REMEMBER THE ALAMO
NAWLINS’ OFFICIALS TELL LOCAL TV STATION THAT
Whoever threw Confederate-flag beads during the Mardi-Gras parade would be banned if they were identified invoking a city rule that bans throws that communicate political messages, among other things.
Confederate-themed trinkets thrown during Mardi Gras have caused a stir before when authorities banned Mimi Owens, who runs a Facebook group called “Forever Lee Circle.” Owens threw beads that advertised her group, which advocates for the return of statues of Confederate leaders around the city, she told WGNO.
BOWING AND SCRAPING – ROUND THREE
U.S. District Court Judge Frank Whitney apologized for standing in a Wake Forest University picture with the school’s Kappa Alpha fraternity chapter circa 1982.
Also Kappa Alpha members J. McLain Wallace Jr. and Murray C. ‘Tripp’ Greason III, both who have become attorneys, apologized for posing with the Flag.
Let week, we reported that Wake Forest Dean of Admissions Martha Allman apologized after the 37-year-old yearbook photo surfaced showing that she also took took a picture with a Confederate Flag. This week, her office’s associate dean Kevin Pittard apologized when it was discovered that he was also pictured in 1983 and 1984 yearbooks with the Flag.
LIBERAL SCHOOL ADMIN BYPASSES ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD
Once again, at last week’s meeting, the Albemarle County School Board failed to pass a measure banning the Confederate Flag in the Virginia district’ schools. So Superintendent Matt Haas is implementing the policy over objection of Board members.
Matt informed the Board of such at the close of their February 28th meeting when they had again “punted” on the issue pushing its discussion to another future meeting.
Later that evening Haas issued a press release saying that he would use his “authority to prohibit symbols, lettering, or insignia associated with white supremacy, racial hatred, or violence from schools in the division….Images of white supremacy including Confederate…should not be permitted in our schools because they cause substantial disruption.”
Haas’s announcement upset board members, “I’m not particularly happy that Matt has made this decision,” Steve Koleszar, a school board member, said.
OLE MISS STUDENT SENATE LEADS THE ATTACK
On Tuesday the University of Mississippi student government voted unanimously in favor of removing a Confederate statue from campus.
The Ole Miss Faculty Senate is expected to meet soon to confirm the resolution.
However, neither the student nor faculty senates have the authority to actually remove the statue. We encourage Ole Miss alumni to contact the University board and encourage them to disregard the student and faculty resolutions.
LEGISLATURE SAID NO BUT GOVERNOR SAYS
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, already outed as a Skalawag, has told reporters he supports the effort that would change the meaning of the star on his State Flag from honoring the Confederacy to instead recognizing the injuns who brutalized the State’s early settlers. for their contributions to the state.
“I don’t know that we need to recognize Arkansas in a state of rebellion,” Hutchinson told The Associated Press on Monday. His comments come a week after a House committee voted to reject a proposal to change the meaning of the blue star depicted above the State’s name on the Flag.
Hutchinson told the news agency that when the change is reproposed again later in the legislative session he will actively support it because “it’s the right thing to do.”
DALLAS MONUMENT CLOSER TO REMOVAL
The Confederate War Memorial, located near Dallas’ City Hall, is one major step closer to coming down. The city’s Landmark Commission on Monday voted 10-5 to approve the removal by upholding the City Council’s view of the monument as “non-contributing to the historic overlay district” where the memorial has sat since 1961.
Donald Payton, a black member of the Landmark Commission, said it was beyond time for the memorial’s removal. He said Dallas will still have streets, building and schools that honor those who fought for the Confederacy. In addition to saying the statues were “non-contributing,” Jennifer Scripps, the city’s director of Cultural Affairs, argued the memorial’s installation was “newer than the period of significance” for the park and that the removal of the monument would not “adversely affect the historic character of the property or the integrity of the historic overlay district.”
For the record, we want it known that the Commissioners received over 300 letters in support of keeping the monument and none that we know of supporting its removal. 21 people also came to speak to the Commission against removal, outnumbering by far the only three pubic comments in favor.
