I don’t hear people saying “eat your heart out” much anymore, but if Mr. Orwell were around, I’d dropped him an e-mail. The world he made up in 1984 is indeed reality. Words and symbols we don’t like, we ban and/or shroud in politically correct (and often nonsensical) terms. Orwell’s “thoughtcrime” is our “hate crime.” Want to know what I think of hate crime laws? Check this out.
A European Union official is considering banning the swastika. If I have to explain why this is dumb, counterproductive, dangerous and repugnant, you haven’t been reading this blog long enough. Perhaps it isn’t for you.
While I “get” that Europe is not America, we’re not far from it, my friends. What are the implications of banning the Confederate flag, for example, if that were to ever happen?
Important Update (5:53 p.m.): Speaking of “hate crime,” you might be interested in this one. A grand jury in Oregon “declined” to charge a black ball player, who attacked a white man because he’s white and married to a black woman, with a hate crime.
The man who got knocked out is a member of the National Guard, and he was dancing with his wife and celebrating his last night of leave before going back to Iraq when the ignorant ball-playing thugs got in his face. If I’d been on that grand jury…
This is only one case, but let’s be honest. Hate crime laws are designed to protect the sensibilities of blacks and homosexuals, as if they were children, and penalize whites for thinking nasty thoughts, not the other way around. That’s how they were conceived, that’s how they’re carried out. When I first read about this incident, I knew exactly what would happen. Laws for me but not for thee.
If you’re interested in reading more, see Riley discusses suspension of players.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 63 comments }
Germany has banned the swastika for many, many year. I can remember when films and video games had to be altered to be sold in Germany, because they contained the swastika. Just in the last few years, the game Return to Castle Wolfenstein, which painted Nazis as the villians (well, for being NAZIs! and doing nasty things with the occult). The job of the player was to … kill nazis. But since the swastika was in the game, the programers had to change the graphics for a European release, and they put in eagles or lighting bolts or somesuch.
Has this cut down on the anti-semitism in Europe? Eliminated Nazi sympathizers or Nazi like thought? Nope.
To the Liberal, the parts within life are more important than the whole of it. Take racism for example. Liberals believe that racism is far worse than murder. If a person kills because he hated, his punishment should be worse than the plain murderer. Why? Because hating is a terrible way of “LIVING”, and a hater’s punishment should be worse than the punishment of a plain murderer of “LIFE” – hence hate crime laws.
Banning the Confederate flag? That would never happen!
Oh, wait. I forgot the new motto of the state Georgia is “Here’s this year’s flag.”
“What are the implications of banning the Confederate flag, for example, if that were to ever happen?”
Banning such displays of political ignorance or depravity deprives the open society of necessary and healthy revulsion. Societies made up of largely moderate, decent people (like the United States) must be constantly reminded that not all people are similarly decent and moderate, and small minorities of indecent and immoderate people often strengthen the cause of decency and moderation through their excesses.
For example, prohibiting display of Klan symbols or hooded capes would eliminate public shock at white supremacist symbols. When I see a burning cross or white-hooded Klansmen, I am repelled by the evil, and it reminds me that racism is not dead. The same is true of flag-burners — while they are ignorant and insulting, they remind us that our flag stands for something more than just a country. Their demonstrations outrage the vast majority of Americans who love the ideals of freedom and equality before the law.
If our society purged itself of all objectionable symbolism, it would eliminate its own defenses against extremism. It’s like totally isolating yourself from pathogens – for a short while it will lead to health, but eventually the immune system atrophies since doesn’t fight anything. Introduce a new pathogen after the degradation is complete and it can then take over the whole body.
Banning displays of the Confederate flag would rob us all of a critical reminder: that 150 years ago, half the country took up arms against the other half, for, among other reasons, defending the enslavement of one man by another. While the official endorsement of this reminder is reprehensible and uncouth, banning all Confederate flag displays outright would permanently relegate the relevance of the Civil War to the history books.
Perhaps banning the Confererate Flag would finally allow the south to understand that they lost the war and heros like Robert E. Lee were “traitors” to the United States of America.
