February 20, 2007

Hillary's strange way of opposing the South Carolina flag.

Speaking yesterday:
"I think about how many South Carolinians have served in our military and who are serving today under our flag and I believe that we should have one flag that we all pay honor to, as I know that most people in South Carolina do every single day"...
Huh? That would be an argument against all state flags!

It seems she's trying so hard to say just the right thing and please everyone that she ends up saying something weird.

IN THE COMMENTS: George thinks Clinton's triangulation is brilliant:
I'm a Southerner, and Sen. Clinton's approach to this issue is the first I've seen by a non-Southern politician that will actually appeal to the tender egos of middle-aged Southern men.

Sen. Clinton's approach is extremely clever. In fact, it is brilliant. It appeals directly to the patriotism of Southerners in time of war by asking them to put the present and future needs of the country ahead of what's long past.

83 comments:

The Exalted said...

The existing South Carolina "rebel" flag dishonors the American flag; non "rebel" state flags do not.

There Ann, an easy answer to your forced misunderstanding.

George said...

I'm a Southerner, and Sen. Clinton's approach to this issue is the first I've seen by a non-Southern politician that will actually appeal to the tender egos of middle-aged Southern men.

Sen. Clinton's approach is extremely clever. In fact, it is brilliant. It appeals directly to the patriotism of Southerners in time of war by asking them to put the present and future needs of the country ahead of what's long past.

If I were her opponent--Democrat, Republican, or Rebel--I'd be very nervous.

The Emperor said...

Yeah, I think it was obvious she was distinguishing between the U.S. flag, which we all "pay honor to," and the Confederate flag, which is divisive. She doesn't care if states have their own special flags.

I'm no Hillary fan, but I think she was pretty clear on this one.

Ann Althouse said...

I know what she should have said! I'm talking about what she did say and what her doing that says about her. So, exalted, you are the one who's misunderstanding something! Sheesh!

AJ Lynch said...

No surprise to me; it's classic Clinton family trying to have it both ways.

Except for her socialist worldview, I doubt there is any there there. Sorry if that bursts your hopeful bubble, Ann.

Bruce Hayden said...

I agree with George. Hillary is typically quite tone deaf, and this is a very nice way around the dilemma. Remember, she needs to keep the liberals and Blacks on board, but also needs some Southern swing voters to put her over the top. And this is typically a mine field.

AJ Lynch said...

And I say George is full of baloney. Does George really believe an average (?) SC resident who is already probably flying both flags will take one down due to Hillary's appeal?? I doubt it.

Wake up people - it's just more meaningless noise spewing from the pols' mouths. She is surely avoiding taking on the big issues facing this country and spare me the comments about state primary- I do recognize she is focusing on getting votes from large black voting bloc in a small state.

Bissage said...

So, who does Hillary! think are the people in South Carolina who don’t pay honor to the U.S. flag?

Oh, that’s right, the one’s who are still fighting the Civil War. Apparently, she thinks that’s a number of South Carolinians between one percent and forty-nine percent.

I’d like for someone to ask her to specify the percentage she thinks is accurate.

AllenS said...

I've met, and know quite a few Southern men, and not a one had a "tender ego".

The Emperor said...

She's saying that most South Carolinians are good, God-fearing, flag-loving patriots who believe in, and will fight for, a unified America. They do not believe that people should be divided by offensive symbols like the Confederate flag.

What's "weird" about that?

George said...

AJ--

No "average" pineywoods yaywho is going to scrape the Rebel flag decal off his pick-up's rifle-rack window because of what Sen. Clinton said.

She knows she'll never get those particular white Southern men (i.e. lower middle class blue collar guys) to vote for her.

What she has done is articulate a way to solve the problem without insulting the delicate sensibilities of the all-important middle-aged middle-class (or upscale) white Southern Republican voter.

As for "tender egos," there are many Southern guys who have learned from hard experience to keep their mouths shut around non-Southerners because they know that all too often Southern food, culture, music, and, yes, valor are objects of ridicule.

dadvocate said...

Slavery existed quite legally under the Stars and Stripes for about 4 score and 7 years. Is it really any less of a symbol of slavery?

Frankly, I'm amazed no one has tried to force a change in the American flag because of this, America being such a horrible country and all that.

Malibu Skipper said...

Slavery existed quite legally under the Stars and Stripes for about 4 score and 7 years. Is it really any less of a symbol of slavery?

Um... yes? Is this a trick question?

Tim said...

Hillary!'s husband Bill signed the bill commemorating Arkansas's state flag, which has obvious elements of the Confederacy's Stars and Bars. For whatever reason, this does not seem to matter a whit amongst those sensitive to this issue.

EDH said...

I thought Hillary was a southerner, ain't she?

The Drill SGT said...

Without knowing the rest of the facts, I can't make a judgment here. My assumptions:

- at the state Capitol, there is an American Flag flying
- There is a State flag flying in second place
- somewhere else there is a Confederate

Is the Confederate flag part of a historical display? On the State House? As part of a Civil war Display? 6 Flags over South Carolina?

Victor said...

As a native South Carolinian (transplanted to Maryland, which, fortunately, is still south of the Mason-Dixon Line), I'm curious about what "rebel" flag the so-called "exalted" refers to. The SC state flag has been, as long as I've been on this Earth, blue with a white crescent moon and a white Palmetto tree.

Ann Althouse said...

Emperor: I didn't say that was weird. What's weird is that she tinkered with the locution so as not to offend either the people who love that flag or those who hate it, and as a result of trying to please both groups, ended up with a sentence that, if read literally, would denounce all state flags.

The partisan moderate said...

This is a non-issue for Democrats. They have no chance of winning this state in a general election, unless it is a 48 or 49 state blowout, which in that case it does not matter anyway.

For primary purposes, a large percentage of the Democratic vote is black and really resents the flag. Therefore, it is good politics to denounce the flag in whatever terms the candidate chooses to do so.

As for Hillary, Ann, she is not nor ever has been a hawk or a centrist. If you look at her statements on any number of issues they sound the same as any other Democratic politician. Her Iraq statements are basically Kerry-esque. It consists of falsely claiming both that the President lied and that she gave authority to strengthen his hand at the UN not for the war, which is also not true. It is a problem with the mainstream media that also characterized Edwards (Two Americas) as a centrist in 2004.

DWPittelli said...

Emperor: "She's saying that most South Carolinians ... do not believe that people should be divided by offensive symbols like the Confederate flag. What's 'weird' about that?"

