Home / Robert Farley / Oh, HELLS No!

Oh, HELLS No!

Comments
/
/
/
485 Views

This is unacceptable:

Specialty license plates can be seen all over Kentucky, from Nature’s Finest, to the Masonic Order, to Transylvania University. Many want to show their support for things they care about and the non-profit organization, Sons of Confederate Veterans, is no different. The group want this so-called “rebel plate” featuring the Confederate flag, as well as Confederate president and Kentucky native Jefferson Davis, to be the next offered to drivers in the state.

“This is a message about American soldiers. These are Confederate veterans and we’re their descendants. They’re our family and we’re going to honor them,” says Don Shelton, Spokesperson for the Kentucky division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Kentucky offers dozens of specialty license plate including this breast cancer awareness one but the proposed sons of confederate plate has some people up in arms.

“Because of the history of what that stands for and what that means, and with the people in this country that would be offended by that, I think it’s very offensive. I don’t think it should be allowed,” says Bretta Hulcha.

“I wouldn’t put it on mine,” comments Aaron Means.

The Kentucky Transportation cabinet says any non-profit, like the SCV, can apply for a state-issued plate, all it has to do is pay $22,500 dollars, get 900 prepaid orders and get approval for the design. The SCV says it’s not trying to create controversy.

I appreciate that Kentucky joined the Confederacy in 1866, but in the actual war Kentucky remained part of the Union and sent more soldiers to fight for the North than for the South. Dead enders notwithstanding, 2011 isn’t exactly the time to make it more convenient for local idiots to commemorate Treason in Defense of Slavery. As has been noted in other places, Kentucky’s Confederate contingent doesn’t even have the “I fought for my state” excuse. Believing that the right of white people to own black people is worth killing for is not the kind of value that should be commemorated.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • I didn’t think KY ever left the Union. Oh, wait, is that the current idea? What would that mean for your job (and the gold in Ft. Know)? Do the organizations who propose the plates REALLY get to design them? That opens up a lot of interesting thoughts. And if not, why not allow the plate, put just put Cassius Clay (the greatest Kentuckian in my memory) on it?

  • In the face of such overwhelming stupidity, what can a sane person do?

    On the other hand, at least the NeoConfederates will make themselves easier to ID while behind the wheel. That may wind up being of service to humanity at large before all is said and done.

  • Norman Thomas

    So what? Big deal.

    Don’t like the plates, then don’t pay extra to get ’em. And while you’re at it, let people express those unpopular positions whatever you think they may be. And please don’t make the lane argument that this is somehow government promotion, ‘cuz it ain’t. These people pay extra.

    When the student wanted to burn the flag on campus recently, you were all about his rights.

    Democracy is easy when you agree with others. It’s when you don’t that’s the acid test.

    So, lighten up, Bob, and afford these people their right of expression, even if you don’t like it.

    • DA

      But it is enlistment of government resources, even if they pay extra and even if you find the idea “lane”. I wouldn’t be happy if my state was selling swastika or Klan or Confederacy license plates, even if the people buying them had to pay more.

    • Boudleaux

      I would like grade school logic for 500, Alex.

      “Paying extra” hardly can be held to negate any government action. They would have to “get approval for the design.” Really? So, should a design that celebrates treason and is based on a wholesale misrepresentation of the state’s history get approval? I don’t know — I guess we’ll have to leave it up to “government promotion.” I will be anxiously awaiting the verdict — my group of “Kentucky World War II Gestapo Veterans” also would like a seat at this table. I suppose the only problem you would see with that is that it is “unpopular?”

      Thes clowns are free to put a bumper sticker on their cars, pretending, laughably enough, that Jefferson Davis has anything to do with “Confederate Veterans.” Nobody argues with that.

      • Curse you for making me even seem to defend anything to do with this: “Design approval” almost certainly refers to the form, not the content. That is, you have to make sure that the number is a certain size/shape/color/contrast with the background. There may be some standard content restrictions (e.g., nudity), but I expect they are minimal and in accordance with advertizing restrictions.

    • DrDick

      Really? How about tags celebrating homosexuality or saying that Republicans are all going to hell? Do you support the state issuing such plates and do you really think they would?

      • mark f

        I’m sure he’s already ordered his “Free Mumia” plate.

        • Norman Thomas

          This group didn’t just walk in an order these. They had to make their case to their legislators and get bills passed and signe by their elected officials.

