What I said when I was called a “Nazi”

Half of the U.S. is busy calling the other half names because after eight years of Democrat rule, a Republican has won the presidency – not just any Republican, not an easy going Republican like George Bush or George W. Bush, but a mouthy, fire eating Republican like Newt Gingrich!

So what do you think it was like in Washington when, after scores of years of Democrat control, mouthy, fire-eating Newt Gingrich took over the Congress in 1995?

I can tell you, because I was there and I was the first person attacked by the Left. The press was not so bold then; instead of attacking Newt, it attacked one of his first appointees, me! I was called a racist anti-Semite because of some volunteer work I had done for the U.S. Dept. of Education some 9 years earlier. The foundation, Facing History and Ourselves, applied for a $57,000 grant proposal to share their curriculum for preparing teachers of middle school children to role-play Nazis and Jews and then use values clarification to decide who was wrong and who was right.

My review was the only grant review out of 15 reviews that passed the FHAO grant proposal for funding. I did so because it met all the criteria – none of which addressed the actual content. But in the small space I was given to express my opinion, I criticized the curriculum because it was appallingly inappropriate for 11 – 14 year old children.

Newt said I had to resign because otherwise the Democrats would use me to raise money to “get the Nazi out of the House of Representatives.”  I did not resign because it would have been an admission of wrong doing. Ten days later I was retroactively removed from the payroll. Before that, Newt told half the press I had been fired and the other half that I had resigned.

Here’s what I said in the Washington Post as soon as I had a chance:

January 24, 1995
In a Jan. 11 Style section article, Marc Fisher discusses my purported views on Holocaust education, yet he never talked with me about whether his suppositions were correct. Allow me to correct the record.

I reviewed a much earlier version of the “Facing History” curriculum than the one now in use and have been told that later versions were improved. Indeed, Margaret Strom told me in a radio conversation back in 1989 that my review had helped to improve the program. I have not seen the curriculum since the day I last reviewed it, but as I best recall there was no treatment of Nazi ideology in that earlier version. Hence my suggestion.

I do not know how Mr. Fisher can reasonably conclude, even from the fragmentary quotations he uses from eight years ago, that I oppose Holocaust education. As the article itself makes clear, “Facing History” was not simply Holocaust education, but treated various kinds of genocide. One might argue that the enormity of the evil of the Holocaust was reduced in significance by comparing it to lynchings in the South and America in Vietnam, as I recall the program did.

It is true that the program I reviewed betrayed a left-wing political bias that I thought inappropriate. But, contra Irene Shur, I also objected to the educational pedagogy it employed. This is something on which reasonable people can differ, but I believe it is better to teach young students, as I understand the Israelis do, that “you can never be a Nazi, and you can never be hurt by a Nazi,” rather than to suggest the possibility that the student could be like the Nazis, as Deborah Lipstadt concedes the program does.

I also believe students should be taught the truth about human nature, “that all men are created equal” and have natural rights that others are bound to respect, in contradiction to the evil and errant views of National Socialism and other ideologies of tyranny, as a way of inoculating them against evil.
Mr. Fisher says that the reference to “balance” in my review meant that I would give equal moral weight to the Nazis. The truth is the use of this word was generated by the Education Department’s review instrument, which required reviewers to rate programs for balance. How, indeed, do you balance the Holocaust, I was intending to say. Bring in the Nazis, the KKK? But I have found that due weight is not given in Washington to sleight of academic hand.

Deborah Lipstadt interprets my unfortunately phrased remarks in the way I am afraid many have: as suggesting that the Holocaust deniers’ view of the Holocaust be given a hearing. At the time I was asked to review “Facing History” by the Department of Education, I did not know what “Holocaust revisionism” was nor even that it existed. This whole pathology was outside my experience. I was a lay reviewer, which meant I was asked to review it as a mother and a citizen rather than as a scholar in the field. My review presupposes the existence and the evil of the Holocaust, an assumption universal in academic discourse. The reference to the “Nazi point of view,” unfortunately couched in the value-free jargon of social science that I have since abandoned, was meant to refer only to Nazi ideology.