Nothing weird. But she apparently made her statement without actually saying that the Confederate flag is "offensive," or any similar term. This does not surprise me, as leaving out that part of her chain of logic is what she hopes will keep her statement from angering Southerners who have favored some uses of the "rebel" flag. But skipping such a logical step is also not entirely above-board, nor is it especially helpful in persuading one's opponents.

litsskad said...

Victor beat me to it. Whatever this is all about, it's certainly not about the South Carolina state flag. And I had always thought that the South Carolina flag was one of the best and most easily and widely recognized.

This all would have made a lot more sense if it had happened in Mississippi.

AJ Lynch said...

George:

I believe you just contradicted yourself. First you predicted Hillary's "extremely clever" approach would appeal to "middle-aged southern men" then you say it won't work with "average pineywoods yaywhos" . Are these groups mutually exclusive or are you waffling or is your last name actually Stephanopoulous? :)

Nathan said...

I wonder where this pseudo-patriotic, pro-flag screed was every time her left-wing supporters were burning that flag hither and yon?

CS said...

For many Southern guys, the US flag now serves the same purpose as the battle flag did for decades. It's a symbol of a defensive political and cultural struggle against a richer, more clever, more progressive other that uses moral standards for political advantage. "Yankees," "Eastern Establishment," "Democrats," "the Left," etc.

So it's not just a matter of appealing to conventional patriotism in wartime. It's substituting a more acceptable symbol of conservative defensiveness. It's mainstream acceptable for the candidate to seek identity with the new symbol, but not the old one.

It's actually embarrassing to watch Sen. Clinton or any other candidate try to curry favor with So Carolina voters. Give any southerner of either race a couple of drinks and ask what he really thinks about those people.

The Emperor said...

But she didn't say we should pay honor to one flag only. She said there should be one flag we all pay honor to. There could be additional flags as well (just not racist ones). I just don't buy the no state flags interpretation.

BJ said...

It appeals directly to the patriotism of Southerners in time of war by asking them to put the present and future needs of the country ahead of what's long past.

This ploy may not be directed to white Southerners. The Clintons cleverly employ subtext to triangulate their position, vis-a-vis the infamous "depends on what is, is".

Given that the hard left anti-war wing doesn't trust her, Hollywood is nervously shifting away and a calculated repudiation of her Iraq vote has softened moderate voter support; Clinton must hold the black vote to have any chance of winning the primary.

As a Progressive woman Clinton can't openly attack Obama, but she can inculcate more doubt about his bonafides in a critical voter block. It will not go unnoticed that while Obama is cosying up to Hollywood (code for Jews), Clinton is denouncing the Confederate flag.

So yes, I agree, it was a brilliant move.

Pogo said...

Well southern man don't need her around anyhow.

David L said...

She who buys her campaign endorsements, should not be commenting on state flags.

Al Maviva said...

CS Said:

richer, more clever, more progressive other that uses moral standards for political advantage

Like what? Gay marriage? Euthenasia? Abortion? Eugenics posing as personal choice? The only morality that the "progressive" movement stands for is "opposition to traditional morality," typically dressed up in the language of "tolerance," but in effect acting as a most intolerant form of tolerance. This kind of unctuous posturing doesn't exactly make traditionalists insecure in their position; it tends to make traditionalists cranky, because the hypocrisy is pretty evident. Having practiced in and studied civil rights law for a good long while, I can answer, as a matter of fact, that racism has just as deep a pedigree in the most liberal of states, as it does in the South. It just takes slightly different forms. Go compare Southern versus Northern desegregation orders, if you want to get educated.

Give any southerner of either race a couple of drinks and ask what he really thinks about those people.

Because, y'know, southerners are bigots and all. Not like you progressives and all, with your morally superior politically open minds...

And no, I'm not a southerner, I'm a Yankee down to my fancy-schmancy dress shoes. I just tend to think that people who traffic in stereotypes tell the world a lot more about themselves, than the objects of their ridicule.

Ivan said...

Okay, here's how little people understand of the "Confederate" Flag. Here is a pic of the
CSA Flag

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CSA_FLAG_4.3.1861-21.5.1861.svg

Here is the "new" GA flag:

http://www.50states.com/flag/gaflag.htm

Which flag should be protested again? I was there when the battle flag was taken off the statehouse. Leave it alone. If Hillary wants to talk about flags and loyalty, why didn't she admonish the thousands of Hispanics that marched several months ago waving the current, and quite foreign, NATIONAL flag of another country?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/197673/2_23_032706_immigration1.jpg

Guess that wouldn't have been good politics.

Bill said...

Victor, {I'm curious about what "rebel" flag the so-called "exalted" refers to.}

Not a War Between the States Rebel, but an American Revolution Rebel perhaps.

From your link:
"Asked by the Revolutionary Council of Safety in the fall of 1775 to design a flag for the use of South Carolina troops, Col. William Moultrie chose a blue which matched the color of their uniforms and a crescent which reproduced the silver emblem worn on the front of their caps. The palmetto tree was added later to represent Moultrie's heroic defense of the palmetto-log fort on Sullivan's Island against the attack of the British fleet on June 28, 1776."

PatCA said...

Interesting observation, George. Imagine a politician who could understand and appeal to the inborn yearnings of ordinary humans to be noble. They would win in a landslide. That's Giuliani's appeal right now, I think. After 9/11 he was a man of the people, but leading the people, like when he told the Saudi prince to f*** off with his millions. Bush, the dynasty politician, has missed the vision thing as much as his father.

Malibu Skipper said...

I wonder where this pseudo-patriotic, pro-flag screed was every time her left-wing supporters were burning that flag hither and yon?

Hmm. I don't know. Maybe in the imaginary universe where all this flag burning has been taking place, imaginary Hillary DID say something about it. Just out of curiousity -- when was last time you saw anybody in the United States burn a US flag?

BrianOfAtlanta said...

In response the The Drill SGT:
Is the Confederate flag part of a historical display? On the State House? As part of a Civil war Display?

As someone who was living in SC when this was all blowing up, I was one of the people who never saw the point of flying the Confederate Battle Flag under the US and SC state flags on the capitol. I supported the NAACP's efforts because the flag was simply there to thumb SC's nose at the forces of segregation. It didn't belong there.

However, when SC proposed removing the Confederate Battle Flag from the statehouse and flying it at the Confederate Soldier's Monument on the statehouse grounds, the NAACP moved the goalposts and said that the flag could not be on the statehouse grounds at all. So now, the NAACP & Co. object to flying a battle flag over a monument to the soldiers who served under that flag. Thus, what started as a good idea becomes theater of the absurd.

submandave said...