But there is a possibility to preserve the statue, that is if an interested person who is a resident of Dallas files a lawsuit in district court. You would have 30-days to do so.
Also, there is a good chance that the monument was erected over graves. The City denies this and cemetery records are already being monkeyed with. If someone locally could start digging this would also be a possibility.
WASN’T BARNEY FIFE A NORTH CAROLINA LAWMAN?
A Raleigh man takes a morning walk in the park. Discovering white hoods, likely representing the Ku Klux Klan, on a Confederate statue, he snaps a photo with his phone and tweets it out.
Not being able to determine who the real culprit was, and, in typical fashion, being too lazy to try, the police decide to just arrest the man who tweeted the photo – another major case solved by Raleigh’s “finest.”
But since North Carolina also has a standing record for NOT punishing those who vandalize Confederate statues, 42-year-old Jonathan Alan Williams was only charged with littering.
Williams again took to Twitter to speak about the incident: “I take issue with the accusation that I would waste perfectly good pillowcases. This is slander.”
NON-HERITAGE NEWS AFFECTING THE SOUTHLAND:
France’s National Assembly has voted in favor of an amendment removing the terms mother and father from forms in the nation’s schools, instead using the terms “parent 1” and “parent 2.”
The amendment, which passed into law alongside a new school bill Tuesday, has been seen by France’s majority La République en Marche Party (LREM) as a necessary step to bring France’s schools into line with the European nation’s 2013 same-sex marriage law.
While the LREM, the centrist party founded by sitting French President Emmanuel Macron, has heralded the amendment to the School of Trust Bill, conservative parties have dismissed the development as a danger to society.
SHOULD KAMALA HAVE TO PAY REPARATIONS?
Kamala Harris is a true Democrat. According to Kamala Harris’ own father, the Democratic presidential hopeful’s great-grandmother was a Jamaican slave plantation owner who founded the city of Brown’s Town, Jamaica.
Thats right, Kamala is not the descendant of slaves but of slave OWNERS.
4.5 BILLION INVESTMENT
Chrysler confirms that it is making a $4.5 billion investment in Michigan.
The automaker is planning for expansion in the state expected to create an estimated 6,500 jobs by building new factories and changing some existing ones.
WHAT PASSES FOR “REALITY TV” IN IRAN
Gaza-based Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) showed off its newest missile facilities on Iranian television Sunday, claiming that their supply of rockets for use against Israel is more accurate and has better range than ever before.
“Our rocket force and missile units will surprise the enemy following any foolish act it may do in the future,” a masked PIJ spokesman says in the documentary. “Stupid acts against the Gaza Strip and its inhabitants will turn into hell [directed]at the occupied cities and villages, Inshallah [God willing].”
The group boasted that with the aid of Iran, its engineers have managed to do better than merely replacing the missiles that Israel had destroyed in airstrikes and previous rounds of fighting. Now the terror group has the ability to strike Tel Aviv, Netanya, “and even further,” with precision missiles, it threatened.
HOUSE PASSES FIRST GUN CONTROL BILL IN 25 YEARS
The U.S. House of Representatives just passed a bill to require background checks on all gun sales in the country. It’s the first gun control legislation to pass since 1994. Thank Rep. Gabby Giffords, Lucy McBath, and “Speaker” Pelosi.
Call your Senators!
Leftists and Hate Hoaxes – They go hand in hand
by Al Benson, Jr.
Al Benson, Jr., is the Editor of the Copperhead Chronicle. In addition to writing for Southern Patriot and other publications, he is a member of the Confederate Society of America and the League of the South.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting tired of hearing about how “Jussie” Justin Smollett has been the victim of mean, nasty Trump supporters in Chicago. Stop and think about it-how many Trump supporters are there really in Chicago? Maybe half a dozen, and we are supposed to believe that two of those went out of their way to commit a “hate crime” against Mr. Smollett. And anyone that thinks Chicago is “MAGA country” ought to have his head examined. This is the city of Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama. Come on, give me a break!
