Dixie Heritage News – Fri, Aug 25, 2017




Ever since the violent mob of leftists set Charlottesville, Virginia on fire last week, a fire whose flames the “media” just refuses to stop fanning, Confederate monuments nationwide have had a really rough week.


It begins with the Charlottesville City Council voting unanimously to shroud the statues in black. As a result, numerous residents have called for the resignations of the Mayor, Council, and Police leadership who admitted to only three people who were arrested and all released on summons for disorderly conduct.


On Monday, almost two dozen House Democrats sent a letter to Defense Secretary James Mattis urging him to re-evaluate the names of military bases named for Confederates.


Gary Bledsoe, Texas NAACP president, said that they will begin their efforts at Fort Hood.


ABC, CBS, and NBC’s evening newscasts on Monday all FAILED to cover the thwarted bombing of a Confederate monument in Houston, Texas. The Big Three networks led and concluded each program with full reports on the solar eclipse that crossed the United States, but didn’t even set aside a news brief to the arrest of Andrew Cecil Schneck, who allegedly prepared explosives and tried to set them off near the Texas landmark. CNN and MSNBC also punted on covering the FBI’s investigation of the bomb plot, while Fox News aired an eleven-second news brief on Monday evening.




A park ranger found the suspect “kneeling in the bushes near the statue of Richard Dowling, a commander in the Confederate army” in Hermann Park, one of the most-visited public spaces in Houston. According to a court document, the law enforcement officer “observed Schneck to be holding two small boxes with various items inside,” including “what appeared to be duct tape and wires.” During the arrest, the ranger asked Schneck “whether he wanted to harm the Dowling statue…[He] replied that he did not ‘like that guy.'”


The NBC journalists’ coverage of Schneck’s alleged bomb plot apparently didn’t warrant any on-air coverage on NBC Nightly News or MSNBC’s late afternoon and evening programming. NBC’s LOCAL Houston affiliate, KPRC-TV, did give details on Schneck’s arrest in a Monday online write-up. Initial tests of the suspect’s device found that device contained “most likely nitroglycerin and hexamethylene triperoxide diamine.” A criminal complaint against Schneck outlined that the latter susbstance is a “high explosive organic compound used as an initiating, or primary explosive.” After summarizing his criminal history, the KPRC article noted that “if convicted for Saturday’s incident, Schneck faces a minimum of five to 40 years in federal prison and a possible $250,000 fine.”




In a statement issued August 20, university president Gregory L. Fenves announced that statues depicting Robert E. Lee, Albert Sidney Johnston, John Reagan, and James Stephen Hogg would be removed overnight.


Citing the “horrific displays of hatred” in Charlottesville, Virginia, Fenves said, “These events make it clear, now more than ever, that Confederate monuments have become symbols of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism.”


The figures of Lee, Johnston, and Reagan were rather hurriedly removed under cover of darkness.




Also under the cover of darkness, Ellicott City, Maryland removed a Confederate monument from outside the Howard County courthouse on Monday night. The city’s county executive, Allan Kittleman, ordered its removal in a Facebook post, stating that he believed the monument should exist in a local museum instead. “It has become increasingly clear in recent weeks that memorials such as this are hurtful to many residents in our community and elsewhere,” Kittleman wrote. “Given these feelings and the tragedy in Charlottesville, I felt compelled to remove this memorial from public property.”


Christopher Columbus statue in Baltimore vandalized with sledgehammer


In nearby Baltimore, a 225-year-old monument honoring Christopher Columbus was vandalized on Monday morning. While Columbus is obviously not a confederate icon, the incident exemplifies heightened scrutiny of the historical events and figures memorialized in statues and monuments across the country.


A video posted on YouTube shows two individuals, one of whom tapes a sign to the monument that reads, “The Future is racial and economic justice.” Someone then takes a sledgehammer to the monument.


“Christopher Columbus symbolizes the initial invasion of European capitalism into the Western Hemisphere,” says “Ty,” the video’s narrator.




Police say a Confederate soldier statue at a cemetery in Ohio has been decapitated. Columbus police say the vandals appear to have climbed on an arched memorial at Camp Chase Confederate Cemetery and toppled the statue atop the monument to the ground.


The soldier’s head and hat were knocked off. Police say the vandals took the head but left the hat.


Police say the vandalism occurred early Tuesday at the cemetery where around 2,000 soldiers are buried.




