The whole sudden madness of removing Confederate statutes is a case triggered by the murderous actions of an evil loser, followed by shameless exploitation by craven Democrat and leftist opportunists. Funny how this only becomes an issue while Donald Trump is president (why didn't Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi tear down these statutes). The only reason this is even possible though is the lemming-esque mass of GOPe Republicans spooked and falling over themselves trying not to be labeled racists.
I get the rationale (even if I disagree with much of it) of removing Confederate memorials and statutes. Personally, I can think of at least one other statute that needs to be torn down first.
But why would the University of Texas remove a statute of James Stephen Hogg? He is the first native born governor of Texas.
Big Jim Hogg was a Democrat who courted the black vote (which solidified Democrat power in Texas at the time). Was Jim Hogg the LBJ of his day? Not exactly, although that might (at least from my perspective) justify removing his statute. Still, even by the standards of today, James Stephen Hogg seems like a politician who looked out for his constituents. Jim Hogg put Texas first in politics. Jim Hogg was popular in Texas for fighting legal battles with corrupt federal officials in Washington and eastern rail road tycoons.
Unlike our current 'public servants' in politics (*spit*), Hogg did not get rich while in office (he fought against the rampant corruption of the Grant cronies in Washington at the time). Still Hogg and his family did make a fortune after he left government, but much of that he and his children donated back to State of Texas under the theory if the wealth came from fortuitousness of finding riches in the earth you owned, they also belonged to everyone in the state. The Hogg family made numerous and generous donations to the University of Texas and other charitable institutions.
I get the rationale (even if I disagree with much of it) of removing Confederate memorials and statutes. Personally, I can think of at least one other statute that needs to be torn down first.
— Rick Karle (@RickKarle) August 17, 2017Like Charles Barkley said, it seems like a distraction from real issues going on. I get why some people would question such statutes and memorials, but aren't most public memorials (unless it is a national memorial) best handled on the state and local level? The problem is, where do you stop? And as the Other McCain notes, why the sudden focus on statutes?
But why would the University of Texas remove a statute of James Stephen Hogg? He is the first native born governor of Texas.
Big Jim Hogg was a Democrat who courted the black vote (which solidified Democrat power in Texas at the time). Was Jim Hogg the LBJ of his day? Not exactly, although that might (at least from my perspective) justify removing his statute. Still, even by the standards of today, James Stephen Hogg seems like a politician who looked out for his constituents. Jim Hogg put Texas first in politics. Jim Hogg was popular in Texas for fighting legal battles with corrupt federal officials in Washington and eastern rail road tycoons.
Unlike our current 'public servants' in politics (*spit*), Hogg did not get rich while in office (he fought against the rampant corruption of the Grant cronies in Washington at the time). Still Hogg and his family did make a fortune after he left government, but much of that he and his children donated back to State of Texas under the theory if the wealth came from fortuitousness of finding riches in the earth you owned, they also belonged to everyone in the state. The Hogg family made numerous and generous donations to the University of Texas and other charitable institutions.
Okay, James Stephen did cruelly name his lovely daughter Ima...
Perhaps the media have it wrong (imagine that). James Stephen Hogg did not fight in the civil war (he was too young). His father, Joseph Lewis Hogg, however, owned about 20 slaves and was a brigadier general in the army of the CSA. After a not particularly good start in that position, Joseph Lewis Hogg's military involvement was cut short by a fatal bout of camp dysentery. Not exactly the sort of military career that would prompt a public statute. Still, could the statute in question be that of Joseph Lewis Hogg (it would make sense a wealthy donor would have his deceased father's statute put up on campus)?
Hogg was alive during the Civil War, but was too young to serve. UT-Austin spokesman J.B. Bird said the university had no objection to Hogg's statue on campus, but "the entire statuary is one exhibit, so it all goes together."
That is mighty...progressive of them to say they have no objection to Hogg. He is just a wealthy dead white donor. UT has his money, so no need to worry. So Hogg is out just for associating with the wrong crowd.
Universities and colleges are supposed to be places of learning. There is a lesson to be learned here: don't donate to institutions like the University of Texas. You've been warned.
EBL: Tear Down This Statute, Is George Washington Next?, Separated at Birth: Evil Losers, Ima Hogg Rule 5, and If Insider Trading Is A Crime, Why Can Congress Do It?
Instapundit: Did Terry McAuliffe fans the fires of racism in Charlottesville to get his presidential campaign fired up? Heather Heyer is unavailable for comment.
90 Miles from Tyranny: ESPN pulls announcer for what? and George Soros's Engineered Race War
Don Surber: The people outraged are always outraged, The Press and Trump (strangely symbiotic)
Legal Insurrection: University of Houston renames Calhoun Lofts
Canada Free Press: So while we are tearing down statutes...
The Federalist: Nazi Hunting Fantasies and Hysteria
"Like Charles Barkley said, it seems like a distraction from real issues going on."
ReplyDeleteIn a nutshell.