It’s so far out that even the Chicago Police can’t buy it. Walter Williams, in an article that appeared on http://www.lewrockwell.com for February 27th noted: “…Chicago police say it was a hoax. This type of hoax is part and parcel of the left’s broad agenda of victimology, fraudulence and gimmickry, plus gross media gullibility, incompetence and political attention seeking…Racial hoaxes have been a major part of the leftist agenda going back decades…Most of the nation’s racial hoaxes take place on college campuses. Recall the 2006 lacrosse rape case, in which three affluent white male Duke students were falsely accused of raping a black female stripper. Police exposed Bowling Green State University student Eleesha Long as a liar after she complained about being attacked by Trump supporters the day after his election.”
So, fake hate crimes are a favorite tactic of the Left, and probably those who fund the Left also. They give our fake news media a golden chance to shout, scream, and froth at the mouth in “righteous indignation” about the amazing amount of “white racism” in this country. What about the black racism in the country? Sshhh! Don’t talk about that-don’t you realize that is a non-subject, something to be treated as if it never existed.
An article on https://townhall.com for February 18th of this year spelled this out quite succinctly. It stated: “Liberals must love hate crimes. Why else would they fabricate so many of them? It could be that few events do more to both foster the liberal narrative and further the liberal political agenda than an old-fashioned skoal-chomping, meth-snorting, beer-can chucking hate crime committed by some racist, toothless wife-beater-clad redneck. And if there’s a Confederate flag flying somewhere, so much the better.” The article went on to note “…that caricature is becoming increasingly rare these days…” So how to compensate for this rarity? Well, how about a slew of fake hate crimes for a start?
It’s interesting to note that the Left has no authentic way to promote its agenda and so it must resort to fake hate crimes against those on the right to make itself look good and virtuous. That fact, alone, should tell you something about where the Left really is. Their entire “compassionate” agenda is really nothing more than a fake grab for power-and they’ll take it any way they can get it, no matter who they have to lie about or demonize. For the Left, the end truly justifies the means.
In my internet ramblings I just ran across an article by Michelle Malkin for February 20th on http://www.michellemalkin.com that I thought was good. I don’t always read Malkin because there are some issues she has that I disagree with, but this particular article was good. It had to do with the history of “fake nooses.” She went into a brief history of how nooses have been used as fake hate symbols in recent years. Any of you who have read about the debacle over nooses in Genna, Louisiana a few years back will remember what I am talking about.
Anyway, Malkin writes: “Columbia University, 2007. Remember black psychology professor Madonna Constantine? She made the rounds on none other than ABC’s Good Morning America, claiming she found a ‘degrading’ noose (made of hand-tied twine) hanging from her office door. Constantine led fist-waving protests, decried ‘systematic racism,’ and prompted a nation-wide uproar, as I reported at the time in the New York Post. Things didn’t add up when Columbia initially blocked investigators from obtaining 56 hours of surveillance video. No culprits could be found on the militantly progressive campus obsessed with diversity and multiculturalism. It turned out that Constantine was desperately trying to distract from a brewing internal probe of her serial plagiarism, for which she was eventually fired. The hate crime probe hit a dead end and Constantine faced no criminal charges over the Fake Noose incident.” Read this paragraph again. It tells you something about the caliber of those that instruct your kids in college, not all of them, but at least some. Over the years I have known some honest college professors, but I have also known about some of the other kind, and some of them have most assuredly had Leftist agendas they tried to force on the students committed to their tutelage.
There were other blatant examples amongst the material I dug up, but, again, you can’t possibly use all of it or you’d have a book, and sadly, most today have no interest in books. You can hardly get some to read six paragraphs without complaining that the articles are too long.
So, out of all of this, take a few salient thoughts. The Leftists and their financiers love fake hate crimes, and the more faked they are the more mileage they can get out of them. And fake hate crimes can often be used to detract readers from some of what is really going on. Another favorite tactic of the Left. Colleges are great places for fake hate crimes to be perpetrated and some colleges seem quite reluctant to see fake hate crimes exposed. That should tell you something about such colleges. Are they places you want your kids “educated” in?
