By on July 10, 2015

7103cover_l

Getting caught up in the current controversy over the Confederate battle flag, pro golfer Bubba Watson has announced that he’s going to paint over the Army of Northern Virginia’s flag on the roof of the authentic Dukes of Hazard General Lee Dodge Charger that he owns, and replace it with the stars and stripes of the American flag. I have no desire to rehash the controversy over the Confederate battle flag, but I do want to address an opinion that I’ve seen raised in comments about Watson’s decision.

A number of people have suggested that because Watson’s car is an authentic vehicle that was used in filming the television series, painting over the flag would degrade the car’s value as a collectible. From what I know about TV cars in general and about the history of the cars used in filming the Dukes of Hazzard show, that’s not likely. From what I know about collectible cars, even if Watson does repaint it, that might actually increase its value.

Watson’s car is historically significant as TV and movie cars go and not just because it was one of the 300 or so Chargers used to film the series. Watson’s car was the actual vehicle used to film the signature car jump seen every episode in the show’s opening credits. It was also labeled General Lee #1 by the production team (or should that be 01 #1?). The landing for that jump wasn’t exactly soft. The car was wrecked and disposed of by the studio, eventually sitting in an Atlanta area junkyard for more than two decades before an Indianapolis based Dukes of Hazzard fan bought and restored it. Watson acquired it for $110,000 at a Barrett-Jackson auction in 2012.

c0123bubba

Bubba Watson tweeted out this photo when he bought his General Lee

Because of its use in that scene, it’s probably one of the two most valuable General Lees out of the 17 that have survived — the other valuable Charger being the “hero car” used in shooting scenes with the human stars of the show, which we featured at TTAC recently.

Besides the monetary value, there’s the car’s value as a cultural artifact. Some see painting over the flag as akin to painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa. That level of hyperbole aside, the thing is that I like the idea of property rights. If you owned the Mona Lisa and wanted to paint a mustache on it, I might call you a cultural philistine, but it’s your painting to preserve or deface at your will. The General Lee is Watson’s to do with what he wants.

Getting back to dollars and cents, I don’t think Watson would be doing any sort of damage to the car or its value by putting a different flag on it. As mentioned above, the car was wrecked in the filming of the show and later restored in Indianapolis. The flag that’s currently on Watson’s car was not painted by the shop in California that made the first handful of General Lees for Warner Bros. It was painted during the restoration. It’s not an original artifact.

As the saying goes, it’s only original once. A corollary is that once it’s no longer original, changing it is usually no big thing.

I had the pleasure of interviewing Illinois farmer John Grafelman, who may have the coolest barn find ever. He found designer Larry Shinoda’s personal Boss 302 Mustang prototype, used as both a styling prototype and development car for Ford’s Trans Am racing program, in his own barn. Grafelman had bought it many years earlier in the 1970s but didn’t find out what it really was until relatively recently, when he began an extensive restoration that was just completed last year.

One of the 1969 Boss 302 Mustang’s signature styling elements are the C-shaped stripes that adorn the car’s flanks. On the production cars, the stripe was applied with a then new 3M film that reflected light at night. The prototype stripes, though, were painted, and when I spoke with Grafelman I asked him how he could have “restored” something that historical, effectively destroying it. John showed me archival photos from Ford’s styling studio that showed how the car had a number of iterations of the stripe with different lettering: SR2 (the model’s original internal designation), BOSS, and 302, before settling on the production car’s BOSS 302. When Grafelman bought the car, the stripe was solid black, with no lettering at all. He decided to restore it to how it looked in the studio, with just BOSS.

Just as John Grafelman didn’t degrade the value of his one of a kind vehicle by repainting stripes that had already been repainted a few times, neither would Bubba Watson devalue his General Lee by putting an American Flag on it. Like with the first restoration, it could always be brought back to look original.

If anything, should Watson go through with his plans to repaint the roof of his car, he might actually increase its value by adding to General Lee 1’s story. It’s a funny thing about original vs custom. It often depends on who is doing the customization. I wouldn’t let George Barris touch any car I owned, but I’m pretty sure than any “customization” George does to a car most likely increases its value. The flat screen video screens he put in the back of the Monkeemobile didn’t keep it from fetching more than $300K at auction.

The same would likely be true if Watson puts the Stars and Stripes on his General Lee (historical note: the real General Robert E. Lee served under the U.S. flag prior to the Civil War, so while a General Lee with an American flag might not be historically accurate to the TV series, it would have some historical basis). It certainly wouldn’t degrade the value of the car as a collectible. Regardless of which flag is on the car, neither would be original. Watson could replace the General Lee’s orange with pink in support of breast cancer research and it wouldn’t decrease the value of the car. He could replace the flag on the roof with the black nationalist red, green and black flag, or with a gay-friendly rainbow flag and neither would decrease the value of the car as a collectible.

It’s only original once.

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can get a parallax view at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading – RJS

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

199 Comments on “No, Replacing the Flag on Bubba Watson’s General Lee is Not Like Painting a Mustache on the Mona Lisa...”


  • avatar

    The General Lee was the next inevitable victim of the liberal march against conservatism. Eventually they’ll get around to attacking state flags that have the confederate flag on them.

    Without the Confederate Flag, the car IS NOT A GENERAL LEE.

    The Confederate flag is a defining characteristic of the GENERAL LEE.

    Personally, as a Black male who actually buys Mopar, I’d leave the car alone. People are in such a rush to try and erase the past. I say: let it stay so this way everyone can see what people used to be like. It’s called HISTORY and those who don’t know History are doomed to repeat it.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      I agree that he should leave it alone. Putting aside the fact that the First Amendment applies, in this case it’s an historical artifact. The last time I checked, the General Lee doesn’t represent all citizens, just those who like a particular TV show.

      And, for the record, the conservative movement is doing a damned fine impression of the circular firing squad, no outside effort is needed to hasten its demise.

      My beef is that that damned show destroyed hundreds of ’69 Chargers, a car for which I have a strong attachment, it being my very first car.

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        “Putting aside the fact that the First Amendment applies”

        The first amendment applies to government only. Businesses and society in general are allowed to call you a racist hick and ask you to take it down because, well, they have first-amendment rights, too.

        • 0 avatar
          bunkie

          I think, perhaps, that I wasn’t clear. He has every right to put (or keep) whatever symbol he wants on the car because of his First Amendment rights. That’s what I meant. in other words his first amendment rights settle the question and, furthermore, the car is an historical artifact that should remain as it is.

          This is completely different from contemporary use of the flag as a symbol of an existing state government to represent all the people.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Since when is a movie car a historical artifact?

            As pointed out in the article, if it was “all original” then repainting it would be devalue it.
            It was a wrecked car that was repaired/restored.

            Any owner can repaint it. The fact that it was car #1 does not change regardless of the flag on the roof.

            With that being said, I disagree with cultural revisionism and the modification or “era authentic” items to meet the whims of the “politically correct”.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            How are you deciding what constitutes a historical artifact Lou? TV and movies define our culture now, and have for decades. Can a piece of sporting equipment be a historical artifact? How about a sculptor’s tools?

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            CJinSD – valid point.

            Does mass media accurately represent our culture?
            Did Dukes of Hazzard?

            There is considerable argument around the influence of mass media. Some say it shapes culture and other’s say it just mirrors it. I feel it does both but the preservation of a wrecked stunt car only has value to those who place value upon it.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Thank you for your civil reply. Any historical artifact is only of value to those who place value upon it, so defacing one to appease those who don’t should only be done by the most barbaric members of mankind. ISIS likes to destroy artifacts they see no value in, for example.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            CJinSD – The car in question was destroyed then restored and repainted. No one is defacing an artifact.

            If we were talking about painting a different image upon the Shroud of Turin or a Swastika upon the original “Betsy Ross” flag then I’d agree with you.

            Someone could chose to paint this car every month with a different state flag but at the end of the day it could be repainted back to the “original” TV version and it still doesn’t change the fact that it is “Duke’s Charger #1”.

    • 0 avatar
      Detroit-Iron

      @bigtruck I just looked at your youtube channel and I have to point out that a FAL is a battle rifle, not an assault rifle.

    • 0 avatar
      George B

      I agree. Without the confederate flag on the roof Bubba Watson’s car is just an expensive Dodge Charger that was once used in a TV show. The people that restored this car went to the trouble of painting it the original gold color and then painting it orange with the stars and bars on the roof with the same imperfections in the flag as the car that appears at the start of the TV show. The labor that went into the paint restoration is a significant part of the value of the car.

      • 0 avatar
        rdclark

        This is my grandaddy’s axe. The blade has been replaced six times, and the handle seven.

        The flag on the roof is not a restoration, it’s a reproduction. What the car is worth is whatever someone will pay for it, but the question of whether the car has cultural or historical value can only be answered by the willingness of a cultural or historical institutoon — a museum or a university, say — to accession it. “Restored” artifacts do find their way into museum collections, but generally not as anything but display items.

    • 0 avatar

      Amerika is no different from Soviet Union in that respect (rewriting history a banning flags). Communists rewrote Russian history and banned Russian national flag, religion, freedom of speech introducing political correctness which rivals American PC, forced all conservatives out of country, sent remaining ones to Gulag or simply executed right away. Eventually they did the same with liberals. After fall of Soviet Union Russia and other former republics turned around 180 degree politically correctness turning into hatred and world peace into war mongering. Soviet government collapsed under its own weight. It is a cautionary tale for my American friends since US and West in general is headed in the same direction, slowly initially but it starts to accelerate. Just see what happens in Europe because they are trail blazers.

