Limbaugh: ‘The Confederate Flag Is the Legacy of Democrats, Not Republicans’

[rangerrebew]

 
Limbaugh: ‘The Confederate Flag Is the Legacy of Democrats, Not Republicans’

06.22.2015 | Alicia Powe | 0


 

Rush Limbaugh during his Monday radio blasted liberals for casting full blame of the Confederate flag’s controversy on Republicans when in reality it’s Democrats who are “responsible” for supporting the flag.




“Do people even care anymore about truth, objective truth?” Limbaugh asked.

Limbaugh pointed to Democratic governor Sen. Ernest “Fritz” Hollings, who served in 1962 when the Confederate flag was first flown over the Statehouse.

“When did all this become a Republican problem? If you go to Arkansas… You know, all these old racial segregationists, they’re all Democrats, Bill Clinton’s mentor from Arkansas, J. William Fulbright, was a proud segregationist! And Bill Clinton signed a proclamation authorizing the Confederate flag to fly over the statehouse in Arkansas.”

“It was a Republican, ladies and gentlemen, a conservative Republican governor who first tried to get the Confederate flag removed from atop the statehouse,” Limbaugh continued. “And, by the way, that conservative Republican governor got no support from the local NAACP. In fact, when that all happened, the Democrats used the flag against the Republican governor, and it may have cost him the election. That was not that long ago.”

Read more at http://dailysurge.com/2015/06/limbaugh-on-confederate-flag-the-confederate-flag-is-the-legacy-of-democrats-not-republicans/

[GourmetDan]

 
                                   

[NavyCanDo]

During the Garfield vs. Hancock election a handbill was passed out as a reminder of who the Democrats were. It would be considered inflammatory language today, and maybe a little troubling to those of us who can trace our roots to the old South like me, but if you were at age to still remember the Civil War and was handed this handbill, it made perfect sense, and was very profound and true.

Why I will not Vote for the Democratic Ticket

I am opposed to the Democratic Party, and I will tell you why.
Every State that seceded from the United States was a Democratic State.
Every man that shot Union soldiers was a Democrat.
Every man that loves slavery better than Liberty was a Democrat.
The man that assassinated Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat.
Every man that sympathized with the assassin – every man glad that the noblest President ever elected was assassinated – was a Democrat’
Every man that wept over the corps of [end of] slavery was a Democrat.
Every man that cursed Lincoln because he issued the Proclamation of Emancipation – the grandest paper since the Declaration of Independence – every one of them was a Democrat.
Soldiers! Every scar you have got on your heroic bodies was given you by a Democrat. Every scar, every arm that is lacking, every limb that is gone, every scar is a souvenir of a Democrat.

The handbill then contrasted Republican and Democrats:
The Republicans have done some noble things – things that will be remembered as long as there is history. But there are some things they did not do.
They did not use an army to force slavery into Kansas…
They did not oppose emancipation/
They were not “Ku-Klux”
They did not scourge, and hang, and shoot, and murder men for opinions sake.
They did not organize the Louisiana white league or the South Carolina rifle clubs
They did not drench the South with the blood of inoffensive colored men…

[Fishrrman]

“Do people even care anymore about truth, objective truth?” Limbaugh asked.

A very good question.

Unfortunately for a large and growing segment of the population, the answer is "no".

Also unfortunate is that this isn't going to change for the better.

It's going to get worse...

[Luis Gonzalez]

Wow.

I agree with Rush.

[Bigun]

Sanitizing American history is a liberal conceit that the "enlightened" present can exonerate itself from the sins of the past. Unfortunately for them history doesn't work that way.

[Luis Gonzalez]

During the Garfield vs. Hancock election a handbill was passed out as a reminder of who the Democrats were. It would be considered inflammatory language today, and maybe a little troubling to those of us who can trace our roots to the old South like me, but if you were at age to still remember the Civil War and was handed this handbill, it made perfect sense, and was very profound and true.

Why I will not Vote for the Democratic Ticket

I am opposed to the Democratic Party, and I will tell you why.
Every State that seceded from the United States was a Democratic State.
Every man that shot Union soldiers was a Democrat.
Every man that loves slavery better than Liberty was a Democrat.
The man that assassinated Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat.
Every man that sympathized with the assassin – every man glad that the noblest President ever elected was assassinated – was a Democrat’
Every man that wept over the corps of [end of] slavery was a Democrat.
Every man that cursed Lincoln because he issued the Proclamation of Emancipation – the grandest paper since the Declaration of Independence – every one of them was a Democrat.
Soldiers! Every scar you have got on your heroic bodies was given you by a Democrat. Every scar, every arm that is lacking, every limb that is gone, every scar is a souvenir of a Democrat.

The handbill then contrasted Republican and Democrats:
The Republicans have done some noble things – things that will be remembered as long as there is history. But there are some things they did not do.
They did not use an army to force slavery into Kansas…
They did not oppose emancipation/
They were not “Ku-Klux”
They did not scourge, and hang, and shoot, and murder men for opinions sake.
They did not organize the Louisiana white league or the South Carolina rifle clubs
They did not drench the South with the blood of inoffensive colored men…

That's actually adapted from a speech by Robert Green Ingersoll.

