Althouse: Nikki Haley is calling for the removal of the Confederate battle flag from the state capitol grounds.

June 22, 2015

Nikki Haley is calling for the removal of the Confederate battle flag from the state capitol grounds.

Watch live now, here.

Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott are also taking this position.

UPDATE: Haley is giving recognition to the different "viewpoints" of the meaning of the flag, but at the state house, "It's time to move the flag from the capitol grounds." Huge applause. "Some people will see this as a sad moment... but this flag, while an integral part of our past, does not belong in our future.... By removing a symbol that divides us, we can move forward in harmony." She speaks of honoring the "9 souls... who are in Heaven." She stresses that it's South Carolina's decision, and that many people outside of the state have misunderstood what the flag means. It doesn't mean hate, she assures us, but it does cause "pain to so many," and that is the reason for banishing it from the state house grounds — though of course, as she mentions, individuals remain free to display the flag themselves.

257 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 257 of 257

Michael said...: buwaya puti

I believe you are right about the disdain by elites for underclass, even working class, whites. This is on accelerants if it is a southerner. Just as progressivism gives its adherents a sense of being intellectually superior to conservatives without the attendant work or study they, progressives, feel an extra jolt of smart if they happen to have been born outside the south. It is quite weird. Having contempt for a region is quite primitive. A tell.; 6/22/15, 9:16 PM
Birkel said...: "Rhythm and Balls", let us join together to condemn the Democrats who enacted the current South Carolina law.; 6/22/15, 9:17 PM
Michael said...: R&B

You were going along fine until you got to Kearns.; 6/22/15, 9:20 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Birkel is a bit like the Northern Copperhead Democrats, who sympathized with the way the insurrectionists were being repulsed.

It's a wonder what he would have done had they taken Gettysburg, and proceeded to march onto Washington as they planned.

That's a stumper, isn't it, Birkel? But then, you're an ideologue. And ideologues ain't got no use for practical thinking or understanding the actual consequences of their advice.

Continue being a romantic. It gives you such a passionate platform from which to project some sort of political ideal, even if you don't know what that is.; 6/22/15, 9:20 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: "Rhythm and Balls", let us join together to condemn the Democrats who enacted the current South Carolina law.

I'll "condemn" what was wrong with the past (I've never refused to) if you'll condemn what's wrong with the present.; 6/22/15, 9:21 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Ok fine. People hate Kearns. The point was Alexander Stephens' intention to block the 13th amendment. If that's wrong take issue with the fact, instead of pretending that the historian must have got it wrong without any proof that she did.; 6/22/15, 9:23 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/22/15, 9:23 PM
Birkel said...: I do condemn your ignorance, manifesting presently.; 6/22/15, 9:26 PM
Birkel said...: I notice you still cannot criticize Democrats, "Rhythm and Balls".; 6/22/15, 9:27 PM
Birkel said...: Your comment at 9:20 is vapid, "Rhythm and Balls".; 6/22/15, 9:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Paddy O: I disagree. He's making a key point about America.

No, he's not. He latched onto a semantic quibble while floundering about for an argument to support an attitude. If he happened to stumble onto something that looks like "a key point about America" it was mere happenstance.

I had a similar discussion with a very educated friend from Austria, who was very wary about American displays of patriotism. At the core of the American model is that we do not defend a Fatherland or for a flag. Our public servants are oriented by the Constitution, in effect the model of governance that binds us together as equals. This is what makes America so unique and, in many ways, so misunderstood, as our patriotism is of a very different sort than many other places.

Yes and no, Paddy. Whatever their attachment to abstract ideals and "laws not men" (which is indeed a good and noble thing), any human being who isn't a desiccated ideologue loves a real place and real people, not just a set of rules about how society ought to be run. To say that Americans don't partake of that kind of ordinary patriotism is wrong; to claim that they shouldn't is inhuman. In fact, I'd say that the more the U.S. is viewed as a nothing but an abstraction, an idea of society applicable anywhere, detached from any cultural foundation and shared history, the less respect "public servants" seem to show for the Constitution as a clear model of governance (rather than as a mere springboard for creative semantics allowing them to do whatever the hell they want).