      • 0 avatar
        koshchei

        You’re 100% wrong on every single point. The Great Terror was a human tragedy of unspeakable magnitude that you cheapen with your idiot revisionism.

      • 0 avatar
        RideHeight

        My money’s on the Russian guy being right about Russia.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        Nobody’s *banning* the confederate flag.

        It’s being removed from the list of state-approved symbols representing all people in the state. This is thoroughly appropriate, considering what was do to some Americans under that flag.

        The other thing that’s happening is that more people are being more vocal about negativele opinions of the flag. They might make you feel like you should not feel *comfortable* displaying the flag. That’s not the same as banning it.

        I’m in favor of not banning it, mostly because I believe in free speech. But it’s also helpful to me when assholes self-identify by adorning themselves with that flag.

    • 0 avatar
      LectroByte

      > the liberal march against conservatism

      Seems like Donald Trump and Big Truck guy are doing a damn fine job of destroying my beloved GOP

    • 0 avatar
      koshchei

      Top: You’re missing the critical issue here, which is that the car’s paint and detailing isn’t original – it’s a restored derelict. He could paint it pink, change the number to 69, and put the LGBT flag on the roof and not harm the value whatsoever.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    Obviously it’s his car and he can paint it however he goddamn wants, but if you paid an exorbitant sum to have a General Lee, *why* would you want to paint over the flag on the roof and make it less like the original General Lee?

    • 0 avatar
      harshciygar

      Because to a person like Bubba Watson (est. net worth $20 million), a $110,000 car is less than 0.5% of his net worth. He’s making a statement, plain and simple, for the cost of a repaint; that’s literally walking-around money for a guy like him.

      As far as I’m concerned, the only places that should be removing the Confederate flag are government institutions, as there’s a very strong argument for linking slavery and secession to that particular emblem. But if private individuals want to fly it, go for it. It’s pretty much just an “asshole” indicator at this point.

    • 0 avatar
      slance66

      Because culture nazis are making him feel bad about having a car with a confederate flag on it. Taking down the flag from the statehouse in S.C. was an obvious step. Trying to eliminate it from private or commercial use is ridiculous and will have negative, not positive consequences for race relations. No confederate flag merchandise in the Gettysburg museum shops? Seriously?

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        Shall we replace the swastikas on Hitler’s car as well?

        • 0 avatar
          notapreppie

          Or strike the “N-word” from Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn?

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          In Germany any display of the Swastika is illegal.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            So I guess the answer is yes then.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            danio3834 – it all depends. If an item is all original and faces restoration that is a different animal. This car was salvaged and as rdclark points out, the paintwork is a reproduction.

            I should of added more information to my comment about the Swastika being illegal in Germany. We could go that route in the USA or Canada but like I said earlier, “With that being said, I disagree with cultural revisionism and the modification or “era authentic” items to meet the whims of the “politically correct”.

            Doing what is ethically sound can be extremely complex and a solution for one circumstance may not fit another similar circumstance.

            Hitler’s car versus a TV car are similar cases but are decidedly different in context.

            Germany decided that the swastika is illegal but they do look at the intended purpose of it’s display.
            A museum piece with the Swastika on it in the context of war would be fine but that same piece used by a Holocaust denier carries a decidedly different message.

            My apologies for answering a question that required a complex answer with a simple one.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        “No confederate flag merchandise in the Gettysburg museum shops? ”

        Interesting tidbit, I was in Gettysburg the day before the mess in SC.

        Obviously the media has blown it out of proportion, no one thought of racism when they saw the rebel flag the day before the mess. Unfortunately the media has used the “ban guns” mantra so much they don’t even get hits for it anymore, so racism was the obvious next step apparently.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          “no one thought of racism when they saw the rebel flag the day before the mess”

          Pretty much every black person has associated the rebel flag with racism since the Civil War, and the association got more intense as the flag was used as a symbol of both the Klan and Jim Crow.

          I should mention that South Carolina is almost 30% black. The one state with a rebel flag left in its state flag, Mississippi, is closer to 40% black.

          So your “no one” is leaving out, at a minimum, a third or so of the population. Plus white people who know the flag’s history, which is a lot of them.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Your making the false assumption that the rebel flag represents racism, it doesn’t and many of the older Black individuals, as well as some of the younger more educated blacks, simply don’t see the flag as hateful. If you could see the south from your ivory tower you would notice that even black individuals fly the rebel flag. This is NOT a white v black deal. This is a rest of the U.S. v southern U.S. deal that’s been created by a media that will do anything for ratings.

            Outside of the Southern United States I have no idea what the flag represents, but here it is pride and being free.

            By making this an issue your opening healed wounds and creating racial tensions. The real racists are those that see race in every issue this is an excellent example.

            As for me, I care more about the truth than the flag. I don’t own a Rebel flag, and I’m not about to go buy one for any reason. But those who do, more power to them.

            I remember just 10 years ago going into VA and seeing the rebel flag under the U.S. At several places including the McDonald’s, didn’t seem to be an issue then. In the south no one pays any attention to the flag, it is as normal as seeing a U.S. Flag. This issue can only hurt and divide our country, and those who are calling names of those who proudly display it are to blame for the divisiveness.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Ask 100 black people (in any region, South or not) what the rebel flag means to them.

            At least 95 of them will include racism in one form or another in their answer.

            And it remains mind-boggling to me that anyone could try to claim seriously that a symbol of a movement founded for the purpose of perpetuating slavery doesn’t represent racism. You’ll tell me the motivations for perpetuating slavery were economic rather than racist, but the institution was so racist that that explanation doesn’t remotely cut it.

            My mom’s family goes back to the 17th century in Virginia. She is the product of a “rebel” branch of the family that fought for the Union and lost family ties because of it. I’m very proud of that part of my family.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Im sure in your fantasy world 95% of blacks see Racist connections to the Rebel flag, but I live in the real world where it’s just another flag to the vast majority.

          • 0 avatar
            OneAlpha

            Here’s the thing.

            The Confederate Flag represents racism – TO SOME PEOPLE. To others, it represents the honoring of ancestors. To still others, it represents a noble fight to defend home, family and country from an invading aggressor.

            Personally, I think that the flag has held its place in Southern culture for as long as it has because of that final reason.

            But to unilaterally declare that the ONLY thing the Confederate flag symbolizes is racism would be the same as saying that the ONLY reason that ANY young woman gets a tattoo is because she’s angry at her father.

            Yes, that’s the reason SOME women get tattoos, just as some get them to express spiritual beliefs, or allegiances or artistic preferences, or whatever.

            To declare that there’s only ONE thing associated with any particular act or symbol is obnoxiously rigid for a group of people that fancy themselves sophisticated and nuanced.

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        “Because culture nazis are making him feel bad about having a car with a confederate flag on it”

        Maybe he felt it was a worthwhile statement to make?

        “Trying to eliminate it from private or commercial use is ridiculous and will have negative, not positive consequences for race relations”

        So, how do you think that argument would work if it was the Nazi swastika or the standard of Imperial Japan?

        Shameful memoirs of our collective history, frankly, can stay in the museum. I would not shed a tear if they were looked at and either mocked or winced at in that context. They’re nothing to proudly trumpet.

    • 0 avatar
      Jeff Waingrow

      At the time Bubba bought the car, the Confederate flag was less controversial than it became after the nine deaths in Charlotte. Bubba is a great golfer but also a big brand. He endorses lots of products, and there’s only downside for his keeping said flag on the car. I imagine Bubba was likely unaware just how many people found the stars and bars image offensive (even before the Roof connection).

  • avatar
    bunkie

    I really miss the old National Lampoon. Two of their more obscure send-ups stick in my memory. The first was the reimagining of The Joy of Sex as if written by Buckminster Fuller. The second were the over-the-top brochures for ’50s era Bulgemobiles with paintings of interiors that could house an aircraft carrier.

    And, of course, who could forget the fake VW Beetle ad showing the car floating in a pool with the tag line “If Ted Kennedy drove a beetle, he
    would be the President now”?

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      >And, of course, who could forget the fake VW Beetle ad showing the car floating in a pool with the tag line “If Ted Kennedy drove a beetle, he would be the President now”?

      Man, I only read the accounts of that incident maybe a few years ago since I’m not old enough to remember it. What a piece of sh1t Ted Kennedy was.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        “was” bring the key word. In the first half of his life, Teddy turned out how you might expect for someone who was given everything on a silver platter. A child of affluence, he was essentially given his senate seat, passed down from his older brothers.

        But after the incident, Kennedy started to clean up his act. Alcohol remained a challenge, but he buckled down and represented Massachusetts well. He was known as the hardest worker in the senate in later years, and had close relationships with his peers, regardless of their politics. Kennedy became a very effective senator, back in the days when the senate functioned properly, and compromise wasn’t a dirty word.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          While that may be true, it’s kinda hard to look past the fact that he drove his car off a bridge, left his secretary to die, and didn’t report it to anyone unti the next day after someone found the car.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            I agree. Drunk drivers should be jailed, especially when their actions result in death.

            I feel bad for going so far off topic. Ronnie wrote a nice piece about antique car valuations, but I fear the comments will get swallowed up by emotions over the controversy about a treasonous, racist flag.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        One more National Lampoon reference:

        Gahan Wilson (the macabre cartooninst who has been in Playboy since the 1960s) did a piece called something like “the paranoid guide” in which he asked the VW driver if he had ever considered if the assembly worker who, knowing that a particular beetle was destined for export to America, intentionally “forgot” to tighten “the critical bolt that connects the steering wheel” as revenge for the efforts of the Eighth Air Force in 1944…

    • 0 avatar
      bryanska

      For a while I collected 70s-era Lampoon issues and audio recordings. That was a very special brand of comedy that will never be repeated again. Some of my favorites:

      – Negligent Mother Magazine sponsored by Sparties, “the 5 day live-in diaper suit”
      – Wang Beat magazine, a teen pop culture magazine devoted to the masturbatory habits of celebrities
      – Time Bastard, the adventures of a perv who used his time machine solely to get laid, accidentally populating the present with copies of himself

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    That high-contrast crossbar pattern on a car roof would sure be an easy target for a helo or drone!