It didn’t take even 24 hours for the City to make good on its promise to remove a monument to the Confederate dead from West Palm Beach’s city-owned Woodlawn Cemetery.


At midday Tuesday, workers carved the monument out.


On Monday, Mayor Jeri Muoio said the city would remove the 10-foot-tall “In memory of our Confederate Soldiers” fixture, which is owned by the Daughters of the Confederacy. She said the city’s lawyers had reached out to the Daughters in the past few months, asking them to remove the monument. “They haven’t done that, so we will do it for them,” she said Monday. “We sort of lost our patience.”


Just Sunday, someone had vandalized the monument, which has stood in the Dixie Highway cemetery since 1941.


City officials had been cagey about when they would move to cart off the marker. On Tuesday, a Palm Beach Post photographer driving past Woodlawn at 10:30 a.m. saw nothing out of place. The photographer drove by again at about 12:30 p.m. to find a crane at the site and the monument already lying on a flatbed, with workers digging out its 4-foot-deep concrete base.


The United Daughters of the Confederacy, when asked for a statement opposing the removal of the monument issued a statement through their National Headquarters, reportedly from President General Patricia M. Bryson, saying in part: “To some, these memorial statues and markers are viewed as divisive and thus unworthy of being allowed to remain in public places. To others, they simply represent a memorial to our forefathers who fought bravely during four years of war. These memorial statues and markers have been a part of the Southern landscape for decades. We are grieved that certain hate groups have taken the Confederate flag and other symbols as their own … Join us in denouncing hate groups and affirming that Confederate memorial statues and monuments are part of our shared American history.”




Violent protesters, led by Black Lives Matter, gathered on Monday evening in downtown Bradenton to demand the removal of a Confederate monument, erected in 1924, outside the courthouse. Last Friday, the city council voted 6-1 to board-up the granite obelisk with plywood to protect it from just such a mob.


Protesters, chanting “Take it down!” repeatedly, encountered a growing group of counter-protesters, who assembled to defend the monument and shouted “It’s history!” While “tensions began to flare” early on between the two sides, according to the Bradenton Herald. Local police acted quickly and ultimately sent in horses to break up the situation.


Manatee County spokesman Nick Azzara told the Bradenton Herald the Confederate war veteran memorial was taken off the grounds of the county courthouse on Thursday morning. Only the slab where the monument stood remained in place.




The Sons of Confederate Veterans’ northwest division is considering adding security to a private park it owns in Washington State after two monuments honoring Confederate President Jefferson Davis were vandalized with paint and tar sometime Thursday night. A group of Portland activists claimed responsibility.
Members of the division have started the cleanup process and said they have no intention of removing the monuments from Jefferson Davis Park. The quarter-acre park was dedicated in 2007 on a parcel of land just west of I-5.


Debate over Confederate monument dominates Decatur, Georgia city council meeting


Emotions were reportedly running high on Monday as around 75 residents from Decatur – located in the Atlanta metropolitan area – attended a city council meeting to discuss the future of the Confederate monument that has sat in the city’s square since 1908. Local news reported that the council opted to ignore petitions that the monument should be removed.


In the last week, duelling petitions have been circulating in Decatur. One supporting the monument has garnered more than 1,000 signatures. Another calling for its removal has more than 2,000 signatures. Residents presented both to the city council on Monday.


Last week, someone smeared the monument with feces.




In Kennesaw, Georgia, a Confederate Flag flies in the heart of downtown at the corner of Main and Cherokee streets. The flag, which was cut down at least two times this week. In response, Kennesaw’s local politicians have asked the State to give them the power to remove the Flag. Currently, the Flag is protected by a State law that restricts the movement or removal of veteran memorials.




The Confederate Flags had been in a Manhattan apartment window for over a year. And then, in a matter of days last week, endured hurled rocks, a punched-out window, and legal action.


Now, the lighted flags are no more to be found in the seventh-floor windows in the East Village neighborhood.




A local home owners association used The Darien Times newspaper to pressure a local homeowner known to display the Battle Flag into removing it.


Before doing so, the homeowner issued a statement that read: “If I wanted to hang a flag that symbolizes hatred and intolerance, I would have put up a flag of ISIS or ‘Black Lives Matter.’ I don’t recall Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. expressing outrage over statues and historical symbos during the Civil Rights movement. I succeeded in that I ‘offended’ someone by legally displaying something on my home. I find it sad that there is actually a person who has enough time on his/her hands to write the editor. Maybe that is time better spent volunteering – Person to Person, religious organizations, Meals on Wheels, the Darien Senior Center, etc. can all use help I am sure.”




