Replies

There is nothing wrong with judging someone by association. If someone running for office went to the Bahamas with Bill and Hillary I wouldn't vote for them. Neither would I vote for John Walker due to his association with the Taliban.

I'd also not vote for anyone demonizing people with terms like "granny" or "eat, meet, and retreater" and who seeks to reduce membership in the SCV by driving out people who are not sufficiently radical for them.

If someone comes to the SCV and volunteers to "polish headstones" and has no interest in politics, going to meetings, or doing anything else then I will welcome that person as an official "headstone polisher" because the headstones of Confederate soldiers actually need polishing. If someone comes to the SCV and wants to do NOTHING but write articles for local historical publications then I will welcome them because historical articles need to be published. If someone comes to the SCV and wants to do nothing but pay his dues and hang a certificate on the wall then I will welcome him because his dues are needed and his friends need to see that certificate on the wall.

If someone wants to form a white separitist group then they should go do it and leave the rest of us out of it. If they want an organization that focuses exclusively on attacking the NAACP and excludes "headstone polishing" then go form it. They should, however, stop trying to increase dissension and argument inside the SCV and reform it into something it is not and never has been.

This is funny. You shouldn't "demonize" someone with terms like "granny" but it's okay to demonize them with terms like "racist" and "white supremacist."

And why? Because of who their law clients were? Morris Dees once defended a guy whose legal fees were paid by the klan. Do you call Dees a "klan lawyer"?