Emperor: "But she didn't say we should pay honor to one flag only. She said there should be one flag we all pay honor to. There could be additional flags as well (just not racist ones)."

So, what you are saying is that HC's comment was just a bland endorsement and advocation for the U.S. flag and should nto be interpretted as made in opposition to any flag (including "racist" ones)? In other words, her statement was completely without point or purpose, other than to fool others into thinking she had said something meaningful and deep? Now I see why some of you think she's the perfect politician.

This was a vanilia anti-"rebel flag" statement offered as required pablum for southern liberals and minorities without being a blatant anti-"good-ole-boy" jab. It was worded awkwardly simply because, as Ann said, she wanted to have her grits and eat them too. Not much to see or remark on, in my opinion.

The Drill SGT said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

Your comment has been saved.
It may take a moment for your comment to appear on the site at the original post
Post a Comment On: Althouse "Hillary's strange way of opposing the South Carolina flag."
36 Comments - Show Original Post
Collapse comments


The Exalted said...
The existing South Carolina "rebel" flag dishonors the American flag; non "rebel" state flags do not.

There Ann, an easy answer to your forced misunderstanding.

7:23 AM


George said...
I'm a Southerner, and Sen. Clinton's approach to this issue is the first I've seen by a non-Southern politician that will actually appeal to the tender egos of middle-aged Southern men.

Sen. Clinton's approach is extremely clever. In fact, it is brilliant. It appeals directly to the patriotism of Southerners in time of war by asking them to put the present and future needs of the country ahead of what's long past.

If I were her opponent--Democrat, Republican, or Rebel--I'd be very nervous.

7:43 AM


The Emperor said...
Yeah, I think it was obvious she was distinguishing between the U.S. flag, which we all "pay honor to," and the Confederate flag, which is divisive. She doesn't care if states have their own special flags.

I'm no Hillary fan, but I think she was pretty clear on this one.

7:44 AM


Ann Althouse said...
I know what she should have said! I'm talking about what she did say and what her doing that says about her. So, exalted, you are the one who's misunderstanding something! Sheesh!

7:58 AM


AJ Lynch said...
No surprise to me; it's classic Clinton family trying to have it both ways.

Except for her socialist worldview, I doubt there is any there there. Sorry if that bursts your hopeful bubble, Ann.

8:07 AM


Bruce Hayden said...
I agree with George. Hillary is typically quite tone deaf, and this is a very nice way around the dilemma. Remember, she needs to keep the liberals and Blacks on board, but also needs some Southern swing voters to put her over the top. And this is typically a mine field.

8:15 AM


AJ Lynch said...
And I say George is full of baloney. Does George really believe an average (?) SC resident who is already probably flying both flags will take one down due to Hillary's appeal?? I doubt it.

Wake up people - it's just more meaningless noise spewing from the pols' mouths. She is surely avoiding taking on the big issues facing this country and spare me the comments about state primary- I do recognize she is focusing on getting votes from large black voting bloc in a small state.

8:20 AM


Bissage said...
So, who does Hillary! think are the people in South Carolina who don’t pay honor to the U.S. flag?

Oh, that’s right, the one’s who are still fighting the Civil War. Apparently, she thinks that’s a number of South Carolinians between one percent and forty-nine percent.

I’d like for someone to ask her to specify the percentage she thinks is accurate.

8:29 AM


AllenS said...
I've met, and know quite a few Southern men, and not a one had a "tender ego".

8:30 AM


The Emperor said...
She's saying that most South Carolinians are good, God-fearing, flag-loving patriots who believe in, and will fight for, a unified America. They do not believe that people should be divided by offensive symbols like the Confederate flag.

What's "weird" about that?

8:31 AM


George said...
AJ--

No "average" pineywoods yaywho is going to scrape the Rebel flag decal off his pick-up's rifle-rack window because of what Sen. Clinton said.

She knows she'll never get those particular white Southern men (i.e. lower middle class blue collar guys) to vote for her.

What she has done is articulate a way to solve the problem without insulting the delicate sensibilities of the all-important middle-aged middle-class (or upscale) white Southern Republican voter.

As for "tender egos," there are many Southern guys who have learned from hard experience to keep their mouths shut around non-Southerners because they know that all too often Southern food, culture, music, and, yes, valor are objects of ridicule.

8:44 AM


dadvocate said...
Slavery existed quite legally under the Stars and Stripes for about 4 score and 7 years. Is it really any less of a symbol of slavery?

Frankly, I'm amazed no one has tried to force a change in the American flag because of this, America being such a horrible country and all that.

8:50 AM


Malibu Skipper said...
Slavery existed quite legally under the Stars and Stripes for about 4 score and 7 years. Is it really any less of a symbol of slavery?

Um... yes? Is this a trick question?

9:05 AM


Tim said...
Hillary!'s husband Bill signed the bill commemorating Arkansas's state flag, which has obvious elements of the Confederacy's Stars and Bars. For whatever reason, this does not seem to matter a whit amongst those sensitive to this issue.

9:08 AM


EDH said...
I thought Hillary was a southerner, ain't she?

9:09 AM


The Drill SGT said...
Without knowing the rest of the facts, I can't make a judgment here. My assumptions:

- at the state Capitol, there is an American Flag flying
- There is a State flag flying in second place
- somewhere else there is a Confederate

Is the Confederate flag part of a historical display? On the State House? As part of a Civil war Display? 6 Flags over South Carolina?

9:11 AM


Victor said...
As a native South Carolinian (transplanted to Maryland, which, fortunately, is still south of the Mason-Dixon Line), I'm curious about what "rebel" flag the so-called "exalted" refers to. The SC state flag has been, as long as I've been on this Earth, blue with a white crescent moon and a white Palmetto tree.

9:12 AM


Ann Althouse said...
Emperor: I didn't say that was weird. What's weird is that she tinkered with the locution so as not to offend either the people who love that flag or those who hate it, and as a result of trying to please both groups, ended up with a sentence that, if read literally, would denounce all state flags.

9:15 AM


The partisan moderate said...
This is a non-issue for Democrats. They have no chance of winning this state in a general election, unless it is a 48 or 49 state blowout, which in that case it does not matter anyway.

For primary purposes, a large percentage of the Democratic vote is black and really resents the flag. Therefore, it is good politics to denounce the flag in whatever terms the candidate chooses to do so.

