13 January 2008 by Published in: General musings 32 comments

Always being on the alert for examples of neo-Confederate idiocy, I came across this prize on one of the Yahoo Groups e-mail lists on the Civil War that I subscribe to. It came across last night, and I hereby declare it the neo-Confederate grand champion for 2008, as I cannot imagine ANYONE topping this little prize:

I would also like to add that I am a founding family of Virginia and America. My family fought for the South. None of my ancestors owned any slaves. Also, with my family coming into this country in 1609 and 1614 I had many direct ancestors die in the Rev. war. If your family has not been in this country since before the ACW, I would rather not hear your opinion. As I do not believe you to be an American.

By our hero’s definition, more than 90% of U. S. citizens are not Americans, including me–my family did not immigrate to the U. S. until 1904. I wonder what our neo-Confederate hero thinks about Native Americans, since they pre-date his family?

Nice grammar, too.

Not surprisingly, our genius refuses to sign his posts, so nobody knows what his name might be. However, I do wish he’d head back to the mobile home, raise the Confederate battle flag with “git ‘er done” on it, turn on the Dukes of Hazard, and hopefully, never, ever reproduce. Like Britney Spears, this guy is a prime example of why people should be required to obtain a license to reproduce.

Scridb filter

Comments

  1. Mike Peters
    Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 9:10 pm

    Eric,

    He would be one of the first people I know to have “many direct ancestors die in the Rev. war.” The patriots only had about 4500 dead. The odds would be staggering.

    Mike

  2. Mike Peters
    Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 9:12 pm

    Eric,

    That would be battle casualties.

    Mike

  3. Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 9:13 pm

    It’s indeed a prime example why vasectomies should, in some cases, be MANDATORY medical care.

    What a fool. Not only is he clueless about North American history, he’s probably not even up to the standards of the 6th grade education he likely has.

    But we need folks like him around, ya know – I’ve heard that laughing adds years to your life, so this clod will make us all eternal!

    J.D.
    (Family came here from Italy in 1893, so I guess I should get myself a green card to stay here…)

  4. Mike Peters
    Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 9:15 pm

    Eric,

    Also, if I may add, if his family is a founding family of the Commonweallth, I find his statement — “None of my ancestors owned any slaves. — difficult to swallow as well.

    He gets my vote!

    Mike

  5. Steve Basic
    Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 10:34 pm

    I was born in NJ. Does that make me an Illegal? :)

    What I find funny is we already have a champion in this genre and the year is 13 days old. :)

    Steve

  6. Sun 13th Jan 2008 at 11:57 pm

    Steve,

    I believe it was Chris Rock who said that if elected President, the first thing he’ll do is eliminate New Jersey from these United States.

    Chris Rock for Emperor For Life :)

    J.D.

  7. Michael Aubrecht
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 11:15 am

    Hey Eric, the Dukes of Hazzard (w/ 2 z’s my friend) was a great show from my youth. BTW: I’m really sorry to find out that I’m a foreigner….bummer.

  8. Caswain
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 11:28 am

    In a letter to the editor of one newsstand Civil War magazine, I saw an argument advanced with regard to blacks in Confederate service that I’d say tops them all. I cannot quote it exactly, but the letter writer attempted to explain the lack of hard documentary evidence of wide scale black service in the Confederate army with some rather twisted logic. Basically, the writer insisted that the lack of such evidence was in fact PROOF that such service was common place! After all, everyone was sworn to secrecy, so the lack of documentation illustrates how well this conspiracy was covered up.

    While I believe firmly that every one is entitled to their own opinions, there reaches a point where some opinions are firmly planted in thin air. At that point I’m apt to present my own theory as to the motives of the owners of said opinions.

  9. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 12:01 pm

    Dear Sir ,
    While I can understand your distaste for the individual , I think your ” cultural profiling ” of him smacks of ungentlemanly conduct of the same ilk.
    Please corrrect your demeanor so I can cease further admonishment and continue your enjoyable cavalry writings.
    cordially ,
    David Corbett

  10. Cajie
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 3:45 pm

    I don’t agree with your analysis and opinion on the poster whose family founded Virginia and America. Since you came in 1904 after the new empire of 1865 was founded you are a citizen of THE UNITED STATES and not THESE UNITED STATES.

    BTW does neo-confederate mean to you racist? The R-word is the N-Word for white people.

