Controversial Confederate Flag Painting Removed From Art Exhibit
- Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:03am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
An art appreciation professor in Georgia has had his controversial, interpretive Confederate flag painting removed this week from an annual faculty art show at Gainesville State College. It‘s a move he’s calling censorship.
“I tell my students that they may come across art that they don’t like — they may even hate it and that’s OK,” art appreciation professor Stanley Bermudez told the Gainesville Times. “If you don’t like the way something looks, you don’t have to look at it.”
The color painting, called “Heritage?”, depicts a Confederate flag with images of a KKK member and a black person hanging from a noose in the background.
Bermudez, who’s from Venezuela, likened his piece‘s removal to the censorship ushered in by his home country’s dictator, Hugo Chavez. He said the painting does espouse a less-favorable view of the flag, but that’s what comes to mind when he thinks about it — images that result from what he learned of the South while growing up in Venezuela and also while in college in Texas.
“I wasn’t expecting that kind of feedback. I’ve been an artist for 25 years. I’ve always known that artwork can be powerful, but I never dreamed it would be this powerful to the point that I would be censored,” he told the Times.
But what some call censorship, others call reticence or discretion:
Although the finished piece is how Bermudez sees the flag, not everyone agrees with his views. Public response to the piece was so strong that Gainesville State’s administration asked that the picture be removed from the faculty showing in the Roy C. Moore Art Gallery on the college’s Oakwood campus, Bermudez says.
While Bermudez doesn’t agree with the decision, he does “respect it.”
“I know if I was in that kind of position, I’d have a difficult time making a decision, because it’s a hard one to make,” he said.
Read the full story from the Times.
(H/T: Gawker)
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 676 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 527 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 409 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 372 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 328 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 266 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 278 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 151 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 266 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (203)
Marcus Junius Brutus
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:03pmI’m absolutely fine with the Confederate flag flying or being painted anywhere, but when you paint a clan member and the scene of a lynching, than that crosses the line and should not be tolerated.
Report Post »dutchtouch
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:32pmJust playing devil’s advocate……who determines where that line lies?
Report Post »George1
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:42pmThe great thing about art, is that if it offends you, then you really NEVER are forced to look at it.
Report Post »IFIWEREPREZ
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:47pmWhy would you be okay with that flag being flown or painted? That flag represents opression and slavery. The confederacy was formed to promote and protect salvery. If you don’t believe me, read the constitution of the confederate states. There was nothing noble or redeaming about the south’s rebellion. There may have been some soldiers who didn’t really understand the true purpose behind the revolution, but it was absolutely about slavery.
The lynching and kkk are correctly tied to this flag. After the reconstruction period, it was the Democrat party in the south that formed the kkk and used lynchings and beatings to intimidate the newly freed blacks to not use their rights to vote, or more insidiously to force them to vote democrat. This is the most perverse lie in our countries history. Modern day blacks vote democrat because their parents did and the democrats continue to pander to them with promises of free services and a dip into “Obama’s Stash.” What they don’t know is that their ancestors were intimidated into voting democrat by the kkk post revolution democrats.
Then the modern democrats try to cover their perversion by stating that the current conservative southerners are the same as the southern democrats of the kkk. This is so wrong that it’s sickening. It is taught in schools so much that many southerners don’t know the difference.
Marcus my friend, you’ve got to get with history. The south will NOT rise again.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:45pmAmen sir! As for the person calling himself “IFIWEREPREZ”, I thank God Almighty that you are NOT the president since you are sorely lacking in historical knowledge…In fact, I find your erronious claim (The south will NOT rise again) to be ironically comical since in spirit WE ARE NOW THE SOUTH!
Report Post »I weat the Confederate Battle Flag on my left shoulder (closest to my heart) to show that I identify with those in the past who have been hagridden by the federal government to the point of secession. WE ARE THE SOUTH!
dcenac
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:51pm@ IFIWEREPREZ
That is your view of the flag. Once again symbols are subject to interpretation. That is why we have to be very careful about banning thing that we consider offensive. An example of this is the swastika. Today by popular western culture it is viewed as a symbol of racism but for Buddhist and the Hindu it has been a religious symbol for 3,000 years. Just because a symbol has been used to promote and evil point of view does not make it utterly evil. Many Southerners see the flag as not a symbol of hate but one of Southern Identity. A symbol should be just that……it should reflect the person using it not necessarily the person who is viewing it. You view the Confederate Flag as offensive due to racial issues….speech has to be taken into context or it can be misrepresented……same goes for symbols. The wearer/bearer may have a different context than you.
Report Post »George1
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:03pmThat is a beautifully executed piece, but the artist should have known ahead of time the controversy it would cause. Symbols mean different things to different groups. The swastika is ingrained in our memories as a symbol of the Nazis and their hatred, however, many native american tribes used it long before the Nazis ever existed. The confederate flag doesn’t mean the same thing to me (as a young black man) as it does to someone in the south, and that’s something you have to be aware of when analyzing any piece of work. Your interpretation isn‘t going to match up with other’s.
Report Post »SueDinNY
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:57amDon’t worry. I‘m sure it’ll show up at Smithsonian.
