Warning: This is NOT an invitation to violate the prime directive of this site, which prohibits the discussion of modern politics.
I received this from a reader as a comment:
Hay Harry great way to advance you Obama agenda by using the Civil War Times so show you hate for the Tea Party.
Nice. Beyond the assault on my senses presented by this guy’s spelling, I have no idea how he so completely misread my quote in Civil War Times (you can read the full version of what I submitted here).
I was inclined to let this reader’s comment die an obscure death, but I was informed today that he also sent a note to the magazine, calling my quote a “cheap short”. I assume he meant “cheap shot”.
My thoughts on the whole controversy surrounding Governor McDonnell’s Virginia Confederate History Month proclamation boiled down to disappointment that, rather than being used as an opportunity to discuss historical issues such as the diversity of the population of the Confederacy and of Virginia before and during the war, it was being used to forward agendas on both ends of what is viewed as the political spectrum in our country these days. That’s why my references to the Tea Party movement included characterizations of it by extremists, both opponents and supporters.
At the extremes, we see reactions ranging from claims that Confederates were nothing more than terrorists, that slavery had little or nothing to do with the Confederate cause, that the Tea Party movement is primarily a gathering of neo-Confederate racists, and that the same movement reflects frustrations similar to those felt by the slaveholding south. All are gross distortions of the truth, and politically motivated.
It could be that the reader confused me with one of the other folks quoted. There was at least one opinion expressed that could be considered polemic.