Neoconfederates Show Their Tolerance of Dissent

Over at The Gift That Keeps On Giving, the Lexington SCV honcho made this posting.  Robert E. Lee IV gave his support to the administration at Washington & Lee University.  In part, he wrote, ““It is clear to me that president Lee would wholeheartedly support your goals of making Washington and Lee a welcoming environment for all students who choose to come there today,” and, “As a proud alumnus, I, too, support those goals.”  Not only is he a descendant of Robert E. Lee’s, but he’s also an alumnus of Washington & Lee.  So what was the reaction of people with no connection to the University at all [and probably would never meet the intellectual criteria for admission to the University] and no connection to Robert E. Lee at all?  Here’s what Mr. Lexington SCV said:  “Robert E. Lee IV sells out great-grandpa. Not surprising from a man whom numerous people have told me said he ‘didn’t want to hear any of that s**t’ about his famous ancestor’s Confederate service. Ronald Regan for instance has a left-wing lunnie for a son that the left keeps in a closet somewhere and rolls out every presidential election cycle to oppose dad’s party. IV should stick to making and drinking bourbon, lots of it”

Charming, eh?  All the ignorant spelling is unchanged from his posting.  The article also mentions him:

“Do[r]sey heard about the letter from a W&L student about a week before convocation.

“ ‘Just because you have a family member that takes a position doesn’t mean that has any reflection on the father or grandfather’s views,’ Dorsey said. ‘It’s neat that he’s a descendant, but he didn’t know Robert E. Lee.’ ”

He had a week to think about what he was going to say and this was all he came up with?  “He didn’t know Robert E. Lee?”  I’d say he knows Robert E. Lee much better than Mr. Lexington SCV knows Robert E. Lee.

“Madam, do not train up your children with hostility to the government of the United States. Remember, we are all one country now. Dismiss from your mind all sectional feeling, and bring them up to be Americans.” [Robert E. Lee, 1867]

Lee himself didn’t have the confederate flag flying on campus when he was the President of Washington College.  According to David Cox, former rector of the R. E. Lee Memorial Church in Lexington, the claim that R. E. Lee told a woman who asked what to do with a battle flag to “fold it up and put it away” “is consistent with his letters and acts of his last years. He was always looking ahead.”

Let’s look at what the rest of the nice people in the group had to say.


So people who know nothing about Lee and aren’t members of the Lee family claim he “wouldn’t have endorsed such a decision,” claim Robert E. Lee IV is “a disgrace to the name,” and is “a disgrace to the family.”  Does anyone wonder why these folks deserve all the scorn they get?

The group’s owner had this piece of nonsense:

9-13-14-2 9-13-14-2a

Nothing in the article talked about the confederate constitution.  And the rest of his nonsense is simple idiocy.  Nobody’s destroying their heritage, and neoconfederates aren’t a race.

Next we have the first example of their so-called “tolerance.”


We have someone claiming there are people who “think somebody owes them something because they are a certain color.”  Yeah, like white folks?  Then we have one of the newer village idiots warning people not to participate in the comments because someone is there who won’t swallow their baloney and has the nerve to actually point out their errors.  And of course another member chimes in with “her arguments are easily shot down much like the rest of the arguments against our heritage.”  Funny, in that this particular member has never been successful at “shooting down” any arguments.


I wonder which version of “bemuse myself” she’s using.  Is she saying she’s confusing herself?  But the funny thing is the person who feels necessary to claim he has a Ph.D. In what, he doesn’t say.  It certainly isn’t history.  A quick Google search indicates it’s probably in mechanical engineering or the like.  He certainly doesn’t understand how making the place more welcoming to minorities promotes diversity.  Apparently demographics is beyond his ken.  In any event, he’s probably the exception that proves the rule in that he might be able to be admitted to the University.


Someone says, “He sure is not of the Lee blood we know.”  Of course, they know no “Lee blood.”  And we see also that they know nothing about George A. Custer as well.  And they don’t appear to be happy with Bertram Hayes-Davis, who seeks to impart a broad understanding of Jefferson Davis encompassing his entire life, and not just the four years of the Civil War.  If there’s learning involved, these people are against it.

But now we come to the most egregious example of their so-called “tolerance.”

9-13-14-6 9-13-14-6a 9-13-14-6b

Someone has the temerity to actually voice dissent in the group about what they’re saying and what’s the reaction?  The person is attacked and removed from the group.  Interesting one person claims to be a historian, yet he doesn’t seem to have authored any papers or books about history.  I guess he’s a legend in his own mind.  Another person likes to write a bunch of words, but when you actually look for substance it’s sorely lacking.  I’m sure he thinks it’s brilliant.  He certainly knows nothing about the history of the confederate flag.

