An Open Letter to Neo-Confederates On Behalf of Ron Paul
by Tim Manning, Jr.
Dear Neo-Confederates:
Ok, "Neo-Confederates" is a nasty little name. But we all know that term of derision is used when referring to a certain sort of person, of which I am one. It includes anyone who particularly does not hate the South and who thinks things would have been better off if the Northern empire had not invaded.
In Clyde Wilson's latest book, Defending Dixie, which I copy edited and published, he acknowledges in an essay entitled "Confessions of a Neo-Confederate" that his "title is a little tricky. I do not consider myself a 'Neo-Confederate,' though I have been labeled as such, with malice aforethought, by self-appointed snarling watchdogs of orthodoxy."
He goes on to say that he does not dwell in the past, even though he is proud of the South's struggle for independence in the 1860s. He even says that he is not in favor of reinstating the Confederate government. What he wants is for the South's "unique and admirable culture to flourish and decide its own future. This is a happy and positive mission in tune with a changing world."
For most of us in the South, the current season of presidential campaigns has been anything but happy and positive, and most of you are probably still undecided about who to vote for in the primary election. News flash: One of us is running!
Although originally from Pittsburgh, Ron Paul moved to rural Texas in 1968 and has been an honorary member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans for at least 12 years. If you want to know why, just check out what the James Morgan Utz Camp number 1815 of the Missouri Division has up on their website.
He has given countless speeches in front of Confederate flags for Southern Heritage groups and has never faltered from his defense of Dixie. Or, for that matter, our critique of Secretariat-General Lincoln.
He is the brainchild of the Austrian economists at the Mises Institute and The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.
Sure, the puke machines in the national press are ignoring and downplaying Ron Paul. However, one of the biggest surprises in this year's election is the overwhelming dominance of Ron Paul supporters on the internet.
One reason the media ignores him is that the giant corporate polling monstrosities have become dinosaurs. They haven't figured out that over the last eight years a large portion of Republican primary voters have quit using home telephones. We all have caller ID and do not answer their market research solicitation calls. We use cell phones, which also have caller ID.
In any case, all of these giant polling companies are in for a rude surprise in the New Year. They've always been propaganda machines, and they may find that they're not as influential as they used to be. Young and energetic conservatives are going to vote en masse for Ron Paul. And, suddenly, us Southern Heritage people are getting on board.
Mitt Romney had been pretending to run the furthest to the right of the frontrunners. But last week, he couldn't keep shoving his foot deeper into his own mouth. Check out what he said in the CNN YouTube debate about the Confederate flag.
Fred Thompson wasn't much better. Just call him 'Mumbling Fred'. You can tell he was nervous and trying to straddle the fence.
Of course, McCain was asked the same question in the debate in Columbia, South Carolina, on May 15. He tried to straddle the fence, too. He said he hated everything the Confederate flag represents -- racism, bigotry, hatred, all the generic leftwing answers. The crowd was silent. Then he said he supported the compromise -- keeping the flag where it is now, by monuments, but not in positions of authority, such as atop state capitols.
The Fox News black moderator reiterated his question, which came across more like an accusation of racism. McCain stood by his position and told him to "move on", which was followed by the loudest and most enthusiastic applause of the night.
Giuliani is a good way to understand where Thompson and McCain are coming from. He's taking the same position Bush did in 2000: It's a states rights issue. But just watching Giuliani answer that question, you can tell that they feel like they have a gun to their heads, and don't want to say what they really think. For example, everyone knows where Giuliani stands on abortion, but he says the same thing: "states rights issue". Yeah right. He doesn't mean it.
Just look what Bush has done against the Confederate flag, as president. He removed a tiny Confederate memorial plaque from the Texas Supreme Court building in Austin in the dark of night. His Vice Emperor Cheney bribed the then-governor of South Carolina, Jim Hodges, to violate the dying wishes of South Carolina Congressmen Floyd Spence, and not play "Dixie" and have the Confederate flag at his funeral. Cheney refused to attend unless both demands were met, and they were. Previous presidents have all paid tribute and publically respected the South's cultural symbols.
If we didn't know any better -- and maybe we do -- it would appear that Bush and Cheney have a policy "Sharpton chides Cheney over Confederate flag flap" to never appear in the presence of a Confederate flag. When all of the frontrunners -- Romney aside, since he is even worse -- say word-for-word what Bush said when he was campaigning for president, what makes any of us think they would act any differently?
