Half Moon Bay Review
TalkAbout Start a topic Login Create Login Forgot Password  
All Categories Around Town Elections Entertainment/Dining Schools
City Council Environment Sports Beyond the Coastside Catch All
Clay Lambert's Blog Mark Foyer's Blog Stacy Trevenon's blog Mark Noack's blog Bill Murray's Blog

What happened in Charleston

Nine people killed and and one injured by a 21 year old (alleged) mass murderer. Here is what Bernie Sanders had to say about it

"What transpired in Charleston, South Carolina, last night was not just a tragedy, it was an act of terror.

Nine of our fellow Americans were murdered while praying in a historic church because of the color of their skin. This senseless violence fills me with outrage, disgust, and a deep, deep sadness.

This hateful killing is a horrific reminder that, while we have made important progress in civil rights for all of our people, we are far from eradicating racism.

The Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church is one that has been attacked, burned, and rebuilt throughout its 200-year history. While their community mourns now, they will rebuild, and they will emerge stronger than before.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and their congregation. But we can add our actions to our prayers. The families and the community that have been hurt so very badly by this brutality need our help. Let us stand with them in their time of mourning."

Note that Bernie attributes the crime to racism

Fox News attributes the same event as an attack on Christianity. Web Link

The same horrible story being exploited to support the political views of both sides.


Here is a comment allegedly made by the alleged shooter. If true, the motive is obvious.

"“I have to do it,” the gunman was quoted as saying. “You rape our women and you’re taking over our country. And you have to go.”

Web Link

The guy sported a jacket with the South Africa and Rhodesia flags and had the Confederate stars and bars on his car.

Watch certain quarters try to spin this as an attack on Christianity, not African Americans.

I don't mean this to be snide, but if your kid cannot get past ninth grade- after three attempts, please don't give him a .45 for his 21st birthday!! (Especially if he, ummmm, dislikes a certain subset of the population with, ummmm, a certain frenetic fervency...)

I rarely blame the parents for crap like this, but on this one- they should be in jail with him. (Even if their own bigotry wasn't the root of his they still gave him an automatic firearm- knowing his proclivities.)

I do so wish we could protect ourselves from stupid people with guns...



^^^ I don't mean this to be snide, but if your kid cannot get past ninth grade- after three attempts, please don't give him a .45 for his 21st birthday!! (Especially if he, ummmm, dislikes a certain subset of the population with, ummmm, a certain frenetic fervency...) ^^^

It's best not to speculate before the facts are known. There are reports this morning that he bought the gun himself in Charleston.

He was awaiting trial on a felony charge. Whether he bought the gun himself or his dad bought it for him, gun control laws were broken.

^^^ Watch certain quarters try to spin this as an attack on Christianity, not African Americans. ^^^

That would make you feel better about yourself, wouldn't it?

You have to wonder about those that immediately politicize this heinous act of terror against the black community. Or blame FoxNews as the SC state senate minority leader did. He gets an initial pass from me because one of the victims was his friend and a fellow state senator.

But it does show how insidious the divisive thinking of the Left has become. They use a "War On Anything" to pit Americans against one another. That has to stop.

You have to wonder about those that immediately politicize this heinous act of terror against the black community.

No. It wouldn't. I was speaking to exactly that problem. And here we go with FD throwing kicks and punches at TA posters before the blood's dried.

Oh, and FOX apparently didn't miss a beat:

Fox News Blames The 'War On Christians' For Charleston Attack

Web Link

Don't be angry at me for seeing the way things work around here these days, Honeybee.


>>"He was awaiting trial on a felony charge. Whether he bought the gun himself or his dad bought it for him, gun control laws were broken."<<

Not quite accurate. Selling a gun to someone accused of a felony is only illegal if you know about the charge, usually from a background check. South Carolina has no background checks. And if the gun was purchased before the charges were filed, in South Carolina it's legal for him to keep the gun until convicted.


>>"I rarely blame the parents for crap like this, but on this one- they should be in jail with him. (Even if their own bigotry wasn't the root of his they still gave him an automatic firearm- knowing his proclivities.)"<<

I think you may be off target here, no pun intended. The suspect's friends say he bought the gun himself, albeit with money his parents gave him for his birthday. And there is no indication that the parents knew of his "proclivities"... he did not live at home and his racial views apparently emerged only recently. Also, the weapon was a semiautomic handgun, not an "automatic firearm."

It's not abundantly clear whether the shooter could legally buy a gun. South Carolina gun laws: Web Link

In any event, I wouldn't want to be the store owner that sold him the gun.

Federal law against "strawman" purchases upheld: Web Link

There will be cries about "doing something" about this, but what we get are statements from folks like the President that says no one should have a handgun.

Statements like that are useless. They resonate with anti-gun folks, but we've seen time and time again that the mentally ill can get guns, cars, knives, poison, rope, hammers and anything else they want. The faces always turn to guns and say they're the problem. They're not.

The problem is that we treat mental illness very poorly. We medicate and monitor. We don't educate the entire family about how to deal with the issues. In many cases, the family isn't there or isn't capable of dealing, which means there need to be programs that make sure the mentally ill don't fall between the cracks.

Here's a big reason why:

Web Link

Decisions and elections have consequences and Ronald Reagan screwed the pooch when it came to the mentally ill. His legacy lives on. Now we through the mentally ill into prisons - privatized prisons.

throw not through.

First- in response to my comments last night- that's what I get for listening to early reports.

Coasters- you hit the nail on the head, although I'm not convinced this one is an issue of mental health, or a lack of proper care. Hatred is not a mental illness, nor is bigotry, or any of a few hundred other proclivities that can be used to justify the most heinous behavior imaginable.

I have no knowledge of this young man, and perhaps he is mentally ill, but I think it is equally possible that he is simply poorly educated (potentially with a low IQ as well), ignorant, and easily manipulated as a result- which led to his feeling that such an act was justified in his worldview.

Finally: I think the issue isn't as much mental health issues as it is the media and our all-consuming desire for fame and fortune. (On the part of some at least...) This young man is quoted as saying he wanted to start a race-war, which clearly wouldn't be possible without the media attention he felt he would get as a result of the act. Thus we've created a feedback loop, wherein heinous acts by horrible people fascinate and are given tremendous coverage, thereby spurring even more heinous acts by even more horrible people.

The more horrible the act the more famous you will be- for some I can even see this as a form of desirable epitaph. And for the most part we're playing into this mania every time something else like this happens.



