Tuesday, March 08, 2011

That flag again



The soulful one himself above. He must be good: Having the official NAACP defending use of the Stars and Bars really boggles the mind
"Some NAACP supporters plan to boycott the Detroit arm's annual fundraiser over an honor for Kid Rock they say doesn't mesh with the civil rights group's goals.

The rocker is set to receive the Detroit branch's Great Expectations Award at the annual dinner, which typically attracts about 10,000 people, on May 1 at Cobo Center.

But Adolph Mongo, a longtime political consultant and head of Detroiters for Progress, said he and others will sit out over Kid Rock's use of the controversial Confederate flag during performances. "It's a slap in the face for anyone who fought for civil rights in this country," Mongo said Thursday. "It's a symbol of hatred and bigotry."

NAACP officials defended the honor. "Kid Rock ... has consistently lifted up the Great Expectations of many persons … concerning the future of the city," Donnell R. White, interim executive director of the Detroit Branch NAACP, said in a statement.

Kid Rock and his representatives couldn't be reached. But in a 2008 interview with the Guardian in Britain, he said the flag to him represents southern rock 'n' roll.

Source

23 comments:

sig said...

"It's a slap in the face for anyone who fought for civil rights in this country," Mongo said Thursday. "It's a symbol of hatred and bigotry."

And this is a slap in the face of any Southerner who has a relative who fought in the Civil War. The Civil War may not be politically correct, but it is the heritage of thousands of United States citizens who stood up for, fought for, and many gave up their lives for their Constitutional rights.

Anonymous said...

The southern traitors lost. America won. Deal with it.

Use the Name, Luke said...

Anon 3:28,

Are you trying to start another civil war?

The South was correct about the States' Rights arguments, but wrong about slavery. When the North won, States' Rights were lost. If the South had won, slavery probably would have continued far longer, that is, if the broken pieces had even survived.

As I see it, this country was damaged by the Civil War, not by who won; and we're still suffering the consequences today.

Anonymous said...

The flag represents "southern rock-n-roll"? Well, if nothing else, that statement tells you this guy's an asshole. And that the notoriously racist NAACP is standing up for him tells you there's an "incentive" (see: $$$) in it for them.

Tens-of-thousand of brave AMERICANS died fighting for that flag and what it meant to them. If you disagree with what they did, fine, but that in no way lessons the value of their sacrifice. Of course to blacks, and their White liberal enablers, there is no value in what those brave warriors did. No matter. Since when is their opinion about anything relevant.

Anonymous said...

Tens-of-thousand of brave AMERICANS died fighting for THE US FLAG and what it meant to them.

Anonymous said...

4:21 AM. I don't support Luke's religious opinions, but his comments on the Civil War were quite reasonable, and don't warrant being called "anti-American" or "traitor". Please apologize to Luke.

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:41, & Luke

You are correct. I should not have associated anyone today with the civil war era traitors of the south, including Luke. Just as I am not responsible for the sins of my ancestors, neither should be anyone else. I am sorry.

Anonymous said...

The South was correct about the States' Rights arguments,....

No they weren't.

The "States Rights" argument was based on the idea at the time that the States could nullify any Federal Law - even Constitutionally mandated laws.

The South was against tariffs and taxes on goods, even though the Constitution clearly allowed them. The South was against Slave laws because they felt that slavery, even though it crossed state lines and the importing of slaves came through ports.

"States Rights" was an idea that some founding fathers championed, but it was not written into the Constitution. The South then argued for the idea of "nullification," which is basically the idea that if you don't like a law, you don't have to obey it.

Today, the concept of States Rights is a little different. It is states saying that the Federal government has overstepped its Constitutional authority.

But back in the days prior to the Civil War, States Rights meant that the States were not bound to follow Federal laws, even if those laws were legal under the authority of the Constitution.