The entire educational scene today, from K-12 through college is something that parents need to start looking into and researching and checking out. The days of letting “educators” bowl you over with pious platitudes are over. Parents need to start doing the homework about what their kids might be learning. I can guarantee you that once you start doing this, you will never be the same again, but, if you do it, your kids and grandkids will be better off for it.
Repeal “Sikh Heritage Month” Bill
by Dan Murray
School teacher, Dan Murray is a writer, speaker, and the founder of Immigration Watch Canada.
Most Canadians are probably not aware that on Nov. 7, 2018, Parliament voted to celebrate “Sikh Heritage Month” nationally in April of every year. That observation starts this April.
The big question most Canadians should ask is “WHY”?
According to Sikh MP Sukh Dhaliwal, who introduced the bill, here is why : “By designating the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month, the Parliament of Canada would provide an opportunity to reflect on, celebrate and educate future generations about the inspirational role that Sikh Canadians have played and continue to play in communities across the country”.
The next question Canadians should ask is this : Is it true that Sikhs played an inspirational role in Canada? The evidence clearly says that they did not.
The following is a list of 8 reasons why Parliament should never have even considered the celebration of a “Sikh Heritage Month”:
(1)The behaviour of some of the earliest Sikhs to arrive in Canada (aboard a Japanese-named ship called the Panama Maru in 1913) was a foreshadowing and a warning. It demonstrated Sikh willingness to use fraudulent documents. It also showed their attitude that they had a right to enter Canada and that Canada had no right to oppose their entry.
The Panama Maru event helps to explain much of what happened in the much larger Komagata Maru incident in 1914. Sikhs repeatedly use the KM event to proclaim victim status. They omit many facts including the fact that they assassinated a Canadian immigration agent. For details, see
The Panama Maru carried 56 East Indians to Canada. Most of the passengers on the Panama Maru had not lived in Canada previously, but falsely claimed that they had. They produced fake money order receipts, time cards, etc. to substantiate their claims. Immigration authorities allowed 17 to land (those physically recognized to have been here before), but they detained 39 of the 56. A Board of Inquiry looked into the case and ordered that the 39 be deported, but litigious East Indians in Canada determined to make the Panama Maru case a test case which, if won, would open Canada’s border to huge numbers of Sikhs and other East Indians. Their lawyer J.Edward Bird appeared before Justice Dennis Murphy, the author of a Royal Commission which had investigated Chinese Immigration Fraud. He ruled against the East Indians. Undaunted, Bird then went to Chief Justice Gordon Hunter, who was notorious for appearing drunk in court and who was a clear embarrassment to the government. Hunter allowed the 39 to stay. Worse, 4 of the 39 who had been ordered deported for medical reasons, escaped from detention and could not be found. After this humiliating incident, Canadian immigration authorities undoubtedly resolved not to let the Sikhs humiliate them again, particularly those on the Komagata Maru.
(2) Although many years of Sikh immigration peace followed, the Singh Decision of 1985 signaled the beginning of Sikh-caused refugee and immigration chaos in Canada. Between 1977 and 1981, six citizens of India (all Sikhs with the surname Singh) plus a Guyanese citizen of Indian heritage, made separate refugee claims in Canada. This should have been seen as another warning. In making their claims, the Sikhs continued a Sikh pattern of using litigation to break down any barriers to Sikh entry to Canada. Initially, all seven were denied entry, but they used a loophole in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms (particularly the definition of the word “everyone” to include non-Canadians such as them) and remained in Canada. In doing so, they turned Canada’s refugee system into a quasi-judicial body which soon became mired in tens of thousands of claims (most of them illegitimate).
Those claims have cost Canada billions of dollars and saddled Canada with people who have contempt for Canada. Is this supposed to be an example of the “Sikh Heritage” that Canadians are expected to celebrate every April?
(3) The Sikh bombing and murder of 329 people about an Air India plane in 1985 should have moved Canada to place severe restrictions on Sikh immigration. But it did not. That bombing plot which originated in Vancouver caused the largest mass murder in Canadian history. Up to this point in 2019, the Sikhs have placed Trudeau in their collective pocket. Most important, none of the Sikh ringleaders has paid for that crime.