Report Post »The Toad
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:53amThe confederate flag is a pretty flag and one with a lot of history! Minorities don‘t like it of course but that’s their problem. It is another point in history were government was over stepping their bounds!
Report Post »Nemo13
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:53amYou can do whatever you want and call it art with Jesus or Mary or whatever, but not confederate Flag? Some may hate that flag, some may not, that is opinion. I hate a lot of things, doesn’t mean I have a right to ban it for others. Too many crybabies with chips on their shoulders.
Report Post »JB-Illinois
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:53amAmazing it was banned (not that I would go see it) considering a few years ago my friend and I took our young girls to the museum of contemporary art in Chicago and there was an “art exhibit” (and I use that term loosley) WITH a security guard (so no kids enter- I am sure tax payer funded), of clay male sex organs rotating around on a disc (like a record player), and actual videos of anal sex on videos around in room. I was shocked. Shocked to think someone thought this was art,that someone “approved” it, and that tax payer dollars funded it. It was a peep show for pervs-funded by Illinois (and Illinois is broke). So sad we uphold perverts rights,tantrum toting liberals,but deny normal people many things.
Report Post »Our tax dollars being wasted again. Speak up America, because if you don’t- who will.
antena
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:49amEither you believe in free speech or you don’t. Either you believe in freedom of expression or you don’t. If you only believe in freedoms of speech or expression that YOU agree with, then you are no different than radical Muslims.
Report Post »Likewise, you also have the right to be offended and to express your disgust. But censorship is not what America is about. Pornography offends me – but pornography to me may be art to you. As thinking individuals, we have the ability to discern what we believe inappropriate. Then avoid and evade.
ronstclair
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:47amNote to ENCINOM:
Report Post »The Confederate Flag is, not to state the obvious, is The Confederate Flag. It is a symbol of the person who puts it on display. Much of what goes on in this country could be solved by taking a minute to talk to the displayer and find out what they’re all about.
Some would be shown to be robe wearin’, black hatin’ racists of the worst kind. Other would share knowledge about that period in history that might offer enlightenment and an understanding you have not yet known.
The problem with starting from a simple “the Confederate flag is a racist symbol” is that virtually every symbol has been used for evil. What happens if one day your attitude is what governs the opinion of The Cross.
Take a minute and learn. Nothing wrong with having an opinion but yours seems to be a recitation of what’s been taught. There is much to learn.
encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:12pmThe confederate flag is the flag of traitors to the constitution. There is nothing noble about the flag or the misplaced pride that the south has about their role in the civil war. The flag was flown by those that sought to keep the tradtion of slavery alive.
The confederate flag is a relic of the past, that is best left there as a tombstone to a failure of this nation to live up to its ideals.
Report Post »MrScary
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:42am….are these the same people (or type of people) who don’t object to a Jesus made of poo as art? Was that taken down for being offensive, no. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it….1st amendment rights apply regardless of how offensive it may be. If not, who is it that decides when the 1st amendment applied?
It’s only censorship when the government does it…..
Report Post »Alabama Rick
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:41amLibs do the same thing with the American Flag. I am a southerner and we did a lot of stupid things. No denying that. I still love the South as well as the rest of the country.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:26pmI’m a Southerner as well, and yes, a lot of stupid things were done here in the South. The same can be said about the North as well, and can be said about every nation, race, and group that has ever been in existence.
Some people just don’t understand History and follow what they are told, rather than learn what the truth is.
Report Post »dcenac
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:38amI don‘t particularly care for the painting but I do see it’s banning as censorship. Definition of censorship is: Censorship is suppression of speech or other communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. Just because people find something objectionable doesn’t mean that it should not be seen or heard. A lot of people find this site and the conservative point of view harmful and I consider it censorship when they try to silence it. Same goes the other way. You don’t like it….don’t look at it. You don’t like what some say…don’t listen. I find it disturbing when any entity thinks it has the right to filter what can be seen by an adult as long as it is not illegal.
Report Post »ThomasUSA
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:38amKeep your friends close and your enemies closer… We should keep every reminder of history’s mistakes in the forefront so we do not forget them. One of the problems in this country now is that the threats to our liberties have been hidden from eyes and minds of the masses.
Report Post »the phathom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:32amThe confederate battle flag has been hijacked by groups of people with bad intentions. This has made the flag, which so many Americans died under a bad symbol which it is not. The south was fighting for what they believed in at the time and that was an economic matter and had nothing to do with slavery until 1863 when Lincoln made it such. The skinheads need to get their act together and stop using a flag that has absolutely nothing to do with their evil cause.
Report Post »antena
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:50amI believe the term is “state’s rights”.
Report Post »Airb0rne4325
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:51amI agree. The flag has been hijacked, much like the Swastika was hijacked by the Nazi’s. that symbol had been around in all parts of the world by many different cultures and religion’s before it became the symbol, with the power that it has today.
Report Post »For people of the South, like myself, it symbolizes my Southern Pride. It has nothing to do with race. The power of the symbol lies in the eyes of the beholder.
smithclar3nc3
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:15pmI disagree yes while some supremist look to the flag as a symbol of white power. Most southerns look at as a time when the United States Government unjustly tax and over regulates it citizenry and the citizenry fought back. As for Airbourne the swastika was asymbol invented by the national socialist workers party as a sign of their collectism in restoring germany. It wasn’t highjack it was theirs. It is simular the a chinese symbol but just a little different. It represented the arms of the left making a muscle. As a sign of power. That what my uncle told me he learned while in WW2. Four powerful arms of socialism.
