crosstar
2008-10-16 17:21:44 UTC
MC CAIN, YOU'RE NO GEORGE WALLACE
Richard Barrett
To borrow a bit from the debate, in which Lloyd Bentsen rebuked Dan
Quail for comparing himself to John Kennedy, I'd have to say to John
McCain, "I knew George Wallace. George Wallace was a friend of mine.
And, Senator, you're no George Wallace." I am prompted by McCain's
remark that Wallace was the "worst chapter" in American history,
because the contrary is just the case and the contrast between
Wallace and McCain is telling. Wallace, of course, was the pugilistic
Alabama Governor, who declared, at his Inauguration, "Segregation
today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." Wallace went on to
his legendary "stand in the school-house door" to protest integration
and, eventually, was winning Democratic-primaries and poised to take
the White House. He was gunned down by a man who, still, guffaws
against segregation.
Wallace, a World-War-II veteran, knew that integration was the
battering-ram of Communism and that by opposing the mixing,
inter-marrying and co-minglingof the races, America would be saved
from being reduced to the level of some third-world country and that
the Red Star would never surmount the red-white-and-blue. Written in
that "worst chapter" of the Wallace book were such ideas as a man's
home is his castle, a man should have freedom of association, to pick
and choose his friends. A man should have freedom, to work and earn,
hire and fire, according to the dictates of his own conscience. But,
crucially, the Wallace Doctrine included sending looters, rioters and
Communists to jail, shoring up the common-man and marching to the
will of the majority, not minorities. It was "conservative" and
democratic, progressive and peace-making.
Had Wallace not been gunned down, there would be no "civil-rights"
bills, ramming minorities into jobs, they could not perform, and
into schools, where they could not learn. There would be no
"voting-rights" acts, drawing districts to install minorities and
disenfranchise the majority. There would be no "sub-prime" lending
to minorities, no amnesty to aliens, no "bail-out" of bankers and no
feckless foreign wars. The White House would not be the fountainhead
of lies and capital of corruption. There would be no "blackmail" of
welfare, subsidies and food-stamps, paid out to the progeny of
looters, but the able-bodied would work, obey the law and earn their
own way. The spreading of slums, downgrading of law-enforcement and
driving away of jobs would be reversed. And, the cue would be taken
from George Washington, not John Lewis.
Why is it the "worst-chapter" when men married women, each race
married within its own kind and freedom superceded Communism? Why
was it so bad when a man had but one wife, bountiful and healthy children
and the "faith of our fathers"? Why was it the "worst" when a man was
rewarded for the sweat of his brow, not affirmative-action? What was
so wrong about merit, study, responsibility, achievement and honor?
What was so bad about chastising pre-marital sex, miscegenation,
perversion and homosexuality? Wallace never owned seven houses,
married for money or adopted a non-white child. He never junketed to
North Vietnam to "reconcile" with the Communists and prop up Red
China. He never faulted living in a neighborhood, going to church or
attending school, among one's own people. He saw only one America,
one way-of-life.
Why is it the "worst-chapter" when there was one language, English,
one law, the Constitution, and one vision, freedom? Wallace was
an exponent of the "solid" South, from which he "sent a message"
to "return to our roots." Home-owning, not home-invasion,
car-manufacturing, not car-jacking. So important was the South, that
subsequent presidential-aspirants adhered to the "Southern strategy."
The Republican Party had been brought back to life when it opposed
the civil-rights bill and carried the South, plus Arizona. Richard
Nixon ascended, for adopting the Wallace-platform, as did Ronald
Reagan, for co-opting the Wallace "constitutional-government" stance.
To slur Wallace slaps not only Southerners, segregationists and
anti-Communists, but "Reagan-Democrats," "conservative-Republicans"
and heartland Americans.
To unsubscribe from Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/unsubscribe.php
To subscribe to Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/subscribe.php
To comment on Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/comment.php
To read this article on the Crosstar website:
http://www.nationalist.org/docs/history/2008/101601.html
Crosstarlist
Trademark/service of nationalist.org
Not necessarily Crosstarlist views
Copyright 2008 The Nationalist Movement
Richard Barrett
To borrow a bit from the debate, in which Lloyd Bentsen rebuked Dan
Quail for comparing himself to John Kennedy, I'd have to say to John
McCain, "I knew George Wallace. George Wallace was a friend of mine.
