Confederacy of the determined - (Southern heritage buffs vow "Confederate History Month")

WASHINGTON TIMES.COM ^ | APRIL 24, 2005 | Christina Bellantoni

[CHARLITE]

Southern heritage buffs vow to use the Virginia gubernatorial election as a platform for designating April as Confederate History and Heritage Month.

The four candidates have differing views on the Confederacy, an issue that has been debated for years in the commonwealth.

"We're not just a few people making a lot of noise," said Brag Bowling, a spokesman for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the oldest hereditary organization for male descendents of Confederate soldiers. "This is not a racial thing; it is good for Virginia. We're going to keep pushing this until we get it."

Each candidate recently shared his thoughts on what Mr. Bowling called a "litmus test for all politicians." Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine would not support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Former state Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore would support something that recognizes everyone who lived during the Civil War.

Sen. H. Russell Potts Jr. and Warrenton Mayor George B. Fitch would support a Confederate History and Heritage Month. Many past Virginia governors honored the Civil War or the Confederacy.

In 1990, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, the nation's first black governor, a Democrat and a grandson of slaves, issued a proclamation praising both sides of the war and remembering "those who sacrificed in this great struggle."

Former Govs. George Allen and James S. Gilmore III, both Republicans, issued Confederate History Month proclamations. In 2000, Mr. Gilmore replaced that proclamation with one commemorating both sides of the Civil War -- a move that enraged the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Gov. Mark Warner, a Democrat, has refused to issue a gubernatorial decree on either side of the Civil War.

Mr. Kaine, another Democrat, would decline to issue a Confederate History and Heritage Month proclamation if he is elected governor, said his campaign spokeswoman, Delacey Skinner.

[TexConfederate1861]

Allow me to answer....the Provisional Confederate Congress.
(Who were themselves directly elected by the people)

[M. Espinola]

"In other words, the South had no reason to secede, except to protect its right to expand slavery."

It's true, especially after one reviews the bombastic speech of Confed 'VP' Andrew Stephens. Today that speech remains one of the most worshiped hate rantings of the KKK & neo-Nazis (those that can read). The words are 100% pure hate.

I am wondering if anyone will dare defend Stephens deliberately provoking viciousness.

[stainlessbanner]

State delegates at the convention. Representative gov't.

[4CJ]

Jefferson Davis was SELECTED not ELECTED, real Americans know the difference...

A lie repeated is still a lie. Jefferson Davis was nominated in committee (the Constitutional Convention) and was ELECTED Provisional President. With the ratification of the permanent convention, Davis RAN for election and won the seat.

[M. Espinola]

We know Castro and Yamamoto are/were self declared enemies of the United States. I believe in the case of Yamamoto being a leaned man, he knew his actions at Pearl Harbor were beyond wrong and the implications for Japan but he acted regardless and paid the highest price.

Lincoln was President of the United States. Booth and his conspirators were part of the rebellion in this nation that resulted in civil war.

In fact currently there are a number of books out concerning Booth and his 'other interconnections', some of which may have been overseas powers. I do have a verdict either way at this point.

If the Booth conspirators had been successful they would have murdered the entire heads of Lincoln's Executive Branch of the American government. That is the known plan. So some of Booth's cohorts chickened out at the last minute, maybe understanding there abominable actions were absolute treason against one's country.

Remember we almost witnessed the entire slaughter of not just members of the White House, but those on Capitol Hill too, on 9-11. Instead the high-jacked jumbo jet heading for it's preplanned 'target' was shot down. Unfortunately thousands were murdered that day in the air and on the ground & in buildings.

If people begin saying it's okay to bump off this or that President for whatever reasoning, where does it end.?

Lincoln (and I do not agree) was willing to be far too lenient concerning the cotton empire's architects of insurrection, and he was shot in the back of the head for his efforts for mending the nation after the four long years of a horrific Civil War.

Lincoln assassination reminds me of that deadly day in Dallas, a despicable inside job. A stain on our country's soul.

[M. Espinola]

State delegates at the convention. Representative gov't.

So you actually admit Davis was not elected as all Presidents of the United States are, by the voters, the regular shmoes, remember them? Lincoln was elected in the same traditional manner Presidents Bush, Reagan, JFK and George Washington coupled with all other Presidents were elected, by the American voter, the general public.

Anyone can get their like minded friends together as 'delegates' and 'vote' in a president.

Stop the historical spin. The Civil War ended a long time ago, so did the era of Jim Crow, or had you not heard?

[TexConfederate1861]

Friend:

First: Please do not dishonor my ancestors by refering to the war as a "Rebellion". It wasn't. Congress officially named it the War Between the States in 1877. To refer to the war as a "rebellion" is as ludicrous as me refering to it as the "War of Northern Agression"

You may not agree with the fact that the Confederacy was a legitimate entity, but you must realize that from the Southern point of view, Lincoln was an enemy. Once he authorized Kilpatrick & Dahlgren to make their raid on Richmond, he placed himself in the risk of being killed s well. From the Confederate Governments point of view, ordering an assassination was morally correct, and viable, due to the above facts.