Your Austrian friend was wise to feel an instinctive distrust toward what probably looks to him like a society run on bloodless ideals, because bloodless ideals can turn out to be so terribly bloody. (The Soviet Union was a "proposition nation", too. As was revolutionary France. Official France still claims to be so, but the real French nation isn't.) He knows that "propositions" can get every bit as ugly as "blood and soil". He was wrong about America being nothing but a nation of abstractions, unbound by the ordinary emotional attachments to country and countrymen, of "mystic chords of memory" (at least, I hope he's wrong), but his instincts are sound.

The Stars & Stripes represents this allegiance to the Constitution, which is why burning the symbol itself is protected speech. It is pointing to a deeper bond.

"Under" the flag, not "for" the flag, is a good way of saying that.

But I admire your tact and charity in attempting to give Meade a graceful exit from his nonsense.; 6/22/15, 9:29 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: "It gives you such a passionate platform from which to project some sort of political ideal, even if you don't know what that is."

Project?

Freud called, line trey.

All of this is pointless and silly compared to Sunni/Shia or Catholic/Protestant conflicts.

Or, if you prefer confining your mind to this geographic locale called America, you ought maybe study up on Native Americans. Just like the eponymous Schmidt in "About Schmidt."

I hope the cutting off of the eyelids and forcing death by burned eyeballs-type stories are just that, scary stories. Man's inhumanity to man though... (sexist as that may appear); 6/22/15, 9:33 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: I notice you still cannot criticize Democrats, "Rhythm and Balls".

That's exactly what the 9:20 comment did, Mr Northern Copperhead Democrat Birkel.; 6/22/15, 9:37 PM
Birkel said...: Calling names without writing "Democrat" is not holding Democrats responsible. Now, we both know why you have such trouble with performing my simple request.

Or, well, I know why and you probably feel uneasy at my insistence.; 6/22/15, 9:41 PM
Æthelflæd said...: Angelyne said..

"Whatever their attachment to abstract ideals and "laws not men" (which is indeed a good and noble thing), any human being who isn't a desiccated ideologue loves a real place and real people, not just a set of rules about how society ought to be run. To say that Americans don't partake of that kind of ordinary patriotism is wrong; to claim that they shouldn't is inhuman. In fact, I'd say that the more the U.S. is viewed as a nothing but an abstraction, an idea of society applicable anywhere, detached from any cultural foundation and shared history, the less respect "public servants" seem to show for the Constitution as a clear model of governance (rather than as a mere springboard for creative semantics allowing them to do whatever the hell they want).

Your Austrian friend was wise to feel an instinctive distrust toward what probably looks to him like a society run on bloodless ideals, because bloodless ideals can turn out to be so terribly bloody. "

I love it when Angelyne puts the big pot in the little one, as the saying goes.; 6/22/15, 9:45 PM
Paddy O said...: "loves a real place and real people"

That's the point. That's what the Constitution orients towards. The Austrian "Fatherland" diminishes the real people for the place, subsuming the people to this general ideal. What the Constitution does is it creates a bond between people with a shared vision. I'd argue it's this shared vision that really is the bond. We wouldn't, or shouldn't, defend a tyrant, whether a politician or in our own families, just because they're "ours". It's not a bloodless ideal at all, it's a blooded ideal that comes out of a shared vision for what is and what can be, in light of a lot of lessons and struggles to forge a common goal. The Constitution is where we commit to being in this together, even if we sometimes don't necessarily like each other.

We commit to each other through the vision that is the Constitution, defending and upholding the Constitution as the core statement--the oath for public servants, because that is our shared agreement on who we are to be as a people. We then also have a built-in critique.

That's the tension with people who are more than willing to toss it out, implicitly if not explicitly. They take a shared, if currently imperfect, vision and replace it with an authoritarian imposition of partisan assumptions. To which we rightly say, "Don't tread on me." Inasmuch as this was an element of some Southern sentiments leading into the Civil War, there's a valid cause. But the reason for the Civil War itself was driven by slavery, which at every point from the very beginning of our Union was a betrayal of the values the union stood for. Ending slavery, fighting for its end against those who fought for its perpetuation (some explicitly, some implicitly), led to a yet more perfect union. We press on in that goal.; 6/22/15, 9:50 PM
Birkel said...: Paddy O,
I wonder at the "we" who press on. Some explicitly wish to fundamentally transform the nation, expressing - at best - an ambivalence to the America that exists.; 6/22/15, 9:53 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Birkel -

Too bad you're incapable of discussing the issues without personalizing everything: Your stance, my stance, no one's stance. The facts are the facts, though. As is the history. If that interests you, drop me a comment sometime. They're what matter more. But if it's your feelings on everything that matter more, I'm sure there are many people here who will indulge you.; 6/22/15, 9:58 PM
Birkel said...: Democrats should not have made the decision to use the current South Carolina flag. Right, "Rhythm and Balls"?