Maine Gov. Paul LePage says he received death threats after comparing the removal of Confederate statues to the removal of a 9/11 memorial.


The Governor made the comparison a week ago during a radio appearance on WGAN-AM. He appeared on the same station Thursday to say he’s gotten letters “threatening to kill me” and “threatening my personal life and my family.”


LePage made his initial comments days after the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. He, like President Trump, correctly blamed “right” and left-wing demonstrators for the violence.


LePage said this week that, “7,600 Maine residents fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War.”




There has been action by Atlanta’s City Officials about renaming Atlanta streets like Confederate Avenue following the events in Charlottesville, Virginia.


A seven-member advisory committee will help Mayor Kasim Reed decide what to do about Atlanta’s “Confederate-themed” statues and street names.


But, as evidenced by the editing of multiple signs bearing the name in Grant Park, not everyone was willing to wait until an official decision is made.


Meanwhile at the Ormewood intersection, one side of the sign was edited. The “fe” in Confederate was covered by material containing the letters “si,” so drivers heading west might have thought they were on Considerate Avenue.


A few blocks down the road, part of the sign that intersects Confederate and Boulevard avenues met the nozzle-end of a spray paint can. Dark graffiti covered the white letters on its southbound side early Wednesday.




With Confederate monuments under fire around the country, The Slate reports on August 24th that liberals have set their sights on Dolly Parton’s WBTS-themed dinner theater.


From Slate:


It’s a lily-white kitsch extravaganza that play-acts the Civil War but never once mentions slavery. Instead, it romanticizes the old South, with generous portions of both corn on the cob and Southern belles festooned in Christmas lights. At its sister staging in Branson, Missouri (the original is up the road from Dollywood in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee), it’s put on at a venue that can only be described as resembling a plantation mansion. Also, everyone in the audience must pick a side.


The same report gets even stupider, however, as New York City mayoral candidate Melissa Mark Viverito wants the final resting place of Union General Ulysses S. Grant closed because of Grant’s “anti-Semitism” as President.




Plans to unveil a monument honoring unknown Confederate soldiers from Crensahw County on Sunday have drawn criticism from the state NAACP.


The monument will be added to Confederate Veterans Memorial Park located on U.S. Highway 331 between Luverne and Brantley. While the park is private property, the owner plans to open the ceremony to the public.


The property is owned and operated by David Coggins, who is commander of the Ben Bricken Camp 396 of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The park is home to monuments honoring soldiers who served in the Confederacy and flags of the Confederacy with granite displays detailing each flag’s meaning and adoption.


“This monument has been in the process of construction for a year,” Coggins said, adding that the monument and park are funded through private sources and donations. “The park is about heritage and education – not about negativity.”


The Alabama State NAACP issued a statement opposing the scheduled unveiling. Patricia Mokolo, communications chair for the Alabama NAACP said that the association does not plan to hold or encourage any protests at Sunday’s event. “We elected not to attend because we’re mindful of people’s safety.”


Coggins said security would be on hand due to the close proximately to a main state highway.


Crenshaw County Sheriff Mickey Powell said Highway 331 is extremely busy this time of year, and deputies will be on hand to ensure traffic flow isn’t impacted. “It’s an active time of the day in general, so we’re concerned about the flow of traffic. That’s the right of way, and we’re going to make sure everyone is able to travel safely, without incident,” Powell said.


The ceremony is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. Sunday, Aug. 27, and will conclude at 4 p.m., beginning with the posting of colors, followed by prayer and the welcoming of guests.


“The property is private property,” Coggins said. “Anyone is welcome to attend the ceremony and visit the park as long as they respect the property. This is a family event and we will not condone violence or disrespect to property or outbursts.”


Russ Vaughan submits the following:


Evidence is turning up from, of all places, the Southern Poverty Law Center, as well as Breitbart and others, that this character, Jason Kessler, who organized the suspicious and supposed Alt-Right demonstration in Charlottesville, Va. that blew up in everyone’s face, is a cunning lefty holdover from the Occupy Wall Street movement and a former Barack Obama supporter. I smell Soros money, sabotage, and Democrat dirty tricks here.