Nevermind- it was all an accident...

“"This is the MO of this administration, any time there is an accident like this, the president is clear. He doesn’t like for Americans to have guns and so he uses every opportunity, this being another one, to basically go parrot that message,” Perry said."

That statement pretty much sums up why the Republicans have literally no hope in the upcoming elections. Hillary Clinton is about as inspiring as belly-button lint, yet she will remain above all these nimrods without even trying.

And that's kinda sad. (Almost as sad as categorizing this tragic and incredibly deliberate inanity as an accident...)



"Perry calls Charleston church shootings an ‘accident’", Web Link

"WASHINGTON — Rick Perry said Friday that the massacre at a black church in Charleston was an “accident” as he accused President Barack Obama of succumbing to a “knee jerk” liberal impulse to push a gun-control agenda."

“This is the MO of this administration anytime there is an accident like this,” Perry said, asserting that since Obama “doesn’t like guns … he uses every opportunity” to push an anti-gun agenda."

"This isn’t the first time Perry has depicted an event others deemed avoidable as something accidental. He blamed an “act of God” for the Deepwater Horizon spill, a well blowout that killed 11 workers and spewed millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico for three months."

This guy is frighteningly out of touch with life, and to use this tragedy - another violent tragedy, as a political pulpit tells us all we need to know about him.

Stick a fork in this guy; he's done (again).

"NRA Board Member Blames Victim for Charleston Shooting", Web Link

"A Houston attorney on the National Rifle Association's board of directors is blaming the deadly Charleston church shooting on one of the victims, saying the slain pastor had opposed concealed carry legislation as a state senator that could have saved him and his fellow worshippers."

"In an interview Friday with The Associated Press, Charles Cotton confirmed writing that "innocent people died because of (Clementa Pinckney's) position on a political issue." The post appeared Thursday in an online discussion board about concealed handguns."

"Nine people were killed Wednesday night after a 21-year-old gunman opened fire during a Bible study at The Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, where Pinckney was pastor."

"Cotton told the AP that he was expressing a personal opinion not reflective of the NRA. He also said he was "stumped" that his comments were still visible because he had deleted them after later deciding they were inappropriate."

Yeah, just what we need - guns in churches, schools, supermarkets and more. Looks like Perry and the NRA are members of the same 'Think Tank'.

Pretty twisted line of thought and not one I can either support or condone.

Why do liberal pundits pretend that conservatives haven't universally condemned the Charleston murders?

Web Link

Answer: Because they derive power from dividing Americans. And because there are too many people like George that eat up that drivel as fast as they can dish it out.

Why do dumbass politicians feel the need to use sick tragedies like this one for their self-interest? The ones that do are sick and should be promptly checked off the candidate list and on a treatment list - along with those that are so sniveling stupid and arrogant enough to try to defend them.

Twisted bunch.

Can't they just provide condolences and move on? or maybe even just shut-up about it?

^^^ Why do dumbass politicians feel the need to use sick tragedies like this one for their self-interest? ^^^

What a jackass! What do you think Obama was doing while the bodies were still warm? What do you think Rick Perry was (rightfully) criticizing?

Nikki Haley is leading through this tragedy. Obama and Clinton are politicizing it. And so it George.

But others can politicize the issue, too. Nikki Haley has called for pursuing the death penalty. You'd never get that from the weak-on-crime liberals that dominate the California political class. In fact, I think that's aquestion that should be asked of Harris the K as frequently as possible. Make her explain why those black lives don't matter!

Republicans like Nikki Haley, if they really care about and understand what happened in Charleston, should demand that the symbol of slavery and segregation, the Confederate flag, be torn down from public buildings everywhere.

The south lost. Get the hell over it. Stop the flagrant treason.

Removing the flag won't stop murderous racism, but it would be a symbolic gesture signalling support for the dismantling of institutional racism and oppression of African Americans.

From esquire.com...

Charleston Shooting: Speaking the Unspeakable, Thinking the Unthinkable

Web Link

Not to think about these things is to betray the dead. Not to speak of these things is to dishonor them. Let Nikki Haley, the governor of South Carolina, look out her window at the flag of treason that is flown proudly at her state capitol and think about these things, and speak of them, before she pronounces herself so puzzled at how something like this could happen in South Carolina, the home office of American sedition.

The Confederate flag isn't a symbol of racism except to those who choose to see it that way and create a stink.

From vox.com

The Confederate flag symbolizes white supremacy — and it always has

Web Link

Yes, let's not raise a "stink" about institutionalized racism and the fact that the confederacy was treasonous dissolved for that reason.

If we all just shut-up about it, it doesn't exist, right?

As if the governor flying a flag had anything to do with some mentally disturbed kid. Talk about opportunistic twisting.

It's also repugnant that a state lost any means to extricate itself from an overreaching oppressive federal government bent on abusing it. Like getting trapped in a spider's web. And no I'm not from the South.

Uff, at this page: Web Link you will find the young man's manifesto, along with numerous pictures of him burning the US flag and others holding the confederate flag. He clearly holds that the Confederate flag is representative of his "movement," and to cement that idea he wrote (among other sad things):

"Only a fourth to a third of people in the South owned even one slave. Yet every White person is treated as if they had a slave owning ancestor. This applies to in the states where slavery never existed, as well as people whose families immigrated after slavery was abolished. I have read hundreds of slaves narratives from my state. And almost all of them were positive. One sticks out in my mind where an old ex-slave recounted how the day his mistress died was one of the saddest days of his life. And in many of these narratives the slaves told of how their masters didnt even allowing whipping on his plantation.

Segregation was not a bad thing. It was a defensive measure. Segregation did not exist to hold back negroes. It existed to protect us from them. And I mean that in multiple ways. Not only did it protect us from having to interact with them, and from being physically harmed by them, but it protected us from being brought down to their level. Integration has done nothing but bring Whites down to level of brute animals. The best example of this is obviously our school system."

The man is an avowed and committed racist, and the Confederate Flag is (by his own admission and offering) the symbol of his struggle. To offer that the flag as presented today is not representative of an endorsement of slavery is plain nonsense.

And like it or not South Carolina tacitly endorses this worldview by having the Confederate flag on the capitol.



You folks do know that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves, right?

