RSS Feed MenuMy latest column for The Week examines the controversy over Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell’s proclamation declaring April as “Confederate History Month”.
[McDonnell] released what he apparently hoped would be a bland, inoffensive statement about the importance of remembering the past.
But the Civil War is a subject about which it is impossible to be bland, and in urging Virginians to remember, the proclamation engaged in some creative forgetting. It claimed that Confederate soldiers “fought for their homes and communities and Commonwealth.” None of those things was endangered in 1861. What was endangered was slavery – and slavery goes entirely unmentioned in McDonnell’s proclamation.
For a governor who was trying to make an embarrassing and divisive issue go away, this was an epic fail. For a politician who is said to aspire to national office, it is a serious misstep.
Click here to read the rest.
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 1:13 am
It is rich as hell to be lectured to by the author of both “The Axis of Evil” and “Unpatriotic Conservatives” on any subject under the sun! Goddamned laugh riot!
msmilack // Apr 8, 2010 at 2:43 am
I saw a moving interview with Julian Bond who suggested that the best response would have been to dedicate a month to remembering the Civil War, not just the Confederacy; that way, the entire history of the period and event could be acknowledged, while the participants from both sides of the war — whom he described as honorable men on both sides — could be remembered. It sounded like an excellent idea to me.
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 3:20 am
Still squirming out of this epic Fail? McDonnell insulted and p****d off blacks and patted the Southern Romantics on the head. The GOP continues to have a tin ear and a rotted heart when it comes to African-Americans.
William F. Buckley supported the South in their opposition to Brown vs. Board of Education in 1955, saying Negroes weren’t civilized. Every five or ten years the GOP finds a new way to remind us which side they chose in the civil rights era. The Southern Strategy worked, the GOP traded southern whites for every black in America.
Well done.
JonF // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:45 am
Re: Every five or ten years the GOP finds a new way to remind us which side they chose in the civil rights era.
Let’s be fair here. The GOP was as divided on Civil Rights as the Democrats were. Many GOP senators did vote in favor of civil righst legislation, and it was a GOP president who sent troops to enforce desegregation.
S.L. Toddard // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:21 am
“Every five or ten years the GOP finds a new way to remind us which side they chose in the civil rights era”
Yes – their own. Isn’t that odd – that there are still Americans who choose their own side? I’m sure that you and your ilk are quite frustrated that you have not yet turned every ethnic American (meaning every American whose ethnicity is “American”) against his ancestors, against his people and against his history. I am not sure why, though – in the long run your side will win, and all Americans will be cringing, servile and impotent, severed from their ancestors and history and each other. You should have no problem whatsoever riding roughshod over these pathetic folk, stripped as they will be of all their virility and pride and ethnic identity, and confiscating what they earn for yourselves and the special interest groups you favor.
“A defense of the Confederate past is morally outrageous”
A defense of the Confederate past is no more “morally outrageous” than a defense of the American past. The stars and stripes flew over more slaves and slaveowners than the stars and bars ever did, and slaves labored in the Union far longer than they ever labored in the CSA. Here is a simple statement of fact (and rbottoms this is not directed at you – I understand that your people and mine have different heroes, as different peoples should): if one must repudiate Confederate history, one must repudiate American history. If the Confederates were “traitors”, the Founders were “traitors”. If the Confederate cause was illegitimate, the cause of American independence was illegitimate. The logic girding these truisms is impregnable and unassailable. It is excusable for a foreigner like David Frum to be ignorant of such things, but the Americans here should know better.
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 10:50 am
rbottoms, fry Mumia!
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 11:40 am
…..and yet initially David Frum dismissed it as a lot of fuss about nothing…..it was a stunt designed to reinforce McDonnell’s Republican base that is heavily made up of Confederacy romantics and some racists……in truth I think it’s more about romanticism than racism……which is really a testament to huge tin ear the GOP has developed……they just don’t seem to comprehend that actions (secession, invading Iraq, trying to block healthcare, etc) have consequences and often they are very unpleasant…..but as long as they are screened from them that’s just fine
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 11:55 am
S.L. Toddard // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:21 am
……”Have you ever noticed” as Andy Rooney used to say, how justifications for the attempted destruction of the union in defence of slavery by white supremacists and confederacy freaks always follow the same well worn path:
1. The civil war wasn’t about slavery it was about nullification, tariffs, states rights etc etc…..when this fig leaf is torn away it’s onto
2. Sterile arguments about legalisms where southern claims about secessionary rights are countered by presidential powers or specific clauses in the constitution about rewriting sections of it. Ultimately futile of course because the duly elected president of the day and the congress believed they had the powers to preserve the union and successfully implemented them.
3. Finally scraping the bottom of the barrel it’s casuistic arguments about reverse racism or cultural marxism, or false continums (the founders were traitors also), and assorted other bs.
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm
Does anyone here really believe that if the governor of New York proclaimed Stalin Appreciation Month that there would be any uproar? Of course there would be no uproar!
DFL // Apr 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm
Winston Churchill called the exploits of the Army of Northern Virginia “unsurpassed in history” in his HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES. The men in gray are heroes and they are certainly my heroes. Anyone who dishonors the fighting men of the South are my personal enemies. That McDonnell is getting all rubber-legged right now tells me that he is soft and not to be trusted.
