Jackson Jambalaya

1) It's probably a typo, but the first byline reads "Winona, Mass", the old abbreviation for Massachusetts. They do mention Jackson and Hinds County further down in the article.

2) 1937, you say? Germans condemning Mississippi's legal system as compared to Germany's "humane racial laws"? Was this while they were building the concentration camps and gas chambers, or were they in use already?

The guy is an idiot and an embarrassment, tru dat. But Mississippians are content with the status quo, and oblivious o the outside world.

He represents Carroll Co. He just ensured re-election.

Mr. Oliver is the Representative for District 46, which includes Carroll County. These statements are probably in line with what his constituents want out of their rep.

As an aside (for your own sanity, please stop here if you agree with Mr. Oliver's take on this issue)...

Last month I had to go to the Carroll County courthouse. I was surprised to see the actual Confederate battle flag (not just the Mississippi flag) flying at the very top of the flag pole at the courthouse. It was particularly jarring since I had just seen the "Emmett Till murder trial" historic marker at the Tallahatchie County courthouse earlier that day. I can't imagine what it would feel like to see that flag flying at the courthouse if I were a black man going to court facing criminal charges. It makes you realize that we really haven't come as far as we would like to think when it comes to civil rights and racism. But that probably makes me some sort of liberal snowflake or something.

Seriously, the Confederate monuments are a reminder of a shameful time in our history. I don't know how any Mississippian could read the first two paragraphs of "A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union" and still celebrate Confederate "heritage" and claim that the Civil War was about states' rights - or anything other than slavery. For your convenience:

"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin." http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~ras2777/amgov/secession.html#Mississippi

Said topical diversion....

We have Russian agents possibly influencing our president and we want to discuss a 160 year old war.....

Focus people

I'll take the opposite position and won't fall in line with Jambalaya's attempt to make this some sort of 'negro lynching' chatterbox thread. Nothing like getting liberals and others stirred up, which was the sole intent of Jambalaya's comments.

I agree that Louisiana's attempt to erase history should be stopped and condemned. I understand the legislature has either put a stop to the removal of statues or is on that path.

Attempting to erase or rewrite history is something not foreign to this land. It's been done before.

People all across the South with louder and more intelligent voices than Kingfish have voiced strong opposition to Landrieu's attempt to solidify his position among the minority electorate. Meanwhile, he has moved out of the house he occupied with his wife and is living with his black employee.

Stir it up, Kingfish. Things are going real slow with your Gold Coast posts and nobody seems to care much about the posts of your liberal correspondent over in Meridian.

And for the record, I don't know a soul who agrees with the notion of 'lynching' anybody of any color for any reason. That was a poor choice of words that should not overshadow the entire sentiment expressed by the gentleman from Carroll.

@12:07 a.m.; one thing you seem to miss entirely in your eloquence is this: There was a difference between secession and war. States, Mississippi among them, seceded for several reasons, the issue of slavery among them. However, going to war was not the result of secession, at least not on the part of The Confederacy. The Confederacy did not engage the north in battle over slavery. That engagement came because Lincoln invaded a Confederate State for purposes of restocking a union compound.

You really need to slow down with your bloviation and learn some history. I forgot to tell you that you could 'stop here' if you didn't want to know this.

I think it's stupid that they're tearing down those monuments and putting them in a museum, but I don't think the people who signed off on it should be lynched.

If you think what he said was in anyway smart or a good idea, just keep your mouth shut like he should have.

5:42 go to your safe space and cry about Hillary !
She was bought by the Saudi's

I doubt there would be an effort to tear down these symbols were it not for the obvious racism of this legislator and that of those threatening to lynch a Congressman for calling for Trump's impeachment.

It is these racist fools, many of whom show up here, who have desecrated the flag and dishonored those who fought for the Confederacy.

The irony is that the worst racists here and elsewhere were either carpetbaggers or later immigrants who were low down on the social totem pole . You might want to check out how many of Mississippi's plantations were actually taken over by Yankees but that some of you seem to think were " planters" that fought for the South. Among the few who did were those who didn't actually fight or who collaborated behind the scenes.

