Saturday, September 26, 2015

Bye Bye Boehner (#RINOS)

John Boehner, the ineffective, compliant collaborator with all things Obama, will resign from Congress and the Speakership of the House, at the end of October.

It's about time.  Mitch McConnell should be next.  Pink slips for pinkos.  I like it.

I wrote about the Boehner problem almost two years ago, and nothing has changed since then.

Read it here.

Monday, September 21, 2015

Stogie's Band: A Couple of Jazz Tunes, Live Performance #Jazz

Here's a couple of songs my band is studying right now.  These recordings were made at our regular weekly practice.

All Right, Okay, You Win


If possible, listen with earphones, otherwise you can't hear the bass and get the full effect.

Update for Georgette:

I added some more songs.

Dreamsville (Practice Sesson)

Cute (Recital)

Corcovado (Practice Session)

Satin Doll (Recital)

Don't Get Around Much Anymore (Recital)

Embraceable You (Recital)

In a Mellow Tone (Recital)

Awful Angst and Angry Aggravation: The Musings and Meditations of a Stogiemeister

Ugh, lately I don't feel good writing about politics.  Politics is so dirty today, invested as it is in the personal destruction and persecution of conservative dissenters.  Often, politics brings out the worst in me.  It causes me to feel hatred sometimes, and I hate that ugly feeling.  Liberals hate our guts, and it is a challenge not to return the sentiment.

I especially dislike the "piling on" of popular-culture robots when some person makes a comment that is reviled, repudiated, repeated and reprinted, stoking enormous ideological hatred for the person who made the remark.  Often the remark is misinterpreted or taken out of context.  I have defended many victims of this phenomenon, and not only conservatives.  I have defended liberals as well, for the sake of justice and fair play.  See here, for instance.

In any case, Fall is in the air and I look forward to the holiday season.

I finished my last corporate tax return on September 15, and now have more time to practice playing bass.  I'd like to get in three hours a day, but one hour will do in a pinch.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

Hunting the Wild Social Justice Warrior (#gamergate)

I just finished Vox Day's book about "Social Justice Warriors" -- what they are, what they do, why they do it and how to fight them.  The book is called "SJWs Always Lie."  You can buy the Kindle version from Amazon for around $10.

This is one of the best books I ever read about the left-right culture wars now raging through Western Civilization.  Vox Day describes predictable patterns in how leftist politicos attack normal people, and attempt to ruin the lives and careers of anyone who goes against "the Narrative" -- that is, whatever propaganda line a particular cell of crazies is pushing, e.g., men oppress women, white racism oppresses all non-whites, this or that is "racist," etc ad infinitum.  These Social Justice Warriors enthusiastically support radical feminism, abortion on demand, open borders, socialism, racial-norming, same sex marriage, transgender acceptance, and many other left-wing causes, and hate those who oppose them.  They regularly destroy the reputations and careers of non-SJWs merely to make examples of them, to create fear in the rest of society, to bully and intimidate outsiders into supporting the Narrative, or at the very least, into silence and non-opposition.

My last post, about the radical feminist Charlotte Proudman, is a textbook example of how SJWs work, and how they attack and destroy non-SJWs.  They do this, not only to support and push the Narrative, but to gain notoriety and respect from fellow SJWs.  They have zero sympathy for their victims, and are completely amoral and ruthless.  

SJWs try to infiltrate and eventually control various organizations and industries.  Vox Day has successfully fought them in the gaming and science fiction industry, but they have substantial control over major media and academia, as well as various left-leaning corporations.  The latter three are usually characterized by oppressive speech codes or "codes of behavior," in order to control the leftist narrative and have a means of identifying and punishing dissenters.   Free speech is still technically legal, but may result in social and professional ostracism, job loss, and a sullied reputation.

Vox Day gives several recent examples of careers destroyed or damaged by this modern-day version of the Red Guard.  He explains what to do and how to react if you become a target.  He explains strategies for defeating this evil movement, and yes, it can be defeated.  He's done it.

This valuable book is a must-read for all defenders of Western Civilization and freedom of speech, association and conscience.  I strongly recommend it.

Monday, September 14, 2015

Man-Hating British Barrister Emasculates British Lawyer for Praising Her Looks (#Proudman)

Bumpy Nose Barrister Charlotte Proudman
I saw this at The Other McCain:  a law partner in Britain connected on Linked-In with one Charlotte Proudman, a barrister (that's British for "attorney").  The law partner, one Alexander Carter Silk, had both a lapse in judgment and a lapse in taste, and remarked to Proudman that he found her Linked-In photo (see left) "stunning."

Proudman, being one of those aberrants known as feminists, then castigated Silk for his sexism.  Not satisfied with merely emasculating Silk privately, she then tacked his severed penis over her office law degree to be viewed as a grisly trophy by fellow man-hating lesbians (aka "feminists").  I speak figuratively, of course.  In lieu of brandishing a severed penis, she copied and pasted the private conversation on social media to publicly embarrass and shame Mr. Silk.  Not satisfied with that, she registered a formal complaint against him with the British version of the Bar Association.  Proudman was doing all she could to seriously damage a man's professional reputation and career for the crime (and error, IMHO) of finding her pretty.

Now if you were a male lawyer in London, would you wish to professionally associate with Ms. Proudman?  Or link to her on Linked-In, or refer clients to her, or hire her, or work with her in any capacity?  I think not.  Man-hating feminists are like faulty time-bombs, ready and able to blow up in your face when you are least expecting it.  Who needs that?  Better to just give her a wide berth, and I can assure you, many will.  This dumb broad merely shot herself in the foot, all for the moral vanity of playing "victim."  I suspect she hurt her own law career far more than she could ever hurt that of Silk.

As for Mr. Silk, his comment about Proudman's appearance as "stunning" was indeed foolhardy, considering today's hostile work environment for normal people.  However, his main guilt is in his poor taste.  The only thing "stunning" about Proudman's appearance is that huge bump on the side of her nose.  Perhaps she should mate with a pelican.  A gay one, to be sure.

Sunday, September 13, 2015

Liberals Love Evil

I got into an online argument with a leftist who attacked me on FaceBook.  He had read this blog and called me a bigot for linking to a "racist, anti-Islamic website."  He could only have meant Pamela Geller's site.  All Geller does is print news items about the daily atrocities, social outrages and news of the Muslim world and of the Muslim immigrants.  Truth can't be "racist," except to morons like Franklin Delano RiehlButthead, or whatever his weird last name is.

So here we are, fourteen years down the road from 911, and leftist morons like FDR are incensed that anyone write the unvarnished truth about the world's vilest, most barbaric, violent and evil religion ever to oppress mankind.  Liberal/leftists are so full of love and tolerance for anyone who hates our guts and wants to kill us.  They love evil and rush to embrace it.

I would love to punch this a-hole in the mouth.

Saturday, September 12, 2015

Supporters of the Confederate Flag: What the Flag Means to Us

A Southern Brother and Patriot
For the past three months or so, we have been told what the Confederate flag means to leftists, liberals and radical blacks.  They have preached their negative impressions from the rooftops, censoring, banning and banishing everything Confederate in their path.  To these people, the very sight of a Confederate flag means "I hate black people!  I'm against racial equality!  I want to bring back segregation, Jim Crow and poll taxes! Long live White Supremacy!"

Well thanks for explaining to us what's in our evil Southern hearts.  We would never have known what we are feeling without liberal-provided stereotypes and knee-jerk reactions to colored cloth.