  • avatar
    Syke

    The United States seems to be determined to go down the road of a Cultural Revolution. In the Maoist sense. Where modes of thought are to be ‘corrected’, history to be sanitized, and the overall look and feel of America is to be changed. “To the good” of course, with that good being decided by those of an American leftist political intent.

    While I hardly expect to see the American version become the human disaster that the Chinese version resulted in, I don’t see it turning out as anything good for this nation as a whole. I’m always in favor of continuing research, and anytime it adds to history I will applaud (trust me, nobody was mentioning United States Colored Troops in 1961 during the centennial – 25 years later when I was doing 4th VA, their presence was instrumental in the best impromptu tactical I’d ever attended, after the tourists had left the Cold Harbor site). It’s when history has certain aspects taken away because it doesn’t fit the current desired political narrative that my paranoia begins to rise.

    History is not something neat to be boxed and tied up with a bow, and anyone who insists on seeing the behavior of someone in 1855 thru 2015 glasses has absolutely no knowledge (and probably no interest in knowing) what was actually going on at that time.

    As a re-enactor, I run into this continually; because a lot of what I portray is repugnant to the tourists coming thru the camp. The people who lived back then didn’t have 2015 sensibilities (actually, most of what we believe and take for granted today would have gotten us run out of town back then, no matter whenever then was), and I’ll be damned if I’m going to adopt them just to make some tourists happier.

    • 0 avatar
      bryanska

      Even recent car history is being revised.

      Jalopnik shits all over the PT Cruiser as being awful now, and awful then. Every few months I have to battle the snark, and remind them of the dozens of awards it won, and the blockbuster sales. Critical and commercial success. Yet it’s “one of the worst cars” according to those awful, horrible people at Gawker. I’m assaulted in the comments and my facts are buried because I don’t get enough upvotes.

      We’re in an era of mob rule, where “intuition” and feeling good trumps fact, history, and even the written testimony of people who were there. There’s no way to win an argument anymore; the only way to avoid permanent damage is to immediately and completely surrender to the whims of others.

      • 0 avatar

        I was at the Motor Muster at Greenfield Village, and at one point I realized that from where I was standing, I could see about half of the cliched perennial “worst cars of all time” candidates: Ford Pinto, Mustang II, AMC Gremlin, AMC Pacer. All of those cars sold well and have their enthusiasts today.

        • 0 avatar
          Margarets Dad

          “All of those cars sold well and have their enthusiasts today.”

          So do Newport cigarettes and Miller Lite. So what? Just because it sells well doesn’t mean it’s not awful. America’s Funniest Home Videos has been drawing viewers by the boatload for 30-odd years. “Showgirls” outgrossed “Citizen Kane” at the box office by a wide margin. The fact that AMC was able to fool a few hundred-thousand poor souls to drop their hard-earned money on an abomination like the Pacer doesn’t prove anything.

          • 0 avatar
            bryanska

            But if you’ve got enough critics of the time on your side, AND popular acclaim, the title of “classic” should be chiseled in stone. I don’t know about the Pacer, but if it was reviewed well at launch and sold well, then we have no right no revise that status. Reading the Wiki entry shows plenty of positive acclaim for the first few years, at least enough that calling it “an abomination” would be historical revisionism. Ask the people of 1975.

            The problem with being revisionist is that you might as well paint the bathroom with your brains, because you’re probably being horrible right now in some way but don’t even know it. Two generations from now, you’ll find your best intentions being mocked, derided, and called an “abomination” by some punk without the imagination to consider how things were different before they were born.

            You can’t laugh at Citizen Kane for not being in color, or not using CGI. In context it was a classic, and remains a classic, because OF COURSE things that came after are better but that doesn’t mean we can look up retired AMC engineers in the phone book and laugh in their faces.

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      One of the main reasons that the American Revolution succeeded was that it wasn’t trying to reform society or change the people.

      The American Revolution is properly understood to be a restoration – of those rights Englishmen had always had, but that had for years been trampled on by the King and his government.

      The French Revolution on the other hand, as well as all the Communist ones and that centuries-long parade of horrid little “colonial wars of national liberation,” were attempts to forcibly impose an academic’s utopia on society, which of course produced nothing but tyranny and a mountain of corpses.

      In the name of making the world a better place, of course.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      True, except for one delicious irony. The party that massacred Native Americans on the Trail of Tears and supported the expansion of slavery is not forced to retire it’s name, symbolism, and ignoble past. Instead, we are required to pretend they never did the things they did, which is probably the real onus for eliminating all Confederate symbolism.

      • 0 avatar
        RideHeight

        Oh, dude! Now I want a Copperhead flag!

        Not that anyone would get it beyond “How come that one star is so big?”

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        I think if you ask most Democrats they will tell you that they want nothing to do with anything their party did in any area before about 1908 and nothing to do with anything their party did on race before Lyndon Johnson stepped up. No one is denying that the party has a terrible history on these issues.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          The same Lyndon Johnson that said:

          These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.

          He followed that up with, “I’ll have those n-words(my edit, not his) voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

          And now most of their babies are aborted and 9,000 of his new Democrats kill each other every year while education standards are lower than ever and the great society has created barriers far more onerous than racism. It was a vile, evil plan, and hopefully the next great black leader will avenge his race.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            LBJ improved. If anything, you’re getting worse.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            And despite his obvious racism, he did what no president for a century before him was able to, and eliminated most racism from the letter of federal law. As with Lincoln, he didn’t have to be perfect to make progress — he just had to be better than the other guy.

            I’ll ignore the rest of your comment.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            By the other guy, do you mean the Republicans in congress that voted for civil rights? You have to ignore a lot to believe what you do.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            No, I mean the previous presidents (of both parties) who didn’t do what LBJ did.

            And his opponent, Barry Goldwater, who sure as hell wouldn’t have done a thing.

            The Republicans in Congress did the right thing on this issue. And Ike made incremental progress, although he wasn’t willing to push for the big breakthrough. But there’s just no way to celebrate the 1964 and 1965 civil rights laws and not recognize LBJ’s place in getting them done.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            “And now most of their babies are aborted and 9,000 of his new Democrats kill each other every year”

            Considering the level of poisonous rhetoric you routinely use around here and the fact that most of those “aborted babies” would have likely voted Democratic, I’m honestly surprised this doesn’t please you.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Have you ever read Goldwater’s explanation of why he couldn’t vote for the ’64 Civil Rights act, unlike the ones he did vote for in 1957 and 1960? He wanted amendments to Titles II & VII, so that it would be a constitutional bill. Speaking of bills, you’ve been sold one. Goldwater was right in 1964, and the mess we have today is the proof.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            30IQ-Fetch,

            It doesn’t please me because I don’t subscribe to you fascists’ ends-justify-the-means moral relativism.

          • 0 avatar
            Jellodyne

            > “30IQ-Fetch”

            Didn’t we used to ban people around here for direct, childish insults? Not that that’s the most offensive thing said in this thread…

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            CJ,
            You don’t know anything about my personal morals. I don’t talk about them here. In order to comment on it, you have had to cut your rather awful view of a liberal caricature and paste it on someone you know nothing about. All I’ve done is express my displeasure with your lovable demeanor.

            Your quote says more about your own morals than I could ever hope to illuminate so we’ll just let it do the talking.

            “30-IQ fetch”
            See, that’s not even funny or clever. Replacing “mile” with “IQ” doesn’t tie into the rest of my screen name. Just lazy. It needs to include all of it, like “Crabby & Jaundiced in my Serial Depression”. See?

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Poor CJ just wishes that he could have a 30 IQ. Sadly for him, that ain’t gonna happen.

      • 0 avatar

        It’s rather telling that Harry Truman’s desegregating the U.S. Armed Forces is pretty much standard fare in high school history books, but the fact that Woodrow Wilson racially segregated the armed forces and civil service is rarely if ever mentioned. Nevermind even bringing up how eugenics was embraced by progressives like Wilson and Margaret Sanger.

        The racial history of the labor movement is also not something often discussed (see “hate strikes” during WWII).

        Funny how the historical party of racism gets a pass from our cultural masters who just happen to support that party, ain’t it?

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          Barry Goldwater desegregated the Arizona Air National Guard and the Senate cafeteria, but the truth has no place in the progressive march back to feudalism.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          If you think that Wilson invented the segregated US military, then…well, you must be the same right-wing revisionist that you’ve been for years.

          Do just five minutes of Googling, and then feel embarrassed.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Folks with CJ’s and Ronnie’s level of hate don’t get embarrassed, just angrier.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            http://www.academia.org/progressive-segregation/

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/wilson/portrait/wp_african.html

            http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_segregation.html

            These must be right wing propaganda sites. Wilson was no better for black Americans than Obama is.

          • 0 avatar

            “Born in Virginia and raised in Georgia and South Carolina, Wilson was a loyal son of the old South who regretted the outcome of the Civil War. He used his high office to reverse some of its consequences. When he entered the White House a hundred years ago today, Washington was a rigidly segregated town — except for federal government agencies. They had been integrated during the post-war Reconstruction period, enabling African-Americans to obtain federal jobs and work side by side with whites in government agencies. Wilson promptly authorized members of his cabinet to reverse this long-standing policy of racial integration in the federal civil service.