And, the other side needs to understand that few of those who did fight actually owned any slaves.

Racists and religious fanatics are a pimple on the ass of humanity.

Hopefully these confederate "monuments" can be removed as soon as possible and this sad chapter can be finally put behind all of us. They were never erected for any historical purpose, but rather to HONOR men who joined in a wicked cause (whether they knew it or not) and to show defiance to the government which we now support. I would feel no different if the Germans erected statues honoring Goering or Hess or Himler and tried to justify them in the face of their Jewish citizens by citing heritage and history. The story can be told in museums and history books without placing these icons in places of honor, as if their cause was right. In Germany they have holocaust museums and remembrances of the terror they inflicted not memorials to the "courageous" Nazi thugs. If history is the real purpose then take a page from Mr. Oliver's mindset and erect monuments depicting the many lynchings that have taken place in Mississippi. Honor them too!

He is a great example of this Mark Twain quote:

“It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt”

I'm tired of racism mess. For a State that is at the bottom of the poll whatever it is need to change it didn't work back then and sure is not working now. What happened back in the day was completely no regards to human life and it still exist today. The thing is how can you say you love GOD when you will go out your way to destroy one of his creatures which is humans. When I say destroy that can mean kill, lie on, give a bad hand just because of race or just plain old hate someone. When Jesus died on the cross he didn't just die for one race he died for us all. What purpose is a statue if it doesn't bring unity to all when this country suppose to be based on being United. Until we get this out of our minds we will forever be lost. Let's rewind this thing and let whites be black and blacks be white how would you feel. You all are quick to defend yourselves against your actions against the other race but you to smart to realize that if it wasn't for the blacks this country wouldn't be where it is today. You all was so busy trying to control the blacks that you forgot about the other race and now they are the ones running this so called United States (I don't see where it's united tell that to someone who is dumb. You all rather defend a statue which serve no purpose then defend your souls from the devil. You all are so petty. I will say to this divided country grow up and figure out what is important in life and instead worrying about what the other race is doing. Let us all humble ourselves and work together. Money, race or where you live makes you no different than anyone, we all have the same color blood and we all was created from the same dust and which we walk on.

8:44,

That term, "racist", was invented by a Russian-born, Jewish Communist in the late 1800s. Its purpose was to divide people in Western Civilization in hopes of bringing a collapse to said civilization.

*yawn*

- Everyday Folks

They will be coming for you Mr. Fish, you are a a snowflake to them now.

Will Feel and Tater make a statement, or are they too afraid to upset their base?

While we're at it, we need to get all the Lincoln monuments, statutes, and things named after him removed also. Have you people ever read all the mean things he said about "negroes?" Do it while we've still got crews on the clock, I say!

Shame to anyone who donated to him. Koch Industries and Empower I'm looking at you.

8:44 Hey Colonel Reb. If you go back through real history you'll find that most soldiers didn't really own any stake in the wars they fought. Most were just doing what they were told or forced to do. It was always the interest of a king, landlord, or master that was really at stake. Just because most confederate soldiers didn't own slaves doesn't mean their cause wasn't about the perpetuation of slavery. Who cares what the grunt in the field thinks he's fighting for. The political establishment that sent him to fight sets the agenda, not some soldier who hardly knows where he is. Like one Viet Nam Vet said "I ain't fightin' for no gooks, I'm fighin' for poon tang".

I don't know why anyone is surprised by a Mississippi politician making this type of statement. The State still observes Robert E Lee's birthday and our esteemed Governor declared a Confederate Heritage Month. This would be akin to Germany having Nazi Heritage month or celebrating Hitler's birthday.

I am so sick and tired of people screaming - "they are erasing history"

How the f*ck are they erasing what was done? If anything, a lot of you are ignoring sh*t that did happen and want to romanticize other parts of history.

