I am TIRED of these motherf*cking Confederates in this motherf*cking State!

[bunkerbuster1]

Why the outburst? Oh, just this piece of crap "news" item in today's Hillbilly Rag. Emphasis mine:

http://gwinnettdailypost.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=84&ArticleID=14265

LAWRENCEVILLE - If a picture is worth a thousand words, Bill Grimes would prefer they illustrate a story or two about the life of a Confederate soldier.

A photograph hanging in the gazebo adjacent to the historic courthouse in downtown Lawrenceville on Saturday to celebrate Confederate Memorial Day supplied many an untold tale, he said. Frayed from the years, the black and white portrait showed stoic, elderly men gathered at a 1912 reunion at the courthouse to mark their service as sons of Gwinnett who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War. Their eyes - like ghostly orbs - made it difficult to disagree.

<...>

"These men were representing what their political rights were, their right to own property; that's what they were fighting for," he said.

Manning a cannon with two comrades, enthusiast Steve Tobelman, a Lilburn resident, fears the war's legacy is being forgotten. "I've seen it, (teachers) are not teaching the history at all," he said. "Not just the whole story - they're not teaching it at all. That's a threat. Generations growing up won't even understand their own government or what they're fighting for."

Earth to Bill Grimes, Steve Tobelman, the god damned Gwinnett Daily Post that printed this unanswered, one-sided garbage, and every other pig-ignorant racist prick who continues to propagate this lie: The Confederate States of America's own Declaration of Independence

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

cites "Slave" or "slavery" no fewer than seventeen times.

The word "property" appears three times. Its very first reference is in the context of "property of slaves."

The only significant property rights being sought were the "rights" to own human beings as property. That is what ought to be taught in schools, and that is what needs to be remembered for as long as we continue to call ourselves the United Fucking States of America.


Ok, rant off. Have a nice day, all.

[Brewman_Jax]

1. Here's the State of Georgia's Letter of Secession

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

Let them try to explain what they REALLY meant. :freak:

[bunkerbuster1]

4. 35 references to slaves or slavery

but, hey, it wasn't about slavery.

[sun zoom spark]

5. Don't forget: slaves = properrty

The right to own "property" = the right to own slaves.

[Hoyt]

11. Great post.

For years, I've heard the argument that the civil war was not about slavery. Yet when you look at the various state's articles of secession, it's pretty clear what it was about.

Years ago, I was listening to one of the shows on Air America -- I think it might have been Randi Rhodes -- and some fool was explaining how the poor southern dirt farmers who fought in the war didn't own slaves and were therefore fighting for something else.

Rhodes (or someone) said, "yea the poor farmers were sitting around and said we better join in to protect slavery because old Mr. Beauregard ain't gonna pick his own cotton."

The ones that really tick me off are those that think displaying the confederate flag is OK. They won't accept that it is America's swastika. . . . . . or maybe that's why the support it.

[Papagoose]

2. No doubt, the Govt of the CSA fought for slavery

but did the average soldier care? I'm from Pennsylvania - a descendant of abolitionists - recently moved to Georgia. I've always had a fascination with Civil War history and never felt that the average Southerner cared much about the issue of slavery. Owning slaves was a rich man's prerogative in large part, the majority of southern men just wanted the federal government off their backs. Pre-Civil War, people were still thinking of themselves as Georgians, South Carolinians, Virginians - there was a deep-seated fear of federal power and federal mandates.

I'm not sure that Bill Grimes was referring to slavery in his quote to the paper. A poor choice of words for sure, but I don't think he meant anything sinister.

[bunkerbuster1]

3. Oh, I'm sure Mr. Grimes thinks he's all enlightened 'n such

And who knows, maybe he really doesn't have a racist bone in his body. But by being an apologist for that revisionist history that courses throughout the South about the Civil War, he's perpetuating something pretty damn ugly.

[Pineywoods Sam]

6. The Southern Secession was caused by one thing

What caused it was that there was a cultural divide between North and South. The reason for that divide was because the North was urban and the South rural.

Unfortunately, slavery was an offshoot of the rural life. And it was slavery more than anything else that caused the secession. In early December 1860, the governor of Georgia wrote an open letter to the citizens of that state trying to drum up support for secession.

http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/jbrown.html

But always remember that there were two tragic events that happened in early 1861. The first event was the Southern secession -- caused by those who would extend slavery and reopen the African slave trade.

The other event was the invasion of the South by Union troops. That last event is known as the Civil War. What was it's cause ?

[Brewman_Jax]

12. Link is gone

and please spare us the historical revisionism. The articles of secession make very plain the reasons.

As for the timeline, South Carolina (1st of the original 7) seceded on Dec. 24, 1860. The Confederacy (CSA) was formed on Feb. 7, 1861. The attack on Ft. Sumter, considered the beginning of the Civil War, happened on Apr. 12, 1861. The first formal battle of the Civil War was the (First) Battle at Bull Run on Jul. 21, 1861, which ended with victory for the CSA. Hardly an "invasion". The timeline doesn't support the "defense of home" argument extended by the historical revisionists and neo-confederates to move slavery from its prominent place as #1 reason for formation of the CSA.

[XanaDUer]

7. I hate the stupid, fucking GDP

Esp. Nate McCullough. The man with four chins who once lamented the potential inability to order fast food because a non-English speaker may take the order.

His pic shows that Nate gets his full intake of calories and then some, even if the fast-food-restaurant worker only speaks Urdu.

[mt13]

8. I just want to

make it clear that I am no relation to this Steve Tobelman!

[groundloop]

9. Instead or ranting on DU.....

Instead of a cuss filled rant on DU which will change no ones mind (because by and large we all are more or less in agreement), why not send a well thought out letter to the Gwinnett Daily Post. As President Obama has stated over and over, we're only going to change the views of those we disagree with through discussion.

[Hoyt]

10. Groudloop, I basically agree.

However, after growing up with these folks in the late 1950s and 1960s, those that still cling to the "states rights to discriminate" aren't going to change their bigoted views at this point.