The Future of Southern Nationalism …

… as expressed by the League of the South.

At least they are candid about their racism and bigotry.

Or you could treat yourself to this:

….on the other side of the capital is a statue to the 33 negro legislators who were thrown out of office in 1868 by the republican and democrats in the house and senate. One of those black legislators was Thomas Beard. He was a mulatto and would say he was white in some crowds and say he was black in others. Beard challenged my ancestor, Stephen Corker, the day he showed up for his seat in the 5th district congress of Georgia. The election was in December of 1870. Corker took his seat and Benjamin Butler of New Orleans fame did not allow Corker to be seated and supported the challenge. A vote was held in 1871 and my ancestor won the right to be seated. Beard spent the rest of the session challanging my ancestor. The last day of the house session only approx. 45 days later the house passed a resolution allowing Corker to officially serve his seat. Corker was the last representative from the old Confederacy to be allowed to be seated as Georgia was the last state readmitted. The Southern papers called it redemption for Georgia. I am proud my ancestor beat the negro on the statue on the Georgia capital grounds. First they took our flag…now they take our statues..Never trust a politician……..last but not least…..the first black georgia congressional representative Jefferson Long was seated for the first time this same 41st Us congress…..one of the few votes he cast was to NOT seat Corker…..again…I am proud my ancestor beat the negroes in the history of my State.

Yes, that’s him.

Want to Take a Course for Credit on the Civil War?

Start here.

No comment.

The First Amendment and Blogging

I note that many people don’t actually read documents they cite. So here’s the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is not the same thing as saying that anyone has an unrestricted right (or any right at all, for that matter) to comment on someone’s else’s blog, or that declining to post comments infringes on someone’s First Amendment Rights. Indeed, those folks wanting to express themselves can do so through establishing their own blogs, so their freedom of expression remains unimpaired by whatever happens on an individual blog.

It is always amusing to see that the people who make this mistake claim they understand the Constitution. They don’t. I doubt they’ve even read it, but it’s clear that they don’t understand it.

In the past a person critical of this blog has claimed that my belief that a certain Virginia Flagger should be able to express her opinion freely in public without suffering retaliation from her employer displays a misunderstanding of the First Amendment … but I did not invoke the amendment. I note that the Flaggers are silent on whether to support this person’s right to express her opinion publicly without fear of retaliation, while I have supported her in this matter. What that says about the Virginia Flaggers I leave up to you to decide.