Is this another example of the “Sikh Heritage” that Canadians are supposed to celebrate every April?
(4) A major reason why the Sikh bombers have never been held to account is the culture of intimidation by militant Sikhs of other Sikhs. The identities of the Sikh perpetrators are quite likely known even by the Sikh members of Trudeau’s cabinet, not to mention by hundreds of other Sikh politicians and professionals. However, all of these Sikhs have remained silent.
As a result, hundreds of the relatives of the bombing victims have never received justice. Until the criminals are behind bars, the word “Sikh” will be a dirty word to those relatives and to millions of other Canadians. Most Canadians want nothing to do with those Sikhs –let alone celebrate “SIKH HERITAGE”.
(5) Young and older male Sikhs have been significantly involved in drug industry criminality in Canada. However, when drug incidents are reported, our treacherous CBC and other media make a point of not disclosing the names of Sikh murderers or Sikh murdered. Most Canadians have come to expect that when the CBC or other media begrudgingly reveal the names of the criminals, those names will be ones such as Parvinder, Balwinder or some other Sikh name. In Metro Vancouver recently, Sikhs complained that they needed more police to deal with drug-dealing and drug gang killings. Ironically, the truth is that many people in Metro Vancouver think that Metro Vancouver does not need more police. It needs fewer Sikhs and less Sikh immigration. Metro Vancouver residents were also probably thinking that Sikh parents had to finally accept a “Canadian” cultural trait, that of being responsible for their offspring, not expecting the “gum’mint” to do that job for them. Again, is this very visible Sikh cultural defect what MP Dhaliwal wants all Canadians to celebrate every April?
(6) Canadians have become incredibly fed up with aggressive immigrants (both Sikhs and others) who demand that Canada adapt to immigrant customs. So far, no group has made as many demands for exemptions from Canadian laws as the Sikhs. In fact, Sikh demands to wear their turbans and their kirpans have been endless. If Sikhs really want to retain their customs, why are they here? Why would Canada want to create another political mess such as the Punjab in Canada and an environmental disaster such as India in Canada through relentless Sikh immigration? For a description of India’s “environmental disaster” status, see Ottawa’s report. https://immigrationwatchcanada.org/2018/02/02/canada-called-source-countries-immigrants-equally-strong-names-trump/
(7) Sikhs have grossly abused Canadian PM Chretien’s decision to create an additional Canadian consulate in India’s Punjab. It has become notorious for being the fraud capital of all of Canada’s consulates and embassies in the world. Tens of thousands of Sikhs have entered Canada as a result of fraud there. In other words, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Sikhs have entered Canada illegally. Why would Canada want to celebrate being defrauded by these people? The numbers are not an exaggeration. At recent Sikh festivals in the Vancouver and Toronto areas, some Sikh leaders boasted that up to 500,000 Sikhs attended. Who else besides Trudeau, would want to celebrate a heritage of shameless fraud?
(8) Political accommodation to the Sikhs has reached new levels of degradation under Trudeau. It is incredible that not a single MP voted against the “Sikh Heritage Month” bill. If they are unaware of the repeated Sikh negative actions against Canada, they should resign. According to statistics, Sikhs comprise about 1% of Canada’s population, but comprise about 13% of Trudeau’s Cabinet.
In making those appointments, Trudeau insulted Canadians of all backgrounds. Unbelievably, he went a step further. He appointed a rookie Sikh MP as his party’s house Leader, a position usually held by am experienced MP. The other Sikh MP’s will not win awards for being Canadian patriots or for having brains. For example, Trudeau’s Sikh Defence Minister, claimed, in an inferiority-complex delusion, that he was the leader of an important Canadian military offensive (Operation Medusa ) in Afghanistan. In fact, he played only a minor role. The same character presented a large, curved East Indian sword to an American General as if that were a Canadian-style weapon! In private, the American must have laughed. That Sikh minister has a serious identity problem. He seems to think that he is representing the Punjab, not Canada.