            Cabinet heads — such as his son-in-law, Secretary of the Treasury William McAdoo of Tennessee – re-segregated facilities such as restrooms and cafeterias in their buildings. In some federal offices, screens were set up to separate white and black workers. African-Americans found it difficult to secure high-level civil service positions, which some had held under previous Republican administrations.

            A delegation of black professionals led by Monroe Trotter, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Harvard and Boston newspaper editor, appeared at the White House to protest the new policies. But Wilson treated them rudely and declared that “segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen.””

            http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            CJ,
            That first site is indeed a conservative activist site. Interesting quote in the first PBS link, though:

            “To understand Woodrow Wilson’s racial views, it is important to remember that he was a Southerner. He had been raised in a climate in which it was presumed that African American people were less evolved than Anglo Saxon people”.

            As much as you would like to reduce this down to progressive vs. conservative, it seems the biggest factor in this is regional culture.

            Wilson’s been dead for 90 years, but if a current Democratic candidate advocates his view on racial segregation, let me know and I’ll punch the other side of the ticket on election day. Until then, as a conservative I’d do what you can to keep Donald Trump from getting too much media oxygen before he blurts out another xenophobic remark as a candidate (and polling well!) for president.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Well, look at that, Ronnie beat me to proving my own point. Wilson’s race problem stems not from being a progressive, but being a Southerner. So please, continue to call the Democratic party the “party of racism”. I’ll in the meantime point anyone who cares to a Mr. Strom Thurmond, who switched to Republican affiliation around 1964 because he opposed the Civil Rights Act.

            There you have it, one racist Democratic President, another racist Republican eight-term senator. Different parties. Same origin south of the Mason Dixon.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            If you chuckleheads are so dim that you can’t figure out that the US military had an array of bans and segregated units since the 1700s, then you need to sue your school teachers for malpractice. Your utter inability to learn even simple things merits some sort of monetary judgment.

      • 0 avatar
        Margarets Dad

        Equating the Democratic party of the 19th century to the party of today is intellectually lazy and downright idiotic. It’s like saying the Yankees are going to tear up the league this year because of how awesome Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth were in 1927. Or calling Volkswagen the company of air-cooled engines. It has no relevance to current reality.

        Here’s the difference between the Democratic Party and the Confederate flag wavers: Unlike the people crowing about how the Confederate flag is about nothing more than their heritage and refusing to come to terms with the very ugly history of bondage, exploitation, and opposition to civil rights that flag has represented for 150 years, the Democrats have actually tried to address the ugly history of their party (and of this entire country) by working to expand civil rights. In other words, they’ve learned from their (and our) historical mistakes and have worked to address them in a constructive, meaningful way, something Confederate flag-wavers have refused to do.

        Unless Honest Abe Lincoln somehow reconstitutes himself, rises out of the grave, and wins the 2016 Republican nomination, I think we’re safe in characterizing the Democratic Party as the party of civil rights for the foreseeable future.

        Oh, and by the way, which party has been systematically taking away voting rights across the country, making it so difficult in some cases for students, old folks, poor and working people, and people of color to get their voters’ IDs that a lot of them have had no choice but to drop out of the democratic process? Hint: It’s not the Democrats.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          “Oh, and by the way, which party has been systematically taking away voting rights across the country, making it so difficult in some cases for students, old folks, poor and working people, and people of color to get their voters’ IDs that a lot of them have had no choice but to drop out of the democratic process?”

          I’m not sure exactly to what you are referring, but if you refer to recent initiatives to force potential voters to identify themselves before entering a polling precinct you should know it was to prevent voter fraud. If your old folks, students, or people of color were illegal aliens, felons, or member of some other group which is not allowed to vote under law then f*** them they should be in jail if they attempted to vote. Proving you are who you say you are is not an onerous process and is frequently required to obtain access to something as common as a bar, a place I imagine many potential voters have frequented. Who is trying to prevent voter fraud? Hint: It’s not the Democrats.

          • 0 avatar
            bunkie

            As if a picture ID is any real protection against voter fraud.

            What we have in New York doesn’t require any ID at all and works pretty damned well:

            When I registered to vote (proving both my citizenship and residency in the process), I *signed* the form. That signature is reproduced on the voter rolls and when I vote, I countersign the form. my signature provides all the identification needed.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The fraudulent arguments about voter fraud are kind of funny.

            (Here’s a hint: If you wanted to steal an election, then you would get control of the ballot boxes and stuff them, not hope that a few ineligible voters could somehow beat the statistical odds by turning the result. Do the math, boys and girls — the “voter fraud” talk is a scam and you’ve been badly duped.)

            In any case, who knew that conservatives would be so eager to force citizens to carry ID? It sounds so, er, French.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            28,
            The voter fraud issue seems to be more complicated than both sides represented here. Politifact ranked this ACLU statement mostly true: “Since 2000, only 10 cases of in-person voter fraud have been proven nationally.” But that’s only one kind of fraud and narrowly defined and they shot down some of the more inflammatory claims about ID laws being equivalent to a “poll tax”.

            Republicans have much to fear from higher voter turnout by minorities and lower income groups, while Democrats have every incentive to increase this turnout. I think it’s naive to believe that efforts and accusations from both parties are not primarily about winning elections. Just like gerrymandering district boundaries, the morality and democracy arguments are secondary.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “What we have in New York doesn’t require any ID at all and works pretty damned well:

            When I registered to vote (proving both my citizenship and residency in the process), I *signed* the form. That signature is reproduced on the voter rolls and when I vote, I countersign the form. my signature provides all the identification needed.”

            I haven’t re-registered to vote in 16 years and as such I do no recall what the process was at the time. I’m not sure how you proved your citizenship in the first place, but the crux of it is NY uses a signature verification. If you are verifying your signature each time you vote, this is not much different than the idea of producing state issued identification. How you registered in the first place would be key here, but assuming there is some kind of real verification process at least someone can’t show up at the polling place claiming to be you and get quick access to a voting booth.

            “Politifact ranked this ACLU statement mostly true: “Since 2000, only 10 cases of in-person voter fraud have been proven nationally.”

            I might agree with ACLU on their 10 cases issue, but of course how often is such a thing actually investigated and by whom? The local police? FBI? Who notifies the authorities? The polling station? Just because there were ten recorded instances of a crime does not mean it was more widespread.

            A poll tax is surmised as:

            “In the United States, payment of a poll tax was a prerequisite to the registration for voting in a number of states. The tax emerged in some states of the United States in the late 19th century as part of the Jim Crow laws. After the right to vote was extended to all races by the enactment of the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a number of states enacted poll tax laws as a device for restricting voting rights. The laws often included a grandfather clause, which allowed any adult male whose father or grandfather had voted in a specific year prior to the abolition of slavery to vote without paying the tax. These laws, along with unfairly implemented literacy tests and extra-legal intimidation,[1] achieved the desired effect of disenfranchising African-American and Native American voters, as well as poor whites.

            Proof of payment of a poll tax was a prerequisite to voter registration in Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia (1877), North and South Carolina, Virginia (until 1882 and again from 1902 with its new constitution),[2][3] and Texas (1902).[4] The Texas poll tax “required otherwise eligible voters to pay between $1.50 and $1.75 to register to vote – a lot of money at the time, and a big barrier to the working classes and poor.”[4] Georgia created a cumulative poll tax requirement in 1877: men of any race 21 to 60 years of age had to pay a sum of money for every year from the time they had turned 21, or from the time that the law took effect”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_(United_States)

            Valid state issued identification is not equivalent to an intelligence assessment nor does it cost the voter any money. If you are a citizen in the nation for any given time you should probably have some form of state issued id for general reasons.

            “If you wanted to steal an election, then you would get control of the ballot boxes and stuff them, not hope that a few ineligible voters could somehow beat the statistical odds by turning the result”

            Somebody was ahead of you on that logic, and you are both right.

            “The people who cast the votes don’t decide an election, the people who count the votes do.”

            Stalin

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Yeah, 28, I know ID laws aren’t in the same universe as a poll tax and wrote that Politifact shot that statement down. It’s inflammatory ACLU rhetoric similar to that used by the Republicans to whip up hysteria that voter fraud is turning elections even though they have no evidence.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          Margaret has a smart dad. Not all of the other children of TTAC posters can make the same claim.

        • 0 avatar

          19th Century? You mean Democrat Governor Fritz Hollings, later to serve in the U.S. Senate for four deacede, putting up the Confederate battle flag over the South Carolina state house took place in 1861, not 1961?

          Robert Byrd was old but not that old. The KKK recruiter and leader served in the U.S. Senate, as a Democrat, into the 21st century.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Strom Thurmond. Served until 2003. Went Republican in opposition to the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Since we’re cherry-picking facts to support partisan notions, you know.

            In his defense, he did try to prosecute members of a lynch mob and didn’t segregate in the bedroom when he fathered a child with his household’s African American maid. But then you get quotes like this:

            “I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there’s not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the Nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches.”

          • 0 avatar

            But of course, one Dixiecrat becoming a Republican offsets a century and a half of Jim Crow enacted by Democrats.

            From the New York Times: The Myth of the Southern Strategy

            http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html?_r=0

            If Woodrow Wilson’s racism flowed from his southern roots, not his progressive politics, what explains Margaret Sanger’s racism? She was a native New Yorker.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            “If Woodrow Wilson’s racism flowed from his southern roots, not his progressive politics, what explains Margaret Sanger’s racism? She was a native New Yorker.”