[olde north church]

If you stop and think about it, the Democrats are so pissed off blacks wouldn't pick their cotton anymore, they have decided to kill their babies in the womb.

[DCPatriot]

If you stop and think about it, the Democrats are so pissed off blacks wouldn't pick their cotton anymore, they have decided to kill their babies in the womb.

Uh....no.  That's ridiculous.

You're doing the same thing they are doing.  Condemning everyone in the South and painting them all the same.  They weren't.  Many abstained from taking sides and getting involved in the Civil War and just wanted to be left alone.

Furthermore, when you point out that the Democrats wanted the status quo...retaining the right to own slaves and even in the 60's, in their being against the Civil Rights Act, their response to the charge is that neither party is the same as it was back then.

At some point, the LEFT had taken over the Democrat Party.  But are all Democrats the same?  Of course not.

Are all Republicans the same?  LOL!   You know we're not.

The difference is that just like in 1930's Germany....many Germans were against Adolph Hitler but were scared into silence.  Just like many Americans are today.

[olde north church]

Uh....no.  That's ridiculous.

You're doing the same thing they are doing.  Condemning everyone in the South and painting them all the same.  They weren't.  Many abstained from taking sides and getting involved in the Civil War and just wanted to be left alone.

Furthermore, when you point out that the Democrats wanted the status quo...retaining the right to own slaves and even in the 60's, in their being against the Civil Rights Act, their response to the charge is that neither party is the same as it was back then.

At some point, the LEFT had taken over the Democrat Party.  But are all Democrats the same?  Of course not.

Are all Republicans the same?  LOL!   You know we're not.

The difference is that just like in 1930's Germany....many Germans were against Adolph Hitler but were scared into silence.  Just like many Americans are today.

I was being facetious.  Illustrating absurdity by being absurd?   

[DCPatriot]

I was being facetious.  Illustrating absurdity by being absurd?   

Sorry, ONC!   

With all the pathological lies and headlines devoid of any sense of reality today, it's hard to spot satire, etc.. 

[GourmetDan]

Furthermore, when you point out that the Democrats wanted the status quo...retaining the right to own slaves and even in the 60's, in their being against the Civil Rights Act, their response to the charge is that neither party is the same as it was back then.

The proper response here would be that the same applies to the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia.

It does not stand for racism (if it ever did), it stands for stubborn individualism in the face of oppressive government (which it does)...

[NavyCanDo]

It does not stand for racism (if it ever did), it stands for stubborn individualism in the face of oppressive government (which it does)...

The "stubborn individualist" you speak of are the Scots-Irish who were a large part of the Southern population. The Confederate battle flag was influenced by the Scottish Flag and also the Flag commonly used by the Ulster-Scots, both having a version of the St Andrew's Cross on them.    The same stubborn individualist who defeated the British  at Cowpens and Kings Mountain, and who made up a huge portions of Washington's army.    The flag was adopted by racist, there is no denying that, but that does not erase the historic significance of the flags true history and the history of the people who first flew it, and what they added to this country. 

[truth_seeker]

The flag was adopted by racist, there is no denying that, but that does not erase the historic significance of the flags true history and the history of the people who first flew it, and what they added to this country.

An example of the right being ineffective at managing their own history, legacy, imagery etc.

Another example is managing the history of the Republican party, abolitionism, etc.

Problem with this topic: When the political poles reversed, Johnson traded blacks for racist white Southerners, the GOP gladly took the racists along with their symbols.

Chickens now come home to roost, so to speak.

[Bigun]

The "stubborn individualist" you speak of are the Scots-Irish who were a large part of the Southern population. The Confederate battle flag was influenced by the Scottish Flag and also the Flag commonly used by the Ulster-Scots, both having a version of the St Andrew's Cross on them.    The same stubborn individualist who defeated the British  at Cowpens and Kings Mountain, and who made up a huge portions of Washington's army.    The flag was adopted by racist, there is no denying that, but that does not erase the historic significance of the flags true history and the history of the people who first flew it, and what they added to this country.

 

[aligncare]

An example of the right being ineffective at managing their own history, legacy, imagery etc.

Another example is managing the history of the Republican party, abolitionism, etc.

Problem with this topic: When the political poles reversed, Johnson traded blacks for racist white Southerners, the GOP gladly took the racists along with their symbols.

Chickens now come home to roost, so to speak.

You sound like a broken record.

It's nearly impossible for Republicans to mount an effective message campaign. Any response will always and necessarily sound defensive because it must first be filtered through a hostile media. The playing field has never been level, nor will it ever be level. So I wish for once you would turn you sharp criticism on to the MSM, which is the real source of negative imaging the GOP suffers under.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You sound like a broken record.

It's nearly impossible for Republicans to mount an effective message campaign. Any response will always and necessarily sound defensive because it must first be filtered through a hostile media. The playing field has never been level, nor will it ever be level. So I wish for once you would turn you sharp criticism on to the MSM, which is the real source of negative imaging the GOP suffers under.

I think the answer here is both far simpler, and more complicated.

