"the Mooch"

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
There's a Nazi rally going on this weekend in Hot Springs. About an hour away from me. Think I may sit that one out.

Rumor has it, people have been told to carry, and leave the kids at home.
 

irk miller

You've been mostly-dead all day.
DTT BOTM WINNER
carnivorous chicken said:
Robert E. Lee is celebrated solely (or almost entirely) for leading a pro-slavery revolt against the central government of the United States. Despite what some people may want to argue -- and I'd be happy to engage on this topic -- the Civil War was fought over slavery. Robert E. Lee is celebrated because he wanted to separate from the US and create a nation based on the enslavement of others. He and his side lost, the Union won, and yet there is a debate over whether these traitors should be celebrated in public places and in front of government buildings?
While I generally agree with the intent of your post, I don't agree with the accuracy of your statement. Lee served the US military for 32 years before secession. He was a celebrated officer during the Mexican-American War and he served as Superintendent of West Point. He served the US for 32 years and the Confederacy for 4 years. He followed Virginia into the war, but he himself had nothing to do with it secession. Lee actually lobbied against secession and he was offered a senior command for the US. It could be argued that his service to the US should be celebrated, but his service to the Confederacy should not. To most people, one nullifies the other and I won't argue that point. I just think Lee isn't seen in the most accurate light and it should be pointed out.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Re: "the Mooch"

And, we're off and running.


Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Re: "the Mooch"

Now, we have Sharpton bitching about his tax dollars going to the Jefferson monument.

The Twitter responses are golden, at least.


Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Re: "the Mooch"

Damn, Antifa is going in on the rocking chairs at Cracker Barrel.

What on earth is happening these days?


Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk
 

irk miller

You've been mostly-dead all day.
DTT BOTM WINNER
What's happening is any idiot can post on YouTube, send a tweet, or share dumb shit on Facebook. The comments on those videos are priceless.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
irk miller said:
What's happening is any idiot can post on YouTube, send a tweet, or share dumb shit on Facebook. The comments on those videos are priceless.
Al Sharpton isn't just any idiot. He's like king idiot. He's influential. He goes after something, as he did the Jefferson monument, it's going to gain traction with his followers.
 

irk miller

You've been mostly-dead all day.
DTT BOTM WINNER
Haha. I was commenting on the Boston Antifa post, but yeah I've never been an Al Sharpton fan either.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Re: "the Mooch"

More folks, who actually have an audience, hopping on the Washington/Jefferson train.

That didn't take a week from the first mention of it, to people hopping on the bandwagon.


Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk
 

stroker crazy

crazy as a fox
Re: "the Mooch"

J-Rod10 said:
That didn't take a week from the first mention of it, to people hopping on the bandwagon.
It's a distinct possibility that some are using it as a distraction from more serious matters!

And some are just trolling.

Crazy
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
irk miller said:
While I generally agree with the intent of your post, I don't agree with the accuracy of your statement. Lee served the US military for 32 years before secession. He was a celebrated officer during the Mexican-American War and he served as Superintendent of West Point. He served the US for 32 years and the Confederacy for 4 years. He followed Virginia into the war, but he himself had nothing to do with it secession. Lee actually lobbied against secession and he was offered a senior command for the US. It could be argued that his service to the US should be celebrated, but his service to the Confederacy should not. To most people, one nullifies the other and I won't argue that point. I just think Lee isn't seen in the most accurate light and it should be pointed out.
I guess I would be more sympathetic to this position if a few facts weren't in the way. Despite his prior record, and despite an offer for a senior position in the Union army, he chose to defend slavery and in the process of defending slavery killed more Americans than another other general opposing Americans. That's a pretty big flaw to overcome. The monuments to Lee don't emphasize his record prior the Civil War with a caveat that says "and then there was the whole unfortunate defending slavery thing, but let's not focus on that part;" they are monuments to the Confederacy that emphasize his role as commanding an army designed to defend the practice of slavery. Although the New Orleans monument was put up in 1880, most monuments to the Confederacy were put up in the early 20th century (to reinforce Jim Crow) or in the 1960s (as a reaction to the Civil Rights Movement), and many (most?) were paid for by the Daughters of the Confederacy.

