Posted on 07/13/2019 11:31:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
Mandated by law, Saturday, July 13 is "Nathan Forrest Bedford Day" Tennessee with an annual proclamation issued by the governor each year. On Friday evening, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas slammed Governor Bill Lee for signing the announcement once again.
This is WRONG. Nathan Bedford Forrest was a Confederate general & a delegate to the 1868 Democratic Convention. He was also a slave trader & the 1st Grand Wizard of the KKK. Tennessee should not have an official day (tomorrow) honoring him. Change the law. https://t.co/XBgoRCBoI0— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) July 12, 2019
But why did he have to sign the law? Fox News has the details:
Tennessee law stipulates that the governor must declare six days to be "days of special observance" and "invite the people of this state to observe the days in schools, churches, and other suitable places with appropriate ceremonies expressive of the public sentiment befitting the anniversary of such dates."
Those days include Robert E. Lee Day, honoring the commander of the Confederate Army, on Jan. 19; Abraham Lincoln Day on Feb. 12; Andrew Jackson Day on March 15; Confederate Decoration Day, celebrating the birthday of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, on June 3; and Veterans Day on Nov. 11.
Accordingly, Democratic state Tennessee lawmakers also criticized the law and the day honoring Bedford.
"This a reminder of the painful and hurtful of the crimes that were committed against black people," Democratic Tennessee Rep. Vincent Dixie told WTVF. "Now you're signing a proclamation honoring the same people that fought to keep people that look like me, African Americans in slavery."
Cruz probably isn't interested in running again. But really, this wouldn't hurt his chances in the South or his chances of getting reelected. The last Confederate veteran died 60 years ago, and neoconfederate sentiment isn't as strong as some people think.
He looks better with a beard.
It is an absurd law giving ammo to the Demons.
The law mandates a proclamation on those days. Previous efforts to change the law have failed. Did Lee’s predecessors, including the most recent Democrat, issue a proclamation for Forrest? I’ll bet they did, but that’s before we all got “woke”.
Lee-Jackson Day was one thing. Nathan Bedford Forrest Day is something else again.
Best Bio I’ve heard of (haven’t read it yet) is:
That Devil Forrest: Life of General Nathan Bedford Forrest
https://www.amazon.com/That-Devil-Forrest-General-Bedford/dp/1542609968
> > > Isn’t he from Texas? How is it any of his business?
It was The Birth of a Nation. Racism is and always has been the Democrats' thing.
The Democrats' views on race have not changed one iota since the day the party was founded. Only the color of the hoods has changed.
He’s a politician. They are not like us.
“The latest “virtue signal” from the GOP. Ted never fails to disappoint as of late.”
Not just as of late. Ted was among the first to criticize Trump for not firing Corey Lewandowski on the spot, despite no evidence.
Cruz isn’t taking the liberal side of this issue. The liberal side is to defend racism and slavery to the death.
Great post!
Accurate, but only a minimal piece of the truth.
Jefferson never bought or sold a slave because he would not buy or sell human beings. He couldn't free them because he was in debt and Virginia law prohibited releasing your slaves if you were in debt.
Washington couldn't release his because they were dowry slaves and Virginia law prohibited freeing dowry slaves.
Little attention is paid to Forrest and if this be true his biography is just a slanderous attack. He might have been more slandered than Alexander Hamilton.
How did the KKK klaim originate? It claims he was a founder but resigned after a year or so.
More so than Stonewall Jackson?
But it is the Klan involvement that separates him from Lee, Jackson, Stuart, and the rest.
I'm leanin' heavily toward Not Guilty.
The KKK claim.....there's no evidence he was in it. His actions and public utterances go against the idea that he was actually in it. When disbanding his troops at the end of the war he told them to obey the law and he took public positions in favor of admitting Blacks to all the professions, no discrimination, etc. He denied he was in it in his congressional testimony. Its almost certain recruiters for the KKK used his name in order to recruit and spread word that he supported it. He was a famous war hero in Tennessee after all. That's probably where the accusations come from. We have to remember that the KKK at that time....ie during the Occupation....was not the same as the 20th century reincarnation of it. It was lawless. It could certainly be violent. It was certainly racist. Then again it was fighting against occupation governments that were manifestly corrupt, governments which levied ruinous taxes on people and dispossessed people of their homes for inability to pay those taxes and governments in which corrupt carpet baggers then stole the tax money and the land. Remember too that almost all of the voters in the South had been disenfranchised during the Occupation so this was massive taxation without representation. It should not surprise anybody that there would be violent opposition to this. So both the Occupation governments and the KKK were quite dirty here.
Vincent Dixie? Irony...
Stupid amd insulting law thouhh...
Ok, thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.