I’ve been suspicious of the nature of the violence at this supposed Alt-Right demonstration since the news first began breaking. It is no secret that radical elements in the Democrat left have been routinely utilizing violence when it suits their purposes. We also know via secret tapings by Project Veritas that the Democratic Party has a semi-official director of dirty ops, Dick Creamer, who hires, trains, and emplaces professional disruptors to encounter, engage, and infiltrate conservative demonstrations to foment violence, assuring that the demonstrations then become the targets of negative media attention – naturally, against the conservative side. Creamer was caught on videotape boasting about his nefarious capabilities when he thought he was in friendly company.


So here we now have another blown supposedly conservative demonstration, where violence erupts and people are killed, and guess who just happens to be a ringleader of the various ultra-right to Alt-Right organizations ranging from KKK and neo-Nazis to the kind of patriotic folks who might go to a Flag Day celebration! Um, that would be our vaporous political will o’ the wisp, Jason Kessler, whose Occupy activities may well have put him in operational cahoots with high-level Democrat operatives. And owing to the leniency of Virginia open carry laws, too many of Jason’s followers just had to parade their personal armories in all their camo combat gear, showing off their minuteman firepower. My first reaction at seeing those clowns strutting down the street like they were in Mosul was, like that of many of my fellow NRA members and military veterans, shaking my fist and yelling at the TV, “No! No! No, you idiots! No!” And that kind of award-winning stupidity makes me wonder if the head planner for the event, Jason Soros…er, Kessler, didn’t have that firepower demonstration all lined up and ready to go precisely to make those right-wing tools look just like the fools they were being, while scaring the bejeezus out of the lefties, blacks, and MSM twerps.


There’s still not enough evidence on the actual violence, other than the schizophrenic kid who ran over the woman, to make any kind of assessment as to who did what in the confrontations between the right-wing demonstrators and the surprisingly strong counter-demonstration. I have to wonder if this Kessler fellow, strong Barack Obama-supporter that he is, had a hand in making sure his Alt-Right marchers were clearly guaranteed to encounter a strong crowd of riled up counter-protesters as well. The reporting of Kessler’s background, as well as that of Charlottesville mayor and Democrat activist Mike Signer and Vice Mayor Wes Bellamy, has convinced me that Charlottesville was a Democratic Party black operation, planned, organized, and carried out to its successful conclusion, to make the media portray all these conservative whites as stupid, racist, and violent. I believe that it was done by this soulless young man, who succeeded in selling himself to the dumb-bunny right-wingers as one of them.




“This is being driven by forces of evil that are beyond what normal people can think about.” – Representative Louis Gomert, (R-TX)


In the following clip from Fox News, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) talks about what happened on August 12 in Charlottesville, placing special emphasis on the fact that demonstrators for the Ku Klux Klan and Black Lives Matter arrived at the event on the same busses!


He also stresses the need for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate who paid for sending all those different groups to Charlottesville, and who ordered the stand-down of the police.




Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video: http://vid.me/rBZbW


And the mere fact it is censored on Youtube proves Youtube is part of the “forces of evil that are beyond what normal people can think about.”


Dr. William VonPeters submits:


Why You Should Never Sign the Refusal to Vaccinate Form


As traditional school schedules resume in the coming days, many parents are bringing their children to their health care providers for sports physicals and well-child visits. If you decline vaccines for your child, your child’s doctor may ask or even insist that you sign a refusal form stating you were offered information about vaccines and you opted out of one or more vaccinations.


This piece of paper may seem harmless, but there are important reasons to decline signing this form when you decline vaccines. Read on to learn why you should never sign this vaccine refusal form.


The Refusal Form From the AAP May Be Used to Scare You


According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), “within a 12-month period, 74% of pediatricians report encountering a parent who refused or delayed one or more vaccines.”


In a letter to physicians, the AAP urged them to record vaccine refusals using a special document:


“The use of this or a similar form in concert with direct and non-condescending discussion can demonstrate the importance you place on appropriate immunizations, focuses parents’ attention on the unnecessary risk for which they are accepting responsibility, and may in some instances induce a wavering parent to accept your recommendations.”


If you are still deciding about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, opting for a delayed vaccination schedule, or declining specific vaccines, your child’s health care provider may use this form in combination with your uncertainty to pressure you to vaccinate your child.


The form includes an admonition stating that the outcome of not vaccinating might include contracting:


“certain types of cancer, pneumonia, illness requiring hospitalization, death, brain damage, paralysis, meningitis, seizures, and deafness; other severe and permanent effects from these vaccine-preventable diseases are possible as well.”


