Wow. The NRCC is claiming something that isn't strictly factual?

Color me stunned.

I'm looking forward to the results tonight.

Republicans hate it when you tell the truth about them, just like McCain's '100 years in Iraq' comment.

I am not so sure why the NRCC is complaining. This is the kind of information that might have motivated more people to vote for Davis rather than vote against him, at least in years past. Maybe times have truly changed.

Will John McCain reject and denounce this KKK supporter?

The Confederacy (as exemplified by its apologists) is an ongoing disgrace to the United States. They took up arms against their countrymen, in no small part to preserve their ownership of other human beings. And their brain-dead adherents point with (utterly misplaced) pride to the Stars and Bars as an emblem of their "heritage" even today.

Get over it. You lost, and deserved to lose. Maybe the only better thing would have been to let them go and seal the borders.

Imagine an America where Newt Gingrich, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Trent Lott, among other blots on the human race, were unwelcome foreigners. Makes me feel all warm just thinking about it.

It's long past time for the Stars and Bars these yokels revere to be regarded as the equivalent of the Nazi swastika, and held in the same contempt. At least post-World War II Germany seems to have learned from that mistake...

West Virginia crushes Obama and spit out the kool aid.

70% reporting, and it looks like Childers has this thing in the bag.

This is most definitely NOT excellent news for the RNCC!!

Bravehart -- Your impassioned defense of the confederate soldiers is interesting. I find it difficult to sympathize with the people who fought in support of the continued enslavement of blacks. In any event, the statute honoring the founder of the Klan needs to go. Let's see if the RNCC renounces and rejects it.

BTW, the "Stars and Bars" flag was not even the official flag of the confederacy, it was the battle flag. The Official Flag has two red horizontal stripes with a white horizontal stripe in between, and a blue square with a circle composed of stars representing the states of the confederacy.

If you want a good laugh at the inability of some people to let go, check this out:

http://www.newconfederacy.com/

Gen. Forrest is the subject of a very old hoax that has been around since the War. There is no truth to the rumor that he was ever a 'leader of the kkk' or that he was a racist. When he was called to appear at the 1871 US Congressional Committee that investigated the charges of his rumored involvement with that group, he was building a railroad with most of his workers being blacks, whom he paid better wages than other companies were paying whites. He worked to promote civil rights for blacks, and for all men; his speech to the Pole Bearers is proof of that.

Here's part of the transcript of Forrest's testimony to that 1871 hearing:
"The reports of Committees, House of Representatives, second session, forty-second congress," P. 7-449.

In 1871, Gen. Forrest was called before a congressional Committee along with 21 other ex-Confederate officers including Admiral Raphael Semmes, Gen. Wade Hampton, Gen. John B. Gordon, and Gen. Braxton Bragg. Forrest testified before Congress personally over four hours.

Forrest took the witness stand June 27th,1871. Building a railroad in Tennessee at the time, Gen Forrest stated he 'had done more, probably than any other man, to suppress these violence and difficulties and keep them down, had been vilified and abused in the (news) papers, and accused of things I never did while in the army and since. He had nothing to hide, wanted to see this matter settled, our country quite once more, and our people united and working together harmoniously.'

Asked if he knew of any men or combination of men violating the law or preventing the execution of the law: Gen Forest answered emphatically, 'No.' (A Committee member brought up a document suggesting otherwise, the 1868 newspaper article from the "Cincinnati Commercial". That was their "evidence", a news article.)

Forrest stated '...any information he had on the Klan was information given to him by others.'

Sen. Scott asked, 'Did you take any steps in organizing an association or society under that prescript (Klan constitution)?'

Forrest: 'I DID NOT' Forrest further stated that '..he thought the Organization (Klan) started in middle Tennessee, although he did not know where. It is said I started it.'

Asked by Sen. Scott, 'Did you start it, Is that true?'

Forrest: 'No Sir, it is not.'

Asked if he had heard of the Knights of the white Camellia, a Klan-like organization in Louisiana,

Forrest: 'Yes, they were reported to be there.'

Senator: 'Were you a member of the order of the white Camellia?'

Forrest: 'No Sir, I never was a member of the Knights of the white Camellia.'

Asked about the Klan :

Forrest: 'It was a matter I knew very little about. All my efforts were addressed to stop it, disband it, and prevent it....I was trying to keep it down as much as possible.'

Forrest: 'I talked with different people that I believed were connected to it, and urged the disbandment of it, that it should be broken up.'"

The following article appeared in the New York times June 27th, "Washington, 1871. Gen Forrest was before the Klu Klux Committee today, and his examination lasted four hours. After the examination, he remarked than the committee treated him with much courtesy and respect."

