[White] Citizens' Council newspaper available online

The entire run of the [White] Citizens Council newspaper is available online at:

www.citizenscouncils.com

I recommend thumbnail mode and then select the page you wish to view.

The members of the Citizens' Councils newspaper makes it quite clear that Confederate symbols were commonly understood as symbols of white supremacy and this view was held by members in mainstream society in the South and elsewhere.

The assertion by Shelby Foote and others that the KKK ran away with the meaning of Confederate symbols during the Civil Rights Era is shown to be nonsense.

Obama vs. McDonnell

There seems to be a bit of controversy over McDonnell's declaration of April history month, with the Democrats in an uproar.

You can read McDonnell's declaration and the controversy at this URL.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/04/post_666.html

This is my letter to Obama about the Arlington Confederate monument.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/2009ObamaLetter.pdf

What is the difference I would like to know? Why are the people in the article linked to by the following URL upset with McDonnell and not Obama?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/06/AR2010040604416.html

Leon F. Litwack and David W. Blight co-sign letter to President Obama

Leon F. Litwack co-signed the letter to President Obama and sent me a letter thanking me for undertaking the effort to write Obama.

His historical writing is of landmark importance in the history of America. If you haven't read his books, I recommend you do. Been in the Storm So Long and Trouble in Mind are two of his books that I strongly recommend.

David W. Blight is also an author of great importance. If you haven't read his books, I recommend that you do. Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory and Frederick Douglass' Civil War: Keeping Faith in Jubilee are two books I strongly recommend.

I will comment more at http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/.

Neo-Confederacy in Texas Education

First a Texas governor that talks about secession and now this with the Texas State Board of Education.

From a March 10, 2010 article in the New York Times:

There have also been efforts among conservatives on the board to tweak the history of the civil rights movement. One amendment states that the movement created “unrealistic expectations of equal outcomes” among minorities. Another proposed change removes any reference to race, sex or religion in talking about how different groups have contributed to the national identity.

And;

References to Ralph Nader and Ross Perot are proposed to be removed, while Stonewall Jackson, the Confederate general, is to be listed as a role model for effective leadership, and the ideas in Jefferson Davis’s inaugural address are to be laid side by side with Abraham Lincoln’s speeches.

The following is the link to the article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/us/politics/11texas.html?src=me

Neo-Confederacy continues to advance and Obama continues to do nothing.

Neo-Confederate Mainstreaming, full speed ahead in the conservative movement

Here is the agenda for CPAC on Thursday.

http://66.147.244.188/~conserz8/cpac/

There is an article on CPAC and the neo-Confederate extremists by Max Blumenthal.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/feeling-the-hate-at-cpac_b_474077.html

At CPAC there was Thomas DiLorenzo on Lincoln. Thomas Woods, leading neo-Confederate, had a session on nullification. Andrew Napolitano was their also.

Ron Paul, of the Libertarian wing of the neo-Confederate moment won the straw poll, though it is questioned what this straw poll represents. However, the fact that Ron Paul could win any poll at a political event says something about the event.

The 2010 Letter to President Obama is online now.

The contents of the letter can be reached through the Arlington Confederate Monument blog at this URL.

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/

Look for it at the side bar on the blog as well as a blog entry.

New post at the Arlington Confederate Monument blog

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/

It is about an excellent book that I am about finished reading.

Was Lincoln a Communist? SCV Neo-Confederates think so.

The Southern Mercury was published by FPAC, "the educational foundation of the Sons of Confederate Veterans." They stopped publishing since they ran out of funds to do so. The Southern Mercury published many extremist articles. The material they published in this periodical was material they thought would educate their members.

One of the cover articles for the March/April 2008 issue of the Southern Mercury is "Republican Party: Red From the Start," by Alan Stang, ( http://www.alanstang.com/), and the article asserts that the Republican party was a communist conspiracy from the beginning. [Southern Mercury, Vol. 6 No. 2, March/April 2008, pages 26-29.]

