Ron Fournier’s been on a mission.
To me, this is like the rooster crowing at dawn.
Even as I type, the bodies of the victims are still not in the ground.
Why the rush from outsiders, trying to force South Carolina to do what it was likely to do anyway?
Anyway, Fournier’s tweet revealed a lack of knowledge, not only of the political eddies of South Carolina and Southern defensiveness in reaction to Northern bigotry, but also exactly what the South Carolina governor could and could not do about that flag.
Especially when northerners try publicly to shame her into doing what she was going to do anyway.
And of course Salena’s right.
I think Fournier also misunderstands how real world public leadership—in other words, politics—works.
Lincoln the procrastinator
Louis P. Masur, The American Scholar: Liberty Is a Slow Fruit—Lincoln the deliberate emancipator—
William Lloyd Garrison, the fiery abolitionist editor of the Liberator, had struggled for decades to see slavery abolished, but when Abraham Lincoln issued the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862, the long-awaited action came as a disappointment. Garrison was furious. Lincoln’s decree would free the slaves in rebel-controlled areas in the seceded states on January 1, 1863, a hundred days away. The delay was intended to give the Confederate states a chance to return to the Union and thus prevent the proclamation from applying to them. Lincoln also believed that the public needed time to digest this unprecedented development. “The President can do nothing for freedom in a direct manner, but only by circumlocution and delay,” lamented Garrison, who on an earlier occasion declared, “If he is 6 feet 4 inches high, he is only a dwarf in mind.”
What was taking Lincoln so long? Did he not understand that slavery caused the rebellion and that to end it he must immediately attack the institution? In a speech delivered on October 1, 1861, nearly a year before the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, U.S. Senator Charles Sumner had thundered, “It is often said that war will make an end of Slavery. This is probable. But it is surer still that the overthrow of Slavery will at once make an end of the war.” Sumner kept steady pressure on the president, visiting the White House not once but twice on July 4, 1862, to implore Lincoln to sanctify the day by emancipating the slaves. Yet Lincoln did nothing more than try to placate Sumner—the Massachusetts senator, he said, was only a month or six weeks ahead of him in his thinking.
The timing of the final proclamation was part of the withering criticism it faced, and the decree has never fully escaped allegations cast by commentators across the political spectrum: that it was unconstitutional, that it could not be enforced, that it would lead to racial warfare, and that it hardly liberated anyone. The soulless language of the document has seemed especially galling to some. In 1948, Columbia historian Richard Hofstadter quipped that the Emancipation Proclamation had “all the moral grandeur of a bill of lading,” and the censure has stuck. In recent decades, a shift in scholarly focus to those outside traditional channels of power suggested that Lincoln did not free the slaves, but rather, the slaves, by running away, freed themselves. Lincoln the emancipator was reduced to Lincoln the procrastinator.
Lincoln the procrastinator.
Nikki Haley, a “follower.”
Haley, a Republican, working behind the scenes (outside of Ron Fournier’s earshot), stitched together a coalition of powerful voices to bring down that flag.
The flag, by the way, that Democratic governors put up in the first place.
I wonder if the rooster thinks he brought the sun up.