Nancy removed 4 historical statues (Page 2): I would one step further by removing all statues, and portraits of every famous American including Rosa Parks, MLK ,every member of the...

dcmdm77

I would one step further by removing all statues, and portraits of every famous American including Rosa Parks, MLK ,every member of the House and Senate including
Richard Byrd, the former Grand Wizard of the
KKK and of every President of the United States, including FDR, JFK, and of course Barack ( Barry Sato) Hussein Obama ( ONE BIG ASS MISTAKE AMERICA) too. We will see that happens or not

maryla

Gatsby wrote:

The next Congress will remove Nancy's portrait, and erase her ugly puss from our history.

Let's hope!!

bahmer

maryla wrote:

I think the reason was they were confederates. I think that is flimsy.

We as a country deserve to know our history. Removing them will in no way impact our future behavior. (IMO)

I was appalled. They want to remove US history, plain and simple. What a disgrace..

Amen and Amen

Simple Sam Loc: USA

dcmdm77 wrote:

I would one step further by removing all statues, and portraits of every famous American including Rosa Parks, MLK ,every member of the House and Senate including
Richard Byrd, the former Grand Wizard of the
KKK and of every President of the United States, including FDR, JFK, and of course Barack ( Barry Sato) Hussein Obama ( ONE BIG ASS MISTAKE AMERICA) too. We will see that happens or not

Their goal, this time, is to erase any mention or reference; be it statutes, pictures, or books that remind them that they (b****s) opposed the creation of the USA, took up arms against the Patriots and fought for the Britt or the war of aggression was not all about them. They do not like the fact that Americans, filled with emigrants from around the world, forgave them and not only permitted them to stay, but has carried many of them through life for over 240 years. I imagine it may be hard for them to see a face in stone or picture of a founding father or brave general who stares from history with a knowing smile which says "we fought for this country and gave you tools to become great. Millions of the brave have died for peace and e******y. And here you are 443 years later, still no more assimilated into the USA as your savage forefathers."

Tug484

maryla wrote:

I think the reason was they were confederates. I think that is flimsy.

We as a country deserve to know our history. Removing them will in no way impact our future behavior. (IMO)

I was appalled. They want to remove US history, plain and simple. What a disgrace..

If you get rid of history, you're bound to repeat it.

Tug484

Gatsby wrote:

The next Congress will remove Nancy's portrait, and erase her ugly puss from our history.

I certainly hope so.

Smedley_buzkill

Kevyn wrote:

They were not statues, they were painted portraits of congress members who were t*****rs and defected to the confederacy.

One more time Kevvy Boy. Show me just ONE place, in the Constitution or in US law as it existed in 1861 where secession is prohibited. Are you actually so full of hubris, (among other, smellier substances) that you think something is treasonous because you think so? There was no treason committed. No matter how much you wish there was. Secession was legal. Three states were accepted into the Union with a written reservation of the right to secede in their ratification statements. Exercising a right recognized for nearly 80 years is not treason. People too stupid to study history are not treasonous either, although maybe they should be.

Smedley_buzkill

woodguru wrote:

She removed four paintings, and I'm not sure why anyone would memorialize t*****rs and losers.

Our government's history had men who were s***e owners that fought to free them, those are the heroes that need to be memorialized. We don't need to be reminded of the losers and t*****rs that some on the right so strongly reveres.

Yes, our country had men who were s***e owners. It also had men like Ulysses S Grant who were married to s***e owners and whose s***es were not freed until the ratification of the 13th Amendment some two years after the Emancipation Proclamation.
Now on the subject of t*****rs, would you like to put your money where your mouth is? How much are you willing to wager that you can find ONE PLACE in either the Constitution or in US law as it was written in 1861 that says secession is prohibited?
You should read the Constitution, or perhaps it would be better if someone read it to you and explained the big words.
You realize of course that a non-citizen cannot be charged with treason except under very narrow circumstances, none of which were met in the Civil War? Robert E Lee had his citizenship restored in 1975, more than one hundred years after his death. No, it was not revoked, under US law you cannot revoke the citizenship of a birth citizen. It has to be surrendered voluntarily.
BTW, if you decide to lose that wager, don't try and quote Texas v White. I said 1861, not a case that was not even brought before the Court until 1869.
You have no understanding of either the Constitution or US law, yet you prate of treason like you know what you're talking about.

