"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with
power to endanger the public liberty." - - - - John Adams

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

NAACP: "Take down Robert E. Lee's painting."

An American Hero Wearing Blue
Robert E. Lee at age 31 in 1838, as a Lieutenant of
Engineers in the U. S. Army.

NAACP - Take down Robert E. Lee's painting. 
Yes, do it, but put up the painting of his hero father, General
Light Horse Harry Lee in its place.

The president of an NAACP branch in Florida has petitioned members of the Lee County Commission to take down a painting of Gen. Robert E. Lee, calling the former Confederate leader a historic symbol of racism.

The painting of Lee has been up since 1929.  So one could say that the NAACP is looking to create an issue just for the sake of creating an issue.  Be that as it may, personally, I have no problem with taking down Lee's painting.

Sorry to any readers from the South, but Lee was a traitor and an oath breaker.  He swore to protect the Constitution and instead raised armies to kill those who kept their oath to the Constitution.  One can debate if Lee is a symbol of racism or not.  But there is no doubt he was a traitor.

Fellow Virginian Winfield Scott wanted Lee to
command the Union Army.  But Lee chose
to break his oath to the Constitution.
Lee County was named after the general in 1887 — 22 years after the Civil War wrapped, the Fort Myers News-Press said.

But James Muwakkil, of the Lee County chapter of the NAACP, said the painting, which has hung in the county commission’s meeting room for years, divides the community.

That painting is a symbol of racism. It’s a symbol of divisiveness, and it doesn’t unify Lee County. It divides Lee County,” Mr. Muwakkil said in a letter, the News-Press reported.

County Commissioner Larry Kiker said the commission would have to hold a public meeting on the issue.

“I would be looking for thoughtful conversation based upon the historical value and why it was put there to begin with, mainly because I don’t know too much about it,” he told the News-Press reported.

The painting hails back decades. The county’s commissioners in 1929 asked Virginia lawmakers to help them get a portrait of Lee, the paper reported.

(Washington Times)

An American Traitor Wearing Grey
The fact of the matter is Lee took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  He chose to break his oath and actively general a rebellion that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans who remained loyal to the Constitution.
Lee's painting should be taken down and replaced with that of a real hero, Lee's father, General Light Horse Harry Lee.

A Hero Wearing Blue
General Henry "Light Horse Harry" Lee III
Federalist Party Congressman, Governor, Father of Robert E. Lee

Henry Lee  -  The painting that should be
hanging in Lee County.

What would Robert E. Lee's father have thought about his son actively making war against the very nation and Constitution he and fellow Virginian George Washington created?
With the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, Lee became a captain in a Virginia dragoon detachment, which was attached to the 1st Continental Light Dragoons. In 1778, Lee was promoted to major and given the command of a mixed corps of cavalry and infantry known as Lee's Legion, with which he won a great reputation as a leader of light troops.
It was during his time as commander of the Legion that Lee earned the sobriquet of "Light-Horse Harry" for his horsemanship. On September 22, 1779 the Continental Congress voted to present Lee with a gold medal—a reward given to no other officer below a general's rank—for the Legion's actions during the Battle of Paulus Hook in New Jersey, on August 19 of that year.
Lee was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel and was assigned with his Legion to the southern theater of war. Lee's Legion raided the British outpost of Georgetown, South Carolina in January 1781 and helped screen the American army in their Race to the Dan River the following month.
Lee united with General Francis Marion and General Andrew Pickens in the spring of 1781 to capture numerous British outposts in South Carolina and Georgia including Fort Watson, Fort Motte, Fort Granby, Fort Galphin, Fort Grierson, and Fort Cornwallis, Augusta, Georgia. They conducted a campaign of terror and intimidation against Loyalists in the region, highlighted in Pyle's Massacre.

Battle of Yorktown
Henry Lee was present at Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown.

Henry Lee and his legion also served at the Battle of Guilford Court House, the Siege of Ninety-Six, and the Battle of Eutaw Springs. He was present at Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown.
During the infamous Whiskey Rebellion, Lee commanded the 13,000 militiamen sent to quash the rebels.
On July 27, 1812, Lee received grave injuries while helping to resist an attack on his friend and fellow Federalist, Alexander Contee Hanson, editor of the Baltimore newspaper, The Federal Republican. Hanson was attacked by a Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican mob because his paper opposed the War of 1812.
Lee and Hanson and two dozen other Federalists had taken refuge in the offices of the paper. The group surrendered to Baltimore city officials the next day and were jailed. Laborer George Woolslager led a mob that forced its way into the jail, removed the Federalists, beating and torturing them over the next three hours.  Lee was left partially blinded after hot wax was poured into his eyes.
All were severely injured, and one Federalist, General James Lingan, died.


Anonymous said...

Dear Gary,
I must respectfully disagree with you on your stance the Lee was an oath breaker and a traitor. Under the terms of the Constitution the States have the right to peacefully withdraw from the Union if the citizens of the state so desire. By resigning his commission after his chosen state had voted for secession Lee, as well as all of the others who did so, no longer had an obligation to the Federal Government, thus no charges of treason can be justified. Had Fort Sumter not been fired upon the Federal Government had no right whatsoever to use force to coerce the States to maintain the Union. I believe that this was fully understood at the time and because of this no charges of treason were ever brought against any member of the Confederate forces as they knew that they could not possibly hold up in court.

Gary said...


I belong to a historical drinking society, or is it a drinking historical society? Can't remember which it is after a few.

In any case, over the decades I have spent many wonderful hours around the campfire debating with friends who are Civil War Reenactors and historians about every battle and political move made by all sides. We have a blast.

Fort Sumter was a key. But the a-hole hotheads in South Carolina wanted a fight to prove their manhood. Remember that two President-Generals from the South (Andrew Jackson & Zachary Taylor) bitch-slapped the South into obeying the Constitution. Many in the South were loyal.

As for treason. Lee and all Southern officers who broke their oaths could have tried by military courts.

If the South no longer wanted to be in the Union then they should have refused to participate in the elections of 1860. They should have cancelled any voting for members of Congress and President.

But the South willingly engaged in the election. If the South had not split the Democrat Party then Stephen Douglas might have become President.

But even if the South had become independent they would still have had to free the slaves just as Brazil did.

But the debate is an eternal one.