When the Southern states seceded, the north experienced a cultural "woman-scorned" syndrome. They went mad, mindless with fury. They invaded not to free slaves, not even to preserve the union, really, but to indiscriminately destroy. That was why they burned dozens of towns, shelled others where there were lots of civilians but no military presence or significance. That was why they stole from civilians, burned houses, barns, crops in the field, killed livestock, even robbed graves. Their "war" was barbarous. Many of them were savages.
When it was over, the South lay in utter ruin, and even that wasn't enough for the bloodthirsty haters. They had to ensure that prosperity wouldn't return to the South for generations. (How they did that is way too lengthy a discussion for a couple of paragraphs, or even a whole blog post.)
But seeing what they had done in the sobering light of "peace" preyed upon them, because, you see, these righteous yankees -- they were people who thought they were God's gift to the world, a shining city on a hill.... And, as hilarious as it is, they still think that today.
There was no denying the savagery and barbarism they had committed against people who didn't deserve it; the whole world could see it. So they set out to retroactively MAKE Southerners DESERVE the savage barbarism done to them. Southerners were evil slavers. Slavery was mankind's greatest evil, and Southerners were the planet's most diabolical practitioners of it. Those evil people even continued mistreating their slaves after they were free! Nothing else, and nobody else, could come close to the devilish evil of the South. The Third Reich with its gas chambers, the Soviet Union with its torture and murder in the gulags ... these folks couldn't TOUCH the Confederates for diabolical evil.
Never mind that the Nazis and the Bolsheviks murdered MILLIONS of civilians -- their own citizens. Never mind that in the four years the Confederacy existed, the slave population increased by about 900,000, which is roughly the same rate of growth as the free population of the USA as determined by the 1860 and 1870 census. (And remember, 700,000 or more Americans and Confederates died in the war, or because of it.) That doesn't fit the hate-narrative, so it is ignored. Or resisted.
The ongoing evilization of Southern white folks is for the purpose of justifying the unjustifiable wrong done to them by the union, which -- and here's the important thing -- was no better. The union was just as sin-ridden as Southerners. Southerners kept slaves? Northerners shipped them and when the shipping was outlawed they SMUGGLED them. So they not only wrongly evilized Southerners -- they clothed themselves in phony righteousness ("We freed the slaves! We cared about Jim-Crowed blacks!")
Sorry, yankees. You don't get to wade nostril-deep into slavery and the slave trade for generations... you don't get to continue smuggling slaves for generations after the trade is outlawed ... you don't get to wallow in the riches you made from your own practice of slavery... you don't get to wallow in the riches you made off somebody else's slaves... you don't get to build your your industry and infrastructure on slave-grown cotton -- and then become pure and righteous in just few decades because you abolished slavery and sold your slaves to get rid of your states' black populations (particularly when you continued to wallow in your anti-black racism).
The guilt, wickedness and infamy of your deep involvement in slavery was still with you when you invaded the South to kill innocent Southerners. Your army stank of it, along with the stench of staggering hypocrisy. You still do, because involvement with slavery and racism as deep, as pervasive, as ugly and as lengthy as yours doesn't wear off that quickly or easily.
The removal of the flags and monuments, and the continual demonization of Southerners, past and present, in the government, the press and popular culture, are all explained by this addiction that has hold of the intellecual descendants of the blue-clad barbarians -- the obsession, the fever, to justify their unjustifiable war on people who did not deserve it, and their ongoing evilization and oppression of those people for generations afterward.
And remember, continuing to lie about those you made war on, and their descendants and supporters, will not make that nasty wiff of guilt and hypocrisy dissipate -- quite the opposite. You are stuck with it. Own it.
Folks, if you want to see what I'm talking about, read any of Kevin Levin's blog posts about the Virginia Flaggers and his evilization of them in his essay for the Daily Beast. Read also any of the sanctimonious, highly subjective, often false comments by Andy Hall. Many others participate in the ongoing hate-war against Southerners, but Kevin and Andy are superb models of it.
Once again Connie, you show to the few readers you have that you don't have a clue about history.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't -- and you can't -- refute anything I said in my blog post.
DeletePeople, this comment by Corey is no longer showing in the "Awaiting moderation" list of my blog; it is showing on the "Published Comments" list, but it is not showing here, so I am pasting it below. Then I'm going to blow it out of the water.
