Sheila Jackson Lee Accuses Rick Perry Of 'Fooling Around' On Confederate Flag License Plate Issue

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) criticized Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who is running for the Republican nomination for president, for "fooling around with the idea" of putting the Confederate Flag on a Texas license plate.

"To put on the state license plate a flag that symbolized fear, intimidation, oppressive action, brutality, slavery and the death of slaves ... and the brutality of Jim Crowism is an outrage and will not be tolerated," said Rep. Jackson Lee, who is black, according to The Hill. She added in her speech on the House floor that a state allowing the Confederate flag license plate should be seen as "not worthy of receiving federal funds."

"What you ask the state to do is, in essence, give credibility to a symbol that has been used as a symbol of brutality and death," she said to the Los Angeles Times.

The Texas Department of Motor Vehicles board split 4-4 in an April vote on whether to allow a specialty Sons of Confederate Veterans license plate showing the Confederate flag, leaving the matter unsettled. One member was absent from the vote, and another member who voted in favor of the plan died in June. The opinions of the absent member and the new member appointed to the board, El Paso auto dealer Raymond Palacios Jr., are not known. A portion of the proceeds from the license plate sales would go to the SCV.

SCV specialty plates are available in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, and Tennessee.

The NAACP has gathered over 22,000 signatures petitioning against the proposed plate. The SCV says that they want to honor Confederate war dead and don't aim to offend.

A Perry spokesperson told the LA Times that he believes the decision is for the board. Perry wrote a letter in 2000 to the SCV stating, "I want you to know that I oppose efforts to remove Confederate monuments, plaques and memorials from public property." The Huffington Post's Jason Cherkis reported on Perry's periodic troubles with race throughout his electoral career.

The board is set to meet Nov. 10, but it's not known whether the board will vote again on the issue.

Comments

[Cionaodh MacGowan]

12:37 PM on 11/02/2011

Let us agree to ban all the flags which the Ku Klux Klan flew, and now flies. Which are those flags? Most of you seek to ostracize the Confederate Naval Jack as the Klan's flag, yet that was just one flag. The battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia is a different flag. The other flag flown by the KKK is the current US flag. Let's ban that one too.

[LiberalLee]

10:58 AM on 10/29/2011

I've always laughed at these confederate wannabes.
" Hey Lookit us! We lost! We got our butts whupped for trying to keep slaves!"
They can call it the war of northern aggression all they want, but the fact remains, they supported a system of degradation and misery.
The Confederacy is dead. As it should be.

[James Everett]

02:25 PM on 10/29/2011

LiberalLee,
The Founders established a Confederated Republic of States in 1781, and in 1787 attempted to make this Confederacy "a more perfect union". The United States united by all three Constitutions, be it the 1781 Articles of Confederation, the 1787 Federal Constitution, and our 1861 Confederate States Constitution was a Confederacy of States. So are we to understand that you reject the Founders Confederated Republic of 1781, 1787, and 1861 ?
Are you then proclaiming yourself as a Nationalist, a traitor ? Our are you simply ignorant as to what a Confederate "Wannabe" is ? You state that.....
"The Confederac­y is dead. As it should be." This proclamation makes you a Traitor. Is this in fact what you are, or are you speaking from ignorance. I really wish to give you the benifit of doubt ! CSAgov.org

[LiberalLee]

09:52 PM on 11/06/2011

Oh get over it.
This isn't called the Confederated Anything of anything. It's the United States of America.
Your ORG has been in the grave over 150 years.
Anything dead that long stinks to high heaven.
Besides, when was the last time your currency bought a blessed thing.
All I reject, if you can manage to wrap that single, long, skinny braincell around it, is the idea that the loser in any war gets to write history to make itself look fashionable or like it didn't get its backside handed to it.

[James Everett]

04:37 PM on 10/29/2011

LiberalLee'
You say....
"The Confederac­y is dead. As it should be."
The Founders established a Confederated Republic of States in 1781, (A CONFEDERACY),
"Stiled The United States of America", then in 1787 the Framers of that constitution sought to make that existing union, "A MORE PERFECT UNION" under the 1787 Constitution. All three Constitutions were compacts between States creating a Confederation of States.
The government that occupies our Confederate States today is a National Democracy Empire, NOT a Confederated Republic. So when you make the Statement that....
The Confederac­y is dead. As it should be.
You are then proclaiming that you are a traitor to the Founders Confederated Republic,and The Framers 1787 Federal Constitution. I suspect that you make this statement out of ignorance. As for your statement that.....
"They can call it the war of northern aggression all they want, but the fact remains, they supported a system of degradatio­n and misery."
Your National democracy Empire supported the same degradation and misery in its attempt to exterminate the Native American Indian, and its Jim Crow laws aimed at keeping the Black man in abject poverty. Are we to understand that you are a PROUD NATIONALIST.
?