[M. Espinola]

The voters did not elected Davis to anything, no matter how you spin it. Davis, and that other one, Stephens, were selected, hand picked by the chief promoters of the pro-slavery's 'Plantation Incorporated', their good friends.

And they say Lincoln was an ugly looking cat? - LOL - This is Poster Boy for cosmetic surgery!

No wonder he needed other people to horsewhip down. Imagine looking in the mirror at that everyday?

[TexConfederate1861]

I won't defend his words. To him, slavery might have been worth fighting for, but he wasn't the one that was doing the dying. What you have to realize is that some statesmen in the South, and most of it's people didn't agree with slavery, but defended it as a matter of state's rights. In other words, [If they can take away our slaves, what will they take away next!] That is the crux of the whole situation. Stephens was a staunch supporter of slavery. The ironic thing is that he and Lincoln were close friends.

[4CJ]

Lincoln was elected in the same traditional manner Presidents Bush, Reagan, JFK and George Washington coupled with all other Presidents were elected, by the American voter, the general public.

Check your history books. Washington, Adams, Jefferson were not elected by popular (democratic) vote.

Even today, you do not vote for President, you vote for a REPRESENTATIVE that will cast THEIR ballot for President. President Davis was elected as President twice, once by the convention, once on state ballots.

[M. Espinola]

Friend:

If I did not call them like I see them I would not be honest in my overview of either side during the Civil War.

I realize Lincoln was the enemy to those promoters of insurrection since they were determined to expand and also maintain their monetary interests in the cotton trade which was only possible due to the continuation of slavery. Let's face it, the plantation masters were not about to pick cotton in the blazing humid heat all day.

In terms of any raid on Richmond. If such a raid would have ended the wholesale bloodshed this nation been reduced to, then naturally & logically a plan to end the Civil War should have been implemented.

Since the removal or capturing of the entire Confederate régime never happened the assassination of President Lincoln is even more detestable.

What if some politicians triggered a civil war in today's America. You and I both know what the public outcry would be. What you are saying here, "From the Confederate Governments point of view, ordering an was morally correct, and viable, due to the above facts."

The assassination of any American President can ever be considered "morally correct".

Look at this topic in this manner. If the same question were polled to the Americans people today on if it is permissible or morally correct to assassinate any American President for any reason, the overwhelming response would be one of being appalled the question was even being asked and second, the answer would be 'no', 'never'.

That is part the point of disagreement. The other is I do not considerer the corporate interests for the promotion of the South's exported commodity crop, that being cotton, to be a government by any stretch of the imagination, no matter how the Southern corporate leaders attempted to spin it even back in 1861.

The majority of little guys doing the fighting for the cotton empire and dieing, did not share in the corporate entities profits.

Examine the moral fiber of some of the prime promoters of insurrection and succession, the likes of Griffin and Stephens. These were despicable examples for human beings so consumed with hate one shot himself because he could not live in reality of freedom for the slaves he so valued for his own self gain.

The bottom line in all of this is if the Confederates had pulled off total victory slavery would have continued and being a divided nation we would have been susceptible to foreign intervention. I know those possibilities are unaceptable to you as well as I.

[M. Espinola]

You should be more than cognizant by now the same worn out spin defending your hero's position on slavery will not work with me and most other on here. Why do you even bother knowing this?

[M. Espinola]

"I won't defend his words. To him, slavery might have been worth fighting for, but he wasn't the one that was doing the dying."

Yes! That's the point. This Stephens schmuck was hoping to make another killing at the expense of the little guys.

If Lincoln was friends with Stephens he needed to have his head examined.

On the 'states rights' issue. the KKK during the 1950 & 1960's used the same line to defend state mandated segregation. That failed too. In fact if you read any of the dribble from such hate groups they still use 'states rights' when it favours their demented causes.

[Old Mountain man]

I'm an Atlanta native and believe me, it never recovered, although it is being overwhelmed with yankees and yankee dollars these days.

[M. Espinola]

Look at that photo of Stephens, you have to admit he was one ugly dude! LOL

[stainlessbanner]

Again, it's called Representative Government.

[TexConfederate1861]

Well, he had suffered from some sort of disease, most of his life. Looks like he had suffered from smallpox as well.
He and Lincoln were great friends before the war. It is well documented.

[stand watie]

THANK YOU, moron for your DIMwitted respobnse.

free dixie,sw

[TexConfederate1861]

You can't justify the assasination attempt on the Confederate Cabinet, and then turn around and condemn Lincoln's assassination. The only difference is that Booth suceeded, where Kilpatrick failed.

[stand watie]

you won't have ANY difficulty getting a part on the GONG SHOW. they like DUMBbunnies.

free dixie,sw