Miami or Atlanta?

[Go Gators]

You work for the NSA!!!???

hahaha no!

[Go Gators]

I cant wait to cast my vote against Sunny. He goes out of his way to make sure Atlanta doesnt build mass transit. And as much as he hate Marta...we wouldnt have got the Olympics without it...and without the olympics I dont think atlanta is..what it is today. Shame on him for not helping and putting people in place to make sure it ran with the right leadership to prevent mishaps. Also, he's given nothing to the Arts. He doesnt get it...he's a red neck republican...with typical ideas that keep minorities away from his party. Besides, he ran his first campaign on the racist flag. Shame on perdue!!! Sorry if thats off the topic of Miami vs. Atlanta

Interesting you should say that. In the past few years, African Americans are the fastest growing demographic within the Republican party. Many of them, except for the NAACP die hards are finding that the Democratic party is hurting them moreso than they claim to be helping them. You can look that up and check me if you want.

Its not a racist flag. Its history. It happened, whether you like it or not. The USA would not be what it was today without that flag, no matter what side of it you are on. The Confederation was not solely about slavery. It was about the Confederates braking away from the Union, and was the MAIN reason Lincoln went to war, slavery actually had LITTLE to do with it as many from the north had their own slaves. Anyway, I think you should be careful in your sterotypes i.e. "redneck". Im sure you dont like people calling you whatever slang name you are, right?

Now, my apologies for getting even more off topic.

[atlmario]

Interesting you should say that. In the past few years, African Americans are the fastest growing demographic within the Republican party. Many of them, except for the NAACP die hards are finding that the Democratic party is hurting them moreso than they claim to be helping them. You can look that up and check me if you want.

Its not a racist flag. Its history. It happened, whether you like it or not. The USA would not be what it was today without that flag, no matter what side of it you are on. The Confederation was not solely about slavery. It was about the Confederates braking away from the Union, and was the MAIN reason Lincoln went to war, slavery actually had LITTLE to do with it as many from the north had their own slaves. Anyway, I think you should be careful in your sterotypes i.e. "redneck". Im sure you dont like people calling you whatever slang name you are, right?

Now, my apologies for getting even more off topic.

yup...if u call 9-11% of the afro american vote "fastest" growing...SURE. Onto...Miami vs. Atlanta.....GO ATL!

[Go Gators]

yup...if u call 9-11% of the afro american vote "fastest" growing...SURE. Onto...Miami vs. Atlanta.....GO ATL!

I would double check my numbers. But Ill give you the 9-11% for arguments sake, who would have thought any African Americans would side with the Republicans say 5 or 10 years ago?

Go ATL indeed!

[ryanmckibben]

I would double check my numbers. But Ill give you the 9-11% for arguments sake, who would have thought any African Americans would side with the Republicans say 5 or 10 years ago?

Go ATL indeed!

I'll just state from the start, this is way off topic, so if it should be moved to another subject, please feel free.

I have lost complete faith in both parties, as have most Americans I would venture to say. Maybe one of the reasons voter turnout is so low? The Republicans have moved to the far right and in response, and to be percieved as the "un-republican" party the Dems have moved to the far left. The result is that both parties are pandering to their political base, leaving the vast majority of the American public to pick between dumb and dumber. All the evidence you need of this party warfare is to talk to a Bush supporter about any of the issues going on in the world right now and inevitably, without fail, one of the comments you hear is "well Bill Clinton didn't do anything about this or that". Who said anythig about Clinton? (the whole "your either with us or against us" mentality I guess). My point is that to the current parties and their supporters, it must be a zero sum game. Either you support the GOP or you support the Dems. Where is the alternative to all the screaming and dumb ideas? Where is the middle ground...the silent majority?

Where is my generations Roosevelt or Kenedy? Where has that "shining city on a hill" gone? How can we lead the world by example when most of the world shakes their head in disbelief at what the Americans are doing now and how we are living?

Until that person shows up, we are left with the same old choice of the lessor of two evils!

[Kheldane]

FTAA seems very unlikely considering current political trends in Argentina, Uraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, & others. Columbia & Panama & Ecuador might be on board for it. Most Caribbean countries would probably be on board - but the whole deal would be pointless without the big southamerican players as part of the deal. The US has already negotiated separate trade deals with Chile & the Central American countries, so I don't expect FTAA to happen any time soon.

