Perry lost my vote for sure - no Confederate plates

Now this really tears it.

This half-witted haircut of a Governor, the pilot/rancher who torched his own mansion so he wouldn't have to live in a place where others could see his playmates' comings and goings at night...yeah that guy....

Now has announced that there will be no Confederate license plates offered in this state.

WTF !!

I've stated my position on the civil war before, and it comports with the plaque and statuary in the Texas capitol. And you don't have to be in favor of slavery to be pro-Confederate. My ancestors in Comal County voted 239-43 in favor of seccession although they owned no slaves.

The civil war was caused when Abraham Lincoln illegally ordered the military invasion and occupation of some states, thus prosecuting warfare which anyone would be justified in opposing.

It's clear that slavery was totally legal under Federal as well as state law but that's not the issue.

The issue is whether people have the right to organize and defend themselves against military invasion from outside, whatever the justification or pretext.

The loss by the Confederate states ruined them. The noble gentry and educated class was wiped out through death and bankruptcy. The occupation which followed was a cruel retaliation.

We are entitled to recognize the nobility and virtue of the Confederate cause.

Never forget.....might does not create right.....just because we were made to submit doesn't mean we have to forget the truth or adopt a lie.

ps...
Had Perry lived in the civil war he would have been a dodger or skipped because he has no convictions or beliefs about anything.

Of course and nevermind about jobs and the economy. LOL

Now has announced that there will be no Confederate license plates offered in this state.
Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

Where do you get this stuff? I don't think Perry has anything to do with it. I do realize that he changes his opinion based on wind direction, but his opinion doesn't matter. Can you please post something to back up your statement. Thanks.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nati...-proposal.html

Does Herman Cain support Confederate flag plates? I sure hope so.

It was in the Austin American-Statemen today, page 1.

It's not the Governor's decision the paper says, but the board that decides the weighty issue usually follows the will of the one who's appointed them.

"We don't need to be scraping old wounds," Perry told Bay News 9 in Tampa, Fla., the Statesman says.

btw....

How much is the state paying for the remote palace he's been living in where no one can see who comes and goes?

Why's it taking sooooo long to repair the downtown Governor's mansion?

Let's be frank about this. He doesn't want to go back there.

If he wanted the downtown mansion repaired it would have been done long ago. Of course D'Torchia will accuse me of "conspiracy theory" for pointing out this fact and making any conclusions based on it.

His intimate social play practices are legend in this town, as was LBJ's, and a few others.

In 1998 when Clinton was exposed having penetrated a thick intern with one of his cheap cigars, one of Johnson's local girlfriends, someone known to have had his love child, said on local television that,

"He [Clinton] couldn't hold a candle to Lyndon.
Few men could. When it came to love-making Lyndon had it all !!"

When asked about her husband's love child, "Lady Bird [for whom our downtown lake/river is named]" replied,

"Lyndon loved people. And women are people."

The civil war was caused when Abraham Lincoln illegally ordered the military invasion and occupation of some states, thus prosecuting warfare which anyone would be justified in opposing. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

The cause of the Civil War is still hotly debated. Lincoln certainly didn't start it. The shelling of Fort Sumter did.

But as far as the flag goes, whether it is a positive or negative symbol is constantly debated but I think you can agree it is an inflammatory subject. I think there is enough rage on Texas Roads without adding one more catalyst. But I still get a holiday day for the Son's of Confederacy and its the DMV's call, not Perry's so it'll probably happen.

How would you feel about a swastika on a license plate? Was a symbol for good for thousands of years and an emblem on the American 45th Infantry Division's arms. ijs

I believe she just doesnt like him. It wouldn't matter what issue he was against. Lol That's the problem with voters they either don't vote or they just don't like an individual no matter their stand. Get to the real issues, JOBS, Economy, and TROOPS coming home. I'm sure they would like how some of us plan our emotional votes. A license plate determines your vote?? WOW really. Tell the troops over seas what your deciding factor is

It's rarely explained WHY South Carolina forces fired on Ft. Sumpter, or if it was a legitimate act or not.

