Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Tang’s logic is illogical. At least the Chiefs won the SB...oh wait.

Let's look at this a different way.... why are you so passionate about keeping a statue of Robert E. Lee? What was amazing about him that we need to fight tooth and nail to glorify? I think there are far more deserving people, real Americans, to memorialize.

And also... soothsayer tang declares that Mahomes will win MULTIPLE Super Bowls in his time in KC.... and the Chiefs are making it to the SB next year.

I am not remotely passionate about Lee. I actually agree with you but many Democrats are crazy as illustrated by my George Washington U example. If Lee goes then who is to say Washington and Jefferson aren’t next?

Guess what? I don't support taking down the statues of Washington and Jefferson. That's silly. And the fact that those statues could feasibly (although probably won't be) taken down doesn't mean that Lee's shouldn't.

You still don’t get it. Love that Kansas education. You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans? Why am I more wrong or right than you who wants Lee statues taken down. Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost. Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope especially with idiot Democrats easily offended by everything these days.

You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans?

You would have the right to believe that. I believe that TJ and GW did more good than bad, and didn't betray the country. I think I have a firmer moral ground to stand on. You don't. To wylie's point, killing natives was pretty accepted back then, and it's not like TJ and GW did the reservation act.

Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost.

Pretty big ******* difference. You don't see GW getting a statue in England, do you?

Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope

How does taking down Lee mean that GW is any more likely to be taken down? As you said, there are probably a small percentage of people who want GW taken down, and those are the only people who will support that. Taking Lee down changes nothing. In addition, the fact that GW could be taken down is unrelated to the point at hand, and has nothing to do with whether Lee should be taken down. I don't believe that GW should be taken down. You agree. We agree that Lee needs to be taken down, and moved to a graveyard or museum. There is no slippery slope here, or ever.

Leftists are illogical. You’re case in point. They ll point to Lee as a precedent. To your point, slavery was accepted and the country was young so the Civil War just happened. You made my argument for me.

I'm clearly not a leftist.

But I don't see how taking Lee down means that people are more likely to want to take GW down. They are unrelated. If you don't want GW taken down now, you won't in the future, either, or at least won't be persuaded by Lee.

Also.... your last sentence made zero sense.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 11:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Tang’s logic is illogical. At least the Chiefs won the SB...oh wait.

Let's look at this a different way.... why are you so passionate about keeping a statue of Robert E. Lee? What was amazing about him that we need to fight tooth and nail to glorify? I think there are far more deserving people, real Americans, to memorialize.

And also... soothsayer tang declares that Mahomes will win MULTIPLE Super Bowls in his time in KC.... and the Chiefs are making it to the SB next year.

I am not remotely passionate about Lee. I actually agree with you but many Democrats are crazy as illustrated by my George Washington U example. If Lee goes then who is to say Washington and Jefferson aren’t next?

Guess what? I don't support taking down the statues of Washington and Jefferson. That's silly. And the fact that those statues could feasibly (although probably won't be) taken down doesn't mean that Lee's shouldn't.

You still don’t get it. Love that Kansas education. You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans? Why am I more wrong or right than you who wants Lee statues taken down. Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost. Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope especially with idiot Democrats easily offended by everything these days.

You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans?

You would have the right to believe that. I believe that TJ and GW did more good than bad, and didn't betray the country. I think I have a firmer moral ground to stand on. You don't. To wylie's point, killing natives was pretty accepted back then, and it's not like TJ and GW did the reservation act.

Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost.

Pretty big ******* difference. You don't see GW getting a statue in England, do you?

Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope

How does taking down Lee mean that GW is any more likely to be taken down? As you said, there are probably a small percentage of people who want GW taken down, and those are the only people who will support that. Taking Lee down changes nothing. In addition, the fact that GW could be taken down is unrelated to the point at hand, and has nothing to do with whether Lee should be taken down. I don't believe that GW should be taken down. You agree. We agree that Lee needs to be taken down, and moved to a graveyard or museum. There is no slippery slope here, or ever.

