George Washington statue is hidden at...

George Washington statue is hidden at the MLK rally in Columbia , SC

Posted in the Lucedale Forum

“John 3:16”

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#1 Sep 9, 2011
THIS IS INTERESTING AND SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T AND WON'T SEE ON THE EVENING NEWS.

The annual MLK observance at the state house in Columbia SC had an interesting twist this year. The event is held on the north side steps of the statehouse. Prominent at that location is a large bronze statue of George Washington.
This year, the NAACP constructed a "box" to conceal the father of our country from view so that participants would not be 'offended' by his presence.

I could hardly believe my eyes when I saw this picture of the MLK Day rally in Columbia, South Carolina. This rally was sponsored by the NAACP and they said that they covered the statue because they "didn't want to offend anyone". Really? George Washington is the father of this nation. How is he offensive to anyone?

Can you imagine what would happen if we covered the statue of Dr. Martin L. King on President's Day? or is only the statue of a 'white guy' offensive ?? Of course, this display of anti-Americanism wasn't covered at all by the national media (surprise, surprise !!), and the local paper in Columbia only ran a short piece on it. It has been covered a little by the blog-world but
I think the word needs to get out to the general public that this is what the NAACP is all about...militant and (most definitely) racist.



JustSaying

Pinola, MS

#2 Sep 9, 2011
This is their way of keeping racism alive.

“John 3:16”

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#3 Sep 10, 2011
Apparently so.

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#4 Sep 10, 2011
George Washington owned slaves
JustSaying

Pinola, MS

#5 Sep 10, 2011
cipsaw wrote:
George Washington owned slaves
The US government does too! US!

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#6 Sep 10, 2011
JustSaying wrote:
<quoted text>The US government does too! US!
I agree with you on that -

“John 3:16”

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#7 Sep 10, 2011
He treated them with respect however.

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8 Sep 10, 2011
I don't have a clue how he treated his slaves, but no one would want to be a slave.

“John 3:16”

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#9 Sep 10, 2011
There were many accounts written about his slaves who were more like servants actually. Lee had no slaves nor cared for slavery while Grant did have a few and was indifferent.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#10 Sep 12, 2011
The_SCOOP wrote:
There were many accounts written about his slaves who were more like servants actually. Lee had no slaves nor cared for slavery while Grant did have a few and was indifferent.
This is a pointless argument. They were within the law when they owned slaves, no matter who they were. Slavery was just a fact of life then. People had slaves just like they now have a tractor or a combine. People used to treat horses badly too when they needed them for farming, but if you didn't take care of your horses or your slaves, you were soon out the money that they cost you.

Slavery was a terrible thing...and it was terrible on both sides. Lets not forget that these people were sold into slavery by their own countrymen, sometimes by their own families. As wrong as it now looks to us to own slaves (and I am not disagreeing with that), at the time it was the only feasible way to do large amounts of work. ANY plantation owner owned slaves.He had to or he would not be able to farm on the scale that they did to supply the factories with raw materials.

To try to pin the blame for slavery on any one group is silly and short sighted. In any economic system, and slavery was one, there has to be a seller, a buyer, and a product. There is plenty of blame to go around, but the real question is, when are we going to stop blaming? How many centuries have to pass before people will just agree that it was something that is better left in the past? All of this debate over who owned slaves and who didn't really comes down to what kind of job they did. If they were a lawyer or a doctor, they probably didn't. If they were a large scale farmer, they probably did. Who cares? Do you know anyone who was a slave? Or whose parents were slaves? Or whose grandparents were slaves? So why are we still throwing blame around?
Strange

Hattiesburg, MS

#11 Sep 12, 2011
I think some of you long winded ones on here publish all the info from the net and then answer yourself. We can all use the net, I am not interested in it being republished.
Spooky

Liberty, MO

#12 Sep 6, 2013
cipsaw wrote:
I don't have a clue how he treated his slaves, but no one would want to be a slave.
Let us agree that owning another human being is despicable but how about looking at the good he did. All of our past leaders had some flaw and minimizing them we will eventually minimize ourselves to oblivion. Slavery was not dealt with in the Declaration of Independence in order to attain 100% involvement by the Southern States but only after long debate. The vast majority of whites wanted it ended.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lucedale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Arrons 14 hr carmen 1
Lucedale Fri just_do_it 2
black-panther-invasion Jul 13 just_do_it 1
Sonic Jul 8 Lnb 2
Building Permit (Jan '11) Jun '16 Ponderosa1969 10
Car cranking Jun '16 Bullhauler 1
Cost of a Septic Tank in Lucedale (Feb '12) May '16 Kimberly 11

Lucedale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Lucedale Mortgages