What does the confederate flag mean to you? (1 Viewer)

[Don Quixote]

The "battle flag" raises different emotions for me, but it honestly should be removed from any "state grounds" like a state capitol. In other "public" locations, such as an actual battlefield, grave-site/memorial of Confederate soldiers, museum, or tomb (which I feel "Lee's Chapel" in Lexington, Virginia would qualify for) it should remain for historic purposes.

Lee's Chapel is a bit more complicated than that. It is a central building on campus, where there are many student events and meetings. It is a bit more than what you typically think of as a tomb. And the flag wasn't first put there until long after Lee died. My biggest complaint about the removal is that the SCV now hangs out on Jefferson Street waving a big Confederate flag as you drive by the chapel; so, it's become a bit more in-your-face than it used to be.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

My family was in Virginia by the mid 17th Century, so I certainly have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. I'll have to check with my Dad, who's the Ancestry.com junkie, but I'd wager I have a few Confederate war dead in the old tree. I don't feel the need to honor them. I don't think they were monsters, but they fought in the defense of something monstrous. They were hardly unique in that respect.

Should we honor Vietnam vets?

I feel completely comfortable honoring soldiers who fought in Vietnam or Iraq. It's hard to think ill of conscripted soldiers who risked their lives to serve their country in wars that were not of their own making.

On the other hand, I would be rather uncomfortable at the sight of anyone honoring Nazi soldiers, because "just following orders" is no excuse.

I have the nagging feeling that I'm not being entirely consistent here. I could argue that the wars in Vietnam and Iraq were simply misguided rather than evil; but for the soldiers on the ground, I'm not sure that killing untermenschen was all that different from killing ####s. [ETA: derogatory slang term for Asians, especially Koreans and Vietnamese.]

In any case, I'd put Confederate soldiers somewhere in between. I'm kind of ambivalent about people honoring them.

 

[General Malaise]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

 

[timschochet]

Mjolnirs, I really respect your viewpoint, (and I always love your posts on the Civil War, as you know), but ultimately I disagree with it.

First off, you point out that your ancestor and men like him in South Carolina fought "to defend South Carolina, their homes and their families." OK, I think an argument can be made that this statement is true for much of the South. They (the Southern states) reacted to Lincoln calling for a militia and formed their own armies to defend against what they believed to be a northern invasion. After the battle of Shiloh a captured rebel soldier who did not own slaves was asked what his motive for fighting was, and he replied, "I'm fighting because you're here." So I think your argument has merit for a lot of the South...BUT NOT FOR SOUTH CAROLINA! The problem with trying to apply this "defense" motive to South Carolina is because the first shots of the war were fired in South Carolina by rebels against United States soldiers and the flag of the United States. These South Carolinians then hauled down that flag and took over a United States fort. When John Brown attempted a similar feat in 1859, he was correctly tried and hung for treason, with the approval of the entire South. Is there a significant difference between the two actions? I can't see it. So attempting to paint South Carolinian rebels as people trying to defend their land, homes and families is simply flawed history. They committed treason.

Second, you argue that the war was not about slavery, but about the right of secession. But if that is the case, why is it that when West Virginia attempted to secede from Virginia early in the Civil War, the Confederate response was to invade West Virginia and put down the rebellion? Why did the Confederacy attempt to put down similar rebellions in Tennessee and North Carolina?

 

[matttyl]

The "battle flag" raises different emotions for me, but it honestly should be removed from any "state grounds" like a state capitol. In other "public" locations, such as an actual battlefield, grave-site/memorial of Confederate soldiers, museum, or tomb (which I feel "Lee's Chapel" in Lexington, Virginia would qualify for) it should remain for historic purposes.

Lee's Chapel is a bit more complicated than that. It is a central building on campus, where there are many student events and meetings. It is a bit more than what you typically think of as a tomb. And the flag wasn't first put there until long after Lee died. My biggest complaint about the removal is that the SCV now hangs out on Jefferson Street waving a big Confederate flag as you drive by the chapel; so, it's become a bit more in-your-face than it used to be.

Yeah, I've been there a few times myself. It is a pretty complicated situation, especially considering that the flags they removed were just replicas, not originals - which I believe are to be placed back in the Chapel in a few years, after they've been restored?

 

[Bull Dozier]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

Other than your statement on Lincoln, I agree with this post whole heartedly.

No, the war was not fought over slavery, it was over secession. The sentiments regarding blacks existed in the Union army as well ... even in the white house. I'm pretty sure most of slave ships before the war were not based out of the south. I don't have time to look it up. I could be mistaken.

This is the mentality the confederate flag means to me.

 

[shader]

The confederate flag is the flag of a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. how could it possibly mean anything to me or anyone else.

