Confederates Lose, Repeat 1865 Disaster

Mike Huckabee's cynical embrace of the Confederate battle flag in the waning days of the South Carolina Republican primary campaign didn't work - and he lost both the primary to an ascendant John McCain and his mantle of easy-going, nice-guy moderate conservative.

Laughably described by modern-day Nathan Bedford Forrest wannabes like Patrick J. Buchanan (who I like to listen to, by the way, in my own train-wreck watching Imus mode) as a "heritage symbol," the flag most Americans know as the Stars and Bars was resurrected by segregationists in the 1950s to fly about statehouse around the south. Everybody knew why it went up. Everybody knew what it meant - and to whom.

The flag is a symbol of white power, of segregationist propaganda dressed up as states rights and local rule, a Klan standard over South Carolina. And Huckabee held it to his heart in a desperate attempt to roll right of the centrist-leaning McCain, so often derided by a Republican In Name Only by the hardcore party faithful and left for dead after daring to buck the nativist, Mexican-hating strand of conservatism. So Huckabee was stripped bear, laid out as one of those old-timey Johnny Reb traitor types. The Nation got it right:

"You don't like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag," the former governor of Arkansas told a crowd in Myrtle Beach, where he was campaigning in advance of the state's Republican primary on Saturday. "In fact, if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we'd tell them what to do with the pole, that's what we'd do."

In Florence, he told his supporters that, "I know what would happen if somebody comes to my state in Arkansas and tells us what to do, it doesn't matter what it is, tell us how to run our schools, tell us how to raise our kids, tell us what to do with our flag -- you want to come tell us what to do with the flag, we'd tell them what to do with the pole."

Exactly when are political reporters going to acknowledge that the candidate they have presented to America as a charming, good-humored "nice guy" is running a "southern-strategy" campaign so extreme in its sensibilities, themes and language that it would have embarrassed George Wallace?

Ah, but the Confederates always lose in the end, don't they? And these days, the Glorious Cause can't get you over the hump in South Carolina.

In other news, Aaron Burr wins Nevada 51-45 despite the wildly strange protestations of an ungracious Thomas Jefferson.

Comments

[b tween]

Well, here's the only problem I have with national focus turning back on that flag:

what will I have to hold up as a symbol of absurdity for the purpose of ridicule if these southern states relegate it to leatherbound history books nobody reads - where it belongs?

My money's on McCain at the moment, and I say that with some sense of relief. The other Republicans - Ron Paul excepted, of course - frighten me.

[OutOfContext]

Tangential comment: I just watched Chisolm '72: Unbought and Unbossed, and one of the takeaways I had was shock at finding how many Democratic Primaries Wallace won including Michigan and Maryland. I had no idea he had that much support.
Not a bad doc. if, as was the case with me, you know little about the '72 campaign and even less about Shirley Chisholm.

[Slappy]

You mean the lets-get-rid-of-the-minimum-wage Ron Paul? Or the life-begins-at-conception Ron Paul? Or the let-bail-from-the-U.N. Ron Paul? Or the crazier-than-bat-shit-lets-return-to-the-gold-standard Ron Paul? Or the racist-newsletters-with-my-name-have-nothing-to-do-with-me Ron Paul? Or the idea-of-separation-of-church-and-state-is-hostile-to-god Ron Paul?

The day the Republicans aren't a Party for those wanting to compensate by having the largest military on the planet is the day a Ron Paul has a chance.

[b tween]

Yeah, amazing isn't it slappy? That Ron Paul is the least of the evils that the GOP has to offer?

Unbelievable that someone I considered a fringe-lunatic candidate 10 years ago now seems almost rational.

Is that the "moral relativism" the wingnuts are always accusing us of?

:)

[Slappy]

Ron Paul: An anti-war Republican. Cant get more fringe than that.

Judging by the number of bumper stickers and signs people hang on the highway, small dollar donations, etc., I would think he was the most popular of the GOP bunch. But he cant get anyone to vote for him. Very curious. Tells me one thing: The Republican party isn't going to anytime soon admit the war was a mistake.

The GOP would have been smart to start impeachment hearings themselves.

[tina oticica]

I was stunned by Huckabee's vulgarity, unless my Brazilian mind is making of "pole"another meaning.
Ron Paul is a novelty for most of his supporters, as if he had never been in Washington.
Slappy's comments have been right on the money.

[b tween]

You know that Ron Paul's status as an anti-war Republican is a happy accident of fundamental isolationism. But I still maintain that compared with the (un)principles of the rest of the GOP horses, he's the most rational. Scary how far we've come, ain't it?

