A weak defense is better than nothing...

Anti-racism is a bad thing I guess? (Images courtesy of Facebook)

Folks, I want to take just a second to address Ms. Maeve Magdalen. While I sympathize with her over her claim of being "attacked" by a white supremacist on Twitter, her final point is something I want to directly address. We've all heard this claim over, and over, and over again. Susan courageously battles white power freaks when we aren't around. Maybe so. I don't know. But ask yourself this question. If that is the case, and that is evidence that everything we are saying about the Heritage movement is wrong, why aren't they themselves highlighting it? You wanna know what I think? I think Susan is just smart enough to try and keep them at arms length. I think she knows it's bad optics. Do I think that they know the backgrounds and beliefs of every single person that show up at their rallies? No. But these are THEIR rallies. To somehow try and pretend that you aren't responsible for YOUR OWN IMAGE is ludicrous. It does not even take a lot of effort to figure out who some of these folks are. They are blatant about it. We are told time and time again that just because we aren't seeing it, doesn't mean that it's not happening. What a total cop out. If it is happening, I say show us, be proud of your anti-racist stance. If this is so easy, and Susan is already doing it, then why can't we see evidence of it? Give me a break folks. It is completely illogical for them to make this claim and not be able to show us some examples, and it is perfectly logical for us to be skeptical simply because we can't believe what we can't observe. I'm calling BULLSHIT folks. I say that if you oppose racism, let's observe it. Now, as for Billy boy, we know that he, Susan, Connie and Steven Monk all go waaaaaaaaaay back!

(All images courtesy of Blogger)

Only, today, Steven's wearing a little bit of a different uniform:

(Image courtesy of VK)

How is it conceivable, that you're going to know someone for nearly five years and not know he's in the Klan? Please. Not buying it. Do you think the public will believe that?

(Image courtesy of Facebook)

Folks, the public can evaluate the evidence for themselves. What does the Heritage movement take them for? Stupid? 

Restoring the honor!


  1. So you are holding people retroactively responsible for something they couldn't have known years go? That's why your criticism of heritage folks is bearing false witness and thus invalid.

    1. False. Although I posted pictures from years ago, the public will hold the Heritage movement accountable based on their actions today. I have no personal animosity towards any of you as people. None. However, your actions don't match up with your words. No matter how y'all try to spin it, the evidence is clear. Perhaps a change of behavior would do y'all well?

      What y'all want to do on private property is fine, I can't stop you, but I can and will tell everyone what I think and feel about it, and y'all won't stop me. Both of these things are guaranteed by our rights, and we should all be thankful for that.

    2. The public doesn't hold them accountable "based on their actions today" because there's nothing wrong with their actions today. Oh, you leftist anti-racist jackasses wrongly accuse them of things, and navel-gaze your own and each other's blogs -- but normal people don't pay attention to you. (I'm normal and I pay attention to you because I like exposing your lies, but most people are too busy with their own lives.)

      There's no indication that most heritage people know of Monk's promotion of the KKK or have seen his pictures from years ago ... or even recent ones. You may post it here, but very few heritage peeps know of your hate blog. You are condemning people for not knowing what YOU know, but they aren't obsessed like you are and don't comb the interwebs looking for the crap you look for and wallow in. Most of them (especially the VaFlaggers) don't even read Simpson, Levin, et.al., unless somebody calls attention to them, and even then, they only read whatever single post is under discussion.

      You need to understand that not everyone sees things the way you do. You need to develop the ability to see, or at least consider, things from a different viewpoint. You don't even try to do that. You condemn flags, heritage, etc., and then you judge and condemn others based NOT on what they believe but on what YOU believe. You substitute your perceptions for their intentions, and that's intellectually (and morally) dishonest.

      This is why what you think and feel is irrelevant.

  2. Notice the use of the wording? This is about modern political ideology for them, not history. They see everything in terms of politics.

  3. Having run across somebody's name on the internet for a few times over a five year period is not "knowing them for five years."

    Dimmy, it is modern political maneuvering that is targeting our heritage.... Sheesh....

    1. NO, it is factual evidence that is targeting your lies. You don't have a heritage to defend. You are defending a lie.

    2. Actually, it is the worshippers and practitioners of leftist ideology who are targeting our heritage ... and the wider U.S. heritage.

      Like it or not, Dimmy... for all you fake "historians," it's not about history -- it's about ideology...