The main dispute relates to US farm subsidies & agricultural import restrictions. Basically, Brazil is an agricultural powerhouse that would completely wipe out several ag-industries in the US if allowed unrestricted access to this market. A similar thing could happen to some brazilian manufacturing (possibly to a lesser extent) if it were exposed to US manufacturing prowess. So both countries have strong business groups apposed to competing with each other...

[Go Gators]

All the evidence you need of this party warfare is to talk to a Bush supporter about any of the issues going on in the world right now and inevitably, without fail, one of the comments you hear is "well Bill Clinton didn't do anything about this or that". Who said anythig about Clinton? (the whole "your either with us or against us" mentality I guess).

I completely understand what youre saying here, but the reason that it is a common response is because the other side thinks that when W. was elected, all past problems in the world seized and all the problems of the world were wiped clean. This obviously is not the case. All current problems with administrations are directly connected with a decision from previous adminsitrations, so yes, you could trace back to H.W., Reagan, Carter...you get the picture...main point, is that a lot of problems of today were created by previous policy decisions.

Ok, sorry Im done now.

(I apologize for getting excited about political stuff on these boards, call me a nerd if you want, but its what I do.)

[Go Gators]

yup...if u call 9-11% of the afro american vote "fastest" growing...SURE. Onto...Miami vs. Atlanta.....GO ATL!

Just an interesting article to articulate what I said earlier.

http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...02/1006/OPINION

[krazeeboi]

Its not a racist flag. Its history. It happened, whether you like it or not. The USA would not be what it was today without that flag, no matter what side of it you are on.

Firstly, history can be racist, and a lot of U.S. history is indeed racist.

Secondly, you're right that the USA wouldn't be what it is today without the Confederacy, but is that for better or for worse? That's the question.

[Go Gators]

Firstly, history can be racist, and a lot of U.S. history is indeed racist.

Secondly, you're right that the USA wouldn't be what it is today without the Confederacy, but is that for better or for worse? That's the question.

I wouldnt necessarily say yes to either one, I would just say it is one of the many defining moments in history.

[Andrea]

Its not a racist flag. Its history. It happened, whether you like it or not. The USA would not be what it was today without that flag, no matter what side of it you are on. The Confederation was not solely about slavery. It was about the Confederates braking away from the Union, and was the MAIN reason Lincoln went to war, slavery actually had LITTLE to do with it as many from the north had their own slaves.

Well, as one emininent historian has remarked, there is no better way to honor one's forebears than by taking their ideas seriously. If you want to talk about actual history, South Carolina said specifically that it was about slavery when they became the first to declare secession. To understand what the Confederate flag signifies, read the Declaration of the Immediate Causes of Secession, adopted by the South Carolina secession convention in December 1860:

Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/scarsec.htm

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.

Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more erroneous religious belief.

We, therefore, the People of South Carolina, by our delegates in Convention assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the nations of the world, as a separate and independent State; with full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.

Adopted December 24, 1860

[Andrea]

Just FTR, here's what some of the other southern states said about why they were seceding:

Mississippi

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

Georgia

Texas

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

[Go Gators]

Ok, I really forgot about this thread until it was brought back up yesterday. Those are neat statements (in a historical regard), but there a documents out there that will support what I said about Lincoln going to war to preserve the Union.

All Im saying is that it is history, it happened, whether we like it or not. Calling it sheer hatred because people dont agree with it is wrong.

[krazeeboi]

It's not called hatred simply because people disagree; it's called that because, well, you read it for yourself. Unless you actually espouse the race-related premises regarding the South's desire to preserve the institution of slavery...

Just because something is historic doesn't mean we don't have the right to look upon it with disdain and disgust. All history isn't venerable.

[Go Gators]

It's not called hatred simply because people disagree; it's called that because, well, you read it for yourself. Unless you actually espouse the race-related premises regarding the South's desire to preserve the institution of slavery...

Just because something is historic doesn't mean we don't have the right to look upon it with disdain and disgust. All history isn't venerable.

I dont know what your trying to say there Krazeeboy, but I would sure hope its not whats implied...

Im not saying you cant look at it however you want, Im just saying it does have the right, just like everything else, to be displayed, discussed, remembered, or whatever anyone wants to do about it.

I would watch what you imply...

[Andrea]

Those are neat statements (in a historical regard),...