Report Post »Desert Dog
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:31amMany people may not like this flag, but a lot of people gave their all to protect our freedoms. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it and move on to the next display.
Report Post »dutchtouch
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:29amIf you try to remove a Crucifix in Urine or a Dung Covered Virgin Mary they scream Holy Censorship. The politically correct crowd is almost ALWAYS INCORRECT.
Report Post »RightUnite
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:40amAbsolutely!
Report Post »JB-Illinois
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:23pmIf something is “medical waste” (urine/feces/etc)in “art”, can not it be banned due to
Report Post »that fact must be professionally disposed of/handled, can certain types of art be banned on that premise? Or is it all “fake” urine/feces, and there should be a new Czar to test it…..We need
to be sure after all…
smithclar3nc3
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:25amWhere the painting of the black power fist with white victims of black crimes…. The liberal artist have no problem drudging up hatred and crimes committed by whites 160 plus years ago. But won’t do the same for hatred and crimes committed by blacks today.
Report Post »Obama Snake Oil Co
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:17amThe flag was something in history only…why people see it as an insult, rude or racist, need only look inside and seek the facts. I am orginally from up north, of mixed race and could care less when the Dukes of Hazard drove their flag drapped car….it means nothing.
Report Post »Grady Curve
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:31pmYou know thats the right attitude… What drives me crazy is that most of the creams and crys of racism is coming from the black community… and race baiting and the hate of white people is coming from the black community… really the white community could give a rats ass about the color of someone’s skin and really dont inject race into much as we are just trying to survive, feed our families and have a little fun from time to time..
Report Post »handsoffmystuff
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:16amThose who control the present control the past. Those who control the past control the future. The past only exists in the human mind. The human mind is infinitely malleable.
Report Post »WAR PIGS CRAWLING
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:34pm@Handsoffmystuff….that’s deep man….reminds me of….cue opening scene from Supertroopers…
Doper1: I’m just saying, I’m saying, if, if you own the beach property, right, do you own the, like the sand and the water?
Doper2: Nobody owns the water, God owns, its God’s water.
Doper1: What if someone like, walks onto your beach, right, like, like, lets say if you do own it, right.
Doper3: No, man, you don’t own the beach, well, you own the sand on the beach, man.
Doper2: What if there’s a naked girl on the beach?
Doper3: That girl is not yours, you don’t own the girl.
Doper1: What if she breaks her foot on your property?
Doper2: She can sue me…..sue me, sue me.
(Supertroopers 2002)
Report Post »jdawg
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:16amThis is the battle flag, not the actual Confederate flag. People who complain about this should at least know what they are complaining about.
Report Post »code green
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:18pmNot to mention that the Klan was formed after the war .
Report Post »Very few northern soldiers had much sympathy for slaves. They were fighting to save the union .Not to free the slaves .
C. Schwehr
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:22pmVery true sir….most people today wouldn’t recognize the flag of the Confederate States of America if they were wrapped up in it. This fool calling himself “ENCINOM” is obviously a product of the propaganda system we jokingly refer to as “public education”.
Report Post »Slavery was NEVER the primary cause for the War. This fool talks like the vast majority of Southerners were fighting to keep their slaves when 95% of the population did NOT own slaves, and it is well known that some free black men fought for the South as well! In fact, some of those slave owners in the South WERE THEMSELVES BLACK MEN!
Ulysses S. Grant himself stated that if the War had been fought because of slavery alone, he would have thrown down his sword! And of course, you have to consider that this man Grant, held slaves until forced to free them AFTER the war by the passing of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution!
Anyone who denies the real reason for the secession of the Southern States as being economic repression at the hands of Northern politicians IS LYING TO THEMSELVES!
C. Schwehr
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:35pmCODE GREEN: A word about the Ku Klux Klan to clarify some history. The original KKK was aimed at fighting the takeover of Southern State governments by the corrupt politicians and “carpetbaggers” who swarmed down from the north in order to ransack what was left (to collect the spoils of war as it were). It was a violent time in the South, and the surviviors of the War just wanted to return their states to local control. The Klan of the time did use some violence against these Northern Carpetbaggers and Scalawags (as southerners who rolled over for the north were called) in order to keep their States under control. But the original Klan was disbanded some time around 1880, and the Klan of the early to mid 20th century is NOT that same organization! And if you’ll remember your history, that Klan was also quite popular for some time in NORTHERN states too before it’s influence began to wane again.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 4:36pm@C. Schwehr
You are just a closet racist and your posting supporting the american terrorist group just proves it.
Report Post »EP46
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:16amIt should be removed…it is a mockery of the Confederate Flag…..very distasteful. Nothing wrong with flying the Stars & Bars but this is UGLY
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:24amThe confederate flag is the flag of traitors to the constitution and there is no honor in the flag. Its the flag of racists and cowards and a disgrace to the country.
dcenac
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:40amSo only pleasing things should be seen….and who gets to decide that. I‘m not willing to put that in anyone else’s hand.