          Now when the commies and the “Free Mumia” are free to try to muster up the same enthusiam and bear the same time and expense and efford…..then you might…MIGHT have something worth discussing.

          • Brad P.

            This group didn’t just walk in an order these. They had to make their case to their legislators and get bills passed and signe by their elected officials.

            That sounds like a substantial government investment. It almost sounds like a government endorsement.

      • Bill Murray

        I think a plate that shows a slave breakinng their chains saying FU SCV would make a great plate.

        • rm

          A Union soldier trampling a confederate battle flag in the mud at Fort Donelson.

    • Brad P.

      And please don’t make the lane argument that this is somehow government promotion, ‘cuz it ain’t. These people pay extra.

      You are aware that these have to be manufactured, and that the government has to dump a good deal of cost into the manufacturer of these plates before a single one is even requested?

      You are also aware that license plates are properly considered government property?

      • Furious Jorge

        I’m certain he is not.

  • efgoldman

    Is this like a rolling blackout of common sense, or something?
    Didn’t we just go through this in Mississippi during the winter?
    At least MS was part of the treason states from the beginning…

    And no, Norman, this isn’t “private” activity, you dip. The plates are issued, recorded, and administered by a state agency. You pay extra, as every state charges extra for specialty or vanity plates. The DMV is still a state agency, even in KY.

    • Anderson

      Hey, down here in Mississippi, I’m *happy* that Kentucky wants to claim Jeff Davis.

      Y’all come fix up Beauvoir on your own dime, while you’re at it.

    • It would be one thing if the extra charge covered the actual cost of manufacturing and distributing the plates, but I doubt that it does. Since it probably doesn’t this is state supported speech, but I’m not so sure that makes a difference. Has anyone litigated the “Choose Life” plates that some states issue?

      Not everything is a constitutional issue– some things are just bad taste.

  • Joe
    • Hogan

      During this occupation, General Braxton Bragg attempted to install the provisional government as the permanent authority in the Commonwealth. However, Union General Don Carlos Buell ambushed the inauguration ceremony and drove the provisional government from the state for the final time.

      Best day’s work Buell ever did.

      • John F

        indeed

  • ploeg

    I’m actually fine with the idea. Provided, of course, that the plates do not feature the Confederate battle flag or any other symbol of insurrection against the government of the United States of America. You’re welcome to slap such symbols elsewhere on your bumper, but license plates are official state documents (of a sort). And no, you don’t get to slap your own sticker on the plate either.

    • DA

      Of course they have the Confederate battle flag.

      • ploeg

        I think we have a pretty good idea of what they want, but it’s not necessarily what they’re going to get. You can honor your ancestors perfectly well without using the symbols of treason.

        • Hogan

          But what if you want to honor them for their treason?

  • jon

    What a great idea. In fact, since I live in one of the original Colonies, I think we ought to have a license plate that features the British Union Jack. Tradition!

    • rea

      See the state flag of Hawaii

  • rea

    Lincoln had rather more ties to Kentucky than Jefferson Davis. Where’s the patriot version of this plate?

  • Warren Terra

    There’s always the slight redeeming feature that the assholes are paying a small fee to proudly display the state certification of their asshole status, helpfully labeling them for all to know and recognize.

    Still, since the though of the state valorizing and commemorating a symbol of racism, slavery, treason, and butchery is repugnant, not to mention offensive and even threatening to those descended from victims of the traitors and to those who simply possess some sense, can we compromise and just literally label the plates with the word “Asshole” in big letters, instead of the Confederate battle flag?

  • Law Prof

    “This is a message about honoring the organization that killed American soldiers.”
    Fixed.

  • chris

    I have to reluctantly agree with Norman here: the government isn’t endorsing everything it doesn’t ban. This is ultimately no different than the infamous ACLU/neo-Nazi case. Jerks they may be, but they’re jerks with rights.

    And if the government allowed most non-profit groups to design vanity plates, but banned neo-Confederates *because of their viewpoints*… as much as I disagree with those particular viewpoints, that is a road I really don’t want to start down.

    • Warren Terra

      Chris, “not banning” is permitting the use of bumper stickers next to the plate. “endorsing” is having the state manufacture an official object for public display featuring the logo in question. The state is saying this symbol is one it doesn’t mind advertising on its official documents. And the Confederacy is not worthy of celebration or even acquiescence; it’s not in any case part of Kentucky’s history; and for at least fifty years the Confederate battle flag has meant, in addition to its history in the civil war, opposition to civil rights and to integration. Without going Godwin, I honestly don’t know what other symbols are widely known, relevant to Americans, and equally vicious in their meaning to which I could compare it.