These words may sound scary to parents who are newly researching the truth about vaccines, but informed parents know that adverse reactions to vaccines are much more likely to occur than contracting the diseases themselves.


The Refusal to Vaccinate Form May Be Used To Take Your Child Away From You


The suggested form provided to healthcare providers by the AAP, which you may be asked to read and sign, includes the following statements:


“I know that failure to follow the recommendations about vaccination may endanger the health or life of my child and others with whom my child might come into contact.”


Some parents and vaccine safety advocates have suggested child protective services or a parent in a custody battle may use this “admission” against the signing parent to remove a child from their care.


In a report published in Pediatrics, the AAP outlines how healthcare providers should respond when parents decline vaccinations for their children, stating that there are circumstances which would justify involving “the appropriate child protective services agency because of the concern about medical neglect.”


The Refusal to Vaccinate Form May Be Used to Require Medical Treatment


The form also states:


“I therefore agree to tell all health care professionals in all settings what vaccines my child has not received because he or she may need to be isolated or may require immediate medical evaluation and tests that might not be necessary if my child had been vaccinated.”


This language suggests that your child may be treated medically against your wishes because you did not accept certain vaccines.


How to Respond to Your Child’s Health Care Provider When They Tell You To Sign the Refusal to Vaccinate Form


If your child’s doctor or nurse presents this form to you, you may simply remind them that you are not obligated to sign this form. Vaccine exemptions are available in all fifty states, and you have the right to use these exemptions to refuse vaccines without signing the “refusal to vaccinate” form.


Patricia Finn, a national vaccine injury and exemption attorney located in New York City, says it is probably best to refuse to sign the form. However, if your refusal to sign stands between you and an exemption, or you and your pediatrician, and you have a valid legal basis for an exemption to vaccinations, then you probably should sign the form because it is not a legally enforceable agreement against you.


According to Finn, signing a refusal form is not a waiver to rights to refuse vaccines, which are protected under statute and the United States Constitution. Simply stated, your rights to refuse vaccines would not be waived by the refusal form. It also would be unenforceable because the form would most likely have been signed under duress.


Another suggestion is to modify the form. You can cross out what you disagree with, initial it, and sign the form.


The rights of vaccine refusers were set out by the Supreme Court in the 1905 landmark vaccine-refusal case, Jacobson vs. Massachusetts. Over one hundred years ago, the Justices of the Court recognized the potential for unnecessary vaccination mandates as being “a plain and palpable invasion of fundamental liberties,” like the new CDC refusal form you must sign to exercise your rights to refuse.


If you are faced with having to sign the form, remember the Supreme Court held in Jacobson in 1905 that only one vaccine was allowable, and only in an extreme circumstance in which a grave danger existed that “imperils society.” The Supreme Court further held that vaccinations to be mandated must be necessary, proportional, non-discriminatory and harm avoidant, which today’s school required vaccines are not. If you are presented with a refusal form from your child’s school or doctor, it would be wise to first consult with an attorney to obtain legal advice about how to proceed.


If you are still uncomfortable discussing vaccines with your child’s health care provider, you may wish to read 9 Ways to Boost Your Confidence When Your Doctor Pressures to Vaccinate.




These refusal to vaccinate forms were created to increase vaccination rates, scare parents, and potentially take children away from parents who decline vaccines or mandate medical treatment. Parents should refuse to sign these forms.


By Christopher McDonald


[Christopher is a regular contributor to The College Conservative]


A review of Nullification: Reclaiming the Consent of the Governed by Clyde Wilson, Shotwell Press, 2016.


As a young conservative, I came across ideas like nullification and states’ rights, during my studies. But they were always passed over, as if they didn’t mean anything anymore. When I read Robert Bork’s excellent book on Originalism, I never saw his unquestioned and unstated premise: that the it is the job of federal judges to decide upon the Constitution. I was never quite so aware of how much we have forgotten about America’s constitutional tradition, as I was when reading Dr. Clyde Wilson’s latest work.


Dr. Wilson’s work Nullification is 10 chapters in length. Most are brief, filled with prose that hits you like a lightweight boxer. No sooner is the reader struck once by a line than another one. Time after time, he takes cherished notions and leaves them in ruins. He fills pages with historical retelling and terse applications of the truth to the present.


Nullification is a brief and useful corrective to some beliefs of mainstream conservatism. Conservatives have largely accepted the supremacy of the Federal judiciary and its two claims. The first, that Federal enactments have power over the enactments of the States. And the second, that only the Federal judiciary, in final analysis the Supreme Court, has the power to declare what is and is not constitutional.


