Saturday, May 18, 2013

The Nutty Professor

With his recent post on Tripp Lewis hitting the net, Brooks Simpson has made himself the Nancy Pelosi of the Floggosphere.

It's rather bizarre to watch him operate. He's a master of spin, although I don't think he realizes that when he spins something, he's giving us a clear look at his own mind and motives, which tells us a whole lot more about him than it does about the objects of his smears.  If he doesn't know the factual particulars of a situation, he'll just make something up. For example, this passage from his post obsessing on Tripp Lewis: 
"As the Virginia Flaggers seek to recover from their recent humiliation (for example, they now have Connie Chastain increasing her involvement by setting up a blog for the group)..."
Ah, first, there has been no humiliation, except in the eyes of floggers. There was a mistake and an apology.

Second, the VA Flaggers blog is not an attempt to recover from (nonexistent) humiliation, as Susan contacted me via Facebook messenger on March 27 asking my advice on setting up a blog. I advised her based on my experiences and I offered to set up the blog. She took me up on the offer, but we were both busy and were able to message about design and content only sporadically throughout April and early May.  Susan emailed me the info for the Stonewall Jackson Vigil entry, on May 16, and I posted it, and a welcome post, the next day. But the blog had been online without posts, since April 25th.

Oops!

Sometime what you don't know can make you look like a fool (and a bully) when the info becomes known.

I note that Tripp couldn't possibly love publicity as much as the nutty professor does. So Tripp is in two -- count 'em -- two videos, one shot by a film student and one amateur phone video -- and that constitutes loving publicity? Stack that up against all the times that the nutty professor has posted on his blog videos of himself on TV and in conferences and simposiums...

Tripp has received a lot of money for his legal defense fund? How much, Simpson?  HOW MUCH?  And HOW DO YOU KNOW what he as received? You need to be forthcoming with this information very quickly, or else delete your slanderous "dawdling" tweets and post an announcement about your rank hypocrisy to all your Twitter followers.

Note that Susan didn't come under "increasing criticism" except from the biggest bullies in the floggosphere. Nobody cared but the nutty professor and a few others. The baby floggers, CoreyMeyer and Rob "Tu Quoque" Bakur, sort of flogged around the edges (Corey on other flogger comment threads and Rob pasting other flogger content on his blog). But Andy Hall has been uncharacteristically quiescent through this whole tempest in a teapot. Makes you wonder...

In a piece of detection worthy of Sherlock Holmes and Nero Wolfe combined, the nutty professor tells us,
"And then Tripp tripped … or so we are led to believe. For, if Susan Hathaway is to be believed (and why would she not be?), it was Tripp Lewis who contacted her to share with her Rob Walker’s now-famous tale of tasering vandals at the Davis monument in Richmond, a story we now know to be untrue."
Tripp told Susan? All you creatures in the Wonderland jury box, write that on your slates! That's crucial information!

Actually Susan was NOT slow to respond to the criticism of character-assassinatin' floggers. She was busy.  See here: Va Flagger Monument Incident Timeline and here: Dawdling? (And take note of that timeline. We'll visit it again.)

Note: Susan did not thank the floggers for bringing "the truth to light." She thanked them -- tongue in cheek -- for helping to bring awareness of the incident and clarification to a wider audience. And "one" "might" have overlooked Susan's statement, depending on who "one" is and how deliberately "one" can "overlook" developments in an incident "one" is zeroed in on and watching with drooling obsession.

Regarding the photos of the taser/club, the nutty professor says, "I don’t recall them being circulated," which once again reveals his infantile position that if he doesn't know about it (or hasn't seen it) it doesn't exist and thus, anyone who says it does is very likely lying. But the photos are on Facebook.  Facebook is worldwide and has 1.11 billion active users. I'd say that's circulatin', bigtime.