Okay, enough B.S.  Now I will tell you what we REALLY feel about the Confederate flag, and why it fills our hearts with self-recognition, loyalty and pride.

We love and fly the Confederate flag to nonverbally state the following:

1.  The South is our country, a country within a country.  We are a people with a history of shared sacrifice, suffering and survival.  The flag says to us, "I belong to something greater than myself:  a nation, a people."  Our nationhood includes many Southern black brothers and sisters who also revere the Confederate flag.  Maybe they didn't read the liberal/leftist/Democrat talking points and are unaware of what they are supposed to believe.

2.  We reject the Northern version of history, that the North fought to free the slaves and the South fought to keep and expand slavery.  The war was a war of conquest based on the North's insistence on subjugating the South economically, and its desire to continue subjecting the South to high tariffs, unfair taxation for the benefit of the North at the expense of the South.

3.  We insist that the Southern states had a legal and moral right to secede from the Union, that "the consent of the governed" was the overriding factor and principle in the South's decision to secede.  The South no longer consented.

4.  We believe that the North's brutal invasion and conquest of the South was criminal in the extreme, naked aggression for the purpose of continuing to tax and rule the Southern states.  There was nothing honorable, legal, moral or right in the North's aggression.  We wholeheartedly condemn it.

5.  We will forever revere and honor our Confederate ancestors who fought for Southern Independence, and forever mourn what was lost at Appomattox -- the right to govern ourselves.

All of the above five points could be summarized as this:  "The South was right and the North was wrong!"  Or, alternatively, "We are Southern loyalists and we are still here!  Deal with it!"

As for the notion that we fly the flag to make liberal black people feel bad, well that's just not true.  Liberals, whether black or white, are just not so important to us to make us expend the energy.  Not that it takes much energy to offend a liberal.  Anyone can do it without hardly trying. Nevertheless, we'd rather sit on our porches and drink iced tea and smoke cigars.  Hating morons takes too much work and accomplishes nothing.

I suspect the current antagonism towards everything Confederate is borne of a worry that we the conquered may not forever wish to remain that way.  Disloyalty to the current mega-state cannot be tolerated.  All must think the same, vote the same, and behave the same.   Screw that.  Long live the South!

Friday, September 11, 2015

The Muslim Attack on America: Fourteen Years Later. Remembering the Heroes of Flight 93.

So today is the fourteenth anniversary of the Islamic attack on America.  On September 11, 2001, devout Muslims commandeered four commercial jet airliners and crashed two of them into the Twin Towers in New York City, one into the Pentagon, and the fourth was stopped by the passengers before reaching its target -- possibly the Congressional Building or the White House.

Los Gatos High School
The fourth flight, United Airlines Flight 93, was bound for Washington, D.C.  The plane's flight was delayed by half an hour, and so the passengers learned of the prior 911 attacks from telephone conversations with airlines personnel and family members.  Huddled in the back of the plane where the Muslim hijackers had moved them, the passengers decided to fight back and attempt to take control of the plane.  They charged the cockpit and the lone Muslim guard outside the cockpit door.  They did not succeed, but their attempt forced the hijackers to abort the mission, nose-diving the plane into a field in Pennsylvania.  There is no telling how many lives were saved and what terrible damage was prevented.

Todd Beamer was one of the heroic passengers.  He was the one who announced the start of the passenger rebellion with the words "Let's roll."

Todd Beamer and a fellow hero, Mark Bingham, were both graduates of Los Gatos High School in Los Gatos, California.  I think of Todd and Mark every Thursday in the summer, when I drive into downtown Los Gatos to attend my Big Band class and practice jazz with the Cats Swing Band (we named our band "the Cats" in reference to Los Gatos, which is Spanish for "the cats."  Los Gatos was named by early Spanish settlers who saw two wildcats fighting there.)  To get to the Los Gatos Recreation hall, I drive right by Los Gatos High School (home of the Los Gatos Wildcats, colors black and orange) on my right, and view its large, grassy lawns and lovely countryside appearance.  Two good, brave men went to school there, and were two of the 2,996 killed on that evil day.  Todd Beamer was from the Los Gatos High Class of 1987, and Mark Bingham was from the Class of 1988.

There is much nastiness of a political nature that I could discuss here today -- But I'll give it a rest.  No politics. Today I will just quietly remember Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham and the other passengers of Flight 93 who, faced with certain death, decided to go down fighting.  God bless them all, for their sacrifice and their inspiration.

Thursday, September 10, 2015

Donald Trump's Worst Enemy: Himself. Wise Up, Donald!

Donald Trump
I have been supporting Donald Trump's candidacy over all others.  I like how he is bitch-slapping the GOP establishment, the go-along Vichy Republicans who are the willing bitches of the Democratic Party.  However, Trump has done himself no favors lately in making intemperate, tactless remarks against other candidates.

I am not referring to his description of Megyn Kelly as a bimbo -- a stupid remark, but not totally off target.  Kelly is more of an opportunist who would trade conservative principles for media fame and acclaim, and therefore not our friend.  I don't object to his description of Lindsey Graham, the wimpish do-nothing senator from South Carolina, as "a guy who couldn't get a job."  Graham is totally without substance or credibility as either a conservative or a Republican.  Again, not our friend.

However, this week Trump made disparaging remarks about Carly Fiorina's appearance, particularly, her face.  Fiorina didn't deserve that.  This was a "gratuitous insult" -- one that had no purpose, was not a reaction to something Fiorina said or did.  It was a cheap shot.

All "The Donald" accomplished was to make himself look like a boorish, tactless cad.  He wants to be the nominee, yet is supplying the Democrats with enormous ammunition to use against him.  Think of the numerous political ads they will run, quoting Trump's own words, to show him as a thoughtless bully with no sense of decorum or propriety -- or basic manners, for that matter.

So today, at long last, I am reevaluating my support for Donald Trump.  With his big mouth and lack of tact, I am beginning to think he cannot win the presidency.  My advice:  Shut up, Donald.  We know you have big gonads, now show us that you have a brain as well.

Wednesday, September 09, 2015

The Terrible Truth About Abraham Lincoln and the Confederate War

One of the best, and yet most succinct essays on Abraham Lincoln's tyranny, is this:  The Terrible Truth About Abraham Lincoln and the Confederate War.  It was written by Michael Hutcheson at his blog, Snap Out of It America.  Michael has not updated his blog in well over a year, and I fear that his excellent essay will be lost or forgotten.  So I am reblogging it here in its entirety.