If you wonder what Bush really thinks about the South and the Confederate flag, just find the cover story from volume 25, number 1 of Partisan magazine. Bush's favorite book on the War Between the States is April 1865: The Month That Saved America, whose title pretty much says it all -- just plain stupid worship of the Union victory at Appomattox.
But it's worse. If you read the Southern Partisan article or any of countless articles on Taki's Top Drawer or LewRockwell.com, you'll see that all of Bush's advisors are big fans not only of Grant and Lincoln, but of Sherman and Sheridan!
The only one saying and believing what supporters of Southern heritage believe is Ron Paul.
It's been pointed out, especially in South Carolina, that the Southern Heritage Political Action Committee should unite behind "someone who can win". The name that used to come up was the hideous Taxachusetts fraud, Mitt Romney. Check out the Harper's Magazine article, if you want to know what kind of sham he is trying to pull on South Carolina.
The other name that comes up is Fred Thompson, but he has problems, too -- voted five out of five times in favor of little amnesty deals, lobbied for Planned Parenthood, and affects a fake made-for-TV Southern accent.
Huckabee, of course, is a huge Lincoln lover and is notorious for using the Yankee Pro-Lifer's favorite analogy about the War: the Dred Scott Case. The War was all about slavery, so it goes, and therefore we should all emulate Lincoln in order to save unborn babies. Interesting idea, but I think we all know where that goes when someone starts out using Lincoln as their model of Christian morality. In fact, Huckabee has said that America must give college scholarships to illegal immigrants as atonement for slavery
In general, he was a tax-and-spend governor of Arkansas than Clinton. And now he wants that for the whole country. His new fundraising motto is "Do it for the children". He goes on to explain that he's not just for children from the time of conception to the time of birth, but from the time of conception until they go to their graves. We're talking big government -- really, really big government.
Don't be surprised to see all of the other candidates attacking Huckabee soon, since his numbers have been rising lately. He's the media's new poster child, just like McCain was -- a sheep in a wolf's clothing.
Last week's CNN YouTube debate started out with 30 minutes of real debate. Everyone came out ugly and muddied up: Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, and Thompson. All of them are marketing shams.
This is especially important for South Carolina, where our early little January 19 primary is the most critical of all, since it was set up as the establishment firewall. Whoever wins here becomes the nominee. Over the last 30 years, other traditionally early primaries -- Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Arizona -- have only been won half of the time by the candidate who went on to become the nominee. But South Carolina is the only real red state primary in the bunch (the new edition of Florida on January 29 especially doesn't count), and we matter most, with a perfect record of 100 percent.
Dear Neo-Confederates:
Ok, "Neo-Confederates" is a nasty little name. But we all know that term of derision is used when referring to a certain sort of person, of which I am one. It includes anyone who particularly does not hate the South and who thinks things would have been better off if the Northern empire had not invaded.
In Clyde Wilson's latest book, Defending Dixie, which I copy edited and published, he acknowledges in an essay entitled "Confessions of a Neo-Confederate" that his "title is a little tricky. I do not consider myself a 'Neo-Confederate,' though I have been labeled as such, with malice aforethought, by self-appointed snarling watchdogs of orthodoxy."
He goes on to say that he does not dwell in the past, even though he is proud of the South's struggle for independence in the 1860s. He even says that he is not in favor of reinstating the Confederate government. What he wants is for the South's "unique and admirable culture to flourish and decide its own future. This is a happy and positive mission in tune with a changing world."
For most of us in the South, the current season of presidential campaigns has been anything but happy and positive, and most of you are probably still undecided about who to vote for in the primary election. News flash: One of us is running!
Although originally from Pittsburgh, Ron Paul moved to rural Texas in 1968 and has been an honorary member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans for at least 12 years. If you want to know why, just check out what the James Morgan Utz Camp number 1815 of the Missouri Division has up on their website.
He has given countless speeches in front of Confederate flags for Southern Heritage groups and has never faltered from his defense of Dixie. Or, for that matter, our critique of Secretariat-General Lincoln.
He is the brainchild of the Austrian economists at the Mises Institute
Sure, the puke machines in the national press are ignoring and downplaying Ron Paul. However, one of the biggest surprises in this year's election is the overwhelming dominance of Ron Paul supporters on the internet.
One reason the media ignores him is that the giant corporate polling monstrosities have become dinosaurs. They haven't figured out that over the last eight years a large portion of Republican primary voters have quit using home telephones. We all have caller ID and do not answer their market research solicitation calls. We use cell phones, which also have caller ID.