Gee, I know that’s harsh language coming from an America-hating liberal – but then I never took up arms against the United States and violently rebelled.
BTW – you all are aware that MLK Day in Mississippi is called “Robert E. Lee and Martin Luther King Day”, right?
Re: Robert E. Lee
It was a different time and a different place.
There was no United States as we know it and he made decisions based on the ideas of his time not ours.
I am not defending his cause per se, just the man.
Never forget that if raised in that time and place you would have most probably have held dear ideals you would never consider today.
Michael,
Your comment in reply to Russel was well said. One of the problems with political correctness is that there is a tendency toward revisionist history, whereby historical figures are judged through the lense of 2005 rather thatn the time in which they lived.
This is just as wrong as outright censorship, and is just as damaging to our way of dealing with the world and events as erasing all symbols our current society finds repulsive.
‘While I “get” that Europe is not America, we’re not far from it, my friends. What are the implications of banning the Confederate flag, for example, if that were to ever happen?’
Its content based discrimination, which would face strict scrutiny, and be rejected in a facial challenge.
Excellent point about eliminating extremism. Eventually, we won’t be able to fight objectionable viewpoints because we wouldn’t have the strength to do so. Right on John
No one was suggesting that the Confederate flag be banned.
What most liberals and some conservatives oppose is the Confederate flag being celebrated as part of STATE flags and proudly flown on PUBLIC property… Confederate flags should be shown in museums as part of historical displays, or part of war memorials, or flown by private individuals on their private property. But certainly not over the State House!
Never forget that if raised in that time and place you would have most probably have held dear ideals you would never consider today.
Comment by Michael
It’s fitting you try this in a thread labled ORWELL.
The logical fallacy in your argument is that EVERYBODY didn’t think the way Lee did. As a matter of fact, dissovling the Union was not evern a Majority opinion – even in the SOUTH. It was the minority opinion of a bunch of aristocratic white land owners in the South who hoodwinked poor farm-boys into believing their cause was about “State’s Rights”.
Given the time and place, in 1861 Robert E. Lee, his generals, Confederate Officers and the Confederate Government were “traitors” agaist the United States of America. In word and in action.
historical figures are judged through the lense of 2005 rather thatn the time in which they lived
comment by Monti
For your information, after the war Lee was branded a traitor by many who wished to see him imprisoned and hanged. Lee was almost tried as a traitor, but the Federal Governemnt needed his help in convincing Southerners to become Americans agains, so he was just left with his civil rights suspended.
He never regained his constitutional rights during his lifetime. The government of the United States ruled that his leading of a rebellion against the United States justified his classification as a non-citizen.
President Gerald Ford had Lee’s citizenship restored in the mid 1970s – over 100 years after they were taken away.
So it seems that the “modern politically correct” eyeball actually judges historical figures much LESS harshly than they were judged at the time.
I wonder if you’ll start defending Benidict Arnold next.
I don’t think it should be banned BUT it shouldn’t fly over a state house either.
I’ve posted this real life example before, so if you’ve seen it, I apologize.
The most effective way to get rid of something offensive is often to give it wide publication rather than try to ban it.
A couple of decades ago Indiana built a new government center in Indianapolis with a large quadrangle that was intended for public use. Almost at once the Klan applied for permission to use it for a rally.
There was a disagreement on how to deal with this problem. Some people wanted to find technical reasons to deny the permission. Others argued (correctly I think) that most people had never had an opportunity to actually listen to KKK leadership. The people who argued that the Klan should be allowed to “parade” and make their pitch to the people won the day.
The first year was quite a show. Big crowds of curious citizens, counter demonstrators and lots of police to keep peace. But after the Klan people started speaking the crowds thinned quickly. Subsequent appearances resulted in fewer and fewer observers.
Now it is often several years between appearances of the Klan. When they do show up there is a large counter demonstration in a church many blocks away. Almost no one shows up for the Klan except a few news people and some state police (just in case).
In the end giving them a bull horn did nothing but drive everyone away. Trying to ban them would have likely resulted in some sympathy for them.
