Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, May 17, 2017

The City of New Orleans early Wednesday removed one of the two remaining Confederate monuments that had been scheduled to come down. The equestrian statue of Confederate Gen. Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard honors the military leader who died in New Orleans in 1893. It is the third monument to come down in the city. ... "Today we take another step in defining our city not by our past but by our bright future," Mayor Mitch Landrieu said in a statement. "While we must honor our history, we will not allow the Confederacy to be put on a pedestal in the heart of New Orleans."

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Last month, the city dismantled the first of the four monuments: an obelisk commemorating the Battle of Liberty Place. The monument marked a deadly fight between members of the Crescent City White League, a group opposed to the city's biracial police force, and state militia after the Civil War.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

One less coded monument to slavery.

#1 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-05-17 01:15 PM | Reply

maybe they can raise a US flag in its place.

#2 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-05-17 01:27 PM | Reply

One less republican participation trophy.

#1 | POSTED BY MODER8 AT

Fixt!

#3 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2017-05-17 01:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

www.youtube.com

Ya'll understand that Gen Lee thought Grant was a drunken blacksmith when he handed over his sword, right?

That's how they told it in the South anyway.

Good on N'Arlins for this move.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-17 01:35 PM | Reply

"Ya'll understand that Gen Lee thought Grant was a drunken blacksmith when he handed over his sword, right?"

I never knew he was a blacksmith.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2017-05-17 01:49 PM | Reply

lol, he wasn't. But that's how they told the story.

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2017-05-17 01:51 PM | Reply

Lousiana was not one of the states that made a declaration citing the causes of their secession (the ones who did all mentioned slavery).

But this about sums it up:

"I do not think it comports with the honor and respect of Louisiana, as a slaveholding state, to live under the government of a black Republican"

- Louisiana Governor Thomas Moore, 1860-1864

Good riddance.

#7 | Posted by Sully at 2017-05-17 01:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Everytime a "conservative" cries crocodile tears OBAMA gets some money from SOROS

Whipped you, again

Teehee

#8 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-05-17 01:59 PM | Reply

Beauregard fought to preserve slavery. Post-war, he argued for black people's right to vote, and was a general in the state militia (made up of former confederates) that fought with the bi-racial police against the White League at Liberty Place. Too weird to make up.

#9 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-05-17 02:07 PM | Reply

Here's Mitch Landrieu's own words.

www.washingtonpost.com

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-05-17 02:47 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

I hear there is a warehouse here in Germany they can store that statue it will feel right at home with the other ones there.

#11 | Posted by THomewood at 2017-05-17 03:07 PM | Reply

"Ya'll understand that Gen Lee thought Grant was a drunken blacksmith when he handed over his sword, right?"

At the time of the war, Lee didn't have slaves, Grant did.

#12 | Posted by jamesgelliott at 2017-05-17 03:39 PM | Reply

"At the time of the war, Lee didn't have slaves, Grant did." - #12 | Posted by jamesgelliott at 2017-05-17 03:39 PM

Apparently not:

Q: Who was the last U.S. president to own slaves?

A: Zachary Taylor owned slaves while in office. U.S. Grant owned a slave he freed in 1859, long before becoming president.

source

#13 | Posted by Hans at 2017-05-17 03:46 PM | Reply

#13 | POSTED BY HANS AT 2017-05-17 03:46 PM | FLAG:

Grant personally owned 1 slave. He wasn't particularly affluent enough to own more at the time. He rented, managed, and lived on his father in law's plantation, which owned a large number of slaves.

#14 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-05-18 08:00 AM | Reply

"At the time of the war, Lee didn't have slaves, Grant did."

AT the end of the war that Grant won no one in the United States owned slaves. This other nonsense you discuss is irrelevant, Lincoln ended slavery once and for all in the United STates and it is why he is considered our greatest President other than Washington.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2017-05-18 08:19 AM | Reply

At the end of the war, several Northern states continued to have slave ownership. It ended some time after the war. They skirted the trans-atlantic shipping ban by buying them from midwest "slave breeder" states.

#16 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-05-18 01:29 PM | Reply

Dammit, Obama!

#17 | Posted by kudzu at 2017-05-18 03:01 PM | Reply

At the end of the war, several Northern states continued to have slave ownership. It ended some time after the war. They skirted the trans-atlantic shipping ban by buying them from midwest "slave breeder" states.

#16 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-05-18 01:29 PM | Reply

The US didn't fight the civil war to end slavery. The US fought the war to preserve the union. That the US was obviously on a course to phase out slavery before the war was a seperate issue for the Union. The war sped up that process but that was not its purpose, to them.

The Confederacy was comprised of states who undoubtedly seceded because they saw that the US was on a course to ended slavery. Every state who released a secession declaration mentioned slavery. They may have sold a load of "state rights" BS to the rubes who had to fight the war but the Confederate deciion makers were acting to hold onto slavery for as long as possible. And in cases where they were willing to put their motivation into words, their own words prove this.

#18 | Posted by Sully at 2017-05-18 03:24 PM | Reply

To consider the south as a monolithic lock step mind numbed inbred group is a little lazy. Perhaps reality might have a point in the discussion. Bobby Lee was a soldier in the US Army for more than 25 years. He was offered command of all union troops by Abe Lincoln. After much agonizing he determined that a Union that had to be maintained by bloodshed did not merit his devotion. After the war he got a job as Collage administrator. He never voted. Others range from Nahum Bedford Forest who founded the KKK with others to George Picket who lead the Republican party in Virginia for decades. My family was at least sane, they were trying to feed themselves and many served in the union army after the war. One in particular was a division commander before the war and then worked as a administrator for the reconstruction government in Arkansas.
We all want to believe that we are moral and upright, but the reality is we are selfish and self serving. Our situation determines how magnanimous we behave. The hungry seldom share food. Every facet of the south had been leveled, far beyond what was required for military victory. England had encouraged people in India and Egypt to start growing cotton so the market price was low, never approaching antebellum prices. So the south became poor and stayed so for about a century. During this time the Democrat party was the only game in town. Seems ironic that anywhere they run things, things get bad and stay that way. Don't accuse me as being a Republican, those I have separate issues with- I am still a libertarian. On the subject of monuments, maybe we should demolish the Washington and Jefferson Memorials, as they both owned slaves. Maybe they should remove the statue of Jackson in Jackson Square, he was too, and he ordered the trail of tears. There is the rub, men are not angels. Even the best among us have flaws.

#19 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-05-18 04:32 PM | Reply

#19 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-05-18 04:32 PM | Reply

None of that changes the fact that every state who gave its reasonsing for seceding stated that it was doing so to preserve slavery.

Nobody is claiming that all people on either side of the war had the same motivations.

#20 | Posted by sully at 2017-05-18 04:37 PM | Reply

Confederate landmarks are needed in order to remind southerners they don't want to be part of America and they hate libruls.

#21 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-05-18 04:49 PM | Reply

I can sort of understand white racists putting up these monuments after losing that war but I can't quite see how people let them stand for another century and a half.

Institutional something.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-05-18 05:39 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

-->
Drudge Retort