In “The Real Constitution,” Wilson takes quick aim at a central conceit shared by Left and Right today. Our conceit that the Constitution belongs to the lawyers (and judges), and only they get to say what it means for us today. Wilson debunks this when he says, “The constitution’s primary function today is to provide lucrative pickings for lawyer and pseudo-respectable cover for power seekers.” He remarks upon how the Constitution, which was meant to be a limit upon the powers of the federal government, is become, in the hands of lawyers and judges, “an unappealable instrument of power.” We are trenchantly reminded that, “The proper meaning of the Constitution is not a legal question but a historical one. Citizens do not need lawyers and judges to tell them what THEIR Constitution means.” Wilson seems to say that the Constitution is the possession of the people, not the domain of the elite.


He reminds us that the 10th amendment is the key to the entire Constitution. Where today we accept ideas of ‘implied powers,’ if we took the 10th Amendment seriously, we would not have the situation we do. Staunch adherence to the 10thAmendment render most federal action since at least 1933 impossible.. The recent Supreme Court ‘decisions’ making homosexual marriage and Federally mandated and run health care, would have been laughed out of existence.


We now believe that courts decide what the Constitution means, and therefore what may or may not be done. But Wilsons shows this not to be the case. Instead, he argues that the abandonment of nullification and the right of the States to interpret the Constitution is part of the reason for which our present government is become a tumor on the body politic. Once supremacy had been established by force of arms, in 1865, and later by federal purse strings, starting in the 1930s, it has been impossible to prevent the Federal government from interpreting the Constitution to mean whatever it wants it to mean.


The longest essay in this book is “The States Are What We Have.” Here Wilson aims to restore the idea that our Republic cannot subsist by the power of violence. If the States are not free to depart from this Union of ours, then they are reduced to a state of absolute tyranny. And under absolute tyranny there can be no true freedom, only what the tyrant will permit. The Founders meant to give us a, “happy Union of mutual consent and support.” It never meant a government of such power it can dictate the shape of our houses and the content of our schoolbooks. Never mind the egregiousness of our foreign policy.


He notes that, “The right to self-government rests on the right to withdraw consent from an oppressive government.” He contrasts empire and republic. Our Republic was founded to protect the freedoms of the men and women who dwell in it. To allow us to live freely, in our own place, with those we call friends about us. To bend our knees to whatever deity we choose, or do not choose. To live honest, decent lives of peace, pursuing each our private ends. This was what the Constitution was meant to protect. But, having abandoned the Constitution, we have replaced our Republic with empire. Empire, where the rulers look down upon the ruled, who cling to their religion and their land. Empire, where we are not free under God, but where we are permitted to do such things as bureaucrats and politicians think we should be doing.


He hews strongly to the idea that the Constitution is the possession of the people of the States, not the fig-leaf by which to legitimize federal corruption. Without the States as equal interpreters of the Constitution, we have no appeal past 9 lawyers in Washington. Whatever they say is as unalterable as the laws of the Medes and the Persians. Wilson’s work helps uncovering the now-forgotten principles of 1798. He labors to recall that the United States are, not the United States is, of a republican form of government.


Wilson also reminds us that the States are wielders of power. And it is that power alone which can hedge in the federal Leviathan. Citizens groups alone have proved insufficient to tame the beast. Only the States have the power and the constitutional backing to do so.


Nullification is chiefly concerned with criticizing present errors with old truths. But Wilson does not take the step of tracing out the practical application of these ideas. They would certainly lead to a magnificent restoration of freedom. As well as to an upending of our accustomed means of doing politics. All of which is to the good.


Overall, Wilson’s work is a refreshing and brief book. As a book of essays, it succeeds in dipping into each portion of what he has to say, while keeping everything within a stream of argument. Whether a book review, an historical essay or a constitutional exploration, Wilson’s work is much needed.


Vice President Mike Pence sat for an extensive interview with Fox & Friends host Ainsley Earhardt on Tuesday, discussing everything from President Trump’s newly announced military strategy in Afghanistan to the national debate over Confederate historical statues.


On the latter point, Pence defended Confederate monuments, like the statue of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia. He condemned the activists who have taken to unilaterally felling statues, saying that destroying public property “in the name of any cause” is unacceptable, and he said the decisions “about what displays happen” should be left to local communities.