The nutty professor continues,
"...and some folks have overlooked the fact that it was Lewis who brought Walker’s tale to Hathaway’s attention."
No! Really? This hyper-crucial, mega-essential piece of information is OVERLOOKED? Well, shut my mouth and call me cornpone!*

Then the nutty professor slips into character assassination mode regarding Tripp. Obviously, Susan's clarification and sincere apology knocked the wind out of him, like a haymaker to the gut. You can almost hear the breath huff out of him in a great gust.

But he loves to humiliate and injure people, if he can -- as I have noted here: A Desire to Denigrate. So the idea here is to smear Tripp -- and me (again) with, "Yet she’s also overlooked Lewis’s role in this whole affair, preferring to have Hathaway take all the criticism."

I haven't overlooked anything. I know only a little about "Tripp's role" in all this, but that is surely a heckuva lot more than the nutty professor knows. That's why he has to make stuff up. Of course, making stuff up is a prerequisite when your aim is the character assassination of people you don't like who have done nothing wrong.

Clearly, the nutty professor is attempting to sow dissension by creating some sort of contention between Tripp and Susan. It's both funny and sad -- pathetic, actually, since it doesn't have snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. But I have to ask, what outsider of a group -- a group who is well aware of his hatred of them -- sincerely believes members of the group are going to take seriously a syllable of what he says?

What's almost as enjoyable as watching Simpson go crazy right before our eyes is to see the insanity in his blog post mirrored in the comments of his followers. I mean, really -- dis could pwove to be fun!* For example, Debbie Page is into conspiracy theories,
"I think Lewis may have had a hand in coming up with the story with Walker, by trying to create some positive publicity about the ‘Flaggers’. When they realized that public police documents and 911 calls (or lack thereof) could easily discredit their whole story, then they had to backpedal and Susan printed her apology."
Debbie also finds it strange that Rob is "out of the picture" even though Norfolk isn't that far away." The only thing that is significant about that, Debbie-dear, is that it was the excuse Rob gave for not going to the Richmond PD in person to get a report.

Following Debbie's flight of fancy, the  nutty professor really outdoes himself, "advising" the people he obviously hates on what's best for their group...  I like this part, "Of course, Chastain is busy keeping the story alive, and the Flaggers should understand that she’s a loose cannon."

The only thing I'm keeping alive is the story of the flogger attempts at the character assassination of Susan Hathaway and now, the nutty professor's attempt at the character assassination of Tripp Lewis. And if tweeting all this stuff to your followers, and posting SEVEN (7) blog entries about it in two days (or eight (8) in four days), including this one about Tripp, after everyone else in the floggosphere has moved on -- isn't what would call trying to keep the story alive -- what is it?

As for my being  a loose cannon -- no chance.  I'm well-secured to the gunwale, muzzle centered in the gun port and pointing squarely at the floggosphere.

 And then he offers this hilarious parting shot (it's so good, I have to post it all):
Again, it’s Lewis who brought Walker to everyone else’s attention. It’s Lewis who was featured in Walker’s work. It’s Lewis who contacted Hathaway and vouched for Walker. It’s Lewis who is benefiting from a defense fund.
And it’s Tripp Lewis who would like everyone to forget this.
I’m sure that someone would notify me that Lewis had admitted his error elsewhere. Chastain served that function for Hathaway. Perhaps she’s composing Lewis’s apology for him right now, so she can post it on the Virginia Flagger blog she started. After all, Tripp Lewis is a southern man and Lewis and Walker are sweet southern boys, although I guess they can turn sour.

(1) The only people who seem determined to "remember" this are floggers -- actually, only one -- the nutty professor -- and I can't imagine that Tripp gives two hoots or a holler what Simpson remembers or forgets.

(2) I post what I write on my blogs and my Facebook. The Va Flaggers write the content that I post on their blog (though I hope to  contribute  now and then).

(3) I haven't met Tripp, but I suspect he is, indeed, a sweet Southern boy.  As for Rob -- he's from Groton, Connecticut.