I apologize, especially to Holocaust survivors and their families, for any aid and comfort that my leaked remarks and the publicity attending them unintentionally might have given to the deluded crazies of revisionism and for any anxiety that one of their ilk might possibly have been appointed as House historian, howev\er preposterous it is on its face.

I also, however, believe that apologies are due to these same survivors, and to me, by those who used the Holocaust, and fears of the Holocaust, to cheapen it in a dirty political game. I do not believe that any of the chief players in the events that smeared me really believed I was antisemitic or even a Holocaust revisionist. Indeed, these attacks only conceal the fact that the serious antisemitism in our day is on the left, and the left does not dare acknowledge it. I intend to seek these apologies, either through reconciliation or political pressure.

To summarize: How best to teach about the Holocaust so that it never happens again? Apart from reading and viewing the outstanding mainstream histories, novels and movies, I agree with the late Lucy Davidowicz: in a nonpolitical way, the most absolute way, by appealing to the highest authority, by teaching the commandment of God: Thou shalt not murder. CHRISTINA F. JEFFREY Arlington





My 2002 Immigration Article

I just ran across an article I originally wrote in 2002:


Immigration policy has long interested me, but I had forgotten this particular piece. In 2002 I became involved in helping a foreign student at Wofford College where my husband was a professor. It was I who brought the student’s plight to the attention of Congressman Joe Wilson who was able to help him gain legal status to stay in college and finish his degree. The article was written as an academic exercise for graduate students of public administration at North Georgia State College and University.

The Most Ethical Administration in History? NOT!

Thanks to Education warrior Donna Garner for this find. I have not read all 633 scandals, I am guessing a few of them might be ambivalently scandalous – but if Donna has vetted the list, I am pretty sure I’ll agree with her!  Read now if you can, or save it as she suggests for posterity. Someday you will be glad you did because the MSM, the “progressive” academy, and some churches will remember only the good he did and maybe even manufacture some since the corpus of good deeds by this administration for the majority of people over the last eight years is pretty thin. I also expect negative stories in the press to become harder to find. Just sayin….

[This is an amazing document to keep for posterity because it clearly shows the unbelievable number of scandals (633) of the Obama Administration. – Donna Garner]

“A Complete Guide to the 633 Scandals of the Obama Administration” —

The Sessions Confirmation Hearing #2

More Commentary on yesterday’s Judiciary Hearing examining Senator Jeff Sessions’ fitness to be Attorney General.

Most important testimony came from Ted Cruz who responded to the super sanctimonious questioning and lecturing of Jeff Sessions by Democrat members, he responded by calling them out on their silence over the past 8 years as the Department of Justice failed over and over to enforce the rule of law and in fact to distort it with little pushback from Congress, and most important, with no pushback Democrat Judiciary Committee members with responsibility for oversight. See this 12 minute takedown here:

This testimony needs no comment except to say that his focus on the most ignorant and most unfair of the Senators questioning Sessions,  Minn. Senator Al Franken. You need to hear this for yourself.

Senator Durbin, D-Ill. (Minority Whip) was the third most annoying of the Democrats (second was Patrick Leahy). Durbin ragged Sessions about Sessions’ position on Amnesty. Sessions pointed out that it will be Durbin’s and the rest of the Congress’ laws that the Attorney General will be enforcing.  Sessions said the cycle of amnesty laws that end up being ignored undermine the nation’s faith in the government. He said Americans have a right to have their laws enforced and that is not happening now.

Durbin didn’t stop until he got Sessions  to stray from his usual message about immigration to say, “We will not end the refugee program.”  Actually, that will not be the Attorney General’s call, but is merely his prediction. I hope we do end the UN/State Dept. program as it exists today.

Second most obnoxious Democrat, Patrick Leahy asked this question. Can religion ever be a reason for not hiring someone? Sessions responded with this example: Suppose a person’s religious beliefs are so strong when it comes to abortion that they feel forced to use their position in the DOJ to try to prevent women from obtaining legal abortions – that person would have to be dismissed. The gotcha effort failed.