I will weigh in on this one as well. While banning the stars and bars is outlandish; I as an African American will never support it. Nor will I stop pointing out that it was the flag under which those who mauled Martin and murdered Medger acted. As a Black American, that is the flag’s message to me. To someone else, it may mean a different thing, and that is understood.
Unfortunately, I cannot tell whether you support southern heritage, states rights or an aryan nation when you fly that flag.
Nor can I ignore that many states’ sudden love affair with that flag coinsided convieniently with my forefather’s struggle for equal rights in this country.
So I will never stop fighting the flag. And I applaud the work of those killed under nazisim who fight so vehemently against the flag flown by their enemy. Just cause Hitler made the trains punctual doesn’t change the symbol’s meaning.
‘While banning the stars and bars is outlandish; I as an African American will never support it. ‘
How about as an american? people fighting under the stars and bars killed more americans than Bin Laden.
Lashawn, how do you feel about a ban on burning the American flag?
banjo (no pun intended)
Stephen,
No need to respond to those who are disrespectful..
The first ammendment doesn’t allow for people to incite riots.
The gray area is – what would people consider inflammatory enough to incite riots.
There are areas of this country where you would be given praise for burning a flag and there are areas where you would be slapped silly. But, the majority of Americans would look at the flag burner as an idiot, shake their heads and walk away.
Did you know that the swastika is actually a symbol of good luck? Before the Nazis that is.
GOOD LUCK EMBLEM
“The Swastika” is the oldest cross and emblem in the world. It forms a combination of four “L’s” standing for Luck, Light, Love and Life. It has been found in ancient Rome, excavations in Grecian cities, on Buddhist idols, on Chinese coins dated 315 B.C., and our own Southwest Indians use it as an amulet. ”
From http://www.luckymojo.com/swastika.html
~L.
I wasn’t trying to be disrespectful, Bak…Sorry if it came accross that way.
I wasn’t referring to you Stephen!
> The world he made up in 1984 is indeed reality
I’m with you on the stupidity of banning symbols, but there’s no way that our current world is even close to Orwell’s imagination. Read the book again.
The problem with banning symbols is simple: it restricts freedom and that’s bad. The intended result is bad too: we don’t want to FORGET Nazi’s, we want to forever remember them for what they were.
So swastika’s stay legal, but those who sport them are harshly derided. Sounds fair to me.
Michael,
Agreed. The USA before the civil war and after were two very different entities. Aside from slavery, many in the south were fighting for self determiniation, and they strongly believed in the term “war of northern agression”.
The war, and its causes are much more complex than racism and slavery. And banning a flag to teach the south a lesson… that is just assinine. That presupposes that all southerners need to be reminded what the outcome of that war was. Or that anyone who looks at that flag sees only one thing, and one thing only. Or that the flag is the only thing that stands between them and ‘enlightenment’.
Banning the symbol of the Confederacy (or any other movement) will only build up resentment for those who remember any good that was there and put it firmly into the hands of people who only see it as a symbol of hate. It would stiffle discussion as well, as noted by a previous poster. Should a symbol of rebellion, with undeniable racist overtones be a state flag (or part of it)? I wouldn’t think it wise or tasteful. But that is a question for the people of each state.
As for the Swastika… I used to work with a Holocaust denier. She pointed to the lack of Swastikas in Germany as proof that the whole “Jew-thing” was just overblown propaganda.
Erasing the evidence should never be part of justice, IMO.
Well said.
Baklava…
Exactly which “areas of this country where you would be given praise for burning a flag” are you referring to?
I can only imagine what stereotypes you have…
LB,
I have a bigger problem with the privileged star athletes acting above the law and societal graces than I do with them being black racists. From my read on things when this first got press, the OSU players were disrespectful thugs, period. Of an interacial marriage, of soldiers, of anyone who wasn’t an OSU baller. They were underage, and have publicly stated that being on the OSU football team confers special privledge in Corvallis. It is good that they are suspended, but Rudulph and his pals should have been out on their butts for drinking (underage)and brawling, period, end of story. These are hateful young men (based on their mockery of a married couple and of service men), and should not be rewarded in NCAA ball, or worse, make it into the NFL. Moss is bad enough, be don’t need yahoos like this as well.