As for Hillary, Ann, she is not nor ever has been a hawk or a centrist. If you look at her statements on any number of issues they sound the same as any other Democratic politician. Her Iraq statements are basically Kerry-esque. It consists of falsely claiming both that the President lied and that she gave authority to strengthen his hand at the UN not for the war, which is also not true. It is a problem with the mainstream media that also characterized Edwards (Two Americas) as a centrist in 2004.

9:19 AM


DWPittelli said...
Emperor: "She's saying that most South Carolinians ... do not believe that people should be divided by offensive symbols like the Confederate flag. What's 'weird' about that?"

Nothing weird. But she apparently made her statement without actually saying that the Confederate flag is "offensive," or any similar term. This does not surprise me, as leaving out that part of her chain of logic is what she hopes will keep her statement from angering Southerners who have favored some uses of the "rebel" flag. But skipping such a logical step is also not entirely above-board, nor is it especially helpful in persuading one's opponents.

9:23 AM


litsskad said...
Victor beat me to it. Whatever this is all about, it's certainly not about the South Carolina state flag. And I had always thought that the South Carolina flag was one of the best and most easily and widely recognized.

This all would have made a lot more sense if it had happened in Mississippi.

9:26 AM


AJ Lynch said...
George:

I believe you just contradicted yourself. First you predicted Hillary's "extremely clever" approach would appeal to "middle-aged southern men" then you say it won't work with "average pineywoods yaywhos" . Are these groups mutually exclusive or are you waffling or is your last name actually Stephanopoulous? :)

9:32 AM


Nathan said...
I wonder where this pseudo-patriotic, pro-flag screed was every time her left-wing supporters were burning that flag hither and yon?

9:35 AM


CS said...
For many Southern guys, the US flag now serves the same purpose as the battle flag did for decades. It's a symbol of a defensive political and cultural struggle against a richer, more clever, more progressive other that uses moral standards for political advantage. "Yankees," "Eastern Establishment," "Democrats," "the Left," etc.

So it's not just a matter of appealing to conventional patriotism in wartime. It's substituting a more acceptable symbol of conservative defensiveness. It's mainstream acceptable for the candidate to seek identity with the new symbol, but not the old one.

It's actually embarrassing to watch Sen. Clinton or any other candidate try to curry favor with So Carolina voters. Give any southerner of either race a couple of drinks and ask what he really thinks about those people.

9:36 AM


The Emperor said...
But she didn't say we should pay honor to one flag only. She said there should be one flag we all pay honor to. There could be additional flags as well (just not racist ones). I just don't buy the no state flags interpretation.

9:43 AM


BJ said...
It appeals directly to the patriotism of Southerners in time of war by asking them to put the present and future needs of the country ahead of what's long past.

This ploy may not be directed to white Southerners. The Clintons cleverly employ subtext to triangulate their position, vis-a-vis the infamous "depends on what is, is".

Given that the hard left anti-war wing doesn't trust her, Hollywood is nervously shifting away and a calculated repudiation of her Iraq vote has softened moderate voter support; Clinton must hold the black vote to have any chance of winning the primary.

As a Progressive woman Clinton can't openly attack Obama, but she can inculcate more doubt about his bonafides in a critical voter block. It will not go unnoticed that while Obama is cosying up to Hollywood (code for Jews), Clinton is denouncing the Confederate flag.

So yes, I agree, it was a brilliant move.

9:47 AM


Pogo said...
Well southern man don't need her around anyhow.

9:53 AM


David L said...
She who buys her campaign endorsements, should not be commenting on state flags.

10:01 AM


Al Maviva said...
CS Said:

richer, more clever, more progressive other that uses moral standards for political advantage

Like what? Gay marriage? Euthenasia? Abortion? Eugenics posing as personal choice? The only morality that the "progressive" movement stands for is "opposition to traditional morality," typically dressed up in the language of "tolerance," but in effect acting as a most intolerant form of tolerance. This kind of unctuous posturing doesn't exactly make traditionalists insecure in their position; it tends to make traditionalists cranky, because the hypocrisy is pretty evident. Having practiced in and studied civil rights law for a good long while, I can answer, as a matter of fact, that racism has just as deep a pedigree in the most liberal of states, as it does in the South. It just takes slightly different forms. Go compare Southern versus Northern desegregation orders, if you want to get educated.

Give any southerner of either race a couple of drinks and ask what he really thinks about those people.

Because, y'know, southerners are bigots and all. Not like you progressives and all, with your morally superior politically open minds...

And no, I'm not a southerner, I'm a Yankee down to my fancy-schmancy dress shoes. I just tend to think that people who traffic in stereotypes tell the world a lot more about themselves, than the objects of their ridicule.

10:03 AM


Ivan said...
Okay, here's how little people understand of the "Confederate" Flag. Here is a pic of the
CSA Flag

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CSA_FLAG_4.3.1861-21.5.1861.svg

Here is the "new" GA flag:

http://www.50states.com/flag/gaflag.htm

Which flag should be protested again? I was there when the battle flag was taken off the statehouse. Leave it alone. If Hillary wants to talk about flags and loyalty, why didn't she admonish the thousands of Hispanics that marched several months ago waving the current, and quite foreign, NATIONAL flag of another country?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/197673/2_23_032706_immigration1.jpg

Guess that wouldn't have been good politics.

10:05 AM


Bill said...
Victor, {I'm curious about what "rebel" flag the so-called "exalted" refers to.}

Not a War Between the States Rebel, but an American Revolution Rebel perhaps.

From your link:
"Asked by the Revolutionary Council of Safety in the fall of 1775 to design a flag for the use of South Carolina troops, Col. William Moultrie chose a blue which matched the color of their uniforms and a crescent which reproduced the silver emblem worn on the front of their caps. The palmetto tree was added later to represent Moultrie's heroic defense of the palmetto-log fort on Sullivan's Island against the attack of the British fleet on June 28, 1776."

10:09 AM


PatCA said...
Interesting observation, George. Imagine a politician who could understand and appeal to the inborn yearnings of ordinary humans to be noble. They would win in a landslide. That's Giuliani's appeal right now, I think. After 9/11 he was a man of the people, but leading the people, like when he told the Saudi prince to f*** off with his millions. Bush, the dynasty politician, has missed the vision thing as much as his father.

10:10 AM


Malibu Skipper said...
I wonder where this pseudo-patriotic, pro-flag screed was every time her left-wing supporters were burning that flag hither and yon?