President Lincoln has been all but deified in America, with a god-like giant statue at a Parthenon-like memorial in Washington. Generations of school children have been indoctrinated with the story that “Honest Abe” Lincoln is a national hero who saved the Union and fought a noble war to end slavery, and that the “evil” Southern states seceded from the Union to protect slavery. This is the Yankee myth of history, written and promulgated by Northerners, and it is a complete falsity. It was produced and entrenched in the culture in large part to gloss over the terrible war crimes committed by Union soldiers in the War Between the States, as well as Lincoln’s violations of the law, his shredding of the Constitution, and other reprehensible acts. It has been very effective in keeping the average American ignorant of the real causes of the war, and the real nature, character and record of Lincoln. Let us look at some unpleasant facts.
In his first inaugural address, Lincoln stated clearly that (1) he had no legal authority to interfere with slavery where it existed, (2) that he had no inclination or intention to do so even if he had the legal authority, (3) that he would enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, returning runaway slaves escaping to the North to their masters in the South, and (4) that he fully supported the Thirteenth Amendment then being debated in Congress which would protect slavery in perpetuity and was irrevocable. He later famously stated, “Do not paint me with the Abolitionist brush.”
Although there was some opposition to slavery in the country, the government was willing to concede everything the South wanted regarding slavery to keep it in the Union. Given all these facts, the idea that the South seceded to protect slavery is as absurd as the idea that Lincoln fought the war to end slavery. Lincoln himself said in a famous letter after the war began that his sole purpose was to save the Union, and not to either save or end slavery; that if he could save the Union without freeing a single slave, he would. Nothing could be clearer.
For decades before the war, the South, through harsh tariffs, had been supplying about 85% of the country’s revenue, nearly all of which was being spent in the North to boost its economy, build manufacturing, infrastructure, railroads, canals, etc. With the passage of the 47% Morrill Tariff the final nail was in the coffin. The South did not secede to protect slavery, although certainly they wished to protect it; they seceded over a dispute about unfair taxation, an oppressive Federal government, and the right to separate from that oppression and be governed “by consent”, exactly the same issues over which the Founding Fathers fought the Revolutionary War. When a member of Lincoln’s cabinet suggested he let the South go in peace, Lincoln famously replied, “Let the South go? Where, then, would we get our revenue!” He then launched a brutal, empirical war to keep the free and sovereign states, by force of arms, in the Union they had created and voluntarily joined, and then voluntarily left. This began his reign of terror.
Lincoln was the greatest tyrant and despot in American history. In the first four months of his presidency, he created a complete military dictatorship, destroyed the Constitution, ended forever the constitutional republic which the Founding Fathers instituted, committed horrendous crimes against civilian citizens, and formed the tyrannical, overbearing and oppressive Federal government which the American people suffer under to this day. In his first four months, he
  1. Failed to call Congress into session after the South fired upon Fort Sumter, in direct violation of the Constitution.
  2. Called up an army of 75,000 men, bypassing the Congressional authority in direct violation of the Constitution.
  3. Unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a function of Congress, violating the Constitution. This gave him the power, as he saw it, to arrest civilians without charge and imprison them indefinitely without trial—which he did.
  4. Ignored a Supreme Court order to restore the right of habeas corpus, thus violating the Constitution again and ignoring the Separation of Powers which the Founders put in place exactly for the purpose of preventing one man’s using tyrannical powers in the executive.
  5. When the Chief Justice forwarded a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision to Lincoln, he wrote out an order for the arrest of the Chief Justice and gave it to a U.S. Marshall for expedition, in violation of the Constitution.
  6. Unilaterally ordered a naval blockade of southern ports, an act of war, and a responsibility of Congress, in violation of the Constitution.
  7. Commandeered and closed over 300 newspapers in the North, because of editorials against his war policy and his illegal military invasion of the South. This clearly violated the First Amendment freedom of speech and press clauses.
  8. Sent in Army forces to destroy the printing presses and other machinery at those newspapers, in violation of the Constitution.
  9. Arrested the publishers, editors and owners of those newspapers, and imprisoned them without charge and without trial for the remainder of the war, all in direct violation of both the Constitution and the Supreme Court order aforementioned.
  10. Arrested and imprisoned, without charge or trial, another 15,000-20,000 U.S. citizens who dared to speak out against the war, his policies, or were suspected of anti-war feelings. (Relative to the population at the time, this would be equivalent to President G.W. Bush arresting and imprisoning roughly 150,000-200,000 Americans without trial for “disagreeing” with the Iraq war; can you imagine?)
  11. Sent the Army to arrest the entire legislature of Maryland to keep them from meeting legally, because they were debating a bill of secession; they were all imprisoned without charge or trial, in direct violation of the Constitution.
  12. Unilaterally created the state of West Virginia in direct violation of the Constitution.
  13. Sent 350,000 Northern men to their deaths to kill 350,000 Southern men in order to force the free and sovereign states of the South to remain in the Union they, the people, legally voted to peacefully withdraw from, all in order to continue the South’s revenue flow into the North.
These are just a few of the most egregious things Lincoln did during his despotic presidency. He set himself up as a tyrannical dictator with powers never before utilized or even imagined by any previous administration. During this four years of terrible war he was one of the greatest despots the world has ever known, his tyranny focused against his own countrymen, both North and South. He was called a despot and tyrant by many newspapers and citizens both North and South, until he had imprisoned nearly all those who dared to simply speak out against his unconstitutional usurpations of power. Those who disagreed with him were branded as “traitors”, just as were the brave and honorable men in the states which had legally seceded from the Union over just such issues as these criminal abuses of power by the Federal government.
Four months after Fort Sumter, when Lincoln finally called Congress back into session, no one dared oppose anything he wanted or speak out against him for fear of imprisonment, so completely had he entrenched his unilateral power and silenced his other many critics.
The Union army, under Generals Grant, Sherman, Sheridan and President Lincoln, committed active genocide against Southern civilians—this is difficult for some to believe, but it is explicit in their writings and dispatches at the time and indisputable in their actions. Tens of thousands of Southern men, women and children—civilians—white and black, slave and free alike—were shot, hanged, raped, imprisoned without trial, their homes, lands and possessions stolen, pillaged and burned, in one of the most horrific and brutal genocides ever inflicted upon a people anywhere; but the Yankee myth of history is silent in these well-documented matters. For an excellent expose of these war crimes and their terrible extent, see War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco.
Only after the Union had suffered two years of crushing defeats in battle did Lincoln resolve to “emancipate” the slaves, and only as a war measure, a military tactic, not for moral or humanitarian purposes. He admitted this, remarking, “We must change tactics or lose the game.” He was hoping, as his original draft of the document shows, that a slave uprising would occur, making it harder for Southerners to continue the war. His only interest in freeing the slaves was in forcing the South to remain in the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation was denounced by Northerners, Southerners and Europeans alike for its absurdity and hypocrisy; for, it only “freed” the slaves in the seceded states—where he could not reach them—and kept slavery intact in the North and the border states—where he could have freed them at once.
The Gettysburg Address, the most famous speech in American history, is an absurd piece of war rhetoric and a poetry of lies. We were not “engaged in a great Civil War, to see whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, can long endure.” The South was engaged in a War of Independence from a tyrannical North, and after having legally seceded, wished only “to be let alone.” The North was engaged in a war of empire, to keep the South involuntarily under its yoke. Government “of the people, by the people and for the people” would not have “perished from the earth” had the North lost the war; on the contrary, it perished in the United States when the North won the war; for, freely representative government, by consent of the governed, is exactly what the South was fighting for and exactly what Lincoln’s military victory destroyed.
The checks and balances of powers, the separation of powers, the constitutional constraints so carefully and deliberately put into place by the Founding Fathers, had all been destroyed in Lincoln’s first months. The Republic which the Founders gave us had been completely destroyed and a new nation-state was set up; one in which the free and sovereign States would afterward be only vassals and tributaries, slaves to an all-powerful, oppressive Federal government. This new nation-state is completely different in both nature and consequence to the original American Republic. One only has to look around today to see the end results and legacy of Lincoln’s war, his destruction of freedom, and his institution of despotic, centralized governmental power and tyranny.
In retrospect, it is a tragedy that John Wilkes Booth did not act four years earlier. Slavery would have ended naturally, as it has everywhere else (except in African and Arab states); the American Republic, liberty, and 700,000 lives would have been saved, and untold thousands of those young men would have lived to contribute their ingenuity, inventions, creativity and talents to the political, economic, literary, scientific and social legacy of our people. And the greatest despotic tyrant in American history would never have gained the foothold of power or been able to establish the oppressive and omnipotent Federal government we all suffer under today.