That is an opinion. Do you share it?; 6/22/15, 10:05 PM
Paddy O said...: "I wonder at the "we" who press on. Some explicitly wish to fundamentally transform the nation, expressing - at best - an ambivalence to the America that exists"

Indeed. That's the current fight: Who are we as a people. There's a lot of people who are closer to the goals of the French Revolution than the American vision.

People don't get that the Constitution frames a discussion in certain ways with certain inherent limitations and restrictions, and leaves off saying too much. Ditching it for perceived penumbras reshapes the nation towards a tyranny, and while it might be for some expressed good cause, will lead to more oppression and suffering by all.; 6/22/15, 10:08 PM
traditionalguy said...: Good comments tonight. I usually cringe at the suggestion that we all listen to one another's points before we go off on them for partisanship reasons, but it worked well tonight thanks to the patience of Meade, insight of zbuwaya Puti and the most thoughtful gentleman, R&B. Thanks to all.; 6/22/15, 10:09 PM
Paddy O said...: "He latched onto a semantic quibble while floundering about for an argument to support an attitude. If he happened to stumble onto something that looks like "a key point about America" it was mere happenstance."

I disagree. I read that distinction right away in his argument and seemed to be what he was getting at in his semantic quibble. That you didn't pick up on it doesn't mean it wasn't there.; 6/22/15, 10:10 PM
wildswan said...: Still you know what finally made South Carolina pull the Confederate flag down was the amazing way the family members responded to Dylann Roofs' madness. There was a great and noble gesture and it had to be responded to by an equal gesture.; 6/22/15, 10:23 PM
Birkel said...: wildswan,
What changed in South Carolina appears to be the people of the state, reflected in their political leadership.; 6/22/15, 10:26 PM
JAORE said...: "To fight, yes. To die, no. For the Stars and Stripes? None that I know."

If you are saying no one wants to die in war, you are correct. If you are saying no one goes to war for a symbol, we can have a discussion. If you are saying southerners do not love the United States and the flag that represents her and will fight for the US, you are woefully ignorant.; 6/22/15, 10:29 PM
Fernandinande said...: Meade said...

"Force != law."

Equals?
No.

Indeed no, since != means "doesn't equal". (A ≠ requires a special character).

But you don't have much justice if you don't enforce the law, do you?

I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean because I showed why it's legal for individual states to secede, but you haven't cited any law underlying the use of force to prevent secession. So you support "might makes right", laws or not.; 6/22/15, 10:42 PM
Michael K said...: " had a similar discussion with a very educated friend from Austria, who was very wary about American displays of patriotism."

About 40 years ago, while I was attending an American College of Surgeons meeting in San Francisco, I was asked to escort a well known Dutch surgeon around the city during the convention. We had a good time going to dinner and to nightclubs. On Friday, the convention was over but the USC football game was that weekend and I asked him and his wife if they wanted to see some "Americana" with our sports enthusiasm. We went to a university "pep rally" downtown and he later told me it was a fascinating experience.

He said that there was martial music and marching and drinking and cheering. He said it would be dangerous to be in such an event in Germany (This was 1972) but, in America, everyone was happy and celebrating and he felt no danger or discomfort. He told me that that event taught him more about Americans than years of attending medical meetings.

I hope it is still true.; 6/22/15, 11:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Paddy O: That's the point. That's what the Constitution orients towards. The Austrian "Fatherland" diminishes the real people for the place, subsuming the people to this general ideal.

That's so much cant, Paddy, on the same level as the ignorant cant that European lefties write about American patriotism.

We wouldn't, or shouldn't, defend a tyrant, whether a politician or in our own families, just because they're "ours".