For example black confederate soldiers - the legend the myth. Can you honestly say to yourself, that a person held in bondage would pick up arms to fight for his captors? Would you do it?

Then even if there were black confederate soldiers - look at how the south rewarded their so-called service. After the Great Compromise of 1877 - blacks no longer had the civil rights their white counterparts had, due to Jim Crow and Segregation laws.

That's why that black confederate soldier stuff is made up of myths and legends. H.K. Edgerton, Anthony Hervey, Arlene Barnum, and Andrew Duncomb are some people willing to ignore certain aspects of history for attention and paid appearances.

I am not saying Mississipi needs to change the names of streets, towns, or county's, but it is well overdue to redesign the state flag.

That confederate emblem on the state flag is a hate symbol that is only worn or endorsed by bigots and racists.

People will not see Mississippi in a positive light until we take a major step towards updating our brand and image.

8:59; Actually the statues were erected in remembrance of those who fought for a separate nation, The Confederate States of America...not in defiance of anybody, Union or otherwise.

Nobody gives a shit what you think about German history either. At a minimum, you should get your US history correct.

He should be arrested for inciting terrorism.

10:36 - Exactly! By the way, this isn't his first go 'round with a PR blunder. http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/politics/2016/03/18/lawmaker-constituent-could-care-less/81962014/

Don't drink and Facebook at the same time. It's dangerous to your political health.

The Mississippi Republican Party needs to seriously consider if this is what they want to be. This is no longer the party of Eisenhower or Reagan or any other leaders of the past.

The Party got to him, he apologized, Feel and Tater regrettably have stayed silent. That's real leadership.

It is not "erasing history" to decide that you no longer wish to celebrate treason against the U.S.A. with public monuments to the traitors. I am a citizen of the United States, and I'm glad my country defeated the rebellion against it.

Let the statues be placed in a museum to help educate people about the South's long history of racism and resistance to law.

It is a historical fact that more whites were lynched in America than blacks. Not defending anyong just stating a fact. Mob lynching type of justice was used against all Americans.

2:31

You need to study a little bit more on history and the structure of the United STATES.

A State attempting to secede from a union of States is not "treason", and there was no rebellion against the United States proper.

Landrieu plans to auction off the monuments to the highest bidder, individually or by lot, how ironic. They will also have to approve how you display them and New Orleans' roll in removing the monuments. Even the State of Louisiana has to submit a RFP. I am sure he doesn't have any qualms about shipping them out of state. If one is interested in protecting their heritage they should submit a proposal, otherwise I suspect someone might buy them and grind them up for stone.

For starters it isn't the state of Louisiana removing the memorials, polling would indicate that the majority of everybody outside of Orleans Parish is opposed to any sort of removal. The blame here lies squarely at the feet of Mitch Landrieu and the city of New Orleans.

Lets go back about a decade ago where Moonie-boy voted to approve the SCV plates for the state of Louisiana. New Orleans had a black mayor and these monuments were not a problem. What changed? What sort of "come to Jesus" did Mitch and the city have? This sort of thing wasn't even on the radar in 2014.

Mary Landrieu got beat, and hard, during the mid-terms in 2014 by a Republican for her senate seat. That means that the Landrieu name is all but done in Louisiana politics. Then in the Summer of 2015, the Charleston shooting allowed for nothing but grandstanding. Take a look at Mayor Landrieu's speech as Lee came down last week. He's clearly gaming for some higher office in the DNC.

So please, don't clump in the rest of the state with the safe-spacers in New Orleans. Crap like this would not fly in Lafayette, Alexandria or Monroe.

The statues being removed are about national media coverage for the de blasto of the south. Who goes to New Orleans and pays tribute to statues ? They go to see and enjoy a place like nowhere else. The welfare and harmony of the citizen's be damned... the mayor's aspirations are too important.