Delusional Sikhs belong to other parties also. To summarize : Is it sane to accept Sikh political degradation as part of Canada’s “heritage”?
This list could be ten times as long.
To put the matter bluntly but truthfully, the passing of the Sikh Heritage Act in November of 2018 is an example of how Canada’s Parliament has descended into the most degrading acts of political sodomy and boot-licking.
Our CBC and many politicians are proud to engage in such activity, but to recover Parliament’s dignity, here is what Parliament should do immediately:
REPEAL THE “SIKH HERITAGE MONTH” BILL.
IN ITS PLACE, INTRODUCE NEW BILLS TO PROTECT CANADA’S FRENCH AND UK HERITAGE AND PROTECT CANADA’S BORDERS!!
Legalized Plunder: An American Way of Life – I’d be jailed if I stole property like government does
by Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University, as well as a syndicated columnist and author.
Frederic Bastiat, a French economist and member of the French National Assembly, lived from 1801 to 1850. He had great admiration for our country, except for our two faults – slavery and tariffs. He said: “Look at the United States. There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its properdomain: the protection of every person’s liberty and property.” If Bastiat were alive today, he would not havethat same level of admiration. The U.S. has become what he fought against for most of his short life.
Bastiat observed that “when plunder becomes a way oflife for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system thatauthorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” You might ask, “What did Bastiat mean by ‘plunder’?” Plunder iswhen someone forcibly takes the property of another.That’s private plunder. What he truly railed against waslegalized plunder, and he told us how to identify it. Hesaid: “See if the law takes from some persons whatbelongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himselfcannot do without committing a crime.”
That could describe today’s American laws. Weenthusiastically demand that the U.S. Congress forcibly use one American to serve the purposes of anotherAmerican. You say: “Williams, that’s insulting. It’s noless than saying that we Americans support a form ofslavery!” What then should we call it when two-thirds to three-quarters of a $4 trillion-plus federal budget can be described as Congress taking the property of one American and giving it to another to whom it does not belong? Where do you think Congress gets the billions upon billions of dollars for business and farmer handouts? What about the billions handed out for Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, housing allowances and thousandsof other handouts? There’s no Santa Claus or tooth fairygiving Congress the money, and members of Congress are not spending their own money. The only way Congress can give one American $1 is to first take it from another American.
What if I privately took the property of one American togive to another American to help him out? I’m guessing and hoping you’d call it theft and seek to jail me. When Congress does the same thing, it’s still theft. The only difference is that it’s legalized theft. However, legality alone does not establish morality. Slavery was legal; was it moral? Nazi, Stalinist and Maoist purges were legal, but were they moral?
Some argue that Congress gets its authority to bypass its enumerated powers from the general welfare clause. There are a host of proofs that the framers had no such intention.James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” wrote, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one possessingenumerated powers, but an indefinite one.” Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Our tenet ever was … that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare,but were restrained to those specifically enumerated.”Rep. William Drayton of South Carolina asked in 1828,”If Congress can determine what constitutes the generalwelfare and can appropriate money for its advancement, where is the limitation to carrying into execution whatevercan be effected by money?”
What about our nation’s future? Alexis de Tocqueville is said to have predicted, “The American republic willendure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribethe public with the public’s money.” We long ago began ignoring Bastiat’s warning when the federal governmentwas just a tiny fraction of gross domestic product – 3percent, as opposed to today’s 20 percent: “If you don’ttake care, what begins by being an exception tends to become general, to multiply itself, and to develop into averitable system.”
Moral Americans are increasingly confronted withBastiat’s dilemma: “When law and morality contradicteach other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of eitherlosing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.”
Texas is Going to be Bluer than a Bluebonnet
by Paul H. Yarbrough
Born in Mississippi, Paul H. Yarbrough now calls Texas home. A critically acclaimed novelist, Paul is now bringing his writing talents to the political arena. He is also the humorist behind the weekly column, Redneck Diary.
