Do I Owe the Virginia Flaggers an Apology?

Last week I pointed out what I interpreted as a racist comment from a prominent member of the Virginia Flaggers. A few days ago they offered the following response, which included a photograph of an African-American man carrying a Confederate flag in front of the Museum of the Confederacy.

I certainly don’t want to be known for casually accusing people of being racist, but I fail to see how this photograph assuages concerns. The Richmond community – who the Flaggers claim to be improving through their efforts – deserve a response to these types of statements. What exactly did the statement mean? How would this specific Flagger explain it to the individual in front of the MOC and the rest of Richmond’s black community?

Who are the Virginia Flaggers?

Print Friendly
 

59 thoughts on “Do I Owe the Virginia Flaggers an Apology?

  1. Patrick Young

    Wow. If Grayson Jennings has “a black friend” then he can’t be a racist. Your whole theory falls apart Mr. Levin and you should shut this blog down. Now.

    Who needs to make an argument when you have a photo of a black man with a Confederate flag?

    Reply
    1. Steve

      I wonder how many Jewish friends U.S. Grant had? Should read General Grant’s order number 11; Talk about anti-semitism! Is this blog strictly to mock and opine about flaggers and those who honor their Confederate ancestors or discuss the civil war?

      Reply
      1. Kevin Levin Post author

        Grant’s order has been well documented by historians. I fail to see what this has to do with this particular post. Perhaps you can explain what the statement in question has to do with honoring one’s Confederate heritage.

        Reply
        1. Jerry Dunford

          My curiousity has got the best of me, Me I am a Southerner, I am a conservative, a christian, I believe in God, and yes I make my share of mistakes and blunders.

          * Sexual orientation -Straight
          * Father, Grand Father
          * Religion- Christian-Protestant
          * Political affiliation – Independent politically, no party affilation
          * U.S. Veteran – yes honorable
          * Oppose Obama and his Liberal policies and destruction of traditional America

          Now, I am assuming the most of the anti-flagger, anti-South noise is coming from the following types of people,

          * Homosexual
          * Father- ?
          * Religion- Catholic or non religious
          * Democrat and Liberal
          * No Military servise
          * And most all of you support Obamas policies and character

          So, which one of you has the BALLS TO TRUTHFULLY WITHOUT USING SOME OF YOUR POISON AS A SMOKESCREEN WILL TRUTHFULLY, 100% TRUTHFULLY ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT YOUR CHARACTER.

          * Levin
          * Simpson
          * DICK
          * Meyer
          * Hall
          * Mackey

          Let’s hear it from the boys.

          Reply
          1. Kevin Levin Post author

            I have to say that this is much more entertaining than anything Connie Chastain has written.

            Thanks, Jerry and thank you for your service.

            Reply
          2. Jimmy Dick

            Jerry, I think you have a problem with anyone that isn’t you. I really don’t like the tone you just took with your use of the word Catholic. I’m Catholic with 20 years of US Military service and a Master’s degree in history. I’ve asked you before what your degree was in and where you went to school. So speak up.

            Reply
          3. Corey Meyer

            * Sexual orientation -Straight
            * Father- yes of two great boys
            * Religion- Lutheran
            * Political affiliation – Pretty much Center…while I list a bit to the left.
            * U.S. Veteran – No
            * I don’t agree with Obama 100% of the time but wonder what American Traditions really are?

            Reply
          4. Brooks D. Simpson

            Man, the hits just keep on coming.

            I don’t see what sexual preference or religious affiliation has to do with character. Nor do I see whether being a parent has anything to do with character (you’ve just disqualified Connie Chastain, as she’s not a parent, from the ranks of people who have character … and, as you are a Virginian, I should note that you’ve also disqualified George Washington). Conservative groups have used me as a consultant, and, unlike you, I’ve appeared on Fox News, so we can set aside that issue as well. My two years in ROTC at the University of Virginia, while they ended with my being awarded the Department of the Army’s Superior Cadet ribbon in 1977, convinced me that while I’d be a great general, I would be a lousy second lieutenant … but the military employs me as a consultant, too. People who know my politics would not characterize me as a fervent supporter of the president: students complain that they can’t figure out my politics.

            But what, I ask, has any of this to do with character? Nothing, I’d say. However, your posts tell us a great deal about your character. I’ll leave it at that.

            Reply
              1. Jimmy Dick

                He just wanted to wrap himself in the flag of the nation he despises for defeating the champions of slavery. What he is going to find out is that he is in a minority. I think he wants to try to link military service with his viewpoint on things and that just is not possible.

