Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president. That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons.

First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying "The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861, beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected."

Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continues to grow. This flag was crafted in the 1890s. It’s highly offensive to a large number of people, and there’s very little debate about that."

Then there's this:

When asked about this topic, Gov. Walz compared these Republican efforts to “somehow saving the Confederate battle flag.” The governor added, "These are the arguments that happened with Jefferson Davis statues in Alabama."

Comparing a Union state that fought to free slaves with Jefferson Davis is is highly insulting. Gov. Walz should be criticized constantly and ridiculed mercilessly for that statement. When a politician says "there's very little debate about that," that's often proof that the subject hasn't been debated because it wasn't a priority with people. In this instance, the state flag wasn't a high priority. Were some people upset? Minnesota is a leftist-Marxist state where there's constant complaining about trivial things. HotAir's Ed Morrissey gets it right in this commentary:

Walz is an idiot. He claims that the current Minnesota state flag is "highly offensive to a large number of people," but what they mainly object to is the history of the state and its relations to the Native American tribes that live there. The seal on the flag was the symbol under which Minnesotans marched AGAINST the Confederacy, which is also part of the rich history behind the flag. The people "offended" by it mainly appear to be academics and progressive activists. I lived there for 23 years and was politically active most of that time, and *never heard a word* about the flag being offensive, let alone broadly so.

Furthermore, the new flag design looks suspiciously like Somalia’s flag, which has created accusations of pandering to the large Somalia ex-pat community in Minneapolis. And finally, the whole flag redesign project smells like a desperate attempt by Walz to glom onto the efforts in the South to eliminate *actual* Confederate iconography in official government flags and thus to be somehow culturally relevant.

Ed is right. Tim Walz is trying to create a legacy for himself so he can run for president in 2028. He doesn't have a chance of winning the Democrats' nomination but I'm betting that he's willing to 'settle' for being the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

This is Caroline Cummings' report of the unveiling of the new flag:

The Minnesota State Flag must follow these 5 princciples:

1. Keep it simple. The flag should be so simple that a child can draw it from memory.
2. Use Meaningful Symbolism The flag's images, colors or patterns should relate to what it symbolizes.
3. Use 2-3 Basic Colors. Limit the number of colors on the flag to 3, which contrast well and come from the standard color set.
4. No Lettering or Seals. Never use writing of any kind or an organization's seal.
5. Be Distinct or be Belated. Avoid duplicating other flags but use similarities to show connections.

The Commission is essentially a special interests' commission. These DFL special interest groups appointed 1 member each to the Commission:

1. Council of Minnesotans of African Heritage
2. Minnesota Council on Latino Affairs
3. Council on Asian-Pacific Affairs
4. one member representing the Dakota community
5. one member representing the Ojibwe community, appointed by the executive board of the Indian Affairs Council.

This Commission was rigged from the start. Its composition was mostly minority and indigenous communities. It intentionally limited representation of European communities. Sen. John Jashinski rightly noted that "83% of Minnesota's population isn't represented on the Commission. With commissions that favor minorities, it isn't surprising that there's great wealth flight from Minnesota.