 

[dgreen]

The problem with trying to apply this "defense" motive to South Carolina is because the first shots of the war were fired in South Carolina by rebels against United States soldiers and the flag of the United States. These South Carolinians then hauled down that flag and took over a United States fort. When John Brown attempted a similar feat in 1859, he was correctly tried and hung for treason, with the approval of the entire South. Is there a significant difference between the two actions? I can't see it.

I'd say one significant difference is that South Carolina had seceded prior to their attack.

 

[Henry Ford]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

Yeah, a lot of individuals didn't fight solely because of slavery, so the war wasn't solely about slavery on an individual level - but that's the big problem with the flag. The flag is a symbol of the official reasons for secession. Not the collection of individual reasons each person went to fight.

 

[TobiasFunke]

In no way shape or form do any of those except maybe the Mississippi state flag and the Alabama Coat of Arms resemble "well-known flags" of the Confederacy.

This is exactly what "slippery slope" means People want to remove the stars and bars from public display, and you somehow think that position traps them into considering whether we have to change the Tennessee Titans logo. Supporting the removal of the stars and bars from public display means you support removing the stars and bars from public display. That's it. if the Titans logo looks like the stars and bars, I'd say change it. If it doesn't, I don't care unless someone gives me and the rest of the public a reason to care, at which time we can all consider it.

As has likely been mentioned here a few times, the flag in question isn't the "Stars and Bars". The flag in question is the "battle flag".

And just how many "Well known flags" of the Confederacy are there? If your answer is two or more, then most definitely one of them would be the "Stars and Bars" and thus the state flag of Georgia (and others I mentioned) would need to be changed.

Nobody cares about these stupid technicalities. You're trying to use a scalpel where all that's needed is a machete. If it looks like the thing on the roof of the Dukes' car, get rid of it. If not, deal with it on a case by case basis depending on whether and how strongly it reminds everyone of support for slavery (and later, support for segregation). I'm absolutely sure that the thing on the roof of the Dukes car strongly reminds people of support of slavery, and later for segregation, so it's a pretty clear case in my opinion, I don't care if it's square or rectangle or has fringe around it or is part of a larger image or whatever.

And I'm not saying they should be forced to change it. I'm saying they should want to change it, and I think less of them if they don't.

Technicalities? You said "well known flags of the Confederacy." You must have at least heard of the "Stars and Bars" if you listed it (by mistake) 4 times above. That is the ***OFFICIAL*** (isn't that how we FBGs make something official?) flag of the Confederacy. If that's not one of the "well known flags", I'm not sure what is.

Also, I think your usage of the phrase "use a scalpel where all that's needed is a machete" isn't proper here. Two sentences later you're talking about a case by case basis - aka using a scalpel. The "use of a machete" would be removing all battle flags and "stars and bars", and all road names, school names, military base names, town names, county names....and so on. I don't think anyone is for that...if I'm understanding your phrase correctly.

Why are you being so obtuse?

If it looks like this, I think they should take it down (assuming we're in the United States where context connects that image to the Confederacy). If it's a larger image that includes something that looks like that, I think they should probably consider whether to take it down. If it doesn't look like that, it's a different issue on which I don't really have strong feelings at the moment. End of story.

I don't care what's the "official"flag and what isn't. I'm not taking any position on any naming situation- that's textbook slippery slope nonsense. I don't care where they built the slave ships. It's about what people think when they see an image. When people see something that resembles the image I linked they think of the Confederacy and slavery, and to a lesser degree they think of the segregation movement that revived the flag as a symbol of the South. Anyone who says otherwise is full of ####.

 

[rockaction]

I'd just like to chime in and say that slippery slope shouldn't even exist as a logical fallacy anymore given our relentless drive toward assuring others that things won't operate that way, that they're standing on a slippery slope, and then -- for whatever reason -- proceeding to inevitably pour logical waters and extensions all over said slope.

 

[Plorfu]

I'd just like to chime in and say that slippery slope shouldn't even exist as a logical fallacy anymore given our relentless drive toward assuring others that things won't operate that way, that they're standing on a slippery slope, and then -- for whatever reason -- proceeding to inevitably pour logical waters and extensions all over said slope.

That, and it's offensive to Asians.

 

[rockaction]

I'd just like to chime in and say that slippery slope shouldn't even exist as a logical fallacy anymore given our relentless drive toward assuring others that things won't operate that way, that they're standing on a slippery slope, and then -- for whatever reason -- proceeding to inevitably pour logical waters and extensions all over said slope.

That, and it's offensive to Asians.

Indeed.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I'd just like to chime in and say that slippery slope shouldn't even exist as a logical fallacy anymore given our relentless drive toward assuring others that things won't operate that way, that they're standing on a slippery slope, and then -- for whatever reason -- proceeding to inevitably pour logical waters and extensions all over said slope.

That, and it's offensive to Asians.

A slippery cracker, indeed.