Well, the documents are not a parlor trick. They're the official, self-drafted proclamations of the southern states regarding their withdrawal from the United States of America in order to preserve slavery. They exist today just like they did then.

People often attempt to rewrite history to make it seem more palatable, but the fact is that these documents are in essence the declaration of independence by the states that became the Confederacy. They couldn't have made their opinions and intentions much plainer.

[ryanmckibben]

Go Gators...you are correct, that period in our history both existed and was an integral part in what this nation is today. The same can also be said of Germany and the Third Riech. I certainly don't think a German province adopting a Swastika flag would be either appropriate or, well...human. Slavery, no matter how big a part of our history, is moraly irreprehensible.

From a logical viewpoint, I agree with krazeeboi. This nation would have been better of without that particular institution. The short term benefits of free labor pale in comparison to the social and economic problems created when the enslaved finally earn their freedon, which historically, has a 100% chance of happening.

[Go Gators]

Well, the documents are not a parlor trick. They're the official, self-drafted proclamations of the southern states regarding their withdrawal from the United States of America in order to preserve slavery. They exist today just like they did then.

People often attempt to rewrite history to make it seem more palatable, but the fact is that these documents are in essence the declaration of independence by the states that became the Confederacy. They couldn't have made their opinions and intentions much plainer.

I agree. I sincerely meant that they were neat to read, hope it didnt come across as sarcastic or trying to be smart.

Go Gators...you are correct, that period in our history both existed and was an integral part in what this nation is today. The same can also be said of Germany and the Third Riech. I certainly don't think a German province adopting a Swastika flag would be either appropriate or, well...human. Slavery, no matter how big a part of our history, is moraly irreprehensible.

From a logical viewpoint, I agree with krazeeboi. This nation would have been better of without that particular institution. The short term benefits of free labor pale in comparison to the social and economic problems created when the enslaved finally earn their freedon, which historically, has a 100% chance of happening.

I agree with that too. But again, the Confederacy was not only based on slavery.

[krazeeboi]

I dont know what your trying to say there Krazeeboy, but I would sure hope its not whats implied...

Im not saying you cant look at it however you want, Im just saying it does have the right, just like everything else, to be displayed, discussed, remembered, or whatever anyone wants to do about it.

I would watch what you imply...

Yes, but as with everything, context is important. Understand, we're not talking about individual rights here, but collective interests. Someone can display a flag with a swastika on it if they wish. However, should such a flag be displayed and placed in a position of honor by the government, knowing that at the very least, a segment of the general population is highly offended by the symbol? All history should not get the big stamp of approval from the general population just because it's history. No one is denying the fact that "it," whatever "it" may be, happened, nor that it cannot be discussed or even displayed. But when you throw government into the picture, nothing gets the seal of approval simply because it's history. That's the inherent flaw in your argument.

[Go Gators]

Yes, but as with everything, context is important. Understand, we're not talking about individual rights here, but collective interests. Someone can display a flag with a swastika on it if they wish. However, should such a flag be displayed and placed in a position of honor by the government, knowing that at the very least, a segment of the general population is highly offended by the symbol? All history should not get the big stamp of approval from the general population just because it's history. No one is denying the fact that "it," whatever "it" may be, happened, nor that it cannot be discussed or even displayed. But when you throw government into the picture, nothing gets the seal of approval simply because it's history. That's the inherent flaw in your argument.

Oh boy, this sounds like the LSAT's all over again. Ive pretty much gotten over "flaws" in my arguments....

If what you say is true, then there should ultimately be no display of any symbols at all in all of government, (i.e. American Flag, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Eagle, etc) because every ethnic group is going to offended by something. Again, all Im saying is that there was so much more to the Confederacy than slavery, and thats why people have the right. Northerners are well documented of taking in slavery as much as the South was. The Confederacy was much more about disapproval of then current government.

This is just going to go in circles...

[Pillsbury]

^ This argument will keep going in circles because everyone keeps pointing out that every Southern state listed slavery as the reason for leaving the Union, but you keep denying that slavery had much to do with the formation of the Confederacy. I don't understand that. These people came out and said why they were fighting and yet people still deny it. Have you ever read the Cornerstone Speech? If you haven't, you should. And yeah, I thought Sonny was an idiot for telling the flaggers that they could have their precious flag back as the state flag and shoved down the throat of 9 million people, 8,900,000 of whom couldn't careless one way or the other, meanwhile making the whole state look like some backwards burg---yeah, I'm definately looking forward to voting against that guy.