Today, we say "the Constitution doesn't allow that, and therefore it is wrong." The South said, "we don't like the law, and even though the Constitution allows if, we will nullify it on the basis of 'States Rights."

The States Rights of today is not the same as that of the Civil War.

Spurwing Plover said...

The leftist NAALCP is just trying to get in big with the rest of the liberal crowd of blabbering nit-wits they ned to be disbanded

Anonymous said...

My issue here is really the double standard. Confederate flag use by Kid Rock deemed okay by NAACP. Confederate flag use by someone else deemed not okay by NAACP. I have this strange idea of equality actually being equal! Some words exist that a black man can say but I cannot. I find that double standard reprehensible. Actions either are or are not acceptable. The ad hominem argument has always been a false one.

Anonymous said...

Luke is 100% right and being pro-South does not make you a traitor, saying such things is ignorant and rude. ANyways, I not a big fan of Kid Rock, but I love that he used the flag.

Anonymous said...

The war of northern aggression or northern arrogance.. get over it yankees it is a piece of cloth. The so called confederate battle flag was not the official flag of the confederacy.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:49 The south was correct about nullification of Federal law, but your point is even less valid if you remember Andrew Jackson stopped the right for states to nullify laws, brush up on your history.

Anonymous said...

Slavery would not have continued if the south had won. Most slave owners had freed their slaves and were not too interested in starting it up again. What did the freed slaves get afer being freed? where is their forty acres and the mule? The mule, i mean jackass is now president.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:17,

The south was correct about nullification of Federal law,

No they were not. There was no basis in the Constitution for nullification. Even though there were people who believed in the idea, the South was wrong on that issue.

No state has or has the right to say they will not follow a legal, Constitutional law simply because the state does not like the law.

if you remember Andrew Jackson stopped the right for states to nullify laws,

Excuse me, but Jackson did no such thing. Jackson continued the policies of Madison and Jefferson in not allowing nullification. You make it seem that Jackson suddenly made "no nullification" out of thin air. He did not.

Anonymous said...

Most european countries had abolished slavery well before the US, and even in the US in was seen as becoming uneconomic. Slavery may have meant free labour but it had to be purchased and maintained. Employing poor workers at very low wages without any other responsibilities was much cheaper, especially when they had to spend their little wages on company-owned accommodation and goods, etc.
The industrial workers of the North and countries like Britain endured far worse conditions and were slaves in all but name.

Anonymous said...

"states' rights was not written into the constitution"??

Read it again. Especially the 10th Amendment.

Use the Name, Luke said...

…and Ninth as well.

Anonymous said...

Read it again. Especially the 10th Amendment.

…and Ninth as well.

The concept of "state's rights" today is not the same thing as "states rights" the South argued before the Civil War.

The "states rights" the South argued was that a state retained the right to disregard any Federal law that the state disagreed with. Even if that law was within the Federal powers as enumerated within the Constitution, the South felt they had the right to disregard that law.

That definition of "state's rights" is not found in the Constitution. You can read it all you want, but you won't find anything that says "only laws that states like are applicable."

Today, the definition of "states' rights" has changed or evolved to mean those rights that are not given to the Federal government. It is a definition that is well understood today and that is a good thing.

However, it is not the same as the definition of "state's rights" the South argued.

The two definitions are apples and oranges.

You'll find the modern definition within the Constitution, but not the South's definition.

Anonymous said...

The attacks by the Left on the South's history and heritage will not stop, until we stop them.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/10/ore-bus-driver-confederate-flag-pushing-job/?test=latestnews#

Anonymous said...

"The attacks by the Left on the South's history and heritage will not stop, until we stop them."

North = WINNERS
South = LOSERS

Enough said.

Anonymous said...

"embrace our differences"


LOL @ Liberals

Anonymous said...

The US will be dismembered anyway by multi-culturalism, even if ironically it was founded on a multicultural mix.

Ironically too, just as Europe was getting over its nationalist dis-unity, its ethnic minorities will break it apart again.