 

[General Malaise]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

Other than your statement on Lincoln, I agree with this post whole heartedly.

No, the war was not fought over slavery, it was over secession. The sentiments regarding blacks existed in the Union army as well ... even in the white house. I'm pretty sure most of slave ships before the war were not based out of the south. I don't have time to look it up. I could be mistaken.

This is the mentality the confederate flag means to me.

I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
—Abraham Lincoln, First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858

Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.
—Lincoln in a 24-page printed pamphlet in May 1861 to Reverend James Mitchell

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The confederate flag is the flag of a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. how could it possibly mean anything to me or anyone else.

Every so often I see this flag, especially on the northshore:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_West_Florida#/media/File:Bonnieblue.svg

Republic of West Florida. The US government annexed it in 1810. I think people think it's cute, or want to somehow recall this is historical anomaly, but I also wonder if they are making some political statement, not sure.

 

[matttyl]

In no way shape or form do any of those except maybe the Mississippi state flag and the Alabama Coat of Arms resemble "well-known flags" of the Confederacy.

This is exactly what "slippery slope" means People want to remove the stars and bars from public display, and you somehow think that position traps them into considering whether we have to change the Tennessee Titans logo. Supporting the removal of the stars and bars from public display means you support removing the stars and bars from public display. That's it. if the Titans logo looks like the stars and bars, I'd say change it. If it doesn't, I don't care unless someone gives me and the rest of the public a reason to care, at which time we can all consider it.

As has likely been mentioned here a few times, the flag in question isn't the "Stars and Bars". The flag in question is the "battle flag".

And just how many "Well known flags" of the Confederacy are there? If your answer is two or more, then most definitely one of them would be the "Stars and Bars" and thus the state flag of Georgia (and others I mentioned) would need to be changed.

Nobody cares about these stupid technicalities. You're trying to use a scalpel where all that's needed is a machete. If it looks like the thing on the roof of the Dukes' car, get rid of it. If not, deal with it on a case by case basis depending on whether and how strongly it reminds everyone of support for slavery (and later, support for segregation). I'm absolutely sure that the thing on the roof of the Dukes car strongly reminds people of support of slavery, and later for segregation, so it's a pretty clear case in my opinion, I don't care if it's square or rectangle or has fringe around it or is part of a larger image or whatever.

And I'm not saying they should be forced to change it. I'm saying they should want to change it, and I think less of them if they don't.

Technicalities? You said "well known flags of the Confederacy." You must have at least heard of the "Stars and Bars" if you listed it (by mistake) 4 times above. That is the ***OFFICIAL*** (isn't that how we FBGs make something official?) flag of the Confederacy. If that's not one of the "well known flags", I'm not sure what is.

Also, I think your usage of the phrase "use a scalpel where all that's needed is a machete" isn't proper here. Two sentences later you're talking about a case by case basis - aka using a scalpel. The "use of a machete" would be removing all battle flags and "stars and bars", and all road names, school names, military base names, town names, county names....and so on. I don't think anyone is for that...if I'm understanding your phrase correctly.

Why are you being so obtuse?

If it looks like this, I think they should take it down (assuming we're in the United States where context connects that image to the Confederacy). If it's a larger image that includes something that looks like that, I think they should probably consider whether to take it down. If it doesn't look like that, it's a different issue on which I don't really have strong feelings at the moment. End of story.

I don't care what's the "official"flag and what isn't. I'm not taking any position on any naming situation- that's textbook slippery slope nonsense. I don't care where they built the slave ships. It's about what people think when they see an image. When people see something that resembles the image I linked they think of the Confederacy and slavery, and to a lesser degree they think of the segregation movement that revived the flag as a symbol of the South. Anyone who says otherwise is full of ####.

I agree with everything you say about the battle flag. I honestly do, and I said that it should be taken down from the State house in SC and likely from other state sponsored places. My next point was that the battle flag isn't the only thing being brought up from people like Jon Stewart who said:

"In South Carolina, the roads that black people drive on are named for Confederate Generals who fought to keep black people from driving freely on that road. That's insanity. That's racial wallpaper. You can't allow that."

And in the post by Maurile Tremblay very early this morning, quoting an article written by Ilya Somin which was "liked" 6 times here in post 603, where it said:

"Unfortunately, flying the Confederate flag (as South Carolina still does) is not the only way that state and local governments continue to honor the Confederacy and its leaders. Throughout the South, there are still numerous schools, streets, and other institutions named after Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee (who, contrary to some popular mythology, was also a defender of slavery), and other Confederate bigwigs. This isn’t limited to conservative areas in the deep South. It is also true of places like liberal northern Virginia, where I live. You can’t drive more than a few miles here without seeing a street named after Davis, Lee, or Jeb Stuart."

