How could a nation fighting against it's own fathers and brothers on it's own soil, killing Americans on American soil, EVER be a victory for any side?

NO ONE WON. Those that say one side won and the other side lost are despicable, ignorant and inhumane. Good grief....GROW UP!

Put the flag in a museum where it belongs. The MOST that it should remind us of is what we as a nation were willing to do to make a point to each other. It was a senseless and ignorant war.

We are all AMERICANS NOW!

Oh, and even though Fred is a horrible candidate, I've got to give Fred some credit for this. I don't mind if people fly the Confederate flag on their car or in their home, but please keep it out of state capitals.

Newsflash for you: SO DO THE OTHER 49 STATES.

When is this guy going to get a clue and drop out?

Jim in Orlando, you must be under the age of 30 and reading the standard revisionist history taught in public schools. The Confederacy did not fight to save the institution of slavery nor did the Union fight to abolish slavery. Check your history. Lincoln did not issue the Emancipation Proclamation until 1863 or two years after the fighting started. The Cofederacy was ready to free slaves in order to garner support for their war effort from European allies. This war was fought for the same reasons that the American Revolution was fought which was in the fewest words can be explained as taxation without representation. The industrialized North was in favor of limiting imports of manufactured goods from Europe through tariffs and the South sufferred from the tariffs placed on exported agriculture goods (cotton). Protectionist policies of the North hurt southern business. Jim in Orlando, you are either ignorant or not a conservative.

Posted By John,Memphis, TN : December 6, 2007 2:52 pm

In your dreams John. I'm 52 BTW. The north fought because Lincoln chose to preserve the Union. The South seceded after years of friction, grossly apparent with the Compromise of 1850, the Missouri Compromise, the Kansas Nebraska act, John Brown's raid, and many other examples. While there were other issues, as noted by another poster, the issue of slavery's existence and expansion, and the ability of the Federal Government to impede it, was debate #1. While Lincoln's decision to make the Emancipation Proclamation did not occur until 1863, it was not because the issue had not been the leading factor for the South's departure. Rather, there were two prevailing factors by 1863 1) He heeded to pick a time when the North was more receptive to the concept of a free black man as a cause to fight, and more importantly 2) he did not have the Constutional authority to just proclaim the slaves as "free". Rather, as commander in Chief, since the south was using slaves to build defenses, he used his power as Commander in Chief to declare the Confederate State slaves (not northern) as free, and not a tool of the Confederate defense. To disagree is one thing Johnny, but to call me "ignorant" is to show your familiarity with that state of being. Next.

I understand that some find it offensive, but frankly I find it offenseive when any minority says they can't succeed at something because the "man" is keeping them down. I find it offensive that no one has a problem with blanket statements about all white people being racist but if I wear an article of clothing bearing a Confederate Battle Flag or put one on my truck I may as well be up on charges for hate crimes.

Also, last time I checked the American Flag also flew on the slave ships bound for America from the African Slave Coast.

For all of the northerners who like to complain about the south and the southern states being backwards. The last time I checked Southern Reconstruction failed. U.S. Grant was a drunkard with a worthless cabinet.

On the otherhand, the south (Virginia) produced more Presidents than any other region, and these Presidents are the ones we all revere and admire and wish more people were like.

So I don't think the South sucks so bad. We all were in this slavery thing together so don't shove it just on us down here.

How so many people insist that the ONLY thing that the Confederate flag represents is bigotry and slavery stuns me.
Don't look now, but the war between the States was about MONEY,,,just like every war! The south had an agricultural economy while the north had an industrial economy. The cessation of slavery was only one tool used by the north to preserve the Union's status quo.
The south merely wanted self determination. (As I do in this century,,,,poor me, how likely is that?)

Posted By Tom, Orlando, Fl : December 6, 2007 3:07 pm

the problem with southerns is that they are ignorant...

Show us where in the Constitution there is a clause for succession??

Obviously the higher tariff that he ran on would've damaged the Southern sale of cotton, which was the true cornerstone of the confederacy. From the perspective of a Southerner, it seemed as if the political balance had shifted to the North, and that it would only be a matter of time before things were changed.

Plus, they thought Lincoln and the Republican Party wouldn't risk employing force to prevent the South from seceding. Technically, they were right, as the North probably wouldn't have acted successfully if the South hadn't mobilized first and struck Fort Sumter. That first aggressive action prompted the border states to shift North, and give a larger populational edge that spurred them to victory.

Just my historical perspective, take it as you will...

This is a flag of a defeated country and by virtue of that should only be flown at a statue or memorial site honoging that part that was good.

The flag itself is more about slavery and the subjection of blacks to whites.

Personally I wouldnt allow it to be flown in my own neighborwood period!.

Considering Richmond was the capitol of the Confederacy, I would say it's part of the south.

You did have some good thoughts until I read that.

The Creator of the Universe had stamped them, indelibly, with a different color and an inferior physical and mental organization. He had not done this from mere caprice or whim, but for wise purposes. An amalgamation of the races was in contravention of His designs or He would not have made them so different. This immense number of people could not have been transported back to the wilds from which their ancestors were taken, or, if they could have been, it would have resulted in their relapse into barbarism. Reason, common sense, true humanity to the black, as well as the safety of the white race, required that the inferior race should be kept in a state of subordination. The conditions of domestic slavery, as it existed in the South, had not only resulted in a great improvement in the moral and physical condition of the negro race, but had furnished a class of laborers as happy and contented as any in the world.[1]

Just as one example, the Vice President of the Confederacy said that slavery was the "cornerstone of the confederacy" during the war and that states rights was afterwards.

And as anyone who reads the confederate constitution knows, it didn't care about state's rights. Slavery was a state's right in the union, it was forced on states in the Confederacy. The Confederacy refused to let states secede from it. The only nod to a stronger state was that the government couldn't engage in internal improvements or some forms of taxation.

What the South was really worried about was that, if they tried to secede in 15 years, they'd have no shot at Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri, which were rapidly bleeding slaves into the deep south.

Think about this for a minute – when the South seceded, they had a pro-Southern Congress and Supreme Court. What was the threat to southern liberty from entities they controlled?

Unless you have been on the receiving end of racial intolerance, it is hard to really empathize with those who have. I don't think people should minimize those feels of anger caused by symbols that have been used as symbols of hate.

Instead of political correctness, where we all center our lives, dialog, and ctivities around the most overly sensitive, intolerant character with a big mouth. Why not abandon this disaster and embrace tolerance?

Given my oddball position on just about everything, I find myself in disagreement with everyone at one time or another. Rather than insist that they abandon their beliefs and mores, I simply chalk it up to the diverse and interesting nature of mankind.

The guiding factor in any equation should be : " If no blood is shed or property lost or damaged, then it's not to be infringed upon.

So, raise the flag of your heritage and to hell with whoever is offended by it. We'll look the other way when you guys inevitably do something we feel is inflammatory and keep living our lives.

Which word don't you rednecks understand?