Leftists are illogical. You’re case in point. They ll point to Lee as a precedent. To your point, slavery was accepted and the country was young so the Civil War just happened. You made my argument for me.

I'm clearly not a leftist.

But I don't see how taking Lee down means that people are more likely to want to take GW down. They are unrelated. If you don't want GW taken down now, you won't in the future, either, or at least won't be persuaded by Lee.

Also.... your last sentence made zero sense.

You don’t follow eh? Leftists want offensive statues taken down. And if they see Lee as offensive many may see GW as offensive too. Just because you don’t conflate the two doesn’t mean others won’t. Explain why your fellow idiot Leftists are offended by the Colonial mascot...

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/5/2019 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bagchucker on 4/5/2019 2:26:00 AM (view original):
3. Robert E Lee fought for Virginia

The general consensus of historical opinion is that Gen. Robert E. Lee made a very difficult decision to support his beloved Virginia. (as Bagchucker states!)
I believe it's fair to conclude that he loved Virginia--- his home (land) more than he did the Union that existed at that time.
As a soldier he did his best when given command of forces in defense of the New Country that the Confederacy viewed themselves.

As someone with family roots in Missouri. A state wherein the citizens were literally divided in two by the "notion" of blacks as "free" men. (Few people even gave a thought to the Black women!) By that I mean frequent occurrences of families divided with brother(s) vs. brother(s) all over the issue of "southern" secession and the right of the Confederacy to live freely by their own rules and ways------I can safely say that highly educated, well respected men like Gen. Lee didn't make such decisions frivolously nor did they take pleasure at the reality of taking up "arms" against their own friends, neighbors and (sometimes) family members. Don't they teach the Civil war in Kansas Tangy? hell, watch Outlaw Josey wales, you'll get just a small taste of the treachery committed by (in that case) the Union forces.

That may be true. What is also true is that

a) Regardless of his personal intentions, Lee fought for "Team Slavery" in the Civil War.
b) Lee was a traitor to the United States.
c) Lee did not want statues of himself put up.

When you combine these truths, we can see that Lee is not deserving of a statue glorifying him.

Team Slavery? Is this the Twilight movies?

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 11:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 11:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 10:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Tang’s logic is illogical. At least the Chiefs won the SB...oh wait.

Let's look at this a different way.... why are you so passionate about keeping a statue of Robert E. Lee? What was amazing about him that we need to fight tooth and nail to glorify? I think there are far more deserving people, real Americans, to memorialize.

And also... soothsayer tang declares that Mahomes will win MULTIPLE Super Bowls in his time in KC.... and the Chiefs are making it to the SB next year.

I am not remotely passionate about Lee. I actually agree with you but many Democrats are crazy as illustrated by my George Washington U example. If Lee goes then who is to say Washington and Jefferson aren’t next?

Guess what? I don't support taking down the statues of Washington and Jefferson. That's silly. And the fact that those statues could feasibly (although probably won't be) taken down doesn't mean that Lee's shouldn't.

You still don’t get it. Love that Kansas education. You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans? Why am I more wrong or right than you who wants Lee statues taken down. Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost. Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope especially with idiot Democrats easily offended by everything these days.

You may not agree with TJ and GW but what if I want them taken down because they killed Native Americans?

You would have the right to believe that. I believe that TJ and GW did more good than bad, and didn't betray the country. I think I have a firmer moral ground to stand on. You don't. To wylie's point, killing natives was pretty accepted back then, and it's not like TJ and GW did the reservation act.

Only difference is that TJ and GW won their war and Lee lost.

Pretty big ******* difference. You don't see GW getting a statue in England, do you?