      • Especially since the notion that the state would literally accept any and all plate designs without any subjective judgments on content/message is pretty absurd.

        • DrDick

          Somehow I do not see the state endorsing plates celebrating nudism or homosexuality anytime soon.

          • Joe

            Looking at the website, the only arguably ideological plate in the specialty section is a “Choose Life” plate. The Supreme Court allows the state to favor “life” (Hyde Amendment) in the way such plates seem to suggest.

            [I guess some of the others can be deemed “ideological” in some sense, but it seems a stretch. None are in any way controversial.]

            KY claims here that it is open to all comers. I don’t know what their limits are. But, if they selectively allow certain messages, at some point they can get in trouble. As to homosexuality, if they single them out, that would be a problem. The state supreme court actually protected homosexual conduct before some others.

            • Norman Thomas

              The state supreme court actually protected homosexual conduct before some others.

              Just so you know, I would protect YOUR homosexual conduct.

              • Furious Jorge

                Aaaaand here we go.

          • chris

            …and I would be in favor of the ACLU’s (hypothetical, AFAIK) suit on behalf of those groups, too. With fewer second thoughts, even.

            (Well, except for the “endorsing” part, which I’ve already explained is misleading. Creating a forum for public expression by members of the public does not amount to endorsing every viewpoint that is expressed in that forum.)

            • DrDick

              That is true only if the state truly opens the forum to all comers, for which there is not supporting evidence (on the contrary, they seem to selectively privilege conservative speech).

      • chris

        The state is saying this symbol is one it doesn’t mind advertising on its official documents.

        Describing the official state design as an “official document” is a bit of a stretch, but not totally unreasonable, but describing a vanity plate as an official document?

        The rest of your post seems to amount to “I support the right of everyone to express their opinion, except for opinions I REALLY disagree with. They should STFU.” That’s not a position I can agree with, or want the government to ever take.

        Custom license plates are a kind of speech forum, albeit a limited one, and there are IMO strong reasons to oppose viewpoint-based discrimination (which is clearly what this would be). The state should be limited to enforcing reasonable content-neutral restrictions on the design (like making sure you can still read the number).

        • DA

          Whatever, if you don’t like “official document” call it an “official material”. It’s a form of notification from the state indicating that your vehicle is officially registered.

          Your argument is seriously that if the state doesn’t support your opinion by customizing the artwork on its official materials according to your specifications, then your freedom of expression is being violated. This is just transparently silly.

          • chris

            If it does so for some viewpoints and not others, then it is engaging in viewpoint-based discrimination.

            Neo-Confederacy isn’t *my* opinion; far from it. But, like Patrick Henry, I can recognize the value of freedom of expression even when it is used to express things I find repugnant. I’m honestly a bit shocked to be so much in the minority on this thread. Whatever happened to liberal principles?

  • dave

    I’m fine with this as soon as Kentucky begins offering pro-Osama Bin Laden plates.

    • Uncle Kvetch

      Can I order one that says “GOD HATES REPUBLICANS”?

      • X

        Well, pay $22,000, get 900 pre-orders and find out.

  • Would Kentucky allow the Revolutionary Communist Party to design a plate with a burning American flag? No? Then the state is actually endorsing treason in defense of slavery by authorizing these plates.

    • Lurker

      What is especially hilarious is that here, the State of Kentucky would be promoting treason against itself. From a “states’ rights” perspective, it is understandable that a state government might consider the confederate government a part of its lineage, effectively endorsing treason against the Union. That might be their right as sovereigns.

      However, Kentucky state government was on the Union side. For the State of Kentucky, the Kentucky confederates were traitors. In effect, the losers of the intra-state civil war are now requesting that the winning govenrment endorses their position that is essentially hostile towards the existence of that government.

      It is about the same as asking queen Elisabeth to endorse Cromwell.

      • ajay

        Her Majesty’s Ship Cromwell.

        • Hogan

          Oliver or Thomas?

          • Stag Party Palin

            Well, it’s a destroyer, so should be Oliver. That’s an interesting group of ships, the “Cr” class. A long as we’re honoring people, how about Thomas Crapper, inventor of the ballcock?

            HMS Crapper. ‘struth!

