It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Wetpaint72
If those who enjoy the flag and its symbol of "heritage", would have stood up for that said "heritage", would have taken a stand and defended the flag from being hijacked by groups that preach hate, white supremacy, segregation, this wouldn't be happening.
originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Fine. In a republic such as what the US is supposed to be, I believe it is the duty of its member states to constantly remind the central authority of who is really in charge.
And of what will happen if that central authority steps outta line.
I see no problem with a state government flying a flag that represents, essentially, a giant middle finger to the federal authority. In fact I encourage it. It's part of why that state government exists in the first place.
Satisfied? Can't set the anarchism aside entirely, but I tried.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Yea, all that federal aide the states receive from the federal government certainly IS a big eff you to the states. Man the NERVE of the federal government, giving the states a bunch of money to implement its local policies!
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask
Well, Baltimore, Ferguson, Oakland, Toledo, Cincinnati, Fontana... all deep South cities with strong Southern heritage connections. Oh, wait, actually none of those cities fall into that category. My bad.
Considering the places the media advocates changing the most are also the places with the least modern strife, it makes you wonder.