Republicans Courting Racist Vote in Childers-Davis Race?

One thing I love is that the JFP will identify Democrats. Mainstream Media won't do it.

As for the rest. Uh, Obama's a democrat, Childers is a Democrat. Same side of the aisle. I can't see the "racist" angle there. Then again, I was born after 1964.

They may be on the "(s)ame side of the aisle", but the Repubs know exactly what they're doing. They're trying to link Democrats not only to Obama, but to his former pastor as well. The race-baiting may not be as in-your-face, but it's definitely going to be there, as if it isn't already. Also, look for the Republicans to make subtle hints of Obama being Muslim, even though he isn't. A woman in West Virginia who is supporting Hillary Clinton was interviewed by NBC News and she said she wonn't vote for Obama because she believes he is a Muslim, though the reporter told her he wasn't. She still doesn't believe it. Republicans will try to go after people like her who aren't convinced that Obama isn't a Muslim. They're going to use it as a scare tactic. I'm telling you, with Obama being in the race, this campaign season will likely be the nastiest I've ever seen in my life.

According to CNN.com, Childers is the projected winner. Here's their article about the ads.

Childers ahead 51% with 64% reporting.

Forrest was not the founder of the Klan, he was the first grand wizard, great poo-paw, or what ever, but it already existed before he became a member. He even order it disband in 1869 because it had become too violent in the South.

Childers is a blue dog Democrat who believes in fiscal responsibility according to my reliable political sources. I hope that's true.

The RNC is wasting millions of dollars on trying to paint Obama as "The Islamic Candidate" and to tie every single Democrat to Obama and Jeremiah Wright. If Republicans think this sort of appeal to ignorance is going to get them control of the Congress in November, they are way wrong.

If Republicans think this sort of appeal to ignorance is going to get them control of the Congress in November, they are way wrong.

Right. Childers' win proves it. But I honestly don't think the GOP, especially the southern version, knows how NOT to play the race card. It'll be interesting to watch.

This race proves what we've been saying for years: With decent candidates and good turnout, Mississippi is most certainly not a solidly red state. Maybe people will start listening now.

I have to say, all the wound-licking is hysterical to watch this a.m. Folo—the site loved by state's Republican's because of its emphasis on Scruggs madness—is nailling Alan Lange to the wall this morning. And his site is just a site to behold today: Some dude is over there saying that high turnout isn't good because a lot of those people aren't smart or informed enough to vote.

And there, people, is your voter ID crowd. Look what the cat dragged in.

Bubba, that defense of Forrest is revisionist according to historians. He helped start and push the Klan in order to scare the bejeesuz out of black people so they wouldn't vote and support carpetbaggers. He distanced himself politically when it got more violent—kind of like the White Citizens Council and the Americans for the Preservation of the White Race did here when Klan violence got out of hand—but the whole point of Forrest's efforts were to terrorize blacks and keep them in their place.

He is a disgusting historical figure, and it's tragic that anyone in the 21st century would support a statue of him. Ever seen the one they erected in Selma that supporters claimed to have nothing to do with racism -- but had clever "dragon" jargon on the placard? I have pictures somewhere.

Look, the wink-wink #### won't work anymore. It's time to call these efforts out for what they are: appeals to racism.

I think today is the first time I've ever truly enjoyed reading one of Lange's sites. He's not showing much political acumen, per usual, but some of his posters are. Here's a good one:

The democrats may be waking up to something that has been true for a long time: raw numbers are there for them to win statewide if they put up a decent - even half-decent - candidate.

Look at some of our statewide races. The Ds have put up schoolchildren and still garnered fairly respectable percentages, given the candidate they put in the race. If they had someone decent, I shudder to think.

We republicans need to rethink our strategy. Continually running candidate after candidate on an “our values” strategy may have seen its day come and go. And probably for the better.

Same thing we've been saying since day 1. The Democrats have been losing in this state because they fear Republicanism and don't talk straight and put up good candidates. Fine if they're socially conservative, but don't play stupid games, like Musgrove did by inviting over the 10 Commandment stone, or Eaves did by praying every five seconds during his race.

Talk non-racism populism about bread-and-butter issues and get out the vote! And stop pretending to be Republican because that limits the number of voters who are going to bother to turn out for you, you goobs.