Then Leahy went down a very ugly path questioning Sessions about Trump’s recorded crude remarks using the word “pussy.”  Sen. Leahy asked this: “Is grabbing a women by her genitals sexual assault? Sessions answered “yes.” Leahy came across silly, vindictive and irrelevant.

Sen. Mike Lee asked a great question; what about agency “guidance documents” will AG prosecute based on these?” Personal note: one of the worst of these “guidance documents” was circulated as a “Dear Colleagues” letter as a U.S. Department of Education threatening loss of funds if colleges and universities didn’t crack down on alleged sexual assaults using approaches favored by the DOE, such as guilt based on flimsy evidence and absence of legal assistance for the accused.  Males are the usual “accused” persons and the goal of the hearings seem to be expulsion of the accused with no recourse or provisions for appeal.

Senator Crapo, R-Idaho – wanted to discuss Regularity overreach. Sessions agreed and lamented that  agencies failed to consult the Office of Legal Counsel before over-reaching.
Crapo compared  Operation Chokehold with the movie “Minority Report.”

Fourth most annoying Democrat, Richard Blumenthal tried to browbeat Sessions into giving up his vote on the Judiciary committee when other nominees come before the committee. That would be foolish and Sessions didn’t fall for it.

Civilian Control of the Military

I had not intended watching this hearing about General James Mattis’ waiver. John McCain is chairing the meeting. Both of the experts, historian Eliot Cohen, a Republican and an academic historian who was also the organizer of an anti-Trump letter during the campaign and Kathleen Hicks, former Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense in the Obama Administration, both favor giving the General a waiver because of his unique qualifications and the dangerous situation created by the election of Donald  Trump.

The Sessions Confirmation Hearing

PART ONE: DC- January 10  (Quotes are not always verbatim – but close as I can manage listening and writing at the same time. I do not use quotation marks unless I am pretty sure they are close to accurate – in case of doubt, we’ll have to check official record, when available.)

COMMENTARY: Senator Grassley could not have been more gracious and complimentary of the Senator who “has served with us since 1997” and “this body has relied on him…”

“He has done his duty,” like the good Eagle Scout he is. He will shed his role of writing the law and taking on the duty of enforcing it – Grassley reminded the committee that he has taken up the role of enforcement before. He predicts Session will enforce the law without respect to persons. He will be a good leader enforcing the laws faithfully. “This is a simple and foundational principle.”   Grassley is complaining about the failure of the present Justice dept. to enforce laws it does not like.

Grassley says he looks forward to hearing how Sessions will transition. He says that Sessions in the past has sought assurances from nominees that former AG candidates that came before the Judiciary Committee.

COMMENTARY: If Grassley is not sincere, if this committee is not going to confirm this nomination, I will be be exceedingly shocked. But I am here to hear and watch and report to you because his enemies will be watching and listening to find ways to criticize.

Grassley in summary: “He is a man of honor and integrity and faithful to the law.”

Feinstein: Introduces Dreamer Denise Rohah; Maxine Waters, and a ministerial delegation all from L.A. She says she knows Sessions and has committed to him in private to support him, but this committee hearing will be thorough and fair. His job will be to enforce federal law equally for all Americans even if he voted against the law when it was passed.

She says the AG does not investigate or prosecute at the direction of the President. “That model has failed.”

COMMENTARY: Is Feinstein referring to Obama and Holder/Lynch?

Lincoln’s AG said his job was to uphold the law, not be political.

She goes on to preach about the role of the AG – to make sure “this government follows the law – and never tortures again.”

Deep Concern – she says Mrs. Evelyn Turner “I am very troubled by his stance against equal rights even in the recent past…no evidence he has change…advocated for an extreme conservative stance.” Turner lays out all Sessions “bad votes.”