SFTor1 // Apr 8, 2010 at 12:14 pm
S.L. Toddard says that the GOP was behind their “own” side in the Civil Rights era. The implication is of course that the GOP was then a party for white people, and it was in the interest of these white people to deny civil rights to others.
Behind Mr.Toddard’s emanations is just another racist with a thesaurus. Good luck with this human garbage in the Republican Party.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 12:18 pm
DFL // Apr 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm
“Winston Churchill called the exploits of the Army of Northern Virginia “unsurpassed in history” in his HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES.”
……General Sir Alan Brooke, Churchill’s principal military advisor for most of the war, described the Werhmacht as ” they really are the finest soldiers in the world”………I agree with you totally about the fighting qualities of the southern infantry, and the tactical and strategic skill of their leaders Jackson and Lee,…….but you might want to step out of the smoke wreathed nostalgia for a moment and remember that, unfortunately, all that heroism, like that of Wehrmacht’s, was in furtherance of a deeply flawed cause.
dendup // Apr 8, 2010 at 4:38 pm
David, here you quote yourself in an evasive manner. While you link to your column, you leave out the core f your argument there in favor of trying to offend no one here- a sin you equate with cowardice in other contexts.
Here is what I think is the best part of your column:
“Maybe the beginning of the answer is found in another great speech, from another eloquent leader, Richard von Weizsacker, president of West Germany, delivered to the Bundestag on May 8, 1985, the 40th anniversary of the Nazi surrender. With just a few alterations, it could serve as a valedictory for the Confederacy as well.
“We need and we have the strength to look truth straight in the eye–without embellishment and without distortion. … The greater honesty we show in commemorating this day, the freer we are to face the consequences with due responsibility. … “”
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:50 pm
Off topic, but is John Henke too bored with the idea of running a blog over at The Next Right.
Both blogs started at roughtly the same time, and NR went up first if memory serves. What’s the update rate over there, twice a month?
I may not agree with anything David Frum writes, but at least he writes something for me to poke at, it’s night of the living dead at Next Right.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:57 pm
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:50 pm
“I may not agree with anything David Frum writes, but at least he writes something for me to poke at, it’s night of the living dead at Next Right.”
….To be fair David is properly capitalized whereas Henke probably isn’t……I must say I’ve derived huge entertainment from David’s blog and …..boy…..does it tell you somenthing about the nature of today’s GOP.
“
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:04 pm
To be fair David is properly capitalized whereas Henke probably isn’t
If Henke posted as much on his own blog as I do on David’s he might have some traffic.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 8:00 pm
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:04 pm
” If Henke posted as much on his own blog as I do on David’s ”
…..you and I are part of the regulars but the right as represented here sure paints a hell of an interesting picture don’ t you think
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 9:07 pm
…..you and I are part of the regulars but the right as represented here sure paints a hell of an interesting picture don’ t you think
If start with the assumption that the picture of America has been painted Salvidor Dali, yes.
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Heh.
Tea Party candidate received farm subsidies, but he’s ready to eliminate them
Last week, Amy Gardner reported on the Tea Party flak faced by Tennessee congressional candidate Stephen Fincher over the roughly $200,000 per year he receives in federal farm subsidies.
The size of Fincher’s subsidies put him in a class of his own, but he’s not alone in receiving such subsidies. According to USDA records downloaded by the Environmental Working Group, Indiana State Sen. Marlin Stutzman, who is running for the state’s open U.S. Senate seat, received a total of $156,907.54 in subsidies from 1997 to 2006. During the last year for which we have records, he got $13,630 in subsidies.
Stutzman, who co-owns a farm and fully owns a farm trucking company, was elected to Indiana’s legislature in 2002 and has built some national support among conservatives looking for another rising star. On his campaign site, Stutzman trumpets the support of RedState’s Erick Erickson and some kind words from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.).
Rocketship7 // Apr 8, 2010 at 10:50 pm
Democrat’s still (2010)harbor a former member of the KKK in the US Senate.
David, we United Empire Loyalists harbored Jefferson Davis. Part of our proud Canadian history.
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Democrat’s still (2010)harbor a former member of the KKK in the US Senate.
We;re not harboring the old codger, we’re just waiting for him to expire.
Last time I checked he a.) renounced that evil decades ago, and b.) gets himself elected using the good old two party electoral system.
The difference between Robert Byrd’s sins and the modern GOP is we know the GOP is full of s**t when it comes to their claims of all new spots. Byrd brings home the bacon to the mostly white citizens of his state which I would assume counts for his continuing in office.
In any case the problem isn’t ours, it’s yours. Demographics say Hispanics, Asians, and African-Americans will outnumber whites pretty soon. If the GOP keeps on its present course they won’t seeing their votes.
So please, commemorate the South’s Stormtroopers with Confederate Nazi Month or whatever you call it every damn year. We’ll see who benefits.
Carney // Apr 10, 2010 at 12:16 am
If non-whites are hostile to Republicans, why should Republicans support non-whites becoming a majority? Why shouldn’t Republicans halt and reverse immigration?
This is never answered – we just even louder demands that Republicans drop all stances annoying to non-whites and that whites should be the first major demographic group in world history to voluntarily and deliberately lose control of our destiny in our own nation, to groups that are openly and aggressively unsympathetic, at best, to our interests. Sorry, that offer is not attractive. I’ll stick with rolling back immigration.