Where does one draw the line? You apparently want to completely remove anything that has a likeness to the battle flag (so at least one state flag, and maybe one state's coat of arms). Would it honestly stop there? Should it honestly stop there? I'm not sure.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with everything you say about the battle flag. I honestly do, and I said that it should be taken down from the State house in SC and likely from other state sponsored places. My next point was that the battle flag isn't the only thing being brought up from people like Jon Stewart who said:

"In South Carolina, the roads that black people drive on are named for Confederate Generals who fought to keep black people from driving freely on that road. That's insanity. That's racial wallpaper. You can't allow that."

And in the post by Maurile Tremblay very early this morning, quoting an article written by Ilya Somin which was "liked" 6 times here in post 603, where it said:

"Unfortunately, flying the Confederate flag (as South Carolina still does) is not the only way that state and local governments continue to honor the Confederacy and its leaders. Throughout the South, there are still numerous schools, streets, and other institutions named after Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee (who, contrary to some popular mythology, was also a defender of slavery), and other Confederate bigwigs. This isn’t limited to conservative areas in the deep South. It is also true of places like liberal northern Virginia, where I live. You can’t drive more than a few miles here without seeing a street named after Davis, Lee, or Jeb Stuart."

Where does one draw the line? You apparently want to completely remove anything that has a likeness to the battle flag (so at least one state flag, and maybe one state's coat of arms). Would it honestly stop there? Should it honestly stop there? I'm not sure.

I don't know either. I'd guess I'd probably support changing those things? Like I said it isn't really that difficult to do, and if nothing else it's a nice gesture of reckoning with the region's past and of reconciliation. But I don't really care that much, because I don't think street names trigger an emotional reaction the same way the flag does. I've driven those roads too, and most of the time I don't even think about it. The only time it even crosses my mind is if they use the full name of the person, like Jefferson Davis Highway in Richmond. When it's just Lee Highway or Leesburg or something I don't even make the connection.

 

[Henry Ford]

I agree with everything you say about the battle flag. I honestly do, and I said that it should be taken down from the State house in SC and likely from other state sponsored places. My next point was that the battle flag isn't the only thing being brought up from people like Jon Stewart who said:

"In South Carolina, the roads that black people drive on are named for Confederate Generals who fought to keep black people from driving freely on that road. That's insanity. That's racial wallpaper. You can't allow that."

And in the post by Maurile Tremblay very early this morning, quoting an article written by Ilya Somin which was "liked" 6 times here in post 603, where it said:

"Unfortunately, flying the Confederate flag (as South Carolina still does) is not the only way that state and local governments continue to honor the Confederacy and its leaders. Throughout the South, there are still numerous schools, streets, and other institutions named after Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee (who, contrary to some popular mythology, was also a defender of slavery), and other Confederate bigwigs. This isn’t limited to conservative areas in the deep South. It is also true of places like liberal northern Virginia, where I live. You can’t drive more than a few miles here without seeing a street named after Davis, Lee, or Jeb Stuart."

Where does one draw the line? You apparently want to completely remove anything that has a likeness to the battle flag (so at least one state flag, and maybe one state's coat of arms). Would it honestly stop there? Should it honestly stop there? I'm not sure.

I don't know either. I'd guess I'd probably support changing those things? Like I said it isn't really that difficult to do, and if nothing else it's a nice gesture of reckoning with the region's past and of reconciliation. But I don't really care that much, because I don't think street names trigger an emotional reaction the same way the flag does. I've driven those roads too, and most of the time I don't even think about it. The only time it even crosses my mind is if they use the full name of the person, like Jefferson Davis Highway in Richmond. When it's just Lee Highway or Leesburg or something I don't even make the connection.

Especially after a racist tragedy when the U.S. flag is flying at half mast and the Confederate battle flag is flying high.

 

[Bull Dozier]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

Other than your statement on Lincoln, I agree with this post whole heartedly.

No, the war was not fought over slavery, it was over secession. The sentiments regarding blacks existed in the Union army as well ... even in the white house. I'm pretty sure most of slave ships before the war were not based out of the south. I don't have time to look it up. I could be mistaken.

This is the mentality the confederate flag means to me.

I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
—Abraham Lincoln, First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858

Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.
—Lincoln in a 24-page printed pamphlet in May 1861 to Reverend James Mitchell

I'm surprised those are the two you chose. It is undoubted that Lincoln said much on the subject, often contradicting himself. Lincoln was a politician after all. We could probably throw quotes at each other to infinity. The issue is that we must determine what was in the heart of a man who died over 150 years ago. I'd think that what we each think Lincoln thought is an exercise in faith as much as anything. I'll leave it with just this one, and acknowledge you can probably find more (so can I), but the balance of the evidence I have found in the books I have read lead me to a different conclusion than you.

I leave you, hoping that the lamp of liberty will burn in your bosoms until there shall no longer be a doubt that all men are created free and equal.