Commentary: So this list of BAD VOTES comes after a lecture telling us that the AG is not political – interesting how it flips.  If politics is to be put aside, why doesn’t Feinstein. Although she is reading the letter from Turner – she must agree. I wonder if she really will vote for Sessions. Ultimately we must derterminde if Senator Session can be the AG for all the people…there is a deep fear about what a Trump adminsitration will bring to this country…”  Also will people be able to rely on the AG’s office to protect rights. She cites hundreds of letters from civil rights and feminist groups. Her bottom line, will he be able to detach himself from this President?”

Sen. Richard Shelby, Sr. Sen. from Alabama introducing Sessions: Says Shelby, Allegations against Sessions are baseless.

Code Pink demonstrator is removed.

Sen. Susan Collins – many disagreements on policy; has come to know him as a person of integrity; principled leader and has worked across the aisle to work with Kennedy to pass the prison rape prevention act; says Sessions is with her in opposing unfair trade agreements and practices that hurt American workers; also says Jeff Session is the same fair modest person in private as in public. She has never witnessed anything to suggest that he is anything other than a dedicated public servant and decent man. They joined the Senate together and apparently like each other.

She gave a long list of examples of his fairness with respect to race. She wants to point out something I mentioned yesterday, to wit, Senator Spector’s change of heart with respect to his vote against Sessions. Upon his change of parties from Republican to Democrat, a reporter asked him this: “Do you regret any of your past votes as a Republican?” Out of thousands, maybe tens of thousands of votes he could only name one regret – his vote against Session’s nomination for District Judge 31 years ago.

Sessions is sworn in. (His grandchildren are in the room and they are adorable)  He introduces his family. His daughter Ruth is married to a man named Wouk if I hear right and appears to be Asian. He has 4 children and ten grandchildren. The oldest is nine.

Every major law enforcement officer’s association has endorsed him – Sessions is expressing sorrow for the loss of LE members who lost their lives in service yesterday.

Statement: Interrupted by black protesters – one looks familiar. He thanks Shelby and Collins for kind introductions. The 3 senators have served together for 3 years

Another protester: “You’re a pig; stop these fascist pigs from getting in power.”

Sessions thanks Trump for nomination and expresses humility. “You know who I am; you know what I believe in; I revere the Constitution, the rule of law, fairness and impartiality. Goes on to say the same things Grassley and Feinstein say the job of an AG is… and he adds, even when telling the President what the law is, the job of the AG is to tell him the truth;  “the message must be clear, everyone is expected to do their duty.”

He talks about the way Ed Meese ran the department and how he himself trained Federal Attorneys.

Concerned with the jump in murders and all crime – up over 4% in the last two years; murders increased 11 percent to the highest rate since 1991.

COMMENTARY: This is more important than discussing racism – Americans want domestic tranquility. Further, one cannot defend one’s self against such charges. I know, you can ask me about this. Proving you didn’t do something is hard, proving you don’t think something is even harder.

He is honoring law enforcement today at the hear, as the number in the audience shows, and they are honoring him – he’s calling for more support for LE and he is assuring them that they will have his support. Talks about the research, expertise, and training to help state and local LE to reduce crime.

He is going to work to make the job of Justice to root out fraud and false claims as well as contracting fraud. His commitment is to see that the laws are enforced faithfully. No one is above the law or beneath its protection.

Sessions now being questioned by Sheldon Whitehouse D-Rhode Island. Sessions defends Justice Department interpretation of fraudulent speech as not protected speech.

Whitehouse wants to know if the Trump campaign violated the law vis a vis Russian hacking, will do his duty as AG. Sessions answers it well.

Sessions says he did not chant “lock her up” at rallies; he says he favored a special prosecutor  at the time accusations were made against HC during the campaign. He has already said he will recuse himself if HC is charged by the Justice Department.

Whitehouse says he represents a lot of Latinos and police chiefs who worry that Trump’s policies might disrupt community relations that took decades to create.

123Sessions defends his previous remarks about the NAACP were positive and laudatory. But with regard to their support of pro-Sandinista forces during the Cold war, he said they could damage the good reputation they had developed over the years by supporting anti-American policies.