It remains to be seen if state Dems will figure out how to capitalize over the tanking Republican Party (before they figure out how to remake themselves again, probably finally turning away from the southern strategy and family-values hypocrisy). Musgrove is in a good place, probably due to Barbour's hubris about election placement, but this state's Dems needs to find and groom more exciting candidates if they want to really take advantage of the GOP backlash.

OK, I have a story to outline now. But it does feel a bit weird to wake up in a Mississippi where 75 percent of its congressional delegation is not Republican. And, yes, I'm gloating a bit because it proves what we've said over and over again about the importance of turnout and of reaching new voters.

I'd say it's more of the weak republican president in the oval office, but then I'm not a profesional handicapper. :)

One thing in democrats favor in Mississippi; more often than not they're not the wild-eyed "We're just stupid Americans" Democrats. Sometimes they actually recall who put them in office.

It's high time that the state Dem party stop acting like children afraid of the schoolyard bully and put up candidates that aren't afraid to act like Democrats and represent progressive yet populist platforms. Particularly with the high black population here, there is no reason for this state to be as red as the Kool-Aid man.

I hope the republicans keep running people on their values. When they do this they don't just look like wingnuts they look peanuts or mentally incompetent nuts. Most of us know by now that they don't have any values unless you count Babylonian or hellhouse values.

Donna, I found something you might find interesting.

"In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest’s alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow “massacre.” The investigation was chaired by Forrest’s old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, “We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest.”

The following article appeared in the New York Times June 27th, “Washington, 1871. Gen Forrest was before the Klu Klux Committee today, and his examination lasted four hours. After the examination, he remarked than the committee treated him with much courtesy and respect.”

Congressional records show that Gen. Forrest was absolved of all complicity in the founding or operation of the Ku Klux Klan, and he was certainly never a “Grand Wizard”. These committees had the utmost evidence and living witnesses at their disposal. The evidence precluded any Guilt or indictment of Gen. Forrest and the matter was closed before that body of final judgment in 1872.

The following findings in the Final report of this committee of Congress concluded, “The statement of these gentlemen (Forrest and Gordon) are full and explicit…the evidence fully sustains them.”

I've run into that. It was done in 1871, Bubba. It's not the only thing out there.

What I don't get is all the effort to make Forrest into a hero now. Even if folks don't want to believe he was involved in the KKK, why not let him fade into oblivion rather than try to celebrate him as a hero? Because most people doing that are celebrating him because of his, er, pro-heritage past, if for no other reason than to send messages to others that they have not given up on the lost cause.

Could you give the link for that info that you just copied, Bubba?

Aw hell, let's skip the dance of me asking you for the link and then watching you squirm, and cut to the chase:

Here's the link for apologist poo you just posted.

Nice source for the history lesson, dude. Do you think we're fools here?

Why didn't you post this part, too, while you were copying off that bigot's blog:

The most beautiful and touching things that I saw in this wonderful place were the relics gathered from the house of that great man Nathan Bedford Forrest. Of course, I was awed to see the nails that they had gathered from the very house in which he lived his great life. And I felt faint when I saw the block of pine they have there. It’s said that he even touched with his own hands. Isn’t that something?

Along with the sense of holy wonder that all this inspired in me was a deep gladness in my heart that some American patriots have not been scared by disgusting liberal scare tactics and the foul screeching that accompanies the black propaganda campaign against this wonderful American knight from days of old.

As my great friend Billy Bob Neck might say, ain’t no one going to put the scare on the Daughters of the Confederacy! These fine women who run that wonderful museum are actually descended from real life rebels ? and that noble blood clearly courses through their veins. They aren’t afraid to declare a hero when they see a hero!

And Nathan Bedford Forrest is a real hero. Don’t believe the poison that liberals will try to pour in your ears on this subject. Ignore their hateful agenda and recognize a rich piece of heritage. It’s one of the finest pieces in the beautiful jigsaw of this great nation under God.

This was under a photo of Forrest there:

NB Forrest. A grand man. A high man. A wizard of a man. How I long to be part of his clan!

Wrong got from Jack McElroy's blog on the Knoxville News Sentinel, http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/editor/2006/02/nathan_bedford_forrest_rides_o.shtml which seems like its orginial source.
where he got it I have no idea. I have never heard of the Shelley The Rebublican.

What you posted is word for word on that dude's blog, and it was the only thing that came up in Google for the exact words.