[Cionaodh MacGowan]

01:18 PM on 10/28/2011

This issue will always surface when the race baiters on the left need to demagogue the symbolism of the Confederate battle flag in order to galvanize their constituency or alienate the constituency of someone targeted by the dramatization. Sheila Jackson-Lee has engaged in such demagoguery by trumpeting this issue from the floor of Congress. She knows this is not a federal issue, yet she spoke of it in the House of Representatives. She knows this is a matter in which a State Board has direct controlling authority and its authority over vanity license plate approval is restricted by state law governing that approval. The Texas Governor can not intervene one way or the other, and she knows it. But her tactic has worked because Perry fell into her trap and has been duped into contradicting earlier statements in support of both the SCV and Confederate symbols. This also emphasizes that Sheila Jackson-Lee and others like her, the NAACP, SPLC, fundamentally do not want a rapprochement of the black, African descended and white, European descended populations either in Texas, the South or any other part of the country.She and others want the racial divide to continue to be a chasm for their political gain, and the public disparagement of Confederate symbols is one of the chief tools in their arsenal.

[LiberalLee]

12:54 PM on 10/26/2011

Hi Ho Blunder! Away!
Perry saddled up his faithful steed again I see.
Poor critter needs a break, what with towing Ricky as well as his sidekicks, Whoopsie, Backtrack, and Who Me? every day!

[James Everett]

03:46 PM on 10/29/2011

Speaking as a Confederate, Rick Perry is NOT one of our, He is all yours; else he would not be seeking political office within your National Democracy Empire.

[LoriAnn]

12:45 PM on 10/26/2011

Perry seems to embody the attitude of foolhardy, foolish, fool in general !! The last idiot we need in charge of this faultering country is someone who holds onto the confederacy as if its something to be proud of ! Ever hear of slavery.... thats your confederacy honey ! Perry is still thinking the "Dukes of Hazzard" was a historical memoire !!

[Goldengrl]

01:32 PM on 10/26/2011

LoriAnn, excellent post. F&F! When I see those flags I feel very uneasy to say the least, it represents a negative time in our history. Celebrating the confederacy with plaques, monuments and license plates is insensitive to those who were the victims of it.

[Mary Urech Stallings]

05:37 PM on 10/26/2011

Heck, my family has lived in Texas since 1824, my G-G grandfather fought for the south (he was from Missouri, my Mom's side); the Texas side of the family had 3 members who fought with Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans.

AND I have to tell you, the sight of the Confederate Battle flag makes me sick to my stomach and has no place in decent society. And Perry has no business running for President.

Aside: Sheila Jackson Lee is still a racist hate monger.

[Cionaodh MacGowan]

10:23 AM on 11/02/2011

Confederacy~slavery??? Excuse me, but Alabama ended slavery precisely when NEW JERSEY did--NJ was not in the Confederacy. You have been brainwashed.

[RobbieB]

12:45 PM on 10/26/2011

Perry's not "fooling around". He knows exactly what he's doing. Race-baiting.

[Cleburne123]

01:09 PM on 10/26/2011

The only race baiting going on here is by those making this an issue.

[RobbieB]

02:16 PM on 10/26/2011

Let me restate: Perry - in a desperate attempt to rile up the confederate flag-toting crowd - believes his can bring more of them over to his camp and can help him in the southern primaries. If you're African-American, try driving through Northern Arkansas and pull up at any of the houses flying the confederate flag. Go ahead.

That flag is a symbol to many Red-staters, and it has NOTHING to do with the Civil War.

[Barbara DeZan]

07:09 PM on 10/27/2011

So, you think it's fine to honor a flag that was the symbol of slavery?

I suppose putting a swastika on one would be fine, too.

I spit on that flag just like I would on the Swastika.

[Cleburne123]

12:04 PM on 10/26/2011

Some of these comments against the plate, or more specifically against people who want the plate are made by people who are guilty of the following:

BIGOTRY: Obstinate and unreasoning attachment to one’s own belief and
opinions with intolerance of beliefs opposed to them.

IGNORANCE: A lack of knowledge, either in general or of a particular
point.

PREJUDICE: Unreasonable predilection for or objection against something;
or an opinion or leaning adverse to anything without just grounds or
before sufficient knowledge; or an irrational attitude of hostility
directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed
characteristics; or an opinion or judgment formed beforehand or without
due examination.

[Barbara DeZan]

06:11 PM on 10/27/2011

Wrong. We'd also be against anyone who wanted toput a swastika on a plate.

The confederate flag is a symbol of slavery and death to millions of them.

It's nothing to be proud of.....

Race has nothing to do with it.