The article is a review of "Red Republicans: Marxism in the Civil War and Lincoln's Marxists," by Al Benson and Walter D. Kennedy, leading neo-Confederate. (http://olesouthbooks.com/kennedy_brothers/red_republicans.php) or (http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan30.htm). It is a book that asserts that there was some type of communist conspiracy. As Stang explains [Page 27]:

"Even a brief perusal through Red Republicans will verify the idea that the Republican party has been Communist since its inception."

Another excerpts from page 27:

"... Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting. Had this really been a 'Civil' War, rather than a secession, they would and could easily have seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals."

We learn on page 28 that "The GOP Convention of 1860 took place in Chicago, a flaming center of German Communism."

On page 29 Stang explains that:

"So again, the Republican Party did not 'go wrong.' It was rotten from the start. It has never been anything else but red. The the characterization of Republican states as 'red states' is quite appropriate"

Somehow this leads to Alan Stang discussing that Ron Paul isn't a communist, but has to run as a Republican and but that Ron Paul is against Red Republicanism. Dr. Paul is alleged to be a true Democrat but not a modern communist Democrat as he explains on page 29.

"Dr. Paul is much more a traditional Democrat. I refer of course to the Democrat Party before the Communist takeover, which began with the election of Woodrow (Federal Reserve -Income Tax-World War I) Wilson and was consummated with the election of liar, swindler, thief, traitor, and mass murderer Franklin Delano Roosevelt."

In the end notes for the article, the reader is urged to visit http://www.alanstang.com/ for additional articles.

So I did and looked at the books he writes and has for sale.

Alan Stang sees many conspiracies in the Republican party and is the author of a book, "Not Holier Than Though" (http://alanstang.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=15&zenid=8345353ecd6ab41c78def320548c1822) which asserts that George W. Bush and Karl Rove "have colluded to make the Republican Party a sodomite organization from the top down."

Sons of Confederate Veterans on Obama as a candidate

The Southern Mercury was published by FPAC, "the educational foundation of the Sons of Confederate Veterans." They stopped publishing since they ran out of funds to do so. The Southern Mercury published many extremist articles. The material they published in this periodical was material they thought would educate their members.

One of these articles is, "Americans Face The Worst Presidential Candidate in History," by Robert Slimp [Southern Mercury, Vol. 6 No. 3, May/June 2008, pages 28-33]. Robert Slimp is a leading figure in the Council of Conservative Citizens, http://www.cofcc.org/.

In the article Slimp is dismayed by all three then presidential contenders, McCain, Clinton and Obama, as he he states towards the conclusion, "I will not attempt here to suggest for whom we should vote in this truly horrible choice of candidates."

Slimp's comments on Obama from pages 32-33 give you an idea of the temper of the whole article. [Errors in the original]

"It is very clear to me that if Barack Obama should be elected President, he would be extremely anti-white and would demand reparations for slavery and press hard for affirmative action to the degree that it would hurt young whites who were seeking jobs or admission to College and Graduate Schools. Even if he were elected, I would think he would be a one term President and the Congressional Republicans with a "corporal's guard' of Democrats would stop most of the radical and unjust laws he would propose. However, I believe that his rhetoric and anti-white legislative proposals would stir up racial riots. If he were running for re-election, these riots would turn into an extremely violent nature that would seriously damage race relations in America, and leave entire sections of some of our cities in ruins."

The article concludes with an exhortation to the reader to hold true to the values of Southern heritage which for Slimp includes racial purity as follows in these two excerpts. [Page 33]

"We who have a Southern heritage cannot afford to surrender our history and symbols. One of our greatest United States Senators, Richard Russell of Georgia, said during the debate over the 1964 Civil Rights Act. "I believe that we should love all people, regardless of race. We must respect one another. However, we must all be proud of our race and will fight to preserve it. I am not ashamed of my beloved Southland. If there has ever been a land worth saving, in Dixieland, I'll take my stand to live or die for Dixie." [Russell was an opponent of civil rights legislation.]

"'There is a race,' cried Giradeau 'which coming down through the centuries enveloped with antagonistic influences and hostile nationalities, has stood out in perpetual protest against surrendering our principles by amalgamating with other peoples.'" [Giradeau was a famous pro-slavery antebellum theologian.]

