Saturday, March 7, 2015

Jimmy Dick's Version of "Integrity" in Online Discussion

The following is edited from one of the usual heritage-hating blogs. It's an exchange between Jimmy Dick and myself that occurred in the comment thread of a particular post about veterans. (The "she" he mentions here is me.)
J. DICK: She and the other Neo-Know Nothings say the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery.

CONNIE: Mr. Dick, I challenge you to find where I have ever, ever, ever said “the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery”. I’ll tell you right now, you won’t find it, because I’ve never said it, ever. EV-VER. Which makes YOU the liar. Why? Why did you tell this lie? Either prove where I have said it, or apologize to me.

J. DICK: Oh, so you are ready to announce that the Civil War was caused by slavery? You’re ready to admit that the slave states seceded in order to preserve slavery? Say it clearly and I will be more than happy to apologize.
Note how he attempts to change the subject. He refuses to prove that I said what he claims I said, and brings up something totally irrelevant. It doesn't matter WHAT I'm ready (or not ready) to announce. It doesn't change the fact that he accused me of already having said something that he refuses to prove I said. I remind him of that....
CONNIE: Mr. Dick, you said I SAID , “the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery”. The burden of proof is on you.

If you can’t produce a link, a copy-paste, anything, where I have said, “the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery,” then you owe me an apology. 
Look what he does next. Pointing out that my not making a statement about slavery has nothing to do with his claim of what I've already said. And he says I want proof of what started the war? No, I'm asking him to prove where I said what he's claiming I said.

Question for my readers. Is Mr. Dick truly confused about the proof I'm asking for? If so, what does that say about academic-level reading comprehension? And if he KNOWS that's not the proof I'm asking for, what does that say about his intellectual honesty?

J. DICK: As expected and anticipated Connie Chastain is not going to make the statement that slavery was the cause of the Civil War. She wants proof...
...Well, open your eyes and mind and start learning. Read the primary sources such as the Secession documents. Read Charles Dew, James McPherson, Eric Foner, etc.

Connie, you said you wanted an apology. You will never get one because you can’t admit the truth. The evidence is overwhelming that the secession conventions were over slavery and that slavery started the Civil War. You reject the facts in favor of fiction [edit].

You get no apology.
I don't really care about an apology from you. I simply acknowledge that if you can't prove your accusation against me, it is a lie, and you owe me an apology for it. Whether you offer it or not doesn't amount to a hill of beans to me.
J. DICK: “I will be extremely pleased to announce to the world that I would be apologizing to Connie Chastain because she has stated for the record that slavery was the cause of the Civil War, that the men who fought for the Confederacy fought for the right to own human beings, and the men at the secession conventions chose to secede over slavery.”

When Connie Chastain makes that statement she will no longer be [avoiding the truth]. Until then she is.
That is all irrelevant to the fact that Jimmy Dick accused me of already having said something that he refuses to prove I said. Also, I do not believe Jimmy Dick has a corner on truth; what he has stated here is, at best, his opinion, his spin.
Do not bother to post anything unless you make that exact statement, Connie. I will accept and apologize for nothing but you stating that statement as fact. I will not be holding my breath.

CONNIE: Mr. Dick, you claimed I said something I’ve never said. You lied about me. These other demands you are making are irrelevant to the fact that you lied about me.
For my part, this exchange was to make the point that he cannot prove I said what he claims I said and without proof, his claims are lies. It's funny to watch him squirm, to try to change horses in midstream, to reframe the discussion to take the heat off himself, to move the focus from the past, i.e., what (he claims) I've already said, to the future, what he's demand that I say.

This is a sleazy, slimy discussion technique on Mr. Dick's part; but it's a hallmark of flogger discussion techniques one encounters all the time. He needs a nickname ... How would "Tricky Dick? do? Hahahahaha.


43 comments :

  1. Tell J. Dick that George Purvis said the war had nothing to do with slavery and invite him here to prove me wrong. Oh BTW tell him happy thanksgiving, he will know what you are talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  2. He's a Yankee. This is how they think. Everything they say and do is based on a single premise; The North IS the FINAL Authority in ALL things, period. The whole argument over secession is based on the fact that the South didn't have the Northern People's permission to secede. Which they needed, because only Northerners have any rights or authority, when it comes to how the country is governed. Yankees sincerely believe that the Constitution grants them supra Authority that the rest of us don't have. It comes down to; "Why are you denying our rightful rule over you?" "Why are you denying our right to regulate your wickedness, your rights, your freedom?" "Why are you defying us?" That's why they concentrate on slavery and secession. Because it keeps people from asking the relevant question; Why do Northerners think they have authority in governing the United States, that the rest of the country doesn't? Why does a state like Illinois or Rhode Island carry more weight in government than all thirty four Southern and Western states put together? I don't mean to tell you your business, Ms. Connie, but I think it's about time the ball was in the other court. Slavery is gone. But Northern rule continues. It's time to make the floggers defend their defense of Northern supremacy. Make these characters explain why they think sixteen states having more rights, more authority, special rights, special exemptions and special set asides, constitutes a supposed Union of equals and how this is good for the other thirty four states. Either they can justify it logically and legally, or admit the truth; They're a different country with wholly different cultural, political and national interests..

    ReplyDelete
  3. Connie.

    You don't have to post this but perhaps you might be interested in this newsletter. You may want to post a link someplace on your page. I already have a permission --

    SOUTHERN HERITAGE NEWS & VIEWS is FREE and sent to you via E-mail. To subscribe send e-mail to: demastus@aol.com

    Please like my Southern Heritage News & Views Facebook page and share it with friends:
    http://www.facebook.com/SouthernHeritageNewsandViews

    SHNV Blog
    http://shnv.blogspot.com/




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, indeed I will. I don't know why I haven't done so before now.

      There are some others that need to be added to that list.

      Delete
    2. Not a problem. Do you need the email from Demastus?

      Delete
  4. Typical. Claims that you stated something, he is asked for proof of such statements, he is unable to provide such statements, so he does a side step.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jimmy dick is not known for telling the truth or being accurate.

      Delete
  5. Thank you Connie. A perfect example of the Flogger fascists dishonesty. And since we've already established they all share the same conformist mindset, it's clear you'd get no better answers from the rest of them either.

    I had a similar situation happen about six weeks ago over at a facebook page where a nobody name Greg "Eatoff" attempted to pull the same sort of dishonest crap on me: specifically he claimed I thumbed up previous posts that I did not, and then later removed them....a like I and a couple others called him out on. He disappeared (I think the chicken s**t actually blocked me) but not before giving me one more somewhat coherent parting shot. Tisk tisk. Another glorious victory for the Man the Deniers Fear Most.

    Connie, I love watching you make them squirm. I'd go there and do it myself, but shooting fish in a barrel just isn't much of an intellectual challenge for me, and none of them have the guts to come to my humble little blog at all.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Connie,

    You may want to address Bakers ignorant post about you.

    https://historicstruggle.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/confederate-islamaphobia/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not likely. The flogger frenzy over what they imagine to be my "racism" is amusing, but I'm busy, you know? I don't have time to pay attention to such sound and fury, signifying nothing. There may be a few things I care about even less than I care about flogger fantasies and lies about me, but I can't think of any at the moment. :)

      Delete
    2. George
      I took it upon myself to reply to these two fellas. I pray your pardon Ms Connie.

      Delete
    3. You are true Southern gentlemen, and I do appreciate your concern... If I didn't have several years experience with these bozos, I might be more upset, but by now I know the drill.

      May I say you gentlemen are such a wonderful contrast to their boorishness? Thank you so much!

      Delete
  7. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Blowing_a_raspberry.ogv

    I keep having this web site downloaded on my computer every time I open Backsass. I know what it means and it seems juvenile even for the neo-yankees. If i hadn't told y'all lately I don't like yankees, their feet stink and they don't love Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jessie,

      Saw that website a couple of times. Has it popped up on Cold Southern Steel? Do you have a malware program?

      Delete
    2. Jessie and George ... the fellow blowing the raspberry is my doing. To show Kevin Levin what I think of his opinions. I try to be nice, but now and then my pure mountaineer cussedness comes out, you know?

      Delete
    3. Thanks Connie. I was thinking malware.

      Delete
  8. with his Bait and Switch tactics he should sell used mobile homes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dick, Baker, et. al., have all drunk deeeeeeeply of the leftist Kool Aid. Despite their association with academia, they're not very articulate. Jimmy Dick apparently doesn't even try to articulate, beyond name calling. I've never seen him substantiate any of his name-calling and accusations about heritage folks. If he has, he hasn't done it on one of the usual flogs.

    As for "Islamaphobia" (sic) -- have you noticed these "freedom of religion" leftists never show a bit of sympathy or concern for the Christians being brutally murdered by ISIS? *Children* being beheaded? And other Muslims burned alive? Is it that the identity of the "victim group" determines whether leftist sympathy is activated? One of anonymous commenters at Xroads callously calls videos released by ISIS of their horrifyingly brutal murders "snuff films." So much for sympathy for the victims, if you're a flippin' leftist.

    I have expressed my sympathy for the victims of race-based (Klan-type) violence in various places on the Internet. I even included denunciation of it in one of my novels, through one of the characters. But of course, that doesn't jive with what they yearn to believe about me, so they ignore it.

    However, to don one's extremely selective leftist "tolerance" and criticize the critics of Islam, or anti-jihadists such as myself, is the height of hypocrisy and, even worse (deliberate?) inattention.

    ISIS kills in the name of Islam -- to spread Islam. I've never seen anyone, even the most demented heritage-hater, claim the KKK was attempting to spread Christianity. You cannot separate Islam from its long, bloody history of spreading the "faith" by violence, murder and war. But if you set that aside and try to ignore it, as leftist "multiculturalists" do, you will find that Islam simply isn't compatible with the liberties and laws of the United States.

    Take halal slaughter of animals; they cannot be rendered unconscious before their throats are and they die slowly by bleeding to death. In the USA, there are federal laws mandating humane slaughter for all animals (except birds and chickens; and it ought to be made to apply to them, as well). http://awic.nal.usda.gov/government-and-professional-resources/federal-laws/humane-methods-slaughter-act

    And this doesn't even begin to address the utterly inhumane treatment of women allowed, if not mandated, by Islamic law. Where are the feminists?

    Moreover, Islamics in the USA are already demanding that separation of church and state not apply to them -- demanding that schools and workplaces accommodate their practice of religion that Christianity would never be afforded.

    Most of the terrorists who have wrought havoc on Americans here and elsewhere, were radicalized in a mosque.

    The problem with leftists like these heritage-haters is that they can't separate people from behavior, beliefs or ideology. That's why they think if you criticize homosexual activity, you "hate gays." If you criticism feminism, you "hate women." And if you criticize Islam, you "hate Muslims."

    To the contrary, I feel concern and sympathy for Muslims, because they are the largest group victimized by their own religion. But facts don't matter to leftists. Making themselves look "good" and "tolerant" and "accepting" -- though they aren't -- so they can condemn those who they say are bad, intolerant and rejecting (though they aren't) is their motivation. It's all about creating the warm fuzzies in themselves, by any means possible, regardless of how fraudulent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent. Baker didn't post a link to your blog post or the video. Fact is he was only telling what he want everyone to believe.

      Delete
  10. In truth, Jimmy Dick has no meaningful understanding of the war, so he mindlessly parrots the emancipation mythology ad nauseum. The war between the CSA and the USA had absolutely nothing to do with slavery, and it is ludicrous to claim otherwise.
    Slavery was a perfectly legal feature of both countries, and that irrefutable fact makes their claims regarding slavery as the cause of the war a laughable farce.

    ReplyDelete
  11. At "Civil War Memory", Jimmy Dick has a nasty little post that I will rewrite, but using his language, to make it more accurate.

    Jimmy Dick is a liar.
    Jimmy Dick is a hypocrite.
    Jimy Dick has no honor whatsoever.
    Jimmy Dick is a posturing fraud.

    Kevin Levin and James Harrigan also threw the "racist" label at the Flaggers. Levin, of course, teaches at a segregated school, and Harrigan teaches economics at UVA. There are no black faculty members in the department of economics at UVA.

    What a pathetic bunch of frauds they are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. of course they will throw out the racism card. It is the only card they can play.

      Delete
  12. Jimmy Dick preaching on racism?

    Jimmy Dick lives in a Sundown Town - a place where the number of black people can be counted on one hand.

    And teaches at Moberly Area Community College.
    Here's a sampling of their faculty-
    http://www.macc.edu/rs-news/900-macc-holds-annual-facultystaff-fall-workshops

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh that is absolutely priceless. And maybe someone should ask Dick why the school website is in English. Looks like Dick's multi-cultural credentials are as shallow as his understanding of history.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Does he live in Moberly? According to the census, 91.1% of the population of Randolph County, where Moberly is located, is white, 5.8% black, and the rest Asian, hispanic, etc.

    Like soooooo many other heritage-hatin' floggers, he talks the talk but don't walk the walk. That's because they believe if they point to others and scream "Racist!" enough, they can live like racists and nobody will hold it against them. Jimmy Dick -- Racist. Hhahahahaha.

    BTW, he still owes me an apology, as he has not proved I said what he claimed I said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://allthingsliberty.com/author/jimmy-dick/

      http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/sundowntownsshow.php?state=MO

      Delete
  15. Oh, my. Knox County, where Edina is located: White alone, percent, 97.7% What a lousy hypocrite he is.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And it just gets better and better. The President of MACC is white, and so are yhe Presidents Emiriti. Oh, and all six members of the Board of Trustees are white. No doubt Dick, Mackey, Hall, Levin, and Simpson are indignant and outragedover this overt racism.

    Who thinks any of them will blog about it?

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think it is more than fair to jam another thumb in Dick's eye. I just visited his blog site and it is written in English. Evidently his Arabic, Spanish, Hindu, Korean, and Chinese friends are not welcome, inasmuch as they can't read a word posted there. Also, the background image on the site is of three white men (Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin). Tsk, Tsk. But there is more. His blog roll consists of thirty blogs, all written in English, and all hosted by whites. Once again, tsk, tsk Jimmy. You miserable fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Gentlemen thanks for the info. Keep the skeer on them.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Still waiting for Connie's statement that the Civil War was primarily caused by slavery, the Confederate soldiers were fighting for the right to own human beings and that the men at the secession conventions chose to secede over the issue of slavery.

    Y'all are hilarious. I use you as examples of how non-historians mangle history. My students think you and this crew of liars are funny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually you can't prove the war was about slavery. Post one period document that supports your statement. I say slavery had nothing to do with the war. Prove me wrong.

      Happy Thanksgiving LOL LOL LOL


      George Purvis

      Delete
    2. Mr. Dick, still waiting for you to prove this statement you made: "She" (referring to me) "and the other Neo-Know Nothings say the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery."

      I have never said the secession conventions were about anything but slavery and the Civil War was caused by anything but slavery. You haven't linked to where I said it, or provided other proof I said it. Until you do, your statement is a lie.

      Delete
  20. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp
    Oh look a fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, any honest reading of the document presents the fact that South Carolina was remonstrating the disregard of the Constitution by the northern States. Prompting South Carolina to exercise the following right described by James Madison. Thank you, Mr. Dick, for presenting South Carolina's Declaration of Causes.

      James Madison -- "Where resort can be had to no tribunal superior to the authority of the parties, the parties themselves must be the rightful judges in the last resort, whether the bargain made has been pursued or violated. The Constitution of the United States was formed by the sanction of the States, given by each in its sovereign capacity. The States, then, being parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal above their authority to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated, and consequently that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition."

      Delete
    2. "An agricultural people, whose chief interest is the export of a commodity required in every manufacturing country, our true policy is peace, and the freest trade which our necessities will permit. It is alike our interest, and that of all those to whom we would sell and from whom we would buy, that there should be the fewest practicable restrictions upon the interchange of commodities. There can be but little rivalry between ours and any manufacturing or navigating community, such as the Northeastern States of the American Union. It must follow, therefore, that a mutual interest would invite good will and kind offices. If, however, passion or the lust of dominion should cloud the judgment or inflame the ambition of those States, we must prepare to meet the emergency and to maintain, by the final arbitrament of the sword, the position which we have assumed among the nations of the earth."

      -Jefferson Davis, First Inaugural Address
      Montgomery, AL, February 18, 1861

      Delete
    3. "Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: the right of a State to govern itself; and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted."

      Ok so point out exactly where this documents declares war. The ball is back in your court.

      Secession was not illegal.

      Delete
  21. Now if "fighting for slavery" is the issue, it could rightly be said the United in fighting to preserve the union was fighting for the institution since it was legal.

    Prove me wrong Jimmy

    ReplyDelete
  22. So Jimmy Dick is nothing but a drive by poster??? Jimmy where are you? Are you hiding behind Mackey, and Simpson???

    George Purvis

    ReplyDelete
  23. Jimmy-
    "I made sure to point out your ignorance to my class yesterday....The class had a nice laugh....etc etc"

    Of course those sentiments were perfectly sincere...
    ...from a captive audience subject to Mr. Jimmy giving them a passing or failing grade.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Another flogger blog-
    http://amoregeneraldiffusionofknowledge.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome, but monitored.