Baklava,
What areas of the nation are more likely to slap you silly for flag burning? I am planning vacation, and I wouldn’t mind knowing that the hippie slapping duties will be taken care of for me. Granted, many hippies are a bit silly before any slapage…
I wouldn’t mind knowing that the hippie slapping duties will be taken care of for me.Granted, many hippies are a bit silly before any slapage
Comment by SCSIwuzzy
Gee – if a liberal said “I’m going on vacation and looking for a place where Christian Fundamentalist slappage is taken care of for me…” I could image the outcry here….
That depends on the senses of humor and context people are possesed with, I would imagine. For the context, read Jab’s question of baklava, and bak’s assertion before that. For humor…
…crickets…
Good commenting going on here. When we say ‘never again’, how pray tell will we ensure that if we don’t remember the who, what, how and symbologies of the evil?
In Germany, the fact that the bent cross is illegal only makes it more attractive to the subversives. Believe me, nazi paraphernalia ain’t that hard to find anytime or anywhere.
Much like the general ban on handguns over there except for law enforcement and certified bodyguards. So who runs around in public squares flashing handguns? The cigarette bootleggers ($7/pack), black marketers and hip-hoppers — yeah hip-hop wannabe gangstas.
They have done everything to remove the 10 commandments from public places, Courthouses, bibles are not allowed in schools, they have banned or want to ban ‘under G-d’ in the pledge, I remember when that came into effect, we, students were confused as to why it was inserted into the pledge, after all we said a prayer everyday before the pledge, I guess ‘Ike’ had an idea aforehand.
One of the big things recently is to ban the Confederate Flag, aka the ‘battle flag’, how will that make anyones life easier/better ? Once banned . Then where does it stop, it hasnt stopped with the attempts to ban Christmas the mere mention of the greeting, ‘ Merry Christmas’ is almost forgotten at least the Leftist would like to think so.
The civil war is part of our history as is slavery, by banning the Stars and Bars, would that then mean it never existed ?
Then what is next, in Richmond there is a cemetery, Hollywood cemetery where a good portion is dedicated to Southern Soldiers and Confederate Flags are everywhere, this is true throughout the south where does it stop and what does that do to the First Amendment, this has been deemed ‘Free Speech’ issue.
Once this banning gets started where does it stop ?
Mark
Russell, re: your comments about Robert E. Lee being a traitor,
If you want to look at it that way, then so was George Washington.
Think about it — if Washington hadn’t won the war he was fighting, he would have been tried as a traitor to England. And probably hanged, hence Franklin’s comment about “We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”
Everything I’ve read about him suggests that Lee was a good man. He picked a bad cause to fight for, but he did so not out of a desire to protect slavery, but out of loyalty to his state (which he felt was his primary loyalty, overruling loyalty to the Union.)
As for MLK day – did you know that Lee’s birthday was on January 19th? (I didn’t, but it took me thirty seconds with Google to find out. Just a tip.) In some calendar years, that’s naturally going to fall on the same day as MLK Day, which is celebrated on the third Monday of January.
Now, if the state of Mississippi celebrates Robert E. Lee’s birthday *every year* on MLK Day, even in years like this one when it falls on a weekday (one could understand bumping it forward to the next Monday if it falls on a weekend), then you might have a point. But until I see proof of that, I’m inclined to believe that you’re stretching coincidence into conspiracy.
Anyone from Mississippi around here? What day is Lee’s birthday celebrated on this year? Wednesday the 19th, or Monday the 17th?
The basketball players should be charged, PERIOD.
“While I “get” that Europe is not America, we’re not far from it”
I agree, we are not far from being Europe. I’ve no doubt you find that as disturbing as I do.
The more we are unlike Europe, the more sure I am that we are doing something right.
The more angry Eurpoe is at us, the more sure I am that we are doing something right.