          • ajay

            Oliver or Thomas?

            I suspect this was left tactfully unclear.

            There was also a USS Cromwell, but that definitely wasn’t named after either, but after Captain John P. “Take her down!” Cromwell, USN.

        • rea

          During the Dreadnought race leading up to WWI, Churchill tried to name a new battleship after Cromwell and got slapped down by the King for his pains.

        • Holden Pattern

          In the Royal Navy’s defense, Cromwell did kill a lot of Irish. So maybe that’s what they’re thinking of.

    • chris

      Would Kentucky allow the Revolutionary Communist Party to design a plate with a burning American flag? No? Then the state is already violating the First Amendment.

      FTFY. The injustice would not be in allowing the Confederates to have their design, but in *not* allowing the Communists to do likewise. That’s free speech 101.

      • chris

        …and since I didn’t make it explicit: “the state is already violating the First Amendment” is not a good reason to violate it some more.

      • Norman Thomas

        I disagree.

        There are certain groups that truly don’t have rights and those are ememies of the state. And before you fly off the handle and say these old farts that buy these plates are enemies of the state, think of Taliban or Hezbellah.

        No one would think twice about nor affording the Taliban some lame sense of equal treatment because they are understood to be enemies.

        And since our economic system was designed as a capitalist one, activist communists are also enemies of the state.

        They do not have the same rights as other groups. Sorry, Charlie.

        • Scott Lemieux

          Yes, one certainly cannot say that Confederates were enemies of the United States government.

          • Norman Thomas

            Are you saying that people buying these plate are enemies?

            Is that what you’re saying?

            • Scott Lemieux

              Are you saying that anyone buying a license plate with a hammer and sickle would be an enemy? Is that what you’re saying?

              • Norman Thomas

                No, I stated that activist communists were enemies of the state. Please read more carefully.

                However, Scott, I would be fine with a hammer and sickle on YOUR car.

                Knock yourself out

              • Malaclypse

                No, I stated that activist communists were enemies of the state. Please read more carefully.

                So we can only commemorate lazy treasonous confederates. Got it.

              • Furious Jorge

                That Norman seems unable to recognize the glaring inconsistency in his own argument makes me doubt his sincerity.

        • firefall

          Indeed, and the Confederacy was an enemy of the US state (and the state of Kentucky). So, glad to see you supporting the rejection of the Treason in Defence of Slavery plates.

          • Norman Thomas

            The Colonies were enemies of the Crown.

            Look, this has degenerated into the usual “We defend communism” argument out of the left.

            Heard this already. Save it.

            • Malaclypse

              The Colonies were enemies of the Crown.

              It would, therefore, be understandable for the British government not to issue George Washington commemorative license plates.

              • Norman Thomas

                It would, therefore, be understandable for the British government not to issue George Washington commemorative license plates.

                No one’s asking the federal government to issue anything.

              • Malaclypse

                No one’s asking the federal government to issue anything.

                Okay, fixing my comment to account for your exercise of trivia: It would, therefore, be understandable for the British English government not to issue George Washington commemorative license plates.

        • Malaclypse

          ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty Norman Thomas said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

        • DrDick

          So a group which has actually committed treason against the US may be commemorated (the Confederacy), while those which have not done so (the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or Communists) may not? The non sequitur here should rightfully make your head explode, except that we already know it is completely empty.

        • ajay

          And since our economic system was designed as a capitalist one, activist communists are also enemies of the state.

          You’re going to need to point to some sort of evidence for that, Norm, old sprout. IANAA, but I don’t think the Constitution says anything at all on the subject. The closest it gets is explicitly giving the state the right to seize private property as long as it compensates the owner.

          (Fifth Amendment: nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.)

          • DrDick

            Pretty much it. There is no official US economic system, but then you would not expect Normy to know that any more than he knows anything else, other than what the voices in his head tell him.

          • A couple things:
            1. Isn’t there an inherent contradiction between “capitalist” and “our economic system was designed”?
            2. Read Novak, Salus Populi. The corporate revolution in American law was relatively late in the 19th century, and not part of the revolutionary era.

        • chris

          No one would think twice about nor affording the Taliban some lame sense of equal treatment because they are understood to be enemies.

          Wrong. Even the Taliban has the right to talk. It’s the other things they do *besides* talk that they should be locked up for.