                Reply
                  1. Kevin Levin Post author

                    You won’t be hearing anything more from Mr. Dunford on this thread. I am perfectly willing to allow him to display his shallowness for all the world to see, but that’s as far as it goes.

                    Reply
                  2. Marian Latimer

                    I’m with you, Patrick. I’m Catholic, albeit not much of an attendee these days, partially for health reasons. I’m a big Pope Francis fan too after being not too fond of some of those who came before him. I can also, and I’m sure this will upset Mr. Dunford, claim a distant relationship, gasp, to Nathan Bedford Forrest, something that I’m sure causes my Civil Rights activist grandmother, on the other side of the family, to positively spin in her grave.

                    What did the Catholics ever do to y’all anyway? My southern father, (he of the Forrest side) converted to marry my mother.

                    Reply
        2. Eric A. Jacobson

          Well Lee did apologize for losing at Gettysburg. Sort of. Mostly he blamed the soldiers for not doing what he expected of them.

          Reply
    1. Kevin Levin Post author

      I hope the post makes it clear that I am not issuing any type of apology until the statement in question is explained. Of course, I don’t believe that such an explanation is forthcoming.

      Reply
  2. Brooks D. Simpson

    Flagger logic is to say that if a Flagger has a black friend, the Flagger isn’t racist. Of course, if the Flagger has a racist friend (hello, Matthew Heimbach), and you post a picture of that friend, then the Flagger(s) in question is/are racist.

    Didn’t see that black man invited to the Flaggers’ picnic … but I did see Matthew Heimbach invited to it. Guess that means Flaggers welcome racists.

    Just offering Flagger logic.

    Reply
    1. Jerry Dunford

      Mr. Levin, and Simpson, do you two men have pent up anger about your childhood, sexual related internal issues that bother your manhood, or are you just so unhappy that you only get satisfaction by making statements to degrade others.

      As I do not personally know either of you, or your group of liberal friends, but like liberals everywhere all you seem purposed to do is to bring disgrace to your groups, to your philosophy, as you are pure negative and destructive mainly to yourselves.

      The good people who have spent their private money, their time, not the governments or I should say, the peoples money, to do something good, to show respect, love and appreciation for their many ancestors they love and honor.

      You guys, have no honor, you dishonor your names, you show disrespect and hatred, hatred for what, do you hate those who have done nothing wrong other than to pay their respects to their heritage, or do you hate them and their ancestors who unlike you boys, were men of courage and conviction. Men who gave up their families and suffered the enormous hardships of a war to save and protect their state from being destroyed and their families killed by those who were determined to stop them from not wishing to be part of the Union any longer.

      Have either of you served in a military conflict, do either of you have any real connection
      to a situation of putting your very lives on the block to do your duty, as a man, as a husband, a father in a family, in order to protect those you love from harm or evil.

      With all of Americas problems today, the many homeless, the many sick and in serious situations, unemployment, crime, and so many other ills, and you put all your venom, your energy, and your dishonest, disrespectful, degrading words into harming others that are doing good work for their family, you are so shameful, so little, and prove to me that you are gutless individuals, with no souls. Real men, men who will have the love and respect of their children and families, you cannot be, your children if you have any, will be very disappointed in knowing that all their father stood for was to shame others, to degrade and hut others, and to be such cowards, as only cowards do the dirty low life work you both do and your friends such as Mackey, and Meyer, Dick and others.

      You are COWARDS, and I ask, I ask that you look at yourselves as you really are.

      Reply
      1. Kevin Levin Post author

        Thanks for the comment. I will interpret this as an endorsement of the views expressed in the subject of this post. Happy New Year.

        Reply
              1. Al Mackey

                As I don’t normally engage in trash talking, I’ve been refraining from mentioning the Decade of Dominance. :-)

                I’ve consigned Jerry to the troll pile due to his inability to engage in an adult discussion. He is really obsessed about other people being gay. I think a psychologist might have a theory or two regarding latent homosexuality–not that there’s anything wrong with that.

                Note he’s a religious bigot as well as being a homophobe.

                * Sexual orientation – Take a guess.
                * Father
                * Religion- Yes
                * Political affiliation – Independent, former Republican
                * U.S. Veteran – Yes. Retired officer.
                * Oppose stupid politicians on both sides.

