There are probably a few more than you think, but I think there are just as many apologists in the North as in the South. So it is not exclusively a Southern phenomenon.
A greater point is that some of the history of the Confederacy that we take for fact was actually part of what i have been referring to as the ‘myth’ created by former confederates after the war. Typically history is written by the victors, but the American Civil War is an anomaly since former Confederates had a hand in creating how they would be viewed in history by future generations. Now I do not advocate total erasure of this history, only the clarification on a few points. Celebrate the deeds in battle, bravery and honor on both sides… but do not allow that to overshadow the issue of slavery and the abuse within the system.

“Yes, but” — the right was obviously retained by each state. However, Congress has (and had) the power “To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions” and the secession was seen by the federal government as an obvious insurrection.

> And I’m sorry if I confuse
> people, I tend to take a
> position from an academic
> view

Be careful what you read! There are very few actual so-called unreconstructed Southerners to be found. 99% of the people in this country who pay much more attention to the Confederate Civil War memorabilia are also the first in line to scramble aboard Russian Cold War vehicles and equipment in a museum, rather than the US counterparts.

You are incorrect as well as neurotic about this.

> a shrine to the memory of the Confederacy.

Same thing. You are almost religious (I’d be more accurate in saying you are than when liberals misuse that term) with a negative religion centered on a demon called the Confederacy and its associated imaginary myth.

You still are not understanding the point I’m making. I never compared the Confederacy and the Nazi government and said they were the same. I also never stated that the Germans celebrate their Nazi past. I said that after both wars those involved participated in the creation of/latched onto a myth to explain their participation. Unlike Germany which has faced and for the most part accepts its past, however, our country has historically accepted the myth of the Confederacy as fact and has been unwilling to budge, labeling anyone who does as revisionist (by the way, the very act of studying history is an act of revision. It is constant, and there are always debates and new ideas. The story on any specific historical topic will therefore never be completed). Fortunately our country is starting to wake up, for example sites like Gettysburg are restructuring the interpretation of the battle and look at the causes and a more broad story rather than just being a shrine to the memory of the Confederacy.

You’re being sick again.

> it is ‘a matter of obvious fact’

Much of what you say is myth is not myth, there is no widespread “celebration” of the Confederacy, there is no widespread “celebration” by Germans of the Nazi past, either (in fact, Germany has frequently been anti-war to the point of being psychotic about its Nazi past), the Nazi government was more evil than the Confederate government, the Nazi government was the official government while the Confederates were traitors to the Union (something you are psychotic about), there was widespread support for German revanchist behavior while opinion was divided about secession (with much support as well as rejection of it among Unionists, as there was reluctance more than excitement among the Confederates)…how many more pieces need be made? …

Everything you say is true. I have no problem remembering achievements by either side. My whole point is that apologists try and create the Confederacy into this society, government of utopian ideals, when it certainly was not. Also, even though they were wrong about their assumption at the time, they did secede because they thought Lincoln was going to free the slaves. So for the South it was about preserving a way of life based on slavery, in the North (for Lincoln) it was about preserving the Union. In fact, if the South had rejoined before the issuance of the Final Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln would have allowed the states to decide whether to continue slavery or abolish it.
btw, excluding border states New Jersey had the most slaves in the North (a total of 13 at the time if I am not mistaken).
Also, my point of comparing them to the Nazi regime was a comparison to the creation of the myth to explain their involvement, it in no way compares them to being almost the same during their existence. I hope I’m clearly understood on that.

Also remember that when Lincoln issued his famous Emancipation Proclamation it did NOT affect slaves in norther states or those in states under Union control, such as Tennessee! Now if ending slavery was the nobel moral cause that guided the north then why did Lincoln stop himself there? There were also political motivations to making the war about slavery– that was keeping the European powers out of it… afterall they had banned slavery in the preceding decades and couldnt be seen as supporting it. Now, I am from the north and am quite glad the union won… the north was able to push through ammendments to the constitution banning slavery, and granting the right to vote. However that doesnt take away from that fact that many fought for the south because they believed their homes were under attack.

Racism was not just a southern thing… in fact the highest concentration of Klan members for years was in the northern state of New Jersey!

So recognizing the achievments of southern generals, and the honor of southern generals (eg- Robert Lee) is by no means a disgrace or similar to being a Nazi sympathizer. Just as one can admire Rommel’s ability, or the revolutionary Blitzkreig tactics and not be considered a Nazi sympathizer.

If it was about military policy then he could have chosen a better quote. Maybe someone more towards the present since tactics have changed so much. You know, like Patton, Eisenhower, or MacArthur. Someone who is relevant to ALL Americans, not just the ones who perpetuate the memory of the Lost Cause.

[false statements and projections, followed by]

> those who continue to
> celebrate the Confederacy

#@#$*(@#$ People are not “continuing to celebrate the Confederacy” [sic] and this remark was not aimed at such people. THE CONGRESSMAN’S REMARK WAS SOLELY ABOUT MILITARY POLICY.

> And if my analogy is false,

It is false as a matter of obvious fact.

> then prove it without just
> dismissing it because it does
> not fit into your
> Weltanschauung.

Now THERE is one hell of a projection of your own problem!

I’m not mischaracterizing reality. Only pointing out the mischaracterizations made by those who continue to celebrate the Confederacy. It is a problem that those who seem to continue to dismiss the side that opposes this illegal immoral war, which we are losing thanks to the incompetence of this administration and the GOP, celebrate and quote traitors to our country to support their position.

And if my analogy is false, then prove it without just dismissing it because it does not fit into your Weltanschauung. And if you think I am comparing the crimes of the Confederates to the Nazi murder of Jews, among many other groups, then don’t even try because I was not trying to make such a connection.

It is obvious, and shouldn’t require explaining!

I’m not going to condemn Ted Poe, without more evidence of his intent, but it wasn’t the smartest thing to do.

I’m aware of that. Lessons not learned in Crimean War learned or not learned during the Civil War (learned again in World War One); lessons not learned in Chechnya being learned in Iraq…

Of course, we’re extra nice. We could solve the urban combat problem Russian style if we chose, such as in Fallujah after the killings and corpse-burnings…but even though the USA and others (Israel) ties their hands behind their backs, they’re still the politically incorrect “bad guy”…

After all, Sherman didn’t tie his hands behind his back and you have no problem with that. We should make our enemies howl.

You are overreacting and mischaracterizing reality.

Your overreaction is similar to that of someone else who tries as hard to find even the best news about Iraq or anything else in the world positive about, or less negative about, the USA as instead the most negative possible.

> It is in fact the moral
> equivalent of Germans
> celebrating their Nazi
> past.

False analogy, false statement.

No, the fact is that it was neurotic, not merely a form of ad hominem and attempted guilt by association, but neurotic, for a few extremists and others with questionable motives or minds to seize what side Forrest took (as well as his later activities) rather than address the real issue that had been raised in the first place, the validity of the “surge” concept and its timing. Then these people overreact at the response; any normal person would question or be irritated at the neurotic obscession with Forrest’s later political activities (as well as seize the opportunity to throw extra venom at the Confederacy, the South, and at the GOP).