@9:35 - you know what I'm sick of?? I'm sick of people constantly putting Mississippi "at the bottom of the barrel" without any justification for doing so. in WHAT barrel do we reside at the bottom???? How is our economic position worse than say....New Jersey? Oh...they have a higher avg income? Really??? so WHAT? They ALSO have a much higher cost of living. Do you really think by grossing another $20 thousand or so you are going to make up for the difference in the cost of a house in ANY N/E or West Coast state compared to the cost of a much nicer, much bigger house (with a YARD) in Mississippi??? Puhleeze! Give me my 1850 sg ft, nice yard, granite countertops and ensuite bathroom for under $200,000 and let California keep its 1000 sg ft 1950's mid-century, 3 bd, one (tiny) bath and 100 sq ft back yard for $500,000 while oh-so-progressive New Yorkers live in their 750 sq ft high rise apts that cost upwards of $750,000. Yeah...we are really hurting here in Mississippi, aren't we????

Rep. Karl Oliver is a DUMBASS. Everyone that has an ounce of brain matter knows you don't call an African American the "N" word or say they should be lynched.

This dumbass put it in PRINT.

4:02 I have worked in Lafayette, Alex, and Monroe and I have never seen a Confederate Memorial.

@ May 22, 2017 at 2:57 PM

"A State attempting to secede from a union of States is not "treason", and there was no rebellion against the United States proper."

Nice try, that's an argument "confederate sympathizers" always try to sell to romanticize the actions of the slave owning and defending ancestors.

Albeit, there was never a clause in the constitution to where a state could legally secede from the union and the act not be considered treason. However, states only have the powers to set up internal laws to govern within this union. It does not have the individual power to secede it has to have permission from the rest of the states to do so.

At the rate Mississippi is going, I think we would have a good shot now. LOL!!!!

But Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama would simply annex the remaining portions. Tennessee would love to suck up Tunica, DeSoto, and Marshall. Louisiana would gladly take up Adams, Wilkinson, Warren, Hancock, Harrison, Pike, and Jackson. While Alabama would eat up Kemper, Lauderdale, and Lowndes.

Well, Mr. Oliver got us back in the national news again. In the words of Michael Corleone in "Godfather: Part 3":

"Everything I thought that I was out, they pull me back in".

5:o6; I can't say 'nice try' since it was a really piss poor try. If it was treason why was nobody every charged with, prosecuted for or convicted of treason. Even Lincoln's own cabinet members are on the record as having said each state had the right to leave the union just as they had the right to join it.

All you know is what you hear at Starbucks.

5:46 pm

You are a dullard.

The southern states were allowed great freedoms post war to the chagrin of Grant and many others.

Had the north killed all white slave owners and made adequate plans for the slaves we would be a stronger union.

Southerners were given a conciliation prize...an ego trip. You fought valiantly and it was romanticized.

Now we reap what was sewn. Divisive to this day and clouded by fools like you.

@5:04 this is 4:02 again.

There is a Confederate War Memorial at the Rapides Parish Courthouse in Alexandria, and a statue of Confederate General Alfred Mouton at the city hall in Lafayette.

It won't be long before the hipsters go after them, they've already started on Mouton.

@7:13 YEP your right I baited you into pointing them out. Look for the go fund me campaign to get them removed too.

@9:16. Well good luck with that, it isn't like GoFundMe has ever accomplished anything major. I have my doubts, because it isn't a godless shithole like New Orleans.

You see, people like you are the problem. You think by cheap branding of "social justice" you are righting some perceived wrong that you or I were never a part of. Sorry kid, but by keeping Mississippi's flag, a CBF, or a statue intact I'm going to act in opposition to these moves to make your self esteem pique for a second before you find something else to complain about. Banter about under your faux-enlightened views of "tolerance".

This isn't South Carolina either, where a shameless panderer of a Governor can use a flag as the boogieman that made a church murderer do what he did, mere days after she was defending the thing. And now we can't even watch the Dukes of Hazzard these days because of it. Alabama just may put the flags back up on it's statehouse if this Monuments Bill they have gets signed. The GOP establishment may pander to fools like you pre-2016, but their days are numbered. As is your precious DNC. As is your BLM too. Mississippi's flags are staying, but your actions and fools like you that populate places like Ole Miss are the direct reason why Trump is now our president, and if you keep it up, you've just guaranteed him another term.