I just clicked around a bit, and it seems you have fallen into the trap of picking up talking points and passing them on without checking the source. Even the Knoxville paper page is only quoting a letter, and he is clearly using those cut-and-aste talking points so popular among folks like our bigot friend. No time to investigate further at the moment, but I should give you some advice about using *primary* sourcing. You can't just copy something off a blog and go around using it as evidence. A good thing about blogging over talk radio is that you can't get away with spreading propaganda as easily because people demands links and primary sources. As they should.

Wasn't meaning to spread propaganda, just thought you might find the info (right or wrong) interesting. Been doing a little checking myself, his quoting/cutting and pasting of the NYT article from 1872 is only right for this part "WASHINGTON, June 27. Gen. FORREST was before the Kuklux Committee today, and his examination lasted four hours.", still searching for the rest.

I know this is starting to get away from original topic, so I'll make it quick: let's have a petition to rename Forrest County since it is named for Nathan B. Forrest. I don't know what to name it to, but anything other than Forrest County.

Then let's rename anything with the names Washington,Harrison,Jefferson,Madison,Monroe Jackson,Van Buren,Tyler,Polk,Taylor,Johnson and Grant because they were U.S. presidents who owned slaves.

i have no clue what yall are talking about...bubba youre joking ive been the same thing for years...im sure you dont mean it...but i think its pointless for me as a black man to celebrate the people that oppress me...carry-on...

Is Lee County named for Robert E. Lee? What about Jefferson Davis County?

You act like Forrest County is akin to Hitler County.

If we are going to rename somthing, Ross Barnett Reservoir might as well be named Klu Klux Klan Kreek as far as I am concerned. Ross Barnett was one of the most hateful, race-baiting politicians in the annals of hateful, race-baiting politicians. The name of that reservoir is a disgrace.

We should rename it "William Winter" Reservoir after a decent Mississippi governor.

Or, at least lose of the R's, golden. ;-)

I think you're having a hard time getting the point, Bubba.

Just make it Ku Klux Kreek. Shorter and snazzier. That is one remarkable name, I tell you that. And the Ross is in there just so we don't forget like people have done with Forrest County.

weird, but good, ladd (from your previous post)
waking up to this Mississippi feels good
I walked in my office and the Ledge front page said Dems upset and I thought, it's happening it's really happening here
yeah

and I second the vote for a Winter or Welty reservoir

Donna, I get your point, you don't get mine...LOL
Forrest was not the founder of the klan.
Search for "100 Years of Terror" by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Wait, I missed something.

Was there proof that Davis supported erecting such a thing? Can someone provide a link supporting that?

You made me curious. Here's the most complete piece I can find about it. It does look like the DCCC played a bit loose with the facts—although it is something that he would step up and offer to take a controversial statute of a Confederate leader from Memphis. Sounds like playing to a certain audience if you know what I mean. But that doesn't mean that the DSCC shouldn't have been more precise.

On the other hand, it is laughable that the Repubs are outraged about race-baiting. This party has gained its power in the south by race-baiting and did in that campaign. Neither should do it -- that means you, too, Hillary -- and twisting the facts would qualify as race-baiting, although pointing out a candidate's support of the Confederacy would not be. That's just putting important character facts out there that voters of all races need to know. (Not all white people in Mississippi are closet Confederates, for God's sake.)

If Republicans are so outraged about this, they need to clean their own house first. And Dems should not give in to any temptation to twist someone's words or actions into something worse if that is what they did. It's bad enough to invite a status of controversial Jeff Davis to have a home there. The truth is good enough.

Bubba, Nathan Bedford Forrest used the Klan to terrorize black people. He is not a frickin' hero.

Donna, I never said he was a hero, I just said you were wrong in saying that he was the founder of the klan.

I didn't say you said he was a hero; my problem with your comments is that you are repeating revisionist "history" about Forrest just like the ones who think he is a hero say. If you don't, thank God.

Interesting you call me wrong without proving it. The truth is that it is undefinitive whether he "founded" the Klan (with others), but it is clear that he was one of its earliest leaders and "wizards." My point earlier is that such strong defenses of him is suspect in itself, and is usually done to show one's solidarity with white heritage. I'm glad that's not what you're doing, but it is what many, especially politicians, do.

The scariest part is to see who considers him a hero and passes along the revisionism the most—like that bigot on that site that posted those talking points you shared earlier, which seems to be the whole sum of your backup materials for proving me wrong.