When the day comes that modern Europe is happy with us as a nation, I’ll be very worried.
The swastika: I grew up in Minnesota which actually had more people of German ancestry than Swedish ancestry. All of my ancestors came from Germany. A friend showed me some pictures of a gathering of women from his family from long ago. On display was a homemade quilt with swastikas as the main design. From the looks on the women’s faces. you could tell they were very proud of it. I dislike seeing swastikas but try to remind myself that before Hitler, it was just another good-luck symbol to many people. To me, the banning of the swastika is one way for Europeans to allow themselves to be hateful towards Jews, while congratulating themselves at the same time. I don’t understand why the same people who are all exercised about the Patriot Act don’t see civil liberties problems in “hate speech/thought” laws.
LaShawn
I live in Portland, Oregon (home of the largest Liberal MoonBatCave on the West Coast); I closely followed the televised and print media stories covering this sordid occurrence.
There is more than is being accurately reported on this one. The thugs formerly known as starters on the Beavers’ squad were treating the cafe as if they owned it of course, but specifically, the player who assaulted the guardsman had been racially harassing Sapp’s wife the whole time they were there.
From the moment they walked in together as husband and wife, she was at the receiving end of sexual crudities, racial epithets (yes, especially including “oreo N****” and the “N” word – several times!), and lewd physical come-ons.
Her husband being a man, he did not just sit quietly by as the abuse was heaped on – he spoke up on at least two occasions, cautioning the offender(s). Being a disciplined military man, though, he was not the one who escalated things. He and his lovely bride took the floor for one last dance together and then went for the door.
The player who committed the assault threw verbal insults after the two, and finding himself being coldly ignored, followed them, blindsiding the guardsman with at least one, possibly two punches to the back of the head (the first punch was not to the face), knocking him out cold – or pretty close to it.
But you won’t see this account of events in the MSM. The initial stories were either inaccurate or truncated; after the first week, it ceased being anything other than a “local” story, meaning it only gets covered in Corvallis. How do I know these things? I used to live in Corvallis years ago, I still have friends there, and I get down for a visit sometimes.
There was quite simply no other possible primary motivation than race for their actions. As such it should have fit the existing legal definition of a “hate crime” – be that an Orwellian construct or not, it is the (unevenly applied) law of our land.
At least two of the players will never play under Coach Mike Riley again. He won’t put up with that deplorable misbehavior, nor the lurking attitudes behind it, regardless of the outcome of the trial.
But it is more of a concern that the grand jury could not support bringing a charge of intimidation. What were they thinking? Did they have a pulse?
Or maybe a better question is: What were they told by the District Attorney?
It reminds me of another story that took place in Portland several years back. There was a local lesbian couple, one white, one black – who shared a home in the city. It bears mentioning that the black woman was in a wheelchair.
They filed a police report alleging harassment when menacing notes, and acts of vandalism and intimidation – including burning crosses on the front lawn – began happening.
The two got plenty of tv airtime on local news; there were leadoff stories, interviews, and filler stories interviewing both black and gay/lesbian local advocates. The story ran for at least 2 weeks or more…
Intolerant evangelical Christian-types were, of course, fingered as likely to blame for the incidents, and there were predictable candlelight vigils led by the same groups of activists and advocates. Police were starting to look bad in the local media and coming under heavy criticism for not apprehending the perps, for not caring about either the black or the gay communities…
So the cops set up an undercover stakeout. With a videocamera. And lo and behold, filmed the “disabled” partner walking out her front door and down the steps after dark to plant and burn a few crosses on her own front lawn.
The tape ran on one day on the three local news broadcasts, and was never seen again. After a week I never found another article about it in the “Oregonian”. The woman was given all the sympathy in the world – she was deemed to be suffering from a “psychological disorder” or some such rubbish…
Shades of the Rev. Al Sharpton and Towanna Brawley.
No significant apology was offered to the community or the police department. The advocates and activists simply glossed over it – many sniffing that, although these incidences were false, it did not matter, because there were many real scenarios of harassment that were as bad or worse, which went unreported because of a climate of intolerance, hatred, and discrimination.