            This is an incomprehensibly dense line of reasoning. Not every data point fits square on the regression line. Not every member of a geographic area has the same belief systems even if there is an overall trend. Hey, if Seattle is so dang rainy, why was it sunny there that one weekend I visited?

            Your posted NY Times article weakens your thesis. It argues that wealth arrived in the South mid-century, so economic preferences drove the shift towards Republican voting. The racism was still there, they just voted for the party that protected their newfound wealth. Ergo, party affiliation and racism are not coupled.

            I’m arguing it’s a regional phenomenon. You want to view it as partisan so you can continue to dehumanize those you disagree with, as is your typical wont. Whatever keeps you happy and smug, Ronnie.

  • avatar
    OneAlpha

    True, it’s his property to do with as he pleases, but to repaint it would be to abet the whitewashing of some unique aspect of the past in the name of YET ANOTHER silly, manufactured, transitory cultural flare-up.

    The flag controversy will pass, but the General Lee should be kept intact. The appearance of that car is iconic and frankly, Old Glory just wouldn’t look right on top.

    The Confederate flag is a stunning piece of graphic design that really works with the General’s overall look.

    Besides, the next owner’s just going to have to pay to put the proper flag back on the car.

  • avatar
    Domestic Hearse

    Next thing you know, they’ll outlaw Catherine Bach’s shorts.

  • avatar
    arvy_p

    Well, if I’m him and I want to own/drive that car but don’t like the imagery the Rebel flag conjures up, then I would either remove the flag and just leave it orange, or replace it with something else “rebellious” like a Jolly Roger. Old Glory just doesn’t fit. On the other hand, I would leave the flag in place, because I wouldn’t see it as “I hate non-whites”, I would see it as “yeehaw let’s go dupe old Roscoe again!”

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      How about a color matched vinyl roof wrap? Don’t remove it just cover it. The next owner can do as they please.

      • 0 avatar
        clivesl

        I think the next owner of a car that was bought over $100,000 will be able to afford a paint job.

        As Ronnie said, it has no effect on the value of the car and Bubba can afford the paint so who cares? All the folks that are talking about him being ‘forced’ to remove it are projecting their feelings onto this thing.

        He is painting over the flag of the guy that just killed a bunch people in a freaking church. Why must there be some great conspiracy to motivate that? Maybe, Bubba Watson, saw the sort of guy flew that flag and thought to himself he didn’t need to hang with that crowd ideologically.

        Believe it or not, some folks just don’t want to be associated with mass murderers. People are funny that way.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    I feel no colonial cultural shame. My ancestors never oppressed a Native American. They did not own or transport slaves from Africa.

    My paternal ancestors were thrown of their land, faced starvation that was brought about by government policy and discriminated against for centuries. Yet I am fond of the nation/people that historically did this to them. Even the Monarchy that was in place. The descendants of the people that did that no longer believe in or engage in those activities, so why hold it against them?

    However, the flag(s) of the Confederacy seem to have a special meaning in North America. They tend to serve as a symbol and rallying point for those who have racist tendencies. As such they cannot be given official, government approval for that would be seen as condoning those racist opinions.

    And for those who fly it to commemorate their ‘heroic’ ancestors. Well those ancestors fought against the American flag and the American government and actively sought to destroy the USA as we know it.

    Should they be officially commemorated for those actions?

    How would you feel if you saw someone flying the flag of North Korea, North Vietnam, Castro’s Cuba, the Soviet Union or the Nazi flag in North America to commemorate one of their ‘brave’ ancestors who died fighting against the USA, Canada, Australia or other democracies?

    And by the way the Dukes of Hazard was in my personal opinion TV for the lowest common denominator. A piece of juvenile tripe with little redeeming value except for the popularization of cut-off jeans for young women.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      “And for those who fly it to commemorate their ‘heroic’ ancestors. Well those ancestors fought against the American flag and the American government and actively sought to destroy the USA as we know it.”

      Wrong, maybe you should read up on Robert Lee and the Civil war. There’s also no Racist aspect to the Rebel flag, whether your too close minded to believe it or not. The amount of hate that’s been brewed by the Media and by people that haven’t ever stepped foot into the American South is disgusting and unwarranted.

      • 0 avatar
        Exfordtech

        The flag that represented the CSA? The group of states that fired upon a federal fort, beginning a civil war under the premise of protecting state’s rights, when the right they went to war for was the right to own people? Please clarify this for me.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        I’ve read a lot about the Civil War. At no point did I read that the purpose of the Confederacy was to support the US or to abolish slavery. In fact, quite the opposite.

        Southern man, better keep your head
        Don’t forget what your good book said.
        Southern change gonna come at last
        Now your crosses are burning fast.

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        “Wrong, maybe you should read up on Robert Lee and the Civil war. There’s also no Racist aspect to the Rebel flag, whether your too close minded to believe it or not”

        You know, except for the leaders of the Confederacy, who expressly said it was. Are you just forgetting the Cornerstone speech? Or practising a little “creative” revisionism?

        And, you know, the racists who dusted it off in the 1960s as a reaction to the Civil Rights movement.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Does everyone forget where Lincoln said he never could see blacks becoming equal members of society, as he didn’t see them as capable of learning the same way as whites? What is this double standard?

          This is how the 1800 and all of time before that was, it wasn’t a disgusting thing to say it was just how common thought was. We obviously know that all Races are equally capable today. But that doesn’t change the past no matter how loudly you moan and complain. The past is what it is, there’s no sugar coating it, and it sure as hell shouldn’t change because it’s too raw for a modern audience.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            That’s different than supporting and proliferating the institution of slavery.

          • 0 avatar
            psarhjinian

            “What is this double standard?”

            Because it’s not the same thing.

            Lincoln is talking about civil rights (or the lack thereof), which applied to women, the poor, Natives and all sorts of people. Not a good thing, but…

            The southern states wanted to maintain, extend **legitimize** slavery. Not the lack of civil rights, but outright people-as-property slavery, all because some rich guys wanted to keep being rich and didn’t like that their (slave-based) economy was both economically and morally bankrupt.

            It’s not a double standard because it’s not remotely the same thing. Not at all.

          • 0 avatar
            Exfordtech

            Just because it was held as common belief that some people were considered as less equal in the past does not make holding that belief correct. The idea of owning people should have been universally repugnant, not ok just because everyone else was doing it. To my eyes, the symbol of a rebellion that supported the ownership of people, to be disposed of as the owner wished, is racist.

        • 0 avatar
          InterstateNomad

          I second what psarhjinian and Arthur Dailey posted.

          No teacher or news station taught me that the Confederate Flag was a symbol of racism. I am well aware that there is much more to history to the flag than what is thrown around here on the Internet.

          Actually, the people that had the flag painted on their cars taught me what the flag stood for with their behavior, thoughts, and speech.

          I did not know it was a symbol of the anti-Civil Rights movement, thanks for sharing that; it falls right into what I already see and know.

          It still is a protected under free speech, but if you are denying what it actually represents today (racism), you are simply rationalizing. Of course Mr. Watson would want to get rid of it if he doesn’t want people to think of him that way.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Ronnie, I’m inclined to agree with you, but with some caveats.

    What’s lost in the discussion about this flag thing is the distinction between the rights and responsibilities of individuals vs the government.

    While I personally think clinging to Confederate flags is dumb, it makes sense to me that it would be removed from public/government displays. However, individuals should feel no compulsion to ban it from their own displays.

    Today it’s the Confederate flag; tomorrow it’ll be crosses, Stars of David, and Washington Redskins badges.

    Someone should produce a “COEXIST” bumper sticker that includes a Confederate flag. But I suspect the sort of people sporting these stickers can’t actually coexist with the Confederate flag.

    Personally, I’m offended by the District of Columbia license plate which says “Taxation Without Representation”, because it fails to address the original intent of DC vs the grotesque distortion it has become.

    • 0 avatar
      clivesl

      “However, individuals should feel no compulsion to ban it from their own displays.”

      There has been no compulsion in any of this other than public sentiment. In fact, most of the big bans came before anyone could really say anything about it.

      I honestly think that most Americans had no real opinion one way or the other on the Confederate flag. Until the nutjob wrapped himself in it (metaphorically) and killed all those people because they were the wrong color. Once that happened a whole bunch of folks started looking at that flag again, it’s really not surprising that in 2015 many didn’t care for what it represented any longer.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        So how many Native Americans need to be gunned down before DC’s football team gets a new name?

        • 0 avatar
          RideHeight

          This!

          Give that name back to the peanuts!

        • 0 avatar
          clivesl

          Well that’s thing, could anyone have seen this flag thing coming before the shooting?

          DC might have new name next season or never for all I know. But if something happens that draws a lot of attention to it in a hurry? Then it could go bad for Snyder real fast.

          Which would be fun to watch.

      • 0 avatar
        Syke

        Actually, those who are currently loudly opposing the flag’s right to exist are not the product of recent self-introspection. For the most part, they’ve been against anything that memorializes the Confederacy for years. That racist’s actions in the church just finally gave them the wedge issue to push their ideas of how we should be thinking.

        • 0 avatar
          clivesl

          Which is exactly my point. That small group of activists just got a bright light shined on their issue. The American people looked at the issue and came down on their side. I am not seeing anything other than the normal evolution of society.

          Amazon and eBay are into making money, and the fact that they banned the flag almost immediately after the shooting tells you where society is on this.

          These corporations aren’t making political statements, they are acknowledging the reality that the vast majority of their potential customers are at this point, frankly repulsed by the sight of it given recent events. That reality could cost them money so they are dealing with it.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            They’re not activists. They’re ideological terrorists.