The Muslim Invasion of Europe (or "Refugees" for the Naive)

Muslim "Refugees" Invade Europe
There are tens of thousands of Muslim refugees flooding into Europe from Syria and elsewhere, allegedly to escape war and violence.  Apparently, Muslims, like Socialists, like to flee the hell-holes that their ideologies create.  However, whenever they have escaped to more enlightened locales, they then begin re-establishing the ideology from which they fled.

Some say the "refugees" look more like invaders than the poor, down trodden wretches we generally associate with the the term.  Invasion by immigration, and conquest by population replacement, are in the offing.  What we are witnessing is a successful strategy for Islam to conquer the west, by a slow and patient kind of subversion.  They are aided in this by liberal politicians who strike poses "welcoming the immigrants," because the highest point of enlightenment is to sacrifice one's own culture, language, customs and religions for decidedly inferior ones.  Let our grandchildren grow up in totalitarian hell-holes of poverty and oppression!  Their sacrifice is worth the opportunity to strike poses in the here and now, for fellow "enlightened" self-hating leftists, and the ecstasy that moral vanity brings.

The "refugees" should be turned back.  Let them enjoy the fruits of their sacred culture.  They have spent centuries building it, now let them enjoy it to the fullest.  We do not need this disruptive, violent and hostile culture in our midst.  See it for what it is, an invasion by hostiles, who come not to assimilate into our culture, but to replace it with theirs. It is a process known as stealth jihad.

Wednesday, September 02, 2015

DEBUNKED: Stanford Paper Claims Right-to-Carry Increases Crime

The information below was part of an earlier post, but I consider it important enough to have a post of its own.

Leftists are pushing back hard on the belief that right-to-carry laws deter crime.  Some liberals and liberal institutions (like a professor at Stanford University) are publishing papers that say the opposite is true:  that more guns means more crime and violence.  See conclusions of the Stanford paper here.

Intuitively, the professor's claims do not make sense to me.  If criminals know that a neighborhood has guns, would they be less likely to do home invasions or burglaries?  If criminals know that there are right-to-carry laws in effect, would they be less likely to shoot up schools and theaters?  I would think so.  What makes less sense is that otherwise lawful citizens turn into criminals when they have ready access to guns.  Absolute bunk, but liberals will believe anything.

REBUTTALS:  I found two sites that rebut the Stanford study as sophomoric and biased.  No surprise there.  Read MORE JUNK, LESS SCIENCE: New Stanford “Working Paper” claims right-to-carry increases assaults by 33%

Also read:  Right-to-Carry Gun Laws Linked to Increase in Violent Crime -- a rebuttal.

If liberals throw the Stanford study at you in argument, refer them to the above links.  The Stanford study is superficial and highly biased.

More Twitter Fights With Leftists

Twitter fights can be fun and invigorating, but they do take a lot of time....waste a lot of time, perhaps.  Their only good comes in practicing debate with angry liberals, and in deflecting personal insults.  If you have a thin skin, twitter fights can help you grow a thicker one.  I am at a point where liberal insults don't bother me in the least.  It only shows how totally devoid the leftist mind is of any understanding or arguments, i.e. about politics, economics, climate change, taxation, history, religion or government.

Basically, liberals are ignoramuses who think their lack of knowledge is enlightenment.

Some interesting points that came out of this morning's twitter fight:

1. Gun Control -- Leftists are pushing back hard on the belief that more legal guns and open carry laws deter crime.  Some liberals and liberal institutions (like Stanford University) are publishing papers that say the opposite is true:  that more guns means more crime and violence.  The Stanford paper (as summarized by the Stanford News) is based on computer models.   The models, data and source documents are not available for study, but this really sounds bogus to me.  Any alleged increase in crime should be tied back to individuals who have abused right-to-carry laws, not computer models.  An anti-gun professor in an anti-gun, leftist environment has produced a paper that "proves" his biases.

Intuitively, the professor's claims do not make sense to me.  If criminals know that a neighborhood has guns, would they be less likely to do home invasions or burglaries?  If criminals know that there are right-to-carry laws in effect, would they be less likely to shoot up schools and theaters?  I would think so.  What makes less sense is that otherwise lawful citizens turn into criminals when they have ready access to guns.  Absolute bunk, but liberals will believe anything.

My chief antagonist, one Tam somebody, asked derisively if I doubted peer review and Stanford University.  I sent her a link that shows that "peer review" does very little to improve the quality of research papers.  So no, I am not impressed with peer review as it relates to research papers.  This shut her up for a while.

As for the paper being from Stanford University, so what?  Stanford is a hotbed of leftist thought and ideology.  I would expect the paper to be biased, just as so many "scholarly" papers on global warming have been.  Further, other researchers have reached the opposite conclusion.  The question is not yet decided in scholarly circles.

UPDATE:  I found two sites that rebut the Stanford study as sophomoric and biased.  No surprise there.  Read MORE JUNK, LESS SCIENCE: New Stanford “Working Paper” claims right-to-carry increases assaults by 33%

Also read:  Right-to-Carry Gun Laws Linked to Increase in Violent Crime -- a rebuttal.

2. The Rich and Taxes.  The rich pay way more than their fair share of taxes, yet liberals believe the opposite.  Liberals view corporations that keep earnings off-shore to be "traitors" and "tax evaders."  They want to tax the living shinola out of every corporation, then kill the stockholders and sell their bodies to rendering plants.  Just kidding about the rendering plants.

3.  The Military:  Weaker or Stronger?  Liberals have graphs and charts that prove anything they want, and insist that the military is very strong compared to other functions of government.  Maybe.  I hope so.  However, my general impression is that the military is quite a bit weaker since Obama took power; he has fired numerous generals and officers, for example, and overall military morale is lower.

4.  Black Lives Matter, a Hate Group?  Black Lives Matter members have lately been advocating murder of police officers and other whites, and eight cops have been murdered in the past nine days.  However, the liberal tweeters says there is no "direct evidence" that these calls for violence are responsible for the officers' deaths.  Maybe it's just a black thing that we wouldn't understand.  Lee Stranahan, however, thinks the group advocates killing cops.

I will be looking for more information about items 1, 3 & 4.  If you have any relevant links or comments, please let me know.

Monday, August 31, 2015


Well now, in the past week or ten days we have seen (1) a black man  in Virginia shoot two white television reporters to death on live TV, and (2) a black man in Texas shoot to death a Sheriff's Deputy while he was refueling his patrol car.

There was no apparent reason for these murders -- well, except for the obvious reason that the victims were murdered because they were white.

Race-hate is most obvious in black people as a group.  There are exceptions, of course, but way too many blacks hate non-blacks and wish to do them harm.

Around the first of August, the old fool Black Muslim leader Louis Farrakahn called for black volunteers to murder white people.  Looks like the POS is getting his wish.

Well let's see -- in the past year we have seen blacks burn down Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland, as well as injure many in knock-out games.  Colin Ferguson has reported widespread black-on-white violence all across the nation, the news of which is heavily suppressed by the mainstream press.  Now other blacks are advocating mass murder and some blacks are acting on that admonition.