This article was followed by another article in the Southern Mercury by Robert Slimp, titled, "Will the 2008 Election Bring the End of the America We Know?" [Southern Mercury, Vol. 6 No. 4, July/August 2008, pages 34-37]

A notable excerpts [page 34]:

"Behind the scenes, the insiders who are paying for the election of both the Republican and Democratic candidates for president and some of the members of Congress, are One Worlders. These are the big international bankers, members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Tri-Lateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, and others who believe that the quickest way to achieve their aims ..."

Also, unlike the previous article, where Obama is referred to as Senator Obama or Barack Obama, in this article it is always Barack Hussein Obama. Maybe there are two Barack Obama's in the Chicago phone book and Slimp wanted to be clear. The rest of the article is the promotion of other third party Presidential candidates, such as Bob Barr with the libertarians, an extensive discussion of Ron Paul, and Charles Baldwin of the Constitutional Party.

'"You Lie!' United States Congressman Joe Wilson" Confederate Veteran article

Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) Lt. Commander-in-Chief R. Michael Givens, in his "Report of the Lt. Commander-in-Chief," has an article in the Jan./Feb. 2010 issue of Confederate Veteran, their official publication, on page 8-9, titled"

"You Lie!": United States Congressman Joe Wilson.

The introduction to the article is as follows:

"Two words heard around the world. Former SCV Compatriot Joe Wilson may been correct in his assessment of President Obama's statements concerning health insurance for immigrants, but that is a discussion for another place and time. What interests me is the consternation caused by someone even pointing out a possible falsehood. One might have thought, by all the fuss that was made, that the Congressman had failed to notice the beautiful garments with which the emperor was clothed. But isn't it really our ancestors, and we their proud progeny, that have been the subjects of the most outlandish lies perpetrated in American history?"

The rest of the article goes on to complain that American history that disagrees with their view point is a lie and discusses Orwell and Hitler and etc.

Of course it goes without saying that the condemnation of Rep. Joe Wilson's behavior during the State of the Nation address is that it is poor manners, out of turn, and inappropriate. The U.S. Congress is where there is supposed to be deliberative discussion, and not a shouting match.

Clearly the SCV is sympathetic to Joe Wilson's action.

This is an earlier post of mine on Joe Wilson's action and what it might portend for Obama's next State of the Union speech. (Check the update where I discuss Joe Wilson's behavior.)

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/10/gop-party-going-neo-confederate.html

On Jan. 27, 2010 we will see how the next State of the Union Speech goes, as I posted before, since Joe Wilson's outburst resulted in him getting a torrent of campaign cash, this year there might be multiple outbursts as Republican representatives seek to establish radical credentials and raise campaign cash.

Lincoln re-enactors being harrassed by the SCV

I have come across two photos and captions in my research of neo-Confederate literature which indicate that the neo-Confederate hostility towards Lincoln is being acted out at public events. In one case with a gun.

In the Jan.-Feb. 2010 issue of the Confederate Veteran, official publication of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, (SCV).

On page 29 is a picture of a elderly Lincoln re-enactor surrounded by SCV re-enactors at the annual Blackstone, Virginia Arts and Crafts and Heritage event. The picture shows the SCV re-enactors giving the Lincoln re-enactor some tickets. The re-enactors are physically much larger than the re-enactor.

The caption explains, "Shown are members of the camp presenting Lincoln with two complimentary tickets to Ford's Theater." The picture is small, but it doesn't look like the Lincoln re-enactor is smiling. Ford's Theater is where Lincoln was assassinated.

On page 31 is a picture of an elderly Lincoln re-enactor sitting in a chair, seemingly unaware that a SCV member is standing behind him in Confederate uniform, with his right arm fully extended with a pistol pointed at the head of the Lincoln re-enactor.

The caption reads, "2nd Lieutenant Reece Clark Craven Camp 1966, Asheboro, NC, participated in a living history at Sunny Slopes Farm Heritage Day on May 2, 2009, where you could have had your picture made with Abe Lincoln (aka Ed Kirkman), Camp Adjutant P. Dwain Roberts stands behind 'Lincoln'!"

Beyond the incidents themselves is the fact that the persons doing these events want them to be known and published and that the editors of the magazine thought they were worthy of being published.

I don't remember seeing pictures like these in earlier issues. Perhaps it is some campaign against Lincoln re-enactors that has just started or perhaps it is just two isolated incidents. However, since these photos were published, I think that other SCV camps will look to emulate them.

I call it harassment since I doubt Lincoln re-enactors really appreciate this.

Co-signatures for letter to Obama beginning to come in.

For the rest of the 2010 campaign, I am going to mostly be blogging on the letter to President Obama at http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/. I will only occasionally be blogging on the topic at this blog, and mostly just to refer the reader to the other blog.

People are beginning to co-sign my letter to President Obama. I am not going to have it online right away for reasons that will become obvious later.

Last year the letter campaign was rushed, so we just got co-signers of professors and prominent academics. This year I am broadening it to include community leaders, journalists, and others.

Already some very prominent people have co-signed. As each person signs, I ask for referrals to other persons that they think might sign and also encourage the invididual to forward the letter to those they think might be interested.

The co-signature campaign is on a roll now, and I think we should be able to gather a remarkable number of signatures.

Update: 2010 Letter to Obama concerning the Arlington Confederate memorial almost ready

We have been going over the 2010 letter to Obama about the Arlington Confederate memorial for the last two weeks and it is going to be ready this week, maybe Tuesday might. I will be gathering signatures starting Wednesday, January 6, 2010. Getting started on this in January should provide us with the opportunity to gather many more signatures than last year.

The letter isn't a repeat of last years letter either, but a whole new approach to the issue.


For those of you who didn't see last year's letter to Obama I have it at the URL below. It mostly concerns itself with the history and meaning of the memorial.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ObamaLetterNR.pdf

Also, this is the report on the 2009 letter to Obama.

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/2009/10/final-report-on-2009-letter-to.html

I will be tracking developments at this blog.

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/

UPDATE:

The letter has been finished and is being distributed for signatures. It currently isn't online though. I am circulating privately and in listserves before posting it. It won't be posted in this blog, but on the Arlington Confederate Monument blog, URL given above.

United Daughters of the Confederacy on Christmas Carols that aren't PC, (Politically Confederate)

One of the cover articles of the Nov. 2007, UDC Magazine, the official publication of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) is "Christmas Songs as Union Propaganda." On page 12, Sybil R. Willingham, Historian General of the UDC 2007-2008, has an article titled on that page, "Christmas Songs as Propaganda."

As Willingham explains:

"New Songs have been added over the years, and sometimes writer put their own words, opinions and political views to the Christmas story in an effort to influence the public. Some of our favorite hymns that we enjoy singing today contained controversial verses that have since been removed. Such was the case with the issue of slavery and the looming conflict that threatened to erupt between the North and the South."

Imagine that, someone might think the Christmas spirit is incompatible with slavery!

So what are these Christmas songs with their 'insidious' "Propaganda"?

One is it seems, "It Came Upon a Midnight Clear," published by a Dr. Edmond Sears in 1849 which Willingham claims out has an anti-slavery message in the 2nd verse which is no longer sung as follows:

"Yet with the woes of sin and strife
The world hath suffered long;
Beneath the angel-strain have rolled
Two thousand years of wrong;
And man, at war with man, hears not
The love song which they bring;
O hush the noise, ye men of strife,
And hear the angels sing!

If this is an anti-slavery message, so much the better I would say. Exactly what is controversial about this verse and who would find it controversial?

Another Christmas carol which Willingham sees as Abolitionist propaganda, is "O Holy Night." Willingham refers to a 3rd verse of the song as follows:

Truly He taught us to love one another;
His law is love and His Gospel peace.
Chain shall He break for the slave is our brother
And in His Name all oppression shall cease.
Sweet hymns of joy in grateful chorus raise we,
Let all within us praise His holy Name!

If we aren't singing this verse, we should, in my thinking, that is, if you a Christmas singing person. Again, to whom would this be a controversial verse?