          • gmack

            Chris,

            If you or anyone else on this thread would like to purchase a Confederate flag/hammer and sickle/swastika/Go Taliban!/Osama bin Laden Rocks!/Kill whitey!/Britain sux! bumper sticker and affix it on your car, please do so. The question is whether the state should be putting such logos on its official materials. If it refuses to do so, it does not abridge anyone’s freedom of expression.

            • DrDick

              This.

            • chris

              So the state should only put logos of *approved* ideological groups on its license plates?

              You really don’t have a problem with this? What kind of Bizarro World have I walked into today?

              Abolishing the program entirely would be fine — indeed, possibly the best outcome. But giving the state’s imprimatur to only the groups the state decides are nice and well-behaved does not sit well with me, no matter how harmless the stated criteria seem.

              There’s apparently already an anti-abortion group approved — what do you think are the odds of approving an abortion-rights counterpart? The only way to stop the state from manipulating its content standards to meddle in ideological debates is to forbid it from *having* a content standard.

              • Malaclypse

                So the state should only put logos of *approved* ideological groups on its license plates?

                Personally, I’m all for not having any special-interest license plates, just because I don’t like the state having a veto on stuff. But if the state is going to have a veto, any veto, then vetoing a plate that honors people who committed treason because they wanted to own slaves is a damn fine place to use that veto.

              • DrDick

                Abolishing the program entirely would be fine — indeed, possibly the best outcome.

                I think that is the position that most of us here are advocating.

              • chris

                Personally, I’m all for not having any special-interest license plates, just because I don’t like the state having a veto on stuff.

                Well, yeah, that’s pretty much what I’ve been saying all along.

                But if the state is going to have a veto, any veto, then vetoing a plate that honors people who committed treason because they wanted to own slaves is a damn fine place to use that veto.

                I actually disagree with that; I think it would be better to make a decision not to exercise the veto *at all*, because then you produce a result equivalent to not having it. And if you’re not using it at all, then not using it in any particular case can’t be interpreted to mean anything.

                The only way to win is not to play.

            • chris

              The question is whether the state should be putting such logos on its official materials.

              No, it isn’t: the state has already decided in favor of doing so. The question is whether, having made that decision, the state is obligated to apply it equally to any such group, or whether it can pick and choose which ideologies the state likes and treat people with favored ideologies better than people with disfavored ideologies.

              It doesn’t matter if it’s Confederates or Communists or people who think aliens landed at Roswell; the question is whether the state should be in the business of deciding between approved ideas and disapproved ideas, or not.

              • DrDick

                Given, however, that this access is NOT (and will not be) equally granted to all parties, then the program should be abolished.

  • I think one of these plates would be a perfect complement for my “Treason In Defense Of Slavery” license plate frame.

  • I’d be fine with this if we could also mandate that Georgia license plates feature William Tecumseh Sherman.

    • Norman Thomas

      Here’s the FUN part.

      Your being “fine with it” is not required.

      Unless you live in that state, you have little standing.

      • This is such an intellectually dishonest argument. States try to do things all the time that get overturned by the federal government.

        • Norman Thomas

          Well, this ain’t one of ’em (doofus).

      • L2P

        Ah, standing: the last refuge of the racist and sexist douchebag. If you don’t have any real defense to the argument, just say they don’t have the right to even MAKE the argument. Treasured by Alito and Scalia for nearly a decade.

        Well played, Norman. Well played.

        • Norman Thomas

          Standing is a requirement in most legal proceedings and the reason it is required is to keep nosy busy-bodies from interfering when they don’t have a dog in the fight.

          It’s called “Freedom is the default”.

          • L2P

            “Standing” is the artificial and generally unnecessary means used by courts to avoid correcting obvious injustices. Your “not having a dog in the fight” is another person’s “vital interest at stake.”

            Potato, potahto. Douchebag, though, sounds the same to everybody – and people that talk about “standing” are racist and sexist douchebags.

            Again, well played, sir. Well played.

          • jackd

            Standing is a requirement in most legal proceedings and has nothing to do with blog posts and comments.

            You’re welcome, “Norman”.

  • Halloween Jack

    I’m sure that there are yahoos here in Illinois that would like a Confederate flag plate so that they could have the Stars and Bars right next to “Land of Lincoln.” Not sure what our African-American Secretary of State would have to say about that, though… no, wait, I am pretty sure.