Larry Joe

Simple Sam wrote:

Howell Cobb, He was speaker of the House during the Thirty-First Congress. As governor of Georgia from 1851 to 1853, he was considered a staunch unionist. From 1857 to 1860, he was secretary of the treasury under Buchanan. In 1860, he supported the Southern walkout from the Democratic convention at Charleston. Later, he was chairman of the Montgomery Convention and president of the provisional Confederate Congress.

James Orr, State house of representatives 1844-1847; elected as a Democrat to the Thirty-first and to the four succeeding Congresses (March 4, 1849-March 3, 1859); chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs (Thirty-third Congress); Speaker of the House of Representatives (Thirty-fifth Congress); was not a candidate for renomination in 1858; resumed the practice of law at Craytonville. [/b]He was one of three commissioners sent to Washington, D.C., to treat with the Federal Government for the surrender of the forts in Charleston Harbor;[/b] Member of the Confederate Senate in 1861; served in the Confederate Army during the Civil War; special commissioner sent to President Johnson to negotiate the establishment of provisional government for the State of South Carolina in 1865; member of the State constitutional convention in 1865; elected Governor of South Carolina as a Republican in 1866; president of the State convention at Columbia in July 1866; delegate to the Union National Convention at Philadelphia in August 1866; judge of the eighth judicial circuit 1868-1870; member of the Republican State convention in August 1872; delegate to the Republican National Convention in 1872; appointed by President Grant as Minister to Russia in December 1872; died in St. Petersburg, Russia, May 5, 1873; interment in the Presbyterian Cemetery, Anderson, S.C.

Charles Crisp, served under Grover Cleveland who was the first Democrat elected AFTER the Civil War. The House, under the direction of Speaker Crisp, backed the President’s plea to repeal the Sherman Silver Purchase Act. Crisp’s tenure as Speaker ended when Republicans regained control of the House in the 54th Congress (1895–1897.

Robert H****r, a different kind of guy. He did own a plantation, although I can not find s***e ownership in Census records, he probably did own one or more.

Of the four, one may have owned s***es and may have been in favor of war.

Howell Cobb, He was speaker of the House during th... (show quote)

Thanks for the history lesson! I had no idea of their backgrounds. I bet Pelosi had no idea either. But then honesty has never been her strong suit. T*****rs, not at all. Do you think the liberals in our group would consider all of us t*****rs? If not, they need to check with the Mother Country. The greatest Unionist of them of them all, Abraham Lincoln never called Confederates t*****rs.
Larry Joe

son of witless

maryla wrote:

Definitely

Donald J. Trump holds rallies. Democrats hold r**ts.

EconomistDon

woodguru wrote:

She removed four paintings, and I'm not sure why anyone would memorialize t*****rs and losers.

Our government's history had men who were s***e owners that fought to free them, those are the heroes that need to be memorialized. We don't need to be reminded of the losers and t*****rs that some on the right so strongly reveres.

How about statues of George Washington, General Ulysses Grant, and Frances Scott Key? They have all been knocked down by ignorant youth who probably failed history. Washington's statue was wrapped in a US f**g that was then burned. Do you consider these three people losers and t*****rs? Are you so braindead that you support all the h**eful actions of B*M? These fools are obviously ignorant of our nation's history and are insuring that our history is erased for future generations.

BTW, I hope that you understand that Grant and Frances Scott Key fought in the Civil War to FREE the s***es.

I'm not sure that Pelosi understands history; she is obviously ignorant about the paintings she removed.

Tug484

EconomistDon wrote:

How about statues of George Washington, General Ul... (show quote)

Pelosi is ignorant period.

promilitary

maryla wrote:

I think the reason was they were confederates. I think that is flimsy.

We as a country deserve to know our history. Removing them will in no way impact our future behavior. (IMO)

I was appalled. They want to remove US history, plain and simple. What a disgrace..

How does she have the authority to do this?

promilitary

woodguru wrote:

She removed four paintings, and I'm not sure why anyone would memorialize t*****rs and losers.

Our government's history had men who were s***e owners that fought to free them, those are the heroes that need to be memorialized. We don't need to be reminded of the losers and t*****rs that some on the right so strongly reveres.

It is still our history; it should be left alone.

Simple Sam Loc: USA

promilitary wrote:

How does she have the authority to do this?

Congress has the power under the antiquities act.