Unfortunately, the best history is not found on the Internet. You have to work a little harder. When I did Forrest research a few years back, while working on my master's project about white supremacy in Mississippi, the best information was in books without an agenda one way or the other. But I don't have that stuff at my fingertips. I think the materials are in storage in one of about 50 boxes of paper. It wasn't hard to find in a good academic library, though. I learned more about southern history sitting in dusty stacks on the top floor of the Columbia library than I ever did living in Mississippi, unfortunately. That's a very sad statement.

Speaking of Jeff Davis County, do y'all know the circumstances and timing of its naming?

I would be interested to know the names of those books, if you can remember any, I am always open to learning. I have been trying to find a source for the Congressional hearing in 1871 but it seems like the LoC is the only place you can read the transcripts or pay 800.00 for a cd set of them.
Being that military histroy one of my hobbies,besides annoying you :) I do look at the Confederate army leaders differently from you, I have read and learned more of their military history and not their political history.

I agree that the internet is not the best place to find history, because anyone can write anything and say it's the truth.

Tell us about the naming of Jeff Davis County, I have no idea.

You made me curious. Here's the most complete piece I can find about it. It does look like the DCCC played a bit loose with the facts—although it is something that he would step up and offer to take a controversial statute of a Confederate leader from Memphis. Sounds like playing to a certain audience if you know what I mean. But that doesn't mean that the DSCC shouldn't have been more precise.

Thanks as I suspected as much. I know the partisans don't care about precision and truth when their side engages in spin, but I don't believe either party should knowing play such games and should stick to issues.

The Davis ads featuring Obama/Wright were lame and deserved to be denounced, and I think most people saw thru them.

Bubba, I seem to remember reading about the congressional hearings, and their context, in my research, but honestly I don't remember enough good details to go into it with any authority. I will report back when I manage to get into my stored files, a goal I have for this year. Unfortunately, when you spend half or more of your time as a researcher, you can't always remember the specific sources, specially once you hit your 40s. ;-) I do seek out primary sources, however, and ones that aren't biased by cultural revisionism. Unfortunately, there are so-called "historians" out there making money off poorly sourced (and dishonest) books that are playing to cultural biases of certain groups, on tops from Hitler/Holocause to the Confederacy to the Klan, and those are the ones usually referenced by people only looking for that angle on the Internet.

I think it's fine to admire Confederate (or whatever) military strategy (although military fans who only care about Confederal leaders are suspect for obvious reasons). Unfortunately, that excuse is used by many as a way to promulgate the lost cause. And even if you are a student of military history, there is no reason, say, to put up a statue of a military leader who fought for a horrible cause. Or to have a symbol of race terrorism used as the state symbol.

In this country, there has been little or no effort to erase Confederate symbols or history, military or otherwise, from our libraries, our museums or or textbooks. (Unlike in Germany, where Swastikas and Hitler's writings are illegal, which I disagree with).

But one can usually tell the difference between someone who is a serious student of history and someone who is holding onto the lost cause because the latter is the one wanting statues and state flags ... or spreading revisionist history and talking points without good sources.

I do have notes on Jeff Davis County closer at hand. But as I recall from a project we did a few years back, it was carved out and named for that great man <sarcasm off> in the 20th century. There was more to that; I'll see if I can find it. That one should be easier than the other one.

I agree with you, Jeff. Certainly, it's fair game, and important, to point out to black voters, especially, that Greg Davis played political race games by inviting controversial Confederate statues. However, the lack of precision will, and should, open them up to criticism.

I've long said that the key for Democrats is not to stoop to Republican race games, but to rise above them. There is a fine line on this one, and they shouldn't have crossed it, but they may have stepped over it. It's not entirely clear from the report.

According to a source or two online, Lee County was named for Robert E Lee in 1866, after being carved out of Itawamba County and Pontotoc County. Lee was also a US Army Colonel of some promise as well.

I tend to jump around in my reading and studying of military history. I am in a WWI phase now.

I believe you. You're not of the ones I'm speaking of, clearly. We all know them when they show up, pretending that it's about military history and yelping about "protecting our flag"!

Get the damn thing out of the elements in a museum where it belongs. Then they can gaze at it longingly all they want, and black kids attending re-segregated schools don't have to walk it every day.