The fact that SOME people misuse that flag to their own horrible racist purposes doesn't mean everyone else should have to abandon the symbol of their state's lost freedom. (The irony there isn't lost on me either. The whole thing is wretched.)

their state's lost freedom

Interesting. Please explain.

Link to the terrorist's manifesto:

Web Link

>>>The fact that SOME people misuse that flag to their own horrible racist purposes<<<

The flag was originally flown over the capitol building in 1962- to protest the federal push for desegregation and civil rights. In the 100 or so years prior to 1962 no one thought to fly the flag- it wasn't until equal rights and civil rights were being forced on South Carolina that the legislature acted to place the flag in defiance on top of the capitol building in Charleston.

I.E. The flag was put up there in the first place for racist purposes.

Sorry Uff,


>>>their state's lost freedom<<<

That one's easy Coasters- they lost the freedom to own slaves.

But... Are there any other freedoms they lost??

Nope. They've got free and equal trade with every other state and the world, the right to bear arms, the same rights and representation in our Federal Government as each and every one of us.

The only "freedom" they lost was the right to own other men and women, and to force them into labor for profit. (Which was OK because they (the negroes) actually enjoyed this arrangement...)



It's like this, our Honeybee and ff are of sound mind and believe that - States should have their own rights. That would be the freedom Uff is seeking us to understand.

When you have the American Flag flying at half-staff and the Confederate Flag not.....Nikki Haley states that only the Assembly can decide on the half-staff out of respect for these lost lives. I'm not politicizing, but perhaps it's time to place flag in a Museum.

DCE, I'd say that still falls under 'SOME people misused that flag to their own horrible racist purposes.' Or perhaps they simply resented anything the federal government forced them to do (right or wrong). Without spending weeks researching we aren't experts. On that topic, a "drive-by media" article:

Web Link ..... CNN: "Why the Confederate flag still flies in South Carolina"

"And to be sure, there are plenty of Southerners who see the flag as nothing more than an emblem of regional pride; the same way someone from New England might drape a "Don't Tread on Me" flag over a balcony.

"Interestingly, the original design for a Confederate flag was very much like the U.S. flag. After all, Southerners believed they were the true defenders of the ideals that had fostered the American Revolution."

It's a shame the symbol of the states' lost freedom to leave the union has been intertwined with racism. Maybe it's beyond saving at this point; the meaning has been co-opted and corrupted.

Yes granny, it looks really bad that the Confederate flag is flying full staff full time. Even now. But that's the law there.

Symbols matter only in the context in which they are seen TODAY.

The swastika was a sacred symbol for literally thousands of years. Nobody wearing swastika tattoo today is trying to share a peaceful Buddhist/Hindu message.

Cross-burning began in 16th Century Scotland as a call to defend the clan (not the Klan). An African-American family finding a cross burning on the lawn today wouldn't assume it was placed there by Scottish historians.

Whether the Stars and Bars was born as a symbol of racism is irrelevant. What matters is what it symbolizes today... flying at full staff over a racial abomination. The message couldn't be clearer.

"After Charleston shootings, gun curbs dormant in Congress", Web Link

"WASHINGTON (AP) — This week's slaughter of nine people in a South Carolina church left prospects that Congress will curb guns right where they've been for years — remote for now, according to lawmakers and activists on both sides of the issue."

"Conceding that congressional action was unlikely soon, President Barack Obama said lawmakers will tighten federal firearms restrictions when they believe the public is demanding it."

From fd above: "What a jackass! What do you think Obama was doing while the bodies were still warm?"

It is part of our President's job to recognize lawlessness, which this incident posses. It is the job of Congress to do something about it. They have not and appear not willing. Tragedy after needless tragedy strike Americans, in our own country, repeatedly and for some time now. As President, Obama is suppose to recognize these tragedies to America and push Congress for change. He did his job. I hope our elected in Congress are paying attention to all this needless suffering, but it doesn't appear that way. They haven't yet and likely won't - until something like this horror happens to one of them or their family members.

Perry and the NRA have jumped on this, each to serve themselves. Perry called it an accident, then railed on gun rights, while the NRA went straight for their pocketbook, declaring that it was the preacher's fault for not allowing firearms in his church. They went on to say that schools throughout America should be armed and more.

There are some very sick individuals out there; scary people. The ones that scare me the most are the ones that look for a way to profit from &/or in some other way serve their own self-interests using this tragedy and the so many before it.

Perry and the NRA have clearly crossed that line.

The only thing that I can think of that approaches the callousness of those serving themselves over this are the ones that support that type thought.

There is NO justification for it.

The political part of this would be tighter gun control. Obama addressed that. The candidates for President would be well served offering condolences, perhaps mentioning the obvious need for better regulation and enforcement and move on, like I mentioned above.

Beyond that, they are no more than simple leaches, just like those that try to support them.

That, of course, is merely my opinion.

>>It is part of our President's job to recognize lawlessness<<

Funny how he conveniently doesn't "recognize" it when he's the one being lawless.

The blood was still on the pews when Obama shamelessly started in on his political opportunism.

I'd like to hear how more laws on the law abiding helps stop those who are lawless.

^^^ It's like this, our Honeybee and ff are of sound mind and believe thatg ^^^

Piss off you wretched old hag! I haven't said a thing about the Confederate flag or states' rights or slavery.

Those politicizing this tragedy should be ashamed of themselves. And that includes you, George Muteff.

It appears that when our Gualala boddie runs out of gutter dwelling labels for everyone and the chips are down, he sinks even lower with his consistent personal attacks.

"What a jackass! & "Piss off you wretched old hag!" Terms of endearment from up north. Just brings a warm fuzzy to all he 'meets' and displays his inability to apply any measure of civility to anyone. Articulating one's position can be difficult when the tools aren't there.

Anyone as angry as fd is every day is someone to be concerned with. It has been that type of behavior that has caused many of the needless tragedies that we have seen, like the one in Charleston. Frustrated, angry (generally) white males that "snap".

The prosecution just rested in the trial of the Colorado theater mass murderer and we see it again. One never knows when or where the next senseless tragedy will occur. What we do know is that it is highly likely that when it does, and it will, it will be perpetrated by another sick individual that carries some of the characteristics discussed here, with the ability to acquire yet another firearm and ammunition that will result in extreme suffering for others, forever.

Very sad.

"Rick Perry's Charleston comments proves he's not presidential material", Web Link

"Two days after the terrorist attack, Perry said these words on the Steve Malzberg Show: “This is the M.O. of this administration, anytime there is an accident like this. You know, the president’s clear. He doesn’t like for Americans to have guns, and so he uses every opportunity – this being another one – to basically go parrot that message.”