He also defends his commentary on our immigration policies today that are not skill-based.

Grassley: Notes from the evaluation of Session’s office back in 1992; USAO of the Southern District of Alabama was found to be exemplary as well as other letters of support.

Senator Mike Lee R – Utah “You taught me a lot over the years.”

COMMENTARY: Lee seems a bi nervous…

Lee wants to discuss the role of the lawyer – a simple thing when you are representing an individual – client has one voice; more complicated with a corporate client; in the case of the US government and the AG’s representation of that client – it’s complicated. AG serves at the pleasure of the President but at the same time, he has an obligation to be independent who provide independent analysis. How do you see this?

Sessions:  AG sometimes has to referee between agencies. Ultimately, he has to be loyal to the Constitution. Every AG is appointed by a President; confirmed by the Senate. Ultimate loyalty to the President means the AG tells him if something can be done and if it can be done, to help him do it Constitutionally.

Lee: Special Prosecutor allows for a sensitive question to be handled without question of conflicts of interest. AG has to decide when a special prosecutor is appointed. How would you see your role here?

Sessions: AG should not appoint SPs willy nilly. Sessions did criticize AG Lynch for not appointing a special prosecutor in the case of HC – but he was a politician in the middle of a campaign and not an AG studying all the ramifications of the situation.

Lee: Duty of independence re: the Office of legal counsel. Good to see you

Sen. Amy Klobuchar D – Minn. Asks for explanation of Session’s views of Voting Rights Act

Sessions: VR Act was adopted after findings of documented systematic denial of voting rights.

AK – What about Voter I.D. laws?

Sessions: I have said I think properly drafted voter ID laws are Constitutional but I have not studied this issue. SC has said that targeting only a few states being covered by the VR Act and found section 5 to be unconstitutional.

AK says she is concerned with laws that make it harder for people to vote. She thinks the more we can do to encourage people to vote the better. She was on a trip with McCain and Graham to Ukraine and how unfair practices can influence elections. Asks if he believes the reports of our intelligence agencies.

SESSIONS: No reason not to.

AK: Asks if he will continue to support efforts to stop violence against women.

Sessions: Yes

AK  Immigration question because Minn has benefitted economically.

Sessions: Bringing in more workers than we have jobs for will have a negative impact on people and the nation. Corporate interests cannot be put first.

AK  We are a country of Immigrants

(Another disruptive protestor)

Sessions: Look at Canada’s immigration laws based on skills.

AK: Concern about journalists and charges against them; Justice department has said they will not put reporters in jail for doing their jobs.

Sessions: I have not studied the new rules but in the 80’s we knew you could not subpoena reporters without the highest level of scrutiny. But you could have a situation where the media is not unbiased and is involved in illegal activities.

Ben Sasse R @BenSasse – Nebraska  He includes into the record a statement from AG’s of 25 states in support of Sessions. Speaks of a crisis of confidence caused by a president saying he can’t do things and then doing them and thus creating doubt about the value of oaths of office. Things aren’t working according to School House Rock lyrics.

Sessions – “Every day we get away from that is a problem.”  The belief that Judges can redefine the meaning of words based on their political opinions.

Sasse –  Congress has underrated and invited the Executive to over-reach.

Sessions – Turley has written about this – we write laws that are too broad; the law should be clear and set limits. Fidelity to law and limits is important.

Sasse – when can the AG declined to prosecute? If the DOJ says a tax can’t be collected, then the law is not followed. Talking about improper actions…What is proper prosecutorial discretion?

Sessions – Critics of immigration said the failure to enforce DACA and other immigration laws – He says that is over-reach. The Solicitor General states the position of the DOJ and defends the law. The only time the DOJ can stand down unless the law cannot be “reasonably defended.”

Sasse –  wants a stop to fines being given to third parties.

Sessions – It’s a very dubious process – not the best way to settle cases.

Sasse – How will you rein in independent executive agencies?

Sessions – This is an historic question. Sometimes even Presidents hide behind the independence of agencies.

Sasse – What is the role of the of OLC?