--July 10, 1858 Speech at Chicago, Illinois

 

[Jack White]

Look, I majored in history at a college in Jackson, Mississippi. I was immersed in the culture, toured the battlefields, read the literature, studied the war, know about Lost Cause, etc. I realize that many Northern soldiers and citizens held the same views on blacks that Southerners did and I do believe that at his heart, Abraham Lincoln viewed blacks as an inferior race.

But to say the Civil War was not fought over the issue of slavery is asinine and an apologists attempt to deny the truth. The war was fought over secession, okay, why did the south want to secede? The south wanted to secede because it didn't want more non-slave states than slave states in the union and it certainly didn't want to see the abolition of slavery. The Civil War was waged over States Rights? Yeah, THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES.

Stop saying the Civil War wasn't about slavery.

Other than your statement on Lincoln, I agree with this post whole heartedly.

No, the war was not fought over slavery, it was over secession. The sentiments regarding blacks existed in the Union army as well ... even in the white house. I'm pretty sure most of slave ships before the war were not based out of the south. I don't have time to look it up. I could be mistaken.

This is the mentality the confederate flag means to me.

I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
—Abraham Lincoln, First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858

Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.
—Lincoln in a 24-page printed pamphlet in May 1861 to Reverend James Mitchell

Lincoln’s own words quoted directly from The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (CW), complete with specific citations for every single quotation.


LINCOLN WAS AN OBSESSIVE WHITE SUPREMACIST

“Free them [blacks] and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this . . . . We can not then make them equals.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 256).

“There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people, to the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races” (CW, Vol. II, p. 405).

“What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races” (CW, Vol. II, p. 521).

“I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races . . . . I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 16).

“I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races . . . . I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people . . .” (CW, Vol, III, pp. 145-146).

“I will to the very last stand by the law of this state, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 146).

“Senator Douglas remarked . . that . . . this government was made for the white people and not for negroes. Why, in point of mere fact, I think so too.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 281).


Until His Dying Day, Lincoln Plotted to Deport all the Black People Out of America

“I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation . . . . Such separation . . . must be effected by colonization” [to Liberia, Central America, anywhere]. (CW, Vol. II, p. 409).

“Let us be brought to believe it is morally right , and . . . favorable to . . . our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime . . .” (CW, Vol. II, p. 409).

“The place I am thinking about having for a colony [for the deportation of all American blacks] is in Central America. It is nearer to us than Liberia.” (CW, Vol. V, pp. 373, 374).


LINCOLN ONLY RHETORICALLY OPPOSED SOUTHERN SLAVERY. IN PRACTICE, HE STRENGTHENED IT

” I think no wise man has perceived, how it [slavery] could be at once eradicated, without producing a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty himself.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 130).

“I meant not to ask for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.” (CW, Vol., II, p. 260).

“I believe there is no right, and ought to be no inclination I the people of the free states to enter into the slave states and interfere with the question of slavery at all.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 492).

“I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 16).

“I say that we must not interfere with the institution of slavery . . . because the constitution forbids it, and the general welfare does not require us to do so.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 460).


LINCOLN CHAMPIONED THE FUGITIVE SLAVE ACT

“I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the fugitive slave law.” (CW, Vol., III., p. 40).

“[T]he people of the Southern states are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive Slave Law.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 41).

Lincoln Advocated Secession When it Could Advance His Political Career

“Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.” (CW, Vol. 1, p. 438).


LINCOLN VIEWED FORT SUMTER AS AN IMPORTANT TAX COLLECTION POINT AND WENT TO WAR OVER IT

“I think we should hold the forts, or retake them, as the case may be, and collect the revenue.” (CW, Vol. IV, p. 164).


LINCOLN BELIEVED THE CONSTITUTION WAS WHATEVER HE ALONE SAID IT WAS

“The dogmas of the quite past [referring to the U.S. Constitution], are inadequate to the stormy present . . . so we must think anew and act anew.” (CW, Vol. V, p. 537).

“The resolutions quote from the constitution, the definition of treason; and also the . . . safeguards and guarantees therein provided for the citizen . . . against the pretensions of arbitrary power . . . . But these provisions of the constitution have no application to the case we have in hand.” (CW, Vol. VI, p. 262.


“[T]he theory of the general government being only an agency, whose principles are the states [i.e. the true history of the American founding] was new to me and, as I think, is one of the best arguments for the national supremacy.” (CW, Vol. VII, p. 24.

“I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful . . .” (CW, Vol. VII, p. 281).

“You [General John Dix] are therefore hereby commanded forth with to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers [New York World and New York Journal of Commerce].” CW, Vol. VII, p. 348.