Niggas, you are poking a sleeping giant, one you do not want to awaken.  We are quite fed up with your bullshit.

Defending George Zimmerman on Twitter

A Drawing by Dixon Diaz
I learned that George Zimmerman has a Twitter account, so went in search of it so I could follow him.  I read some of the liberal/leftist posts on his site, and before I knew it, was involved in a flame war with a pack of liberals.

Arguing with liberals isn't bad -- their arguments are so misinformed and weak, that there is no stress in it.  Of course, they call you a lot of names and insult you, but that doesn't bother me at all.  One of them, a woman calling herself "Jade Helm Commander" expressed an unusual interest in the size of my genitalia.  Eventually she reverted to the usual form, calling me a racist.  I finally figured out what a "racist" is.  It is anyone who expects all races to be held to the same standards of behavior and accountability.  

I was amazed at how ignorant my liberal contenders were as to the facts of the Zimmerman case.  Listening to them, you would think Trayvon Martin ("a child") had been machine-gunned in his stroller while sucking on a pacifier.  Martin was a hulking brute, recently kicked out of school for fighting, and who loved fist fights.  The liberal twitterites did not seem to know that Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest, raining down punches onto Zim's face.  With a broken nose, in pain and in fear of his life or great bodily injury, and with adrenaline pumping, Zim's survival instinct kicked in and he shot Martin.  In such a moment the victim of such an attack isn't going to philosophize about racial equality, ponder the age of his assailant or offer him platitudes.  He is going to act, and let the consequences fall where they may.  An old saying is appropriate here:  "It is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

A Short Recess From Politics: Psychic Powers and Pumpkin Plants

This past week I came across a book in my library about improving one's psychic powers.  Normally I wouldn't bother with such topics, but I figured, what the hell.  The book was "Another Door Opens," about dealing with the death of loved ones, finding your true path, and dealing with frustration and stress.  The book had an ameliorative effect on my chronic depression, which had lately been stoked by America's descent into fascism, and I felt better after reading it.  I decided that maybe such topics weren't as worthless as heretofore believed.

Later in the week, I found myself in Barnes & Nobles Bookstore in Gilroy, California, a lovely, well stocked store that one rarely sees anymore, with the advent of Amazon.  I got to browse and handle real paper and ink books, and bought a couple more on psychic subjects.  One book was on how to develop one's psychic powers.  After reading it I intend to use my psychokinetic powers to plant a Confederate battleflag between the butt cheeks of every Yankee politician from here to Hoboken and turn Bernie Sanders into a horned toad.

Another life-affirming project has been the planting of pumpkins in my backyard.  I think I waited too long to plant the seeds -- they should be in the ground by the first of June, and I waited until the middle of July.  Nevertheless, I decided to press on and see if the Great Pumpkin really will rise from my pumpkin patch on Halloween and bring toys to all the good little girls and boys.  If not, maybe I'll have a pumpkin or two for Thanksgiving, and learn how to be a better farmer next year.

So far the only thing my pumpkin plants have produced are fragile yellow flowers.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

George Zimmeran's Painting of the Confederate Flag

George Zimmerman owes big bucks to attorneys for representing him in a politically driven murder trial two years ago.  Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, "an unarmed teen," as the media likes to describe him.  Martin, however, was armed with his fists and a really bad attitude, and sucker punched Zimmerman before sitting on Zimmerman's chest and pounding his head into the cement. 

Unfortunately for the "unarmed teen," Zimmerman wasn't.  Unarmed, that is.  Scratch one punk.

Since Martin was black, he was a member of the Dalai Lama Tribe of the Ebony Epidermis, the DLTEE, a sacred group who are never wrong, never at fault, and always the victim, no matter what the circumstances.  So a politically driven, leftist district attorney decided to try Zimmerman for second degree murder.  One cannot shoot a member of the DLTEE even in self-defense, because, as noted above, such people are never at fault, never responsible, and always victims of unrelenting white Hispanic racism.  Alas for the High Priestess of the DLTEE, Zimmerman was acquitted on all charges in 2013.  Charges, that according to the police, should never have been brought.

Now George Zimmerman has turned to painting artwork to sell, so he can pay his enormous legal bills.  His paintings are fetching large sums.  His latest painting is of the Confederate Battle Flag, and was inspired by Florida Gun Supply owner Andy Hallinan, who displays a Confederate flag in his gun store.  Halliman declared his gun store to be a "Muslim-Free Zone" and is being sued by CAIR, a Muslim "civil rights" group.  Zimmerman's painting is partially in support of Halliman.  Zimmerman adds:
"My confederate flag painting also represents the hypocrisy of political correctness that is plaguing this nation."
  Read about it here.

This blog has supported George Zimmerman from the get-go, after learning the facts of the case early on.  We were incensed over the political show-trial to which Zimmerman was subjected, and wish him the best.

Stogie Stuff: Windows 10 and H.L. Mencken

Yesterday I upgraded mine and my wife's laptops to Windows 10.  It was fairly easy to do, and free.  I like the Windows 10 format; it's zippy, boots up and shuts down a lot faster than Windows 7.  Also, the learning curve for the new format seems fast and easy. 

Lately I have been interested in the writing and thoughts of the famous, early 20th Century muck-raker, H.L. Mencken.  Mencken wrote highly controversial pieces in the 1920s and 1930's.  He was a libertarian and an atheist.  Although I don't share his atheism, I find his writings about religion to be insightful and often humorous.  I am currently reading the Kindle version of "H.L. Mencken on Religion," a collection of his essays on the subject.

Sometimes Mencken's conclusions are the same that I previously grasped on my own.  For example, how religions tend to ensconce rules into a needless permanence, and continue obeisance to those rules long after the rules no longer make sense.  Mencken writes, echoing thoughts of Nietzsche:
1.  Every system of morality has its origin in an experience of utility. A race, finding that a certain action works for its security and betterment, calls that action good; and finding that a certain other action works to its peril, it calls that other action bad. Once it has arrived at these valuations it seeks to make them permanent and inviolable by crediting them to its gods. 
2.  The menace of every moral system lies in the fact that, by reason of the supernatural authority thus put behind it, it tends to remain substantially unchanged long after the conditions which gave rise to it have been supplanted by different, and often diametrically antagonistic conditions.
Perhaps the best example of this is the Jewish and Muslim prohibitions on pork.  When the ancient Jews created that prohibition, there were sound health reasons for it.  Pigs carried a variety of diseases that could be passed onto man through his diet, trichinosis being the most obvious example.  However, modern methods of raising farm animals and of curing and cooking the meat make these risks of small consequence today. 

Another example is ritualistic slaughter, a practice that shames both Jew and Muslim, in that it is unnecessarily cruel and painful to the animals being slaughtered.  The original requirements of ritualistic slaughter were based on reasons of health.  Only freshly killed animals should be eaten, in order to avoid food poisoning, and steps were laid out by which this was to be accomplished.  However, modern means of slaughter affect nothing of any consequence in the meat produced.  The old ways should give way to better, more modern ones.

Friday, August 14, 2015

Was the Civil War About Slavery? A West Point History Professor Says "Yes"

Yes, the Civil War was about slavery, says a West Point History Professor; and he is "proud" of "his army" for its brutal assault on the Southern States.  Of course, the professor's arguments are shallow and sophomoric.  The Abbeville Institute rebuts this biased and erroneous screed in point by point fashion.