Report Post »Bullcop34
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:17pm@encinom…Ignorance is bliss for you today isn’t it? If you find that the Confederate Battle Flag is offensive then surely you will find the the Starts and Stripes is even MORE repulsive, degrading and embarassing. See, If you actually could read history, you will find that slavery was started UNDER THE US FLAG!! Wait, that doesn’t fit your agenda does it? There is more, so keep reading. During WW I and WW II, the US interned Germans, Japanese and Italians simply for their race. This was done under the US FLAG and NOT the CONFEDERAT BATTLE FLAG! Get your history right because you are truely showing your supreme ignorance.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:22pm@encinom
Before you spout your baseless rhetoric…please go and educate yourself. You obviously have no understanding of the history of this Great Country, nor a grasp on the History of the Civil War. Until you can get even a sliver of understanding on either subject, most of us will just write you off as a sheep who can’t think for himself and only spouts what he hears others say.
The South were far from traitors. Take a look at the rights the States have always had, the Constitution on which this Nation is based, and you will see who the true traitors were. The Federal Government was never meant to be as powerful as it is, and from the Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 to the Constitution, there is documented evidence of the Sovereignty of the States which was encroached upon by the Federal Government for YEARS before the start of the Civil War.
Need I say more? I’m sure you will obviously do the right thing and go look up the history I write about to verify for yourself, or will you continue to spout things you’ve heard other say.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:01pm@Shikezi
The Treaty of Paris is not relavent. The treaty representst an agreement betweenthe colonies and England. After the treaty was signed the Colonies entered into a new compact, the Constitution, that created a strong centeral government, you need ot learn your history.
The South, unable and unwilling to cast off slavery went to war with the federal government to protect its perverse tradition. Look at the writings at the time from the Southern states, they all reference the need to protect the institution of slavery. There was nothing noble about the South’s cause.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:11pmNote to ENCINOM: I see that you are a victim of the lies used to justify the invasion of the Confederate States of America after they PEACEFULLY, and LEGALLY seceeded from the United States that they had helped build. They were SOVEREIGN states which had VOLUNTARILY joined a union which had turned into yoke about their necks. If one were to read objective history books of the time, you would find that 75% of the federal government’s taxes were generated by the South, but very little of that money found it’s way back. Instead, it supported the building of infrastructure in the North. Shipping laws favored the North also. It was illegal to ship cotton directly from the ports in the South to buyers in England. Such shipments of cotton were required to be transshipped to northern ports FIRST (giving extra profits to Northern ports and shippers) before going to England.
Report Post »And the North was not innocent of wrong doing against free blacks. Many states had laws preventing blacks from being educated, or even LIVING in certain states as they tended to take jobs away from white people because they worked for less money.
The only reason why slavery even comes up in the equation of North v. South is when the nations of England and France both consider officially recognizing the sovereignty of the Confederate States. Lincoln uses the (up ’til then ignored) slavery issue to gain the “moral high ground” and prevent such recognition….purely a strategic move to prevent a possible win by the South with Anglo/French support.
One might also wonder why the South was attacked so viciously by her Northern “Brothers” since at no time did Souther Army forces commit such attrocities as wholesale abuse, torching whole cities, intentional starvation of the civilian populations, rape, murder, etc against Northern population centers while such things were common to Northern Army forces and actually applauded by military leaders! General William T. Sherman himself admitted that what he did to the South during the “War of Northern Oppression” were WAR CRIMES!
So who were the treasonous bastards here? Oh, and let’s get something else straight…THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A CIVIL WAR IN THIS COUNTRY!
encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:33pm@C. Schwehr
What a way to re-write history. The South fired the first shot. There is nothing noble about hte south causes, the South, increasingly under pressure to enter into the modern world and renounce slavery, instead they decide to form their own pro-slavery nation. If slavery was not the reason. why is it list as such in the founding documents of the Confederate States.
The revisionist history Beck preachs about the Founders, and the false history by those still looking for honor in the disgraced South, is nothing more than a justification for racism and bigotry.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 2:51pm@encinom
The reason the Confederate Constitution mentions slavery in it is rather simple. Not quite sure what you are trying to imply. Of course they would have it listed in their constitution and of course it was protected. Are you really that dense? No one here has denied that slavery was part of the issue. Pay attention. They mentioned it because they believed it was an integral part of their economy and way of life. No one disputes this. Your claim that they were refusing to catch up to the “modern word” is both ludicrous and naive. Apparently you don’t know your history very well. Read Lincolns own words.
The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 DOES have credence to the debate at hand. It was/is an international document that recognised the sovereignty of each individual state. Now, we can move on to the Constitution and you can plainly read that States rights are still there and still recognise the sovereignty of each State AND limit the power of the Federal Government. The 10th amendment for example. I also reiterate, that the States have never once given up their sovereignty even when ratifying the Constitution.
So before you try and talk all big and bad about what you think you know, go and read the Constitution. I would also like to point something out for you just in case you try and use it as an argument. The constitution was very relevant to the country during the time, and yes its still relevant today. Despite the sheep who say the Constitution is outdated and blah blah, back during that time…EVERYONE respected and followed the Constitution. To them it was not outdated. So if you are capable of keeping your arguments related to the time period and not your current ideologies that have NOTHING to do with the ideologies of that time period…that would be great.