Former sports announcer and bankrupt, now Lt. Governor of Texas, Dan Patrick has decided that his historical acumen can bring Texas forward into the true modern way of thinking. That is, the South is and always had been a bunch of ignorant savages. But no more. If con men such as he can remake his fortune via politics and radio blather then he can make Texas not just “purple” but “blue.” These sorts of politicians are the reason Ted Cruz won by such a narrow margin in November. At least we’ll have him for six more years.
Patrick has simply pulled Governor Greg Abbot by the political lapels. Shame on the Governor, too. In Texas, the Lt. Governor is the most powerful office in the state, which is where most of the blame for this non-conservative nonsense comes from. Together they are driving conservatives away.
Both have decided on going politically expedient regarding a plaque in the state capitol building, put up in 1959. The plaques is labeled: “The Creed of the Children of the Confederacy.” Because we desire to perpetuate in love and honor the heroic deed of those who enlisted in the Confederate services and upheld its flag for four years of war, we the children of the South have united in an organization called the Children of the Confederacy in which our strength enthusiasm and love of justice can exert its influence. We, therefore pledge ourselves to preserve pure ideals; to honor the memory of our beloved Veterans; to study and teach the truths of history (one of the most important, which is, that the War Between the States was not a rebellion, nor was the underlying cause to sustain slavery) and always to act in a manner that will reflect honor on our noble and patriotic ancestors. Those are the words of conservatism.
Patrick et al cower from the likes of black Dallas Democrat Eric Johnson who says, regarding the creed:
“It really tells some pretty clear lies in clear text…who can say the Civil War wasn’t a rebellion when we called the people who participated, and they called themselves, the people who participated in the war Rebels.”
Consider what award winning (and black) economist, well-known author and historical student Dr. Walter E. Williams of George Mason University says:
THE PROBLEMS THAT LED TO THE CIVIL WAR are the same problems today — big, intrusive government. The reason we don’t face the specter of another Civil War is because today’s Americans don’t have yesteryear’s spirit of liberty and constitutional respect, and political statesmanship is in short supply.
Actually, the war of 1861 was not a civil war. A civil war is a conflict between two or more factions trying to take over a government. In 1861, Confederate President Jefferson Davis was no more interested in taking over Washington than George Washington was interested in taking over England in 1776. Like Washington, Davis was seeking independence. Therefore, the war of 1861 should be called “The War Between the States” or the “War for Southern Independence.” The more bitter southerner might call it the “War of Northern Aggression.” The South did not rebel. They seceded lawfully, as had the Colonies in 1776.
Lincoln rebelled in 1861 when he unlawfully called for troops to invade the Southern states. Lincoln was the rebel. Lincoln, indeed, was the traitor. The South fought in defense of federalism; Lincoln raised troops to fight for nationalism and tariffs for the national treasury.
Patrick and Abbott are typical would-be conservatives who are no more conservative than the street corner neoconservatives who feed off of racism and pseudo history. If these political pros have researched history with any degree of primary source studies it is unclear.
Of course, the Southerners who were labeled Rebels accepted the notion only in the same sense as the Colonists excepted the appellation in 1776. As early as 1765 Patrick Henry in opposition to The Stamp Act: “if this be treason, let us make the most of it”. Patrick Henry was hardly a traitor. He was loyal to the covenant that the British Crown had originally agreed to for each independent colony.
What is disturbing about creatures like Patrick is often they are heard hiding behind the Bible with some paraphrased (edited) nonsense that The South was wrong. Had they truly studied some of the great theologians such as R.L. Dabney or James Henry Thornwell instead of modern on-stage glory hounds calling themselves evangelists, they might understand that the South was right. The South was for federalism, not slavery.
Both North and South were at the historical end of an unfortunate labor system that had been used in the expanding western world for 200 years. But the South certainly would not foster great men like Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson or Jefferson Davis to lead a war over this system. And it certainly did not offer up as sacrifice one out of every four lives to have such a war. But Lincoln would-and did. His soul was as dark as his beard.