    Your inheritance includes many many examples of illegal changes to our original Constitution, including the passage of the 14th amendment in 1867. The 14th is the amendment talked about now that is being used to make citizens of illegal immigrants children born here.

    Another illegal act is the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

    google it.

    As President Jefferson Davis said: quote from memory paraphrased, these issues our people fought and died for will re surface in another time.

    I am glad you are not one of the immigrant marxist of 1848 who came here after their take over of Germany failed and were so active in America during lincoln’s war..

  11. Cajie
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 3:55 pm

    BTW – there were a lot of people in the South who did not OWN SLAVES. you people making these harsh comments should do your homework. Same for Black Confederates. The proclamation was made because the Blacks were helping the South – lincoln’s plan was for them to rise up and kill us, but they did not!

    google H. K. Edgerton of North Carolina, a Black Confederate who is marching across Dixie with the Confederate Battle Flag.

    google; j. J. Johnson, Nelson Wimbish, William Williams, Bob Harrison, Col kelly’s website and other black Confederates.

    BTW does REDNECK mean to you racist? The R-word has become the N-word bomb thrown at whites and especially white Southernors who remember their fore fathers.

  12. Teej Smith
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 4:07 pm

    I happen to be a member of the group from which that bit nonsense came as well. The guy has been moving toward this explosion since his first post. It was obvious to me that he wasn’t on the group to discuss the CW, he had a whole other agenda. I strongly suspect that if he were truly FFV he’d be signing in name in huge letters for all of us to see. My sympathies are with the owner of the list serv who had to go to full moderation of all posts to let things cool off lest he lose all of his members.

    BTW, my ancestors were in North Carolina and Tennessee before the woah, so I’m good. :-)

    Teej

  13. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 4:37 pm

    Cajie,

    If that’s a real name, which I doubt, I will waste my valuable time to respond to your nonsense.

    Your semi-literate rant relies on a number of unsupported assumptions: it relies on the assumption that there is some difference between THESE United States and THE United States, which is not an assumption I accept. They are one and the same. That’s what the Constitution says, and that’s good enough for me. And it certainly does not make what your neo-Confederate comrade in arms says about only those here at the time of the Mayflower being Americans true.

    I likewise fail to see how either the 14th Amendment or the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 are illegal. I know that these are cornerstones of neo-Confederate doctrine, but I’m a lawyer. I actually paid for a legal education, and I swore an oath to defend the Constitution, something I take very seriously. I’ve now been in the practice of law for more than twenty years, and I have never seen anything other than neo-Confederate nullification propoganda that remotely suggests to me that there is anything illegal about thse things. Please, do enlighten me as to how these acts are illegal. Just because you say they are doesn’t make it so. You’re going to have to prove to me, relying upon proper legal precedent and analysis, if you’re to give me any reason to believe that you’re anything but another neo-Confederate nut job.

    And, to answer your inquiries, to me neo-Confederate means this: “a political and/or cultural movement based mainly in the U.S. Southern states that is characterized by a celebration of the history of the Confederate States of America (CSA) and support for the CSA’s aims. Neo-Confederate issues may include states rights, such as nullification (in which state laws override federal laws), and a pro-Confederate view of history, particularly regarding the American Civil War and the role of slavery in that war.” It does not mean “racist”, although you certainly have plenty of them in your ranks.

    And to me, “redneck” also does not mean racist, although again, there are plenty of them. To me, redneck means someone who chooses to be ignorant. If the shoe fits….

    And I figured that sooner or later, the H. K. Edgerton card would be played. Like that guy has a lot of credibility.

    Here’s a warning for you. You are welcome to post on my site as long as you play by my rules. The beauty of this is that it’s my site, and I pay for it, which means that I get to make the rules. Those rules are what they are. There is no right of appeal and there is no discussion of the rules. One of my primary rules is that people who post here do not get the privilege of insulting me on my own website. The next time I see something that remotely suggests that you are insulting me, as your last posts did, the comment(s) will be deleted, your IP address blacklisted, and you will be permanently prohibited from posting here.

    I trust I have made myself abundantly clear.

    Eric

  14. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 4:42 pm

    David,

    While I appreciate your sentiments, not everyone is a gentleman like you. See the two comments by the idiot calling himself Cajie that appear directly below yours.