Watch Pence’s full interview with Earhardt below, with the discussion of Confederate monuments beginning at the 12:46 mark and going to the end of the clip:




U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, the sole statewide elected Democrat in Florida, ducked a question about removing Confederate monuments and is now getting grief from members of his own party who worry he’s estranging blacks and liberals as he faces a reelection campaign next year.


“I don’t know what to think of this,” said Rep. Shevrin Jones, a black Democrat sponsoring legislation to remove Confederate monuments statewide. “I would like Sen. Nelson to acknowledge that the people who are represented on those statues were individuals who oppressed black people,” said Jones, echoing other Democrats. “I want him to acknowledge that there is no place for them anymore. Our country is no longer there, we have moved on … there’s no need for them, that’s what Sen. Nelson should be saying.”


Nelson’s office did not immediately comment on his record concerning Confederate monuments, but his comments Monday night at an event in Lakewood Ranch indicated that he has refrained from weighing in because the removal of the monuments in Florida is a State, not federal, issue.


“I think leaving it up to the good sense of the communities involved is the best thing to do,” Nelson said when asked about removing monuments, according to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Nelson indicated he might oppose the monuments when he said that “a monument, a statue, ought to signify unity instead of division.”


Many Democratic insiders shook their heads and worried that Nelson’s approach was a sign he doesn’t appreciate the fervor of radical liberal activism, namely supporters of former presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). They say Nelson is likely to face his toughest challenge ever, from Florida Gov. Rick Scott, next year, and the Democrat can’t win if the leftists aren’t excited.


“It seems that Bill Nelson doesn’t want to take a stand on the issue for political reasons. But this is not the time to shrink back from what he knows is right,” said state Sen. Randolph Bracy, an other black Democrat who had once thought of running against Nelson.


“It’s a little bit tone deaf from a skilled operator like Bill,” one top Nelson backer said. “He’s slightly vulnerable from the Bernie Bro wing of the party and doesn’t need to agitate it further. And Bill also needs Democrats to be enthused about him next year, not just voting out of obligation.”


Newcomer Chris King and former U.S. Rep. Gwen Graham of Tallahassee reiterated their call to pull down all the monuments.


The only major black candidate in the race, Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, would only say of Nelson’s comments that “I know that our opinions differ, but I know Senator Nelson’s record and he’s stood tall on these issues. Local communities need to have tough conversations about where they stand on this moral issue and how we heal our state. We need to have these conversations now so our children don’t have to decades from now.”


In the Florida Legislature, Rep. Jones said he’s hopeful that Republican House Speaker Richard Corcoran, who also might run for governor, will allow his bill to be heard to remove Confederate vestiges from the public square. But, he said, the hard work remains to reform criminal justice, improve voting rights and improve minority communities.


According to the latest Valient Poll® survey conducted by Valient Market Research®, only 33% of Americans want the removal of Confederate statues from public places.


The full-text of the survey question: Do you approve of the removal of Confederate statues from public places?


Extended Press Release & Complete Set of Data Tables for this Valient Poll are available on our website:


Key Findings
Only 27% of women and 38% of men are for Confederate statue removal.
Just 28% of former Confederate U.S. State residents support statue removal.
College-educated Americans are almost equally split on this subject – 40% for removal and 38% against.
Majority of lower & higher income Americans do not support removal, while the middle class is conflicted.
52% of African-Americans support removal compared to 30% for Whites/Caucasians.
39% of Millennials support removal – highest of any American generation.
52% of Democrats are for removal and 60% of Republicans are against statue removal.


Why Stop at Reassessing Confederate Monuments?
What About the Kennedy Brothers?
by Larry Elder


Larry Elder is a best-selling author and nationally syndicated radio talk-show host.


Twitter @larryelder.


As we rewrite history and remove Confederate monuments deemed “offensive” when viewed through the prism of contemporary standards of morality, reasonable people ask: Where does one draw the line? The left, for example, reveres the Kennedy brothers, John, Robert and Edward. But if evaluated by today’s standards of social justice, would these left-wing icons hold up?


In Sen. Ted Kennedy’s case, how does the monument-removing left feel about the kiss Kennedy blew Gov. George Wallace a mere 10 years after Wallace delivered what became perhaps that era’s most infamous defense of segregation? At Wallace’s request, Kennedy spoke in Alabama at a 1973 Fourth of July “Spirit of America” rally honoring Wallace in 1973.