And the Confederate flag is different okay. It's divisive. It's racist. I"m sorry, but that's the way it is. I know that people who fly the Confederate flag do so out of respect for their ancestors or just simply to be rebels--I realize that and I don't belittle them for it. But you cannot deny that every single time this area of the country has ever wanted to oppress or intimidate the black population they have brought out that certain flag, whether it was in 1956 in reaction to Brown v. Board of Eductation or in the countless number of cross burnings and lynchings that occurred in this part of the country during the last 100+ years.

[Go Gators]

^ This argument will keep going in circles because everyone keeps pointing out that every Southern state listed slavery as the reason for leaving the Union, but you keep denying that slavery had much to do with the formation of the Confederacy. I don't understand that.

Good Lord. Please read, and re-read my posts, and then brush up on history. I know this era inside and out. I DID NOT SAY IT WAS NOT A REASON FOR LEAVING THE UNION. I said there was much more to it in addition to that. Theres always more than what your being told. Look it up, research it, you will find it.

Oh well, I guess Im just a racist southerner who hates everyone except for prominent white people and anyone who is anti-Sonny, or thinks anything different than me. Long Live Robert E. Lee.

Give me a break.

[Andrea]

If what you say is true, then there should ultimately be no display of any symbols at all in all of government, (i.e. American Flag, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Eagle, etc) because every ethnic group is going to offended by something.

That's inaccurate and diversionary. Whatever the merits or demerits of the Confederacy may have been 150 years ago, in today's world the Confederate flag clearly symbolizes racist oppression to many millions of Americans (white, black and otherwise). There are countless ways to study, honor and enjoy the history of the South without utilizing inflammatory racist symbols. I'm a ninth generation Southerner and I had ancestors who fought bravely in the Civil War. But it's in no way necessary for me to flaunt an offensive, racist symbol in order to appreciate my heritage.

I love the South, and am as much a product of Georgia's red clay as anyone around. But the brutal and violent history of black slavery, and the century of Jim Crow that followed it, is a dark and troubling chapter in our region of the country. It's troubling that there are still people who seek to minimize and gloss it over. It's even more troubling that there are those who still defend and promote the use of public symbols which signify the racism, hatred and oppression of that era to millions of their fellow citizens.

[Pillsbury]

Good Lord. Please read, and re-read my posts, and then brush up on history. I know this era inside and out. I DID NOT SAY IT WAS NOT A REASON FOR LEAVING THE UNION. I said there was much more to it in addition to that. Theres always more than what your being told. Look it up, research it, you will find it.

Oh well, I guess Im just a racist southerner who hates everyone except for prominent white people and anyone who is anti-Sonny, or thinks anything different than me. Long Live Robert E. Lee.

Give me a break.

And you need to re-read my post. I never denied that you admitted that slavery had something to do with the Civil War, I said you deny that slavery had "much to do" with the Civil War. There is a difference and I acknowledged it. And I have researched the Civil War; history was my major in college and I've read more than a few books about the Civil War and the antebellum South, and I'm a lifelong Southerner who can trace his roots in Augusta, Georgia back to before the Revolutionary War. I've read the letters from the young Confederate soldiers fighting. I've read the speeches given by Southern politicians. I've read the speeches given by John C. Calhoun a good 15 years before the Civil War when he wanted to secede from the Union because he felt that abolitionist in the North were gaining ground (I guess he was a visionary???). What have you read? And where in the Northeast, outside of New York, were their slaves in sizable numbers like there were in the South? Where is this documented?

Once again, everyone keeps showing you evidence that what was clearly in the minds of those in power in the South was the issue of slavery. It came out in the writings and the speeches; hell, it was even declared as THE reason for leaving in the Cornerstone Speech, yet people like you continue to push it off into a corner and tell the rest of us that we just don't know the truth and that we need "research it" like we're a bunch of naive children. Give me a break man.

[Pillsbury]

The Cornerstone Speech was written Stephens, not Davis, and I apologize for the error. But it basically states that the Constitution was flawed and Stephens seeks to determine the proper place for blacks in the South: "Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the [black man] is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition." Delivered by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate State of America, to an enthusiastic crowd in Savannah, Georgia.