George,

First of all,the flag usually referred to as the "Confederate Flag" is no such thing.It is a battle flag originally, as I best recall, from a regiment in Tennessee, later, resurrected by the Ku Klux Klan as a symbol, of what they perceived, as "Southern Pride" (read:segregation).

The original Confederate flag was the "Stars and Bars", and, contrary to myth, was used by all thirteen of the Confederate states till 1865. If anything, this battle flag was, and remains, the banner of the Klan and all that nefarious outfit represents. It was the official flag at virtually every lynching and segregationist protest. In my judgement, it would be appropriate for the likes of Senator Trent Lott to use this flag as the standard of his racist mentality, but any thoughtful, decent person, should work responsibly to unite this great nation of diversity and beings of all races and colors. The flag of the Klan falls far short of that goal.

I feel our current flag of thirteen stripes and fifty stars should represent the United States of America, all of the United States, not a regional, "throwback" battle flag that represented the darkest period in our history! Call it Southern Pride but I remain convinced that that term is a euphemism for racism, as was so clearly stated by the Senate majority leader on the occasion of the celebration of an, ardent segregationist's one hundredth birthday, Senator Strom Thurmond. Now Senator Lott says his remarks were an attempt at light hearted humor, some what like an attempt at light hearted humor about the Holocaust.

"Cooter" may be a Democrat in the style of the bygone south, but his trotting out this symbol of the segregationist era of the "Old South", is more typical of the views of the former leaders of the South and various "good ole boys" like southern Democrats, of the past, ie: Governors George Wallace or Ross Barnett and various "Grand Dragons". I think we can do a lot better than candidates like "Cooter" Jones who end up losing, anyway because they offer so little at the outset.

I don't subscribe to the theory that anyone is better than no one, particularly, if all they offer is shop worn symbols and a divisive message. I don't think it is wise to emulate the dark side of your opponent, it just demeans the entire process, with little gained. And,more important, much lost. A progressive program designed to aid the citizenry, fulfilling the concept that government should "promote the general welfare" presented with hard hitting facts and a dignified presentation should still be worth consideration.

It shall possibly take time for this philosophy to prevail,but I think the consequences to our future as a free and democratic society will be in even greater jeopardy, if it doesn't. Maybe I am naive, but I still feel optimistic enough to believe that voters will respond to a campaign based on facts and a message of hope and optimism. Not a "down and dirty" diatribe that attemps to match the more undesirable aspects of the opposition.

Haven't you and all of us had enough of this hopeless negativism from the current White House down to our local Republican candidates? If we must win by sinking to the level of the Karl Rove mentality, it will be a short lived accomplishment as I predict will be the fate of the Bushites and their ilk.

Harry Tenney (electronic mail, December 10, 2002)