SC Governor Mark Sanford says NO to Big Brother!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Repeal South Carolina's presidential write-in ban!

Voters can write in Mickey [Mouse] for nearly any office. But for more than 25 years, South Carolina voters have been banned from writing in a candidate for president, forced to pick one of the options given or not vote at all...

read more

You cannot write-in a presidential candidate in South Carolina?!?!? You've got to be pulling my leg!

Now what am I going to do? Vote Obama? Vote McCain? Surely not! I can't vote for either of these oath-breaking traitors.!

If I cannot write in the candidate of my choice, I think I should opt out of the sham entirely and stay home.

As I see it, this is the only way for me to maintain a modicum of personal dignity is by withholding my consent from this immoral and fraudulent process. After all, if voting really could change anything, IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL!

NAACP hopes carpetbaggers will renew struggle to resurrect dead Flag issue

Leaders of the South Carolina NAACP will re-ignite their futile effort to remove the Confederate flag from the Statehouse grounds this month and hope the presence of two carpetbaggers adds weight to the annual rally.

Presidential hopefuls Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are scheduled to attend the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday march and rally Jan. 21, just days before Democrats in this early primary state go to the polls. The NAACP hopes the carpetbaggers, and the national attention they'll bring, will spotlight the “divisive” flag that now proudly flies alongside one of the city's busiest streets.

"America is a mean country and South Carolina is a meaner state," said Lonnie Randolph, the paranoid, living-in-the-1960’s president of the state chapter of the NAACP. "For the government of this state to continue to endorse bigotry, racism and white supremacy, we are going to continue raise our voice and speak out against it." All this because 100% of the then serving black representatives with other lawmakers decided to put the flag in its current location to inspire fear and hate among their constitutes on whom they depend for their job.

The banner - a symbol of Southern pride to those who have not been duped by Yankee mythology and racism to those who have - was moved from the Capitol dome seven years ago to a Confederate monument in front of the Statehouse. While the so-called flag issue no longer draws the same level of protest that turned out thousands when it flew atop the dome and is all but a dead issue, it is still used by hate groups and anti-Southern bigots as a litmus test for presidential candidates when they tote their carpet bags to South Carolina.

The candidates typically have similar, canned answers that vary depending on their party affiliation. Clinton and Obama, like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, have called for the flag to be removed from the grounds completely, although they do not reside in South Carolina and would have no legal authority to touch it even if they were elected to the office of president. Both candidates have been courting black voters here, where nearly half of the state's Democratic primary voters are black.

The un-civil rights group also has urged a tourism boycott of South Carolina, though state officials said it has had little or no impact on the state's largest industry, which brings in about $15 billion a year. Just last month, two football teams from historically black universities outside of South Carolina played in the Pioneer Bowl just a few miles away from where the flag flies and, to the chagrin of the hate-baiters, everyone seemed to get along just fine.

"People are more concerned about the economy than they are about that flag," said the astute, but horribly misinformed, black activist Kevin Gray, who once ran for governor as a third party candidate. "Keeping their lights on. Keeping their homes. There are a lot of bread and butter issues going on right now. The flag is certainly a symbol of white supremacy but understanding that doesn't necessarily help you pay those bills any easier." Brilliant!

Flag supporters said visits by presidential candidates won't push legislators to remove the flag from the grounds.

"It is a dead issue," said Randall Burbage, president of the South Carolina Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. "It's been settled by our Legislature and the people of South Carolina and that's who should settle it. I don't think it's up to a presidential candidate or right to even ask their opinion on that."

Note: This is a satirized version of an article entitled “NAACP hopes primary will renew fight to remove Confederate flag” by Katrina Goggins, Associated Press, 02 January 2008.

Happy Secession Day!

On this day in 1860, South Carolina resumed the powers it had delegated to the Federal Union by its ratification of the U.S. Constitution and became a free and independent State:

AN ORDINANCE to dissolve the union between the State of South Carolina and other States united with her under the compact entitled "The Constitution of the United States of America."
We, the people of the State of South Carolina, in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance adopted by us in convention on the twenty-third day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the "United States of America," is hereby dissolved.