Huh? Since when are truth and facts irrelevant?
As a tourism department slogan for my state goes,”Welcome to Oregon – things look different here!”
Robin:
‘Think about it – if Washington hadn’t won the war he was fighting, he would have been tried as a traitor to England. And probably hanged, hence Franklin’s comment about “We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”’
Traitor to england and traitor to america are different things.
Which is probably the point. A traitor to the US is not nesc. a traitor to the states that tried to secede.
IOW, sKerry may be a traitor to us, but not to France and Viet Cong. Wonder if he got some kind of diplomatic immunity during his honeymoon trip to Paris
Oh well, he can’t help himself, he was born with overly ripe blue d’Avergne in his mouth
‘Which is probably the point. A traitor to the US is not nesc. a traitor to the states that tried to secede.’
But he’s still a traitor to the States. And perhaps we shouldn’t be honoring the ones that killed more americans than al-qaeda.
Don’t forget other George Orwell “Newspeak” terms.
Illegal aliens are now “immigrants”. Even though they didn’t have permission to enter, didn’t wait up to 12 years in their country of origin, didn’t have health or DNA (yes!) tests, didn’t pay thousands of dollars, didn’t get fingerprinted at the US embassy, didn’t undergo background checks, and didn’t fill out a stack or forms, the Orwellians still consider illegal aliens the same as legal immigrants, and thus should have the same rights and privilages!
Legal immigrants who support orderly legal immigration by enforcing of the immigration laws are now labeled “anti-immigrant”!
Amnesty leading to citizenship for illegal aliens is now “a temporary worker plan”. I guess this means they will only be working until they become citizens, after that they will be on welfare or running some scam.
If you still believe the Constitution is for “We the People of the United States”, instead of for everyone in the world, then you are a nativist!
“Wanting a better life”at the expense of others is no longer a crime, as long as you are “good hearted”. I wonder why anyone obeys tax, business, and theft laws anymore? I suppose all you have to do is donate some of your gains to the church or favorite corrupt politician, and it’s all OK!
I tell SAN FRANCISCO is run by a bunch of freaks and weirdos they want to ban guns they fine you for flying old glory but they allow gays to marry and they want dog to have rights what a miserble dump frankly the whole damn place should fall into the pacific ocean
1. The Confederacy and all those associated with it are NOT “traitors”. The U.S., after all, seceeded from Great Britiain, didn’t we?
2. Jan 19 IS Robert E. Lee’s birthday. It ought to be remembered, even not officially. Gen. Lee was a sterling example of a gentleman and a soldier.
3. Orwell (despite his socialistic leanings) was a genius, and his 1984 is very prophetic, too. With the quasi state lockdown that seems to pervade our society, can telescreens be far behind?… “Big Brother is Watching You!”
La Shawn,
Are comments officially closed for all posts after this one?
Please say it ain’t so!!!
Hi Mike – Comments will be closed for most posts. I’m at the point where dealing with them is more trouble than they’re worth. I’ll open comments occasionally. For instance, I’ll probably “live-blog” the inauguration tomorrow and open a comment thread. I’m sure you’ll have lots to say.
Hey Mark Slater, regarding the telescreens; why is it when one right-clicks on any Flash animation, there’s that little radio button to turn on/off the webcam? Wonder if the day’ll come that the option will be grayed out and permanently on?
Actus,
If you think Robert Lee, or any other secessionist who put on a uniform and followed rules of war, and bin Laden are equivalent I don’t think there is much left to say. As other’s have pointed out, that would also put Washington into the same company.
Still curious: anyone here from Mississippi, or any other states where Lee’s birthday is officially commemorated? What was the commemoration date this year: yesterday (his actual birthday), or Monday (coinciding with MLK day)?
If it was the latter, then Russell’s unstated “Mississippi is still racist” argument might have some merit; but if it was the former, then his unstated argument fails entirely. I’d like to get some actual data, if anyone has any to provide.