"Yes, Rick Perry, Mr. Opps, called the horrific events in Charleston an “accident.”

"Charleston Shooting Suspect's Childhood Friend Details Their Upbringing", Web Link

"A childhood friend of the Charleston shooting suspect says he must have only recently began to "hate black people" as there was no indication of his being racist while they grew up."

"Caleb Brown, who identifies as half-black, said he went to elementary and middle school with Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old accused of killing nine people inside Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, on Wednesday. Brown, 20, said he last saw Roof, 21, about a year-and-a-half ago."

"How could you claim [to] hate people like that, kill all of these people [when] you were my friend back then?" Brown said he wanted to ask Roof. "This white supremacist, racist, 'black-people-have-to-go' kind of ideals weren't put into him when he was a kid. It wasn't something that was sitting and festering his whole life and then he just busted. It’s very recent that that came into his mind and that type of mindset. That’s the only way it could have been."

"Though Brown claims "there was absolutely no indication of him even being racist" when the two were younger, Roof's roommate, Dalton Tyler, previously told ABC News that Roof had been planning "something like" the shooting for six months."

“He was big into segregation and other stuff,” Tyler said. “He said he wanted to start a civil war. He said he was going to do something like that and then kill himself.”

I like the part (so much that I laugh out loud) during the aftermath of these shootings where the NRA, the right-wing talk show hosts, and their drone-like followers always stress the need "not to politicize" these "tragedies."

That's like cigarette manufacturers decrying people trying to politicize cancer.

It serves their purpose--their political purpose--since this is just the area where they are weakest and most threatened. Hit the other guy hard when he's down but, oh no, when I'm on my knees it's not fair! Not fair!

They cry "don't politicize" and then the mass mailing fund raising letters go out the week after...

You can set your watch by it...


"Running for political cover in the wake of Charleston church shooting" / "As the world reels from a racially-motivated, deadly attack on a church in South Carolina, presidential candidates try to navigate through tough issues involving race, religion, guns, and the Confederate flag." - Web Link

"Race, religion, guns, and the Confederate flag. It’s a political combination with high potential for tripping up politicians, especially those aspiring to higher office."

"And so we see those eyeing the presidency in 2016 – especially Republicans – positioning themselves in a way that credibly acknowledges the horror of this past week’s mass shooting at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, without offending key elements of their political base."

"This is not a cynical observation. It’s the nature of politics, but it’s also understandable as all Americans try to make sense of the senseless. Sometimes it’s best to just say little in the face of such highly-charged tragedy that can be said to find its roots in what has been called “America’s original sin,” that is, slavery."

The closing paragraph just above is very similar to my thoughts and comments above - the ones I got chastised for making by our twisted little northern buddy. But this piece offers more:

"Back in 2000, Sen. John McCain was in a tough battle with George W. Bush in the South Carolina primary election. Reporters pushed him on whether the Confederate flag – the one his ancestors had fought for in the Civil War – should be removed from the state capitol."

"He said that while the flag was a ''symbol of racism and slavery'' it was also a ''symbol of heritage,'' and its placement or removal should be left to the people of South Carolina. It wasn’t a truthful answer, he later acknowledged."

“I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary,” McCain said. “So I chose to compromise my principles. I broke my promise to always tell the truth.”

"For the most part, GOP presidential candidates are taking the line Sen. McCain did before he “answered honestly.”"

Thank you Senator, for finally being honest and coming clean. I wish your republican peers would do the same thing - now, before the election, instead of blatantly selling their soul for a dollar and vote. It's not starting out that way though and only shows the lack of ethical and moral character of those that take the path of pandering before truth.

>>blatantly selling their soul for a dollar and vote. It's not starting out that way though and only shows the lack of ethical and moral character of those that take the path of pandering before truth.<<

Selling their soul, like letting our once great nation be sunk by 50 million illegal aliens, in order to get their votes. The undocumented Democrats.

Yes, that.

Not even a pretense of honesty in that little gem, was there, uffish?

Actual number of illegal aliens in the US: 11 million. Not 50. 11.

Number of illegal aliens who can vote: Zero.

Number of illegal aliens' children who can vote: Zero, at least for the next 18 years.

Number of illegals' "anchor babies" who are entitled to remain in the US: Zero. Web Link

And just for the record, most of the so-called "anchor babies" are NOT the children of illegals. They're the children of wealthy legal visitors who arrive on tourist visas. Many are what uffish has previously referred to as "dirty Chinese"... and having their children here is 100% legal.

Clearly we need to screen rich Asian tourists for late-stage pregnancy.

As if all these illegals are not making babies who turn into Democrats! Add the population growth from illegals AND their kids.

They should all go home.

When you're born here, you ARE home.

The highest law in the land says so.

If you don't like the United States Constitution, maybe it's you who should go live somewhere it doesn't apply. I'm sure lots of folks here will have suggestions for you.

Once again we see uff complain about immigration on a thread dedicated to the recent tragedy in Charleston - a race issue, amongst others. Unless you can tie the tragedy in Charleston to immigration, uff, it would be very appropriate and appreciated if you would save your immigration issues for an immigration thread - like the one I started because of you, after asking you to start your own that never happened.

Many issues that we see and face have multiple facets. This tragedy in Charleston is a good example of that. I have not, however, been able to in any way connect the dots between this tragedy and immigration. If you can, uff, please do. If you can't, maybe the most recent thread on immigration might be a better place for you to display your thoughts, opinions and comments on said immigration?

Thanks.Although you and I disagree on may, if not all the aspects of immigration that we've touched on to date, that is not the reason I'm asking what I am. I'm doing it because it is the civil, right thing to do. You have stated so on other threads many times, so I know you can appreciate my request. Again, thank you.

"Huckabee, Santorum Say Confederate Flag Is A State Issue", Web Link

"Two GOP presidential candidates, former Sen. Rick Santorum (Pa.) and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, said Sunday that it was up to South Carolina to decide whether to remove the Confederate flag outside its Capitol, declining to weigh in on how the state should act."

"Huckabee, who in 2008 told South Carolina voters that "you don't like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag," stood by his remarks, suggesting Republicans were being "baited" to respond to an issue that wasn't of national concern."