    As long as we have this type of thing to deal with, this type of thing will go on.

    Eric

  15. Michael Aubrecht
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 5:49 pm

    This type of ‘neo-ranting’ makes it very difficult for those of us with a special attachment or penchant to Confederate history to defend the preservation and preservation of it. Ultimately, it hurts the memory of Southern history and heritage more than it helps, and much like the ongoing debate over the flag, it muddies the waters with unsubstantiated arguments and makes all of us look bad. Worse off, it reignites a divide that is senseless, and prevents people from truly sharing different perspectives and information. Talk about “brother vs. brother!”

    Eric is a Jewish, liberal Phillies fan in OH who specializes in the cavalry (w/ a predominantly Union focus). I’m a Christian, conservative Yankees fan in VA who specializes in the religious-side off the conflict (w/ a Confederate focus). We are about as opposite as two history-buds could be, yet we both get along wonderfully and have the utmost respect for one another. The same can be said for the majority of us here in the blogoshpere. Why don’t they get that?

    It is unfortunate that things have to turn ugly in order for us to appreciate each other’s POV’s. I actually left that Yahoo group today as I couldn’t take the banter – or the tons of emails that came as people argued back and forth.

  16. Brooks Simpson
    Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 6:47 pm

    Well, first off, I’m a Yankees/Islanders fan who is very happy to see the Giants go to the frozen tundra that is Lambeau Field, probably a politcal centrist, and a native Noo Yawker. I’m the direct descendant of Union veterans who is married to the direct descendant of Confederate veterans. So I don’t know how I fit in. :) But the internet offers a great deal of protection for those with keyboard courage; it also offers us a glimpse into portions of society we’d rather not see.

  17. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 10:02 pm

    Eric:

    While most homegrown white Southerners do not take offense at being called a “redneck” it is, in my opinion, often MEANT to stereotype and to be insulting, demeaning and could, based on certain definitions, be considered a “racist” term, to wit:

    1. Used as a disparaging term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.
    2. A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude. (American Heritage Dictionary)

    Of course, most know the term originates from the fact white farmers often have sunburned necks from working outside all day. Wikipedia states that: “The word can be used either as a pejorative or as a matter of pride.” I suppose it depends upon your perspective and the circumstances in which the term is used.

    From my perspective, I am rather proud of my dirt-farmer, “rural laboring”, Scots-Irish roots and heritage and, frankly, could not care less if someone calls me a redneck. Though I come from that stock, I can trace my heritage in Virginia all the way back to Jamestown. I like to fancy myself as a “refined redneck.” :) My wife happens to come from Scots-Irish stock as well (as a matter of fact, we share the same great-great grandfather – which is, according to some, another defining characteristic of rednecks). She is also of Monacan Indian descent – a very proud & unique bloodline combination which makes her mean as he** – but in a sweet kind of way.

    Regarding the “neo-Confederate” label, I believe its over-used and seems to be an easy (and at times unfair) way of dismissing honest disagreements and difference of opinion regarding the “late unpleasantness.” It seems that anyone who celebrates their Southern heritage now has the “neo-Confederate” label plastered on them. Yes, there are plenty of ignorant yahoos out there making silly statements about Southern heritage. But there is just as much silliness and ignorance coming from the other perspective as well.

    I’m actually working on a rather long post along these lines for my blog, but enough for now. I look forward to meeting you in March.

    Best,
    RGW

    PS: I hate to run, but my wife is out of Red Man and I need to make a quick trip to 7-11.

  18. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 10:29 pm

    LOL, Richard. I thought she chewed Copenhagen? :)

    As for me, I’m off to the INS to see if my application for citizenship was approved. Since my family’s only been here 110 years or so, they told me I have to own something that pre-dates the Civil War, preferably from Colonial Times. I’m carefully packing up my Continetal coin collection to take along.

    Wish me luck!

    J.D.

  19. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Richard,

    I’m not ordinarily one to use pejorative terms, and, in fact, typically avoid them. However, in this instance, there was no doubt in my mind that this particular glass slipper fit Cinderella as if it was custom-made.

    As far as the neo-Confederate label is concerned, I only apply it to those who richly deserve it. These individuals richly deserve it. I fully understand that it’s an insulting term to most. Some of these guys, however, wear it proudly. I suspect that both of these are the sort to wear it proudly. Besides, I chose not to call them crackers, which is also an accurate description of both.

