... someone directed me to her Facebook page. It’s a continuation of more of the same of her rants against various folks.A continuation of more of the same? Isn't that a little redundant, like saying tooth dentist or foot podiatrist? Isn't a continuation more of the same? And isn't more of the same a continuation? Keep in mind that this man is a professor at a major state university ... who puts down my writing, editing and self-publishing of books he's never read....
Ms. Chastain declares: “Once again, Simpson is seeing, or purporting to see, similarities between people and the ideas they hold, for the purpose of guilt-by-association tar-smearing, while ignoring the differences, which are what’s truly important.”
I love how she attributes motives to me. In fact, I was giving her the opportunity to distance herself from Mr. Wallace. Her major effort along this line was to note that Mr. Wallace roots for Auburn while she roots for Alabama.
(I’d love to know whether Mr. Wallace ever expressed himself about Cam Newton.)
She does not go into detail on where she disagrees with Mr. Wallace about southern heritage. I wonder why she chose not to do that.
I found her case about the powerlessness of the SHPG to get anything done powerful. I also found her admission that her own work is insignificant to be revealing, especially since she persists in it.
He sez, "I love how she attributes motives to me. In fact, I was giving her the opportunity to distance herself from Mr. Wallace."
Aw, isn't he a thoughtful man, to give me such an opportunity? The only problem is, that statement is complete and total bullcrap, and anyone who believes it needs their head examined. It's not only a blatant lie -- it's a hilarious one! Had me literally laughing out loud. This man hates my guts, and he loves to attempt smears of people with guilt-by-association, especially Southern heritage advocates. The very existence of that blog post is a attempt to smear me with a cooked up association with Hunter Wallace and Occidental Dissent.
But the lying doesn't stop there. What's amazing is Simpson's claim that my "major effort" to distance myself from Wallace is my tongue-in-cheek description of us as opposition college football fans (me, Alabama; Wallace, Auburn).
Simpson further compounds the lie by saying, "She does not go into detail on where she disagrees with Mr. Wallace about southern heritage."
I don't know the degree to which I disagree with Mr. Wallace about Southern heritage because I don't know all his views on it. I barely skimmed a couple of posts at this blog -- and that was enough for me to know I didn't agree with a lot of what he said, and didn't need to read further.
What Simpson ignores, though, in order to make his mendacious implications, are these comments from me, re: Mr. Wallace:
1. Having visited that site once or twice recently, I found that there's a lot I disagree with Mr. Wallace about. This most recent visit there confirmed that disagreement.Do you suppose Simpson didn't see those statements in my blog post? (Kinda like he didn't see my PROUD CONFEDERATE DESCENDANT badge while claiming we Southern heritage advocates were afraid to use the word, Confederate?) Or do you suppose he saw them, and he's ignoring them in order to, um, continue more of the same of his attempted smears?
2. I suspect most of the disagreement is based on differences that result, ultimately, from my being a Christian and his being an atheist.
3. I don't agree with or approve of Mr. Wallace's views on race.
In other words, did Brooks Simpson lie ... again?
As we used to say back in my high school days, is grass green? Is the Pope Catholic?