Denton Confederate soldiers monument being removed

[GrandGreen]

22 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

You are so wrong, it's amazing. Please, do a little tiny research before you have these beliefs.

I suspect that there is next to nothing to support your contention, other than your belief.   It was government entities erecting these statues not the KKK.  

Again, tear them down; they don't belong; but don't reinvent history to serve a revisionist view of history.

 

 

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

This is just not true. The "governments" did not fund and erect them. It's odd that you want to put your down as fact when it's out in the open who funded the statues 50 years after the war.. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Daughters_of_the_Confederacy

This is not "re-inventing."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/united-daughters-of-the-confederacy-statues-lawsuit

All the texts and reading say this is true. Except them that say "we're not Nazis." Which is true, they aren't. 

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[GrandGreen]

5 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

This is just not true. The "governments" did not fund and erect them. It's odd that you want to put your down as fact when it's out in the open who funded three statues 50 years after the war.. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Daughters_of_the_Confederacy

 

If you read your own source, it states that the Daughters of the Confederacy was a lobbying group that primarily got funding for the erection of statues to properarate the myth of the old South from Congress.   Last I heard Congress was an important part of the government. 

If you are going to use sources at least read them. 

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

8 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

If you read your own source, it states that the Daughters of the Confederacy was a lobbying group that primarily got funding for the erection of statues to properarate the myth of the old South from Congress.   Last I heard Congress was an important part of the government. 

If you are going to use sources at least read them. 

Good God man. A lobby group of racist assholes got other racist assholes to agree. The first group is racist assholes paid for the monuments. The government did not pay for it. 

The base facts are that they are racist assholes trying to reinvent history and you not being from a slave state gives your some freedom to have the real ability to see the truth. Awesome. 

They are racist assholes. This is not about the poor soldiers who didn't even own slaves. Poor them. War is filled with people that had no skin in the game except their own skin. I hope you build statues for everyone else that I makes the wrong choice for doing the wrong things for things like slavery. How's that statue for the poor Nazi soldiers that didn't even hate Jews enough to kill them personally? We should definitely put one of those up in the place of the UDC statues.

Edited June 29, 2020 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

A popular vote didn't get that statue put up at the Denton court house - likely just a city council vote. So this removal happened in the same way. It doesn't require some popular vote to remove it. It's clearly a divisive monument to an invented history is happy slavery and poor soldiers that never owned slaves. It doesn't stand the test of time. 

 

It's not in re-inventing some history. You didn't even grow up here and experience the white washing of the history. But you ran with it when you got here... 

[97and03]

6 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

I suspect that there is next to nothing to support your contention, other than your belief.   It was government entities erecting these statues not the KKK.  

Again, tear them down; they don't belong; but don't reinvent history to serve a revisionist view of history.

 

 

If you truly have an open mind about this, the video below is very informative:

 

[MCMLXXX]

6 hours ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

Good God man. A lobby group of racist assholes got other racist assholes to agree. The first group is racist assholes paid for the monuments. The government did not pay for it. 

 

One thing we can all agree upon is the fact that these “racist a*******” were all Democrats.

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

34 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:

One thing we can all agree upon is the fact that these “racist a*******” were all Democrats.

Again - you are not being completely honest with yourself. 

In name they were Democrat. Everyone knows the party lines switched with the 'Southern Strategy'. I find it very hard to believe you don't understand the most basic of facts.

Edited June 29, 2020 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[Censored by Laurie]

33 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:

One thing we can all agree upon is the fact that these “racist a*******” were all Democrats.

yup. conservative white democrats. probably like your parents. 

[Censored by Laurie]

2 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

Again - you are not being completely honest with yourself. 

white fragility is way too strong here for honesty

[MCMLXXX]

52 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

Again - you are not being completely honest with yourself. 

In name they were Democrat. Everyone knows the party lines switched with the 'Southern Strategy'. I find it very hard to believe you don't understand the most basic of facts.

Can you point to any Confederate Monument that was erected when Republicans were in charge of the jurisdiction? That is the issue. Your “Southern Strategy” argument is a straw man as it relates to erection of monuments. The issue you mentioned above was Monuments. As to CBL’s personal attack on my parents I will speak on that issue later when I have more time.

Additionally, the monument in Denton was erected under a completely Democrat Commissioner’s Court and taken down by a completely Republican Commissioner’s Court.