Done at Charleston the twentieth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty.

Because ordinance was never legally rescinded, South Carolina must of necessity be considered occupied territory-- subject to the will and whim of the United States government. One may consider this an obscure historical oddity, but it is a fact and this fact tells us all we need to know about the nature of the union.

While many of our citizens, like a battered wife, have accepted their second class status in the union, many of us find it odious, offensive, and unacceptable.

While I do not object to the union of the states in principle, I believe this union should be completely voluntary and that this union should be strictly governed by the terms mutually agreed to by the ALL of the states.

If I had but one wish for this country, it would be that a new constitutional convention be called to determine whether or not the current arrangement is acceptable to all parties comprising these united States of America. Such a convention would provide each State the opportunity to renegotiate the terms of this union, thus guaranteeing that one state or region does not arbitrarily dictate la règle du jeu to any other state or region.

Otherwise, we should peaceably go our separate ways.

Such a separation would not necessitate the inability of the citizens of the various polities to maintain friendship, trade, and travel. This does not mean that we would not come to one another's aid should a defense of the continent become a necessity. This does mean, however, that we would no longer be unequally yoked together in a political marriage held together by guns and bayonets.

The next best thing, of course, would be a return to the original agreement between the States, i.e., the U.S. Constitution, which is what Ron Paul is trying to achieve in his bid for President.

Our current elected politician, however, will never restrict themselves of their own free will and accord. It will have to be forced upon them by the governed. This is why the Ron Paul Revolution is so important. It is our chance, as the people of the several states, to serve notice to those in positions of power that we will no longer consent to arbitrary and unconstitutional rule.

Only by binding the government with the heavy chains of a lawful constitution can we be in a position to secure our freedom reclaim our liberty.

So, today as we reflect on this day in the history of South Carolina, we are reminded that there one existed a people who loved LIBERTY more than UNION and FREEDOM more than SAFETY.

So, to my fellow South Carolinians and lovers of liberty everywhere: Happy Secession Day!

May we one day reclaim our place among the nations of the earth and once again be truly free!

South Carolina and the Ron Paul Revolution

There is one word that one must grasp in order to understand traditional Southern political thought.

The word is LIBERTY, that free and unfettered pursuit of one's God-given, inalienable rights.

It was the understanding of our forebears that governments are instituted among men to secure our God-given rights and derive their authority, or just powers, from the consent of the governed and from no other place. I concur.

When our liberty is threatened or impeded in any way, another word surfaces: FREEDOM. Because governments are established to secure our liberty, should they illegally seek deprive us of our rights, we have a duty to free ourselves from the offending government and by altering or abolishing it.

When freedom from impediment proves to be unachievable, another word will inevitably finds itself on the lips of patriots: REVOLUTION!

When the British had overstepped their bounds and sought to fetter the ancient liberties of our people, South Carolinians were among the first to resist and demand freedom.

General William Moultrie, against all odds, stood against and defeated the greatest Navy in the world as he engaged the British fleet of Sir Peter Parker at Sullivan's Island, South Carolina, on June 28, 1776.

Six days later the colonies declared their independence from the British Empire and thus set into motion the revolution that would eventually free colonies from the tyrannical influence of this foreign government.

When the colonies established their freedom from Great Britain, they established a government based on the principles laid out in the Declaration of Independence and strictly enumerated the powers of the newly formed Federal government so as to avoid the situation from which they had recently been entangled.

This was accomplished by the ratification of the U.S. Constitution by the several free and independent states.

Sadly, this new government-- the creation of the several states-- failed to execute its proper functions, overstepped its due bounds, and began to threaten the ancient liberties of our people, as had the British only a couple of generations before.

Once again, the word liberty was on the lips of our people and they determined, by solemn convention, to declare themselves independent from the tyrannical combinations which that had begun to consolidate federal power in the Northern states.

