Wednesday, May 23, 2012

When Outsider Interference Is ... A-Okay

Ya know how Dixie-bashing bloggers have complained in blog posts and comment threads about "outsiders" attempting to interfere with the Confederate flag restrictions in the City of Lexington, Virginia? The local community, they say, should be able to decide whether they want Confederate flags on the flag staff attached to city light poles...

Well, I guess it depends on who the outsiders are. Check out this excerpt from a recent comment thread on Andy Hall's blog...


BILLY BEARDEN -- The issue in Lexington was initiated by W&L Prof Anna Brodsky, certainly an outsider, being all Russian and stuff. She was the only woman to complain to the media “I am offended in front of my students” and “I have embarrassed feelings” was her quotes. Certainly the stuff that subjects others to lose rights and subjects cities to lawsuits.

She alone initiated the 350 anti flag petition, signed by her students (95% intenerant) and fellow staff members

I have a copy of an email from City Manager Ellistad that states until Brodsky, not a single complaint was lodged about the flags.

Not even the main complaining Lexington store owner, Mr Hockaday, resides in Lexington. But he does sell numerous Confederate items….


ANDY HALL -- But Brodsky is a resident and (I presume) a citizen and a voter, regardless of where she was born. The assumption that her voice in this is somehow invalid, or less important, than those of non-residents who feel like they have some connection to the flag, is problematic for me. Brodsky may have initiated the petition, but I still don’t believe it would have (A) gotten traction, and (B) passed overwhelmingly without wide public support.


BILLY BEARDEN -- Traction without wide support?

Yes, a small segment of well connected lefties brought about September 1st, 2011.

To fully appreciate the current situation in Lexington, you have to go back just prior to 2001…

During his tenure, a former W&L President with the assistance of his wife removed much of the artifacts related to the military career (both USA and CSA) and life history of Robert E Lee from the Lee Chapel. That President passed away in 2001. His name was John William Elrod, and his wife was Mimi Elrod. :O

At the bottom of the obituary for President Elrod, it was requested that in lieu of flowers, donations be sent in his name to the Southern Poverty Law Center. :O

Mrs Elrod entered local politics after statewide attempts failed. As a Councilman in Lexington, hers was the leading voice against the location of the proposed satillite of the Museum of the Confederacy. Even Waite Rawls attempts to appease her by dropping the name “Confederacy” from MoC failed. :O

It was during these hearings in 2007 that 2 local citizens, Mary Alexander and George Pryde made media reports by also speaking against the MoC as racist. :O

Professor Brodsky certainly had a friend in Mimi Elrod. All of the staff signatures on the 350 name petition knew her very well. Quid Pro Quo. :O

By September 1st, 2011, Councilman Elrod is Mayor Elrod, and Alexander and Pryde are now councilmen. I can personally vouch for the fact that Mr Pryde’s vehicle sports an Obama/Biden bumper sticker. :)

I can only assume there are more than double 350 individuals at W&L University. I can also safely guess that whatever the number who spoke up at the council meeting that night for the flag ban, it wasnt even 2% of Lexington’s 7,000+ residents. :)

What is overlooked in all this is the Pro-Flag 1,670 name petition, which wasn’t even considered in the vote that night. :(

It was a well connected stacked deck of Obama Democrats who made it happen. Now the city is made to suffer. :(

Come November 2012, a new day will dawn on America, and the largest removal of one party will occur with the removal of the Obama progressive liberal elites. Mayor Elrod and her heritage haters will have to seek honest jobs. :D

(End of excerpt.)


So somebody wanna explain to me why outsiders (many of them Virginians) protesting the flag ordinance is bad, but student outsiders (many from out of state) signing a petition in support of it is okay?

One of the most reliable things about anti-Confederate, Dixie-bashing, self-appointed civil war police is their adherence to a blatant double standard.

Where Petulance and Arrogance Meet

Lower-echelon Dixie-basher and self-appointed civil war thought cop Rob Baker has grown increasingly petulant since I enable comment moderation on my blog. Apparently, he has no problem with his buddies doing it -- only when I do it.

In my blog post of May 22, I pointed out the what the difference would be between former Confederate states, counties or municipalities (1) flying a rainbow flag and (2) acknowledging a government and nation they were once a part of by flying that nation's flag -- on public property.

