The ‘descendants’ speak

I see that Ann Coulter has written a piece about the Jefferson descendant who was quoted in the New York Times as saying his ancestor’s memorial should be removed.

Lest anybody think this is a ”me-too” article, written to compete with Ann Coulter’s piece, I had already planned to write this because I was so exasperated with the Times interview with Mr. Truscott. I remembered a previous such interview with some other self-identified descendant of a Southron hero; it may even have been a descendant of General Lee, who likewise spoke against his illustrious ancestor.

First, before that previous article attempting to tarnish the memory of a good (and great) man, I never considered the possibility of a reputable newspaper trolling for someone willing to condemn his ancestor’s character. In times past this would have been considered low and shameful.

Having ancestors who were people of character and accomplishment is in a way a great burden to carry; hoping to match their levels of success and renown can be daunting and discouraging. Do some people cope with that by disparaging their ancestors’ accomplishments as Truscott or the other ‘Founding Father’ descendants have done? If so it is a poor way to react.

How many descendants could Thomas Jefferson have today? Thousands? Potentially, he could, but he was left with only one child to carry on his line, so there many not be many. But I am a Jefferson descendant (my readers have no doubt heard it enough times) and I get incensed when anyone defames my progenitor. I think that’s the natural reaction.

But the Times think they scored some kind of victory by finding one man (out of potentially thousands) to help smear his ancestor’s character. One man’s opinion is hardly the definitive word on the life and accomplishments of Thomas Jefferson.

So suppose Truscott is an actual descendant; is he a direct, lineal descendant? On which side? As far as I know he is not kin to me, and if he were I would not be proud to claim that kinship, seeing that he seems to have decided to side with the slanderers of his own forefather.

I thank Ann Coulter (though she will not see this post on an obscure, low-traffic blog) for reiterating the evidence that gives to lie to the Hemings side’s allegations. All too often those slanders are given as gospel in the media (as the original CNN story about Truscott). All too often people repeat those unfounded lies. Thanks to Ann for her refutation of the lies.

3 thoughts on “The ‘descendants’ speak

  1. Grasping at straws. I remember when young I was incensed by the ‘we wuz’ crowd claiming Jefferson.

    As I got older I asked, why would it even matter if (big if) true?

    Then I realised, why else? Tertiary fame and opportunities for the gibs me of the dats.

    I personally have some famous ancestry. I’m proud of it. But at the day’s end we all have to be worthy of our ancestry by building a name like all of us do as dissidents, or in other ways.

    Godspeed, sir!


  2. I remembered a previous such interview with some other self-identified descendant of a Southron hero; it may even have been a descendant of General Lee, who likewise spoke against his illustrious ancestor.

    You’re likely referring to the “Reverend” Robert W. Lee (scare quotes definitely intentional); he’s been clamoring for the removal of General Lee’s statues for several years now. Here is his latest “full statement” concerning the matter.:

    I’ve written about this self-righteous gnostic ingrate before. I’ll have to go dig up the links to several articles I collected on him a couple of years ago, but suffice it to say that he is supremely confused (bordering on heretical – and “borderiing on” is probably giving him too much credit, or ‘benefit of the doubt,’ but anyway) when it comes to his professed religion. E.g., he once wrote that he “want[s] nothing to do with” the kind of god who would deny his beloved, unsaved uncle (whose name escapes me at the moment) entry into Christ’s Kingdom. I’m not making that up, nor am I embellishing in the slightest. I’ll find the link to the article in question and post it in a follow up comment later.

    There is the possibility too that you’re thinking of the alleged descendants of Stonewall Jackson. I recall seeing two of them advocating the removal of Jackson’s statue(s) in an interview with CNN I believe a short time after the Charlottesville thing.

    Our modern iconoclasts have their reward. At the end of the day they will answer for their sin against their fathers; it being such an important principle to honor our fathers and mothers that the Supreme Being devoted one-tenth of the Decalogue (and an even greater proportion of that table containing our duty to our fellow man) commanding its faithful observance. How that fact escapes such twits – particularly self-styled “preachers of the Gospel” – I will never know. But of course any man who can write that he wants nothing to do with a god who would deny an unregenerate sinner entry into the Kingdom of Heaven has rejected his Heavenly Father first and foremost, so it stands to reason he would likewise reject his forbears. I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s