Read Lincolns own words as I mentioned further above. Read history that shows the Federal Government was extending its power beyond what the Constitution allows. Read about it all and then come back and argue with a little bit of intelligence. At this moment, all you are doing is spouting rhetoric that can be heard by any progressive out there.
Let me also point out that the North treated the “free” slaves WORSE than the plantation owners you vilify so much. You see, it is easy to spout nonsense when you don’t do your own research. When you get your education from progressive elites who rewrite history instead of teach history. I doubt you can come back with any argument worth replying to. In fact, I‘m sure you’ll spout the “traitor” nonsense and the slavery thing over and over again without really coming up with some tangible arguments….pretty much like you’ve been doing.
All you have to do is read the words of Lincoln and MANY others the years before the War, during the War, and After the War. Tell me what you find, and then lets see if you actually come up with an argument that has some grounds.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 4:34pm@Shikezi
My God you are dense. The Peace Treaty is not a governing document. The articles of Confederation and the Constitution, both ratified after the treaty are governing documents. Art. 1 of the treaty reflects the relationship between the Colonies and Britian and has no bearing on how the Colonies would organize themselves in the future.
The Treaty has no relavance, but you are right to point to the Constitution. The Constitution does reserve certain rights to the States, at the same time the Constitution makes the Federal Government supreme over the States. Also, the jursipurdence for the 10th amendment does not support you claims. United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court asserted that the amendment “added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified.” The amendment is a trusim as to the nature of the relationship between the Federal and State government and does not have the weight you give it.
The rest of your post is nothing more than southern revisionist history. The irony of your argument is that you are arguing that the South was the champions of freedom by attempting to keep their slaves. The problem with you is that you sought out revisionist history to justifiy your beliefs.
Report Post »OneFunR6
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 9:27pmencinom
“revisionist history Beck preachs” [sic] ROFLOL!
IF ignorance is ‘bliss’, YOU should be a LOT happier!
“The South fired the first shot.”
Yes, but BEFORE the STATE of South Carolina fired,…
THEY ‘politely ASKED the Federal Troops to,….
REMOVE themselves from THEIR SOVEREIGN PROPERTY!
and they REFUSED TO GO!
Abraham Lincoln was a REPUBLICAN, in fact the 1st Rep. President,…
but African-American’s vote 90%+ for Democrats? WTF?
Not to mention that LINCOLN was the one who CLOSED DOWN the US Supreme Court in order to PREVENT THEM from hearing South Carolina’s case for the RIGHT to Succeed for the UNION!
It is/was NOT “the Civil War”,…. it WAS/IS “THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES”.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 5, 2011 at 8:24amencinom
Report Post »“the flag of racists and cowards” Cowards? You obviously could fill volumes with what you don’t know.
Gonzo
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:16amIf the same images had been superimposed on to the the American flag, it would have won awards.
Report Post »Fairfield County Tea Party
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:15amIt is not censorship in my opinion… It is the difference between tasteful and disgusting. This is repulsive and i personally am glad it has been removed.
Report Post »dcenac
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:44amOnce again…who gets to decide tasteful. Would you like a government board or entity to have a set of standards for “tasteful”…..Sounds like you support the “Fairness Doctrine” for radio and tv as well.
Report Post »wildjoker5
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:53amSo, pictures of rainbows and lolipops for everyone!!!
Report Post »MareeClaire
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:10pmIt‘s interesting how Beck was recently demanding a piece of art be removed from the Smithsonian because it was not to Beck’s liking…looks like censorship only works in one direction where Glenn is concerned
Report Post »ClockKing
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:47pmHey Maree, works for me! How ya like them apples? See, it’s often about power, and rights are never all or nothing. Got it?
Report Post »skoz14
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:14amthe picture is pretty bad
Report Post »the_ancient
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:11amThe only question here should be
“Does this art gallery get any public funds”
If the answer is yes, then there is a 1st amendment case. if it is 100% private funded (which is doubtful) then there is nothing to see here.
Report Post »henryKnox
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:58amVery good point. I don’t understand the outrage, but we see it all the time. I believe everyone should be allowed to express themselves and people can agree or disagree with it, that creates dialogue. When someone goes too far, the feedback that they get will make the point. Everyone remembers the urine and cross “art” exhibit and it was clear that it was offensive. I don’t find this flag painting offensive, I see it more of a historical representations and I’m not afraid of history.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:58amAgreed.
Report Post »Carl1
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:11amI have no problems with the confederate Flag. But that is tasteless. But you have to look and where it came from? They wanted it be insulting.
Report Post »FED-UP-AND-READY-TO-TAKE-ACTION
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:17amThey may want it to be found as offensive. But what is more offensive is weak minded people who cannot deal with the past and would seek to make it not real…………
Report Post »FromtheBasement
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:31am@Carl1, I think that‘s the artist’s point. The history of the southern states is tied to the confederate flag and violence. What I find ridiculous is that this piece can be so easily removed when pictures of the Madonna covered in feces or paintings of religious figures participating in depraved sex acts are so quickly defended and allowed to stay.