Hmm. I don't know. Maybe in the imaginary universe where all this flag burning has been taking place, imaginary Hillary DID say something about it. Just out of curiousity -- when was last time you saw anybody in the United States burn a US flag?

10:12 AM


BrianOfAtlanta said...
In response the The Drill SGT:
Is the Confederate flag part of a historical display? On the State House? As part of a Civil war Display?

As someone who was living in SC when this was all blowing up, I was one of the people who never saw the point of flying the Confederate Battle Flag under the US and SC state flags on the capitol. I supported the NAACP's efforts because the flag was simply there to thumb SC's nose at the forces of segregation. It didn't belong there.

However, when SC proposed removing the Confederate Battle Flag from the statehouse and flying it at the Confederate Soldier's Monument on the statehouse grounds, the NAACP moved the goalposts and said that the flag could not be on the statehouse grounds at all. So now, the NAACP & Co. object to flying a battle flag over a monument to the soldiers who served under that flag. Thus, what started as a good idea becomes theater of the absurd.

10:19 AM


submandave said...
Emperor: "But she didn't say we should pay honor to one flag only. She said there should be one flag we all pay honor to. There could be additional flags as well (just not racist ones)."

So, what you are saying is that HC's comment was just a bland endorsement and advocation for the U.S. flag and should nto be interpretted as made in opposition to any flag (including "racist" ones)? In other words, her statement was completely without point or purpose, other than to fool others into thinking she had said something meaningful and deep? Now I see why some of you think she's the perfect politician.

This was a vanilia anti-"rebel flag" statement offered as required pablum for southern liberals and minorities without being a blatant anti-"good-ole-boy" jab. It was worded awkwardly simply because, as Ann said, she wanted to have her grits and eat them too. Not much to see or remark on, in my opinion.

10:30 AM


The Drill SGT said...
BrianOfAtlanta said...

I agree with both of Brian's points, now that I understand the context.

Hillary was attempting to make a pandering move in Democratic primary politics nation wide.

It has some positive impact on SC primary politics.

It has a negative impact on SC general election po0litics, but as a poster pointed out, there is no way the SC matters in the race. In orther words, if SC is in play, she has already won the elctoral college.

It has an unknown result in places that might be close like Florida and West Virginia, in the General election.

George said...

AJ--

She's not going to get the redneck vote. She doesn't care about it.

She wants to appeal to/peel off from Republican loyalty:

a) upscale;
b) white;
c) urban;
d) middle-aged;
e) Southern;
f) college educated
g) men;
h) who are "influencers"
i) and who may contribute to her campaign and vote for her.

Clearly, Stephanolpllosususus-type guys are high-fivin' it.

Even though she wants to seize Exxon's profits Chavez-style, I'll give her a look.

Meade said...

She doesn't need the votes of middle-aged Southern men with tender egos. They are a vanishing population. She especially doesn't need the support of voters for whom the Confederate battle flag represents a positive symbol of white supremacy, slavery, segregation, or bigotry.

She needs the votes of all Americans who proudly and honorably defend their country against an enemy who today is no less committed to the defeat of the United States of America than was the the Confederate government when it ordered artillery to fire on the United States Army troops in Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, in April 1861.

eatyourbeans said...

I was down South for the first time in my life last summer to attend a funeral in Beaufort SC. Before the service I walked around old the Church's graveyard, where some worthy of the Confederacy buried in a vault. On the surrounding fence there were placed, in alternation, small US and Confederate flags. For what it's worth, this Yankee found it moving and very beautiful.

hdhouse said...

ann the censor strikes again

Victor said...

Bill, I assume that was said with tongue firmly in cheek ;~)

To the "exalted" I say, read the dates again. That flag was designed during the American Revolution, when we were all fighting the British. You're arguing the current American flag is also a rebel flag.

BTW, when I went to elementary school in SC (briefly in the early 70's) we said the Pledge of Allegience (with the words "under God," too!) every morning, to the American flag. IIRC, the SC state flag flew beneath the American flag in the schoolyard; no version of a Confederate flag was on the school grounds.

Pogo said...

I'm with Meade. I don't give a damn about all this flag nonsense.

If Hillary! or any of the Democrats could convince me they would fight aginst the real menace we face in militant Islam, I'd be happy, even if they decided to Chavez the health care system.

But they can't.

AJD said...

Oh no! Annie's Hillary Obsession Disorder is showing.

What a wretched disease.

TMink said...

Meade wrote: "She especially doesn't need the support of voters for whom the Confederate battle flag represents a positive symbol of white supremacy, slavery, segregation, or bigotry."

That is good for her campaign as there are less of this type of person down here. And that is a good thing.

Trey

Meade said...

eatyourbeans said...
... some worthy of the Confederacy buried in a vault. On the surrounding fence there were placed, in alternation, small US and Confederate flags. For what it's worth, this Yankee found it moving and very beautiful.

eatyour,
Imagine now the small Confederate flags gone... only small Stars and Stripes to honor the repatriation of those worthy dead rebels welcomed back into the Union after the failure of their militant cause -- the defeat of the United States.

Add to it, perhaps, a small plaque with the words of Lincoln at war's end: "Let 'em up easy."

Still just as moving and beautiful, isn't it?

Richard Dolan said...

Ann says: "It seems she's trying so hard to say just the right thing and please everyone that she ends up saying something weird."

What's interesting here is the contrast between Hillary's fudging around on this kind of issue (all symbol, no substance), contrasted with her refusal to do the same thing about her Iraq vote (lots of substance, and the dominating issue of the day). Many of the comments on this thread note that, for Hillary's base, symbolic issues like the Confederate flag stuff in play here have become real litmus tests of one's PC purity. Hillary is toeing that line, without any need for much prompting either. That she tried to do it in an artful way, but didn't quite pull it off, is just another instance of what we are all accustomed to seeing politicians do. It's quite in keeping with her comments, e.g., about Roe and abortion -- the "safe, legal and rare" mantra.

But for those who dismiss her as "all triangulation, all the time," as if she were a pandering hack without any real core, you need to come up with an explanation for her refusal to do the same on her Iraq vote. That's an issue where every other Dem, along with all of the usual lefty pundits, have long since signed on to one version or another of "Bush lied us into it." It's also the issue that, at least for now, looks like it may cause her the most problems with the Dem base. Yet she refuses to disavow her vote on such bogus, partisan grounds -- as she says, if that's what you want, then there are plenty of other candidates willing to say that. That's an example of the opposite of "trying so hard to say just the right thing and please everyone" - at least, everyone who is likely to vote in a Dem primary.