Read it here.

Monday, August 10, 2015

The Civil War Absolutely Was Not About Slavery: Must-Read Book Tells Why

I am currently rereading Gene Kizer Jr's book, Slavery Was Not the Cause of the War Between the States -- the Irrefutable Argument.

Kizer's book is very convincing in its argument that economics was the overriding factor for both South and North.  If the South seceded, it rid itself of the huge tax burden  foisted on it by the North.  Its ports would attract shipping and imports, drawing substantial business and tax revenues away from the North.  The North, on the other hand, would face economic devastation, so dependent was it on the South for its jobs, manufactures and tax revenues.  In fact, immediately after the first seven states seceded, a depression began in the North and there was a growing financial panic.

These facts are not just Kizer's theories or interpretations.  His conclusions are drawn from documents from the time period, including speeches, quotes from famous people, newspaper accounts, editorials, and the writings of economists.  There is enough material there to give Northern apologists nightmares.

Another part of the book is a reprint of Charles Ramsdell's famous treatise on "Lincoln and Fort Sumter."  This essay describes in detail, minute by minute in some cases, the Fort Sumter controversy, who did what and when.

The crux of the Fort Sumter problem was this:  South Carolina had seceded from the Union, and wanted control over the fort that was located within its own borders.  Lincoln was faced with a dilemma:  if he gave up the fort, he admitted to the legality of secession, and opened Charleston Harbor to tariff-free imports from Europe.  He had to start the war, but knew he must not be seen as the aggressor.  What to do?  Ramsdell does not draw any conclusions for you, but the facts point irrefutably to Lincoln's plan to start the Civil War by forcing the South to fire the first shot.

Lincoln was a tyrant, but a crafty one.

Wednesday, August 05, 2015

Confederate Quote of the Day: How Democratic Societies Tyrannize Dissenters

Tyranny in democratic republics does not proceed in the same way, however. It ignores the body and goes straight for the soul. The master no longer says: You will think as I do or die. He says: You are free not to think as I do. You may keep your life, your property, and everything else. But from this day forth you shall be as a stranger among us. You will retain your civic privileges, but they will be of no use to you. For if you seek the votes of your fellow citizens, they will withhold them, and if you seek only their esteem, they will feign to refuse even that. You will remain among men, but you will forfeit your rights to humanity. When you approach your fellow creatures, they will shun you as one who is impure. And even those who believe in your innocence will abandon you, lest they, too, be shunned in turn. Go in peace, I will not take your life, but the life I leave you with is worse than death.

Alexis De Tocqueville

Tuesday, August 04, 2015

Lawfare Pushback: Aaron Walker Sues Brett Kimberlin and Wife for Malicious Prosecution

If you have  been following the long lawfare saga of Brett Kimberlin vs the Universe, you know how many people that Kimberlin has sued for frivolous and vexatious reasons.  One of Kimby's first targets was an attorney named Aaron Walker, and over a period of three and a half years, Kimberlin made Walker's life a living hell.  Walker wrote about Kimberlin's criminal past and vexatious legal filings, and Kimberlin attempted to use the court system to silence Walker, or in the alternative, to ruin Walker's life and career through frivolous lawsuits.  These lawsuits have been dismissed except for one remaining, and Walker expects it to be dismissed as well.

FINALLY, Walker is in a position to push back.  In June, he filed a lawsuit against Kimberlin and his wife, Tetyana, for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false imprisonment, and seeking an injunction. Get more information at

You can read Walker's legal brief on Scribd here.   It describes the history of Kimberlin's persecution of Walker, as well as the damages Walker seeks.  Unlike Kimberlin's rambling and ambiguous briefs, it is well written and specific as to the torts inflicted by the defendant onto Walker.

Payback, they say, is a bitch.  Now Brett Kimberlin gets to enjoy the pressures, the expense and worries he inflicted on others via the legal process.  There is one major difference, however.  Walker's lawsuit is neither vexatious nor frivolous.

Sunday, August 02, 2015


Some black lives matter. Others are just a complete pain in the ass, taking more from society than they contribute, endangering everyone else with their proclivity for violence and crime, and forever displaying a really, really bad attitude.

 #blacklivesmatter-my ass

Friday, July 31, 2015

Confederate Soldier Picture of the Day: Confederate POWs in Virginia, Mid-War

"They were the dirtiest men I ever saw. A most ragged lean and hungry set of wolves. Yet there was a dash about them that the northern men lacked."
Maryland Resident upon seeing the Confederate Army

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

The GOP's Brilliant Strategy to Lose Elections

The latest brilliant strategy we are seeing from Yankee Republicans is to diss Southern Republicans.  The former does this to the latter by joining in the feeding frenzy on everything Confederate.  We see Pajamas Media running well-worn myths about the Glorious North vs the Evil South, Branco Cartoons giving the GOP credit for removing the flag in South Carolina, and common memes of how Republicans are Civil Rights Crusaders from way back, and "racism" is hard-wired in the brains of Southerners and Democrats.

Idiotic Republican Assertions:
1.  The GOP has always been passionately in favor of racial equality, and therefore blacks should vote for the GOP.
2.  Democrats are the Party of Slavery.  That's why the Confederates were overwhelmingly Democrats prior to the Civil War.
3.  Republicans are all in favor of eliminating Confederate flags, monuments, memorials, plaques and street names, wherever they are found.  This policy will make blacks vote for the GOP and the Republicans will have a near-permanent majority throughout the United States.

Idiotic Democrat Assertions:
The Solid South switched from being a Democrat majority region to a Repubican one because of RACISM.  The Southerners knew they could continue hating and persecuting black people with the blessings of the GOP, because the Democrats would never stand for such bigotry.

Some Common Sense to the Above:
1.  The early Republican Party billed itself as "the White People's Party."  The early GOP wanted to keep slavery (meaning, all blacks, slave or free) out of the new territories.  This was not because they cared about the slaves, but because they despised black people as a pariah race and didn't want to live with them.  The Republicans and Lincoln had no inclination to make social and political equals of blacks, and stated so publicly.

2.  Of course Southerners were Democrats prior to the war.  The Republican Party was a new, sectional party, pledged to the welfare of the North against the South, as opposed to the welfare of the country as a whole.  The GOP wanted to increase the tariff that fell so heavily on the Southern states, to make improvements and pay for corporate welfare in the North.  Why would anyone sane vote for a party that wanted to tax them to death?

3. Modern Republicans may think it's a winning strategy to piss on the Confederate graves of Southerners, but those Southerners are overwhelmingly Republicans.  Many of them will just stay home on election day, rather than vote for a Republican grave-pisser.  So we have Northern Republicans alienating white Southerners, who vote Republican, to curry favor with blacks, who vote for Democrats.  Brilliant!  This is a great strategy for electing Hillary Clinton.  Way to go, guys.

4.  The Democrats are not "the Party of Slavery."  Slavery was introduced into America by the British, before there was a United States and before there was a Democratic Party.  The generation of 1860 had inherited the system of slavery and it was entrenched into the economy and life of the South.  There was no easy way to get rid of it.