He left a comment, "When exactly was there a new southern nation. I know of a rebellion, or perhaps a Southern independence movement, but a country?"

As if what he "knows," or claims to know, is universal truth. The Confederate States of America was a sovereign nation-state with a government, a constitution, territory defined by borders, constituent states, citizens, an organized economy and treasury, foreign and domestic trade, a military. That it was unnecessarily and brutally warred upon from its inception doesn't negate any of this.

As Douglas Harper has so ably noted, "Any nation fighting for survival from the cradle, invaded and blockaded all its life, doesn't get a chance to express the finer points of democracy and civil culture. If all we knew of Americans was how they actually behaved from 1776 to 1783, we wouldn't think much of our sense of "democracy" or commitment to "personal freedom."

Rob finished, "And what of this country's population that had allegiance to their home and not the country? What about those in East Tennessee that did not want to leave but were forced to under occupation?"

Again, Douglas Harper more than adequately explains it --

The CSA was a bid to form an independent nation out of a region that had a common enemy and some collective regional identity. But the CSA comprised many sub-cultures (a few of them didn't want to be there), and it had a leadership that sometimes confused self-interest with public policy. It had its fair share of charlatans and profiteers and criminal opportunists. It had some brilliant generals and a great many men in uniform who would be the pride of any army in human history. It was committed to 18th century republican values that were incompatible with fighting a modern war, and it had internal social conflicts that the war aggravated.

In nearly all of this it was entirely like the American Revolutionaries. The colonists in 1776: one-third for independence, one-third against, one-third uncommitted. That must be the standard for legitimacy, or else our United States lacks it. The CSA fought a much larger enemy than George III, mostly on its own soil, without a Dutch loan or a French fleet to aid it, and the majority, in spite of internal divisions, put up a herculean effort, won spectacular victories, made shift with what little it had, and held out till the place was literally gutted and blood-drained by its foe.

When I pointed out to Rob that he and I don't see things the same way, and that I don't have to believe what he believes, he responded with, " 'belief' is based on fact. Your belief parallels the Santa clause (sic) fable."

Me: You BELIEVE your belief is based on fact. My beliefs are based on facts you refuse to recognize.

Rob: You beliefs aren't based on anything but "Confederate Heritage" revisionism Connie. Your "facts" constantly get torn apart because you don't have the slightest idea how to interpret or analyze those facts. I posted on your blog. You chose to email me personally."

Me: You don't know what my beliefs are based on. Yours are based on PC indoctrination foisted off by those who must evilize somebody else in order to feel better about their own uncertain morality and beliefs. My facts haven't been torn apart. Your post came to me in email from Blogger; I hit "reply." You don't like it? Stop harassing me, you won't get the emails, capisce?

Rob: Again Connie you know nothing of my back ground. I've experienced various view points from different professors. I went to Private Schools for my Undergrad. I've experienced apologists and what you deem as PC revisionists. You've also demonstrated, or attempted to demonstrate, the revisionism you call heritage on several occasions given me a decent perception of what you base your "facts" on. I never stated I didn't like it. You're the one that claims harassment from disagreement, if you don't like it, then stop writing absurdities. Capisce?

Me: You know nothing of my background, Rob. I've experienced different viewpoints from professors. I went to a private high school and college, plus state universities. I've experienced apologists and PC revisionists. Yes, my observations on political correctness, state-sponsored and otherwise, hold up. You're perception is skewed, not decent. You can disagree without harassing; you can reply on your own blog. Don't tell me what to do. You don't have the authority.

Rob: LOL. What a reactionary response. I'm glad you had differing view points, but I am not arguing your background am I? I am arguing what you present as facts. Obviously you didn't pay attention in history class. I also don't remember telling you what to do, outside of a comical mocking of you telling me what to do of course."

I guess when he wrote that, he had already forgotten that he just told me, "...stop writing absurdities. Capisce?" And didja notice he didn't identify what facts I presented that he's arguing with? (It's as rare as hens' teeth for them to identify our "facts" that they say they're challenging.)

Interesting thing about Rob and his fellow self-appointed civil war thought police is they they claim to have facts on their side, but what they present as fact is their opinion.... It's interesting also that they label our facts as fables, but, as I just noted, they rarely if ever identify what facts/fables they're challenging. (Rob didn't identify any in the exchange under discussion here.)

