States rights versus Federal Intrusion
 

the new Virginia governor and myself see eye to eye on this one.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36208200

These folks can't find anything from this century, or even the previous century, to argue about? This isn't about states' rights, it's just politics.

I didn't read anything about "Federal intrusion" in the linked article.

I don't have a problem with it.

Oh, who amongst us does not have fond memories of the Confederacy?

those amongst us who have ancestors who fought in BOTH
revolutions for American Independence, one, alongside George Washington
and company against the British aggressors, two, alongside Robert E. Lee and company against the northern aggressors. they both fought and bled for what they believed in: the right to self-govern.

I always find it hilarious that many people still think the confederate
battle flag (stars and bars) is a symbol of racial hatred. if they bothered to check into the REAL meaning behind the southern cross flag, they would
find that it is a Saltare, a St. Andrew's cross which is a symbol
of christianity. perhaps that is why those who hate the south
attempt to twist the meaning of the Confederate stars and bars into a symbol of hatred.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Saltire

- Don't tread on me

As a fan of State's Rights, I have a conflict with praise for the Confederacy. Fans of the Confederacy want to say that the Civil War was about States' Rights, and NOT about slavery. The problem with that argument is that the Right the Confederate States wanted to preserve was the Right to buy and sell human beings.

Without refighting the civil war, the problem with the flag is not it's original meaning but what it stands for today. I some how doubt that the average bubba with a flag on his pickup is familiar with St. Andrew's cross and would be prepared to discuss the finer points of states right. Like it or not, it has changed meaning for most people. I spend enough time in the south to understand the meaning of the "stars and bars" hanging on the side of a bar.

FWIW, the US probably didn't have the constitutional right to force the southern states to stay in the union. The "states rights" aspect of the argument is that the US should have let those states form their own nation, or remain independent. The original intent was to have a relatively weak federal government and strong state governments, more like the current EU than the current US.

I have to agree with Craig on the 'what is the meaning now' thing. Here in Oklahoma it is not unusual to see Swastkas on older things because before the Nazi's came to power it was, for hundreds of years, considered a good luck sign to some Native American tribes.

The 42nd Infantry Division even used it as a unit patch during WW 1. They changed their logo to the Thunderbird when the US entered WW 2.

It would be hard to find anyone today that would think of this symbol as anything other than a logo for the Nazi Parth.

Guess the article is too hot for MSNBC

I what century are they living there? Dwelling on the past for populist reasons.

Could be. However we do dwell on the past on a lot of town celebrations, state celebrations, etc, etc, don't we?

the right to self govern? really? self govern those 3/5ths people, who lacked the right to vote? sounds like self governing wasn't going on for a large part of the population? or did i miss something in history class?

Well since the Holocaust "never happened" in the eyes of some, maybe slavery "never happened" either.. ;)