SCSIwuzzy, I concur. That we have the right and duty to revolt against our government in the event that absolute power has absolutely corrupted the powers that be was intentionally designed into our founding documents. In fact, one of our founding fathers thot a revolution might be necessary every generation or two.
The moonbat movers and shakers know that, hence the long-range attempts to strip away local power, and stack the 1st, 2nd, 4th and other amendments against those who would conserve our values and principles.
Within that context, slavery notwithstanding, Jefferson Davis & Robert E. Lee, among others (not all), were honorable men and disagreed/fought by the rules.
Ironic that if the MSM was around, they’d be harping that the North was fighting a lost cause and Lincoln lied and that we should just cede the South up to the “insurgents” & “freedom fighters”.
Note that also up until the Civil War, the US was always refered to in the plural (emp on States), afterwards in the singular (emp on United). That was a major shift in the prevailing meme.
Robin, I’m not from there, but I gooogled “Lee Holiday Mississippi” and came up following info.
Haley Barbour is the Republican Governor of MS and did proclaim MLK/REL holiday. http://www.governorbarbour.com/ProcHoliday.htm
But wait, there’s more.
According to the Secretary of State website, http://www.sos.state.ms.us/pubs/Proclamations/King.asp, it would appear that REL’s birthday was originally & officially commemorated by the Legislature in 2003. So the legislature is a bunch of racists?
Well, hold on, what Russell left out in his rant is that the whole backstory is not so clear, so let’s walk the cat.
According to the citation of authority for MLK/REL comes from “Section 3-3-7, Mississippi Code of 1972″. Since Democrat Ronnie Musgrove was MS Governor, the 2003 MLK/REL holiday is therefore by his authority.
When further investigating Section 3-3-7, Mississippi Code of 1972, we find it was amended in 1997. Kirk Fordyce was the Republican Governor of MS in 1997 when the code was revised by the Legislature to add the following (empasis theirs):
(2) In lieu of any one (1) legal holiday provided for in subsection (1) of this section, with the exception of the third Monday in January (Robert E. Lee’s and Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, birthday), the governing authorities of any municipality or county may declare, by order spread upon its minutes, Mardi Gras Day or any one (1) other day during the year, to be a legal holiday.
The document makes reference to “approved February 11, 1993″, so let’s see what changed in 1993. Hmm, can’t seem to Google it except for one site that is password protected and apparently intended for MS Lawyers, so let’s try LexisNexis. Hmm, nothing there either. Rather than being some kind of vast conspiracy, I think that documents that have been superceded and are that old, just have been digitized yet. So we’re stuck with the 1972 annotated and 97 versions. So let’s look at 1972, annotated:
(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2) of this section, the following are declared to be legal holidays, viz: the first day of January (New Year’s Day); the third Monday of January (Robert E. Lee’s birthday and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday); the third Monday of February (Washington’s birthday); the last Monday of April (Confederate Memorial Day); the last Monday of May (National Memorial Day and Jefferson Davis’ birthday); the fourth day of July (Independence Day); the first Monday of September (Labor Day); the eleventh day of November (Armistice or Veterans’ Day); the day fixed by proclamation by the Governor of Mississippi as a day of Thanksgiving, which shall be fixed to correspond to the date proclaimed by the President of the United States (Thanksgiving Day); and the twenty-fifth day of December (Christmas Day). In the event any holiday hereinbefore declared legal shall fall on Sunday, then the next following day shall be a legal holiday.
(2) In lieu of any one (1) legal holiday provided for in subsection (1) of this section, the governing authorities of any municipality or county may declare, by order spread upon its minutes, Mardi Gras Day to be a legal holiday.
So it would seem that somewhere between 1972 and 1993, MLK was added in. As for REL, I don’t know. Odds are he’s always been around, seeing how Confederate Memorial & Jefferson Davis gets one as well.
Ultimately, much ado over feigned indignation. If we forget the players in the Civil War, we risk forgetting why we fought. So let all the memorials and statues remain, lest we forget and repeat history.
“If you think Robert Lee, or any other secessionist who put on a uniform and followed rules of war, and bin Laden are equivalent I don’t think there is much left to say.”