Prior to taking it down they created a committee led by John Baines that recommended it be left with an exhibit explaining its history etc. I had hoped the committee would recommend its removal. The entire Court voted on these matters including Bobbie Mitchell. I doubt you know John or Bobbie but they are honorable people. I am glad that the ultimate decision was to take it down. Democrats dominated the Denton County Commissioner’s Court into the 80’s and did nothing!

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by MCMLXXX

[Censored by Laurie]

8 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:

Can you point to any Confederate Monument that was erected when Republicans were in charge of the jurisdiction? That is the issue. Your “Southern Strategy” argument is a straw man as it relates to erection of monuments. The issue you mentioned above was Monuments. As to CBL’s personal attack on my parents I will speak on that issue later when I have more time.

not an attack...simply pointing out that if your parents grew up/lived in the south between the 1930s and late 1960s, they were likely fervent Democrats.  

now...how you then square that idea with your statement on racism...well that's on you, sport. 

[97and03]

Democrats in the South switched to Republicans over a period of time beginning in the 60s. Alabama Governor George Wallace was a segregationist Democrat. His politics helped lay the foundation for the modern Republic Party’s approach to white voters. 
It is why most white Southerners became Republicans. Anyone who knows anything about modern American history knows this. 

https://www.history.com/news/how-the-party-of-lincoln-won-over-the-once-democratic-south

The night that Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, his special assistant Bill Moyers was surprised to find the president looking melancholy in his bedroom. Moyers later wrote that when he asked what was wrong, Johnson replied, “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican party for a long time to come.”
 

——————————————————
In Wallace's 1998 obituary, The Huntsville Times political editor John Anderson summarized the impact from the 1968 campaign: "His startling appeal to millions of alienated white voters was not lost on Richard Nixon and other Republican strategists. First Nixon, then Ronald Reagan, and finally George Herbert Walker Bush successfully adopted toned-down versions of Wallace's anti-busing, anti-federal government platform to pry low- and middle-income whites from the Democratic New Deal coalition."^[23] Dan Carter, a professor of history at Emory University in Atlanta, added: "George Wallace laid the foundation for the dominance of the Republican Party in American society through the manipulation of racial and social issues in the 1960s and 1970s. He was the master teacher, and Richard Nixon and the Republican leadership that followed were his students."^[47]

[CMJ]

8 hours ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

How's that statue for the poor Nazi soldiers that didn't even hate Jews enough to kill them personally? 

Despite claims to the contrary, those actually exist in Germany.

 

http://www.thirdreichruins.com/memorials.htm

[MCMLXXX]

10 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

not an attack...simply pointing out that if your parents grew up/lived in the south between the 1930s and late 1960s, they were likely fervent Democrats.  

now...how you then square that idea with your statement on racism...well that's on you, sport. 

Pay attention. SWB used the term “racist a*******”. My statement is a fact. Perhaps I should have rephrased it as those you referred to as “r...”.  I have no idea what you are referring to as “ your statement on racism”.  My statement is it exists and It is a sin.

Dead men/women don’t change political parties.

Edited June 30, 2020 by MCMLXXX

[GrandGreen]

8 hours ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

Good God man. A lobby group of racist assholes got other racist assholes to agree. The first group is racist assholes paid for the monuments. The government did not pay for it. 

The base facts are that they are racist assholes trying to reinvent history and you not being from a slave state gives your some freedom to have the real ability to see the truth. Awesome. 

They are racist assholes. This is not about the poor soldiers who didn't even own slaves. Poor them. War is filled with people that had no skin in the game except their own skin. I hope you build statues for everyone else that I makes the wrong choice for doing the wrong things for things like slavery. How's that statue for the poor Nazi soldiers that didn't even hate Jews enough to kill them personally? We should definitely put one of those up in the place of the UDC statues.

Wrong than take to a wild rant to support your view.  Obviously, some confederate statues were privately funded, but that was a small percentage.   

You might take your own advice and invest in a little research before you firmly avow something as a fact.  

I got it, it is very easy to take the high road 150 years later.  Slavery was evil and lasted far too long, you are going to have to turn over a lots of rocks to find anyone that doesn't agree. 

The Civil War was a tragedy and like all history, people should learn from it; not bury it. 

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

Try to keep up - I didn't bring up any political group at all in relation to monuments. MCMLXXX brought it up as a troll statement about how democrats did it. I was only pointing out how the parties switched platforms - which is fact. Look at what party Strom Thurmond started in and which he ended in. He never switched his political philosophies - only parties. 