___________________
* Thanks, Bugs!

Friday, May 17, 2013

Anti-Confederacy Resides on the Left

“If we had not developed this ordinance, we might have a group of people who were opposed to women’s choice or who were pro-life. And they would get into a discussion through their flags,” said Mimi Elrod, Lexington Mayor.  http://on.wtvr.com/wan48LW
Okay, so the leftist Lexington government is also motivated by a desire to squelch the expression of pro-life advocates so it doesn't want to allow things that would "get them into a discussion."

I can understand a leftist politician like Me!Me! Elrod preferring to strike out at pro-life rather than defend pro-choice after the country has seen the horrific reality of "pro-choice" recently revealed by the Gosnell trial. In any case, this is similar to the kind of political fraud perpetrated by the Obama Administration that seems to surface every day lately, and that has the people so disgusted. The true purpose of the city ordinance was to keep Confederate flags off city lamp posts, period, and everybody knows it.

Exactly What Does He Think Dawdling Is?

From the Twitter Feed of Brooks D. Simpson:
Just make sure that when you apologize for yr transgressions that you don't dawdle like Susan Hathaway
Dawdle?
  Four days is dawdling? 
FOUR DAYS IS DAWDLING?

Complied from Susan's second release:
Friday May 10 -- Original release posted on the Internet

Saturday May 11 -- Navy personnel emails Susan; Susan goes out of town for the day to  son's graduation. Other Flaggers attend Confederate events. In evening, Susan and Tripp decide to investigate vandalism claims

Sunday May 12 -- Mothers Day activities much of the day.. Flaggers contact Rob about lack of police report. He says he will get it Monday.
Monday May 13 -- About 1 p.m. Tripp  messages Walker about police report. Walker says he was unable to get the report over the phone and would be out of town for the summer and could not produce it in person.

Tuesday May 14 -- In early a.m., Susan goes to Police Department to check on lack of report in person. About 12:55, posts second release with clarification and apology on the Internet.
I wonder which of these steps he would consider "dawdling." And if he thinks this is dawdling, what on earth is his concept of expedite,  hurry, speedy...

There are lots of other phrases we need to go into before we're done with this issue. One of them is "piling on."

Stay tuned.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Count On It

Connie Chastain will want to keep this story alive.
                                                   ~Brooks D. Simpson

_______________________________

You know it, maligner.

Oh, not the story of Walker, the Va Flaggers and the fake vandalism incidents. I'm going to keep alive the story of the attempted character assassination of Susan Frise Hathaway by you, Kevin, and your co-maligners.

You think you've heard screeching? You'd better invest in some cyber-ear plugs, mud-thrower. You ain't heard nothin' yet.

Oh, yes. I'm going to keep alive the story of Flogger verbal assaults, thuggishness, malicious fabrications, vilification, piling on and sheer malice.

Count on it, crap-slinger.

Monday, May 13, 2013

OH, NOES!!! IT'S THE END OF SOUTHERN HERITAGE!!!

UPDATE  ~  UPDATE  ~  UPDATE
 
Susan Hathaway, Rob Walker Jr. and the Virginia Flaggers 
Have Some Explaining To Do, Kevin Levin? 
Not to you, bub. Not to you. 
END OF UPDATE
______________________________________________________

.
Hang the crape! Blow the monuments to smithereens! Burn all the flags! Turn the MOCs into Nail Salons! Disband the SCV and UDC! Peel off them SECEDE stickers!

IT'S THE END OF SOUTHERN HERITAGE AS WE KNOW IT!

That's the conclusion, or the hinted-at conclusion, of floggers Simpson, Levin and Baker re: the Richmond Monument Vandalism incident, the subsequent report about it written by Susan Frise Hathaway that appeared in several online proSouthern venues, and the Richmond Police Department's information that they have no record of the incident.

I don't know what happened. I'm waiting to find out rather than -- as these floggers did -- drawing conclusions based on personal prejudice and animosity.  (Although I'm certainly drawing conclusions about them, based on years of reading their crap, and their obvious animosity for Southern heritage, particularly the Virginia Flaggers and most particularly, Susan Frise Hathaway.)

They exhibit a certainty -- indeed, an eagerness -- for the Virginia Flaggers (all of 'em? Yep,presumably all of 'em) to be collectively responsible for an incident about which we don't know the whole story, and with which only two names have been associated. But "the Virginia Flaggers" are conspicuously referred to repeatedly in their posts.

If it turns out that some or all of Walker's story is fabricated, he likely won't be trusted by some or all Southern heritage advocates in the future. Particularly, I assume, Ms. Hathaway. Although I only know her online, I suspect she is not the kind of person who takes being mislead lightly. On the other hand, she is truly despised by the floggers, and they will do anything to palm her off to their sycophants as besmirched by her writing and distributing Walker's account of the incident. (They'll palm her off negatively to their sycophants over anything ... over nothing, really.  Over their own animosity, their own prejudice. That's just how they are.)

They're doing their best to make a mountain out of a molehill, when everyone knows molehills simply don't have enough dirt to make a mountain. Said molehill is the "silence" from Susan and the SHPG, perhaps some others. First of all, in my humble opinion, the floggers are not interested in the truth to begin with, and if this incident had not been reported, they would be lambasting Susan and the Flaggers for something else -- although nothing of substance, you may be sure. They have a history of it.

Second, these floggers have the patience of a three year old. They seem to think, because they WANT IT NOW, it should be delivered NOW. They don't seem to understand that not everyone has the leisure that they have to play around on the Internet. I have sometimes had to wait hours, even days, to get replies to messages I've sent to Flaggers and others in Southern heritage. Practically all of them are volunteers in Southern heritage efforts. They have lives, families, children, jobs, and other time-consuming responsibilities. They are under no obligation to drop all that and answer my messages as soon as I send them  -- or to answer the taunts and childish demands of floggers.

So now the floggers are beside themselves with orgiastic pleasure because THE RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT -- not a prejudiced and hate-filled flogger like themselves -- seems to be validating their opinions. They are actively attempting to get newspapers in Richmond to cover the story -- and I think we know why. Likely only Southern heritage folks in Richmond and elsewhere saw Susan's announcement, but these floggers want the fury of the press to land on her head, noise reports about this incident across the land and, by way of piling on Susan, to smash the whole Southern heritage community. To shut them up. To end them.

The problem I see with that is, if that happens, who are they gonna bash for their own ego-strokin' pleasure and the entertainment of their blog sycophants?

And I can't help but wonder about the near-silence of Andy Hall through all this. His last blog post (about some lecture series) was posted May 10th.  He's even been uncharacteristically circumscribed in the comments at other flogger blogs -- at least, the ones I skimmed (Simpson, Levin, Baker). This is the sort of thing that Andy loves to reshape into hideous derision...  I can't imagine what's got his tongue -- unless he's working on a masterpiece of invective which, you know, might take a little bit more time than usual to compose....

Anyway, it's all moot, now, since the floggers are speculating that this might be a death-dealing blow to Southern heritage, or at least an enormous setback. Expect the electronic champagne to flow for several posts at the flogger blogs... Until they realize they have no one to attack, mob, mock and ridicule ... which will be a significant blow to THEM, since that appears to be one of their prime motives for blogging about the, um, civil war and ... whatever else ....

Meanwhile, the freaking President of the United States has sicced the IRS on conservative groups, caused the death of four Americans in Libya and lied about it, covered it up and now makes light of it...  ignores the Pennsylvania abortion butcher trial (and will likely ignore the verdict just out), attempts to stomp the Second Amendment ... but the Richmond thingy is what's REALLY important....

Sunday, May 12, 2013

I Wonder....

(1)  Is Rob Walker a Virginia Flagger?  He is identified that way by at least one flogger. I haven't done an in-depth investigation, but I've noodled around on Facebook, YouTube and Google a bit, and I can't find him participating in any flagger activities in any capacity except videographer. His Facebook page indicates he has made videos about a lot of other subjects, as well.

(2)  Is Rob Walker more than one person? In an article purportedly about his preventing vandalism of a Confederate monument, Kevin Levin identifes him as "Virginia Flaggers" -- plural. Levin does this in the subject of a blog post which reads,"Virginia Flaggers Foil Vandalism of Jeff Davis Monument" but the post itself seems to indicate that Walker is one person.