“It was decided [by Lincoln alone] that we have a case of rebellion, and that the public safety does require the qualified suspension of the writ [of Habeas Corpus].” CW, Vol. IV, pp. 430-431.


LINCOLN WAS ECONOMICALLY IGNORANT OF THE BIG ECONOMIC ISSUE OF HIS DAY: PROTECTIONIST TARIFFS

“[A] tariff of duties on imported goods . . . is indispensably necessary to the prosperity of the American people.” (CW, Vol. I, p. 307.

“y the tariff system . . . the man who contents himself to live upon the products of his own country , pays nothing at all.” (CW, Vol. I, p. 311).

“All carrying . . . of articles from the place of their production to a distant place for their consumption . . . is useless labor.” (CW, Vol. I, p. 409).

“I was an old Henry Clay tariff whig. In old times I made more speeches on that subject, than on any other. I have not changed my views.” (CW, Vol, III, p. 487).

“The tariff is to the government what a meal is to a family . . .” (CW, Vol., IV, p. 211).

“I must confess that I do not understand the subject [the economics of tariffs].” (CW, Vol. IV, p. 211).

“The power confided to me, will be used . . . to collect the duties and imposes; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion . . .” (CW, Vol. IV, p. 266).

“Accumulations of the public revenue, lying within [Fort Sumter] had been seized [and denied to the U.S. government] . . . . [The administration] sought only to hold the public places and property [i.e., the forts] . . . to collect the revenue.” (CW, Vol. IV, pp. 422-423).


ALTHOUGH HE NEVER BECAME A CHRISTIAN, LINCOLN CLAIMED TO KNOW WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF GOD AND BLAMED THE WAR ON HIM, ABSOLVING HIMSELF OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, IN ORDER TO BAMBOOZLE THE RELIGIOUS POPULATION OF THE NORTH

“t is peculiarly fit for us to recognize the hand of God in this terrible visitation [i.e. the war].” CW, Vol. IV, p. 482.

“You all may recollect that in taking up the sword thus forced into my hands this Government . . . placed its whole dependence upon the favor of God.” (CW, Vol. V., p. 212).

“God wills this contest [the war].” CW, Vol. V, p. 404.

“If I had my way, this war would never have been commenced . . . but . . . we must believe that He permits it for some wise purpose of his own, mysterious and unknown to us . . .” (CW, Vol. V, p. 478).

“t has not pleased the Almighty to bless us with a return to peace . . .” (CW, Vol. V, p. 518).

“[R]ender the homage due to the Divine Majesty . . . to lead the whole nation, through the paths of repentance and submission to the Divine Will, back to the perfect enjoyment of Union . . .” (CW, Vol. VI, p. 332).

“It has pleased Almighty God . . . to vouchsafe to the army and the navy of the United States victories on land and sea.” (CW, Vol. VI, p. 332).

“I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me . . . . God alone can claim it.” (CW, Vol. VII, p. 282).

“He intends some great good to follow this mighty convulsion, which no mortal could make . . .” (CW, Vol. VII, p. 535).

 

[Leviathan]

Bo, Luke, Daisy's cooter, Cooter, Boss Hogg, etc. I was channel surfing the other day and ran across a Dukes of Hazzard marathon. For nostalgic reasons I wound up watching an episode.

The premise of the episode I watched was a car race between Uncle Jesse and Boss Hogg. The center of town was the start/finish line. The entire town was there and every single one of them was waving a miniature Confederate flag. I scratched my chin thinking how much has changed since the early 80's.

I occasionally see the Confederate flag here in town. It's on the roof of a genuine "General Lee", which was used on the set of the Dukes of Hazzard.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I'd be willing to change my name from Forrest to something more Union sounding.

Lincoln

Sherman

Battle Hymn of the Republic

Grant

 

[Don Quixote]

The "battle flag" raises different emotions for me, but it honestly should be removed from any "state grounds" like a state capitol. In other "public" locations, such as an actual battlefield, grave-site/memorial of Confederate soldiers, museum, or tomb (which I feel "Lee's Chapel" in Lexington, Virginia would qualify for) it should remain for historic purposes.

Lee's Chapel is a bit more complicated than that. It is a central building on campus, where there are many student events and meetings. It is a bit more than what you typically think of as a tomb. And the flag wasn't first put there until long after Lee died. My biggest complaint about the removal is that the SCV now hangs out on Jefferson Street waving a big Confederate flag as you drive by the chapel; so, it's become a bit more in-your-face than it used to be.

Yeah, I've been there a few times myself. It is a pretty complicated situation, especially considering that the flags they removed were just replicas, not originals - which I believe are to be placed back in the Chapel in a few years, after they've been restored?

Yes, but not in the same place. The opposition was to the flags in the Chapel by the tomb itself. The originals will go into the museum downstairs when restored. I think that's a good spot for them.