    Eric

  20. Mon 14th Jan 2008 at 11:52 pm

    JD – best wishes on your citizenship application. Hint for the exam: The Nation’s capital is not Richmond.

    Eric: One of the definitions of “cracker” from freedictionary.com (Probably authored by a redneck):

    “Used as a disparaging term for a poor white person of the rural, especially southeast United States.”

    It appears the terms can be considered synonymous.

    Again, I would not be offended if someone called me a “cracker.” What is the antithesis of neo-confederate? Can one be a neo-yankee or would neo-unionist be more accurate? :)

    BTW, no offense meant or taken in our exchange. I’ll notify you both when I post my more detailed and, hopefully, rational thoughts on this sordid subject.

    I leave you now, my Northern brethren, to retire for the evening. Before going to bed, I must empty the Mrs.’s spittoon, check the still, and have my midnight snack of fried ‘possum. Nitey-nite.

  21. Mike Peters
    Tue 15th Jan 2008 at 2:36 am

    Cajie wrote:

    BTW – there were a lot of people in the South who did not OWN SLAVES. you people making these harsh comments should do your homework.

    Cajie,

    I have studied genealogy for quite some time. As a matter of fact, it was my spring board to study the “recent unpleasantness.” And most of my family lived in the commonwealth of VA, many fought for Jeff Davis & some of them, regretably, did own slaves. So I have done my homework. The gentleman in question said the following:

    “I would also like to add that I am a founding family of Virginia and America. My family fought for the South. None of my ancestors owned any slaves. Also, with my family coming into this country in 1609 and 1614 I had many direct ancestors die in the Rev. war. ”

    If his family was a “founding family of VA” & if they have been on this North American continent for some 400 years,then someone in his genepool owned slaves. Period. Family trees go back exponentially — one set of parents, 2 sets of great grandparents, 4 sets of great great grandparents, etc. So, the odds would be astronomical that a “founding family” (whatever that means) living in a Southern state from 1609-1865 did not have any slaves. That dog just don’t hunt! He just didn’t dig deep enough into his family history. He might be studying paternal connections & not maternal. He may also be hiding the truth. Could be ashamed. I don’t know.

    The war is over! The Union won! Get over it.

    Mike

  22. Tue 15th Jan 2008 at 10:49 am

    Well said, Mike. I think all of us realize that Cajie’s claims are food for giggles.

    Richard, why didn’t you tell me before it wasn’t Richmond? Rats! I guess that capital is probably somewhere else along Davis’ escape route. I peeked at the fellow taking the test next to me, and he wrote in Washington, DC. Ha ha! What a bonehead!

    Love fried possum. Don’t throw away those claws – dip ‘em in egg batter and bread crumbs, makes for good eatin’ while watching Sunday Nascar!

    J.D. “Pork Rinds are a Food Group” Petruzzi

  23. Cajie
    Tue 15th Jan 2008 at 5:11 pm

    Genealogy also was my spring board to the true knowing of Lincoln’s War. It was a ten year gut wrenching experience to realize what was done to my Southern Ancestors by the USA empire’s determination to keep the South as their colony. Call me names I don’t care, I know what I know. The proof is in the pudding.

    Thank you Richard for your clarification of the labels applied to the Southern people by their detractors, you made the point of where I was coming from.

    The 1867 14th amendment was approved by coercion of the Southern Representatives who disapproved and were forced to approve or they would not be allowed in the union that they were not allowed to leave. Thus began reconstruction. Look it up. Consider the break up of the Soviet union, independent Georgia comes to mind, and other empires around the world over the centuries, who have had to let their people go. In 1861-1865 The South was forced into the union by gun and bayonet.

    As to all Southernors owning slaves – no way. We got em, we had em, we did the best we could with em. I don’t apologize for it or feel shame, Obama’s ancestors owned em and he is nth cousin to Dick Cheney.. Robt E. Lee’s ancestor returned from school in England and denounced slavery in the Virginia legislature and a message was sent to the king to stop the importation of slaves, Also Georgia sent pleas to the king to stop the importation of slaves, both pleas were denied by the king, so whose flag is the flag of slavery? People were really tired of dealing with it so by the time 1861 rolled around only about 7% owned slaves in the South (they were expensive, it was the poor whites who were sent to clear the swamps and got malaria). Some of these plantations were owned by north easterners, of which some were absentee owners and some who came South remained because they loved the South and supported the Confederate States of America. The plantation owners were feeding the NE mills (see book c 2007 COMPLICITY, they name names you will recognize today) (see, Jefferson Davis’s wife’s family in Natchez, Charles Dahlgren, brother of John A. Dahlgren the famous inventor of the yankee naval gun used in lincoln’s war to slaughter my people).