We shouldn't, but we do, just like other people, so I don't know what your point is here. We Americans are hardly the first people to make note of this moral point. I somehow doubt it's an alien concept even to Austrians.

We commit to each other through the vision that is the Constitution, defending and upholding the Constitution as the core statement--the oath for public servants, because that is our shared agreement on who we are to be as a people...

That's the tension with people who are more than willing to toss it out, implicitly if not explicitly. They take a shared, if currently imperfect, vision and replace it with an authoritarian imposition of partisan assumptions. To which we rightly say, "Don't tread on me.

Who's this "we" saying "Don't tread on me"? An increasingly marginalized section of the citizenry in opposition to an ascendant "shared vision" that happens to include a real fondness for the "authoritarian imposition of partisan assumptions", that's who. That's the point. Your entire response here is nothing but a lot of rah rah "proposition nation" boilerplate, apparently typed out as an exercise in avoiding even your own observations:

People don't get that the Constitution frames a discussion in certain ways with certain inherent limitations and restrictions, and leaves off saying too much. Ditching it for perceived penumbras reshapes the nation towards a tyranny, and while it might be for some expressed good cause, will lead to more oppression and suffering by all.

Yeah, good thing that the people who "don't get" the Constitution and go larking after "perceived penumbras" are being held in check by the shared vision of "us", the real people that "the Constitution orients us towards". Being the real people that "the Constitution orients towards", there can surely be no "reshap[ing] the nation towards a tyranny!"

What a confused load of cant.; 6/22/15, 11:05 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: If the South woulda won, we woulda had it made
I'd probably run for President of the Southern States
The day Elvis passed away would be our national holiday
If the South woulda won, we woulda had it made

I'd make my Supreme Court down in Texas
And we wouldn't have no killers getting off free
If they were proven guilty, then they would swing quickly
Instead of writin' books and smilin' on TV

We'd all learn Cajan cookin' in Louisiana
And I'd put that capital back in Alabama
We'd put Florida on the right track, 'cause we'd take Miami back
And throw all them pushers in the slammer

Oh, if the south woulda won, we woulda had it made
I'd probably run for President of the Southern States
The day young Skynyrd died, we'd show our southern pride
If the south woulda won, we woulda had it made
"Play a little dixieland boys, ah yes"

I'd have all the whiskey made in Tennessee
And all the horses raised in those Kentucky hills
The national treasury would be in Tupelo, Mississippi
And I'd put Hank Williams picture on one hundred dollar bill

I'd have all the cars made in the Carolinas
And I'd ban all the ones made in China
I'd have every girl child sent to Georgia to learn to smile
And talk with that southern accent that drives men wild

I'd have all the fiddles made in Virginia
'Cause they sure can make 'em sound so fine
I'm going up on Wolverton Mountain and see ole Clifton Clowers
And have a sip of his good ole Arkansas wine

Hey, if the South woulda won we'd a had it made
I'd probably run for President of the Southern States
When Patsy Cline passed away, that would be our national holiday
If the South woulda won, we'd a had it made, olay he hee hee
I said if the South woulda won, we would a had it made

Might even be better off

Yep. It's all just as innocent as a Hank Williams Jr. song.; 6/22/15, 11:16 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Democrats should not have made the decision to use the current South Carolina flag. Right, "Rhythm and Balls"?

That is an opinion. Do you share it?

Duh. Obviously.

Neither should have Republicans. Who cares? Drop it. That's what it looks like is happening. A good thing.; 6/22/15, 11:23 PM
chickelit said...: The night they drove old Dixie down
And the bells were ringing
The night they drove old Dixie down
And the people were sneering
They went, 'Nah, nah, na, nah, na,'; 6/23/15, 12:01 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Lol! How did I know you'd be the only one to not only quote Joan Baez, but fit her into some silly response to that!?

Hank Williams' delusional lyrics are fun, but their nonsensical assumptions aren't worth taking seriously - and I'm sure he knows it. But he's not sneering at himself, is he?; 6/23/15, 12:03 AM
chickelit said...: Rhythm and Balls said...

I'll "condemn" what was wrong with the past (I've never refused to) if you'll condemn what's wrong with the present.