[Cionaodh MacGowan]

07:31 PM on 10/27/2011

Why is the Confederate flag a "symbol of slavery and death"? Because southern states had slaves? Did not northern states have those slaves too (e.g., New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware)? Surely you know this. Does not the US Constitution have slavery embedded in it to this very day, and it is overruled only by the 13th Amendment? Did not slave trading ships, sailing from ports in New England actively fly the US Stars & Stripes and maximize the cargo holds of those ships to account for the loss of life in passage? And since all of that is true, yet you fixate on the Confederate flag as somehow deserving of all the animosity about the legacy of slavery.......

It looks to me like you are actively sublimating pertinent facts about that era that might prove that other regions of the US, and the US flag in particular, are just as complicit in slavery, and thus "death to millions" and are thereby transferring your guilt of that era, as an American, upon a target, the Confederate flag, and upon a segment of the US population, the descendants of Confederate veterans, who are irrelevant persons in your estimation. The Confederate flag and the descendants of Confederate veterans are, therefore, easy targets for you to blame. Easier than the kind of introspection and examination of the facts often requires.

http://www.slavenorth.org/
http://www.tracesofthetrade.org/

[Cleburne123]

09:10 AM on 10/28/2011

well, see what MacGowen wrote and.....you can be against a swastika on a plate all you want, unfortunately Texas has implemented a program where it does not have the right to pick and choose which plates to allow and deny. If the board votes the plate down, the SCV will sue, Texas will waste tax payer $$, the SCV will win, as it has in three other states, and the SCV will get it plate. I personally would not care to see a nai plate, however, unlike you, I would just ignore it because I know I have no expectation of being free from being offended. Millions of slaves died? Certainly slavery is wrong, however I am interested in where you got that number. I am not sure that is true.....Well, I for one and proud of my ancestors and the flag is a symbol of his sacrifice......

[JoanMeijer]

11:34 AM on 10/26/2011

Seems like Perry thinks running for President is a joke.... at least he's joking about the issues.... bringing up distractions and his proposals can hardly be taken seriously. I think we need a serious president not a frat boy.... we already had one of those and look how that worked out.

[becky bradshaw]

12:19 PM on 10/26/2011

Perry's main competitor for the nomination is Romney, and he as yet has failed to elaborate a position on any major point. What is Romney's plan for the deficit? What is Romney's Middle East Plan? What is Romney's jobs plan? When he does talk about an issue, he remains so vague, as to be meaningless (see immigration).

Make fun of Perry and Cain and Bachmann. Fine. But at least they clearly indicate where they stand.

[kathy smelser]

11:30 AM on 10/26/2011

he is trying to come up with a new lic.plate so that when he moves to the island it will already be scratched off of his to do list

[mdbeard41]

11:08 AM on 10/26/2011

How hard can it be to just take a stand on this issue? Just as with the Birth-er non-issue, Perry is giving insight in to his ideology. His explanation that Trump just needs to have some fun is very telling. Perry is willing to be associated with hate, intolerance, and ridiculous ideas just to supply red meat to his base.

[LoriAnn]

12:47 PM on 10/26/2011

Hes about as one dimensional as a person can get and still draw a breath !

[mdbeard41]

09:17 PM on 10/26/2011

True, just when you think that this is bad as their candidates can get they always find one nuttier than the current flavor of the week. Who would have thought that Bible Spice was not the lowest, then came Bachman and Cain.... Forget drug testing welfare recipients, can we require psychological testing for people running for public office.

[ChiGuy]

10:12 AM on 10/26/2011

These supposed "sons" of Confederate Veterans know full well just how painful the sight of that flag is to many people, yet they proudly display it claiming that they're just showing pride in their heritage.
At least they're alerting people to their bigotry up front.

It's not the racist you see but the one that you don't who poses the greatest danger.

I would imagine there are more than a few "sons" of Nazis in Germany who would proudly display the Swastika if they could, too.

[Cleburne123]

01:12 PM on 10/26/2011

Umm, while many of the 30,000 plus members are grandsons and great grandsons, the organization does have what it calls "real sons" whose fathers were actually Confederate vets. You must not know much about the SCV as camp (chapter) meetings are open to the public and the organization doesn't care what color you are so long as you can prove lineage to a Confederate soldier.

[ChiGuy]

06:42 PM on 10/26/2011

Umm, I don't give a rat's backside how many genuine bloodlines there are stretching back to that time. Nor do I care whether they are open to all races. (Although I cannot imagine there are all that many blacks, if any, in their ranks.)

The Confederacy, and its flag represent a despicable group of people during a terrible time in our country's history. And the "sons" know full well that what that rag represents is hurtful to millions of Americans.

Let them just put a pretty little "SCV" on the plates and leave it at that.

[IWantTofu]

10:01 AM on 10/26/2011

The confederate flag is the symbol of the traitorous side that tried to secede from the United States. On the other hand, you can understand why the governor that wanted texas to secede would be sympathetic to the confederate flag issue.