I think this shows that neoconfederates can’t deal with opposition in their group.  A person who respectfully disagrees and doesn’t call them names is attacked and banned from the group for daring to claim they’re wrong.



  1. josephinesouthern · · Reply

    Mackey you just showed [edit] than I thought – apply to yourself and the memory black hole about “allowing opposition in your group”. NOT lol

    1. Well, Ms. Bass, I certainly do allow opposing viewpoints as long as the individuals are able to comply with the rules for commenting here. If you are unable to engage in an adult conversation, you won’t be posting here. Note that I routinely allow Connie’s viewpoints here, and she disagrees with me all the time. But she is able to follow the rules for commenting. Can you?

  2. They keep talking about how there are other Lee family members who disagree with WLU’s recent change, but they haven’t been able to produce any. Which is their MO, it seems to me, after a few weeks looking into such groups.

    1. Thanks for commenting.

      They confuse their wishful thinking with reality.

  3. Those people are their own worst enemy. As Ms. Crabtree explained, the vocal online heritage crowd loves to throw around catchphrase identifiers like “Honor,” but they display very little of it. Someone voices dissent and they censor her. John Stones claims to be a minister but obviously missed out on Christ’s teachings about helping the poor. My favorite part is the blatant hypocrisy rampant in the group. For example, Connie Chastain’s routine assessment of Corey Meyer’s fake screen names. Granted, Corey’s numerous fake profiles are annoying, but Connie refuses to acknowledge Carl Roden’s portrayal of an adolescent female who goes by Amanda; or the troll (Austin/Carmichael/Caldwell etc.) who comments on her own blog. The real “Southern Heritage” apparent among the heritage crowd is closet racism, hypocrisy, and dark comedy.

    1. Jimmy Dick · · Reply

      It is all about their version of the past and the present. Their concept of honor is sadly lacking as they have little enough of actual honor themselves. The desire to willingly distort history in order to suit their ideology shows they lack honor. I give credit to the men and women of 1860/61. They didn’t lie at all about their desire to secede or start a war. They said it upfront in big, bold words for the whole world to know. I may disagree with them and may say they were traitors, but they weren’t liars.

      Unfortunately, their descendents refuse to honor their own ancestors. They instead choose to lie about the past in order to make the actions of their ancestors look different. That is dishonorable. The people of that past or any past for that matter did what they did for their own reasons. To lie about it is unethical. There is no learning of history when it is presented in such a way as to make it seem different than it actually was.

      That is at the core of the problem with the southern heritage folks. They can’t restore honor unless they acknowledge the truth of history because they themselves are the ones denying honor to their ancestors.

    2. josephinesouthern · · Reply

      As one who has been censored by your crowd of yes men many times I am proof that you are accusing others of what you do your self, and although it would fill the net none of the Southern Heritage crowd has sought to make even one webpage about you. I think Ms. Crabtree is a fake.

      1. Ms. Bass, the fact that your posts have been allowed here shows that you’re wrong. I do edit posts to take out insults and curse words in order to make this a family-friendly place. As long as people follow the rules for comments, are on topic, and are not spam sites, their posts are allowed whether they agree with me or not, and I usually warn those who are having trouble following the rules before declaring them trolls and taking action against them. Whether Ms. Crabtree was “a fake,” to use your words, or not is immaterial. She posted a respectful disagreement and was summarily deleted from the group.

  4. You notice how they use the word “liberal” as a sort of all-purpose term to describe something they don’t like and/or don’t understand? And as far as Lee goes, Thomas Connelly was right: the “Marble Man” will never, ever die. I can’t even imagine what it must be like to be so intellectually un-curious.

    1. One of these folks is constantly calling me a Leftist. That’s actually really funny, as any of my friends who are really liberals would tell you. 🙂

      1. jfepperson · · Reply

        As one of Al’s friends who is really liberal, I will venture to the edge of modern political commentary to confirm what he said above. Al and I have had a number of heated-but-friendly, and generally respectful political discussions. Al is no “Leftist,” and that is fine with me. The world would be a dull place if everyone agreed on everything.

    2. “The “Marble Man” will never, ever die.”

      You can’t kill something that never lived.

  5. I was talking with my inlaw visiting from Texas. She explained that those who put Confederate battle flags on their cars and trucks are just in it for the macho “I’m a rebel” fantasy heritage. They have little to no interest in any facts or actual history, so all of our research and evidence falls on deaf ears. Is she right?

    1. Some of them no doubt are just like that. Others can be educated.

  6. Do you consider the Kennedy twins, authors of “The South Was Right”, to be among those who can be educated?

    1. Unwilling rather than unable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: