There is now an organized group fighting the George P. Bush and San Antonio liberals in their giant taxpayer project called Reimagine the Alamo, you may have heard some of their ads on radio.
It may all be too little too late and I don’t agree with all the points on their website, or at least their spin. However, it is not too late to understand that Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush is behind this project which empowers the vision of very liberal San Antonio to change how the Alamo and the site is perceived.
Jerry Patterson
I’ve been discussing this issue for years, telling you how former Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson got the ball rolling and took control of the Alamo from the Daughters of the Republic of Texas who saved it and well operated it since.
Patterson deeply, and quite emotionally, wanted control of the historic Texas site and engineered moving control of the hallowed site into the state’s land commission. He did all of that while working with the ultra-Leftwing San Antonio mayor at the time Julian Castro, later a member of President Obama’s cabinet.
George P. Bush
George P. Bush became Land Commissioner and went even farther by locking the DRT out of their property and attempting to seize the DRT’s archives. George P. Bush was wrong and the issue was settled in the courts in June of 2016 with the state relinquishing all claims to the DRT archives.
At savethealamo.us the grassroots group makes many arguments about why the Bush/San Antonio liberals’ plan should be opposed. Among the most compelling is the moving of the Cenotaph, honoring those who died, away from the Alamo proper.
Such re-imagining of important cultural sites and issues has been all the rage with the Left and most often results in exhibits where cultural heroes are diminished and bad-guys reinterpreted as misunderstood victims…
When you combine the move of the Cenotaph with renaming the site San Antonio de Valero mission; having a Pennsylvania firm in complete control of the project, hiring a new Alamo CEO not from Texas but from Ohio, and; excluding the DRT, the Alamo Defenders Descendants Association, the new and other traditional and historic Alamo-related groups, it becomes suggestive that the project is designed to diminish or change the historic sense the site holds in Texas culture.
Such re-imagining of important cultural sites and issues has been all the rage with the Left and most often results in exhibits where cultural heroes are diminished and bad-guys reinterpreted as misunderstood victims of you name it: White Privilege, European Imperialism, Anglo Oppression, Christian Intolerance, Capialist Greed, and as you know, the list goes on in near infinite fashion.
George P. Bush is a leading figure in giving the Left its way with “reimagining” our sacred Alamo.
George P. Bush is a leading figure in giving the Left its way with “reimagining” our sacred Alamo. This reinterpreting the Alamo site that Gearge P. is enabling simply allows the Left to further rewrite American and Texan cultural history.
Republican voters should take note.
Texans should be furious.
I have not been a supporter of George P. Bush. He is working his way up the ladder to make a run for Governor of Texas and maybe a spring board to President. We don’t need another Bush.
Pratt, You’re full of bull manure. “Patterson deeply, and quite emotionally” wanted control of the site and fought to move it to the “Land Commission”, is total BS. I didn’t even know that was happening until I recd a call from the floor of the Senate while the bill was being debated asking if I would take over the Alamo. The options were TPWD, THC, or GLO and a Senator wanted to amend the bill to send the Alamo to the GLO instead of the other two. And btw Mr Clueless, there is no such thing as the “Land Commission”. Never has been. It’s been the Texas General Land Office since 1837-maybe you should take a remedial course in the very Texas history you claim to defend. As to working with Castro, thats BS as well. Here’s my challenge to you. Produce one fact, one reference, one item of proof to your above claim. I await your response. Jerry Patterson
Pratt replies:
“Pratt, You’re full of bull manure.” [OK, your opinion of me, I have similar of you.]
““Patterson deeply, and quite emotionally” wanted control of the site and fought to move it to the “Land Commission”, is total BS.”
[The statement you make below demonstrates my point, that when the opportunity arose, in this case happenings in the Senate, you moved to pull it under the GLO. Your own words demonstrate the “emotional” part of it. You are a huge supporter of Texas History and did a great amount to well celebrate such while head of the GLO. I applaud such but all together your actions upon learning of the bill and the fight to pull the Alamo under the GLO support the statement with which you disagree. You are deeply committed to Texas History and Alamo and are quite emotional about such.]
“I didn’t even know that was happening until I recd a call from the floor of the Senate while the bill was being debated asking if I would take over the Alamo. The options were TPWD, THC, or GLO and a Senator wanted to amend the bill to send the Alamo to the GLO instead of the other two.”
[Again this directly supports the view that you purposely moved to have the Alamo put under your authority.]
“And btw Mr Clueless, there is no such thing as the “Land Commission”. Never has been. It’s been the Texas General Land Office since 1837-maybe you should take a remedial course in the very Texas history you claim to defend. “
[Again, another example of the emotionalism and an argument about nothing. The office you held is most often referred to as Land Commissioner in the press and has been for years, making that a point of attack an example of the emotionalism we saw in the move to take control of the Alamo from the DRT. I’ll amend the piece by changing the capitalization of the reference. I’m well aware it is the General Land Office. This is like the Austin geeks who bristle at calling the Economic Stabilization Fund the Rainy Day Fund. Silly and needless.]
“As to working with Castro, thats [sic] BS as well. Here’s my challenge to you. Produce one fact, one reference, one item of proof to your above claim. I await your response. Jerry Patterson”
[The City of San Antonio, with Castro as mayor, was doing much talking in the press during all of the time in question of wanting control of the Alamo Plaza site and began an effort to supplant the private businesses across from the Plaza. There sure was much talking about the current project in the San Antonio press and in the San Antonio Express-News about all of this while you were Land Commissioner and trumpeting taking control of the Alamo site. The work with San Antonio to move forward with the full redo of the site began under your tenure and ramped up more under the tenure of George. P. Bush. If you did not work directly with Castro’s San Antonio officials it is quite a coincidence that all efforts from the State and the City pointed the same direction and culminated in the current “reimagine” plan. However, if you did not work or confer with any City of San Antonio officials in discussing the removal of the DRT or future development plans for the site then, you have my apology no matter how hard such is to believe.]
One final comment, I’m glad you didn’t try and claim that you were not instrumental in taking control of Alamo management from the DRT who saved it and ran it well for decades. While the DRT contract was terminated under Bush, the moves began under your term as demonstrated in this story http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Daughters-of-the-Republic-chapter-leaving-Alamo-4152006.php That is the most egregious thing of all from your time.
All appearances as I’ve noted point to a full “reimagine” of the Alamo by people other than the DRT and those who have historically promoted the Alamo in a manner consistent with its traditional sense in the minds of Texans. You offer no arguments contrary to this, the point of the commentary.
All Texans need to know about what Bush is doing to The Alamo. That way we can send him packing, like Trump did his father in the election. Then he can get his carpetbagging self back to Florida.
History is not being rewritten. It’s all there in history books. The cenotaph was placed over 100 years after the battle and there is no history on it – just a list of names. It doesn’t tell you the causes of the battle, nor how long it lasted or the after-effects. You have to read actual history for that.
A cenotaph is a tombstone without a body or bodies underneath. For that reason, it could be placed anywhere.
Stop the hyperbole and the paranoia.
You don’t see a Ripley’s Believe It or Not anywhere near Antietam or Gettysburg. The plans are to make the Alamo compound more respectful and Alamo-centric. Why is this a problem?
Because the site only exits in honor of those who died there, and the cause for which they died. The stated goal, originally in writing but now changed after having been noticed, is to change the focus of Alamo Plaza from one honoring the battle for Texas Liberty to one of just an historical site covering “10,000 years” of history. The moving of the cenotaph significantly away from the site is to remove the focus upon the only reason we have kept the site as a monument. Instead of being ignorant you should read the words of those behind the effort. It’s not just another “mission” site.