Report Post »TruthTalker
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:33amThey quickly replaced the offensive piece of art with a picture of Jesus smeared with fesces as not to offend anyone.
Report Post »LibsRstupid
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:35amIt’s ok to pee in a Jar and put a cross in.
Report Post »Lost in the Flyover
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:50amI grew up as a conservative in the south, and honestly I am somewhat offended by the confederate flag because of what so many people want it to stand for… I think that the art is a valid expression of at least one of many views as to what the flag stands for and it should not have been censored… How can we support such censorship….. Remember many find Beck to be much more offensive than this art…. do you want to see his voice removed from the national dialog? Uf not how can you agree with this action?
Report Post »Rogue
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:50amI have the right not to be offended… In fact, let me find that portion of the constitution…. um.. I’ll get back to you.
seriously though – where does it end? Are we not allowed to give historical reference to any negative peroids or events from our past? Its up to you to decide if this is an homage, or if it is meant to provoke thought and reflection. The point is, it causes some sort of reaction within you – a general reaction that was there long before your laid eyes on this picture. Sadly, censorship and lack of historical understanding is leading to our children not having any clue as how to react to such a thing.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:50amApparently people need to read a little more before they spout garbage about the Confederate flag. It is amusing to watch the sheep spout things about how the flag represents racism and hate and whatever else mindless sheep think about it. No one denies that there were bad in the South just as there were bad in the North. Don’t tell me you forget that aspect of reality? Maybe you should see what the North did to the slaves after the “freed” them, or are sheep unable to read about the truth?
I’m tired of the indoctrination that has gone on to paint a different view of what really happened during the civil war. We all know what the Civil War was fought over, and it had little to do with Slavery. So please, before you sheep spout anymore nonsense…read some history. A clue for you, the Civil War was fought over the relationship between the Federal Government and the State Government. I would also direct those of you who need a tad more help to google and then read about the following…
The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783
Read it and then tell me if you’ve learned anything. I’m sure that if you have any intelligence whatsoever you will understand quite a bit about why the Civil War was fought and how the North distorted history with their “noble” goal of ending slavery. Also notice how the Confederate flag has been labeled a Hate symbol only because it is a way to turn attention away from the real reason the war was fought.
Last clue…Article 1 of the above Treaty I said to read…has never been ceded by the states. Ever.
wildjoker5
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:51am@encinom
The south actually won in their minds after the first battle. They defeated the north and had a direct path to the North’s capital. The south choosing not to cause any more undue suffering choose to get into a defensive fighting position. The south had the money, had the power, they just didn’t have the cordination as the Unified North. The ability that Licoln had to construct the rail system and telegraph system through out the states eventually led to the Norths victory, but that is because they were relentless in their belief that we should stay as a Union instead of choosing to go our seperate ways and govern as the individual states saw fit. I equate the North to USSR taking control of eastern europe.
Although the country was in need of getting rid of slavery, now a days, the north would have been looked down upon for their actions. And by far the south was morally corupt and needed to change, but they should have been allowed to go when they wanted to, and when the south choose not to counter attack the north after their first battle.
Report Post »hauschild
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:56amProblem is, that pesky First Ammendment and its right to free speech and all.
It’s amazing how few people truly understand this fundamental right.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:57amThis is one of the main freedoms of art in that so long as it does not call for the harm to a person, then we can choose to like it or not, to agree with it or not, and so forth based on our own individual tastes, preferences and styles. While I personally detest what this painting means to myself, and what I see in it, the artist and critics of art are free for now to state their feeling of it.
Report Post »GeauxAlready
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:00pm.
Report Post »Oh for the Good Ole Days………………. Is that picture a hate crime?……..
chjaka
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:01pmTo say the civil war wasn’t over slavery belies a deep ignorance or possibly willful ignorance of US history.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:06pm@WildJoker5
The North was fighting to keep the Federal Government in power, while the South was fighting to keep their sovereignty. Slavery was an accepted practice around the world at the time and had been for thousands of years. To say they were “morally corrupt” is rather laughable. According to standards today yes, but not during the time then. To look at the past through the lens of today is a shame.
Yes, there were people who did not agree with slavery back then. Yes, the world was moving towards an anti-slavery stance in general. No, that did not make the South “morally corrupt” as many of you think. Its silly to say the least.
Do some research. Read about history. Do not sit back and implant current ideologies onto something that happened during an entirely different time period that had different standards and different views than we have now. Not only is it careless, but it shows just how indoctrinated and naive people can be.
Report Post »Shikezi
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:11pm@CHJAKA
Read the real history and then come back and talk to me. Slavery was just one of many issues that started the Civil War, but it had nothing to do with the reason the Civil War was fought. It was a fight over State Sovereignty, which according to the Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 all states had, and has not ever been ceded by the States.
As I said before, Slavery is/was used as a way to distract people from seeing the truth of the matter. No one here denies slavery is bad and should not be tolerated. Do not misunderstand my intentions. I am simply saying do not be a mindless sheep who buys into the fallacy that the war was fought over Slavery. Read the history. Read the rights the States have always had since the founding of the Unites States. Read it all and then come back and tell me that the Civil War was fought over slavery….be sure to bring proof.