My issue with the self-appointed civil war thought police isn't differing viewpoints. Confederate heritage folks disagree amongst themselves about some things so that's not the issue. My problems are: (1) The totalitarian attitude that underlies their "policing' and (2) their basic motivation -- the evilization of Confederates, of white Southerners then and now --as well as the dishonest arguing techniques and harassment, as Rob has just demonstrated (also illustrated by Corey Meyer's repeatedly messaging me, out of the blue, on Facebook). And, frankly, the sheer arrogance they display.

I don't write absurdities except, possibly, when I do satire. Apparently, satire goes right over their heads. In any case, Rob's telling me to "...stop writing absurdities," perfectly illustrates the totalitarian attitude (guess he doesn't believe in the First Amendment), the arrogance, the dishonest arguing techniques and harassment of the self-appointed civil war thought police and Dixie-bashers -- all rolled into three little words...

I don't care what people believe about the civil war. I don't comb the Internet looking for people whose beliefs about it contradict mine... I don't even care what the Dixie-bashing brigade bloggers think of the war, and you won't find comments from me challenging them. What I care about is when their underlying motive/agenda of evilizing Southerners surfaces on their blogs and comments, and when they distort or ignore history in order to advance that agenda. Go find any comments on their blogs that I have left, and you will see that's exactly what I challenge.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Confederate Flags On Public Property

Listen to Dixie Bashers talk about displays of Confederate flags and you'll hear things like...
It has no right to fly in front of a courtroom, which is supposed to represent all the people, not just those with Confederate heritage.

The Confederate Battle flag, rightly, is associated with slavery and in our own times with racism. It has no business whatsoever to be flown at a public building.

These buildings and public spaces are for us as a society, not for our niches. I don’t demand, nor would I want to see, the so-called African-American flag, the Cherokee flag, a pentagram-emblazoned banner, a Vodou (sic) banner or the rainbow flag (all of which are meaningful to me in one way or another) displayed in this manner. To demand such would not be right, and neither are the demands of these apologists.

The major problem with this line of reasoning is that it sees Confederate flags as a "niche", or a symbol of a few partisans. It is a complete misunderstanding to classify Confederate flags as representing an exclusive group (Confederate descendants or "those with Confederate heritage," the SCV, or whoever) or organizations that have misused the banners.

Confederate flags can certainly be flown in public places in particular states -- those that were part of the Confederate States of America. In this context the flag doesn't "represent" anybody; it identifies the nation of which a state and its counties and municipalities were a part at one time in their history. It goes without saying that a Confederate flag does not belong in front of, say, the state house of Montana or a courthouse in Oregon, as these were not member states in the Confederacy.

The so-called African-American flag, the Cherokee flag, a pentagram-emblazoned banner, a Vodou (sic) banner or the rainbow flag were never elements of the flag of a sovereign nation that its constituent states recognized and flew. One wonder how hard it is to grasp such a simple but crucial fact.

There is nothing wrong with official buildings, from state capitols to city halls, to courthouses and other official property, displaying a Confederate flag to acknowledge that the Confederacy was once their official national government. Many states fly on public property the flags of other governments they have been a party to during their history. In my town, five such flags represent the historical countries/governments to which Pensacola has belonged. In these applications, the proper Confederate flag would be the third national, the political flag of the CSA.

In public and private parks commemorating Confederate soldiers and cemeteries where they rest, the flag chosen by Confederate veterans themselves to represent them and honor their service and sacrifice, is the rectangular battle flag -- the Southern cross. As it is not a political flag of a historic government, it can and should be flown above Confederate cemeteries and memorials in states inside and outside of the old Confederacy.

Of course, there will be those who refuse to see the difference between the official flag of a nation of which a state once was a part and, say, the rainbow flag. Sad commentary on the state of propagandistic education in the USA.


Photo by C. Ward

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Who's the new Dixie-Bashing blogger?

On April 30, a new blogger joined the anti-Confederate blogger brigade with a blog titled "Dixie Bashin'." Apparently, that was inspired by my use of the phrases "South-bashing bloggers" and "Bash-Dixie blogs" and similar phrases on my Facebook group, Backsass.

I identified the blogger as new but it may be that only the blog that's new. The blogger is likely one of our regular Dixie bashers playing anonymous. I don't know for certain who it is (or whether it is a he or a she) nor do I really care. But it's fun to speculate.

The likeliest candidate is Cousin Perfesser Brooks Simpson, with Waurene Roberson running a very distant second. The blogger is too glib to be Corey or Rob, and too frivolous to be Andy.

I've made Waurene a possible candidate only because we've recently run cross each other in cyberspace after a few years being out of touch. We go back a long way, to 2000, at least, and used to spar on various pro- and anti-Confederate Yahoo groups. We recently met up again in a comment thread on Cousin Perfesser's Crossroads blog.

Waurene is a self-styled anti-racist from Mississippi who has gone by various internet handles -- Furry Blues, Lazuli Silke, Bluzlover, and others. She was once a member of the ACLU and may still be. She is, or used to be, huffily disapproving of those who honor Confederate heritage.

That means she disapproves of Confederate flag prom dress wearers, and on the Crossroads blog, she recently aimed a great gust of derision at the most recent such prom-goer because of her footwear. Best I can tell, though Waurene seems to run silent on the outlandish and sometimes blatantly immodest pimp-and-ho ghetto prom outfits sported by some African American kids because, well, she apparently doesn't like to criticize African Americans.

My impression from my years of dealing with her is that she thinks blacks have been so mistreated, they should be above criticism, or at least that their criticism-worthy behavior is understandable and whites should be sympathetic to it, or at the very least, overlook it.

I also get the impression that she thinks that a period of being oppressed confers virtue on a people.... But that may depend on who the oppressors and the oppressed are.

She's a weak candidate for the new Dixie-bashing blogger because of timing. She shows up on Cousin Perfesser's blog -- for the first time, to the best of my knowledge -- on April 25 And the Bash Dixie blog premiers with two posts a mere five days later, on April 30.

But Cousin Perfesser is the prime candidate. He's the one who "discovered" the Dixie-bashing blog and posted a link to it at Crossroads on May 5. That alone greatly ups the odds that he's the "new" blogger.

A little background is in order. Back in mid-April, Cousin Perfesser attempted to smear me with a tragic circumstance from my family history. He actually did genealogical research on my family, evidently to prove that my Chastain ancestors had victimized my Cherokee ancestors by participating in the north Georgia removal that led to the Trail of Tears.

I'm not sure what he expected my response to be -- outrage or mortification at his "exposure" of my family "secrets", perhaps. In any case, I wasn't either one, though I was a bit flabbergasted at this latest evidence of his obsession with me. My response was to post a comment with a list other surnames in my lineage, in case he gets the urge to work on my genealogy some more....

He even claimed to have found that we're kin -- that we have a common ancestor back there -- hence, my new name for him, Cousin Perfesser.

In any case, I think some of his regular readers thought that the genealogy thing was carrying his obsession a little too far. I've even wondered if someone at the university might have expressed disapproval of his display of blatant pettiness, but that's just speculation.

Since then, he has posted about seven (7) blog entries bashing Southern heritage, some of them featuring yours truly. But this represents a tapering off. Nineteen other blog posts during the same time period are about other stuff -- his take on the civil war and related matters, as well as hockey, baseball, race (another of his obsessions), and so forth. I don't read his blog posts on those subjects, as they do not interest me. I monitor his blog for Dixie-bashing and that's all. Ditto Corey's and Andy's and Levin's.

So for whatever reason, Cousin Perfesser has been backing off his attacks on Southern heritage and on me. That greatly enhances the probability that he's the new Dixie-bashing blogger, because he's obsessed with bashing Confederate heritage and its advocates -- and if he isn't going to do it on Crossroads, he needs another place to indulge his obsession.

There are other clues, too. After a five-line introductory post, the very next entry is about -- you guessed it -- me! Both It and Cousin Perfesser refer to me as "biker babe," presumably based on this photo of me that I used as my Facebook profile pic for a while.

Both mention the number of members of Backsass. Apparently, they judge success by number of members and/or readers. I judge it by who's reading ... LOL!

Both Cousin Perfesser and It mention my writing, and both mention my current WIP, Sweet Southern Boys by name.

And that's just in the second post...

Next is a post about member of Backsass and his comments about which states have the most hate crimes -- and they ain't in the South. The next is about the Virginia flaggers (also an obsession of Cousin Perfesser). Then there's an irrelevant music video and after that -- guess what... Another post about me!