She's a much more complex character than Bill in that way.

Minor Ripper said...

Hillary's just released her 50th policy position regarding Iraq, now it's we stay 90 more days, and that's it....talk about consistency!! Please see the short video here:
http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2007/02/hillary-on-iraq-from-this-weekend.html

eatyourbeans said...

Meade,

imagine now the small Confederate flags gone... only small Stars and Stripes to honor the repatriation of those worthy dead rebels welcomed back into the Union after the failure of their militant cause -- the defeat of the United States.

Add to it, perhaps, a small plaque with the words of Lincoln at war's end: "Let 'em up easy."

Still just as moving and beautiful, isn't it?


No, not to me. In this particular war very good Americans died for a very bad cause. Honoring, but not saluting, their flag honors the side that won.

After all, we're not screeching vindictive harpies, leave that to Madame Hillary.

So thinks this Damn Yankee anyway.

.

Brad said...

As far as I can tell, blacks have been screwed under a variety of flags. In fact they've been screwed or at least tried to be screwed by the Democratic Party with their cut and run policy with the Confederacy as well as their vote against the Civil Rights Act. Thankfully, the voters are historical illiterates so these issues will never come up.

ASX said...

Ann has her facts wrong.

The issue is not South Carolina's state flag. The issue is the fact that the Confederate battle flag -- which is not a state flag -- is flown at the South Carolina state house.

One minute of research would have shown this. Even reading the article she linked to would have shown this. (It says, "Rodham Clinton said Monday that South Carolina should remove the Confederate flag from its Statehouse grounds.")

The SC state flag is not the Confederate flag, and it does not include the confederate flag or any variant of it.

Ann is wrong even in the title of the post: Hillary's strange way of opposing the South Carolina flag.

It's not about the South Carolina flag, Ann.

It's about the confederate flag, that is, the flag of a defeated enemy nation of the United States.

CS said...

Y'all please excuse Al Maviva and me while we step out to the parking lot. Apologies to our hostess.

It's probably not useful to conflate the northerners who resisted busing a while back with liberal elites who happen to share their area codes. Narrower brush, please. It's also probably not useful to confuse a list of the characteristics some southerners ascribe to their political and cultural adversaries, with an endorsement of those characteristics.

"Moral?" How about anti-war and environmental/warming positions? Income equality? Gender/orientation rights? And yes, race. It's not as if the left side of the aisle argues in sociobiological terms or something. Buy 'em or not, they're couched in moral terms. The Puritan tradition in US politics and all that.

And let's skip the arguments from authority, m'kay?

Laika's Last Woof said...

"... more clever ..."
That's a canard. Republicans have a slightly higher average IQ than Democrats, but the difference is too small to be statistically significant.

Red states, on the other hand, have a slightly lower average IQ than blue states, but again within the statistical margin of error.

In short they're roughly evenly matched. The misperception that liberals are "more clever" derives from the infamous tendency of progressives toward insularity; predictably, the misperception of superior intelligence is confined mostly to liberals themselves.

I've met both unintelligent conservatives and liberals. The difference, in my experience, is that all liberals believe themselves to be geniuses, and the not-so-gifted ones will reinforce their false self-image by belittling the intelligence of conservatives. Liberal academics have even done psychological studies "proving" that liberals are more intelligent / better-adjusted / whatever. I'm not a psychologist, but that sort of overcompensation smacks of an elephant-sized inferiority complex.

ASX said...

Ann said:
Ann Althouse said...
Emperor: I didn't say that was weird. What's weird is that she tinkered with the locution so as not to offend either the people who love that flag or those who hate it, and as a result of trying to please both groups, ended up with a sentence that, if read literally, would denounce all state flags.


You're being willfully obtuse. No one would interpret her remarks that way. Maybe it's the lawyer in you which likes to find ways to interpret words that no one else would ever think of, except perhaps in reading a contract for loopholes.

Because to all normal people, her comments were not about loyalty to state flags, but to flags of other nations, especially enemy nations that were defeated in a bloody war.

The right likes to throw around accusations of treason. So how does it show loyalty to the United States to fly the flag of our defeated enemy, the Confederate States?

Kirby Olson said...

I am worried about the South Carolina flag. It shows a palm tree with a lunar symbol overhead. Has South Carolina gone Islamic? I think Hillary is right to worry, too, even if she is worrying about the wrong thing. I think South Carolina may have gone Islamic!

the Rising Jurist said...

In this particular war very good Americans died for a very bad cause.

Ah, the pernicious threat of state's rights. Very bad, indeed.

hdhouse said...

Having lived in SC for a while in Strom Thurmond's district (he of the black SO who we all knew about but no one would publish the fact)..and the last school system to desegregate in the SE...and Hillary wedged it just right.

The rebel or confederate flag was on the grounds of the capital and the state universities for years and still might be. if it is displayed properly below the US flag does it matter?

Does it matter that the black vote in SC is surpressed or made meaningless by gerrymandering or "at large" voting? does it matter that a significant amount of the population of SC is made up of retirees or work transplants from the north enjoying cost of living differential etc. but a minority that has little real political power when up against the entrenched good old boys who love that stars and bars?

Hillary is right. she won't win SC but she may make the GOP spend a lot of money they would normally not spend or consider spending.

RogerA said...

"The issue is the fact that the Confederate battle flag -- which is not a state flag -- is flown at the South Carolina state house." There seem to be quite a few "facts" that really aren't facts at all. That simple google search would have disclosed that on April 12, 2000, the SC Senate voted overwhelmingly to remove the flag from the statehouse and place it on the statehouse grounds; and that location was later moved to a confederate memorial.

In short, this discussion, while interesting, is long on opinions and short on "facts." I invoke the ghost of Daniel Patrick Moynihan!

Grim said...

The stance would be rather more brilliant if Sen. Clinton were actually interested in fighting the war. Coupled with her 90-days-and-out mantra, you have to wonder just what banner she's trying to unify us under.

Actually, I think Army Lawyer got it right:

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2007/02/20/#007906

ASX said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
TR said...

Will Hillary demand Arkansas officials reverse her own husband's legislation?

ASX said...

RogerA said...
"The issue is the fact that the Confederate battle flag -- which is not a state flag -- is flown at the South Carolina state house." There seem to be quite a few "facts" that really aren't facts at all. That simple google search would have disclosed that on April 12, 2000, the SC Senate voted overwhelmingly to remove the flag from the statehouse and place it on the statehouse grounds; and that location was later moved to a confederate memorial.