Then Willingham moves on to the song "I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day" with words written by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and set to music by John Baptiste Calkin. The verses she quotes are:

Then from each black, accursed mouth
the cannon thundered in the South,
And with the sound the carols drowned
Of peace on earth, goodwill to men

It was as if an earthquake rent
The hearth-stones of a continent,
And made forlorn the house-holds born
Of peace on earth, goodwill to men

Then in a section of the article titled "The Songs We Loved" Willingham tells us that the previously mentioned songs were not likely to have been sung in the South during the Civil War, (Especially the one that hadn't been set to music until 1872). She then gives brief histories of songs that didn't have abolitionist backgrounds and suggests.

"As you gather 'round with friends and family this Christmas, perhaps you will join in singing some of the old favorites that our Confederate ancestors sang, too."

Which would exclude Christmas songs written by abolitionists.

Well, if you listen to Christmas carols, try to make these Christmas carols that Willingham calls propaganda to those that you listen to. See if you can find complete versions.

Further Updated, Updated Update on the GOP going neo-Confederate

I want to make it clear that I don't think any of the candidates in the NY 23rd district race are neo-Confederates, at least I haven't come across any evidence. The importance of the 23rd district is that moderates are being driven out of the Republican party and the party is going to drive to the right. In the South I believe that will be a drive into Neo-Confederacy.


This is the latest from http://www.politico.com/ on the NY 23rd District race.

"In shift, GOP leaders embrace Hoffman" at the following URL.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28899.html

This update is to my earlier post on the GOP going neo-Confederate.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/10/gop-party-going-neo-confederate.html

It appears that Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate is is climbing in the polls and now is ahead of the Republican party candidate, and tied with the Democratic candidate and appears to have a reasonable chance of winning. House Republicans have suddenly started to support him.

If Hoffman wins, I think that right-wing Republican grass roots, will be emboldened to go after every moderate Republican and people who are not sufficiently right-wing. A big purge may be on the way.

Update:

The moderate Republican has dropped out of the race in the 23rd Congressional District. This is the New York Times article on it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/nyregion/01upstate.html?_r=1&hp

Further update:

The Republican party establishment has crumbled, GOP leaders rush to endorse the Conservative party candidate. Title of article is, "A profile in courage, it isn't - GOP latecomers hop on Hoffman bandwagon."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28972_Page2.html

Report on 2009 Letter to Obama concerning the Arlington Confederate monument

The report is online at:

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/2009/10/final-report-on-2009-letter-to.html

GOP Party going neo-Confederate?, updated 10/31/09

As readers may or may not know, I have speculated about whether neo-Confederacy is going to be mainstreamed into the Republican party.

I have a post on this topic below which refers to all my earlier posts on the topic.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-party-becoming-confederate.html

In an older post I discussed a possible mechanism that would drive the Republicans into extremism and neo-Confederacy. Individual Republican elected officials would have to be concerned that if they didn't shift towards extremism, they would be confronted by and defeated by primary candidates that were shifted towards extremism. The opposing force to this would be the Republican establishment who would see this trend as marginalizing the Republican party. Political parties do come to and end. They may linger for a while, but at a certain point, they cease to be of any importance.

These opposing forces are contenting in the 23rd Congressional District in New York state. I think that this congressional election is of tremendous importance of the Republican party.

These are two blogs on what is happening there.

This article is titled, "NY-23 race first test of tea party power."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28639.html

The Republican candidate there isn't conservative enough, according to a certain faction of the Republican party, so they are backing third party Conservative Candidate Hoffman. It seems it will split conservative and Republican votes and elect a Democrat to Congress. This would be very interesting in itself as a process in which non-right wing Republicans are going to be purged from the Republican party. Another interesting development could be that there would be a Conservative Party congressional representative elected, and he will have a national platform, Congress, to speak out and be heard, and push the rest of the Republicans to the far right.

However, what really caught my attention is that the Republican party establishment is breaking ranks. In this article, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28671.html, titled, "Top Republicans jump ship in NY-23," leading national Republicans are listed who are endorsing the Conservative Party candidate against the Republican party candidate. The Republican Party establishment seems to be fracturing and its resistance crumbling.

I think that this fracture in the Republican establishment needs to be understood in the context of other developments. Earlier this year Joe Wilson shouted out "You Lie," at President Obama's presidential address.