ReplyDelete========
Secession led to war...how can the south say it was invaded when it fired the first shot...you ancestors started it...Mine simple finished it. It wasn't their flippin' cause? Mississippi claims it right out the door in it causes of secession... "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery --- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.
Secession did not have to lead to war. The union chose to respond to secession with invasion and violence. The South defended itself. You think Southerners should have just laid down and let themselve be bayoneted by your murderous ancestor?
ReplyDelete"....how can the south say it was invaded when it fired the first shot..."
Corey, you're supposed ot be an educator, so quit playing dumb. The South fired shots AT THE INVADERS.
Let me type it again, real slow so you can get it. THEY. FIRED. AT. THE. IN. VA. DERS.. The shots were fired in response to the initial aggression by Major Anderson -- moving his troops from Moultrie to Sumter and sending dispatches north that threatened Charleston, dispatches that he knew would intercepted and read in Charleston and correctly interpreted as aggression. Anderson started the war.
Your ancestors were part of an invading army of brutes and barbarians who had no business even being in the South. The Confederacy did not threaten their states, communities and families. There were no plans and no desire by the South to send a marauding army into Illinois and Ohio and Massachusetts and do to them what you savage ancestors did to the South.
Corey, I know and you know that I've never denied that keeping slavery was one of the main reasons for secession in some states, so your reference to Mississippi is superfluous. It's interesting, though, that after stating the importance of slavery right up front, the document goes on to list quite a few other reasons why they are seceding. Mississippi's Declaration of Causes of Secession contains 710 words. You quoted 38 of them; you didn't quote the remainder, or even mention that they existed. You are presenting the first sentence as if it's the total and only reason for secession. You are lying by omission. (Focusing on a portion and pretending it is the whole in order to not acknowledge something you don't want to acknowledge, is a hallmark of leftist debate.)
There's more history in what I say than in what you say. Your arguments aren't about history at all; your arguments are about demonizing Southerners, past and present, feeding your hatred, and and fomenting the same hatred for them/us in others.
"keeping slavery was one of the main reasons for secession"
DeleteI think the Abolitionist's threats of doing to the South, what had been done to Haiti during the French Revolution, had a lot more to do with it,too. Rather than just a simple loss of income. Saying you want to slaughter the entire population of the South and turn the land over for colonisation and resettlement by Northerners,is hardly helpful. Assuming that those people actually cared about the welfare and wellbeing of Blacks. And not about gaining an advantage over their political enemies in the South.
Moving on; Corey can't just come out and say that he believes that Southern secession was immoral because of slavery. He's being obtuse. At ant rate, he's not denying secession, he's denying it's moral legitimacy in this particular instance. He's appealing to a "higher morality" that just doesn't exist, and isn't recognised by any court of record. Many an SJW has found out that it's not a defence, and that morality and law aren't the same thing. That's why they're in jail,to their consternation.
Furthermore,the men who formed the CSA were accomplished and experienced lawyers,governors and state and national legislators. They knew what legal and Constitutional grounds, not moral, which don't apply,that they stood on.
Finally,one of the chief complaints of the North was that Southern statesmen were using the Constitution as a shield. Which begs these questions: As shield?, A shield against what? Which begs this more important question:
Why should Southerners have had to defend themselves politically, legally and finally, militarily against their supposed "fellow Americans" in the Northern States?
Most people can't answer this question, or if they try to, without appealing to the theory of Northern supremacy, pertaining to supra rights and authority in the Union®. Or to "higher morality." Which are not adequate answers at best, or dodges and misdirections at worst.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWay to repeat known falsehoods there James. There were claims of fires being started in Texas by abolitionists...come to find out it was started by a meteorite...lol...silly people.
DeleteCorey, are you familiar with the concepts, singular and plural? You say, "There were claims of fires..." FIRES is plural. That means more than one. Then you say, "...it was started by a meteorite..." IT is singular. A is singular. So one fire was caused by one meteorite. What (or who) started all the others?