And now you are trying to say democrats put them up too. Which sure, I am positive the racist assholes who put them up were affiliated to the democrats. *That* is a strawman. 

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[CMJ]

I would say the parties mostly switched on race relations.  Republicans were always a party appealing to business and Wall Street though, going back to basically the founding in 1854 - certainly once the 1870's came around.  That somewhat shifted with Theodore Roosevelt, but even then Progressivism was sort of evenly divided between the two parties, just in different ways.  Taft was actually pretty progressive on fiscal stuff too, though not to TR's liking (even though he busted more Trusts than Teddy did!). 

 

But in the 1912 election, the Wilson, Debs, Roosevelt, and Taft all sorta fought in similar economic lanes.  Certainly their platforms were much closer than one would think given their were four candidates with significant support.  But even if one removes the Progressive era, the GOP has been the party of business since Harding.

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

40 minutes ago, CMJ said:

I would say the parties mostly switched on race relations. 

...and that is exactly what we are are talking about. 

We are not bringing up how the Republicans used to try to protect the nation's resources (national parks, EPA, etc)  and believed in science. 

Edited June 29, 2020 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[CMJ]

You can't give Republicans sole possession of those issues though.  Republicans and Democrats did conservation (the NPS was actually created under Woodrow Wilson).  All I am saying is many people legitimately seem to think the parties mostly switched all beliefs during the 60's.  It was way more complicated than that.

Edited June 29, 2020 by CMJ

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

14 minutes ago, CMJ said:

You can't give Republicans sole possession of those issues though.  Republicans and Democrats did conservation (the NPS was actually created under Woodrow Wilson).  All I am saying is many people legitimately seem to think the parties mostly switched all beliefs during the 60's.  It was way more complicated than that.

EPA was voted nearly bi-partisan with some Republicans voting against - though since Nixon was at he helm, he gets the credit. Obviously there used to be more issues that both parties were able to agree on (like soil conservation after the dust bowl).

With that said - I've *only* heard people talk about the switching political poles in relation to race - since other governance issues were not as opposing one another like now. Bringing up the other topics just tries to invalidate or justify why some are trying to hold onto that Lincoln is aligned to the GOP of the Southern Strategy -- when the S. Strategy was *only* focused on the politics of race. Or that the Democrats of the Civil Rights Acts were the same party of the Democrats of the KKK. It is completely disingenuous and not true. 

I've never heard the stance from the famous KKK economists and how it aligns with modern Democrats. Well - because it doesn't exist. No one confuses that when people say the parties switched sides on issues that they are talking about anything other than race. 
 

[CMJ]

Is there a famous KKK economist?  Maybe there is.  🙂

 

I'm talking about lay people.  And yes, I've read plenty on facebook about how Wilson's support of the Federal Reserve was just a way to concentrate wealth in the banking elite like modern GOP would want or other such stuff.  When people want to bring down politicians of yore, they can read history however they see fit and make it so.  It's kinda like the Bible.  Two different people can get three different interpretations based on their preconceived notions.

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

48 minutes ago, CMJ said:

Is there a famous KKK economist?  Maybe there is.

I am sure beneath the hood there were plenty, but obviously I am just commenting that KKK had not many agendas other than race relations. So trying to loosely tied them to modern Democrats is entirely absurd. 

No one is confusing the modern GOP with the old New Deal Democrats - for example. We can  acknowledge with honesty what made politicians like Thurman switch from Democrat to Republican - it was not the Democrat's stance on free education that he found so offensive. 

[Coffee and TV]

2 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

I am sure beneath the hood there were plenty, but obviously I am just commenting that KKK had not many agendas other than race relations. So trying to loosely tied them to modern Democrats is entirely absurd. 
 

Nevermind that while the roots of the KKK were the post-war Dems of the South at the time, the KKK infiltrated and aligned itself with whichever party had a stronghold. In the south that meant the Dems, but in Midwestern states it was the GOP just the same. 

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

----THIS ONE WAS  VERY EXPECTED........ especially if you know the history of it .... At the base is/was a water fountain (no longer worked) and that is where blacks had to use to drink water.... They were not permitted to use any fountains  in the Court-House.... Now think more about that ... They had to bow to get a drink and it looked like they were bowing to the CSA soldier at the top of the arch... I never saw it used that way but a history teacher in my UNT class (1965)  told us that and it made sense.  I am surprised it was still there... I suppose younger people never thought about how it was used. 

Edited June 29, 2020 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66