Report Post »Dale
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:14pmFromtheBasement;
Its called political corruption (I stole it).
Report Post »paperpushermj
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:48pm@fromthebasement
Report Post »Well Said, Perfect, You took the Words out my Mouth but Said Better
tower7femacamp
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 12:49pmFreshly emboldened by their mid-term congressional wins, establishment Republicans are set to extend the unconstitutional police state Patriot Act. It is set to expire in three weeks and Republicans are eager to make sections of the legislation permanent.
Report Post »http://www.infowars.com/republicans-move-to-make-patriot-act-permanent/
we have not rights left.
both parties have destroyed our privacy and free speech.
MareeClaire
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:08pmVery funny Glenn Beck fail video: toward the end he calls a female caller an “evil little b####” – he shrieks it in fact – listen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3J_QLtYqlk
Report Post »Hobbs57
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:10pmThe problem for the media is this flag represents the DEMOCRATIC PARTY of the time. This flag only represented “White Democrats” in the South and they hate to be reminded how their intellect once deemed a race less than equal. The guilt still drives them today, so much so, they scream RACIST anytime anybody strikes that nerve of SHAME connected to them.
It was the party of Lincoln who stood in their way, the Republican party, so they murdered that great man. He was replaced with Johnson who was from Tennessee, who was a Jacksonian Democrat, who was sympathetic to the southern plantation owners, giving them their plantations back, even after the Sherman act had rightfully given them 40acres and a mule to start out life as a free man. This what the “Radical Republicans” did to help the freed slaves ( from the White House web site)
“The Radicals’ first step was to refuse to seat any Senator or Representative from the old Confederacy. Next they passed measures dealing with the former slaves. Johnson vetoed the legislation. The Radicals mustered enough votes in Congress to pass legislation over his veto–the first time that Congress had overridden a President on an important bill. They passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which established Negroes as American citizens and forbade discrimination against them.”
Funny thing is, the White House web site makes Johnson out to be a champion for the common man and that the Radical Republicans used sneaky tactics to under mine him. I am studying this period in History right now, and I know Johnson was no friend to the South. He is the reason the Jim Crow Laws came into effect. He is the reason we had to have our military occupy the South , who lost the war by the way, so the Radical Republicans could ensure the right’s of the free slave. I wonder who wrote his profile on this White House Government site. I am going to investigate this.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/andrewjohnson
p.s. Finny how we can have art with Jesus having Ants on him and also in “Oral sex positions” is ok by the media. They even attacked the lady who walked in and destroyed the art work, making her out be s stupid truck driver hick… Double Standard ???
Report Post »GONESURFING
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:23pmThere was a time when art was tasteful and beautiful, but nowadays everyone just wants to make a political statement.
Report Post »natstew
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:27pmOnly a small minority of people in the South owned slaves and many didn’t believe in it.
The Northern mill owners who worked women and children up to 18 hours a day for as low as $00.10 (that’s 10 cents) a day are not innocent. I know for a fact that my great grandfather did not go war to defend slavery, but he was willing to die for his State. The Confederate Flag is a Part of my history and the KKK and slavery are not!
Report Post »The slimeball should stay in Venezuela and leave my Heritage alone.
Echad
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 1:36pmEver wonder why the Lincoln memorial has the Gettysburg address & his second inaugural address?
Abraham Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address:
IN compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President “before he enters on the execution of this office.”
Report Post »I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss those matters of administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement.
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you.
I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that—
I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
mikem1969
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 3:18pmSure, ban a confederate art piece, but allow those that insult jesus and the christian religion. Hmm, sounds fair. Oh, wait, it is only acceptable if it is anit-christian and/or pro-minority. I am offeneded that they took ti down. Sure I did not like the piece of art, but that does not mean it should have come down. This whole PC BS is one of the things that is destroying the country.
Report Post »Patriot12
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 3:19pmI am offended by EVERY MUSLIM alive so does this mean that we remove them?
Report Post »Hobbs57
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 3:26pm@ Floridacracker, you are right … all I am talking about is the re-construction period after the war. This was a very challenging time for our nation as we moved forward. I believe it was the Fed’s, International Bankers of the time, who killed Lincoln. They wanted the exclusive right to print money again, something Lincoln’s “greenbacks” took away from them. Something I feel we should be yelling out today, Enact the Law Kennedy had passed, and change print our own government backed money again. This would take all their power away and we would hardly go into debt again.
Report Post »I agree with you Natestew about the not all the south being for slavery and not all owning plantations ( more than a few though), and the many in the North was racist as well and the Industrialist were exploiting women and children. All of which the entire picture has to be taken in context and really, one could never understand unless you lived in those times. I didn’t mean to offend you in any way. I read back over what I wrote and I realize I didn’t make the point I was trying to. I was trying to defend the flag as it pertained tp those who weren’t part of what that flag depicts, the Republicans. However, there is a strong connection between democrats of the South and what that flag means to them as well. Sorry again, if that interpretation offends you.