This one references the term, "sensahuma," that I first used on my blog in September 2011, here. So now It is using a term that Cousin Perfesser already ripped off from me in December, here, here, and here.

In this post, It adds a screenshot of a Facebook comment, which Cousin Perfesser has done repeatedly. Another clue -- both like to denigrate the intelligence of people they don't like.

Then there's a post about the Southern Heritage Preservation Group that It identifies as a "hate" group -- and provides "evidence" (including two more Facebook screenshots) that proves no such thing.

And the current post (as of this writing) It puts up is about -- ME! What a surprise, huh!

The new Bash Dixie blog, despite its limitations, is much better than Simpson's Crossroads blog -- better than Andy's and Corey's and Kevin's, too, because it doesn't try to disguise its purpose of South-bashing behind a phony interest in the civil war....


Roberson, Sea Grant Week 2012 Blog (no copyright notices found on blog)
Simpson, Civil War Bookshelf Blog (no copyright notices found on blog)
Dixie Bashin', screenshot of blog header (no copyright notices found on blog)

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Notes on the Dixie-Bashing Blogosphere...

---New Southern organization -- Wanna join?---

Dixie-basher Kevin Levin posted a blog entry about some new organization for the descendants of Southern planters. The organization has caused a minor stir among South-bashing bloggers. Since I don't have any planter ancestors, I posted at "Civil War (Obsessed With Slavery) Memory" a comment similar to this: "I'm thinking of starting an organization for Descendants of Southern Hardscrabble Farmers, Sharecroppers, Sawmillers, and Railroad Workers..."

Levin didn't post it, of course. No sensa-yuma.

---Do white southerners deserve to survive?---

Andy Hall's "civil war era" blog features quite a number of posts about contemporary subjects that hardly date from the civil war "era." Most recently, Andy has agitated, in his laid-back Texas manner, over Dr. Michael Hill's desire that white Southerners survive as a people. (I think Dixie-bashers like these bloggers don't see white Southerners as a people, anyway.) I have found over the years that people obsessed with race and slavery like these bloggers, always have a profoundly different understanding of the League of the South, its positions and the writings of its leaders than I do. What a surprise....

---It IS about us---

Corey Meyer keeps bugging me with Facebook's messaging utility. He's one of the self-appointed civil war history cops who thinks everyone should believe about the war exactly what he believes for exactly the same reasons. His obsession with Confederate heritage advocates dates back to at least 2000, when I first got online -- and very likely much longer than that.

He and Cousin Perfesser ("It's Not About You") Simpson and several of their myrmidons think that if someone living today identifies with the Confederates by saying "we" or "us," that person is claiming to have experienced what the people who lived through the war experienced.

You should've read the righteous indignation when a proSoutherner recently used "we" and "us" that way in a comment on Corey's blog -- "'We' did not fight in the Civil War," said one commenter. "'We' did not experience even one iota of the pain and suffering of the men of either side of that time. It strikes me as the absolute height of stupidity to place one’s selve (sic) with those men while sitting in a comfortable home in front of a computer screen, stoking up an imagined rage over what one can not even conceive of the horror of that time."

Well, of course when we say "we" or "us" in relation to the war, we're not claiming that we experienced the pain and suffering of the war. We are simply acknowledging that we're taking sides.

My town has a new baseball team, the Blue Wahoos. Recently my husband mentioned the team's next game and I said, "Oh, who are we playing?" Frankly, I don't much care for baseball. I've been to a couple of games but I don't know any of the players, and I'm not a fan... And yet, I referred to the Blue Wahoos as "we," meaning, in this case, that the team belongs to the town where I live -- i.e. my town. Only an idiot would think I was claiming to BE one of the team, understood baseball's rules, did the practice sessions, etc.

Now, I'm sure the Dixie-bashing bloggers and their commenters understand this, but they have to pretend to NOT understand so they can express their pleasurable outrage. They pretend to misunderstand a lot of what we say for that reason.

---Confederate Flag Prom Dress Brings Out the Hate---

...but not the way Dixie-bashers would have us believe. Cousin Perfesser recently posted a video about a high school student in Tennessee barred from attending her senior prom because of her Confederate Flag dress. He even acknowledged that it's a non-issue with the "Zzzzzzz" in his headline, leading one to wonder why he posted about it.