What wrong with the present is that we have a Lincoln Log Leader who believes "with malice towards some, and more charity for y'all."; 6/23/15, 12:08 AM
chickelit said...: Oh and "Lincoln" was a terrible movie. Worse that "MILK."; 6/23/15, 12:10 AM
chickelit said...: Daniel Day Lewis was the sole reason the movie carried that revisionist script.; 6/23/15, 12:13 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: What wrong with the present is that we have a Lincoln Log Leader who believes "with malice towards some, and more charity for y'all."

Are his eyes the scariest part of him for you to look at? Maybe just don't look at his eyes. Look at the ground or up at the sky, instead. Don't make eye contact with him and initiate an internal dialogue about chemistry or some other special interest.; 6/23/15, 12:13 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Oh and "Lincoln" was a terrible movie. Worse that "MILK."

Awwww. Well isn't your opinion special.

Guess what? So are 243,580 opinions.

Daniel Day Lewis was the sole reason the movie carried that revisionist script.

Don't you ever get bored of making assertions without evidence? It seems awfully boring. What the hell was "revisionist", (in the sense of false, anyway? All history has been revised at some point). And movies without any poetic license don't air in theaters, anyway. They have a name. We call them "documentaries".; 6/23/15, 12:17 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Lol. And Milk was an even more popular and critically acclaimed movie.

I'm getting the impression that the reason Chick doesn't explain his strange and unpopular opinions is because he thinks hating the subject matter is reason enough.; 6/23/15, 12:19 AM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Daniel Day Lewis was the sole reason the movie carried that revisionist script.

He was not the only good actor in that, as incredible as he was. It also had great cinematography. And despite your inability to explain what historical details were done wrong, the attention to historical detail on wardrobe, architecture/set design, lighting, etc., was enough to set a bar. They even restored Lincoln's original pocket watch to use its ticking as part of the background sound.

You'd think a guy who's into details would dig that.

I think modern "Republicans" hate Lincoln and what he stood for just that much. It really shows you how much the parties have changed.; 6/23/15, 12:23 AM
Todd Roberson said...: Mr. Balls reminds me of a guy we had at the office who had a propensity for talking himself out of deals. He made some good points with clients and had some insightful remarks but didn't know when to stop talking. We learned to take him along for the first few meetings then find something else for him to do before his need to win every little talking point became tiresome.

Maybe there's a similar approach that could be employed here? Maybe limiting his input to a set number of posts?; 6/23/15, 12:50 AM
Todd said...: Alex said...
Because Walker is the presumptive GOP nominee and he can't be trusted to be POTUS. He had a moral obligation to give a strong opinion on Friday and he didn't. He showed weak moral character and doesn't deserve the presidency.

6/22/15, 4:25 PM

Unlike our current President, I believe he understands that not everything should involve the President. He should not (nor should he be expected) to comment an every / any thing that happens in the country. It was / is a state issue and no business of the Feds or other states. How is that so hard for you to understand? Is it that you are unused to seeing restraint from a politician? Unused to seeing an opportunity NOT taken advantage of? I would personally be much happier if more politicians started to shut-up about things that are not relevant to them and their responsibilities. Most have a hard enough time managing the things they are tasked with doing.

P.S. I like icecream and am not a robot...; 6/23/15, 8:25 AM
virgil xenophon said...: Todd is on tgt here. Under the Constitution this flag "affair" is strictly a State matter alone, not that of a Federal Govt holding limited (according to the Constitution that is--silly me) enumerated powers. And the President is NOT El Cid. He is but a part of the joint output of all three branches of government and does not speak for it as the final authority. As JFK once jokingly said in a press conference about some matter or another: "Well, that's my view on the matter, but whether the government will feel that way is quite another. A Press Corps obviously more educated than that of today about how government worked roared..; 6/23/15, 9:01 AM
Known Unknown said...: Meanwhile, the South is more fully integrated than any other area of the country.

This is a big distinction that actually matters.

Is that why there were no riots in Charleston? Is that possibly why there was a wonderful outpouring of support across a bridge?

Racism in the South is more out-in-the-open, so you can recognize it and ignore it. But here in the North, it exists mostly in the shadows in very segregated societies. It manifests itself in subtle political ways and the marginalization of blacks under the auspices of "good intentions."; 6/23/15, 9:28 AM
Known Unknown said...: Sorry for the awkward grammar in the last sentence. God forbid Blogger provide an edit feature.; 6/23/15, 9:29 AM
Birkel said...: I see "Rhythm and Balls" still cannot bring himself to say, plainly, that Democrats are responsible for the South Carolina flag issue.

