1911Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
(CNN) -- Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean sparked criticism from his rivals Saturday after invoking the Confederate flag in a defense of his views on gun control.

"I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," the former Vermont governor said in an interview published Saturday in the Des Moines Register. "We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross-section of Democrats."

It was at least the second time Dean publicly used the Confederate flag to describe Southern voters who often vote for Republicans.

Dean previously used the flag reference during a February meeting of the Democratic National Committee.

At that event, Dean received a rousing ovation from the crowd when he said, "White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us, and not [Republicans], because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."

All the other Democratic candidates at that time attended that session except Sen. John Kerry, of Massachusetts, who was absent for health reasons.

Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt, of Missouri, both issued statements Saturday attacking Dean's recent comments.

Gephardt, who polls show is in a close race with Dean to win January's Iowa caucuses, wrapped his criticism in patriotism.

"I don't want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks. I will win the Democratic nomination because I will be the candidate for the guys with American flags in their pickup trucks," Gephardt's statement said.

Kerry used his statement to illustrate his views on gun control and his support of the NAACP.

"Howard Dean is justifying his pandering to the NRA by saying his opposition to an assault weapons ban allows him to pander to lovers of the Confederate flag," Kerry said in his statement. "It is simply unconscionable for Howard Dean to embrace the most racially divisive symbol in America. I would rather be the candidate of the NAACP than the NRA."

Dean told the National Rifle Association in a 1992 questionnaire that he opposed restrictions on private ownership of assault weapons, and received the NRA's highest ratings when he was governor.

Dean has said he believes gun control laws should be a state matter, a position that might be considered a liability with the liberal base of the Democratic party, which supports federal gun control measures.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/01/elec04.prez.dean.confederate.flag/index.html



The above is from CNN. Here is my comment:

Whether people here support the Confederate flag or not is not the debate I wish to bring up. I live in the "north" and am a life member of the NRA. I also live in a city. The point is that Dean does not understand who the NRA is. He believes it is the stereotype that the anti-gunners believe. He does not understand who we are and who it is that supports gun rights and individual freedom and gun ownership. He should not have gun owners support (nor should any democrat) since he does not understand who we are and what we stand for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Oh, and not to mention the fact that he says it's a state issue and not a federal issue. ??? :confused: :confused: He sure doesn't sound like someone who will actively support gun owners and push for our rights.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,787 Posts
ssr,

You are probably right. I fear that many people are still so close minded that they do not realize that all kinds of people want their Constitutional rights acknowledged. These rights blast through lines of race, creed, color, religion, sex, politics, and economics. The antis, of course use that ignorance to their advantage; "Let's make gun owners look like separatists, that'll scare the voters!" :rolleyes:

I love politics.;)

Be well!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
I don't care what Dean thinks; I won't vote for him or any other Democrat, ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,086 Posts
ssr said:
Oh, and not to mention the fact that he says it's a state issue and not a federal issue. ??? :confused: :confused:
Dear ssr,

To a great many of the people who fly the Confederate battle flag it symbolically represents their belief in "states rights". In other words, people who believe in getting the federal government off of our backs. No major Democrat has really pushed that ideal in the past thirty years since George Wallace ran for the Presidential nomination in 1972. It looks like Dean is trying to win the "Dixiecrats" back into the fold.

This idea of it being a state issue is more in line with the Libertarian Party than either the Democrat or Republican. The smaller the government is, and the closer it is to the people, the easier it is for the people to influence it. State and local elected officials are much more responsive to the voters than the ones at the federal level. Getting control back in the states would be a great help in correcting many of the things our government has done. I just wish that Dean would put health, education, etc... in the same category as firearms and state that he thinks the states should handle these things as well. Stay safe, Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
I don't think Dean literally meant people with Confederate flags in pickup trucks. Indeed (not that I'm judging), I am uncertain that there are that many people who have confederate flags in their pickup trucks, and that they would be a significant windfall of votes.