DeleteTEXAS TROUBLES. The Texas slave panic of 1860-often called "the Texas Troubles" by the press-was the most serious happening of its kind in the South since the Nat Turner insurrection of 1831. Though generally less emphasized by historians than the more celebrated earlier event, the Texas panic of 1860 may have been at least as important, for it helped prepare Texans and other Southerners to leave the Union. The Texas Troubles broke out in the aftermath of a series of fires in North Texas on July 8, 1860. The most serious of these destroyed most of the downtown section of the small town of Dallas. In addition, about half of the town square in Denton burned, and fire razed a store in Pilot Point. At first, the leaders of the affected communities attributed the fires to a combination of the exceedingly hot summer (it was reportedly as hot as 110 degrees in Dallas on the afternoon of the fire) and the introduction into the stores of the new and volatile phosphorous matches. Indeed, subsequent experience with "prairie matches" in Denton satisfied the citizens of that town that spontaneous combustion was the probable cause of the fire there. In Dallas, where there had been excitement the previous year over the whipping and expulsion of two allegedly abolitionist (see ABOLITION) Methodist ministers, certain white leaders detected a more sinister origin to the area's fires. Four days after the fire, Charles R. Pryor, the young editor of the Dallas Herald, wrote a sensational letter to John F. Marshall, editor of the Austin State Gazette and chairman of the state Democratic party, stating that "certain negroes" had been interrogated and had revealed a widespread abolitionist plot "to devastate, with fire and assassination, the whole of Northern Texas...." The "Abolition preachers" whom Dallas had expelled the previous year allegedly had sought their revenge by recruiting blacks and abolitionist whites to wreak fiery and bloody vengeance upon the whites of the region. Pryor wrote similar letters to L. C. DeLisle, editor of the Bonham Era, and Edward Hopkins Cushing, editor of the Houston Telegraph (see TELEGRAPH AND TEXAS REGISTER), warning that the conspiracy, far from being confined to the Dallas area, extended over the whole state. Calling the conspiracy "a regular invasion, and a real war," Pryor admonished DeLisle: "You...are in as much danger as we are. Be on your guard, and make these facts known by issuing extras to be sent in every direction. All business has ceased, and the country is terribly excited--
DeleteRead the rest at online Handbook of Texas History.
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/vetbr
Some more from The Handbook of Texas History Online:
DeleteBEWLEY, ANTHONY
By Donald E. Reynolds:
BEWLEY, ANTHONY (1804–1860).
Anthony Bewley, abolitionist Methodist minister, was born on May 22, 1804, in Tennessee, the son of John Bewley, a Methodist preacher. While still a young man he decided to enter the ministry. From 1829 to 1834 he served the Methodist Church as a circuit-riding member of the Holston Conference of Virginia. Around 1834 he married Jane Winton of Roane County, Tennessee. They had five sons and three daughters. In 1837 the Bewleys moved to Polk County, Missouri, and six years later Bewley resumed his circuit-riding ministry and joined the Missouri Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church. When the church divided over the issue of slavery in 1845, the Missouri Conference voted to join the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. Bewley was among the antislavery members of the conference who refused to accept this decision and chose instead to remain in what they considered to be the true Methodist Church. By 1848 these Methodists had reorganized into the Missouri Conference of the Northern Church, though many still referred to themselves simply as members of the Methodist Episcopal Church.
By 1858, after serving for ten years in Northern Arkansas, Texas, and Missouri, Bewley had moved his family to Johnson County, Texas, and established a mission sixteen miles south of Fort Worth. Although he was considered to be weak on the slavery issue by some northern Methodists, his antislavery views were threatening to southerners. Thus, when vigilance committees alleged in the summer of 1860 that there was a widespread abolitionist plot to burn Texas towns and murder their citizens, suspicion immediately fell upon Bewley and other outspoken critics of slavery (see TEXAS TROUBLES). Special attention was focused on Bewley because of an incendiary letter, dated July 3, 1860, addressed to a Rev. William Bewley and supposedly written by a fellow abolitionist, William H. Bailey. Many argued that the letter, which urged Bewley to continue with his work in helping to free Texas from slavery, was a forgery. The letter was widely published, however, and taken by others as evidence of Bewley's involvement with the John Brownites in Texas.