Like I said IDC that much but you have yet to convince me that this is not a slippery slope

How does taking down Lee mean that GW is any more likely to be taken down? As you said, there are probably a small percentage of people who want GW taken down, and those are the only people who will support that. Taking Lee down changes nothing. In addition, the fact that GW could be taken down is unrelated to the point at hand, and has nothing to do with whether Lee should be taken down. I don't believe that GW should be taken down. You agree. We agree that Lee needs to be taken down, and moved to a graveyard or museum. There is no slippery slope here, or ever.

Leftists are illogical. You’re case in point. They ll point to Lee as a precedent. To your point, slavery was accepted and the country was young so the Civil War just happened. You made my argument for me.

I'm clearly not a leftist.

But I don't see how taking Lee down means that people are more likely to want to take GW down. They are unrelated. If you don't want GW taken down now, you won't in the future, either, or at least won't be persuaded by Lee.

Also.... your last sentence made zero sense.

You don’t follow eh? Leftists want offensive statues taken down. And if they see Lee as offensive many may see GW as offensive too. Just because you don’t conflate the two doesn’t mean others won’t. Explain why your fellow idiot Leftists are offended by the Colonial mascot...

Right. That's my point. These 'leftists' are going to want Gw taken down regardless of whether Lee is taken down.

And taking down Lee will empower them even more. Hence the slippery slope. If your party members were sane I d agree on Lee but they aren’t so I am hesitant.

No. You just said that the crazy people will want the statues taken down no matter what. No one is swung by Lee.

I disagree. They are just waiting for a precedent. You argue just to argue.

Here's the deal. A statue of Gen. Lee in Kansas is quite likely to be offensive to some creampuff somewhere. That's logical.
A statue of Gen. Lee in Montgomery, Alabama is just not as offensive to the majority of folks living there.

Now, try erecting a statue of some noteworthy Kansan (are there any?) in Jackson, Mississippi and the likelihood of offending some creampuff Mississippian goes way up.

Reactions to statues is entirely dependent on BOTH the statue AND it's location.

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/6/2019 8:58:00 AM (view original):
I disagree. They are just waiting for a precedent. You argue just to argue.

Then why did these 'leftists' vote to remove the colonel?

Posted by laramiebob on 4/6/2019 9:01:00 AM (view original):
Here's the deal. A statue of Gen. Lee in Kansas is quite likely to be offensive to some creampuff somewhere. That's logical.
A statue of Gen. Lee in Montgomery, Alabama is just not as offensive to the majority of folks living there.

Now, try erecting a statue of some noteworthy Kansan (are there any?) in Jackson, Mississippi and the likelihood of offending some creampuff Mississippian goes way up.

Reactions to statues is entirely dependent on BOTH the statue AND it's location.

Right. That's my point. It seems strange to erect a statue of a traitorous person who fought against your country.

Where's the Adolf Hitler statue in Austria?

Dougout bought it from 'em years ago.

Posted by tangplay on 4/6/2019 10:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/6/2019 8:58:00 AM (view original):
I disagree. They are just waiting for a precedent. You argue just to argue.

Then why did these 'leftists' vote to remove the colonel?

What colonel? Who wanted who "removed"? Somebody had a problem with Colonel Sanders? I never heard about "leftists" wanting Colonel Sanders removed from anything. Ain't he dead? Was he even real? Doesn't the McDonald's Corp. own KFC? Inquiring minds want to know these things?

LMAO, Bob. The statue of Spongebob Squarepants offends tang.

Posted by laramiebob on 4/6/2019 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/6/2019 10:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/6/2019 8:58:00 AM (view original):
I disagree. They are just waiting for a precedent. You argue just to argue.

Then why did these 'leftists' vote to remove the colonel?

What colonel? Who wanted who "removed"? Somebody had a problem with Colonel Sanders? I never heard about "leftists" wanting Colonel Sanders removed from anything. Ain't he dead? Was he even real? Doesn't the McDonald's Corp. own KFC? Inquiring minds want to know these things?

****. I am tired.

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/6/2019 11:24:00 AM (view original):
LMAO, Bob. The statue of Spongebob Squarepants offends tang.

Spongebob supports gay rights