In any case, all of these giant polling companies are in for a rude surprise in the New Year. They've always been propaganda machines, and they may find that they're not as influential as they used to be. Young and energetic conservatives are going to vote en masse for Ron Paul. And, suddenly, us Southern Heritage people are getting on board.
Mitt Romney had been pretending to run the furthest to the right of the frontrunners. But last week, he couldn't keep shoving his foot deeper into his own mouth. Check out what he said in the CNN YouTube debate about the Confederate flag.
Fred Thompson wasn't much better. Just call him 'Mumbling Fred'. You can tell he was nervous and trying to straddle the fence.
Of course, McCain was asked the same question in the debate in Columbia, South Carolina, on May 15. He tried to straddle the fence, too. He said he hated everything the Confederate flag represents -- racism, bigotry, hatred, all the generic leftwing answers. The crowd was silent. Then he said he supported the compromise -- keeping the flag where it is now, by monuments, but not in positions of authority, such as atop state capitols.
The Fox News black moderator reiterated his question, which came across more like an accusation of racism. McCain stood by his position and told him to "move on", which was followed by the loudest and most enthusiastic applause of the night.
Giuliani is a good way to understand where Thompson and McCain are coming from. He's taking the same position Bush did in 2000: It's a states rights issue. But just watching Giuliani answer that question, you can tell that they feel like they have a gun to their heads, and don't want to say what they really think. For example, everyone knows where Giuliani stands on abortion, but he says the same thing: "states rights issue". Yeah right. He doesn't mean it.
Just look what Bush has done against the Confederate flag, as president. He removed a tiny Confederate memorial plaque from the Texas Supreme Court building in Austin in the dark of night. His Vice Emperor Cheney bribed the then-governor of South Carolina, Jim Hodges, to violate the dying wishes of South Carolina Congressmen Floyd Spence, and not play "Dixie" and have the Confederate flag at his funeral. Cheney refused to attend unless both demands were met, and they were. Previous presidents have all paid tribute and publically respected the South's cultural symbols.
If we didn't know any better -- and maybe we do -- it would appear that Bush and Cheney have a policy "Sharpton chides Cheney over Confederate flag flap" to never appear in the presence of a Confederate flag. When all of the frontrunners -- Romney aside, since he is even worse -- say word-for-word what Bush said when he was campaigning for president, what makes any of us think they would act any differently?
If you wonder what Bush really thinks about the South and the Confederate flag, just find the cover story from volume 25, number 1 of Partisan magazine. Bush's favorite book on the War Between the States is April 1865: The Month That Saved America, whose title pretty much says it all -- just plain stupid worship of the Union victory at Appomattox.
But it's worse. If you read the Southern Partisan article or any of countless articles on Taki's Top Drawer or LewRockwell.com, you'll see that all of Bush's advisors are big fans not only of Grant and Lincoln, but of Sherman and Sheridan!
The only one saying and believing what supporters of Southern heritage believe is Ron Paul.
It's been pointed out, especially in South Carolina, that the Southern Heritage Political Action Committee should unite behind "someone who can win". The name that used to come up was the hideous Taxachusetts fraud, Mitt Romney. Check out the Harper's Magazine article
The other name that comes up is Fred Thompson, but he has problems, too -- voted five out of five times in favor of little amnesty deals, lobbied for Planned Parenthood, and affects a fake made-for-TV Southern accent.
Huckabee, of course, is a huge Lincoln lover and is notorious for using the Yankee Pro-Lifer's favorite analogy about the War: the Dred Scott Case. The War was all about slavery, so it goes, and therefore we should all emulate Lincoln in order to save unborn babies. Interesting idea, but I think we all know where that goes when someone starts out using Lincoln as their model of Christian morality. In fact, Huckabee has said that America must give college scholarships to illegal immigrants as atonement for slavery
In general, he was a tax-and-spend
Don't be surprised to see all of the other candidates attacking Huckabee soon, since his numbers have been rising lately. He's the media's new poster child, just like McCain was -- a sheep in a wolf's clothing.
Last week's CNN YouTube debate started out with 30 minutes of real debate. Everyone came out ugly and muddied up: Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, and Thompson. All of them are marketing shams.
This is especially important for South Carolina, where our early little January 19 primary is the most critical of all, since it was set up as the establishment firewall. Whoever wins here becomes the nominee. Over the last 30 years, other traditionally early primaries -- Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Arizona -- have only been won half of the time by the candidate who went on to become the nominee. But South Carolina is the only real red state primary in the bunch (the new edition of Florida on January 29 especially doesn't count), and we matter most, with a perfect record of 100 percent.
posted by PoP at
6:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home