"If the state government of South Carolina wishes to address an issue in their state, that's fine," he told NBC's Chuck Todd. "But, Chuck, if you can point me to an article and section of the Constitution in which a United States president ought to weigh in on what states use as symbols, then please refresh my memory on that."

"For those of us running for president, everyone's being baited with this question as if that has anything to do whatsoever with running for president," he continued. "My position is, it most certainly does not. As president you're focused on the economy, keeping America safe ... I don't think they want us to weigh in on every little issue in all 50 states that might be an important issue to the people of that state, but not on the desk of the president."

"Santorum gave a similar response." Read the piece to get his quotes. He provides the old greased pig approach; leave it to SC, but he has an opinion. When asked his opinion again, he again said leave it to SC.

It's sad to know that in this day and age we still see Presidential candidates that don't get it and never will. Not what I want in my President, but then neither has a chance.

Sad state of affairs. And this is the best the republicans can do?

It's about to become more of a problem for some of the Republican candidates.

Turns out the shooter picked up his racist philosophies from a frequent GOP financial contributor.

Web Link

Some of Ted Cruz's vital body parts are puckering so hard they squeak.

50 million illegal aliens

That's 20 million more than the right-wing, racist/extremist Anne Coulter claims. The number's about 12.3 million, by most accounts and most came here legally during both Republican and Democratically dominated administrations through H1B's, L1's, J1's etc.

While many Republican presidential candidates say it is a "State issue", Senator Lindsay Graham is urging the removal of Confederate Flags from State property.

Web Link

Meanwhile, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley plans to call for the removal of the Confederate flag on statehouse grounds, two senior lawmakers said Monday, signaling a significant shift in position from her and other state Republican leaders on the issue.

Web Link

This is something I just ran across; interesting piece - "After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn’t Had a Similar Massacre Since.", Web Link

Here's how it begins: "After the mass shooting in Charleston, South Carolina, President Obama was quick to raise the issue of gun control. On his interview on Marc Maron’s podcast WTF, released Monday, Obama referred to Australia’s strict gun laws as a positive example. Will Oremus wrote about Australia’s laws after the 2012 shooting at Sandyhook Elementary School. The piece is reprinted below:"

A worthwhile read.

Lindsey Graham goes temporarily sane, asks that Confederate Flag be removed and placed in museum:

Web Link

George, Australia is a country of 23 million people. They had about 3 million guns to deal with.

We have 320 million and 300+ million guns to deal with. Different scale issue and much different culture. You tell Americans self defense is no longer a legitimate reason for owning a gun and you might want to start running in a zig-zag pattern in the opposite direction of them.

Yeah, Coasters, I agree, but it was/is worth posting (imho) just the same.

Always interesting to see how others cope or deal with issues of this magnitude and horror.

Besides, I'm not getting any younger ... my "zig-zag pattern' would just take too much out of me if I had to do it for more than 30 seconds (maybe) and could remember which way to turn next!

Always interesting to see how others cope or deal with issues of this magnitude and horror.

I interpret the 2nd Amendment as broadly as possible. I believe that even gun registration is unconstitutional because the whole purpose of the 2nd amendment was to defend against any enemy including the state. If the state knows who has guns, then at least half the purpose of the amendment is thwarted.

However, we may live in a time in which having ubiquitous gun ownership is no longer desirable, practical or healthy.

>>If the state knows who has guns, then at least half the purpose of the amendment is thwarted.<<

Exactly. But now reality sets in. It would seem possible compile such a list if one was desired. Surely only a very tiny number of gun owners have always paid for ammo with cash, never subscribed to a hunting magazine, etc. If Target knows you are pregnant before you tell your family then finding out if you own a gun seems like child's play.

"Big Data," data mining. Heck, just ordering Wal Mart to turn over its gun buyer data would nail 80% of the owners!

So, *given* that de facto registration already exists, how does that change one's thinking about all those things you couldn't do for fear of registration? Thinks like mandatory training, traceable guns, etc.?



>>"I believe that even gun registration is unconstitutional..."

I disagree for two reasons (as do the federal courts for 100 years).

First, nothing in the 2nd Amendment implies that the government knowing you own weapons infringes upon your right to own them.

Second, all our Constitutional rights are regulated to some extent, from free speech (hate speech and physical threats are not protected) and free press (libel is not protected) to the 6th Amendment rights to compel witness testimony (inapplicable to national security cases)... and nearly 240 years of federal case law confirms that no Constitutional right is absolute.

The NRA position, for example, that regulation -- ANY regulation -- automatically constitutes infringement is simply untenable.

I would also point out that in the 2nd Amendment's wording, the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" is preceded by the qualifier "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..." yet the aspect of a "well regulated militia" is utterly ignored in the modern defense of the right to keep and bear. So half the Second Amendment's purpose is already thwarted, which I find exceedingly hypocritical.

And I speak as a lifelong (and current) gun owner and onetime NRA member.

The Republican candidates have tested the winds and have decided "how to lead"

Sunday Mike Huckabee was asked his opinion on the Confederate Flag on the S.C. State grounds. He responded

“I still think it’s not an issue for a person running for president,” Huckabee said, adding, “[E]veryone’s being baited with this question as if somehow that has anything to do whatsoever with running for president. And my position is, it most certainly does not.”

Following Governor Haley's comments

"Huckabee replied, “Absolutely, because that’s where it needed to be settled.” He went to say he “salutes” the South Carolina governor’s decision.

There’s a lot of that going around. National GOP candidates who couldn’t muster the courage to give a straight answer over the weekend are suddenly delighted to say how much they agree with Nikki Haley’s decision.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) wouldn’t give his position, but after yesterday afternoon’s press conference in South Carolina, Walker is suddenly delighted to endorse Haley’s new position.

Former Govs. Jeb Bush (R) and Rick Perry (R) soon after did the same, saying after Haley’s announcement what they wouldn’t say before.

It’s quite a coincidence how these candidates decided to add clarity to their ambiguous positions right after someone else did the heavy lifting."

Watching leaders turn into followers so quickly is quite a sight.

Well it was Haley's state after all.

What did Hillary or Bernie or Mr Six Pack say when they were asked?

Isn't it just lovely how the Left continues to divide the country over this tragedy and divert attention from the 9 victims of domestic terrorism to a flag?

Isn't it just lovely that the Left isn't happy with the State of South Carolina making up its own mind on what to do with the flag.