    3. You don't have a heritage to defend. You defend white supremacy predicated upon a lie. You spout your bullshit ideology all the time and have NO FACTS to support your lies. Then you reject any fact that proves you to be lying. Just look at your posts. It's all the same crap day after day.

      The confederacy existed to sustain slavery. That was its sole purpose. You and your fellow flaggers wave flags saying you are protecting a heritage. Fine, it's a heritage of racism. Then you whine saying it isn't racism. Bullshit.

      YOu want to support US heritage? The US defeated the confederacy and put down an illegal rebellion. I don't see you defending that factual heritage. I see you lying about what happened and then claiming to be a victim. The only way you are a victim is in your lying mind.

      What is a historian? One who uses facts when studying history. You sure as hell are not a historian nor is anyone who waves that CBF of racism. Then you have the gall to call historians fake. That's the usual line of ignorance from you because you don't like the facts that prove you are lying.

      So here we go again, just another day of KKKonnie lying her ass, whining about leftists, and moaning about her fake heritage. Go back to your blog of ignorance, Polly. Better yet, go get the mental health care you need so you can live in the real world.

    4. I don't defend white supremacy, Dimmy. You couldn't find such a defense in my writing -- blogs, websites, social media, anything -- if your life depended on it. (Bonus -- try to find where I've personally claimed to be a victim because of heritage issues.) I do expose and beat up on anti-racist jackassery, but that's not the same as white supremacy....

      Your first paragraph is such a marvelous example of junior-high level reasoning. How did you get in the military? How on earth did you become an educator? Don't they have STANDARDS for teachers in Missouri?

      See, you leftists can't even agree on why the Confederacy existed... (to protect slavery? To "sustain" it? [They could have done that by staying in the union.] To "expand" it? The purpose of the Confederacy was political independence from D.C. -- the District of Corruption then, and even worse today.

      BTW, Dimmy, the heritage of the USA is racism, too. Even your vaunted leftist programs -- war on poverty, great society -- disproportionately harmed blacks by destroying the black family (financing the lives of women and children, but not if there was a husband/father in the household) to create voters for the leftist Democrats. So the Confederacy and our heritage is no more racist than the USA and YOUR heritage.

      Certainly I support U.S. heritage, especially that which comes down to us from the country's founding. The USA isn't defined solely by its defeat of the Confederacy, except by anti-racist jackasses such as yourself. Your ignoring the rest of the country's history is evidence of your hatred of Southerners, past and present.

      Historians haven't "used facts" ever since the leftist takeover of education after WWII. They have an ideological agenda to push. Like sociology and "wimmins studies" and everything else in higher education, the purpose is to indoctrinate (i.e., turn students into spineless, gutless delicate snowflakes who are traumatized by words chalked on the sidewalk). Now the indoctrination reaches all the way down to kindergarten.

      Dimmy, you aren't the proclaimer of who is a historian any more than you are a proclaimer of who is a native American. Remember how you royally screwed up on that one? You need to quit while you're not too far behind....

      Some historians are fake, Dimmy. YOU are a fake historian; you have an ideological agenda and you use history to push it. You don't present facts -- your specialty is unproven accusations, presented in hysterical blog comments like the one I'm responding to. What's funny is you aren't even capable of seeing just how risible you are....

    5. You don't find a defense in your writing because you choose to ignore anything you've said.

      Good thing you don't teach history because you don't know it. What you know is what you want it to have been. You see something and say this caused it, but you can find nothing to prove your claims.

      The purpose of the Confederacy was slavery. Why? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE SECESSIONISTS SAID IT WAS. If you say anything else, you are lying. That's what you do is lie.

      You are not a historian because you don't use historical analysis or facts when making up history. All you do is whine like the baby you are.

      I teach history. You don't. I use facts. You don't. You lie. I don't. You have a huge agenda of hatred based on white supremacy and you don't like it when you get called out on it. Well, too bad.

  4. Hey KKKonnie the Liar. You want to prove me wrong? Show me the primary sources from 1860-1861 that the secessionists were not seceding over slavery. Then use primary sources to explain the historiography of sociology education in the US, history education in the US, and higher education in the US.

    You made a claim. Now back it up or shut up.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Virginia Flagger Hubert Wayne Cash: "I have learned that most but by no means all blacks are a worthless bunch of freeloading, dangerous, animals that should be put down like the dogs they are."

Listen to previously unreleased audio of Mike Peinovich playing the Charlottesville Police Department like a fiddle...

Infight The Right: Are Christopher Cantwell and Jason Kessler backstabbing buddyfuckers?