  • Nathan Williams

    Why are vanity plates a good idea, again? Bumper stickers exist. I’m not particularly libertarian, but I don’t see why the state should be getting involved here at all. (And if I get up on the wrong side of the bed, I’d probably agree that even non-specialty vanity plates of the “GR8MOM” variety are a bad idea, since it gets the state into having to judge whether things like “3MTA3” are acceptable)).

    • BigHank53

      I saw one a couple weeks ago that read “JD&COKE”. Have fun blowing into that breathalyzer, you moron.

  • Norman Thomas

    Why are vanity plates a good idea, again? Bumper stickers exist. I’m not particularly libertarian, but I don’t see why the state should be getting involved here at all.

    The state gets to collect additional revenue. It’s as simple as that.

  • Robert Farley

    Norman,

    You have successfully annoyed me. Bye.

    • Uncle Kvetch

      Sweet relief.

    • DrDick

      Thank you from the sane universe.

    • Brad P.

      Ol’ Iron Fist Farley is working on a reputation.

    • Weird. I liked having Norman (Big Gay Al and other sundry identities) around ’cause he made the exact same weasely, thought-free, mendacious dumbass arguments my lunkhead libertarian co-worker made on the various political topics of the day. Like they got the same email from the right-wing wannabe gadfly list or something. So, whatever dumbass comment my co-worker made would be pre-refuted by the good people of the LGF commentariat in such a manner that was not only elucidory and concise, but also witty and clever.

      Night before last, my co-worker quit and now Norman’s banned. Synchronicity, man. The only difference is my erstwhile fellow employee was a handy cat to have in the kitchen and we worked well together.

    • asdfsdf

      You know, I’m willing to say that he didn’t really deserve it. He hasn’t yet sunk to the levels of the other people you’ve banned, and annoyance shouldn’t really be all that it takes, imo.

  • jmack

    And there was much rejoicing. (yaaaayyy)

    • jmack

      That was supposed to be directed at Rob banning Norman.

  • I have a feeling the state of Kentucky would have a fit and refuse to have plates signifying NAMBLA or the KKK. I mean, it’s freedom of speech and I’m sure there are enough perverts and racists and skinheads in Kentucky to get those plates approved.

    • Can we start a campaign in Kentucky to commission Billy Gillispie license plates?

  • JTapp

    Where did you get the idea that Kentucky was a “Union state”? Kentucky was officially neutral, which both sides recognized. But when the elected government were mostly Union sympathizers, 68 counties seceded and were accepted into the Confederacy. Kentucky represents the middle star on the Confederate battle flag.

    • Um, no. Kentucky may have issued a neutrality declaration, but Lincoln was never like, “oh, we’d better just let Kentucky alone to do whatever it wants!” I can issue a neutrality declaration of my own on a given war, but that doesn’t mean the U.S. government is going to allow me to ignore the draft.

      I think the core definition of a Union state is that it remained in the Union. Like, say, Kentucky.

      • DrDick

        I can issue a neutrality declaration of my own on a given war, but that doesn’t mean the U.S. government is going to allow me to ignore the draft.

        Certainly did not work for me.

  • efgoldman

    I guess old Norman is gone now. not a bad thing.

    The real Norman Thomas isn’t much remembered in our history now, but he was in fact a very principled socialist who ran for president a number of times, getting about as many votes as Harold Stassen did.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Thomas

    • asdfsdf

      What is with these people and choosing the names of dead people whose positions they are arguing against? John Casper, a Klansman, calling SEK a white supremacist, and Norman Thomas, our resident rightwinger, taking the name of a socialist. I don’t get it.

      Maybe I should change my name to hitler just to fit in.

  • Norman Thomas

    You have successfully annoyed me. Bye.

    Well, *that’s* hardly cricket.

    If I have said something to offend you, then have the courtesy of saying so and giving me a chance.

    Actually, I thought I did a pretty good job of putting forth ideas without really raggin’ on anyone too personally.

    I made my cases.

    If all you want is sycophants that echo your posts, then I understand your actions.

    • Robert Farley

      Louis/Norman,

      For starters, you should decide what your name is.

    • Nigel

      Psycho Pants: The Legs Of FEAR!!!

      Sorry.

  • EP

    I feel like this issue would be turned around completely if the plate were for Planned Parenthood or Pro-Choice. They have a particularly disturbing plate that says “Choose Life.” But, of course, it’s Kentucky so people are freer to display loyalties to a “more conservative” organization than they are to lefter-leaning causes. And what on earth does the SCV do, anyhow?

It is main inner container footer text