To be a conservative of any stripe requires thinking.

To be any manner of a liberal simply requires thoughtless emotions.

Liberals simply say "Bush bad" and the rest of the tribe pounds their chest, jump up and down and repeat the mantra.

In retrospect, that may have not been the best way to illustrate the difference between liberals and conservatives.

 

[kevindavis007]

I think it was a Democrat who wanted to do the following:  immediate cessation of hostilities and a negotiated settlement with the Confederacy.....

[truth_seeker]

You sound like a broken record.

It's nearly impossible for Republicans to mount an effective message campaign. Any response will always and necessarily sound defensive because it must first be filtered through a hostile media. The playing field has never been level, nor will it ever be level. So I wish for once you would turn you sharp criticism on to the MSM, which is the real source of negative imaging the GOP suffers under.

It was Lyndon Johnson who started the polar reversal, of the two parties-1964. Not the MSM.

Richard Nixon gladly took it up with the Southern strategy-1972.

The present GOP "base" on a map looks like the pro-slavery, pro-segregation, pro-discrimination South. The MSM didn't do that.

See "History" paragraph

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South

[aligncare]

It was Lyndon Johnson who started the polar reversal, of the two parties-1964. Not the MSM.

Richard Nixon gladly took it up with the Southern strategy-1972.

The present GOP "base" on a map looks like the pro-slavery, pro-segregation, pro-discrimination South. The MSM didn't do that.

See "History" paragraph

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South

It was the press that looked the other way about Lyndon Johnson's well-hidden racism.... thus setting up and reinforcing the... democrats good (for black folk), Republicans bad, meme that we as Republicans continue to suffer under today.

If we had had an honest media things might have been different today.

[andy58-in-nh]

I'm not a Southerner, and I've always had very mixed feelings about that flag, which the current debate has done nothing to change.

I don't believe in banning symbols, even historically nasty ones like the swastika - people must be free to judge on their merits things that symbolize even the absence of freedom.

My preferred flag (other than Old Glory) is on my wall, here in my office as I type these words. I think it stands on its own merits:

[Fishrrman]

Andy wrote above:
[[ My preferred flag (other than Old Glory) is on my wall, here in my office as I type these words. I think it stands on its own merits: ]]

Looks good, Andy.

But be assured that it's only a matter of time before the left goes after the Gadsden flag with the same vitriol that they're tossing at the Battle Flag now.

I have no problem with the Confederate flag, none whatsoever. In a time when the scourge of governmental power, abetted by a rapacious Congress (with the elected Republicans being amongst the greediest) grows and devours what remains of our personal freedoms, the South's flag remains one of the most powerful symbols of resistance in the face of almost certain loss. An enduring icon of Scots-Irish defiance, American-style.

I don't own any Battle Flags myself. But when I see one, I am reminded again that perhaps indeed The South "had it right"...

[NavyCanDo]

You all realize what this is all about don't you? It's all politics.  It has nothing to do with banning a flag, but everything to do with dividing the conservatives on an issue, as demonstrated right here not only on this forum but on other conservative forums as well.  And as we will see leading up to the first debate, the candidates, will be divided as well.  You can bet your bottom dollar, the first debate will attempt to bait the candidates with a question on the flag. If they give a populist answer to the question,  that the flag is a symbol of racism and should not be displayed on public land, they take a chance on losing southern supporters. If they take a strong First-Amendment Stand and state the Federal Government overstepping the powers given them, and they should not be able to ban the flag, then they will be labeled a racist, and any sound-bites on the subject used against them in ads.

[Paladin]

You all realize what this is all about don't you? It's all politics.  It has nothing to do with banning a flag, but everything to do with dividing the conservatives on an issue, as demonstrated right here not only on this forum but on other conservative forums as well.  And as we will see leading up to the first debate, the candidates, will be divided as well.  You can bet your bottom dollar, the first debate will attempt to bait the candidates with a question on the flag. If they give a populist answer to the question,  that the flag is a symbol of racism and should not be displayed on public land, they take a chance on losing southern supporters. If they take a strong First-Amendment Stand and state the Federal Government overstepping the powers given them, and they should not be able to ban the flag, then they will be labeled a racist, and any sound-bites on the subject used against them in ads.

Excellent analysis, NCD. It also should be pointed out that the whole manufactured controversy is designed to keep Conservatives on the defensive and provide the flag burners with a patina of moral superiority.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You all realize what this is all about don't you? It's all politics.  It has nothing to do with banning a flag, but everything to do with dividing the conservatives on an issue, as demonstrated right here not only on this forum but on other conservative forums as well.  And as we will see leading up to the first debate, the candidates, will be divided as well.  You can bet your bottom dollar, the first debate will attempt to bait the candidates with a question on the flag. If they give a populist answer to the question,  that the flag is a symbol of racism and should not be displayed on public land, they take a chance on losing southern supporters. If they take a strong First-Amendment Stand and state the Federal Government overstepping the powers given them, and they should not be able to ban the flag, then they will be labeled a racist, and any sound-bites on the subject used against them in ads.

I just don't understand why banning the Democrat battle flag is a conservative issue?