Why not, one wonders?; 6/23/15, 11:54 AM
traditionalguy said...: The South Carolina Dems that did the Dixiecrat move in 1948 to sink the Scots-Irish honest man Truman were lead by very proud a racist named Strom Thurmond. Strom also had black women in his bed in his youth while he was a Dixiecrat.

Strom rebranded himself a GOP Senator after Reagan's landslide and married a aide 40 years his junior. He was an old barnyard Rooster.

So WTF does the Brand Southern Democrat mean anymore anyway?; 6/23/15, 1:12 PM
ken in tx said...: I moved to the Greenville, SC area in 94. I did not see anything like what BP&j described there. I did see a Fuji plant, a Hitachi plant, and a Mita plant with Shinto shrine in front of it. But then I never hung out at the Diamond or Platinum Gentlemen's clubs--which were frequently shut down for drugs and prostitution. The kind of folks that go there I wouldn't vouch for.

I am not a ham sandwich.; 6/23/15, 1:37 PM
David said...: Unless Doris Kearns Goodwin and Stephen Spielberg were lying, Alexander Stephens was still pressing for slavery just months if not weeks before Appomattox. He wanted speedy readmission of the Conf. states precisely so that they could be given the opportunity to block ratification of the 13th amendment.

Mainly this reminds that the Confederate leadership was consistently delusional.; 6/23/15, 3:34 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Was Doris Kearns Goodwin lying? I don't know, but she's done it before. She's been caught plagiarizing and then lying about it afterwards. If you type "Doris Kearns Goodwin" into Yahoo search, the 3rd suggestion is "Doris Kearns Goodwin plagiarism". Follow any of the links there. Then find a more plausible authority for any statements you want to make about American history.; 6/23/15, 3:52 PM
JackOfClubs said...: Haley should have quoted Robert E. Lee: "Fold it up and put it away."; 6/23/15, 11:12 PM
Anonymous said...: There are conflicting attitudes concerning the "Confederate Battle Flag" and the way it has been used in S.C..
But let us look at the South Carlina Flag, a goodly portion of which is the "Gadsen Flag": named after that Flag developed for all 17 cruisers - the first Revolutionary War battleshilps to fight on our side..
You know the yellow field with the rattlesnake on it that has the words written above it "Don't Tread On Me".
As that has been coopeted by the "Tea Party" surely it too should be stricken from the public record in S.C.

History is. How people USE and ABUSE History to make "current" points is sometimes amusing, but mostly political in nature; ignores the very real sacrifices made by our very real ancestors - you remember THEM do you not? "The Declaration of Independence" the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. That nearly 750,000 of those ancestors died in the Civil War (at a time when slavery - however despicable we may NOW find it to be , was perfectly legal in the Civilized World then - and truth be told is still "legal" in parts of Africa and the Middle East today. That over 90% of those who fought for the Confederacy NEVER OWNED A SLAVE should be tossed on the assheap of history is, I suppose, fitting and clear when that side loses the fight over who controls - and has controlled that territory, those people; 6/24/15, 3:15 AM
Birkel said...: traditionalguy:
The man who put the flag up was not Strom Thurmond. Your historical ignorance does not make what you want to be so a fact.

The man who put the flag up was a Democrat his entire political career. That man was Ernest "Fritz" Hollins.

Would you like to try again?; 6/24/15, 9:06 AM
Meade said...: Hollings. With a "g".

Would you like to try again?; 6/24/15, 11:02 AM
Birkel said...: Pedantry never gets old, Meade.; 6/24/15, 2:10 PM
Birkel said...: Especially pedantry that was caused by autocorrect. Hollings was "corrected" to Collins and I typed over the 'c' with an 'h'.

You proud of that, Meade?; 6/24/15, 2:14 PM
Birkel said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/24/15, 2:14 PM
Unknown said...: What is the real reason for the removals of the confederate battle flag from the state grounds? I don't see why they can't just keep it there like they have been doing for the longest time!; 6/25/15, 12:22 AM