Recognizing the danger, Bewley left for Kansas in mid-July with part of his family. En route he stopped for eleven days in Indian Territory to wait for the remainder of his family and later visited with friends in Benton County, Arkansas. On September 3, 1860, a Texas posse caught up with him near Cassville, Missouri. His captors returned him to Fort Worth on September 13. Late that night vigilantes seized Bewley and delivered him into the hands of a waiting lynch mob. His body was allowed to hang until the next day, when he was buried in a shallow grave. Three weeks later his bones were unearthed, stripped of their remaining flesh, and placed on top of Ephraim Daggett's storehouse, where children made a habit of playing with them. After Bewley's death the Northern Methodists ended their activities in Texas.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Dictionary of American Biography. Charles Elliott, South-Western Methodism: A History of the M. E. Church in the South-West, from 1844 to 1864 (Cincinnati: Poe and Hitchcock, 1868). Macum Phelan, History of Early Methodism in Texas, 1817–1866 (Nashville: Cokesbury, 1924); A History of the Expansion of Methodism in Texas, 1867–1902 (Dallas: Mathis, Van Nort, 1937).
Even More from The Handbook.
DeleteABOLITION
By Claude Elliott:
ABOLITION. Abolition sentiment was never significant in Texas, although antebellum Texans often expressed fear concerning its presence. There were Unionists in Texas, but few, if any, were abolitionists, though many had strayed away from solid Southern sentiment enough to wonder whether slavery did not operate to retard Southern progress. At times, particularly in 1860, during the so-called Texas Troubles, public excitement reached an advanced stage of hysteria in contemplating the presence of abolitionists.
{Fires of unknown origin destroyed large parts of Dallas, Denton, Kaufman, Waxahachie, and other North Texas towns. Rumors spread that the fires were started by abolitionists to demoralize the people in preparation for a slave uprising.}
Gruesome stories of slave insurrections were circulated, always exaggerated or wholly without foundation, as were tales of wholesale poisonings, which seem to have been the product almost entirely of fertile imaginations. The Texas press in particular played an important role in promoting the fears of an abolitionist-led uprising. Charles Pryor, editor of the Dallas Herald, in a letter printed by the Texas State Gazette in July of 1860 declared: "It was determined by certain abolitionist preachers, who were expelled from the country last year, to devastate, with fire and assassination, the whole of Northern Texas, and when it was reduced to a helpless condition, a general revolt of slaves, aided by the white men of the North in our midst, was to come off on the day of election in August." Such stories were picked up and carried by papers around the state and throughout the South.
{Several scholars have argued that at least some of the events related to the Texas Troubles were the result of an organized though ineffective plot, but conclusive evidence is lacking.}
To offset these dangers, whether real or imaginary, vigilance committees were organized to ferret out offenders and administer proper punishment. The result was that justice through regular channels disappeared at times and was replaced by mob action. Three blacks were hanged in Dallas in the interest of public safety. A white man in Fort Worth accused of tampering with slaves was also put to death. The most definitive charge against any one of them, as reported to the press, was that "he had prowled about the country." Texans often dealt harshly with Mexicans as well, fearing that they encouraged unrest among slaves. In 1856 the editor of the San Antonio Zeitung was threatened with a coat of tar and feathers for printing criticisms of slavery. Three years later, Northern Methodists in conference at Bonham made derogatory remarks about slavery and slaveowners and were immediately threatened by intolerant inhabitants. Hostility towards Northern Methodists reached a peak in August 1860 with the lynching of Rev. Anthony Bewley, an ordained missionary suspected of being an abolitionist and slave agitator. A few people in antebellum Texas criticized slavery, but there were few outright abolitionists.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Walter L. Buenger, Secession and the Union in Texas (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1984). Randolph B. Campbell, An Empire for Slavery: The Peculiar Institution in Texas, 1821–1865 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1989). Wesley Norton, "The Methodist Episcopal Church and the Civil Disturbances in North Texas in 1859 and 1860," Southwestern Historical Quarterly 68 (January 1965). Frank H. Smyrl, Unionism, Abolitionism, and Vigilantism in Texas, 1856–1865 (M.A. thesis, University of Texas, 1961). William W. White, "The Texas Slave Insurrection of 1860," Southwestern Historical Quarterly 52 (January 1949).
From the Handbook of Texas.
DeleteDelta County.