 

[timschochet]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

 

[General Tso]

Is anyone in here supportive of expanding it from taking down the flag to changing street names and school names? Just curious.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

I've heard this raised on the radio, and actually I thought Stewart had raised it, but I think that's going too far (both the comparison and renaming any and every little thing confederate).

 

[Leviathan]

Is anyone in here supportive of expanding it from taking down the flag to changing street names and school names? Just curious.

Not sure. They did it in Germany after WW2. I found an old postcard that one of my Grandmother's cousins wrote to her in 1941.

The image on the front was of a town square, somewhere in Germany. The street sign is very clear. "Hitler Strasse".

Pretty sure that street is called something else now.

 

[Christo]

Just think how awful the NBA would be if the south had won.

No reason for a salary cap

 

[jon_mx]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

The politically correct Nazis are out in full force. And I apologize if I insulted any Nazis, but the PC police are over the top and out of control.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

I've had southern folk call me a yankee on more than one occasion in a non-ironic way meant to put me down. Which of course I always take as a compliment.

There are large sections of St. Louis and Missouri in general that were settled by Germans, have German names. The German traditions and past are still celebrated but they don't fly the Nazi flag. The Confederate worship should be washed from our country too.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

The politically correct Nazis are out in full force. And I apologize if I insulted any Nazis, but the PC police are over the top and out of control.

I know right?

For the rest of his life Calhoun defended the slave-plantation system against a growing antislavery stance in the free states. He continued his strident defense of slavery even after he joined the Tyler administration as secretary of state.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I've had southern folk call me a yankee on more than one occasion in a non-ironic way meant to put me down. Which of course I always take as a compliment.

There are large sections of St. Louis and Missouri in general that were settled by Germans, have German names. The German traditions and past are still celebrated but they don't fly the Nazi flag. The Confederate worship should be washed from our country too.

Because German-Americans would want to fly a Nazi flag?

This would be more like changing all German names from monuments and streets, because, you know, "nazis"

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Is anyone in here supportive of expanding it from taking down the flag to changing street names and school names? Just curious.

This is one issue that I've changed my mind on over the past few years. A while back, I would have said that folks who worry about street signs, school names, etc. are just being overly sensitive. More recently though I've come around to the view that people who embrace the confederate flag and confederate history as their "culture" are just being idiots.

I grew up in southern Indiana, which is a lot more "south" than "midwest." I was used to seeing the confederate flag on bumper stickers, license plates, shirts, hats, etc., and I get that they're not intended as racist but as some kind of signifier of one's redneck status. Now that I've been out of that area for a long time, I've grown far less sympathetic. Find some other way to show that you're a redneck -- like a Bass Pro Shop hat or something, or a sticker of Calvin peeing on the other brand of pickup. And it strikes me as crazy that we have a highway named after the president of the confederacy.

I have no problem with streets, schools, building, etc. named after racists. Lots and lots of people were racists, and I strongly disagree that we should judge them by our modern standards when they stood out by the standards of their era. (Lincoln being an awesome example). But let's cut out the actual full-blown confederates.

 

[jon_mx]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

The politically correct Nazis are out in full force. And I apologize if I insulted any Nazis, but the PC police are over the top and out of control.

I know right?

For the rest of his life Calhoun defended the slave-plantation system against a growing antislavery stance in the free states. He continued his strident defense of slavery even after he joined the Tyler administration as secretary of state.

The guy opposed admitting California as a state, a true American hero!

 

[St. Louis Bob]

I've had southern folk call me a yankee on more than one occasion in a non-ironic way meant to put me down. Which of course I always take as a compliment.

There are large sections of St. Louis and Missouri in general that were settled by Germans, have German names. The German traditions and past are still celebrated but they don't fly the Nazi flag. The Confederate worship should be washed from our country too.

Because German-Americans would want to fly a Nazi flag?

This would be more like changing all German names from monuments and streets, because, you know, "nazis"

No it would be like having buildings, streets and monuments to Hitler, Himmler, Goebel et al. All while flying a Nazi flag. You know like we do for the Confederacy now. #### those slave owning traitors.

 

[Fennis]

I wish I lived on Genghis Khan Way.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I'm burning my ottoman.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Has anyone mentioned that the church where the massacre took place was on Calhoun Street? As in John C. Calhoun?

Black guy I heard on the radio this morning compared that to having a synagogue built on Himmler Avenue...

The politically correct Nazis are out in full force. And I apologize if I insulted any Nazis, but the PC police are over the top and out of control.

I know right?

For the rest of his life Calhoun defended the slave-plantation system against a growing antislavery stance in the free states. He continued his strident defense of slavery even after he joined the Tyler administration as secretary of state.

The guy opposed admitting California as a state, a true American hero!

Another way to view Calhoun is that he did what he could to keep America from splitting into two and falling into the bloodiest, most horrific war of its history.