Isn't it just lovely that the Left are collectively a bunch of hypocrites when it comes to the Clintons establishing a Confederate Flag Day in Arkansas?

"What did Hillary or Bernie or Mr Six Pack say when they were asked?"

Hillary: "San Francisco (CNN)The United States' struggle with race is not over, Hillary Clinton said Saturday in an emotional speech that called for more candor on racial issues and stepped-up gun control laws in the wake of the deadly Charleston, South Carolina church shooting that left nine dead earlier this week.

Invoking leading civil rights figures and the Bible, Clinton told the U.S. Conference of Mayors in San Francisco that as "tempting" as it is to isolate the Charleston shooting as a random event, "America's long struggle with race is far from finished."

"I know this is a difficult topic to talk about," she said. "I know that so many of us hoped by electing our first black President we had turned the page on this chapter in our history. I know there are truths we don't like to say out loud in discussions with our children, but we have to. That is the only way we can possibly move forward together."

Bernie said: "“The Charleston church killings are a tragic reminder of the ugly stain of racism that still taints our nation. This senseless violence fills me with outrage, disgust and a deep, deep sadness. The hateful killing of nine people praying inside a church is a horrific reminder that, while we have made significant progress in advancing civil rights in this country, we are far from eradicating racism. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and their congregation.”

I must confess my ignorance, but I don't know who "Mr. Six Pack" is.

A little history for the leftists that clarifies who was always in support of removing the stars and bars and who insisted it remain:

Web Link

Hint: it isn't what the left wing media wants you to believe.

Sigh. To make it clear, What did Hillary or Bernie or Mr Six Pack say when they were asked ABOUT THE FLAG.

Did the press ask them too, or did they only try to cause a misstep for Republicans?

The Democrats who worked to get the flag flown in 1962 are as shameful as the Republicans who worked fifteen years ago to enact a law that proscribes its removal.

This isn't about left and right, it's about what that flag represents- as shown by the numbskull who used it as a symbol of the validity and righteousness of his hatred- hatred which led to the massacre of nine innocent people.



"Isn't it just lovely that the Left are collectively a bunch of hypocrites when it comes to the Clintons establishing a Confederate Flag Day in Arkansas?"I

No person has supported Bill Clinton's signing of a bill in 1985 which established 300 special event days weeks, or months in Arkansas which included "Confederate Flag Day" in Arkansas. It was a very bad decision and the country deserves an apology and explanation farm Bill Clinton.

Of course Hillary is co-responsible according to some. A look at her record over the last thirty years should establish her position on race relations.

It is unique to right wing justice that a wife is guilty of her husband's sins. Not even the wacko Christian extremists make that claim.

"Well First of all--The wife's responsibility is to allow the husband to be the Spiritual Head of the household. That she is to submit to his leadership.

Secondly, a woman is not to hold a position of authority over a man in either the home or the church. (1 Timothy 2:11-15; 1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

Thirdly, A woman is to be a "worker at home" and not out in the work force! (Titus 2:3-5; 1 Timothy 2:14-15)"

Web Link

"Sigh. To make it clear, What did Hillary or Bernie or Mr Six Pack say when they were asked ABOUT THE FLAG.

Did the press ask them too, or did they only try to cause a misstep for Republicans?"

Sigh. Look it up yourself

"The Lesson My Own Racism Taught Me About Reaching My Full Potential. Words of a Charleston, SC Native.", Web Link

An interesting piece.

This person appears to share her thoughts, which hold value, on being raised in a culturally challenged environment. She discusses her upbringing, which is not unlike that of many, and her fears, feelings about it and her realizations from it.

In the end, it also appears that her blog is an ad for a "free video e-course"; but the content of what she lays out is a very real commentary from a "normal" individual raised in the south (primarily, but is spread across all states).

Isn't it funny how our formative years so impact the rest of our lives, both in good and in bad? It can be, and often is very hard to face what we initially cringed at as a youngster but grew to accept over time.

We can be such complex critters, huh?

If you have the courage you can listen to what Bernie Sander's said.

Web Link

Web Link

Thanks BB for your earlier long response to my question in which you simply change the subject. It turns out that the press is not asking Mrs Clinton her opinion, preferring only to try to trip up the Republican candidates.

To her credit in 2007 she did say she thought the Confederate flag should be removed. However there were also numerous Confederate flag political buttons for her campaign.

The response from the unhinged side of the right is now claiming the rainbow flag - the symbol of unity, tolerance, acceptance and equality - is really a symbol of hatred towards Christians and should be taken down.

Because Jesus hated unity, tolerance, acceptance and equality? Or is it because doubling-down on hatred is all they can think of?

Web Link

In response to Uff's assertion that the Civil War was not about slavery...

This paragraph should leave no doubt that the Civil War was about slavery

Web Link

From South Carolina's formal justification for seceding:

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.

^^^ Or is it because doubling-down on hatred is all they can think of? ^^^

You're confused. It is the rainbow jihadis like you that are intolerant and spewing hatred towards the religious of the Judeo-Christian type.

^^^ In response to Uff's assertion that the Civil War was not about slavery... ^^

It wasn't. It was about saving the union, otherwise Lincoln would have let the states secede. It didn't become about slavery until Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation to keep the French from helping the South.

^^^ The Democrats who worked to get the flag flown in 1962 are as shameful as the Republicans who worked fifteen years ago to enact a law that proscribes its removal. ^^^

Bee-ess! Web Link

A clear conscience in a Democrat is indicative of a poor memory.

^^^ If you have the courage you can listen to what Bernie Sander's said. ^^^

What a drama queen!

Ok. I'm convinced "fdrouillard" is a bot.

That last response was just a sequence of canned insults and platitudes designed to look somewhat folksy, but clueless.

Cool! Another classic academic entry from the Gualala College of Cluelessness!

I must admit, though... half right is a significant improvement on Franny's usual zero.

See, in order to have a war, you need at least two sides... and most of the time their motivations differ. So yes, the boy in the back row does get 50% credit for saying the war wasn't about slavery. To the North, it wasn't.

But to the South, it was ALL about slavery. You can read the secession declarations in their own words right here: Web Link

Mississippi was even more blunt about it than South Carolina:

"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."

The line about the tropical sun is special, isn't it?

And then there's Texas, which got all evangelical about the whole thing:

"That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; 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..."

And Georgia's primary complaint was the Northern states exercising states' rights... by refusing to return their escaped slaves.