5.   Southerners voted Democrat for many years after the war, because there was just no way they would ever vote for the Party of Lincoln.  However, as the Democratic Party gradually transformed into the Party of Socialism, High Taxes and Big Government, Southerners made the switch.  Southerners, being very patriotic Americans who value personal liberty and small government, realized that the modern  GOP was much more aligned with their views than the modern  Democrats.  They made the switch for good reasons, not for "racist" ones as the modern Democrats would have you believe.

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Zo of "ZoNation" is a Flaming Ignoramus on the Civil War

Zo, an alleged black conservative for Pajamas Media, has been shooting his mouth off again about the Confederate flag.  He even went so far as to denigrate Anthony Hervey, a black supporter of the Confederate flag and Confederate history, who was killed last week by other blacks, who like Zo, are ignorant and intolerant of Confederate history.

Zo's sophomoric arguments fall along these lines (my brief rebuttals are highlighted):

1.  The Confederates were Democrats
      (You had to be a U.S. citizen to be a Democrat.  Confederates did not qualify.)
2.  Democrats believed in slavery and the "right to own other human beings."
(Yankees, and Whigs, who became the Republicans, believed in the right to own slaves too.  They proved it by buying and working slaves in Northern states and by selling millions of slaves to other countries.  Zo, like many of the historically illiterate, seem to think that only the South owned slaves.  Not even close.)
3.  The Confederate flag is a Democrat flag.
(The Democratic Party did not create the Confederate flag.  The statement is erroneous and asinine.)

Zo is not the only person spouting this nonsense.  A lot of so-called Republicans are saying the same kinds of things.  They seem not to realize that millions of modern Confederate supporters are Republicans, and very few are Democrats.  Modern Democrats, on the other hand, are leading the charge to ban all Confederate symbols, flags and monuments.  They are opposed by Southern Republicans.  For example, the governor and legislature of North Carolina are Republican controlled, and those Republicans passed laws this past week to protect Confederate monuments from Democrat eradication.  The very Democrat-loyal NAACP complained and are threatening a demonstration.

In Georgia, it is Democrats who are insisting on erasing the Confederate figures from Stone Mountain, and who are planning to make it a campaign issue in the next election.

So Zo, it appears that for today, in the modern world, the Confederate flag is a REPUBLICAN flag.  Read it and weep, sweetie.

Planned Parenthood: "Black Lives Matter" (Cartoon)

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Note to the NAACP: Don't Like Confederate Symbols? Tough -- Live With It

We all have to live with things we don't like -- strange customs, religions and beliefs.  Recently in the U.K., a Cafe owner was told to suppress the smell of cooking bacon because it offended Muslims living in the area.  Now the majority of Brits are not offended by the smell of cooking bacon, but the authorities insist that majority sensibilities take a back seat to a perpetually hostile, angry and demanding minority.  Hmm, now what does this remind me of?

You guessed it:  it reminds me of the NAACP and "Black Lives Matter" fanatics who think the world and everything in it is "all about them."  They, like the British Muslims, are a perpetually hostile, angry and demanding minority.  They insist that the majority of Southerners or even the majority of Americans, suppress their traditions, culture and sensibilities to the minority's preferences and biases.  As a result, all Confederate flags, monuments, paintings, songs -- and even graves -- must be ruthlessly suppressed, lest black people see them and be turned into pillars of salt.

Well too damn bad.  We all have to live with things we don't like.  It is necessary in a pluralistic society with people of many backgrounds and tastes.  For example, I hate seeing Abraham Lincoln's ugly mug on the five dollar bill and his picture in schools and public offices.  I am outraged that the greatest flouter of the Constitution in American history is hailed as a hero instead of the consummate tyrant that he was in real life.

I also don't like to see "Butcher" Grant's ugly face on the fifty dollar bill. I believe both Lincoln and Grant's images should be banned from the public square and not afforded any official recognition or respect.  It's okay, however, if private individuals want to display these cretins on private property.  For now, I will give Grant a pass on his grave site.  We won't dig him and his wife up anytime soon -- but keep those shovels sharp and ready, just in case.  One good "turn" deserves another.

Yes, we all have to put up with things we don't like.  And I really don't like the NAACP.  Truth be told, I'm not that crazy about Muslims either (imagine, not liking bacon!).

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Who Gets to Define the Meaning of the Confederate Flag?

This article is called "Beneath the Southern Cross."  It appeared in the  Here is one excerpt:
"The right to define the meaning of the Confederate Battle Flag or any flag belongs to those who by their history and shed blood own its heritage. Radical and lawless groups often display the United States flag, but this does not change its true meaning to fair-minded people. Nor should fair-minded people rightly associate the Confederate Battle Flag with evil because the very same groups expropriate and display it. Groups such as the NAACP and SPLC have no right to define the meaning of Confederate flags any more than the French have the right to define the meaning of the Italian flag or any flag but their own. Redefining and slandering someone else’s heritage and symbols is incredibly arrogant and stirs up needless strife. Honorable people pursuing a just and civil society do not seek to dishonor and marginalize the heritage and symbols of others."
Read it all at the link above.

How to Deter ISIS (Cartoon)

SCV Monitoring Attacks on Confederate Monuments, Markers and Plaques

Here is a message from SCV Headquarters (Hat tip:  Louisiana Sons of Confederate Veterans)


Daily there are new attacks on our Confederate monuments, markers, plaques, etc. all over the United States. At this time, everyone is encouraged, either as a individual or camp, to report these defacements to your law enforcement agency as a Hate Crime. Report the crime so the criminal can do the time.

By posting the violation to, it will be automatically added to the list so others are made aware of the heinous offense. We, the descendants of those who fought for the ideas found in the Constitution, will not stand by idle while our symbols and rights are attacked

Deo Vindice!

Charles Kelly Barrow
Sons of Confederate Veterans

"Reflecting Light": When Darby Gets Pissed, Posers Get Dissed - and Hilarity Ensues!

Bono stood on the stage in front of an audience, doing what I have come to learn is his standard holier-than-thou poseur's act. There was dead silence except for Bono repeatedly slapping his hands together. "Every time I clap my hands, a child in Africa dies," he said solemnly.

Voice from the audience: "Well, then, stop fuckin' doin' it!"

Ha! Rick Darby writes at Reflecting Light blog, and when he gets pissed, someone else gets dissed -- and deservedly so. Today he takes to task Daniel Greenfield of Sultan Knish blog, who is an excellent expository writer that regularly defends Israel and takes it to the Muslims who hate everybody -- but who will not allow any mention of the ongoing black intifada against Whites, Asians and Hispanics across the country.

He then turns his sights on Baron Bodissey and his associate Dymphna, two people who created the anti-jihad blog, Gates of Vienna. Rick feels that Baron is too snobbish in his allowance of comments, and deleted the Bono post italicized above, and then banned Rick from commenting at all.

If you like righteous rants, do read Asterisks at Reflecting Light, here.

The NAACP-Fueled Hatred Grows: Will There Be Blood?

Vandalized Confederate Monument
Thanks to the nation's premiere racial-hate group, the NAACP, the South is now a powder keg of pent up emotions.  A group of black men stuck a shovel into Nathan Bedford Forrest's grave this week, dug up part of the grass near the grave, and said they would be back with a backhoe to dig the general up.  A Confederate descendant saw the vandalism on the news, and drove hundreds of miles to replace the grass.

In Arkansas, Confederate tombstones were toppled and many broken, in a historic cemetery, resulting in thousands of dollars of damage.  Confederate monuments were vandalized, including one in a cemetery (see photo left).