So, is he a Virginia Flagger -- or is he SEVERAL Virginia Flaggers? Or not a Virginia Flagger at all?

Since there seems to be some confusion about how many people he is, here's a remedial counting lesson, for those who need it....

Any Questions?


_______________
Graphic by C. Ward

Want to Read Sweet Southern Boys -- for Free?

For your code to download the e-book for free, in whatever format you wish, message me via Facebook messenger, or email me between now and Saturday, 5/18 at c_l_chastain@yahoo.com

Sweet Southern Boys page at Smashwords:
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/209754

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Per Political Correctness


Ever Noticed This?

Floggers love to rip into Southern heritage folks who get history "wrong." But do you ever see them correct folks who take the other side? For example, those who pass off the north as righteously indignant about slavery and uniformly eager to make war in order to march across the South freeing slaves?

You find such sentiments frequently in comment threads following news stories, editorials, or blog posts about the Confederacy, and especially about contemporary Southern heritage issues.  But I don't recall ever seeing a flogger or their followers or commenters correct the folks who make these errors -- not even with gentle language, let alone with the animosity and  disparagement they flog Southern heritage folks with.

They say that for Southern heritage advocates, "It's not about history, it's about heritage."

Floggers constantly demonstrate that, for them, it's not about history, it's about derision.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

So What If They Were Fighting for Slavery?

This question was originally posed to Corey Meyer in my blog comments, but I'd find it interesting to see anyone's answer -- floggers, their followers, random visitors... I'm interested in people's personal view, not something copied from a book...
Let's say for a moment, hypothetically, that the South was fighting to preserve slavery. What is the significance of that, in your opinion?

If you say, "They were fighting to preserve slavery," and somebody says, "So what?" how do you answer that?
Awaiting answers in the comments, folks.

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Sarcasm -- You're Not Doing It Right

In his continuing effort to put down Southern heritage (or in this case, Southern independence) advocates, Andy Hall has shown his deficiency at sarcasm....  He writes,
Corey Meyer continues to highlight the Southern nationalist movement’s recent infatuation with stickers. My own observation is that the compulsion to cover every flat surface with stickers is transitory, peaking at about age four or five. So maybe Cushman will start posting about his Barbies® soon. That’ll be fun.
Anybody out there have any data on four and five year olds covering every flat surface with stickers? Here's a website about the developmental milestones for four and five year olds (scroll past the three year olds). Seems like if this was a compulsion that PEAKED at these ages, it would at least be MENTIONED in a list of developmental milestones. Frankly, I've never noticed this compulsion in four and five years olds. Have you?

Sarcasm and irony work best when there's a grain of truth in them. If Andy wants to characterize the sticker campaign as juvenile, he needs a more truth-based sarcastic example....  And while you're at it, how about reducing some of that hypocrisy, hmmm?

As I discussed here, Pusillanimous Poltroons, Andy thinks I contribute nothing of substance to any discussion and I'm only interested in questioning the motives, or agenda, or character of people I disagree with about history. As explained, that's absolutely true, insofar as it goes. And since Andy doesn't want his motives, agenda or character challenged, he banned me from commenting at Dead Confederates.  This was back in August 2011.

However, he does sometimes engage me in comment threads on other people's blogs. Oh, he doesn't do it directly. He references or answers things I post, but he doesn't answer me ... he addresses his comment to the blog owner or other commenters.

Now, pardon me for noticing, but that's the kind of behavior teenage girls exhibit when they've had a falling out.

C'mon, Andy. Don't be skeered. Engage me directly -- and answer me this -- if it's okay for you to smear, malign, dump on, belittle, badmouth and otherwise question motives, agenda and character of Southern heritage folks, why is it NOT okay to have the same done to  you -- to the point that you protect yourself with these sooo transparent methods?  C'mon, Andy.  Make your case.

Wednesday, May 1, 2013