Sessions – OLC has a statutory duty to make opinions; The AG can remove the head if they are not following the law; they render opinions on all kinds of matters, to school boards, law enforcement agencies, etc. They should be objective; ultimately it is the AG and President who make sure it is objective.

Al Franken D – Minn.  Quoting from Sessions interview in 2009 in which he said he filed 20 or 30 desegregation cases. Sessions’ office says he filed “a number.” Frankel wants to know which is correct?

Sessions – has checked the records and while there may be more than 20 individuals sued but the individual cases do not add up to 20; some cases were brought before I was the AG and some continued after I left.

Franken spends a good bit of his time defending the Somali refugees in his state and the fact that the children born there are citizens of the United States. He creates a straw man out of some remarks Sessions has made about the Refugee Resettlement program and goes on about

Al Franken – List of cases Sessions says he personally handled 4 de-segregation cases – 3 lawyers who worked on these cases say he had “no substantive involvement.”

Sessions – one of those was Hebret who has stated that I supported and helped etc. Paul Hancock says the AG claims credit for all cases under his jurisdiction.

Al – just signing a paper could not be really “handling a case.” Lawyer Rich says he worked on one case and Sessions had no input into the case. This is one you claim as one of the top 10 cases.

Sessions:  Hebret in 1986 – “We have had difficulty in bringing cases in the past but not with Sessions; i have been able to go to him and he has an open door policy; and yet I have needed Mr. Sessions help in these cases and he has helped me every step of the way; I have had more active help with him and i have worked side by side with him. This was 30 years ago and my memory is my source of information for this.

Al –  When I hear “I filed a case” it sounds to me like “I led the case” or “I supervised the case” it does not mean I just put my name on it. I think we need an AG who does not inflate his involvement. I consider this important.

Sessions – I provided assistance and guidance and supported these cases and attempted to be as helpful as possible to these historic cases. I listed these because they were the most important.

Franken spends a good bit of his time defending the Somali refugees in his state and the fact that the children born there are citizens of the United States. He creates a straw man out of some remarks Sessions has made about the Refugee Resettlement program and goes on about how refugees are having trouble because of people who are not welcoming – implication, people like Sessions.

All Sessions says is his remarks were not aimed at the people Franken was talking about.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-AZ  — says they differ on immigration but has a column in The Hill supporting Sessions nomination. Asks about zero tolerance policy in AZ for illegal border crossers, especially in the Yuma area. Holder and Lynch have put a stop to this with respect to otherwise non-criminal illegal crossers.

Sessions – Supported the streamlined no-tolerance policy which was dramatically effective; my inclination at this point makes me think it has great possibilities.

Flake – put pro-victim rights group supporting letters into the record and asks about Sessions position.

Sessions – very supportive of victim’s rights and rights of prisoners not to be raped or abused in prison. “We do not need to subject prisoners to any more punishment than the law requires.”

Flake – will you commit to work against duplicative grants to LE.?

Sessions – yes, I am committed to protecting taxpayers against this kind of thing.

Sen. Chuck Grassley – discusses the fight he and Sessions made to keep the L-Visa and H1B visas from hurting American workers. They opposed the Gang of Eight’s Amnesty programs. They signed a letter requesting Obama administration investigate companies like Disney mis-using visas to replace American workers which is against the law. Grassley says what has been happening could be characterized as nationality-based discrimination.

Sessions says he has been happy to help with Grassley’s legislation. That it is wrong to see every American job as fair game to anyone in the world willing to do it cheaper.

Grassley asks Sessions what role he can play in affirming the good that law enforcement does. Sessions answers that this is an important area and one that he wants to work on – that we cannot afford not to support our law enforcement.

Grassley then takes up the question of agriculture. He is concerned that there are few people in the DOJ who knows anything about agriculture. He is concerned about increased concentration. He wants Sessions to make agri-business anti-trust cases a priority. Finally he wants emphasis on dealing with fraud.

Sessions says Grassley’s work in this area is important; he congratulated him for his work to help whistle-blowers and try to stop fraud. He wants Sessions to regularly update him on fraud cases.