So... yes, it was slavery.

But don't let it get you down, sonny... 50% is still flunking, but it's progress. Sort of.

Couldn't be a bot, Coasters. A bot loaded with that much misinformation and bad code would just pop and spark and crackle ineffectually, without being able to produce any real... uh.... well... coherent.....



Bot. I think you nailed it.

About the 1856 Republican Nomination of Abraham Lincoln.

Ominous talk of pending civil war was rampant, and there was a real feeling of national crisis when Republicans gathered to choose their first presidential candidate at Philadelphia's Musical Fund Hall in mid June.

Violent civil conflict in "bleeding Kansas" was polarizing the nation. In fact, it was the appeasement of slave interests through the Kansas-Nebraska and Fugitive Slave acts that gave birth to the party.

"The new Republican Party was born in 1854 at a meeting in Ripon, Wisconsin. Abolitionists and those opposed to extension of slavery gathered to protest the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which opened territory to slavery that had been forbidden by the old Missouri Compromise of 1820."

"The delegates got right down to business the first day by adopting a platform. The key plank was firm opposition to the extension of slavery. "It is the duty of Congress to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery." The polygamy reference was aimed at the Mormon settlement in Utah territory."

From the 1856 Republican Platform

"Resolved: That, with our Republican fathers, we hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed with the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior design of our Federal Government were to secure these rights to all persons under its exclusive jurisdiction; that, as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished Slavery in all our National Territory, ordained that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, it becomes our duty to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing Slavery in the Territories of the United States by positive legislation, prohibiting its existence or extension therein. That we deny the authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislation, of any individual, or association of individuals, to give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States, while the present Constitution shall be maintained."

So to say that the Civil War was not about slavery flies in the face of what history tells us. The South recognized that with the election of Lincoln there only hope was secession. Those fears which were so well documented in George's post above were well founded. The Abolishionists who were the base of the Republican Party were in control. Slavery's future was doomed and the South knew it.

It is amazing that Republicans would not know their history.

"Fox News must be stopped: Why its Charleston coverage has finally gone too far

Ridicule isn't enough. We need to call out the lies and rebut them accurately & loudly. This is more than a "story"", Web Link


This one starts out with: There has been some speculation as to whether Dylann Roof is insane, or was so at the time of the shooting at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Certainly the amount of premeditation that went into the mass murder he planned and perpetrated should make us wary about accepting too readily the assertion that he was crazy. But while we might wonder about Roof, there is no doubt at all that for its commentary on this horrific, hate-filled crime Fox News should be indicted in the court of public opinion for its role in this and other racist acts. The network surely was conscious of what it was doing in aiding and abetting; it surely planned to furnish Roof with an alibi regarding the exact nature of his heinous crime.

Indeed, if Roof is convicted I suggest we regard Fox as an accessory after the fact: someone who assists another 1) who has committed a felony, 2) after the person has committed the felony, 3) with knowledge that the person committed the felony, and 4) with the intent to help the person avoid arrest or punishment. An accessory after the fact may be held liable for, inter alia, obstruction of justice.


This guy really gets into it.

The Good News. "Walmart, Amazon, Sears, eBay to stop selling Confederate flag merchandise"

The Bad News. "Sales of three versions of the flag were up 1,670% to 2,305% over a period of 24 hours, according to Amazon data. One of those flags, priced at $1.80 plus shipping, is currently the ninth best-selling item in the Patio, Lawn & Garden department and the top-selling item among all outdoor flags and banners sold on Amazon."

There are, of course, those who would differ as to which is Good/Bad News.

Like it or not, we need to separate public from private here.

It is my opinion that the confederate flag has no business or place in &/or on any public land anywhere in this country.

It is equally my opinion that if individuals want a confederate flag, then they have the right to acquire one.

It matters not what my thoughts are on the flag itself, but rather what is right. Since public land belongs to the public, strong consideration needs to be given when erecting, planting or otherwise placing offensive material on those public lands.

If, on the other hand, individuals want the flag, for whatever (legal) reason, they should be able to get the flag and display it to their heart's content.

We need to be very careful here. I remember, many years ago, when some burned the American flag. It upset me to no end; but then the matter became an issue ... a big issue with the judicial system taking a role. I listened to the arguments, all of them - and some of them made sense.

Whether I like it or not, it is legal to burn our nation's flag. It is legal to wear our nations flag. It is legal to have our nations flag fly atop federal and state buildings and ground. That's because it belongs to us all, complete with all its glorious history and sacrifice.

The confederate flag, however, is a different story, for obvious reasons. That said, however, we need to be sensitive and aware of the rights of individuals. Like it or not, those rights should be protected.

That is, after all, one of this nation's core DNA strands, isn't it?

^^^ It is amazing that Republicans would not know their history. ^^^

It is amazing how Democrats refuse to acknowledge that is was their party that was the pro-slavery party, or that is was their party that has a shameful racist past. That can't even accept that their "inevitable" candidate for president has shamelessly used the stars and bars to promote her 2008 campaign and now shamelessly acts as though people can't string "Hillary" and "confederate" together in a Google search.

It is amazing how Democrats can turn a murderous tragedy into a faux fight about a flag in which they can continue to divide Americans while pretending that it is Republicans resisting change.

They're terrible people that continually agitate to divide American so they can cling to power. And they do it again and again, failing to wait for the victims to be buried or even until their dead bodies have cooled.

A very solid argument can be made that it is hatred, the very hatred we see just above, that is key to this piece, this issue and so much more.

"They're terrible people that continually agitate to divide American ...". What a comment! Just when one thinks that nobody could be that narrow, that hateful, that bigoted, we get what you see.

One primary problem with hatred such as this, is that many throughout this land are conservative on some issues and liberal on others - making it impossible to categorize and bookshelf them. Yes, there are folks that strictly follow party lines, whichever party one chooses to pick, but it seems that more and more are 'independent' thinkers and are able to form their own thoughts and opinions on all issues - taking some from all parties and leaving other parts.

I just don't understand how anyone can be so myopic, so linear as to actually believe that everyone is either a democrat, republican, independent (by party), or anything else.

Just as America is a melting pot, so are our minds - able to sort out likes and dislikes and act accordingly.

One would think that a simple cursory look around at today's political parties would evidence my point here.

Embarrassed that his lack of knowledge has been exposed, Francis strikes out in anger.

Quite typical of the school yard bully whose bluff has been called.