            Someone taught them an absolutist moral code and intolerance for other cultures and ways of living. While this might be advantageous for spreading human rights and personal liberty, it has decidedly less merit in other arenas.

            What makes these people successful is their uncompromising ignorance, and their willingness to torment people in the name of moral propriety until everyone else acquiesces. ISIS by a different name.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            You really and I mean really, need to look into getting high.

            You have so much anger at so many imaginary people attacking your way of life.

            I am being totally serious when I tell you, look into medicinal marijuana if it is available in your state, it can help.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            The world would be better still, if you medicated yourself with an education. Everyone would win.

            This entire issue was started by paranoid people who think that Southerners are out to get them. You couldn’t be more clueless if you tried.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            Well this was fun. I might check in later and see how you’re doing.

            Stay strong TW5, keep swinging.

            PS -The civil war was only about slavery, Chew on that one for awhile.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            “Ideological terrorists?”

            The terrorist is the guy who tries to start a race war by shooting 9 people in a church while they’re praying.

            Not the person who tweets something nasty and hurts the feelings of a person displaying a racist symbol.

            The subset of conservatives who see “terrorism” in criticism need to grow some balls. Freedom of speech means you can say what you want. It also means others are free to criticize you for it, even rudely and in large numbers. People have been calling liberals “traitors” for decades and we roll with it.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “Ideological terrorists?”

            I’m pretty sure this is an oxymoron. Terrorists who are not ideological would probably be classified as anarchists (or perhaps sociopaths?).

            “The terrorist is the guy who tries to start a race war by shooting 9 people in a church while they’re praying.”

            I maintain this was a hit on a prominent state senator. Everyone seems to have taken their eye off the ball. Which to history had the greater effect, who Oswald was (whether or not he was made a pasty) or the fact JFK was assassinated?

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            The problem with treating either Oswald or Roof as a piece of a conspiracy is that both of them were too addled and deranged to work with anyone else. It’s a crazy guy going to a famous place he identifies with black people and shooting a bunch of black people because he thinks it will start a race war.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I can’t think of anything more amusing than citing First Amendment protection while emphasizing the importance of eliminating the Confederate Flag.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Reading comprehension’s not your strong suit, is it? I specifically said people have the right to say what they want, which includes flying the flag. I have no wish to ban it. But I’m perfectly happy to see the flag come under withering criticism, because the ideals behind it deserve that criticism.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            “People have been calling liberals ‘traitors’ for decades and we roll with it.”

            As long as treason remains unprosecuted, anyway.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            That just happened to be a viable target no matter if anyone was “behind it” or it truly was just a mentally ill person. I refuse to believe a random deranged person just happened to target that place, at that time of day, without having a specific primary target. The same jag off could have shot up a street corner full of drug dealers with the same effect. I argue no matter who or if anyone sent him, because we’ll never know for sure, Roof went there to assassinate a prominent politician. Period. The fact Senator Rev Pinckney’s political career was barely mentioned by national MSM speaks volumes. You heard over and over about Gabby Giffords being a US Rep when there was an attempted assassination on her, why is it buried for this man?

            First paragraph:

            “Representative Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, and at least 17 others were shot Saturday morning when a gunman opened fire outside a supermarket where Ms. Giffords was meeting with constituents. Six of the victims died, among them John M. Roll, the chief judge for the United States District Court for Arizona, and a 9-year-old girl, the Pima County sheriff, Clarence W. Dupnik, said.”

            http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09giffords.html

            Buried toward the end:

            “The church is one of the nation’s oldest black churches. The pastor, the Rev. Clementa C. Pinckney, is a state senator. It was not clear whether he was at the church at the time of the shooting.”

            http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/18/us/church-attacked-in-charleston-south-carolina.html

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I don’t think you and I have been reading the same media. We barely found out about any of the other victims because so much attention was paid to Pinckney. And every article about him started with the fact that he was a state senator.

            I haven’t seen Roof say anything about Pinckney in particular. I’ve seen him say and write a whole lot about how much he hated and resented black people in general.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            The random article I cited from NYT did mention the Rev’s political role, but seemed to gloss over it and it was only mentioned toward the end of the article. In both the Giffords and now Pinckney shooting you have three political targets, two of which were successfully assassinated and the third (Giffords) defying the odds and surviving. In 2011 when Rep Giffords was nearly killed, Federal Judge John Roll was successfully assassinated in the melee and the cry from MSM (and IIRC the White House) was for gun control. Now another political target was assassinated yet the MSM glosses over some of the obvious facts while the prole thinking focuses on something pointless such as the Confederate Battle Flag. I find this very curious, why not the same cry for gun control again?

            I agree with you in that Roof’s statements (that I have seen) are not consistent with admitting he was targeting Sen Rev Pinckney specifically, but Gifford’s shooter also admitted to nothing to this effect. In the case of the Giffords shooting, Jared Loughner did not make specific political statements despite the fact he successfully assassinated a Federal court judge and nearly assassinated a U.S. representative (friends say he voiced a generic dislike of Giffords, Pres GW Bush, and the US gov’t). I don’t know what really happened in either shooting, but I do know two of the three reasonably high political targets are dead and its sort of a big deal that each was able to be assassinated relatively easily if you think about it.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            28-

            Honestly, it’s pretty easy to assassinate a State Senator or House Rep. I had been to Giffords’ town hall meetings before and she was very accessible and often had no security. My current House Rep (and in previous years with his US Senator brother) walks in my city’s 4th of July parade every year without security.

            My wife and I stayed at a bed & breakfast in Bisbee, AZ six months or so before the Tucson shooting. Gabby and her husband were staying there at the same time. We had a glass of wine with them on the front porch, and they seemed like nice people. She walked up and down the main street of Bisbee talking to random people on the street around twilight.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @bball

            That’s not very reassuring.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Did you expect State Senators or House Reps to have heavy security?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Yes. Heck any group with enough funding could influence elections or major pieces of legislation if they could hit key players all at once. That’s really not good.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Better to do it with the carrot (money) instead of the stick (violence)?

            I don’t know how things work in other states, but in Michigan, we don’t have the cash to assign a state trooper to each politician. Even the Governor keeps security pretty tidy. The mayor of Detroit has typically kept more security than the Governor. The Oakland County Executive, possibly the second most powerful politician in the state, just has a driver (who is a retired police officer). He was smart to get a driver after his DUI.

        • 0 avatar
          Margarets Dad

          Good God, nobody is saying the flag shouldn’t exist. But it shouldn’t be flown by the Government, which is supposed to represent ALL its citizens, of all backgrounds and races, given its historical association with racist causes–chiefly, the fight to preserve slavery and opposition to integration efforts in the 1950s and ’60s.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “But I suspect the sort of people sporting these stickers can’t actually coexist with the Confederate flag.”

      Hypocrites.

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      Considering the political party that has a stranglehold on DC government, I’ve often wondered if the phrase “Taxation Without Representation” they put on their license plates is a complaint – or a goal.

  • avatar
    midnite_clyde

    As a native South Carolinian I am very happy with the flag being removed from state grounds. Must know the history of our state to appreciate what the flag meant to those who did not celebrate confederate heritage.

    On the General Lee…everytime I saw that car I would cringe because they defaced the most beautiful muscle car (actually I prefer the ’68 Charger over the ’69)ever built. I would also cringe when they did those flying leaps knowing they just destroyed a beautiful car.

  • avatar
    TW5

    The Confederate Flag is not something I identify with; however, I don’t begrudge Southerners from Dixie who use it to signify their region and heritage. Texans have a flag identifying their own Republic so seeing the Confederate flag in Texas is a bit more worrisome than in the Southeast, though it still has some regional relevance.

    However, this cultural purge is tiresome and aggravating, particularly since most of the Yankees who demand removal are from states as white as Europe. The South is integrated, which is more than we can say about most of the North. They still have parades in New York celebrating different types of white people.

    • 0 avatar
      clivesl

      The fact that you still separate the country into South and North speaks volumes.

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        Yes, it does. It proves that you’ve never bothered to look at a demography map.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        I was in PA at the time of the SC mess, the difference between Pennsylvania, and say NC, SC, or Georgia is eye-opening. Seeing someone that isn’t white in rural PA catches your eyes, it is a rare site. Go into North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and it’s a totally different story, being a White man puts me in the minority. These are two different areas with two different cultures, and two different view points. Someone that’s never lived in the U.S. South hasn’t any right talking about what it is and what it is not. If your one to say the U.S. South is backwards, then your saying that being in the most integrated part of the U.S. Is what makes us that.

        The Laws and cultures of Northern states can not appropriately work in Southern States, it’s not a bad thing, it’s just how it is.

        • 0 avatar
          clivesl

          My point is that you are talking about distinctions that haven’t mattered to most of the country since the civil rights movement.

          You are still looking at this country like North vs South means anything and it doesn’t, I guarantee you that we West Coasters think you are all as crazy as you think we are, and the Pacific Northwesters hate us all because we’re dry.

          No one is coming after your culture, we don’t care about or notice your culture. I can assure that out here we have plenty on our plates without worrying about your culture.

          But when the acknowledged symbol of your culture is flown a by a man that murders 39 people for the hell of it you are gonna take some flack for continuing to fly it.

          I see a mass murder wearing the same t-shirt as me I probably take the shirt off for awhile. But then I’m not that emotionally invested in a piece of cloth.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Why do you believe he represents the flag? He doesn’t, and he doesn’t represent those that do fly the flag.

            He has Nothing to do with the flag, at all.