[Tom K]

Brendan:

Whatever else may be said, there's nothing accidental about it. He doesn't believe in intervening militarily in the absence of an immediate threat. Thus, he doesn't believe in being in Iraq.

Call it "lisolationism" or, more properly, "non-interventionsm", the point is the same. His position on this is central to his beliefs, not incidental or accidental.

Tom W:

"the flag most Americans know as the Stars and Bars "

If you are right, it is only because most Americans haven't bothered to educate themselves on the facts. The flag you are referring to is known as "The Stainless Banner". The Stars and Bars is another flag altogether.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America

I suspect many more Americans than you think know the difference, though I am sure that, among those who regard it as insincere to suggest that they have any non-racist affection for the flag, your ignorance is the rule.

BTW, I'm dead-set agin' the Confederate Flag. It's a flag of rebellion and, as an American, I regard it as a symbol of bloody treason (waged through an indefensible coupling of the just cause of states rights with the indefensible institution of slavery). Then, the rebel's grandsons, with even less justification, coupled the just cause of states rights to the indefensible cause of segregation, pretty much killing off any legitimacy that remained with the ideal following the Constitituion's limits on the power of the federal gov't.

But that doesn't mean I gotta pretend no one sees it differently.

[Tom K]

*Or the crazier-than-bat-shit-lets-return-to-the-gold-standard Ron Paul?*

Slappy:

I'm keen to hear your ideas on sound money. Since you know RP's crazy, I hope you at least KNOW SOMETHING about it. Cause from you posting history, I half expect you to say "how can we have poverty when there are inactive printing presses and excess paper."

So tell me, why exactly is the gold standard, or bimetalism, or some meaningful asset-backed currency so crazy?

[Slappy]

The merits of the gold standard are not as important as the idea that we would or even could return to such a system. In today's world it would be impossible to return to such a system. Just another crazier-than-bat-shit idea stemming from the just as crazy "Lets return to the good ol' days" theme that Republicans love to beat a dead horse with. "Back when men were men and women were women and the dollar in my pocket stood for something." Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Ron Paul is just a step toward what I predicted here about a year ago. All you Republicans running around with your heads cut off claiming, "I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I'm not conservative, Im libertarian."

I'll leave it up to your scary intellect to explain the miserable shape our supply side GOP Presidents have left the economy in upon their leaving office.

[Tom K]

Actually, I don't understand monetary policy much at all. It sounds right to me when Ron Paul says that fiat money is too easily manipulated to be healthy, just as it seemed right to me when I read that Andy Jackson opposed the National Bank . . . but I don't have a firm conviction about such things, since I don't feel I have enough information.

I was actually hoping that you might help me understand why Ron Paul is wrong, since you seem pretty sure. If someone wants to jump in in your stead, or for that matter jump in to explain why he's right, I'd be obliged.

[Slappy]

As I understand, (I am not an economist) the current system allows for more flexibility in a world where hedge fund managers are capable of tanking or raising the value of a currency at will. Allows for more control over money in circulation which gives better control over inflation, etc. It does allow for easy manipulation that is required in the world we live in. A world where trillions of dollars exchange hands in a blink of an eye on a daily basis. All on speculation. And a world where technology allows for a far closer and quicker analysis of the economy than in the past. Also allows for a greater money supply in a world where growing economies require greater amounts of capital. Just a brief explanation as I understand it.

I am not an economics scholar. I do not claim our current method is superior. Although I hear no one calling for the gold standard except Ron Paul and those who claim paying taxes is unconstitutional and have 5 lifetimes of ammunition and canned food stored away just daring any government agency to step foot on their property. Calling for the return to the gold standard, especially for a "mainstream" politician, is a sure sign of nuttiness. It not only puts you in league with the black-helicopter crowd but shows you are completely out of touch. To think it is possible to revert to the gold standard is like suggesting we return to vice presidents being members of the opposing party to the pres. Its not going to happen and nobody is calling for it. Nobody of sanity.

Ron Paul is a right wing nut job who fits in just fine with the paramilitary psycho cases living in the woods that were of major concern up until 9/11. Full of conspiracy theories and a hatred of anything on a federal level is a common thread running through his beliefs and with those with an itching to seek revenge for Ruby Ridge. His major saving grace is his anti Iraq war stance. This, and this alone explains his support. Which as has been noted, is hollow. Even the Republican establishment and pundits are wise enough to steer clear of him.