(1) Factually speaking, the statehouse grounds are, in fact, "at the statehouse." So it is accurate to say "the Confederate battle flag is flown at the South Carolina state house," because the grounds on which it sits are themselves at the state house. The alternative would be "the flag is flown on the state house," or "the flag is flown over the state house." Neither of these would be accurate. "At the statehouse," however, is accurate.


(2) You say that the offending flag was moved to a confederate memorial.

Perhaps some flag was moved to a memorial, but according to the article Ann linked to, there is still a confederate flag on the statehouse grounds. It says:

"Rodham Clinton said Monday that South Carolina should remove the Confederate flag from its Statehouse grounds."

Wikipedia also confirms that the flag is still at the statehouse, on the state house grounds:

"There are many statues and monuments on the State House grounds, such as a Confederate battle flag, which flew over the dome of the State House until July 1, 2000."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_Statehouse

So we have two sources affirming that the flag flies on South Carolina state house grounds.

RBeck said...

If you want to see Hillary's head explode, pose the following to her:

A South Carolina business establishment is flying all of the following: the Confederate flag, the South Carolina flag, and the gay rainbow flag. Which, if any, does she recommend that the business remove?

rightwingprof said...

I'm somewhat mystified why Hillary thinks any state flag other than that of her state of residence is any of her business. Could somebody please explain that to me?

Al Maviva said...

Okay CS. Whatever. I'll yield to you that the Bible and morality dictate that the US reduce its carbon output while ignoring the fact that both China and India will exceed US carbon outputs, somewhere between 2010 and 2020 - I think that's in the part about there being special significance in the fall of a sparrow. (Clearly, the sparrow's erratic flight was caused by global warming, ask AlGore, he's got some Powerpoint slides that prove just that). I'll yield to you that Jesus said "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," or maybe that was the progressive point about the morality of income equality as stated by the guy who launched a fairly broad bid to murder traditional religion and morality, I get so confused about that sometimes. And where in the good book, exactly, does it talk about equal rights for sodomites? Last time I checked, Sodom got flattened - which makes it kind of the equal of the Phillistines, one of the Pharaoh's armies, and a whole host of other enemies of the wandering Israelites, but not exactly equal in a constitutional / normative sense.

Look, I'm all for freedom for people who want to worship mother earth, win constitutional protection for sexual practices and smite the wealthy and raise up the poor. We're a free country founded on noble principles, along with quite a few stupid ideas. But please, it insults religion and traditional morality to call them comparable to the progressive cause, and it probably insults the progressives too.

Please, give up on the effort to try to turn modern (as in post-1968) progressive politics into something aligned with or organized along the lines of traditional morality. It isn't, with the exception of the true believers' religious adherence to doctrine, and a hard-to-put-your-finger-on irrationality or inchoate urge at the heart of the movement. If progressive politics were like a religion (aside from the ability of a lot of followers to follow doctrine blindly) then you'd see churches tossing out their doctrine every twenty years as the latest fad they followed got superceded by events.

And please, small point and I know it's just an appeal to authority, but the term is "all y'all" when addressing a group, second person plural. It's only "y'all" if you are speaking to the second person, singular. Now faking Southern dialect and getting it wrong, that is just plain insulting.

Joe said...

I'd like a chance to correct the carpetbaggers ignorantly opining about my State.

The Confederate Flag was put on the dome of the statehouse in 1963 to mark the 100 year anniversary of the civil war by a Democrat Governor. When the anniversary had passed, it was not taken down. This Governor then had a distiguished 40yr career as a SC State Senator where he never once uttered his involvement in the issue tearing SC communities apart. His name? The honorable Ernest Hollings(D,SC).

The offensive flag was removed from the dome by a Republican Governor, David Beasley. As a compromise, the flag was moved to behind an existing Confederate memorial. The flag is no longer visible from anywhere except around that memorial, where it is appropriate.

The NAACP wanted the flag off the dome, its off the dome. I, and a majority of South Carolinians, agreed that it did not belong there. It took a Republican Governor to have the balls to do something about it.

This is all about goalpost moving and racist stereotypes, by Democrats, against Republicans.

Joe said...

Correction, It was 1962, not 63. And, Hollings was in office 39 years as Senator

I forgot to include the link to Holling's accomplishments as Governor:

http://sciway.net/hist/governors/hollings.html

Comatus said...

"It's about the confederate flag, that is, the flag of a defeated enemy nation of the United States."

Seems we'd better lose this one, too: http://www.50states.com/flag/hiflag.htm

Pogo said...

Thanks Joe, and Comatus.
I learned alot from that.

And I remain unimpressed with Hillary's ability to refight stupid and tired old cultural wars from the 1990s with such deft tenacity, or tenacious deftness, or whatever, when she cannot similarly decide if she is up for the battle before us at this very moment. Militant Islam.

greenlantern2112 said...

I would hope the peopel of SC ignore Clinton's comments.

I see no one asking the flag of the UK to be changed, which is what the SC is based off of, and the UK flag has stood over many dishoonorable events in Britians's history. I can think of Ireland for one.

If Clinton is so patriotic she would nt run for president. she is the most un-american candidate this election will ever see.

oh and for all the supposed republicans and conservatives who pass out over the brilliance of the Clintons, get a grip. The only reason the Clinton's have ever gotten ahead at the national level is because of the ineptitude of supposed republicans and conservatives who pass out over the brilliance of the Clintons.

republicans and conservatives have only ourselves to blame if Clinton's get in. The Clintons are not that smart and not that patriotic in the least. Its because we are dumber than they are if they get elected. We seem to let them get a way with not being so smart.

The election is ours to loose folks. Ours to loose.

Seven Machos said...

Why does the South Carolina "flag controversy" crop up like clockwork every time there is an election?

South Carolina could have a depiction of Satan raping a fire hydrant and all manner of monstrosities besides and it wouldn't and shouldn't matter to anyone outside of South Carolina.

Revenant said...

Slavery existed quite legally under the Stars and Stripes for about 4 score and 7 years. Is it really any less of a symbol of slavery?

Uh huh...

Yeah, let's think really hard and see if we can come up with a difference between this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

And this:

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition.

Let's think really hard about that. I'm sure there's some subtle difference between those two world-views, but gosh, I just can't seem to put my finger on what it is...

Cedarford said...