Finally he wants Sessions to tell people his reasons for opposing the 2013 amnesty law.

Sessions says he opposed the 2013 amnesty bill because the 1986 bill did not work and there was no reason to think the 2013 bill would work. Sessions would like to be a part of efforts to reform immigration.

Grassley wants to fight fraud and abuse in the Violence Against Women Act. He wanted tougher sentencing for forcible rape. He wants to know if Sessions will enforce the bill as passed. Sessions says he will.

Grassley is concerned about the Board of Immigration Appeals which can only be overturned by the AG or Federal Court. Asks Sessions to monitor this court. And he agrees to do so.

Congress cannot do all the oversight on its own. We need to rely on strong Inspector Generals. Do you agree that independence is important to the effectiveness of the IG’s?

Sessions: Yes the Independence should be expected and strengthened. IG’s are appointed by the agencies but if they are not seen as independent, then they cannot be as effective as we want them to be. I believe in IG’s.

Grassley is concerned about the bad treatment whistleblowers get – he hopes Sessions will pay attention to and encourage whistleblowers. They should not have to come to the Judiciary committee – they should be listened to in their own agencies. Wants timely action and reports about whistleblowers, action taken, and retaliation if any.

Sessions agrees.

Grassley says the record will be kept open until Monday.

COMMENTARY: Grassley seems extremely supportive of Sessions and his policies.

After the session Grassley met with the press. Questions asked include:

Q. “Will Sessions be confirmed?”

A.  “Yes”

Q. When

A. “By law, after January 20 and even one member can “hold it over.”

Q. “Sen. Blumenthal asked if Sessions has received an award from the Klan. Is that appropriate?

A. “It’s his decision what he asks. Nothing in Session’s demeanor seemed to indicate he thought any of the questions were out of order.”

A. “Why are the outside witnesses put to the end?”

Q.  “Because they were added by the Democrats after the original agenda was put together.”


Welcome to the Southern Scene

This is a new blog designed to inform, educate, discuss and occasionally let off a little steam. The Avatar is Belle Boyd. She was a heroine in the Civil War – find out all about her with the help of Google and Amazon. I welcome you to join me to view the South, the nation, and the world from the point of a lady Southerner. I will try to act like a lady and hope that my readers will not find me coming up short or worse, ugly. All conversations here should be high brow and above board. Deliberate lying will not be tolerated; if BelleProf is found wanting in her facts, they will be corrected right away.

First, being a lady and a respecter of property, including intellectual property, I need to give credit for the use of Belle’s lovely image to two Libraries:

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CREDIT:[between 1855 and 1865] | 1 negative LC-BH82- 4864 A <P&P> [P&P] | LC-DIG-cwpbh-01987 (digital file from original neg.)

UNC  CREDIT: Academic Affairs Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,1998. © This work is the property of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It may be used freely by individuals for research, teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability is included in the text.

Please join me tomorrow when the Southern Scene will be blogging fellow Southerner, Senator Jeffrey Beauregard Sessions’ confirmation hearing to be Attorney General.

Your humble servant was in graduate school at the University of Alabama when Mr. Sessions was a law student there. And when he was nominated in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan to be Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, I was there teaching at Troy State University.

When the Senate Judiciary turned down the Sessions nomination, it was only the second time that had happened in 48 years (per Wikipedia). One of the votes against him was fellow Republican Arlen Specter, who upon deciding to join the Democrat Party in 2009, said his vote against Sessions in 1986 was a mistake, because he had “since found that Sen. Sessions is egalitarian.” Exactly what everyone in Alabama knew!

At 9:30 AM tomorrow and also Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary will conduct “Hearings to examine the nomination of Jeff Sessions to be Attorney General, Department of Justice. “

I hope and pray that Senator Sessions will be treated fairly tomorrow; if you cannot watch, check here to find out how it went or join me live blogging.

If they don’t treat the Senator right, Belle will have to whup up on them – her trusty riding crop is always at the ready.