Lincoln goated the hot-heads in South Carolina into firing on Ft. Sumpter. When it happened there was a fury of reaction against South Carolina in some cities in the north, like New York City, and a lot of people joined the 75,000 man volunteer force Lincoln called for to invade....not only South Carolina, but several other states which also seceeded. South Carolina was seeking to do what then happened in Texas and other Confederate states - to allow the now FOREIGN troops in their country [US army soldiers] to go home, surrender, or sumit to action.

Leaving the Union this way is called SELF DETERMINATION, and was exactly what these same states did in the revolution against the Crown in 1776.

Then Lincoln made another move he knew would guaranteed that other states like Virgina would seceed. He issued them an ultimatum, without law, that they had to raise volunteer forces to assist in the military attack of their neighbor states.

Of course this all had the reaction he knew would happen....it caused those states to seceed as well.

It didn't take long though for the citizens of New York City to turn against the war because of it's ulimited nature and very high cost. The poor of the city were targeted for forced enlistment [almost a death sentence] while the city's well-heeled found numerous ways to avoid the draft. Horrendous riots ensued there as well as other northern cities.

Lincoln's Generals didn't believe in the war, and did as much as possible to limit their commitment to it. This is the real reason why their performance APPEARED to be so less competent than that of the South's.
Then his head General, McClellan, ran against him as a peace candidate in the election of 1864. He was one of only a very few who could voice an anti-war view without being either hauled off to prison by Lincoln [illegally] or having their presses smashed and their property confiscated. In private McClellan voiced the unanimous contempt officers felt for Lincoln by calling him "an ape, a baboon, etc."

Lincoln finally found two sociopathic madmen, losers who only found success in their pathetic lives from their success in war -- Grant and Sherman.

When Grant and Sherman were let loose the South was doomed, and it didn't take long for it to be laid waste.

Lincoln was a liar, a madman, and a sociopath like Stalin, Hitler, or Usama bin-Laden.* He engineered a horrific war for reasons of personal zeal and hatred of others. He forced legions of others to suffer to achieve his revolutionary goals. Because he won, and because he was martyred, the popular myth arose that he was a hero.

Few things succeed like success.

Lincoln was a winner...until the moment the lead crashed into his skull.

*Lincoln was elected with only 38% of the vote from those states still participating in the election. Almost no one voted for him in any of the southern states. If they are included the nationwide vote for Lincoln is pathetically small.

Hitler was elected with 37% of the total vote of Germans voting.

That's your interpretion of History and you are welcome to it. Actually its your interpretation of someone else's interpretation but if that's what you believe. ok.

I tend to believe Harold Holzer's research into Lincoln myself, but you are entitled to your opinion. I would caution stating your opinion as fact though. But this is just a SHMB so carry on.

His 39% isnt bad when you remember that there were 4 guys running for President, not our normal 2.

Breckenridge: 18%
Bell: 13%
Douglas: 29%
Lincoln: 39%

Why's it taking sooooo long to repair the downtown Governor's mansion?

Actually so far it's still on track time wise. From the beginning it was estimated that the work would take until 2012.
We're talking about architecture from 1854. I know it's hard for you to understand but this type of restoration is a little more complicated than throwing some plaster on and covering up the smoke marks. They are trying to restore it while staying true to the original architecture.


If he wanted the downtown mansion repaired it would have been done long ago. Of course D'Torchia will accuse me of "conspiracy theory" for pointing out this fact and making any conclusions based on it.
Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

We'll let readers form their own opinion about your assertions here.

"The mansion was partially destroyed by a four-alarm fire during the early morning of June 8, 2008. Current Texas Governor Rick Perry and his wife Anita Perry were in Europe at the time of the fire. They had relocated during October 2007 for a $10 million major deferred maintenance project that began during January 2008. The project was to include a fire suppression system. State Fire Marshal Paul Maldonado said the next Sunday that investigators have evidence that an arsonist targeted the 152-year-old building.
On February 2, 2011, Chief Tony Leal, an assistant director of the Texas Rangers, announced that a person of interest has been identified that is connected to an Austin-based anarchist group which has also been linked to an attack (involving Molotov cocktails) which was planned for the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis during September 2008. An official close to the investigation said agents determined the fire was a criminal act "after reviewing footage from security cameras." A restoration is currently being performed, but is not expected to be done until 2012."