6:28 calls someone a dullard for pointing out that states had the same right to leave the union as they did to join the union. Perhaps while name calling, 6:28 can cite a constitutional prohibition of leaving the union. And what sort of dullard suggests that since the Constitution doesn't mention leaving the union, then it must follow that states must remain in the union? What kind of F.U. logic is that?

I guess I'm a dullard too...for pointing out for the fiftieth time that Lincoln freed zero slaves and started this war of opportunity.

I knew I could make the racists come out, we are already working on getting Mouton erased.

1:24 am

Yes you too are a dullard.

Lincoln did issue the Emancipation Proclamation at the beginning of 1863, which on paper freed slaves in the states of the Confederacy that had seceded from the United States.

Your pedantic swipes at "right to leave" v "power to leave" the union is inane. Why did the South secede at all? Why fight?

The South fought to leave the Union and to save money, slaves. You see slaves were gold. If slavery became illegal then the Souths "bitcoin" became worthless....worse.....a liability.

Go major in history for 4-5 years and then come back.

7:12

I am confused as to what it is you are trying to say. You state "pedantic swipes" and end your comment with telling someone to "go major in history for 4-5 years..."

I am confused as to how you can complain that the Constitution is pedantic.

The South seceded, specifically, for one reason and one reason alone. The entire economy of Southern States was based on the plantation model, which included slavery, though only about 20% of the whites in the south owned plantations. Slaves were not just of African origin and slave owners were not just white and slaves were not just in the South. Also, there were a minimum of 4,000 plantation owners or farmers in the South who were black AND had slaves.

Your history teaches in only black and white. That only black people were ever enslaved and that the U.S.A. was responsible. Yet during the time African slaves were sold to the Americas, only approximately 5% were sold to the Americas. The vast majority of the African slave trade was elsewhere with Africans themselves enslaving and selling.

On a side note, the word "slave" is derived from the time when African Muslims enslaved white Europeans, Slavic people.

So, slavery has been around since man was man.

Why does the South secede and why are the majority of southern slaves of African descent? Black slaves were more productive in the southern climate because they were acclimated to it. If you are a plantation owner and are paying for your labor, you choose to get the most for your money.

So, your taught history has it that the Civil War was based on a race issue, but it was actually an economic one. The vast majority of the economy of the South was being immediately wiped away with the pen and back then, States were more independent of each other and there was not this misrepresented notion of nationalism that's present today.


Your misrepresentation that "slaves" were gold and abolishing slavery would mean losing that "gold" is factually incorrect and without logic. The fact is that the southern economy had it's foundation in the plantation/farm model which relied on the labor of black slaves who were better at performing the necessary work in this climate.

It would be no different (with some major exceptions) than, say in 100 years, that robots were used to farm the south and farming was the foundation of the economy. Banning robots would not cause harm to farm owners because of the money spent on the robots, it would cause harm because it would disrupt the economy. Sadly, slavery utilized humans and not robots, but the reason for secession is still represented the same.

9:35 AM

You must be delirious.

I'm not going to argue with a guy who says blacks were better at "performing the necessary work in this climate." Such a statement is without factual support in any scientific record. They were good at it...or they would be killed.

(Religion was also a huge factor as white felt that God willed blacks to slavery...which is also crazy)

Let's just postulate for a minute that everyone agreed that anything "memorializing" the confederacy needed to go in the southern United States. Do y'all of the "social justice" persuasion realize how much stuff would have to be knocked down and renamed all across the
region?
Assuming that people were for this, are you social justice people willing to pay for it? I'm sure as hell not. We've got roads to pave,etc.