    There are many books that have come into print since 2000 by educated people who do have real sources and facts that prove my points. Google Sen. Linbergh of MN on the 1913 Federal Reserve.

    There is also a fascinating read of a mystery novel by Thomas Moore “The Hunt for Confederate Gold”. He is a former Pentagon officieal in the Reagon Administration who served on the professional staff of the Senate Armed Services Committee and directed defense and foreign policy studies at The Heritage Foundation.

    I apologize eric if i gave like for like on your blog.

  24. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 10:28 am

    Cajie,

    Apology accepted. Unless you are the moron who made the insulting statement that I quoted, then nothing I said was directed at you or personal to you. You chose to read it that way and left personally inappropriate comments on my web site. So long as you don’t do it again, you’re fine.

    Now, with all due respect….

    I asked you to provide me with proper authority and proper legal analysis to show me how the ratification of the 14th Amendment and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act were illegal and you failed to do so.

    I want to separate the two.

    Arguably, there may be some element of truth to what you say about the 14th Amendment due to the circumstances of Reconstruction. I’m not conceding the point, as the fact remains that duly authorized representatives voted to ratify.

    I fail to see how the Federal Reserve Act is even remotely applicable to the discussion, however. Reconstruction was LONG over by that point, and the Congressional representatives who created and passed the legislation were freely elected. The legislation has passed constitutional muster. How, therefore, can you claim it (a) is even relevant to the discussion and (b) is illegal? Please, enlighten me. Sending me to one person’s OPINION is not proof of the point.

    Thank you.

    Eric

  25. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 10:41 am

    Cajie,

    Regarding the Federal Reserve Act, I highly recommend that you read this:

    http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/3616/FedReserveFacts.html. It disproves your theory, and all of the other myths about the Federal Reserve, quite coherently, with supporting authority. I might also add that the author is a Ph.D. in economics, so presumably he has some clue of which he speaks.

    Eric

  26. Ken Noe
    Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 12:18 pm

    The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was the brainchild of Carter Glass, a conservative Democrat from Virginia, and passed with almost the complete support of southern Democrats in Congress. It was signed into law by the Virginia-born, Georgia-reared Woodrow Wilson, the same Wilson who segregated the federal government. Congressman Charles Lindbergh, who opposed the act, was a liberal Republican who later jumped to the progressive Farmer-Labor Party If the act was illegal, it was accomplished with wide support from sons of the Confederate generation. — Ken

  27. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 12:32 pm

    Ken,

    My point precisely.

    It’s fun knocking out the underpinnings of neo-Confederate dogma….. :-)

    Eric

  28. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 4:19 pm

    Here’s an interesting tidbit about Carter Glass:

    “Montview”, also known as the “Carter Glass Mansion”, was built in 1923 on his farm, which was then outside Lynchburg in Campbell County. It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and now serves as an administration building on the grounds of Liberty University within the expanded city limits of Lynchburg, an independent city.” – Wikipedia

    Dr. Falwell is buried on the grounds behind the Carter Glass mansion.

  29. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 4:58 pm

    Richard,

    That is indeed interesting. Thanks for passing that along.

    Eric

  30. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 8:42 pm

    The term vracker in Florida is considered a complament, it means your family were cattle farmers. Thats they way it was always explained to me. Most of Central Florida is still cattle farms.

    I guess me and Jeff could be defined as Neo Yankees, if there is such a thing.

    As for the going back to the Mayflower, it just means your family stayed in the same area. That can be good and bad.

  31. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 8:43 pm

    make that cracker not vracker.

  32. Wed 16th Jan 2008 at 11:16 pm

    Christopher:

    “I think the American people lose a large part of the joy of life because they do not live for generations in the same place.” ~ Douglas Southall Freeman

    Best,
    RGW

Add comment

*

Copyright © Eric Wittenberg 2011, All Rights Reserved
Powered by WordPress