What he MEANT was (a group I mentioned in the constitution thread) - middle-Americans (well, the subset of those in the south) who may not vote themselves the wealth of others, even though they are poor (perhaps they have principles?)

Dean kind of slipped up. IMHO, the "Confederate flag in pickup" thing was just a stereotypical potshot from a non-southerner. Pick some other group, and substitute in an ethnic stereotype/slur. Hey, at least he didn't say "poor white trash".


Battler.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I have no real problem with states rights and control of certain issues. I do have a problem with it as concerns gun rights, since we have the Second Ammendment which is supposed to acknowledge and guarantee rights to bear arms. If we were to somehow say that no it's a state right to control gun ownership, that is a step at eroding the second ammendment, with states subsequently being able to do or outlaw whatever they want. If he says it's a state issue, he is essentially saying he will give gun owners no support, they're on their own with whatever state they live in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Thank you Gary for articulating a position that a Southern man can't make. While I don't fly the Stars and Bars on my truck (its a bit cliche) I do spend a great deal of time trying to help others understand that we feel that the Civil War was fought over whether a union of states voluntarily joined could be held together at the point of a gun.

Even those of us in the South who do fly the flag know that slavery and Jim Crow laws were an abomination and the work of the Devil.

Many of us feel that regional differences were what made this country great and were far less divisive than the current Federally mandated "Diversity Programs".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
I tought it was interesting that he said it in Iowa. Last time I checked Iowa fought for the North in the Civil War. To me this demonstrated that he is a Northern elitist who equates any rural area, that is not in the Northeast, as a place full of Confederate flag waving gun toting rednecks.


Dont flame me, I drive a truck, have several guns and am kinda from the South.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I think Dean is only guilty of being the only honest politician out their. He freely speaks without rehearsal or preparation and obviously does not have advisors directing his every word. I think this is kind of refreshing.

If only GWB could speak the truth, even for one day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
WOW! I guess Dean does think he has it all sown up and does not need the NAACP!

To appeal to racists this early in the campaign, shows his confidence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
What did Bush lie about? I hear this alot from Bush bashers. If you mean because we havent found WMDs yet then I guess Osama Bin Laden and Saddam never exsisted since we havent found them yet either. There are alot of Iranians and Kurds who were killed by WMD, I bet they are pretty confident Saddam had WMD. I would also appreciate an explaination about why all those bio hazard suits were laying around if Iraq didnt have WMDs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
If Bush lied The DemocRats are a bunch of liars too.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=10056

Democrats on the Record
By FrontPageMag.com
FrontPageMagazine.com | October 1, 2003


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

President Bill Clinton. Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

President Bill Clinton. Feb. 17, 1998.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Sen. John F. Kerry, D-MA. Oct. 2002.

"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."

Sen. John F. Kerry, D-MA. Jan. 23, 2003.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA. Sept. 27, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY. Oct 10, 2002.

We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Bob Graham, D-FL. Dec. 8, 2002.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Madeline Albright, Clinton's Secretary of State. Feb 18, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

Madeline Albright. Nov. 10, 1999.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser. Feb,18, 1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Letter to President Clinton, signed by Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others. Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. Dec. 16, 1998.

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

Letter to President Bush, signed by Sen. Bob Graham, D-FL, and others. Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Sen. Carl Levin, D-MI. Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Vice President Al Gore. Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

Vice President Al Gore. Sept. 23, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."

Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV. Oct. 3, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-WV. Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA. Oct. 10, 2002.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,105 Posts
Battler said:
Dean kind of slipped up. IMHO, the "Confederate flag in pickup" thing was just a stereotypical potshot from a non-southerner. Pick some other group, and substitute in an ethnic stereotype/slur. Hey, at least he didn't say "poor white trash".
LOL. Yeah. At least he didnt say "Bible thumpin gun totin crackers."

:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
He is already backing off the comment. Drudge has an article and I paraphrase here "I want the Confederate flag wavers to put down their flags and vote for me because they need cheap healthcare and better schools". My quote isnt exact but that is the jist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
KSFreeman said:
WOW! I guess Dean does think he has it all sown up and does not need the NAACP!

To appeal to racists this early in the campaign, shows his confidence.
How is he appealing to racists? If you are implying that having a confederate flag is somehow racist, you should do more research on your subject matter. Being from Mississippi, I have many relatives that died proudly under the flags of the Confederacy and I would appreciate it greatly if you would not call them racists. Fighting for your rights is not a racist act, no matter what the NAACP or the revisionist historians might teach at your local liberal University.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,086 Posts
ssr said:
I have no real problem with states rights and control of certain issues. I do have a problem with it as concerns gun rights, since we have the Second Ammendment which is supposed to acknowledge and guarantee rights to bear arms.
Dear ssr,

I think that you are missing my point here. That point is that the federal government really has no business controlling any product within the States. The only reason they are able to do it is by a very liberal interpretation of the Constitutional powers they have to regulate "interstate commerce" and this is backed up for the most part by the federal courts. The federal government does have the power to protect the rights of all citizens if a State seeks to violate tbem. Unfortunately I don't see them doing much as far as firearms rights go. If they are the ones who are supposed to be protecting these rights, they aren't doing a very good job of it.

The federal government is the main source of restrictions on firearms ownership we have. While it's true that states like California, Massachusetts, Maryland, and others have very restrictive firearms laws they don't affect people residing in other states. They do however affect federal law as their Senators and Representatives vote on any laws which the federal government makes. People from one state should not be telling people of other states, and the states themselves, how to live their lives and handle their affairs. However that is what occurs with practically every piece of federal legislation.

As I said before it is much easier to enact change on a state or local level than it is on the national level. My voice means a lot more at my town council meeting or a letter to my local representative tban it does to those I've elected to serve in Congress. As for Dean I believe that I've read him as saying that what works for Vermont may not be right for a more urban state. That leads me to believe that he's not truly pro-firearms rights but rather believes these things should be decided upon by those who are affected. The little guys like us can actually organize and accomplish something at home, which we could not afford to do at the national level. Getting the federal government out of the firearms laws business won't result in anything being worse, and it will probably result in things being better. Stay safe, Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
FedDC, the Confederate flag is a racist symbol. The South fought for their right to own other human beings.

Slavery was the reason for the Civil War. Recently Southern apologists and revisionists have tried to make the Civil War out as some sort of romance novel, but even Southern states proudly display their declarations upon leaving the Union. Slavery is listed front and center. (In Tejas it is proudly displayed in the state museum in Austin). Heck, even Bobby Lee, after the war, admitted that the Civil War was a racist cause.

Racism de jure, and perhaps de facto, in the South is dead, however that does not change its de jure history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
KSFreeman said:
FedDC, the Confederate flag is a racist symbol. The South fought for their right to own other human beings.

Slavery was the reason for the Civil War. Recently Southern apologists and revisionists have tried to make the Civil War out as some sort of romance novel, but even Southern states proudly display their declarations upon leaving the Union. Slavery is listed front and center. (In Tejas it is proudly displayed in the state museum in Austin). Heck, even Bobby Lee, after the war, admitted that the Civil War was a racist cause.

Racism de jure, and perhaps de facto, in the South is dead, however that does not change its de jure history.
Wow, how do I even begin to respond to anything this silly. Ok, here goes...STATES RIGHTS. Slavery was a dying beast and everyone knew it, the south included. It was on the way out even without the war. The south was fighting being taxed into oblivion and having to answer to an unresponsive government that did not care about them or their rights. You should do some research on the subject before you say things like this. The south cam e into the union freely and wanted to leave the same way, they were told no and threatened with force...they responded in kind. Fighting for rights and a way of life that was being legislated to death is not racist and you should be ashamed for making ignorant statements like that.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top