Well, it doesn't take long to see that it IS an issue -- and what kind of issue, and with whom. Confederate flag dresses and their wearers are better than sledge hammers for bashing Southerners. Consider these comments from Cousin Perfesser's lovely blog followers....

martin says: What about her Brother? Did they let him in without his date?

tonygunter says: What a shame! That’s the prettiest size 18 prom dress I have ever seen.

Waurene Roberson says: I’m surprised the dress got her thrown out. Did you see the flip flips she was wearing with that sequined dress? OH. MY. GAWD. To the prom in a sequined dress and flip flops….call the fasion police, y’all….

Al Mackey says: Nice to see another old friend commenting. I agree the flip flops were an egregious fashion faux pas, but the dress itself seemed to me to be of a cut that was not made for a prom, leaving aside the CBF motif. The whole reason for the dress appears to have been to make a controversy, and the principal obliged.

Waurene Roberson says: No doubt it was to make a controversy, but I’m not sure the principal should have obliged. Note the “zzzzz” in the subject head. We get into freedom of speech issues, too, as well as my old mainstay (which is: some things really need warning labels, and that girl wore a big one). As an African-American dress designer told me the other day, at least everything was covered. :-) She’s had girls ask her to design prom dresses that were, shall we say, less than they should have been.

This little kerfluffle is the sort of thing that merely makes you roll your eyes and go on about your business. The shoes were the icing on the crapcake.

Waurene Roberson says: By the way, professor, I congratulate you on achieving the impossible, something I never thought I’d live to see (someone shutting Connie up). Bravo!

Just a few observations about the above....

The "scum-sucking, inbred racist hick" stereotype of white Southerners, which is what lies behind martin's remark, is rooted in hatred, not truth.


In the United States, every state and the District of Columbia have some form of codified incest prohibition.[27] However, individual statutes vary widely. Rhode Island repealed its criminal incest statute in 1989,[27] Ohio only targets parental figures,[27] and New Jersey does not apply any penalties when both parties are 18 years of age or older.[27] Massachusetts issues a penalty of up to 20 years' imprisonment for those engaging in sexual activities with relatives closer than first cousins[27] and Hawaii up to 5 years in jail for "sexual penetration" with certain blood relatives and in-laws.[27]

In all states, close blood-relatives that fall under the incest statutes include father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, and in some states, first cousins, although Rhode Island allows uncles to marry their nieces if they are part of a community, such as orthodox Jews, for whom such marriages are permitted. Many states also apply incest laws to non-blood relations including stepparents, step-siblings, and in-laws.[28]

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh has questioned the rationale behind laws prohibiting incest, at least as they apply to sex between adults.[29]

In 1980, anthropologist Robert Tincher published a study titled "Night Comes to the Chromosomes: Inbreeding and Population Genetics in Southern Appalachia," based on 140 years' worth of marriage records. He concluded that "inbreeding levels in Appalachia … [are neither] unique [n]or particularly common to the region, when compared with those reported for populations elsewhere or at earlier periods in American history."

If tonygunter thinks the controversial flag dress is the "prettiest size 18 prom dress he's ever seen" (feeding the stereotype of fat, white Southerners), I guess he's never seen these dresses... Absolutely stunning!
Oh, and there's lot's more size 18+ prom dresses out there... Just google "ghetto prom" and see for yourself... If would be interesting to see how many of them Al Mackey considered to "of a cut that was made for a prom..."

And If the girl's footwear deserves Waurene Roberson's orgiastic ridicule, I have to wonder what Roberson thinks of this.
And if she thinks clothing like Confederate flag dresses are some kind of "warning label," one has to wonder if she considers this to be a "warning label".
And methinks these young ladies should have gone to the African American dress designer Roberson spoke with...
As for Cousin Perfesser shutting me up -- he obviously has not. He has petulantly stopped posting my comments on his blog, that's all. LIke the other Dixie-bashing bloggers, he likes slandering folks without allowing them to respond -- a very, very American concept.

But I am far from silenced....

Speaking of which.... Marc Ferguson, were you the one who opined that Cousin Perfesser would let my comment through if it was in response to a direct question from another commenter?

Guess what. You're wrong.