I don’t think they’re equivalent. I just think they have killed more americans.
In a war. When did Lee or Davis or Washington or others load up a train or horse carriage and crash them into civilian targets, without warning or declaration of war? They didn’t. They weren’t terrorists.
‘In a war. When did Lee or Davis or Washington or others load up a train or horse carriage and crash them into civilian targets, without warning or declaration of war? They didn’t. They weren’t terrorists.’
Sherman’s march was pretty awful. But that wasn’t the rebels doing that, that was the good ole U.S. of A. And don’t you call our soldiers criminals!
And yes. In a war, thats what i’m talking about: they waged war against the US and killed more Americans than bin laden. The fact that its a war isn’t an excuse: thats the point of blame.
Ahhh, Andy and Scuzzy. Good to hear from you again. I don’t know about Flash, never get much of a chance to use it. If we remember 1984, it was only those of utmost priviledge who were permitted to turn off the eye, which is why Winston was so shocked when O’Brien turned off his telescreen.
Actus, “they” didn’t declare war on anyone. Many Southrons still refer to the late unpleasantness, even today, as the War of NORTHERN Agression.
‘Actus, “they†didn’t declare war on anyone. Many Southrons still refer to the late unpleasantness, even today, as the War of NORTHERN Agression. ‘
They know how to play the victim, and their civilians certainly were victims of Sherman. Still don’t change the fact that they killed more americans than bin laden.
Am I wrong, or did they not fire the first shot?
Fort Sumpter was surrounded, leaving the Confederates no option. The Federals were there, incidentaly, no to free slaves, but to COLLECT TARRIFFS. The welfare of the slaves was of little concern to the North, and even the Emancipation Proclamation specifically denied emancipation to slaves in the Northern slave states and also Union occupied Southern States.
Please DO feel free to construe any of this to mean that I support secession, and not just in 1860. Have you read the news in the last couple of months? Hmmm? I refer to all the rancor of the “red/blue” state controversy in the last election, there are those who not altogether jokingly suggest that those “blue” states ought to secede from the red states. This primarily from those of the LEFT.
As a resident of a “red” state myself (not to suggest that I wholly support the man that the ‘red’ represents), I would be delighted if the blue states would go, and would not lift a finger to stop them. I would like to see the day when being governed by the likes of Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, and others would end.
‘Fort Sumpter was surrounded, leaving the Confederates no option.’
They could have not fired on them. Thats kind of the point.
‘The welfare of the slaves was of little concern to the North, and even the Emancipation Proclamation specifically denied emancipation to slaves in the Northern slave states and also Union occupied Southern States.’
Oh I know.
Oh Actup, your concern for the thousands of Americans killed in the Civil War is touching…
Seems to me that as far as this 16th Commander in Chief was concerned, the war would continue, God willing, until full reparations were made to the slaves, as excepted from his 2nd Inauguration speech.
“If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him?
Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.â€
In like manner, Bush’s 2nd Inauguration speech boldly serves to put the moral equivilance crowd on notice. Freedom supercedes peace. IOW, without freedom, there can be no peace from evil.
I’d still be willing to give them 40 acres and a mule (or, to be more contemporary, 40 acres and a Jeep Wrangler). I’d wager that descendants of slaves could manage the land far better than the BLM!
For that matter, give each of the Indians full stewardship of 40 acres and abolish the BLM
‘In like manner, Bush’s 2nd Inauguration speech boldly serves to put the moral equivilance crowd on notice. Freedom supercedes peace. IOW, without freedom, there can be no peace from evil.’
I know. Its a great victory for liberal idealism. Too bad its also ‘no policy shift’. So coddling of tyrants continues.
Classical liberalism, yes. As in TR, Wilson, FDR Truman, JFK, Reagan and Bush II vis a vis international policy.
sKerry’s liberalism, no. Ironic now that sKerry seems to be parroting classic isolationism and realpolitik a la Kissenger/Baker/Shultz. IOW it doesn’t matter how a particular nation is ruled, as long as they like us.
Comments on this entry are closed.