            Doesn’t matter if he draped himself in a red communist flag, or the Flag of the USA, he didn’t do it because of the flag, and the people that do fly the USA flag wouldn’t represent him. This really isn’t that hard.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            He is the public face of the Confederate flag right now. That is all that matters.

            You want to be mad, be mad at that nutjob for ruining your flag, cause he ruined it good. You can rail all you want about what it means, but for right now it means killing innocent people because they are a couple shades too dark.

            I didn’t give it that meaning, society and a whackjob gave it that meaning.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            Everyone knows the North doesn’t care about any culture other than its own. Only ignorant people could cite racism and demand removal of the Confederate flag in the only region with true white/black integration. Blinding racial ignorance on an industrial scale. That’s what signifies “the North”.

            On the other hand, Yankees throw white power parades with regularity, but the rest of us are expected to understand the history of Ellis Island and the difficulty the North once had integrating various white peoples.

            We get it. You don’t.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            Why do you keep calling me a Northerner? I’m an Oregonian living in CA.

            You keep proving my point by refusing to acknowledge that big chunks of this nation have no dog in this North/South fight you’ve created.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I understand your point. You don’t understand that your point is actually my point.

            We know you’re indifferent and ignorant. That’s the problem. Your own apathy and ignorance can’t be the basis of a cogent argument on your behalf.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            Again you are fighting a war by yourself.

            I am indifferent as to how you pursue happiness. The whole of this great nation (save for a few hundred thousand nutjobs) is indifferent to how you live your life. So who is trying to take this away?

            I live in the bastion of liberal craziness and have many certifiably insane left wing friends. Would you like to know how often the Confederate flag has come up in party conversations in the 20 years? Maybe once or twice.

            Again, you are angry because some tool ruined your flag by associating it with mass murder. You might want to start getting mad at the guy that ruined the flag for you rather than a bunch of folks who didn’t care before.

            As for ignorant, you bet. There is so much I don’t know that it frightens me sometimes. But I keep plugging away, maybe in another 50 I’ll have it figured out.

            But seriously, try getting high.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            “He is the public face of the Confederate flag right now. That is all that matters.”

            That sick loser is the public face of the Confederate flag because the media machine in New York, the demographics of which I’ll leave to you and who have passed up an opportunity to put down a southerner approximately never, decided to make him so. That was their soundbite the day the story broke and they’ve been hitting it in lockstep 24/7 since.

            These are the same people who spent a year trying to turn Trayvon Martin into the pre-adolescent victim of a state approved lynching and Darren Wilson into Bull Connor reincarnate. The south is evil and they’ll find you a narrative to prove it.

            And you bought it.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            “You keep proving my point by refusing to acknowledge that big chunks of this nation have no dog in this North/South fight you’ve created.”

            I strongly agree, but no one here created such an issue. Issues that other cultures in the U.S. Don’t understand are at a forefront because they refuse to accept it isn’t their issue.

            It’s the same issue with Greece, what happens there has minimal if any affect on any dealing in the U.S. yet for some odd reason every news outlet has had it on the front page. The people in Greece can deal with their mess, and the people in the southern U.S. Should carry on as were.

            I have a hard time understanding why issues that are so god-awful stupid spark the most outrage in people. Is it that hard for some (and I’m not saying you) to look at an issue and call it for what it is. I assume these same people are the ones that care about the personal life of “famous” individuals, or care what tabloids have to say. If it doesn’t affect you, you need to find something better to do with your time. The rebel flag doesn’t affect anyone in New York City, yet creating an imagery that all Southern people want the death of non-whites seems to be the way those outside the south want to believe it is.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            People keep confusing what I believe with what reality is.

            You now live in a world where the Confederate flag is less acceptable than it was a month ago. How you chose to deal with that reality is entirely up to you.

            You wanna rage about whose fault it is? I got nothing going on today. I didn’t comment on this reality, I merely pointed it out.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Dan said it much better than I.

            I’m not against you Clive, I’m against the media machine that created this issue and the uneducated mass that are too ignorant to see that they are being fed a line of bull. And that works both ways and I understand that.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I’ll try one more time for your good, and the good of our nation. You are admittedly ignorant and apathetic. Therefore, you cannot offer any useful opinion as to whether there is or is not pressure being exerted on people who live in the Southeast.

            In this particular instance, you’ve chosen to claim imaginary conspiracy on the day the Confederate Flag is lowered from its mast atop the South Carolina capitol.

            You need to give sobriety a whirl.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Dan, the single biggest cog in that “media machine” oppressing you is headquartered in Atlanta.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            My biggest issue is that gullibility of the people in this country. Every other issue is more BS than the next.

            Yet no one seems to take the slightest notice that we are becoming increasingly divided over artificial reasons.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Dal,
            I’m sure that makes you feel good about yourself, but if you actually believe that the issue is that small, it’s pretty damning about yourself.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Section 9.4 of the Constitution of the Confederate States:

            “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.”

            Is this what the defenders of its flag truly want in their constitution? Because that’s exactly what it says.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Has nothing to do with how I feel about myself. It just makes the idea of a media conspiracy sound as ridiculous as it is. It’s not like there’s some appealing element of the rebel flag that everyone would see if the media weren’t covering up. It’s a symbol that:

            1) started out as the symbol of a rebellion that had the purpose of perpetuating black slavery,
            2) became one of the main symbols of the most prominent racist hate group ever to exist in the USA, and
            3) became the symbol of the resistance to ending racist segregation in public institutions and public spaces.

            The only reason the integration that you like to talk about exists in the South (and, don’t get me wrong, you’re right about that) is because the people waving the rebel flag throughout most of the 20th century lost.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            What conspiracy?

            I’m just stating the facts, whether you choose to believe that the media has your best interests in mind is up to you.

            I’m sure the trials and tribulations of Bruce Jenner are really life and death news for you.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @Clive

            For someone who professes to use drugs, you mind seems narrow and unexpanded.

            The Confederate Flag has never been highly regarded outside of the Southeast, but it has always been Constitutionally protected speech.

            Recently, the media showed that the Confederate Flag still flies in the South. The rest of the country knows nothing of America’s racial demography so they don’t know that the Southeast is also the only region with white/black integration. Instead of seeing a strange, somewhat-beautiful paradox that symbolizes the cultural evolution of the US, most people from states with restricted African American demography see a land of hate crimes, and they conspire to restrict freedom of expression.

            This issue is being proliferated by people who know nothing and who understand less than nothing.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            @Hummer, sorry I was replying to one TW5’s attempts to ‘educate’ me. He apparently isn’t good with sarcasm and the written word.

            I don’t think there is media conspiracy on one side or the other. I think that there a lot of hours to fill on TV.

            For some reason people like news that scares them. That’s why we get kidnappings and murders and “Oh My God! Those damn dirty blanks are coming to take your blank!!!”

            The sad side effect is that many people believe we live in uglier world than is actually the case.

            The media made the flag the story because it was good visual, nothing more. It’s same reason the story out of Columbine was the trench coats, it tells a more compelling story.

            My greater point was that this was not some plot. This was a guy doing something terrible that self identified with your flag. On some level I do feel bad for all of you who flew it for other reasons.

            But those days are pretty much done, there just aren’t enough people left that care passionately enough about that flag anymore. So it’ll go away.

            As Vonnegut said, “and so it goes.”

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            I dunno. It’s actually kind of cute that TW5 believes himself to be clever.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            @TW5
            ‘Recently, the media showed that the Confederate Flag still flies in the South.’

            You make it sound like it was piece on the travel channel.

            America was exposed to the Confederate flag because a nut had the foresight to create some visually interesting pictures for the media to use. Said nut then went and killed a bunch of people.

            It could be that many of the folks talking about the flag right now just find it in poor taste given recent events.

            Nah, definitely secret conspiracy.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            @PCH

            Well I didn’t say it wasn’t fun.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @Clive

            I’m sure if someone wrapped themselves in Old Glory and committed a hate crime, you’d run down our flag in the name of political correctness, right?

            You plead ignorance from the outset. It’s your best defense.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            TW5, your efforts to portray this as some kind of diktat being imposed from the North are odd, given recent surveys of public opinion within the South that indicate overwhelming opposition to displaying the flag in governmental buildings, as well as the lopsided vote in the SC state House — one of the two or three most conservative legislative bodies in the nation! — to take the flag down. The position “everything is OK with the flag” is becoming a very fringe one.

          • 0 avatar
            clivesl

            TW5, be honest now, do you understand what the term self-deprecating means?

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I don’t think everything is okay with the flag, and I don’t particularly identify with it.

            I am opposed to uneducated people, particularly those from societies with no appreciable minority demography, stirring up a hornets nest by trying to kill something that is already waning on its own.

            If you don’t live in the South, the cultural forces at play are way above your paygrade. The motivation for the crimes Roof committed are an incredibly complicated issue, not necessarily opposed to the rest of the South’s waning appreciation of the Confederate Flag. Nonetheless, they’ve been appropriated for a slobbering-stupid totemic battle over the Confederate Flag.

            I’m not going to start breathing through my mouth so you guys can feel good about your counter-productive flag revolution.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “I am opposed to uneducated people”

            Be careful. That self-hatred will eat you up inside.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @TW5 – I’m struggling to comprehend much of what you’ve said and most I’ve ignored but I can’t ignore these last comments;

            “I am opposed to uneducated people, particularly those from societies with no appreciable minority demography, stirring up a hornets nest by trying to kill something that is already waning on its own.
            If you don’t live in the South, the cultural forces at play are way above your paygrade. The motivation for the crimes Roof committed are an incredibly complicated issue, not necessarily opposed to the rest of the South’s waning appreciation of the Confederate Flag. Nonetheless, they’ve been appropriated for a slobbering-stupid totemic battle over the Confederate Flag.
            I’m not going to start breathing through my mouth so you guys can feel good about your counter-productive flag revolution.”