And, Senator, you're no George Wallace." I am prompted by McCain's
remark that Wallace was the "worst chapter" in American history,
because the contrary is just the case and the contrast between
Wallace and McCain is telling. Wallace, of course, was the pugilistic
Alabama Governor, who declared, at his Inauguration, "Segregation
today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." Wallace went on to
his legendary "stand in the school-house door" to protest integration
and, eventually, was winning Democratic-primaries and poised to take
the White House. He was gunned down by a man who, still, guffaws
against segregation.
Wallace, a World-War-II veteran, knew that integration was the
battering-ram of Communism and that by opposing the mixing,
inter-marrying and co-minglingof the races, America would be saved
from being reduced to the level of some third-world country and that
the Red Star would never surmount the red-white-and-blue. Written in
that "worst chapter" of the Wallace book were such ideas as a man's
home is his castle, a man should have freedom of association, to pick
and choose his friends. A man should have freedom, to work and earn,
hire and fire, according to the dictates of his own conscience. But,
crucially, the Wallace Doctrine included sending looters, rioters and
Communists to jail, shoring up the common-man and marching to the
will of the majority, not minorities. It was "conservative" and
democratic, progressive and peace-making.
Had Wallace not been gunned down, there would be no "civil-rights"
bills, ramming minorities into jobs, they could not perform, and
into schools, where they could not learn. There would be no
"voting-rights" acts, drawing districts to install minorities and
disenfranchise the majority. There would be no "sub-prime" lending
to minorities, no amnesty to aliens, no "bail-out" of bankers and no
feckless foreign wars. The White House would not be the fountainhead
of lies and capital of corruption. There would be no "blackmail" of
welfare, subsidies and food-stamps, paid out to the progeny of
looters, but the able-bodied would work, obey the law and earn their
own way. The spreading of slums, downgrading of law-enforcement and
driving away of jobs would be reversed. And, the cue would be taken
from George Washington, not John Lewis.
Why is it the "worst-chapter" when men married women, each race
married within its own kind and freedom superceded Communism? Why
was it so bad when a man had but one wife, bountiful and healthy children
and the "faith of our fathers"? Why was it the "worst" when a man was
rewarded for the sweat of his brow, not affirmative-action? What was
so wrong about merit, study, responsibility, achievement and honor?
What was so bad about chastising pre-marital sex, miscegenation,
perversion and homosexuality? Wallace never owned seven houses,
married for money or adopted a non-white child. He never junketed to
North Vietnam to "reconcile" with the Communists and prop up Red
China. He never faulted living in a neighborhood, going to church or
attending school, among one's own people. He saw only one America,
one way-of-life.
Why is it the "worst-chapter" when there was one language, English,
one law, the Constitution, and one vision, freedom? Wallace was
an exponent of the "solid" South, from which he "sent a message"
to "return to our roots." Home-owning, not home-invasion,
car-manufacturing, not car-jacking. So important was the South, that
subsequent presidential-aspirants adhered to the "Southern strategy."
The Republican Party had been brought back to life when it opposed
the civil-rights bill and carried the South, plus Arizona. Richard
Nixon ascended, for adopting the Wallace-platform, as did Ronald
Reagan, for co-opting the Wallace "constitutional-government" stance.
To slur Wallace slaps not only Southerners, segregationists and
anti-Communists, but "Reagan-Democrats," "conservative-Republicans"
and heartland Americans.
To unsubscribe from Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/unsubscribe.php
To subscribe to Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/subscribe.php
To comment on Crosstarlist:
http://www.nationalist.org/contact/comment.php
To read this article on the Crosstar website:
http://www.nationalist.org/docs/history/2008/101601.html
Crosstarlist
Trademark/service of nationalist.org
Not necessarily Crosstarlist views
Copyright 2008 The Nationalist Movement