[camelias and sweet tea]

09:29 AM on 10/26/2011

Oh No! don't give them any ideas down here in S.C.... Some would LOVE that plate

[Cleburne123]

12:08 PM on 10/26/2011

Too late: http://www.scplates.com/scv

[HazelRah1980]

09:03 AM on 10/26/2011

I thought the Confederate issue was settled a long time ago.

[IWantTofu]

10:01 AM on 10/26/2011

It was. It was settled by the Civil War.

[Barbara DeZan]

06:13 PM on 10/27/2011

It was.

The South just can't accept that they lost......that slavery is over....and they have to actually WORK for living since the Civil War.

[Cleburne123]

09:18 AM on 10/28/2011

Wrong, we know the war is over and slavery is over, duh. It's about honoring Confederate War Dead, many of whom are Ancestors of millions of Americans. Obstinate and unreasonable attachment......intolerance to other beliefs.

[HKB]

08:46 AM on 10/26/2011

The Confederacy's declaratio­n of war was an act of treason - states, nor individuau­ls or organizati­ons, do not have the power under our Constituti­on to secede - to try and dissolve our union is treason and an act of war.

We are the United States of America - not the Seperate Collection of States

[becky bradshaw]

12:05 PM on 10/26/2011

Texas is, and has been, legally able to secede. Texas was an independent Republic before it was a state. During the negotiations for the merger, Texas offered the United States the option of absorbing Texas and all of its assets, in exchange for also absorbing the state's debt. The United States declined. This is why there is almost no federally owned land in Texas, with the exception of Big Bend National Park, which was ceded to the federal governmentin 1943.

[HKB]

03:59 PM on 10/26/2011

One of the motivations for annexation was the Texas government had incurred huge debts which the United States agreed to assume upon annexation. As part of the Compromise of 1850, in return for this assumption of debt ($10,000,000), Texas dropped claims to territory, now parts of Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Wyoming, which Texas had never controlled and which the Federal government had captured directly from Mexico early in the Mexican War and governed directly.

The annexation resolution has been the topic of some historical myths; one that remains is that the resolution granted Texas the explicit right to secede from the Union. This is a right argued by some to be implicitly held by all states, although the Supreme Court of the United States of America ruled in Texas v. White in 1869 that no state has the right to unilaterally secede. The resolution did include the provision: up to four additional states could be created from Texas' territory, with the consent of the State of Texas. The resolution did not include any special exceptions to the provisions of the US Constitution regarding statehood. The right to create these possible new states was not "reserved" for Texas, as is sometimes stated. Second, Texas did not have to surrender its public lands to the federal government. While Texas did cede all territory outside of its current area to the federal government in 1850, it did not cede any public lands within its current boundaries.

[Barbara DeZan]

06:25 PM on 10/27/2011

You are wrong.

Contrary to popular myths, the documents governing Texas' accession to the United States of America do not mention any right of secession—although they did raise the possibility of dividing Texas into multiple states inside the Union.

Q: Doesn't the Texas Constitution reserve the right of Texas to secede?

A: This heavily popularized bit of Texas folklore finds no corroboration where it counts: No such provision is found in the current Texas Constitution (adopted in 1876) or the terms of annexation. However, it does state (in Article 1, Section 1) that "Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States..."

I suggest you READ the TX papers instead of just blabbing along your own opinion.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm#1.1

[Cleburne123]

12:13 PM on 10/26/2011

But back then, it was more about the individual states than the union of states. You cannot consider the actions of the seceded states while looking through present day glasses and how more people think of the US as one now. In any event, it was not an act of war, or treason.....NO ONE, from President Jefferson Davis down to the lowliest private, was tried, convicted or hung for treason. If what you say is true, then how is it Confederate Veterans have their own section and a huge monument in the Arlington national Cemetery. Heck, presidents, including Obama, have placed or sent wreathes to that monument to pay respeects on Memorial Day?

The South was not rebelling against the US.....the states voluntarily exited the union of states just as voluntarily as they had joined. The only fighting was the result of an invasion of peacefully seceded states.

"In order to maintain that secession is treason and not a right reserved under the 9th and 10th Amendments, it is necessary to demonstrate that the Constitution sanctions the use of force to coerce a state to remain in the Union." Was Jefferson Davis Right?, Kennedy, page 243....

[GDWhiteman]

01:07 PM on 10/26/2011

Excuse me? Is there any mention of the attack on Ft Sumter in any of the history books you've read? Peaceful?

[GDWhiteman]

01:14 PM on 10/26/2011

Perhaps you "cannot consider the actions of the seceded states while looking through present day glasses and how more people think of the US as one" but I can.

If all this "honoring of heroes" is such a big deal, it seems to me that you could raise funds for that without having to buy a license plate. You want to fly the Confederate battle flag on your car, get a bumper sticker.