There is no one in the world who doesn't acknowledge that President Lincoln was a Republican and that from the time of the Civil War until 1948 the Republicans represented the anti-slavery party and a large portion of the Democrat party was definitely anti-integration if not pro slavery. It was the Republican Party that led the charge for equal treatment in the late '40s for equal military benefits for black veterans which was opposed by primarily southern Democrats.

During the 1948 Democrat Convention, Hubert Humphrey gave his famous speech Web Link And the 35 southern Democrats left the party to form the Dixiecrat Party. The Dixiecrat platform included this plank:

"We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race; the constitutional right to choose one's associates; to accept private employment without governmental interference, and to earn one's living in any lawful way. We oppose the elimination of segregation, the repeal of miscegenation statutes, the control of private employment by Federal bureaucrats called for by the misnamed civil rights program. We favor home-rule, local self-government and a minimum interference with individual rights. We call upon all Democrats and upon all other loyal Americans who are opposed to totalitarianism at home and abroad to unite with us in ignominiously defeating Harry S. Truman, Thomas E. Dewey and every other candidate for public office who would establish a Police Nation in the United States of America."

The major change did not occur, however, until the development of the Southern Strategy by the Republican Party. The Southern strategy refers to a Republican Party strategy in the late 20th century of gaining political support for presidential candidates in the Southern United States by appealing to regional racial tensions and history of segregation.

"In the mid 1960s, a period of social turmoil, Republican Presidential candidates Senator Barry Goldwater[3][4] and Richard Nixon worked to attract southern white conservative voters to their candidacies and the Republican Party.[5] Barry Goldwater won the five formerly Confederate states of the Deep South (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina[6][7]) in the 1964 presidential election, but he otherwise won only in his home state of Arizona. In the 1968 presidential campaign, Nixon won Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee, all former Confederate states, contributing to the electoral realignment of white voters in some Southern states to the Republican Party. After federal civil rights legislation was gained via bipartisan votes, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965, more than 90 percent of black voters registered with the Democratic Party. The VRA provided tools to end their decades-long disenfranchisement by southern states. Hundreds of cases have been litigated to change election systems, such as at-large voting, that have prevented even significant minorities from electing candidates of their choice for city and county positions.

As the twentieth century came to a close, most white voters in the South had shifted to the Republican Party. It began to try to appeal again to black voters and rebuild the political relationship that had lasted through the 1920s, though with little success.[5] In 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman formally apologized to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a national civil rights organization, for exploiting racial polarization to win elections and ignoring the black vote." Web Link

So that is how we got to where we are. What is important is where do we go from here. Screaming that Republicans/Democrats are all bad or all good is both ignorant and not helpful.

George said >>Just as America is a melting pot,<<

That's racist, according to University of California President Janet Napolitano:

Web Link ..... "Administrators want members of campus to avoid the use of racist and sexist statements.. “America is a melting pot,” “Why are you so quiet?” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job,” are all phrases that should raise red flags, according to [new guidelines from] the UC speech police."

Sheesh. To me, this insane bashing of average well-meaning people is part of how the left likes to "continually agitate to divide Americans so they can cling to power."

Nothing personal, but when I start caring what Janet Napolitano thinks, it's time for me to just give it up.

America is and always has been a "melting pot". That is one of the reasons America is such a great country. For those that use Napolitano as their moral compass, call it what you like.

As to uff's close; "... is part of how the left likes to "continually agitate to divide Americans so they can cling to power." Must be nice to be so special and so perfect that you are in position to not only characterize and label others, but pass judgment on the thoughts and character of others.

That would make you "left" uff - because I find that comment offensive, divisive and shallow. Never thought anyone would see the "left" in you?

But hey, that's what makes the world go round, isn't it? We are such complex little critters.

Gee willikers, talk about getting upset over nothing. Maybe you DO care what Janet Napolitano thinks?

The left is constantly shifting further left-- today's liberal is tomorrow's conservative. To force a change on mainstream Americans who wouldn't normally shift with them, the left creates intentional divisiveness and intentional exclusion via name-calling and peer pressure. Demonization, Napolitano style.

Apparently it doesn't feel all that great to be called a racist for saying America is a melting pot.

>>"The left is constantly shifting further left-- today's liberal is tomorrow's conservative."<<

Yes, uffish. Our country and our society are constantly shifting further left... and leaving conservatives behind in the backwaters of history.

The conservatives of their eras opposed the founding of the United States, the overthrow of slavery, the citizenship of freed slaves and the establishment of public schools. My grandmother was born into a country where she couldn't vote because conservatives had prevented women from reaching the polls for 140 years. Social security, Medicare, all environmental laws... the list goes on and on of onetime radical-left policies that are part of society's core today.

Heck, ten years ago, supporting civil unions and decriminalizing marijuana were far-left liberal positions. Now they're pretty much mainstream.

The lesson of history... that conservatism is always left behind and always becomes irrelevant... is taught over and over again. And the disappearing Confederate flags are today's lesson.

Actually, Mark Twain addresses uffish's point better than I ever could:

“The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out, the conservative adopts them.” - Mark Twain


>>"...supporting civil unions and decriminalizing marijuana were far-left liberal positions. Now they're pretty much mainstream."<<

I meant to say mainstream conservative. The liberal positions now support same-sex marriage and full legalization respectively.

Social justice and equality is one thing, but forcing us into an inescapable form of hard socialism is another.

It's too bad the terms liberal and conservative don't really define anything specific.

"A Georgetown law professor just perfectly captured the absurdity of Confederate pride", Web Link

Yes, yes I think he did.

All of this - every single bit of it can now be traced to a government "oversight": "FBI: Dylann Roof got gun because of screening-system failures", Web Link

Seems we can't enforce laws already on the books.

A simple background check - I mean, how hard can it be? And because someone (or more) couldn't seem to do their job? Are you kidding me?

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the tragedy. And just look at what has resulted; nine people of faith dead, a very sick misguided young man in jail likely for the rest of his life and Confederate flag enthusiasts and opponents going at it daily.

Hate is such a lousy cologne, particularly when it was our tax dollars at work that allowed this to happen.

It may have happened anyway had Roof been denied on this application. If he wanted a gun badly enough, he likely would have found one at some point...but we didn't need to help him in his perversions, yet we did.

Add a comment

Please login to comment on this topic.

Login Here

Create a Login

Powered by Podium