And as I mentioned earlier, Lee himself was on record as opposing monuments to the Confederacy as he predicted (sagely, I suppose) that they would prove divisive.
 

irk miller

You've been mostly-dead all day.
DTT BOTM WINNER
carnivorous chicken said:
Although the New Orleans monument was put up in 1880, most monuments to the Confederacy were put up in the early 20th century (to reinforce Jim Crow) or in the 1960s (as a reaction to the Civil Rights Movement), and many (most?) were paid for by the Daughters of the Confederacy.
I covered all that in a previous post. Your previous statement about Lee just needed more information. Like I said, I hold the same opinion, but I also prefer to have all the details on the table. There's the position of being anti-American and pro-Slavery being discussed as they relate to these monuments. Also, your position about Lee highlights a justification to remove all monuments of former slave owners, including those in the Union.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
I think we can all agree that slavery is/was abhorrent.

However, I have a hard time condemning people of that past who lived within the social constructs of their time.

We think the way we do now, because we were taught to do so. Just as those men were taught in their lifetimes.
Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't offer anything than division amongst the people.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
irk miller said:
I covered all that in a previous post. Your previous statement about Lee just needed more information. Like I said, I hold the same opinion, but I also prefer to have all the details on the table. There's the position of being anti-American and pro-Slavery being discussed as they relate to these monuments. Also, your position about Lee highlights a justification to remove all monuments of former slave owners, including those in the Union.
No, it doesn't, although I'm curious why you think it does. Not all slave holders joined a revolt against the US to defend slavery -- isn't that part of what I've been emphasizing? Others had accomplishments that are feted that have nothing to do with slavery.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
J-Rod10 said:
I think we can all agree that slavery is/was abhorrent.

However, I have a hard time condemning people of that past who lived within the social constructs of their time.

We think the way we do now, because we were taught to do so. Just as those men were taught in their lifetimes.
Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't offer anything than division amongst the people.
True -- although the social construct of the time, the 1860s, was broad and included people vehemently opposed to slavery, including many in the South. And including those of African descent in the South, it should go without saying. And abolitionist movements in (what became) the US date to the 17th century. People made choices as to whether they supported slavery, influenced by the situation around them ("how will I get my cotton picked without slavery?" e.g.). People chose to support slavery, people chose to go to war over slavery (not everyone, of course). It's not meant to be divisive Monday morning QBing, but partly it's a continuing attempt to address historical wrongs. Shouldn't be anything wrong with that in a mature society, which is why the defensiveness on one side invites questions as to motive (reinforced by idiots who march with Nazi symbols).
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
carnivorous chicken said:
True -- although the social construct of the time, the 1860s, was broad and included people vehemently opposed to slavery, including many in the South. And including those of African descent in the South, it should go without saying. And abolitionist movements in (what became) the US date to the 17th century. People made choices as to whether they supported slavery, influenced by the situation around them ("how will I get my cotton picked without slavery?" e.g.). People chose to support slavery, people chose to go to war over slavery (not everyone, of course). It's not meant to be divisive Monday morning QBing, but partly it's a continuing attempt to address historical wrongs. Shouldn't be anything wrong with that in a mature society, which is why the defensiveness on one side invites questions as to motive (reinforced by idiots who march with Nazi symbols).
I meant more of the Washington/Jefferson rumblings that are now going on, 100 years prior to the Civil War.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
Re: "the Mooch"

It's getting wild out there.

Guy is Asian to boot.


Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk
 

DTT Bike Of The Month Gallery

DTT Light or Dark

www.cognitomoto.com
https://www.townmoto.com
www.speedmotoco.com
www.jadusmotorcycleparts.com
www.lostapostle.ca/
www.sparckmoto.com
Top Bottom