                Reply
      2. Jimmy Dick

        Ancestor worship is not good for anyone. I noticed in every
        post you make when you are defending the confederates you leave out
        the part about fighting to preserve slavery. If you’re going to try
        to defend the actions of your ancestors you should really give the
        reason that war was fought. You should also consider that fact that
        most of the women wanted their men back at home instead of wasting
        their lives fighting a losing war. You really are an embarrassment
        to this country, Dunford. For anybody to repeatedly lie to others
        about the Civil War and demean the men who fought to preserve the
        United States of America while defending those who fought for the
        right to enslave their fellow man, who chose to ignore the US
        Constitution and the principles of the men who established the
        United States is just despicable. The problems we have today are
        directly due to people like you who support inequality, racism,
        bigotry, and hatred all because your ancestors decided to fight for
        those same principles is appalling. Fortunately, you and those like
        you are a shrinking minority.

        Reply
      3. Brooks D. Simpson

        Jerry, why are you obsessed about the issue of sexual preference? Are you insecure about your own sexuality and your other shortcomings? Do you feel neglected? Troubled?

        You do understand that people let your bigoted rants go through because they are so embarrassing to you and raise questions about the character of some of the people who espouse a certain vindictive version of Confederate heritage, don’t you? Indeed, the best way for the people that you say are intent on discrediting Confederate heritage to discredit it is to allow posts such as yours to appear, because they reinforce an impression of the bigotry, anger, and mindlessness that resides in the heart and soul of some supporters of Confederate heritage?

        In short, you make what you assume is my job rather easy. It’s almost as if you were a damnYankee plant. Enjoy the New Year as you continue to assist those folks who suggest that behind Confederate heritage advocacy are a bunch of bigoted homophobic racist white folks who are deeply troubled and insecure and who are prone to lash out in reaction to their growing marginalization and insignificance. Keep those comments coming.

        It’s as if you want to be a recurring character on Saturday Night Live.

        Reply
  3. Connie Chastain

    Yes, you owe them an apology — all you floggers and floggerettes do, many times over.

    Grayson made ironic use of a cultural phenomenon (a very real, observable obsession with SHOES in the black community) in relation to yet more erasure of Confederate heritage. Racism is hatred or intolerance of another race or other races Noticing cultural obsessions a racial group exhibits — to the point that it is reportable in the news media (and look at photos of the crowds to see the racial groups comprising them) — is not hatred or intolerance.

    Of course, you floggers label it racist for heritage advocates to even notice that somebody is black or to show an interest in racial issues.

    Whether you race-obsessed floggers realize it or not, the country — not just the Confederate community — has just about reached its limit with the racial grievance industry — which you floggers aid and abet — and its flat-out lies

    Just look at GLAAD’s recent and blatant lie that Phil Robertson “praised” Jim Crow laws. In fact, he was talking about the destructiveness of the 1960s poverty/welfare laws that conspicuously did NOT erase poverty, but did a great job of maintaining it by erasing husbands and fathers from poor black homes via the marriage penalty built into welfare laws. Thanks to poverty-creating anti-poverty legislation, the black illegitimacy rate skyrocketed from 23% in 1963 to 72% today. The most accurate predictor of a child being raised in poverty is being born into a single-parent (i.e., single mother) home. And to top it off, fatherlessness results in some of the country’s worst social pathologies. http://fathersunite.org/statistics_on_fatherlessnes.html
    http://blackdemographics.com/households/poverty/

    Yes, you owe the VaFlaggers an apology, just as GLAAD owes Phil Robertson an apology. But don’t offer one. We don’t want hell freezing over. It’s cold enough as it is.

    Reply
    1. Kevin Levin Post author

      Of course that was the intention behind the comment. Thanks for the end of the year laugh. I am sure the likes and comments that followed all fell in line. LOL

      Reply
    2. Patrick Young

      I love the fact that in denouncing fatherless homes, Connie uses stats from an organization of divorced men.

      BTW, I live in a black community and work in another black community. I’m guessing the folks who discern “a very real, observable obsession with SHOES in the black community” are the same ones who order up a nice big watermelon when a black family comes for dinner.

      Reply
    3. Jimmy Dick

      If you want to play with stats, then you should learn how to use them. The statistical data from Kids Count at http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by-race?loc=1#detailed/2/10-12,2,20,26-27,35,42,44-45,48,5/true/867,133,38,35,18/10,168,9,12,1,13,185/432,431 shows a general trend which cuts across all races. The percentage of children in single parent households has been steadily rising for years. This chart showed the increase over five years and it is not good for anyone. When you go further back in time the increase is consistent for years.
      One thing you are trying to do is to establish a correlation between single parent households and welfare. You are not doing that with your data. There are a lot of variables which are not accounted for. Had those been addressed, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) or analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) would have been utilized. You’ve just tossed up numbers and made a blanket hypothesis which is not supported by those numbers. The failure to address the variables negates the external validity of the study as well as the internal validity.
      Any study with results of significance would demonstrate the quantitative measures of analysis used such as parametric testing like a t test, multiple regression analysis, or Pearson product-moment correlation. There is no evidence of that occurring.