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hcd05
"the most publicized county event of the decade occurred on May 19, 1910, when a 500-pound meteorite hit the earth near Charleston during the passage of Halley's Comet."
"Way to repeat known falsehoods there James."
DeleteKnown, apparently, only to you Corey.
Excerpted from The Handbook of Texas History Online.
Deletehttps://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/jcs02
The bloodiest insurrection episode, sometimes called the Texas Troubles, occurred in the intense political climate of 1860.
{In July a series of unexplained fires in Dallas, Denton, and other parts of North Texas encouraged again the formation of vigilance committees.}
These groups conducted interrogations that spread terror in the slave quarters and implicated itinerant ministers as the insurrection leaders. The general rebellion expected on election day, August 6, did not occur, but wildly exaggerated reporting spread panic through most northern and a few central Texas counties. Ultimately about ten reputed abolitionists and probably half that many slaves reportedly died at the hands of frontier justice between July and September. The expectation of a black revolt persisted even after the Civil War. Described by one historian as a "drama of the imagination," this last scare swept through the Gulf South in the summer of 1865 and reached East Texas in the fall. Even early scoffers came to accept the danger as Christmas day, the day of the expected uprising, approached, but the holidays passed without a rising.
These scares followed a consistent pattern. All broke out when Texans felt strong outside political or military pressure and became apprehensive about internal enemies of slavery. In no instance did an organized body of slaves shed white blood, though vigilantes did.
{Some genuinely suspicious circumstances kindled the crises; the conflagrations of July 8, 1860, for instance, began in different towns at approximately the same hour, a fact pointing to arson.}
Occasionally vigilantes found slaves in possession of arms. Testimonials regarding the slaves' intention of revolting in 1835 came from fairly reliable military sources. Otherwise, the evidence suggests that the incidents grew out of emotional tensions and mob actions. Vigilantes often obtained "confessions" through intimidation. Newspapers reported secondhand and contradictory information, based sometimes on accounts supplied by members of mobs. ---->
"come to find out it was started by a meteorite."
DeleteI don't know where you found it,Corey, but I can't find a reference to any meteorite causing a fire in North Texas, in 1860.
I found this, though;
Delta County.
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hcd05
"the most publicized county event of the decade occurred on May 19, 1910, when a 500-pound meteorite hit the earth near Charleston during the passage of Halley's Comet."
No indication it started a fire in 1910, much less one separated by 84 miles and 50 years, in Dallas and Denton.
James, read here...
Deletehttps://books.google.com/books?id=GXfGuNAvm7AC&pg=PA229&lpg=PA229&dq=Battle+Cry+of+freedom+and+fires+in+texas&source=bl&ots=R2ssCL63V2&sig=2ys_rnbgp_GcubFDFGHk5GbnBro&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiflZHjhaHZAhWi7YMKHTWhA30Q6AEIUTAG#v=onepage&q=Battle%20Cry%20of%20freedom%20and%20fires%20in%20texas&f=false
It doesn't say anything the Texas Historical Association's Handbook of Texas History- Online doesn't. The poisoning of wells and caches of arms were rumours. The fires were real. So were the hangings and assaults on citizens by mobs.
DeleteTexas State Archives and Library Commission.
Deletehttps://www.tsl.texas.gov/exhibits/civilwar/trouble.html
I was half asleep late one night, when a documentary on these events came on KERA13, the PBS station out of Dallas. I recall that they said that documents were seized in Denton, from associates of John Brown, which contained maps and plans for widespread guerilla actions against North Texas. However, I can't find any proof of this. Therefore, I'll take it with a grain of salt until proven otherwise.
Dallas Observer: 2010
Deletehttp://www.dallasobserver.com/news/150-years-later-a-reminder-of-the-texas-troubles-that-began-with-a-downtown-fire-7149735
150 Years Later, a Reminder of the "Texas Troubles" That Began With a Downtown Fire
In the new issue of the Texas Observer, Julia Barton reminds: This year marks the 150th anniversary of the so-called Texas Troubles, which began when much of downtown Dallas caught fire on a brutally hot July afternoon. Many thought the inferno, which began at downtown drugstore, was due to scorching temperatures igniting phosphorous matches; but Charles Pryor, editor of the torched Dallas Herald, insisted, without proof, that the blaze was part of an abolitionist plot "to devastate, with fire and assassination, the whole of Northern Texas." Which led, ultimately, to the hanging of three slaves on the banks of the Trinity River.
