Sharpton is Criticizing Cheney For Latest Hunting Exc.

[CloneAggie]

It's all very much revisionist history. The Civil War (War for Southern Independence) was more about states rights vs. centralized power in the federal government. Slavery was one of the tipping points in the decision to secede, but by no means the whole point, for either side.

Not everyone agrees that it was about states rights. See the editorial link below. Yes, an editorial, but a different viewpoint nonetheless.

The Confederate Flag: Symbol of Valor on Behalf of a Bad Cause

In fact, the sequence of events that made Lincoln’s election in 1860 inevitable began with a demand by Southerners for an expansion of federal power, not a defense of states’ rights. During the Democratic convention in Charleston in April 1860, the delegates from the seven states of the deep South walked out when the majority—who had come to nominate Stephen Douglas—refused to accept a plank calling for a federal guarantee of slave property in all US Territories. By nominating their own candidate for president, the Southerners split the Democratic vote and ensured Lincoln’s election by a plurality of only about 40 percent.

I came face to face with the falsity of the states’ rights claim when I was a doctoral candidate in political philosophy about 20 years ago. I fully intended to write my dissertation on Stephens’ A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States, the most detailed presentation of the states’ rights position and articulate defense of the idea that secession was a constitutional right having little or nothing to do with slavery. But then I met Harry V. Jaffa, America’s foremost Lincoln scholar, who asked me if I had ever read Stephens’ “Cornerstone” speech. Like most Southerners, I had not.

The author is:
Mackubin Thomas Owens is professor of strategy and force planning at the Naval War College in Newport, RI, and an adjunct fellow of the Ashbrook Center.

[Cyclonepride]

Not everyone agrees that it was about states rights. See the editorial link below. Yes, an editorial, but a different viewpoint nonetheless.

The Confederate Flag: Symbol of Valor on Behalf of a Bad Cause




The author is:
Mackubin Thomas Owens is professor of strategy and force planning at the Naval War College in Newport, RI, and an adjunct fellow of the Ashbrook Center.

Thanks for the link. It's an interesting view, and I'm always looking for different viewpoints. However, for every opinion to that effect, there is another one saying that state's rights were the underlying issue.

[Kyle]

It is being SOLD as a symbol for racism by Northern, Rich White Leftists.

Do you know any poor southern black people who fly the Confederate flag?

What it really is, for those who tend to fly it,

a. A symbol of the rural south.
b. A symbol of distrust of the centralized federal government.
c. A symbol of historic conflict, where David kept Goliath at bay for much longer than you'd think could be possible.
d. A symbol of protest against leftists who want to enforce "thought-police" and turn a historic symbol into a "hate-crime."
e. A symbol of bravery and military excellence.

I haven't spent much time in the South, thankfully, but I'm fairly sure that near the top of that list is "A symbol of dislike of black people."

Walter Williams, the BLACK conservative commentator has an interesting essay on how historical wrongs can turn out well. Slavery worked for my family: (Our ancestors were from Alsace, and were slaves, continually exchanged back and forth between French and Germans.)

Americans, whose backgrounds include the African continent, can also point to how their history has put them in a place, today, where they have unparalleled opportunity, compared to the world-wide historical options.

I can grant all the factual premises of this argument, but what conclusion am I supposed to draw from it with regards to flying the Confederate flag?

[EggMcClone]

I'm just glad he stopped shooting people.

But, seriously, it is people like him that give hunters a bad name by not following safety rules and participating in things like slaughtering 70 penned up birds. I like to hunt but what's the point of that?

[Stormin]

I think it is shameful that we allow hate-mongers like Sharpton to turn a valid, historical symbol like the Confederate Flag into the boogie-man.

Racist thugs like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson need to actually get a job and work for a living. Someone tell me again how they live in luxury and pay no taxes? Al Capone, anyone???

I'm not a fan of Sharpton, but I think you have a few issues of your own when it comes to hate-mongering. The Civil War was fought over states rights.......to have slavery. The Confederate Flag was their symbol. Sharpton takes his views to extremes, but a man in Cheney's position should be a bit more careful in the message he sends.

[Cyclonepride]

I'm not a fan of Sharpton, but I think you have a few issues of your own when it comes to hate-mongering. The Civil War was fought over states rights.......to have slavery. The Confederate Flag was their symbol. Sharpton takes his views to extremes, but a man in Cheney's position should be a bit more careful in the message he sends.

Dude was not exactly wearing the Confederate flag. He went to a place where there was one hanging in a garage.

Slavery was one of many issues, as the agricultural South was very worried about their ability to sell their cash crops, while the industrial North was becoming somewhat protectionist.

[Stormin]

Dude was not exactly wearing the Confederate flag. He went to a place where there was one hanging in a garage.

Slavery was one of many issues, as the agricultural South was very worried about their ability to sell their cash crops, while the industrial North was becoming somewhat protectionist.

The Agricultural South was not worried about their ability to sell their cash crops. They were more worried about trying to produce their cash crops with slave labor.

So if Cheney hangs out at a place with Nazi flags or KKK items, it is okay? Sorry, but my feeling is he should be a bit more careful about the message he is sending. He has handlers and bodyguards that check out each and every situation that he enters into. There is a good chance they knew the flag was there. Maybe that group is the 9% or so that approve of Dick Cheney and the job he is doing. Or maybe that is the only group of people left that will hunt with Cheney since he has a history of shooting his friends while hunting.

[alaskaguy]

The Agricultural South was not worried about their ability to sell their cash crops. They were more worried about trying to produce their cash crops with slave labor.

So if Cheney hangs out at a place with Nazi flags or KKK items, it is okay? Sorry, but my feeling is he should be a bit more careful about the message he is sending. He has handlers and bodyguards that check out each and every situation that he enters into. There is a good chance they knew the flag was there. Maybe that group is the 9% or so that approve of Dick Cheney and the job he is doing. Or maybe that is the only group of people left that will hunt with Cheney since he has a history of shooting his friends while hunting.

Sometimes your bias against a persons politics may get in the way of your judgement. I consider myself a Dick Cheney critic but do not assume that "there was a good chance they knew the flag was there" and find it even more unlikely that Dick Cheney had any knowledge of the flag.

In this case, I'm fairly convinced that the media generated this story.

[herbiedoobie]

Libelous? Ignorant? Really?

Here's what I was referring to:

Actually, your reference to "caged" hunt IS ignorant. Ignorant as in you don't know the difference between a caged, and canned hunt. And, as it comes from Wiki, I'd guess it was either a "drive" or a "stocked" hunt, which are neither "caged" nor "canned".

I know that pigeons are often shot live, and released from a cage. Pheasants don't make good shooting targets, so I'd guess that someone probably brought a bunch of pheasants to one area, where they hunted them after release, or perhaps they shot them in front of drivers.

It's not my cup of tea, but I don't see anything inhumane about it. I'm sure the freakazoid "animals are people, too" crowd were all up in arms about it (except they don't OWN arms, they just blow up and burn down buildings with people in them, instead) but who cares what they think?

Actually, on further review, someone tell me the difference in ethics between eating a hamburger made from a raised animal and shooting a pheasant that was released from a cage? Or owning a cat who kills a songbird or mouse?