If you want to see Hillary's head explode, pose the following to her:

A South Carolina business establishment is flying all of the following: the Confederate flag, the South Carolina flag, and the gay rainbow flag. Which, if any, does she recommend that the business remove?


The Confederate Flag flap comes from a NAACP crowd also out to lynch innocent Duke students, totally unconcerned with 72% black illegitimacy rates, and murder and rape perp rates 6-9 times higher than for whites or Asians. Outcompeted in most jobs, even by African immigrants.
Given all that, the black drive to prohibit symbols or language of others while keeping their own tribal perks as "never divisive because blacks are victims entitled to say whatever, wave whatever thaey want and only things they object to are "divisive, must be eliminated???" Well, that carries a certain level of jaw-dropping as one listens to the words of hip hop, or the various symbols the grievance crowd is fond of.

Now, beyond the Battle Flag of the Confederacy wanting to be eradicated along with use of "nigger" (outside permitted use in black households, music, and schools)---

We have one state flag carrying the Union Jack, 3 with crosses sure to get the non-Christians that run the ACLU after them someday, and 3 with native american religious symbols safe from ACLU lawsuits. And the Gay Pride Flag. And the POW/MIA flag that honors the zero POWs and zero actual MIAs (MIAs not in the category of "reasonably known dead, corpse not located) the country has had since the end of Vietnam.

Good luck to Hillary! She has some explaining to do.

stars&stripes said...

So should the official American flag be removed sinced it took until the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s for African-Americans to be treated equally under the law? That the official flag represented until then, a hypocrical way of life as opposed to the words of the Delcaration of Independence.

After all it was only until the 1950s-60s that the US Government officially recognized and offered protection to African-American, so that they, like European-Americans, could experience, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

I repeat, should we take down and/or replace the the official Amercian flag because up until the 1950s-60s it represented and supported the Jim Crow laws of this country?

Gray said...

Let's not waste time debating the Confederate flag and all its issues. As a South Carolinian I remember well the debate and resolution years ago.

Yes, Ann, Hillary was pandering to the Black community and wound up saying something she didn't intend. But the bigger issue is that Hillary thinks her opinion about a flag on our statehouse grounds matters to residents of South Carolina!

We South Carolinians don't like outside politicians telling us what we should or shouldn't do, especially inside our own state.

That's what Hillary doesn't get.

vbspurs said...

We South Carolinians don't like outside politicians telling us what we should or shouldn't do, especially inside our own state.

That's what Hillary doesn't get.


I think she's read the history of the Civil War, actually.

She gets. She just doesn't care.

Cheers,
Victoria

Fen said...

I still don't get it: The US flag can be burned b/c its just a symbol; the confederate flag cannot be flown b/c its just a symbol...

TMink said...

Joe, great history lesson. Nothing like the facts to clear up an argument. Thanks man.

Rev, another great post. Well typed.

Trey

Ken said...

I'd like to propose a simple solution. On one side of the Capitol, fly a Confederate flag. This will probably satisfy Republicans. On the other side fly a white flag for the Democrats.

Revenant said...

The Confederate Flag flap comes from a NAACP crowd also out to lynch innocent Duke students, totally unconcerned with 72% black illegitimacy rates, and murder and rape perp rates 6-9 times higher than for whites or Asians.

It also comes from white people who dislike the NAACP but also dislike apologists for racism and slavery.

Revenant said...

So should the official American flag be removed sinced it took until the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s for African-Americans to be treated equally under the law?

That would be perverse, considering that the main reason it took so long to treat blacks equally under the law is that we let the formerly Confederate states vote again. For that matter, the same pack of racist Southerners put the stupid Confederate flags back on display in the first place, purely as a fuck-you for the Civil Rights movement.

The Confederate states left the union and formed the Confederacy for exactly one reason: to protect slavery. The only "state's right" they cared about was the right to keep slaves. America is a nation that contains a lot of racists and used to contain more. The Confederacy was a nation founded for the explicit purpose of protecting the most evil and vile forms of racism.

Oh, and by the way -- the current American flag has only existed since 1960, and therefore dates from after the federal government's recognition that all races were entitled to equal treatment under the law. So even if a person was so ignorant of morality and/or history as to equate the Confederacy with Jim Crow America, the American flag we all salute today never represented the latter.

TMink said...

Rev wrote: "That would be perverse, considering that the main reason it took so long to treat blacks equally under the law is that we let the formerly Confederate states vote again."

Another reason is that the North lost the will to hunt down all the Klan. The Klan started as the terrorist wing of the Democratic party. When things got too bad in South Carolina, President Grant sent down the military to hunt them down like the terrorists they were (and are.)

But the country lost the will to finish the job, the Democrats opposed finishing the war, and the KKK was only driven underground for a generation but then popped up again to practice Jim Crow, lynchings, and general racist mayhem for another 60 years.

Sound familiar?

Trey

stars&stripe(s) said...

Look, why the lies to cover up Clinton's foolishness? we know her husband is a big liar, but now even her & her supporters?

...ummmmm, so since 1960 the US flag that existed is not the same as the one before 1960????

whoever thinks that needs to put the crack pipe down. Their argument has just flown into disingenuous terrority.

If people want to protect Clinton, why dont they tell her to stop having racist political contributors in her campaign before they start saying when and where the US stopped being racist. Many are still racist who serve in our offices of government, including some in Billary's camp. So should she not run for office due to those racist connections of her's?

The US flag, until the 1950s stood, for seperate but equal laws being constitutional. That then changed in 1954, with Brown v. Board of Education. However, African-Americans were still being discriminated in this country, in the North as well as the South.

the only reason the US Flag changed in 1960 was to add two stars for two new states, not to distance itself from the racist past of the US.

Then in 1964 you get the Civil Rights Act being past which granted more important protections & rights for African-Amercians everywhere. So the flag of 1960 still represented racism for many.

If Billary wants SC to change its flag due to a history of racism, how about the US Congress doing the same for the offical US flag hmmm?

History shows that even the North sold out the African-Americans during the First Continental Congress when the anti-slavery delegates caved in and allowed the South to keep their slaves as long as everyone was unified against Britain.

I cannot believe some posters on this thread are this willing to ignore history to support a candidate who is a pathetic excuse for a senator and for a presidential candidate... I am from NY and she has been invisible with all the disasterous weather that has been going here due to global warming...oops I meant, due to the record winter snow storms.

PS

This is basic junior high history folks....I cant believe we have to have discussions on something like this. are people this ignorant?