            It appears that you view the “South” as a distinct society. Society is simply defined as “the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community.”

            You also view others outside of that “society” who question what is occurring as being uneducated or unaware of the “society” being questioned. That would be ignorance.

            Basically you are saying that if you don’t live in the “south” or don’t live in an area with a lot of blacks you aren’t going to understand the issues.

            Odd – I deal with death and dying on a daily basis and I fully understand what is involved but I still have a pulse.

            It is called empathy. That is “the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within the other person’s frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another’s shoes.”

            Give it a try sometime. You might come to understand that those on the so called left that you apparently hate so much might have something in common with you.

    • 0 avatar
      Margarets Dad

      “Most of the Yankees who demand removal are from states as white as Europe.”

      Yeah, you know, like New York. Can’t remember the last time I saw a non-white person on the subway.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Ronnie, you dybbuk you, just had to upstage Baruth today, did’n ya?

  • avatar
    Jezza819

    As a born and raised Southerner that still lives here, I’ve never understood the reasons behind hanging on to that flag. I just don’t have the love and attachment that others have for it. It should never ever fly on government property or even remotely be part of any state flag. But having said that I really don’t get this idea of purging it from private property or cultural references like the Dukes Of Hazzard tv show. To me that was way out of bounds.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    “He could replace the flag on the roof with the black nationalist red, green and black flag, or with a gay-friendly rainbow flag and neither would decrease the value of the car as a collectible.”

    I would say it certainly could decrease its value but what would probably happen is the more outrageous it became the more valuable *that* car would become as people much richer than I played political football with it.

  • avatar
    LeMansteve

    It is truly 2015 when a southern gentleman named Bubba removes the stars and bars from his General Lee Charger.

  • avatar
    carguy

    It’s a freedom of speech issue. Anyone can put whatever flag on their car or house – be it the confederate battle flag a swastika or any other group that fought with the United States. But while you have the right to free speech, everyone also has the right to tell you that you are a dick.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    If the car was wrecked and cobbled back together, then it’s essentially a bucket of bolts that was reassembled and reconditioned, not just an original car.

    For your run-of-the-mill car, reconditioning reduces value, but there are no clear pricing guidelines for something like this. As such, the value of this thing will be more arbitrary than market-driven — one dude with too much cash will set its value based upon its importance as a TV souvenir, then have to pray that someone else comes along at a later date who will pay more than he did. I would leave it as is, making it as close to what was depicted on screen as possible, as I would presume that the guy with the checkbook would want it to be that way.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    How by any stretch of the imagination is the General Lee a cultural icon? The show was only in the top 10 in ratings for 3 years and critically lambasted. Chargers of that era are icons, preferably green ’68 RT’s.

    @Dan wrote and I post this with great regret and trepidation that “the media machine in New York, the demographics of which I’ll leave to you”. The stereotypical racist profiling contained in such a phrase is self-evident. He stands convicted by his own words and by these provides proof of the motives of many who defend the Confederacy.

    @ Hummer wrote “It’s the same issue with Greece, what happens there has minimal if any affect on any dealing in the U.S. yet for some odd reason every news outlet has had it on the front page. The people in Greece can deal with their mess, and the people in the southern U.S. Should carry on as were. If it doesn’t affect you, you need to find something better to do with your time. The rebel flag doesn’t affect anyone in New York City” Well we know that this is just drivel. Economically we are all connected. What happens in Greece impacts the New York Stock Market, the value of the US dollar, interest rates and eventually the cost of your vehicle and fuel. And what happens in one part of America impacts the rest of the nation. The USA is an indivisible union, that was decided when the North won the Civil War

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Agreed, AD,
      Also, 9 of my fellow US citizens were just gunned down. As an American, I am concerned about this terrorist act and want to see these attacks prevented going forward. More terrorist attacks against America are perpetrated by fundamentalist angry white men than by fundamentalist Muslims.

      If that means taking down the symbols of the hatred and treason that fueled this attack, then I am supportive.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      One has to be pretty naïve to think that what is happening in Greece will have zero impact on the USA just like one who thinks that the debate over a “flag” has no impact.

      Just look at the battle lines being drawn over this issue and tell me there is no impact?

    • 0 avatar
      InterstateNomad

      Again, a great post. It’s interesting how we are more transparent that we would like to imagine we are. Their words show their real thoughts and beliefs.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    I both agree and disagree. On the one hand, I do tend to agree with your assessment that this won’t seriously damage the collectible value of the car. As you correctly note, since it has already been restored once, it’s not as though the car is in original condition. if it was original and unrestored, then it would be a different story. As long as the change that’s being made can be easily reversed, the car’s status as a theoretical serial number 1 General Lee and the car from the credits means it will always be highly collectible. At worst, a future owner will have to deduct the cost of repainting the roof. That being said, I do think it hurts the cars authenticity. As much as I view the confederate battle flag as a symbol of racism and treason against the American flag, it is still a matter of history, as is this car. I view the flag the same as I view the Swatstika, and just as I have no issue with the owner of a WW2 Luftwaffe airplane including the Swatstika as part of a historically accurate paintjob, I can’t say I find it offensive to own a General Lee with the battle flag on the roof.

    Where I will disagree in philosophy from your view, Ronnie, is in the idea of ownership. In one of the petrolicious videos, the owner of a Ferrari TR sports racer refers to himself as the “custodian” of the car, instead of the full owner. I really admire that view. Although I think it’s hard to put the General Lee in the same category as a 50s Ferrari race car, when we look at special collectible machines, whatever their true legal ownership, their existence contributes something to all of us, and it’s nice for an owner to take the view that they are more the caretaker of this piece of history to ensure that future generations get to enjoy it. This is more of an issue with drawing a mustache on the Mona Lisa than painting a different flag on the General Lee.

    • 0 avatar

      I agree with you 100% about how the best collectors are caretakers, realizing that someone else will eventually own what they love. At the same time, they still usually sell their cars for market prices so they are well cognizant of monetary values. That ’50s Testarossa will get passed on to an heir or sold for 8 figures. “I wanted to see it go to someone who would appreciate it”, but it gets sold by RM or another top shelf auction house.

      Still, all the car collectors that I know show their cars so there’s some selection bias involved, but I suspect most car collectors, like most collectors, want others to be able to enjoy their collections.

      The Psalmist said, “The earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof”. We’re all just custodians.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      tjh8402 – great post.

  • avatar
    Zykotec

    I think the 68-70 Chargers have always had a special place in the heart of Americans and car people around the world, partly because of Duke of Hazzard, and Bullit, and every other film where one is present, (and destroyed, I think the one in Christine is the only one to get through the film without a scratch)
    While most of the stunts and driving in DoH was fun and exciting (and before my time), I prefer the 2005 film, where the complications of having the confederate flag on your roof are actually a recurring theme in the film.
    On the Lee the confederate flag sure doesn’t stand for racism, but it does stand for a lot of other values that the rebels were proud of having been tricked into having by their privileged leaders.
    The South has always (and apparently still do) had a lower working class that will do anything to protect their rich peoples ‘freedom’ to do whatever they please, hoping that the 1% will once borrow them a piece of the American dream.
    The ‘Redneck’ stereotype is problematic. It has good and bad sides, but it symbolises the ‘common’ mans stuggle against ‘the man’ , as the privilieged people in the South didnt’ want any governing, they made it appear that any governing would also hurt the common man, and made him fight a war against their own people.
    The rebels mostly weren’t fighting for ‘slavery’ in itself, they were fighting for the right of rich people to exploit anyone in general.

  • avatar
    Maymar

    Even as a godless commie liberal who’s more or less visually repulsed by the Confederate flag, somehow the General Lee seems benign, completely removed from any meaning. Not that I care about it being removed from any non-governmental setting (I just subscribe to John Oliver belief that it’s a great way to identify people I don’t want to talk to.

    However, if you want to really get invested in an 80’s TV car, I put forth the A-Team van. It’s much less loaded with controversial symbolism, but they’re still rebels on the run from the government, so you know, you can have a problem with The Man and still get behind them. They’re also former soldiers, for that whole patriot angle. Unlike the General Lee, no one’s bothered by anyone modding or ruining an old G-Series van (but it does look rather bitchin’ properly done up). Or, hell, just paint B.A. Baracus on the roof of the General Lee!

  • avatar
    jimbob457

    I was taught to respect the Battle Flag – the Stars and Bars. Three of my great uncles died fighting for the Lost Cause.

    I was also taught not to refight the War for Southern Independence. That would be bad for business.

    Then the Battle Flag symbol was hijacked by the Segs. Recently a low rent mad dog racist tried to revive it one more time.

    Hoorah for Bubba Watson! Make a statement for sanity.

    You might want to paint over with something that is easy to remove. Who knows? Maybe we hijack our symbol back, someday?

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • nrd515: My ’74 Roadunner with the 360 4 barrel was terrible out of the box, wrong fuel pump, carb linkage...
  • RHD: You could buy a CR-V, switch out the grille and save yourself at least fifteen grand. No one would notice the...
  • RHD: Yup, masks, motorsicle helmets and them there seat belts infringe on our rights as free Americans!
  • RHD: #8 – four 2x4s assembled side to side do not make 16 inches, but 15 inches. The manufacturer is making a...
  • SuperCarEnthusiast: If you can afford $300+K for a Ghost cost gasoline is the least concern. Car insurance premiums...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber