Saturday, April 19, 2014

Odds & Ends -- April 18, 2014

Simpson sez,

Connie, by the way, apparently still has no problem with atrocities, racism, bigotry, and violence against women. When her buddy John C. Hall Jr. uses the same language she claims to deplore in rap lyrics, she says nothing; recall that she once defended Pat Hines’s antiSemitism … really? Same goes for Connie defending Hall’s antiSemitism. Maybe she can spend some time telling us how her views differ from those of Glenn Miller.

...and....

Folks, when I post material showing that John C. Hall., Jr., uses the n-word, in a post she refers to later on at her blog, but she then has the effrontery to assert: “I’m unaware of John using such language,” we must assume that she’s a liar, stupid, or both.

Well, there's another example of slippery lying from the lying professor...or maybe I should give him the benefit of the doubt and say he probably didn't understand what I meant.

I meant that I was unaware of John C. Hall using anti-Semitic language. I do know he considers Jewish folks in the north to be critical of the Christian South, and have read some of his comments to that effect. But that doesn't conform to my understanding of anti-Semitism, which is hatred of Jews and the fomenting of hatred for them in others. I don't believe criticism of blacks or Jews or anyone else automatically constitutes hatred of them.

I see a lot of stuff online I don't agree with, both from people who oppose and hate Southern heritage, and those who respect and defend it. Unlike Simpson, I don't think I'm under any obligation to rake people I basically agree with over the coals because of one or two differences of opinion. If he wants to equate my not doing that as approval or agreement, well, that's just Simpson exhibiting a flaw  in his reasoning.

====================

From a comment thread on Crossroads several years back, the ever pedantic Ms. Blough takes exception to my claim that Jewish folks overwhelmingly identify and vote Democrat, with this:

Ms. Chastain-Yet again, you’ve shown us your aversion to doing the most minimal research lest it conflict with your assumptions and stereotypical views. The Neo-Conservative movement which was enormously influential in both Bush (41) and Bush (43) administrations is heavily Jewish, especially in its founder and leadership. No group is monolithic in its views and to dismiss someone’s work unread because of such stereotypes is at best lazy and at worst blind prejudice.

The fact that D.C. neocons are heavily Jewish doesn't disprove my claim that the Jewish population of the US identifies and votes overwhelmingly Democrat:

From Pew Forums
(47% Democrat and 18% lean Democrat = 65%  ....  more than 2/3, which I would consider overwhelming, particularly when the remaining 34% is divided four ways).

From Jewish Virtual Library

The godfather of neo-conservatism was Irving Kristol, who quipped that a neo-con was a liberal who got mugged by reality. Yes, these folks refugeed out of the Democrat party and oozed into the Republican party, and took it places true conservatives did not approve of or wish to follow. That is why there is a Tea Party made of true conservatives  today.

====================

I'm famous ... again. Simpson's been tolling the Internet (so what else is new?) and he found a post by a demented leftist who was, shall we say, disapproving of my essays at The False Rape Society.(Apparently Simpson is fascinated with my essays for The False Rape Society).

The post is at a blog titled "A Radical Profeminist" run by a Julian Real, who describes himself thusly,"I am a white, class-privileged, Western academically and non-academically educated, intergender (and, much more importantly, anti-gender) male who is also gay, asexual, Jewish, and a survivor of childhood sexual assault and adult sexual exploitation. Contrary to Internet rumors, I don't support any form of genocide, including against any percent of the male population. I don't hate men (or women or transgender people). I am not anti-sex; I'm anti-sexxxism. I'm not anti-male; I'm against male supremacy."

The blog's header sez, "This blog exists to challenge the oppressive forces of white, heterosexual, and male supremacy. I understand each to be institutionalized ideologies that are mutually reinforcing. They work together as braided practices which are misogynistic, heterosexist, racist, genocidal, and ecocidal."

Real's demented rant about me is here. You can read it, but unless you share his demented outlook, you might not be able to understand it....

BTW, for those who are interested in my essays for The False Rape Society, you can read all of them here:

Part One   ~   Part Two   ~   Part Three
(Use your BACK button to return here)

Just try to find where I've promoted rape in any of those essays, and know when Liberty Lamprey says I have, s/he's lying. Once again, I have to wonder if Simpson, Lamprey and all those who blow a gasket over criticism of false rape accusations are okay with  innocent men going to prison for 20 or 30 years for rapes they did not commit.

====================

Simpson has just made a Crossroads post -- a primer about me consisting of one-paragraph (or less) screenshots of comments by me in various comment threads around the Internet. I guess he's been tiptoeing through cyberspace again...

Apparently, he's putting them forth as examples of some kind of hate'n'racism or whatever. He cherry picked a lot of them from my comments here.

If you have some time and can stomach to read it, you'll find hate-comments there of the type that helped to inspire the idea for Gone South.

One thing I notice about his criticism of me is that he never attempts to refute what I say. I'm not surprised. It kinda reminds me of the time Levin and some of his floggerettes jumped all over me for using the term "the darker side of slavery" (they asked me, "What do you consider to be the brighter side?" or some such nonsense) and I had to remind them that a few comments before mine, it was LEVIN who had FIRST used that term, the darker side of slavery. Do you think anybody had jumped on HIM for using it? What a bunch if hypocrites...

You cannot expect reasonable, honest debate from Floggers and their followers. I guess they're skeered of it....

UPDATE   UPDATE  UPDATE   UPDATE  UPDATE   UPDATE 

An exchange by Goad Gatsby and Simpson at the latter's flog:
Goad: I think about the quote from Wanda Sykes, “What you’re afraid of is Karma.” She still doesn’t believe that someone damaged my amp even though her buddies were there to see it but comes up with the fantasy idea that Neo-Confederates are the one under attack.

Simpson: Let’s put it this way: why would her fellow Flaggers support an action she claims did not take place? How does she know? Is she calling them liars, too?
For any folks out there reading my blog who are interested in the truth -- what I said is that I've found no reliable DOCUMENTATION of the incident, which isn't the same thing as saying it never happened.

1 comment:

  1. Over at the "Connie Chastain Primer" post at Crossroads, Spelunker commented: "Brooks, I see she defended SNN, so logically she would defend the LOSers as well. I’ve got some great material coming up that’s going to show just how nice and normal some of those pretty Southern White Nationalist faces at the LOS rallies are. I can’t wait to hear Connie’s defense."

    Well, Mr. Spelunker, most of Simpson's cherry picked quotes came from THIS BLOG in 2011.

    Two years or so later, in August 2013, I wrote here on Backsass, "Over the past year or two, though, there have been indicators that the League is changing -- radicalizing. It appears to have abandoned the counsel of wise elders to increasingly embrace the untried ideas of a younger folks,"

    and

    "I have watched from a distance as the League has continued to radicalize, to accept the influence of white nationalists masquerading as Southern nationalists and to slowly develop a an indifference to Southern tradition and Christianity,"

    and

    "Judging by the comments I've received from time to time as my disapproval of the League's radicalization has become known, I'm certainly not the only one dismayed by this change. These folks still support independence for the South, though. There have been suggestions that maybe it's time for a new group, one that remains true to the League's original, recently jettisoned ideals."

    The entire post is HERE. Phone Booth Conventions

    I would just caution you not to believe everything Brooks Simpson posts at Crossroads. He knows I have developed deep differences with and misgivings about the League and the SNN but he will ignore than in order to smear. That's just what he does.

    And don't expect me to start heaping derision and condemnation on the League and the SNN, either. I disagree with them about some things; I don't hate them.

    BTW, why'd you take down your blog post about the kicked amplifier and the VaFlaggers?

    ReplyDelete

Okay, Mr. and/or Ms. Anonymous. Consider yourself thwarted.

Commenting policy: I will let through what I want to, and block what I want to based on whatever criteria or standards or whim I choose.