Do we have to start citizens' committees to guard our Confederate dead?  If so, let the guards be armed, and the vandals forewarned:  if we catch you desecrating graves and vandalizing monuments to our Confederate dead...there may be blood and it could be yours.  Do not tempt fate; people are very angry and emotions are high.

Destroyed Confederate Tombstones in Arkansas

Friday, July 24, 2015

Confederate Soldier Picture of the Day: Infantryman With Kepi and Bayonet

This young Confederate soldier is wearing  a kepi hat and a frock coat (a long coat).  The epaulets on his shoulders indicates an early war uniform.  The color of the trim might have been blue, designating infantry. (Red was for artillery, yellow for cavalry).

You can see his bayonet scabbard on the left side of the picture (his right).  The white strap that extends from his left shoulder to his right waist holds his haversack.  A haversack was a square bag used to hold miscellaneous items and supplies.

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

"The battle over the Confederate Flag is on and Republicans are betraying their base." Jesse Lee Peterson (Video)

Another black Southerner is making sense.  Jesse Lee Peterson explains why the liberals and the GOP are trying to destroy Southern history.  He says: "The battle over the Confederate Flag is on and Republicans are betraying their base." and "Confederate Flag Haters Are Like ISIS Destroying Christian Artifacts."

Enemies: Max Boot and Jeff Jacoby Vomit Hatred Towards the South; Time to Ditch the GOP?

Ruins of Richmond, 1865
Two alleged conservative writers, Max Boot and Jeff Jacoby, have written hateful and extremist views about the Confederacy, its heroes and its flags.  Both show unfathomable ignorance of history, as well as extreme cultural intolerance to those who value Southern heritage.  Rhetorically, they are pissing on the graves of our ancestors and advancing disunity and resentment among their own base.

Reading their screeds makes it feel like Sherman's march to the sea all over again, destruction of people and property in its path; or the burning of Atlanta just for Yankee spite, or the many war crimes against Southern civilians in 1861 - 1865.

They hate our guts.  There is one problem.

They are Republicans, and the overwhelming majority of Confederate-Americans are also Republicans.  I have been a lifelong Republican, and the anti-Confederate hysteria over the past three weeks has shaken my political loyalties to the core.  I am willing to jettison the GOP, who no longer seem the party of freedom to me.  They seem the party of hate and oppression and brute force, the thugs in blue uniforms with their giant mortars and cannons and bummers with lighted torches.  Having once burned and looted our cities, farms, private homes and even our universities, they want to complete the job by desecrating the graves of our dead.

For the upcoming elections of 2016, we Confederate-Americans can do one of three things.  We can vote for Donald Trump, not because he supports Confederate heritage, but because he isn't a knee-jerk mainstream, backstabbing Republican.  Let us use Trump as a way of getting even for the recent attacks on our heritage.

Sherman Burns Atlanta, 1864
A second alternative is simply to sit out the next presidential election, and let nature take its course.  There are around 16 million Americans of Confederate descent, and many more who identify with Southern symbols and flags from living in the South.  These are the people who make up the "Solid South," whose support is essential for a GOP win in 2016.  If the GOP excludes us from America, we can remove ourselves as voters, at least temporarily.  Time to put the fear of God into the Party of Lincoln.

Rather than sit out the election, however, I would suggest a third alternative, writing in the name of Democrat Jim Webb of Virginia, who supports Confederate heritage.  Jim Webb is a conservative Democrat and would make a fine president.

Read more about the Boot/Jacoby obscenity at Rebellion blog, here, and at the Abbeville Institute blog, here.

Another Black SCV Member Stands Proudly for Dixie and His Confederate Ancestor

Tyrone Williams is not offended by the Battle Flag! His ancestor fought with the 16th South Carolina and he's very proud of it. Tyrone has Dixie as a ringtone on his telephone and a Confederate flag license tag on his pickup truck. He is a 'hard-core' Confederate of Camp 1857 in Leavenworth, Kansas. Folks don't mess with him because he's a retired deputy federal marshal, packs heat and is 6'2". God bless Tyrone for taking a stand!

Compatriot Williams is shown standing over the Confederate headstone of his ancestor.

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Black veteran, a 'Son of the South,' defends the Confederate flag

Courtney Daniels
By Courtney Daniels, a Birmingham native, former U.S. Marine and veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Mr. Daniels wrote a guest opinion for All Alabama, AL.COM, in which he defends the Confederacy and its flag, and tells of his own personal journey from animosity to admiration.  His well written and heartfelt essay should be read and appreciated by every Son and Daughter of the South.

He writes:
The removal of a historical banner won't stop racists from exercising bigotry. As a matter of fact, racists will be racists despite regulations and constant "feel good" legislation, no flag needed. The ignorance of the disgruntled protestors is evident in their refusal to acknowledge that the flag widely recognized as the "Confederate Flag" was never actually adopted as the flag of the Confederacy. They'll also never admit or realize that not only was slavery not the motivating factor for the ensuing civil war, but that slavery was an American institution, not a Confederate one.

The Confederacy, in its prime, never mounted the atrocities of the Trail of Tears or the Black Hills conspiracy. But it seems that all because a few cowards in bedsheets once hijacked the gorgeous colors of a banner so rich in history to terrorize and intimidate other Americans, we condemn the Southern cloth to oblivion as a misnamed symbol of hate. It doesn't matter that slaves outside of the declared boundaries remained enslaved in the North. Neither does it matter that many Southerners gave up plots of their property to house and provide compensable labor for black workers. It doesn't matter that Lincoln, who is often regarded as the liberator of enslaved blacks cared less for the welfare of slaves than for the sovereignty of an entire country.
Read it all here.

Black supporters of the Confederacy appear daily, in growing numbers...and I LOVE IT.

Here's another one:

Here's another:

Confederate Quote of the Day: Allistair Cooke on the Right of Secession

Alistair Cooke, British Author & Historian
The monumental serenity and gentleness of Lee have provoked many sentimental plays and reams of idolatrous prose.  But there might be a fine play in the second moral – and political – conflict he had to resolve:  that of never drawing his sword ‘save in defense’ and yet accepting the command of the Southern forces.  In any case, he went back to Virginia to fight for a principle that, ironically, Lincoln himself had enunciated better than anyone, thirteen years before Secession.  “Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.’

The nub of the conflict between North and South was the definition of ‘any people, anywhere’ (how about the people of Virginia?).  To Lincoln, it came to mean exclusively ‘the people’ of the United States.  The South took him at his earlier word and presumed that any region as closely knit by culture and economics as the South could claim to be a ‘people’ free to assert the right of self-determination.  But Lincoln, in his first proclamation of the war, had declared the ‘combination’ of the Southern states to be illegal.  And to this day, the historians and popular sentiment have overwhelmingly agreed with him.  Yet, it seems to me, we have all been bedazzled by the Gettysburg Address, a small masterpiece of rhetoric of very dubious logic.  Its most famous phrase is very close to political nonsense.  Quite apart from the anarchy implied in any government ‘by the People,’ there remains the ticklish question of how many people or states or ethnic minorities constitute a ‘people’ who may justly wish to govern themselves.  Woodrow Wilson held no such bland assumptions about the whole being more sovereign than its parts when he created nations out of ethnic minorities yearning to be free of government by the Austro-Hungarian empire.  I’m afraid we must conclude, with Justice Holmes, that the winner is always right.
--Alistair Cooke, Alistair Cooke's America