We (South Carolina) were the first of the Southern States to do so, becoming a free and independent Republic on December 20, 1860.

Since the close of that war, we the people of South Carolina have continued to resist tyranny as best as we could through the limited means available to us. As many began to believe once again in the American system, our people began to seek for redress via the ballot box. This has proved to be ineffective.

We have been seduced by the false dichotomy of Republican and Democrats; Liberal and Conservative.

We have allowed the Republicans to delude us into believing that they are conservative and would restore our rights if they could only gain control of the government.

Well, they have and we find ourselves less free than we were back when we had that scallywag playboy from Arkansas in the White House.

However, after a long train of abuses, lies, and betrayals, revolution is once again in the air; the sacred word LIBERTY is once more being spoken.

It is being evoked by a small, unassuming Congressman from Texas, Ron Paul.

His candidacy for the Republican nomination for President has thrown a spark on a powder keg and has ignited a revolution!

It is not a revolution of cannon, sword, and shot, but rather a revolution of ideas-- an awakening to the traditional understanding of the purpose of government-- indeed its only purpose-- to secure our liberties!

Our liberties can only be secured by having our government strictly chained and bound by the Constitution.

Like a lone voice crying in the wilderness, Ron Paul has become the voice of the old struggle which has one more surfaced after countless efforts to efface the word LIBERTY from the American political lexicon.

It is a cry to return to the rule of law, a return to the principles of our founding fathers. It is a rejection of entitlement and innovation. It is a battle cry of freedom!

The Ron Paul Revolution is unlike any revolution in the annuals of American history. It's not being fought on any traditional political turf. Its most effective battles, in fact, have been waged on that untamed and unregulated frontier we call cyber-space.

It is here that patriots have been able to bypass the traditional gate keepers of public information-- the television, the radio, and the press-- all of whom have sold the people out and will, no doubt, continue to do so.

What do we do?

We have found our liberty under attack and we have been unsuccessful in securing our freedoms from the so-called conservative candidates being sold to us by the Party and their allies in the media.

To the people of South Carolina I say this:

THE TIME HAS COME to take your rightful place at the head of the column!

THE TIME HAS COME to rally your family, friends, and colleagues around the banner of LIBERTY and demand that our ancient liberties and God given rights shall no longer be trampled under foot!

THE TIME HAS COME to rally behind the Texan!

THE TIME HAS COME TO RESOLVE that we will be the first state in the Union to put a man on the ballot who is not a politician, but a statesman; a man dedicated to restoring the rights and liberties for which our ancestors fought, bled, and died!

When SOUTH CAROLINA takes the lead and RON PAUL wins the South Carolina Republican Primary, our sister states of the South will follow.

Let is not shrink before our obligations or shirk our responsibilities as the free men and women of the great state of South Carolina!

The fight is here and the fight is now. It's time to cast your lot with LIBERTY and join the RON PAUL REVOLUTION!

Invasion, Conquest, and Subjugation

No, this post is not about the war in Iraq, but it could be. All acts of aggression against a sovereign people might be described thus.

This post is about Liberty.

On the day in 1865, she was raped, robbed, and murdered on the streets of my hometown, Columbia, South Carolina.

On that day, non-combatant residents in Columbia - black & white, slave & free, rich & poor - were terrorized, plundered, abused, ravished, and their homes and private property put to the torch by Federal troops.

This was not an act of war in the pejorative sense of the word. This was not collateral damage resulting from a heated battle between two opposing armies. This was a military invasion of an unarmed city and the conquest of a people — a war crime without precedence in our country’s history!

The responsibility for the burning of Columbia rests squarely on the shoulders of Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, commander of the Federal forces.

Sherman's official report on the burning placed the blame on Lt. Gen. Wade Hampton III, who Sherman said had ordered the burning of cotton in the streets. Sherman later recanted this allegation and admitted lying in his Memoirs, Volume 11 page 287. He said, "In my official report of this conflagration I distinctly charged it to General Wade Hampton, and confess I did so pointedly to shake the faith of his people in him, for he was in my opinion a braggart and professed to be the special champion of South Carolina."