Just 10 years earlier, Wallace defended “Jim Crow,” or legal segregation, by shouting, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,” and attempted to prevent blacks from attending the University of Alabama by blocking a campus doorway. Yet at this July 1973 rally, where Wallace received a “Patriotism Award,” guest speaker Kennedy praised Wallace as a believer in the “true spirit of America,” who supported the right of everyone to “speak his mind and be heard.” Kennedy also talked about the things the two men had in common, including that they “don’t corrupt,” “don’t malign” and “don’t abuse” the people’s trust.


John F. Kennedy won a razor-thin race in 1960. The black vote was crucial. Just four years earlier, nearly 40 percent of blacks voted Republican. Kennedy got 68 percent of the black vote, thanks in part to the tireless efforts of entertainer Sammy Davis Jr. The brilliant singer/actor/dancer/musician/comedian Davis campaigned hard for Kennedy, and even postponed his wedding to a white actress until after the election to avoid costing votes from those who disapproved of interracial marriages. But after Kennedy got elected, and Davis then got married, the President-elect disinvited him from performing at Kennedy’s inaugural gala. It got worse. Twentieth Century Fox, to which Sammy’s new wife was under contract, invoked the morals clause and let her go, effectively ending her career.


The NAACP criticized Ted Kennedy’s appearance at the Wallace rally, and during Jack Kennedy’s presidency civil rights groups grew frustrated over Kennedy’s failure to offer a civil rights bill. But JFK, afraid of alienating the South, wanted to delay any legislation until after the 1964 re-election.


This brings us to Robert Kennedy. FBI head J. Edgar Hoover sought and received permission to wiretap Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The person granting him permission? Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.


Some historians argue that Kennedy agreed to the wiretap because he feared Hoover possessed scandalous files on the Kennedy brothers. But other historians say Robert Kennedy sincerely believed, as Hoover did, that communists infiltrated King’s civil rights team.


“I asked the FBI to make an intensive investigation of Martin Luther King,” Robert Kennedy later told journalist Anthony Lewis. “We never wanted to get close to him just because of these contacts and connections that he had, which we felt were damaging to the civil rights movement and because we were so intimately involved in the struggle for civil rights, it also damaged us.”


Never mind that FBI documents later released do, indeed, show that a close King adviser also served as a high-level operative and financier of the Communist Party USA. Tell this to today’s social justice warriors in Philadelphia where, for example, locals debate whether to move a statue of a mayor whom some black Philadelphians call racist. Whatever Mayor Frank Rizzo was and did, he didn’t own slaves.


Is removing Confederate statues a priority issue among blacks, the group presumably most offended by the monuments? Not really. A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll shows that more blacks want the monuments to stay than want them removed – 44 percent to 40 percent, respectively. Add in the 16 percent who are “unsure” and a majority of blacks either want the statues to stay or don’t seem to care much one way or the other. Also, if Confederate statues inflict such misery on the psyche of blacks, why do tests repeatedly show that blacks have higher self-esteem than whites?


Charles Barkley, the ex-basketball star turned television analyst, said he’s “always ignored” Confederate statues. He said: “I’m 54 years old. I’ve never thought about those statues a day in my life. I think if you ask most black people, to be honest, they ain’t thought a day in their life about those stupid statues. … What we as black people need to do … we need to worry about getting our education. We need to stop killing each other. We need to try to find a way to have more economic opportunity. Those things are important and significant.”


Barkley makes more sense than many of our so-called leaders. Why don’t we first tackle issues like the breakdown of the nuclear family, noncompetitive urban public schools and gang-related violence before we move on to Confederate monuments?




Texas police instructor Phil Ryan has issued a warning to all protesters that if they go around vandalizing, or if they decide to take down a statue, ANY TEXAS CITIZEN CAN SHOOT THEM and it is perfectly legal under Texas law.


“Don’t mess with Texas” is actually a true statement!


The vandals do not have to threaten anyone, all they have to do is vandalize or attempt to vandalize property and they can be shot, and the law goes even a step further – if any Texan sees someone robbing their neighbor, they can shoot the robber on behalf of their neighbor.


Here are the statutes:


Sec. 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON’S PROPERTY. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and: (1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property;


Chapter 9.41 states: PROTECTION OF ONE’S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property (Criminal Mischief is unlawful interference with property).


Chapter 9.42 states: DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property: (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime (Night time is 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise).


Dixie Heritage
P.O. Box 618
Lowell, FL 32663