slavery...but had to play upon the common (non-slave owning) mans pride in his state and the generational feeling that the Federal government was "infringing" upon State rights.... was unfairly taxing the Southern states...and was disregarding the "belief" of the Southern states that the Constitution & Declaration of Independence was written specifically for the "independent" states of America....and yes used slavery as a way to prove this.

They "used" the issue of slavery to prove this point...they used the issue of taxes to prove this point...they used the issue of the wording of the Declaration of Independence to prove the point....But these are just blocks in the underlying foundation that the War was over State rights as opposed to Federal rights.

Jeremy
06-18-2008, 08:23 AM
What's kind of amusing about all of this is that we live in an era where State's Rights have been almost totally eliminated and the Federal Government exercises almost unchecked power.

If the Secessionists were able to see America today, we'd be in for a long round of I told you sos.

millwalldavey
06-18-2008, 09:13 AM
Now count them, 8 championships with 7 Division titles from 1950 to 1962, I guess that only leave room for both thumbs the way some count for championships. All the finger have been taken.


Check your math... 4 between 1950 and 1962... not 8. 4 of those came in the AAFC and were before 1950. Not tough to win a 6-8 team league really.

millwalldavey
06-18-2008, 09:18 AM
This is a good discussion we are having here. So many people are disillusioned and unknowledgable of history. I would wager 50% of the people in this country think the Civil War was fought to free slaves exclusively. Sounds like a nice Hollywood plot, which unfortunately seems to be what drives most of our common knowledge in this country.

Jeremy
06-18-2008, 10:14 AM
This is a good discussion we are having here. So many people are disillusioned and unknowledgable of history. I would wager 50% of the people in this country think the Civil War was fought to free slaves exclusively. Sounds like a nice Hollywood plot, which unfortunately seems to be what drives most of our common knowledge in this country.

Revisionist history....what are you going to do.

Godfather
06-18-2008, 10:21 AM
I don't buy the 26% argument. So 1 out of 4 Southerners was a slave owner. (serious question here - Did that sample include slaves themselves?) The mega-rich slave owners (a small number of that 26%) owned most of the slaves. But they were regarded almost as patricians and wielded an incredibel amount of power and influence over a largely uneducated and deperatly poor white population. Just because a person didn't own a slave didn't mean that he didn't rely on the fruits they bore to improve his quality of life. To suggest that the average Southerner didn't percieve the institution of slavery as a key component of his or her quality of life seems pretty revisionist.


Another point regarding the 26% argument: Several poor, nonslaveholding areas of the South sided with the Union. Western NC, eastern Tennessee, western Virginia, the "Free State of Winston" in Alabama, Winn Parish in Louisiana...

I think the 26% is 26% of the white population. But Louisiana throws a little extra confusion into the mix, as there were mixed-race plantation owners there.

millwalldavey
06-18-2008, 10:54 AM
Revisionist history....what are you going to do.

All history is in some whays revisionist... the powers that be twist it to suit thier agendas.

Dino 6 Rings
06-18-2008, 11:56 AM
Back when I was in the Army, I was stationed in Sweinfurt Germany in 92-94. At the time, I was a big Bob Marley fan. I had a flag, that I hung in the window of my barrack room. (Single Soldier Policy of Life had just kicked in) and I was proud to show my love of Bob Marley. However, it was his face super implanted over the flag of Jamaica. I didn't care about that, I was just a Marley fan.

So this Good Ole Boy Lt Colonel, saw the flag one day in my window, and declared that it didn't belong in the window. He sent word down to my CO, who went to my LT, who went to my TC (Tank Commander) and had the message given to me to remove the flag. When I asked why, I was told because it wasn't an American Flag it couldn't be seen outside. So I was cool, I took it down as ordered.

The next day I noticed, Rebel Flags in windows. Quite a few in fact. So I went to my TC, who went to my LT who then took me to the Major, and I had to explain that I was offended by the fact that while serving in the United States Army, there were flags of a rebel faction of the United States hanging in windows. I was of coarse just being an arsehole, which was my habit at the time, and the Lt Colonel ordered me into his office. After a quick 15 minute discussion (And the moment I walked in the Lt Colonel realized I was White and not Black) his attitude toward my Bob Marley flag changed. He initially ordered all Rebel Flags down. For about a week. Then word came down from the top, that we could fly any flag we wanted, in honor of heritage as long as we displayed an American Flag in an opposing window hung higher. Which I of coarse had an American Flag handy, and hung back up my Bob Marley Jamaica flag and my Stars and Stripes. The Rebel Flags all went back up, as did more American Flags.

I did make a few friends out if with the black guys I was in the barracks with. They liked me more for taking a stance, but the good ole boys in other units, not so friendly for a while.

Anyway, wanted to share that story (If you ever served in Sweinfurt, 92-94, I'm the guy known simply as V )

lamberts-lost-tooth
06-18-2008, 12:53 PM
Another point regarding the 26% argument: Several poor, nonslaveholding areas of the South sided with the Union. Western NC, eastern Tennessee, western Virginia, the "Free State of Winston" in Alabama, Winn Parish in Louisiana...

I think the 26% is 26% of the white population. But Louisiana throws a little extra confusion into the mix, as there were mixed-race plantation owners there.

Non-slave Southern Illinois almost split to join the union but was persuaded by John A. Logan to remain with the North....Even so...there were many southern sympathizers who smuggled northern guns and even cannons to the south.