So let's see, you've accused Governor Perry of "torching his own place" when the facts show that it's an anarchist organization opposed to the Republican party that seems to have torched it. In fact he was in Europe when the fire broke out.
You stated that if he wanted the mansion restored it would have been "completed a long time ago". The concept of historic renovation and the time periods involved in completing such a project seems to escape you.

So are you putting forth "conspiracy theories" here? I'd say you're once again just throwing things out there without the facts to back them up.
When you accuse someone of arson, it'd be nice to have some facts to go along with it OTHER THAN whom Lyndon Johnson had a love child with.

We'll let readers form their own opinion about your assertions here.

" State Fire Marshal Paul Maldonado said the next Sunday that investigators have evidence that an arsonist targeted the 152-year-old building.
On February 2, 2011, Chief Tony Leal, an assistant director of the Texas Rangers, announced that a person of interest has been identified that is connected to an Austin-based anarchist group which has also been linked to an attack (involving Molotov cocktails) which was planned for the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis during September 2008. An official close to the investigation said agents determined the fire was a criminal act "after reviewing footage from security cameras." A restoration is currently being performed, but is not expected to be done until 2012."

Originally Posted by DTorrchia

Yes it was arson. Yes cameras spotted someone, as yet un-indicted and not apprehended.

All that's been put forward [as a red-herring I submit] is "a person of interest connected to an anarchist group...."

This is of course very dramatic, a anarchist arsonist "terrorist."

But there is no proof and no evidence; just claims from state officials all of whom are connected to Perry appointees.

My information is that Perry was concerned about the fact that the mansion can be observed from just about anywhere, and was seeking an excuse to move to a very remote place where his paramores would not be caught on others' surveillance.

I believe the arsonist worked for friends of his.

Yes the re-building is on schedule, but the schedule is made to be ridiculously long....years and years to do what would normally take a few weeks or months at most.

That's your interpretion of History and you are welcome to it. Actually its your interpretation of someone else's interpretation but if that's what you believe. ok.

I tend to believe Harold Holzer's research into Lincoln myself, but you are entitled to your opinion. I would caution stating your opinion as fact though. But this is just a SHMB so carry on.

His 39% isnt bad when you remember that there were 4 guys running for President, not our normal 2.

Breckenridge: 18%
Bell: 13%
Douglas: 29%
Lincoln: 39% Originally Posted by budman33

Yes but isn't it true that most of the southern states didn't even participate in the election? I thought the 38 or 39 percent was just for the voters in states where the election was still on?

My point is that in Germany there were over 50% who were smart enough and would never have voted for Hitler, and the same applies to Lincoln.

I'm convinced over 50% of voters even in the states that had that election would never have voted for someone so dispised as Lincoln, and rightly so.

Turnout seemed pretty good in the South

http://www.etymonline.com/cw/1860.htm

4.7 Million people total voted in that election which 81% of eligible voters I think based on this source. when there are 30+ million people that tells a story right there. Women excluded and blacks excluded and 4.7 is 80 percent turnout.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php

he was despised because he was a masterful politician, was not a devout christian, and was against slavery and became president with the toughest problem this country faced. The media and other politicians thought he was in far over his head and additionally Americans hated all the corrupt politicians before him expected him to be like all the rest.

Some things never change.

Now this really tears it.

This half-witted haircut of a Governor, the pilot/rancher who torched his own mansion so he wouldn't have to live in a place where others could see his playmates' comings and goings at night...yeah that guy....

Now has announced that there will be no Confederate license plates offered in this state.

WTF !! Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

It took this to lose your vote? Really? I mean, seriously, you were going to vote for him before this?

He lost me at "I'm running for President."

It took this to lose your vote? Really? I mean, seriously, you were going to vote for him before this?

He lost me at "I'm running for President." Originally Posted by Booth

A little sarcasim here perhaps on my part. Not unusual.

Perry's emblematic of the Republicans in Texas today.

They could care less that he used to be a liberal Democrat, has changed his philosophy in the most depraved manner possible, makes every decision based purely on the opinion of the moment then reverses himself, is a moron with the most insincere, phoney delivery since Oral Roberts.

A friend of mine who's a Republican contributor told me he was supporting Perry because, "He's been Governor so long he must be doing something right!"

When I asked him to name something he's done which was conservative he replied, "I can't think of anything right now but there must be something!"

He's the Marleboro man.

ps....
Since Perry is the Marleboro man what then is Dewhurst?