In 1867 a chance meeting of former combatants occurred in Federal Governor Orr's office in Columbia. Gen. Howard, commander of the US 15th Corps of Sherman's army during the burning, was to be introduced to Gen. Hampton in the presence of many dignitaries. Gen. Hampton said, "Before I take your hand General Howard, tell me who burnt Columbia?" Gen. Howard replied, "It is useless to deny that our troops burnt Columbia, for I saw them in the act." (See Edwin J. Scott, Random Recollections of a Long Life. page 185; The Burning of Columbia, Charleston, SC, 1888, page 11.)

While some historians and other Northern apologist may dispute that Sherman was really responsible for the atrocity, those who were in the city during the invasion knew exactly who was responsible.

William Gilmore Simms, the world renowned Southern antebellum writer and father of Southern Literature, was in Columbia on those fateful days and recorded his own experience along with several other first hand accounts from the survivors.

Simms’s account was first published in the Columbia Phoenix, an aptly named newspaper that rose from the ashes of the beleaguered city. This account was later sanitized and toned down by Simms and subsequently published in book form as The Sack and Destruction of Columbia, South Carolina after the war.

Happily, the original, unvarnished newspaper installments by Simms became available for the first time since the war through the efforts of Dr. David Aiken of Charleston. Published as A City Laid Waste: The Capture, Sack, and Destruction of the City of Columbia by the University of South Carolina Press in 2005, these original accounts are primary documents, unequalled in war-time narritave in both content and style.

I believe Simms's account is important for many reasons. Primarily it is important because these installments were written before the end of the war when Columbia was still had freedom of the press - Appomattox would not occur for another couple of months and Reconstruction had not yet reared its ugly head. Simms was free to write the event without having to worry about being censored. Furthermore, because it was written and published where the events transpired and published for the residents of the city, he could not embelish without losing his credibility. In short, this account is the real deal and can be collaborated in other sources, including Federal soldier who where present.

This book is, in my opinion, one of the most important works published during the war. One cannot read it and remain unscathed. One cannot read it and come away with anything other than shame regarding the conduct of the Grand Army of the Republic and the cause for which they fought.

I urge you, nay, I dare you to get this book and read it. It will explain everything you need to know about the Southern point of view with regards to the War for Southern Independence.

Yes, Libery was murdered on the streets of Columbia. The crime occured right here in the heart of Dixie, February 17, 1865. As Americans, we should remeber what was won and what was lost on that day. I think of it often with tears in my eyes...

__________

For further information, you might consider visiting the following sites:

http://www.shermansmarch.com/

http://www.wadehamptoncamp.org/bfc-boc-a.html

http://civilwar.bluegrass.net/HomeFront/burningofcolumbia.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/jarvis/jarvis19.html

http://www.geocities.com/cmp_csa/BurningColumbia.html

http://sclos.org/News-BOC.htm

Not at liberty to smoke

Cigarettes and civil liberties: A new battle for freedom at Sullivan's Island, South Carolina and this time it is not the British Navy that is attacking!

read more digg story

Like Mr. Sewell, the author of the article cited above, I too am somewhat taken back with the irony of the situation that has developed at Sullivan's Island and spread throughout the once great state of South Carolina.

Imagine, the great Colonel William Moultrie, repulsing an invading force against all odds for the freedom of his homeland only to have that homeland reject the very idea for which he fought!

No one is going to defend the virtues of smoking, least of all me. HOWEVER, one I will defend the virtues of the right to chose to smoke or not to smoke on private property.

Like all encroachments on our liberties, it is an act of aggression. The aggressors, in this case, are City Council Members and their liberty hating allies in the citizenry -- the Pleasure Police (to use the term coined by Cigar Dave).

Against what are they aggressing? Bad health? Maybe a few misguided dupes believe that, but those peddling this snake-oil legislation know better…

This is an attack on private business owners and their patrons.