That's one hell of an undertaking that would take at least 50 years to complete; probably longer. Your "efforts" would be better spent on policy to truly improve the south instead of obliterating everything that notifies anyone that they are in the south. In other words, get real.

10:05

There is no argument. It is widely held and understood that African slaves were sought after for work in the heat and humid evirons.

Religion had nothing to do with slavery, in any sense that you purport.

Caribbean areas were the first to start replacing white slaves (mostly Irish) with Africans and it became understood that the African slave could better withstand the heat and humidity.

@ 9:35am

You are one walking contradiction.

First, you said

1. "So, your (sic) taught history has it that the Civil War was based on a race issue, but it was actually an economic one."

But yet, you want people to believe that slavery wasn't a racial issue???

Whether it was started in Timbuktu, with the Dutch, English or Portuguese - it ended here in America and therefore you have a moral responsibility to call out the wrongs of slavery.

The ends do not justify the means.

How ould you feel if you were forced to work for free and somebody tried to justify by simply saying, well others did it too?

2. "black slaves who were better at performing the necessary work in this climate."

You said that EXACTLY and then you go on to say,

No need to attempt to reason with 10:05. He left the conversation as soon as he opined that black folks were not more acclimated to the southern climate than others. Racial animus aside, it's a fact that cannot be denied. And nobody has ever attempted to deny it until this imbecile shows up.

1:40

I don't think you understand the use of [sic]. "your" was spelled and used correctly in the instance where you attempted it's use.

But, grammatical arguments aside, the Civil War WAS NOT a race issue. It was unarguably an economic one. You, and many others, attempt to rewrite history through your own eyes and turn it into a race issue.

Speaking of walking contradiction, you want it so bad to be a racial issue but only because blacks were the ones that were slaves. Slavery is/was wrong no matter what color the person. I believe that every person has the God-given rights as others and freedom is one of those.

Now, how you construe that my stating the Civil War was not a racial issue and also state that Blacks were chosen due to their acclimation, contradict each other is laughable. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

Also, follow some logic. The Emancipation Proclamation only listed secession states as areas where slaves were "free." That left over 1 million other slaves, still in slavery. If the Civil War was not about economics (and the associated governance) and was about slavery and/or black people, why would such a proclamation not be so bold as to include every slave, regardless of location?

One can easily be abhorred by the idea of slavery but still exact the truth from history.... unless one is trying to gain something from a different history.

@ May 23, 2017 at 5:22 PM

Are YOU sure it is "YOUR taught history" and not "YOU'RE taught history"

Yes, I'm sure it's "YOUR taught history" and not "YOU ARE taught history" in the context of how I structure the sentence.

The sentence in entirety is, "So, your taught history has it that the Civil War was based on a race issue, but it was actually an economic one."

...in that sentence, "your" is an adverb helping the adjective "taught" which is helping the subject "history"

I certainly can't claim any expertmanship to this whole grammar thing and feel certain I make grammatical mistakes quite often, but I just found the possible passive aggressive nature of trying to use "[sic]" in that instance interesting.

There's a 120 foot high cross at a catfish restarant on Hwy 49 south. In no time this will be removed because a minority of atheist feel sick or offended when they drive by it.
Your freedom of speech & expression is being crushed by the ACLU, SPLC, & bigoted lawyers.

@ May 23, 2017 at 9:36 PM

Hey, genius!

"your"
yôr,yo͝or/Submit

determiner

1. belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing.

"what is your name?"

2. belonging to or associated with any person in general.

"the sight is enough to break your heart"

In other words - you ARE supposed to use the word "your" when someone has possession of an item or title? Your car, your house, your name, your occupation, your wife, your mother, your father, your brother, your sister, your dog, your keys, your books, your neighborhood - hell how about in ebonics - yo' momma, yo' broad, yo' hooptie - see where this is going?

An individual does not freakin' possess the gotdamn word "taught"

Taught is an adverb - it's not a possessive noun!

Just going to redefine the Queens English, typical backwoods Mississippi logic!