Preacher
06-18-2008, 01:39 PM
Back when I was in the Army, I was stationed in Sweinfurt Germany in 92-94. At the time, I was a big Bob Marley fan. I had a flag, that I hung in the window of my barrack room. (Single Soldier Policy of Life had just kicked in) and I was proud to show my love of Bob Marley. However, it was his face super implanted over the flag of Jamaica. I didn't care about that, I was just a Marley fan.

So this Good Ole Boy Lt Colonel, saw the flag one day in my window, and declared that it didn't belong in the window. He sent word down to my CO, who went to my LT, who went to my TC (Tank Commander) and had the message given to me to remove the flag. When I asked why, I was told because it wasn't an American Flag it couldn't be seen outside. So I was cool, I took it down as ordered.

The next day I noticed, Rebel Flags in windows. Quite a few in fact. So I went to my TC, who went to my LT who then took me to the Major, and I had to explain that I was offended by the fact that while serving in the United States Army, there were flags of a rebel faction of the United States hanging in windows. I was of coarse just being an arsehole, which was my habit at the time, and the Lt Colonel ordered me into his office. After a quick 15 minute discussion (And the moment I walked in the Lt Colonel realized I was White and not Black) his attitude toward my Bob Marley flag changed. He initially ordered all Rebel Flags down. For about a week. Then word came down from the top, that we could fly any flag we wanted, in honor of heritage as long as we displayed an American Flag in an opposing window hung higher. Which I of coarse had an American Flag handy, and hung back up my Bob Marley Jamaica flag and my Stars and Stripes. The Rebel Flags all went back up, as did more American Flags.

I did make a few friends out if with the black guys I was in the barracks with. They liked me more for taking a stance, but the good ole boys in other units, not so friendly for a while.

Anyway, wanted to share that story (If you ever served in Sweinfurt, 92-94, I'm the guy known simply as V )

Great story...

and actually a smart decision in the end to hand an American flag higher...

Jeremy
06-18-2008, 01:47 PM
Non-slave Southern Illinois almost split to join the union but was persuaded by John A. Logan to remain with the North....Even so...there were many southern sympathizers who smuggled northern guns and even cannons to the south.

I never knew that. I'm not surprised, but that's a cool historical tidbit.

SteelersMongol
06-18-2008, 08:19 PM
Back when I was in the Army, I was stationed in Sweinfurt Germany in 92-94. At the time, I was a big Bob Marley fan. I had a flag, that I hung in the window of my barrack room. (Single Soldier Policy of Life had just kicked in) and I was proud to show my love of Bob Marley. However, it was his face super implanted over the flag of Jamaica. I didn't care about that, I was just a Marley fan.

So this Good Ole Boy Lt Colonel, saw the flag one day in my window, and declared that it didn't belong in the window. He sent word down to my CO, who went to my LT, who went to my TC (Tank Commander) and had the message given to me to remove the flag. When I asked why, I was told because it wasn't an American Flag it couldn't be seen outside. So I was cool, I took it down as ordered.

The next day I noticed, Rebel Flags in windows. Quite a few in fact. So I went to my TC, who went to my LT who then took me to the Major, and I had to explain that I was offended by the fact that while serving in the United States Army, there were flags of a rebel faction of the United States hanging in windows. I was of coarse just being an arsehole, which was my habit at the time, and the Lt Colonel ordered me into his office. After a quick 15 minute discussion (And the moment I walked in the Lt Colonel realized I was White and not Black) his attitude toward my Bob Marley flag changed. He initially ordered all Rebel Flags down. For about a week. Then word came down from the top, that we could fly any flag we wanted, in honor of heritage as long as we displayed an American Flag in an opposing window hung higher. Which I of coarse had an American Flag handy, and hung back up my Bob Marley Jamaica flag and my Stars and Stripes. The Rebel Flags all went back up, as did more American Flags.

I did make a few friends out if with the black guys I was in the barracks with. They liked me more for taking a stance, but the good ole boys in other units, not so friendly for a while.

Anyway, wanted to share that story (If you ever served in Sweinfurt, 92-94, I'm the guy known simply as V )

Wow. Nice story. :thumbsup:

TroysBadDawg
06-18-2008, 09:20 PM
I am not going to get into a discussion on this board about the Browns we have 8 Championships, like it or not. YEs your championships are from a larger league that has been diluted with players of caliber that would never make the practice squad of the old teams. Then you have free agency that also ruins the game, the players are now in it for the money and not the game.

That being said, I still love my browns and screw the rest of you. I am out of here.

tony hipchest
06-18-2008, 09:31 PM
That being said, I still love my browns and screw the rest of you. I am out of here.lol.

just yankin your chain tbd.

davidgrenier
06-19-2008, 03:20 PM
we make laws now to protect the teeniest tiniest minorities very sensitive feelings in this country.

We do?

What exactly are these laws?

revefsreleets
06-19-2008, 09:21 PM
Oh boy.

LITP?

Ever hear of the ACLU?

Scientology is bad sci-fi, but it's a protected religion. There are laws that are creating trans-gendered bathrooms. Ridiculous laws that cause great expense to (especially small) business to accommodate people with disabilities that are not only unnecessary, they border on the absurd. Must I go on, because I can, oh new and mysterious stalking interloper...