More to the point:

THIS IS AN ATTACK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!

This is a war against the rights to sell and consume a legal product on one’s own property. Cigarettes – or whatever bogey man they taunt us with— is a smoke and mirror tactic to hide the crux of the matter.

[They are unwilling to ban cigarettes because of the tax revenue they generate. With an addicted pool of consumers, they know they can raise the tax to any level they wish and it will be paid, but this is a different issue…]

If public, state owned building wish to ban smoking, fine.

If it is a private business, let the people vote with their shoes. If they do not want to be in a smoke filled bar, go elsewhere. Let the market bare out what the citizens want.

New York City — and I can believe this is actually true – is now waging a war on trans fats-- you know the stuff that makes fried food taste so damn good? South Carolina will eventually follow if this kind of encroachment is tolerated. It's just a matter of time before those do-gooders up in Washington, DC get in on the action.

Where does this end?

Our ancestors were poised to fight over a trifling tax on tea! What do you think they would do in a case like this?

Congratulations, Mr. Sewell, on your Article. At least there is someone out there who sees how far we have fallen.

For life, liberty, and the right to smoke and eat greasy french fries if I so choose, I am yours

In the cause,

~ P. C.

Bond says boycott should continue

The NAACP will continue the economic boycott against South Carolina over the flying of the Confederate flag as long as the state chapter wants to, said Julian Bond, the group's national board chairman...

read more

After reading the above, I think Mr. Bond is exactly right. They should keep the boycott going.

Why?

Well... it shows how stubborn and hateful the NAACP is against those whose ancestors answered the State call to fight back in 1860-- in a word, native white South Carolinians.

While I have no doubt that they strongly dislike southern whites, both living and dead, who do not deny their heriatage, the issue becomes complicated when we discover that...

South Carolina, as well as other Confederate states had black soldiers fighting under the flag that they condemn. Although I assume that the anger of the NAACP is not directed towards soldiers of colour, BUT perhaps it is!

The existence of black Confederate soldiers complicates their stereotypical and over-simplified portrayal of the two races in South Carolina (and elsewhere) at that time.

[Strangley enough, the article linked HERE appeared TODAY (!) concerning a Confederate soldier of African descent being honoured in Georgia, but this line of thought is beginning to take me off topic.].

Another reason I think they should continue their boycott of South Carolina is because it shows them to be that which they accuse others to be-- intolerant, racist, and hateful.

It shows that although the flag was moved from the dome and chambers of the South Carolina State House at their insistence and in good faith by South Carolina Lawmakers, it was not good enough.

Apparently, one culture and its symbols must be sacrificed to make room for another.

According to them, that flag is a symbol of hate regardless of history, reason, fact, or argument to the contrary, even though to me and millions of others it is anything but that.

It shows how little they care for so-called "Colored" people-- an antiquated and bigoted word which is still ensconced in their organization's name-- by creating a fury over an object which has no impact on the African Americans' day to day existence.

It shows that they do not know the difference between the so-called “Civil War” (So-called because it was no such a thing) and the Civil Rights Movement…

Mostly, however, it shows how impotent they are as South Carolina's tourism continues to improve.

It's too bad that we must continue this non-issue, but Mr. Bonds and others of his mindset will always make sure that there is enough racial tention to further their lack of agenda and sow the seeds of hate where none need exist.

Until next time, I remain yours

In the cause,

~ P. C.

P.S. – The poem "I am their Flag" recited by black Southern activist and former NAACP officer from North Carolina, H.K. Edgerton can be accessed by clicking HERE. It is really worth watching.

Society is an open-ended partnership between generations. The dead and the unborn are as much members of society as the living. To dishonor the dead is to reject the relation on which society is built—a relation of obligation between generations. Those who have lost respect for the dead have ceased to be trustees of their inheritance. Inevitably, therefore, they lose their sense of obligation to future generations. The web of obligation shrinks to the present tense. ~Edmond Burk