      Reply
  4. Billy Bearden

    Guess what Patrick,
    folks are being murdered over stupid shoes, it is real and all too common.

    From Sports Illustrated in 1990
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1136895/

    Yet we read here knee slaps and guffaws because the Flaggers must be somehow racist for mentioning something that, for real people, is genocide.

    For Andy Hall
    http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Mom-of-teen-murdered-for-Air-Jordans-launches-campaign-to-stop-violence-212396861.html
    &
    http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Teen-allegedly-shot-to-death-over-sneakers-4135003.php

    For Rob Baker
    http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/suspect-arrested-for-clayton-county-murder/nbM68/
    &
    http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/3-charged-killing-over-high-end-shoes/nWKL3/

    For Brooks Simpson
    http://www.kvoa.com/news/recent-spike-in-tucson-homicides/

    For Patrick Young and Kevin Levin
    http://wamu.org/news/12/01/09/teen_killed_over_tennis_shoes_in_dc
    &
    http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1990-12-04/news/1990338160_1_boiler-room-collins-police
    &
    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/24/us/jury-considers-death-penalty-in-killing-over-athletic-shoes.html

    The only ‘racist’ comment I have seen is the watermelon reference.

    Reply
    1. Kevin Levin Post author

      This fails to fully address Jennings’s point. His claim came down to dismissing why African Americans in the Jacksonville area backed a name change.

      It was a racist statement. No surprise that you fail to find fault with it. What exactly dies tis have to do with the Forrest name change? Please explain.

      Reply
    2. Brooks D. Simpson

      I’m sure Billy thinks he’s making a point here. Use Google, find something about “Sneakers” and murder (even stories over two decades old will do, and Billy can’t figure out the difference between basketball and tennis), and post those links, period. Unfortunately, that does nothing to clear Mr. Jennings’s name.

      My, but the Flaggers are struggling as the year comes to an end.

      Reply
  5. Billy Bearden

    This thread wasn’t on the Forrest name change, it was, I thought, about a photo of a black guy holding a CBF in front of the place formerly known as the MoC.

    And while the comments have swung wildly from the topic, my comment was directed to the taking lightly of Patrick on the serious shoe issue, and the watermelon comment.

    Reply
    1. Al Mackey

      Don’t you think Mr. Jennings was taking the shoe issue lightly, Billy? It looked to me like the flaggers in that post were having a big laugh over it. The thrust of Mr. Jennings’ comment was that African-American students as a group would do anything for a pair of shoes just because there are some criminals who steal expensive shoes. What he’s saying is that it’s a characteristic of the race. [And Mr. Hauser thinks all African-Americans would do anything for a basketball] And here you try to support that notion. So if I posted some links of criminals who happened to be white southerners, would it be correct to say most white southerners shared those characteristics? Or maybe I could post some stereotypical photos of some “rednecks” and say that’s what all the flaggers are like. Would it be fair to make that claim?

      Reply
      1. Kevin Levin Post author

        Great points, Al, but Jennings goes beyond this. He was making a mockery of any conviction within the African-American community that Nathan Bedford Forrest is an inappropriate name for a public school.

        Reply
  6. London John

    Kevin,
    would it be possible, as a New Year’s treat for your faithful followers, to put together a collection of the most laughable posts from mr Dunford and other Virginia Flaggers and Neo-Confederates etc?

    Reply
  7. Nathan Towne

    Without attempting to offend anyone, it seems like this thread has drifted dramatically off topic.

    Nathan Towne

    Reply
    1. Woodrowfan

      but it was fun while it lasted. I’m surprised Dunford didn’t accuse us all of being atheist-Muslim-Catholic-Gay-Commie-Nazi-Fascist-Democrat-draft–dodgin’ Yankees who never use the right fork at dinner daggumit! And get off his lawn!

      Reply
      1. Nathan Towne

        Woodrowfan,

        As of yet, I haven’t been accused of any of those things by Mr. Dunford or any other neo-confederate advocate but of course stranger things in life have happened. As for political issues, I don’t really think that it is my place to delve into any political debates on this type of forum unless the issues deal with historical approach or interpretation.

        Nathan Towne

        Reply
      2. Marian Latimer

        Does this burka make my backside look big, Woodrowfan? And which way is Mecca? Hope it matches my eyes. I ain’t gettin’ off his lawn either. Can’t make me. It’s the shortcut to my communist party meeting. LOL.

        Reply

Join the Conversation