Some historians -- among them University of North Texas's Randolph Campbell, author of An Empire for Slavery: The Peculiar Institution in Texas, 1821-1865
-- insist the blaze should have been blamed on those so-called "prairie matches," which could and often would ignite upon the occasion of nothing more than a hot breeze. Barton has found others who would insist, no, the fires were indeed sparked by revolt:
One group does hold fast to the idea that some kind of uprising took place: descendants of the slaves themselves. Donald Payton's ancestors worked under Crill B. Miller, who owned a farm outside Dallas that caught on fire a few days after the town burned. When Payton, an amateur historian, first read that members of his extended family were implicated in the fire, he felt certain there was a plot. "The slaves weren't as naïve as the movies make them. They heard and saw things like everybody else did," Payton said of the turbulent times after the raid on Harpers Ferry. "I just don't think it was an accident."
Payton tells his version of the story every year to a huge reunion of the Miller family that gathers around July 8 on the former slaves' land in Oak Cliff. "I always want people to be conscious that our struggle to be free did not start or did not stop with Martin Luther King," he says. "We took freedom in hand, and that's a good feeling."
Give them a call, Corey. Since you're a history teacher, they'll be more than glad to help you out.
DeleteDallas Historical Society
Telephone: 214.421.4500
Fax: 214.421.7500
Tarrant County Historical Society Inc
(817) 737-0977
Denton Public Library. Denton, Tx
(940) 349-8752
Kaufman County Library
3790 S. Houston St.
Kaufman, Texas 75142
Phone: (972) 932-6222 Fax: (972) 932-068
Texas State Historical Association
Brett Derbes
Managing Editor, Handbook of Texas
Laurie E. Jasinski
Research Editor, Handbook of Texas
Matt Abigail
Assistant Editor, Handbook of Texas
Texas State Historical Association
3001 Lake Austin Blvd.
Suite 3.116
Austin, TX 78703
(512) 471-2600
(512) 473-8691 (fax)
Texas State Library and Archives Commission - Austin
Lorenzo de Zavala State Archives and Library Building
Physical address: 1201 Brazos St., Austin, TX 78701
Mailing address: P.O. Box 12927, Austin, TX 78711-2927
phone: (512) 463-5455
e-mail: info@tsl.texas.gov
Hours: Mon. - Fri., 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Like I said Cory is an idiot.
ReplyDeleteThe slave population increased by 900,000? from 4 million to almost 5 million? in 4 years?
ReplyDeleteWell, it wasn't slave population in 1870 -- it was the black population, but yeah, according to census figures, that was the increase. There were blacks in 1860 who were not slaves, but counting them would not have increased the first number very much.
ReplyDeleteSlave population 1860
3,953,761
Black population 1870
4,880,009
926,247 increase
https://deadconfederates.com/2018/03/17/virginia-flaggers-salute-yankee-soldiers/#comment-52650
ReplyDeleteI see the Virginia Flaggers are keeping up their research skills...how pathetic.
And you are still clinging to the coat-tails of hate-bloggers, but not blogging yourself.
DeleteAndy is just hilarious, though, isn't he? How many dozens -- hundreds -- of pictures have the Flaggers posted that aren't worthy of a hate-comment. But as soon as one goes up, he's all over it like ... well, like white on rice. Does he comb through their blog and Facebook everyday looking for something he can get his jollies over? Pathetic. Considering how seldom he finds anything in the MOUNTAIN of material available for him to look through, I'd say the Flaggers are quite well acquainted with history. And they don't use it for a vehicle of stirring up ridicule and hatred like you, Andy, Levin, etc. Face it; the Flaggers are morally superior to the lot of you.
Corey, you are a rotten-hearted hater, you know it? One person, ONE PERSON, not "flaggers" posted that image. How is it that you got through college and got a job teaching without knowing how to COUNT? Who did you have to pay to get your job? They don't have very high standards for teachers at Putt-man County High School, do they?
ReplyDeleteGo away. Don't come back until you develop some human decency. No, don't come back even then. Don't come back at all.
Cory you are an idiot and my invitation stands.
ReplyDelete