The New Republic has a very odd article by Michelle Cottle on the ongoing Confederate flag flap, this time in Georgia. (Link via Geitner Simmons)
Gov. Roy Barnes, defeated for re-election in one of the biggest upsets on Nov. 5, had rammed through a revision of the Georgia state flag, shrinking the formerly prominent Confederate symbol to near invisibility and thus angering many good ole boys. (New flag; old flag)
The surprise victor, Sonny Perdue, first Republican governor in 130 years, had promised during the campaign to let the people of Georgia choose their flag in a referendum. After the election he began moving away from that promise, and the Sons of Confederate veterans appears to be letting him escape his controversial commitment.
Since Cottle obviously agrees with “some folks” who thought Perdue’s flag waving “smelled suspiciously like good old-fashioned race-baiting,” you’d think that she would be pleased that Perdue is now attempting to change his position and put the flag issue on the back burner with little heat under it. But you would be wrong.
Just because Candidate Perdue has become Governor Perdue–a bona fide statesman yearning to unite, not divide–doesn’t mean he should be allowed to forget all that quasi-race-baiting he engaged in on the trail. A shrewd politician, Perdue knew what kind of ugly little game he was playing. And now those brave, slightly unbalanced boys in gray should make sure their new governor has to reap what he sowed. . . .
[L]etting Perdue off the hook would send crafty, opportunistic politicians a very bad message: that it’s OK to run on any manner of nasty, divisive, inflammatory issue because you can always just change your tune once elected.
At first I thought this was inexplicably bizarre. She likes the divisiveness? Then I thought it was the foulest, rankest partisanship I could recall: she encourages stirring up race hatred as long as it serves to embarrass Republicans. But then I realized that Ms. Cottle is simply committed to the probity of the political process. You make your bed, you owe it to the voters to sleep in it. “The integrity of our political system demands the Southern Cross be put to a vote,” Ms. Cottle writes primly, “just like Perdue promised.”
I will be watching with interest in the future in full confidence that Ms. Cottle will apply her high standard with principled consistency to national Democrats who zig left to win primaries and zag right to be elected (but which promises are they supposed to keep?), and Southern Democrats who run to the right to get elected and then vote left when they are in Washington.
UPDATE – Geitner Simmons has a fascinating discussion of “The Surprising Confederate Flag.”
I don’t think she’s saying he should keep his bad campaign promises; she’s saying he still deserves contempt for having taken a bad position, even if he doesn’t plan to follow through on it.
Steven – I beg to differ. That’s exactly what she’s saying. He campaigned on promoting a referendum on the flag. SCV good ole boys helped him win. Now he’s backing away, and they’re backing down and letting him get away with it. She’s demanding that he be held to his promise (if that’s what it was; I didn’t follow that election that closely) to hold a referendum. Why? Because that will reveal the true colors of Republicans.
Cottle’s position, while appearing on its face to be principled, is of course nothing but manipulative, hoping to paint Perdue into an unpleasant corner that he appears to have succeeded in slipping out of.
By the way, two can play at racial divisiveness…wasn’t Barnes’s changing the flag that had been around for over 40 years itself a form of racial appeal in the first place? Isn’t he the one who opened the can of worms? Or does that not count because his side is the “good” side?
Fortunately, her position is guaranteed to go nowhere. The Sons of the Confederacy (who favor the referendum) have already wisely agreed to let Perdue off the hook. The Sharpton crowd, whose dogs Cottle threatens to turn loose on Perdue, are in no position to demand a referendum to change the flag they want to keep. If you analyze campaign promises as if they were contractual promises (which they aren’t – far from it) then Perdue comes away clean. The group to whom he made the promise has released him. Those who were not the beneficiaries of the promise in the first place (those in fact opposed to the referendum) have no standing to complain of breach of promise. So, in the court of public opinion, the breach of campaign promise case must be dismissed. That is why Cottle’s catty little article will not even scratch Perdue.
My ames jimmy Walthall. I live in north Carolina in the small redneck town of roxboro. Id just like to say that my school has banned the displayof the Confederate Flag because they believe its been tied in with racial conflicts. I stil wore mine im now facing a suspension. i dont regret it though. i argued the meaning of the flagwith the principal for an hour. her comments she gave me were a load of crap. Im posting this as a reminder to defend our Southern Heritage. Also, is there any good hard arguement I can give to get our right for the flag back? I wont’ back down. as soon as Im back Ill have another southern heritage shirt on. I f theres another more better way to handle the sitaution, please tell me.