So he also opposed the Mexican-American War and he opposed California coming in as a state because it would lead to demands for more slave territory, and that would ultimately lead to war. That is what happened.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USA

if the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

Excellent post.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I've had southern folk call me a yankee on more than one occasion in a non-ironic way meant to put me down. Which of course I always take as a compliment.

There are large sections of St. Louis and Missouri in general that were settled by Germans, have German names. The German traditions and past are still celebrated but they don't fly the Nazi flag. The Confederate worship should be washed from our country too.

Because German-Americans would want to fly a Nazi flag?

This would be more like changing all German names from monuments and streets, because, you know, "nazis"

No it would be like having buildings, streets and monuments to Hitler, Himmler, Goebel et al. All while flying a Nazi flag. You know like we do for the Confederacy now. #### those slave owning traitors.

Actually I thought you meant Germans in the US, you must have been referring to Germans and nazi names in Germany, so I misunderstood you there.

 

[jon_mx]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USAif the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

Excellent post.

It all depends on how you define their cornerstone principle. Their principle was very much states rights, that is what drove most citizens to fight for the confederacy and IMHO a noble cause. The issue they drew the line on was slavery, but I think characterizing that as their cornerstone is disingenuous.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USA

if the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

What's the body count on the deaths under the Communist China flag under Mao and his henchmen again? And NK under the Kims, x-million? And the USSR flag, which people love to flaunt around in kitschy style? Che flags? Lenin's tomb in Moscow and how many Stalin statues in Russia? ISIS is doing what again under a flag? Lots of odes to death everywhere, take a look around.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USAif the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

Excellent post.

It all depends on how you define their cornerstone principle. Their principle was very much states rights, that is what drove most citizens to fight for the confederacy and IMHO a noble cause. The issue they drew the line on was slavery, but I think characterizing that as their cornerstone is disingenuous.

"States rights" is fine. But like you said, the precipitating issue was slavery.

If you're a states rights guy, like I am, you should be pissed that the tarnished a perfectly fine idea by linking it with slavery, and later with segregation.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USA

if the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

What's the body count on the deaths under the Communist China flag under Mao and his henchmen again? And NK under the Kims, x-million? And the USSR flag, which people love to flaunt around in kitschy style? Che flags? Lenin's tomb in Moscow and how many Stalin statues in Russia? ISIS is doing what again under a flag? Lots of odes to death everywhere, take a look around.

When you have to point to the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea to argue that the confederate flag isn't really all that bad, you're losing the argument.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USA

if the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

What's the body count on the deaths under the Communist China flag under Mao and his henchmen again? And NK under the Kims, x-million? And the USSR flag, which people love to flaunt around in kitschy style? Che flags? Lenin's tomb in Moscow and how many Stalin statues in Russia? ISIS is doing what again under a flag? Lots of odes to death everywhere, take a look around.

When you have to point to the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea to argue that the confederate flag isn't really all that bad, you're losing the argument.

Yeah, I didn't make that argument.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I can't believe Britain hasn't had to change their flag after all the horrors that thing flew over. British people are jerks.

Britain should acknowledge their faults, as should the USA

if the confederacy was a nation it should too, it is not. They attempted to break apart from the union in armed rebellion and failed.

Also, the ideals of those countries aren't horrifying. There's a significant difference between standing for good but sometimes (or even often) failing to live up to those ideals and standing for evil from the get-go. The Confederacy stood for evil as its foundational "cornerstone" principle, to use the words of one of its leaders. To my knowledge- which is admittedly limited- no other flag that stood for evil on that scale is still proudly displayed anywhere else on earth.

What's the body count on the deaths under the Communist China flag under Mao and his henchmen again? And NK under the Kims, x-million? And the USSR flag, which people love to flaunt around in kitschy style? Che flags? Lenin's tomb in Moscow and how many Stalin statues in Russia? ISIS is doing what again under a flag? Lots of odes to death everywhere, take a look around.

When you have to point to the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea to argue that the confederate flag isn't really all that bad, you're losing the argument.

Yeah, I didn't make that argument.

Sorry if I misread your position. I haven't followed this thread super-closely.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is the statue right in front of the flag, and the inscription reads:

This monument perpetuates the memory
of those who true to the instincts of their birth,
faithful to the teachings of their fathers,
constant in the love for the state,
died in the performance of their duty...
who have glorified a fallen cause
by the simple manhood of their lives,
the patient endurance of suffering,
and the heroism of death...
and who in the dark hours of imprisonment,
in the hopelessness of the hospital,
in the short sharp agony of the field,
found support and consolation in the belief
that at home they would not be forgotten.

That's a confederate soldier at the top of the monument, which is at the front of the capitol.

 

[Otis]

Car parked on the front lawn next to a weight bench.

 

[Otis]

Losing