The references to the support of slavery in the various states’ secession edicts were not in support of enslaving people but in response to abolitionists desires to repatriate slaves to Africa. Among the greatest of these promoters of repatriation, of course, was Abraham Lincoln. The comments by Southern secessionists on the nature of slavery was no different than in the North. Lincoln stared an illegal war to keep the South and its wealth within the American System (national) and not to free the slaves.
By the way, Governor Patrick, no slave ship ever sailed from a Southern port. All slave ships were of Northern registry and financed by Yankee slavers. North was the navigation society. South the agrarian.
But this constant popular notion that the South and its conservative heart are evil racists who hated the country and hated blacks is the driving force behind the so-called red states changing color. It isn’t a result of children like Alexandria Casio Cortez, or hustlers like Bernie Sanders or Al Sharpton. That ilk will fade into the environs of stupidity and unkindness. The historical dustbin as is said.
But it is the timid moderates like the Dan Patricks and Greg Abbotts and their kissing cousins the Neocon Bushes, Cheneys, Mark Levins and Victor Davis Hansons who will force Texas into purple-then blue. Ted Cruz was forced to the edge. But time had not run out on him and he has survived. But, Governor Abbott, and Lt Governor Patrick be careful. You guys are going to have your own Beto bomb ahead of you.
FROM THE EDITOR
Dr. Ed is a pastor, author, public speaker, radio personality, lobbyist, re-enactor, and the Director of Dixie Heritage.
I want to thank our friend, Dr. Chuck Baldwin, for reminding us that Wednesday, March 6, marked the 183rd anniversary of the fall of the Alamo back in 1836.
For 13 days, 189 brave Texian patriots withstood Santa Anna’s veteran army of over 5,000 troops. Having crossed William B. Travis’ line in the sand, the defenders of that church outside of San Antonio, Texas knew that they would never leave alive. They had several opportunities to leave, yet each time they chose to stay, and to fight, and to die.
It is difficult for most today to comprehend that great men such as Davy Crockett (a U.S. congressman), William B. Travis (only 26 years old with two small children at home), Jim Bowie (a wealthy landowner with property on both sides of the Rio Grande) and Almaron Dickinson (a 36-year-old blacksmith and artillery captain who was one of the very last men to die at the Alamo and whose young wife and daughter were two of only three Alamo survivors) were real. They were real men with real dreams and real desires. Real blood flowed through their veins. They loved their families and enjoyed life as much as any of us do. However, there was something different about them. They possessed a commitment to liberty.
Liberty is an easy word to say, but it is a hard word to live. Freedom involves much more than financial gain or personal pleasure. Accompanying Freedom is her constant and unattractive companion, Responsibility. That is why those who would live free must always FIGHT for their freedom.
Early in the siege, William B. Travis wrote these words:
“Fellow Citizens & Compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna. . . . The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword. . . . I have answered the demand with a cannon shot & our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat. . . . VICTORY OR DEATH! P.S. The Lord is on our side.”
As you read those words, remember that the men at the Alamo did not have the National Education Association (NEA) telling them how intolerant and narrow-minded their notions of honor and patriotism were. They didn’t have the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) telling them they were a hate group. A hostile media did not constantly castigate them as a bunch of wild-eyed extremists. As schoolchildren, they were not taught that their ancestors were nothing more than racist jerks. The TSA didn’t have them on a terrorist watch list. Neither did they have effeminate compromised pastors constantly filling their hearts and minds with the IRS 501(c)3 approved message of “obey-the-government-obey the ‘law of the land'” misinterpretation of Romans chapter 13.
The brave men at the Alamo fought with the belief that America (and Tejas) really was “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” They believed in God and that their cause was just. They also believed that the freedom of future generations depended on their courage and resolve. They further believed their posterity would remember their sacrifice as an act of love and devotion.
To the lesser men of today, the men of the Alamo appear foolish. They had no chance of winning. Still they answered the call of their nation to “Victory or death!”
Remember the Alamo as you watch the Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C.
Those courageous men at the Alamo did not fight and die for a political party or for the “lesser of two evils.”
Until Next Week,
P.O. Box 618
Lowell, FL 32663