Actually, the "kuklos" was started in Pulaski, Tennessee, just before Christmas 1865, by six ex-Confederate officers, and was a sort of social club for Confederate officers.
Gen. Forrest was NOT the 'first Grand Wizard of the KKK". For the correct information on that, here are the actual documented facts :
Bedford Forrest had absolutely nothing to do with the founding of the Ku Klux Klan. And even within the history of the Klan, differences must be noted between the Klan of the 1860s and the Klan of today.
The KKK that was reorganized in 1915 had a well-deserved reputation as a bigoted and sometimes violent organization, fueled by hate and ignorance and thriving on fear and intimidation. But that wasn't always the case. The original KKK of the 1860s was organized as a fun club, or social club, for Confederate veterans. Many historians agree that if a YMCA had been available in the town of Pulaski, Tenn., the KKK might never have existed.

On Dec. 24, 1865, six young Confederate veterans met in the law office of Judge Thomas M. Jones, near the courthouse square in Pulaski. Their names were James R. Crowe, Calvin E. Jones, John B. Kennedy, John C. Lester, Frank O. McCord, and Richard B. Reed. All had been CSA officers and were lawyers, except Kennedy and McCord, who had each served as a private in the Confederate army. The meeting resulted in the idea of forming a social club, an 1860s version of the VFW or American Legion.
Notice, Gen. Forrest was not present at the founding meeting.
Their number quickly grew, and in meetings that followed, the men selected a name based on the Greek word "kuklos" meaning circle, from which they derived the name Ku Klux. Perhaps bowing to their Scotch-Irish ancestry, and to add alliteration to the name, they included "clan," spelled with a K. And so, quite innocently, a new social club called the Ku Klux Klan was created to provide recreation for Confederate veterans.

McCord, whose family owned the town's weekly newspaper, the Pulaski Citizen, printed mysterious-sounding notices of meetings and club activities. As other newspapers picked up his stories about the Klan, word spread and the organization grew.

When the war ended, Forrest was virtually broke, having spent most of his estimated pre-war fortune of $1.5 million outfitting his troops. He was spending his time between business ventures in Memphis and his farm in Mississippi. Organizations such as the Klan were farthest from his mind.

When Forrest was elected Grand Wizard of the Klan in mid-1867 at the Maxwell House Hotel in Nashville, he wasn't even in town. He was elected in absentia. The best scholarly research shows that Forrest never "led the Klan," he never "rode with" the Klan, nor did he ever own any Klan paraphernalia.

The only known order that Forrest issued using his famous name and perceived authority was for the KKK to disband in 1869, which it finally did in 1871. And even that order was written by his longtime friend and former chief artillery officer, Capt. John Watson Morton.

So there you have it. There is no reason to think of Gen. Forrest with anything but admiration and respect. If anyone still thinks badly of Gen. Forrest, that is a reflection of their own bad character, and does not take away from Gen. Forrest's outstanding contributions to humanity.
Always remember, the "kuklos" of the late 1860s wasn't even remotely like the US-flag-waving racist mob on the early 20th century. Above all, remember that Gen. Forrest was NOT 'the first grand wizard of the kkk'.

"We don't disrepect our troops now because of the current fiasco we're involved in with Iraq - support the troops, hate the war - and I look at Conferderate soldiers in the same light."

Some of us don't overlook the element of personal responsibility in being stupid -- in failing to get the facts before acting.

Thus I have no sympathy for those who were gung-ho, or simply too lazy to learn the facts thus were drafted, as concerns Vietnam. US involvement in that country was illegal, and the facts were readily available substantiating that fact. Those who were too lazy to acquaint themselves with those facts are responsible for the consequences of their laziness.

"They didn't necessarily hold the views or share the interests of the cause they were fighting for."

Nor did they necessarily NOT hold the views or share the insterests.

"They were cannon fodder."

Whose fault was that?

"To disrepect their sacrifice is to diminish their lives and to categoricaly taint them the same way you could taint all our current soldiers with the shame of Abu Grave and Guantanimo or for that whole laundry list of crimes against humanity committed under the flag of the US."

Bullshit: to "disrespect their sacrifice" is called for because they were WRONG. If someone ignores a red light and gets run over, what did they "sacrifice" that must be respected? Yet another instance of laziness and egotism, and the irresponsibility of shifting the blame onto others?

To pretend there was somehow something "noble" about their "sacrifice" is to begin to defend the wrong for which they STUPIDLY "sacrificed" their lives.