Surprisingly neo-Confederates applaud Joe Wilson. They should compare Joe Wilson's behavior to Jefferson Davis "Farewell Address to the Senate." Even though Davis had had highly partisan struggles in the U.S. Senate and knew that likely that he would be at war with many of his fellow Senators shortly in the future his address was a model of courtesy. Address at this link. (http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/resources.cfm?doc_id=1507). Davis at the end of his speech says:

"In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed, or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.

Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains to me to bid you a final adieu."

Joe Wilson's comment has lifted him up from obscurity, made him a national conservative hero, and flooded his campaign treasury with money. I can only imagine that there are some other Republican members of Congress who regret not having shouted something during Obama's speech and yet others who plan to shout something or do something at the next presidential address to Congress. The next Obama speech could turn out to be bedlam as Republican congressional representatives shout out to fill their campaign treasuries, defeat rivals in primaries, and further their national ambitions. In fact, there may be competition to find a pretext to be the first person to shout out so as to appear to be a leader of Republicans shouters. After all if 10 or 15 or 25 Republicans shout out, the potential campaign money and national exposure, will be divided up into small slices. As the leader of the shout out, the representative might get a larger slice of the rewards.

Of course the Republican party establishment might have a counter strategy to address this insurgency and we don't yet perceive it. However, it seems that the shift to extremism is progressing at a fair pace and the 2010 elections are still a long ways away.

Some Democrats are observing this with smugness, already counting the votes that will be driven into the Democratic party by a Republican party going off to the extremes. That is a short sighted view of the matter. Having a large national extremist party could results in a very unpleasant surprise in the future.

Update:

The moderate Republican candidate has dropped out in the 23rd district in New York, leaving the Congressional election between a Democrat and a member of the Conservative Party. This is the news item at the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/nyregion/01upstate.html

Mississippi Prosecutor in Curtis Flowers' trial, first got elected by campaigning at a Council of Conservative Citizens meeting.

I provided the key information about Evans and the Council of Conservative Citizens (http://www.cofcc.org/) for the Friends of Justice at this URL.

http://friendsofjustice.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/doug-evans-and-the-mississippi-mainstream/

Neo-Confederate myth or not?

You can find it all over the web in neo-Confederate writing about a supposed Senate Joint Resolution No. 41 passed on March 2, 1928 that supposedly is an endorsement of the expression "War Between the States." It is supposedly in the Congressional Record.

Well I checked the Congressional Record for March 2, 1928. There is a Senate Joint Resolution No. 41. It is however, about recompensing the State of Nevada for expenses it incurred as a territory during the Civil War on behalf of the national government. The text of the resolution is not in the report, just an amendment to the text.

This is the usual claim:

"On March 2, 1928, Senate Joint Resolution NO. 41 was adopted by Congress and entered in the Congressional Record. It reads as follows: A war was waged between 1861-1865 between two organized governments: the United States of America and the Confederate States of America. These were the official titles of the contending parties. It was not a "Civil War" as it was not fought between two parties within the same government. It was not a War of Secession, for the Southern States seceded without a thought of war. The right of a state to secede had never been questioned. It was not a War of Rebellion, for sovereign, independent states, co-equal, cannot rebel against each other. It was the War Between the States, because 22 non seceding states made war upon 11 seceding states to force them back into the Union of States""

However, the text isn't in the Congressional Record. It might be in the Joint Resolution, but it isn't in the Congressional Record, there is just an amendment to it. And the resolution is about a Nevada state claim.

I used Hein's electronic source for the Congressional Record, and looked at the previous and next Congressional session. I looked at the Statues at Large and it wasn't in it.

Perhaps something got put in the Nevada State claims resolution, but the resolution isn't in the Congressional Record as claimed by the neo-Confederates. I am beginning to wonder if the whole thing isn't made up. It would be very convenient to make a claim about a resolution that can't be found or found easily.

Max Blumenthal has article on Joe Wilson and the SCV

The article is online at the Daily Beast at:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-11/joe-wilsons-rebel-yell/

Yours truly is mentioned.