All I really meant to say was it was the Democrats of the South who fought tooth and nail against laws that empowered the freed slaves. It was the Radical Republicans who nearly impeached Johnson, as they fought to have ensure the freed slave were granted what was do to them as a result of the war. I only make this point because I am so tired of Jackson, Sharpton, and the NAACP always calling the Democrats the part of the black’s and painting the Republicans as racist. So quickly they forget who has a history of Racism and that of the Democratic party. One who not so far off, a Senator who was part of it all just passed away, Senator Byrd.
rodamaa
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 3:44pmPerhaps better judgment could be used and certainly a little classless however the point taken and it can be argued under Academic freedom of expression. So tell me, when the white house, that is, our white house hangs ornaments on Christmas tree celebrating Mao or plans to build a mosque on the ashes of the WTC tragedy. Where does those thing fall under? I call it treason.
Report Post »79USMC83
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 6:49pmThe Stars and Bars was the Confederate Battle Flag Period. The KKK and the few lynchings that took place were many years AFTER the war was over !!!
Report Post »1911a1
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 7:20pmFED-UP-AND-READY-TO-TAKE-ACTION
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:17am
They may want it to be found as offensive. But what is more offensive is weak minded people who cannot deal with the past and would seek to make it not real…………
Exactly ! ,,, you know it seems odd to me they would take this down , but yet most have no problem with all the porn on TV ? and violence against everything . but ohh no cant have a confederate flag, our country is becoming a nation of weakling both mind and body ! Geeeez perhaps they should visit Gettysburg and see the sacrifice of all those men , they might have a better understanding of our history !,,, sorry for the rambling but this really gets my gut !
Report Post »CottonMPG
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 8:28pmI think it’s a shame that people are less accepting of that painting than of a crucifix in a jar of urine or elephant dung. I wouldn’t care to see that painting but it is art, and doesn’t need to be censored in my opinion. I do support the right of the exhibitor to pull it out of his exhibit though.
Report Post »goblin
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 9:39pmAfter the Civil War, the Confederacy was eliminated; confederate currency was eliminated; confederate trim and trappings associated with the confederacy were eliminated. The only thing not eliminated from the confederacy was its association with slavery. After 150 years, the rescue from slavery has been turned into an excuse perpetuated by individuals who seek division between the populace for their own gain. Interesting how slavery and human traffic-ing is so prevalent throughout the world and little is done by those contesting human rights. yet America, the land of freedom to do and say as you please as protected by the Constitution is continuously admonished for slavery.
Report Post »chjaka
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:25pm@shikezi
Report Post »You’re the one who needs to read his history pal.
Only a complete ignoramus would deny that the main cause of the Civil War was slavery.
chjaka
Posted on February 4, 2011 at 11:35pmWhile state sovereignty was an unfortunate casualty of the Civil War it was by no means the cause. You must not know or understand US history. I know my facts, and it is OBVIOUS that slavery was the 800 pound gorilla in the room whenever relations between the major sections (North/South/West) were ever in conflict.Without the slavery issue there would NEVER have been a Civil War PERIOD!
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on February 6, 2011 at 12:00pmAmericans (in general) have lost their connection to history to revisionist socialist ‘educators.’ The confederate flag does not represent what the left and race baiters want you to believe it represents.
These groups of people need this distortion to push forward their agenda for special rights, the standing for “government determines your rights” arguments and the denial of Rights and restrictions defined by the constitution for citizens and government.
This struggle has been going on since the earliest point in our nation. And hence the warning from Franklin in his response to the inquiry after the Constitutional Convention as to “what have you given us?“ ”A Republic, if you can keep it.”
By accepting uninformed relativism rather than truth as our heritage we have virtually become unarmed in our national founding and world history. We are self destructing, while maintaining the expectation of a previous existence. That makes no sense. It’s delusional. But it’s also a tool of deception. Look from where this perception originates to see whether or not it is manipulation or ignorance.
It originates from historians, teachers, politicians and ideologues. Not from poorly educated people. Although, the result becomes a poorly educated populace. Or more correctly an intentionally misled populace.
Report Post »wildbill_b
Posted on February 6, 2011 at 6:42pm@ hobbs
If you want to research Johnson
Make sure to read his vetos and reasons behind them.
Make sure to read the Congressional Journal for July 67 pg15461 et seq
Make sure to read Secretary Andrews confirmation letters
Make sure to read the house journals of those southern states that “Had to be occupied” SO the militarily installed governments (Unconstitutional) ratified the 14th (making it void on it faces and merely Prima Facie evidence of statute)
Make sure to understand that Congress had NO authority to use military within the states and can not reasonably assert the governments were not VALID and reinstated as they were allowed to ratify the 13th amendment and had by presidential order been declared peaceful.
Make sure to read all that because I bet you money whatever progressive book you read doesn’t mention it. Read Dyett v Turner and subsequent cases where the 14th is called unconstitutional.
Read the government cases where the Supreme court has 5 times declined to seat on the matter calling it beyond judicial consideration and a “political matter”.
Next ask yourself why you would champion “granted privileges” (14th) over unalienable rights under the Constitution. Do you not believe that “All men are created equal and endowed by their maker with unalienable rights”?? Is one person inferior to others that it requires a “statute” granting lesser rights to protect them? HUM seems the indoctrination machine has worked on you. Enjoy.
Report Post »