On respect for flags...

The furor over the decision of the state of Texas to prohibit the issuing of license plates for the Sons of Confederate Veterans (the so-called "Confederate flag license plate"), combined with Veterans Day observance, has given me pause to think.

Not allowed for a Confederate flag. Okay for Old Glory.

Isn't it odd that people who mm-mm-mm over the trivialization of the Confederate flag (see HERE, HERE and HERE) virtually ignore the trivialization of the U.S. flag -- and it a flag of sovereignty -- like the examples at the end of this commentary?

Why do you suppose that is? Well, it's not hard to figure out. The purpose of criticizing trivialization of the Confederate flags is, quite simply, demonization -- and the people who do it absolutely LUST after demonizing Confederate heritage advocates in specific, and white Southerners in general. They have NO desire whatever to demonize U.S. Americans, who are no less guilty of the same things -- and sometimes worse things.

F'rinstance, Corey Meyer posts repeatedly about how the SCV doesn't properly honor the Confederate Flag but makes a LOT of illogical, off-the-wall ass-umptions in order to do so. HERE, he writes, "I see the SCV have place the world’s largest confederate rag along the interstate down in Florida, and I wonder if this was really about heritage or not? When the SCV placed this flag here do you think they had the following two images in mind as well? For the Neo-Confederates to hold the rebel rag so dear to their heart, I must say that, well no pun intended, to put the rebel rag symbol on a pair of testicles takes balls!!"


...

Pardon me for pointing it out, but it's a stupid question. Why would they have these two images in mind, just because you do? Yes, Corey YOU are the one who has these two images in mind -- that's obvious by your inclusion of them on your blog -- but because YOU do, don't imagine every one else does.

Now, a quick question for YOU. When you put that picture with the big-arse American flag front and center on your blog, did you have the following two images in mind?

...

Besides, what has putting a Confederate flag motif on a pair of plastic truck testicles got to do with "neo-Confederates"? Are you implying that neoConfederates did this? Where is your proof? Just tell us WHO did it, and how you know. Otherwise, you owe a lot of people an apology -- though I'm sure hell will freeze over first.

Look, when you and Kevin Levin and Brooks Simpson and Andy Hall and all your myrmidons take on the responsibility for policing the trivialization and trashing of the U.S. Flag, THEN you might have a case for holding the SCV, or Southern Heritage advocates, responsible for policing the trivialization and trashing of the Confederate flag. Until you do, you are outting yourselves as hypocrites, liars and demonizers ... not to mention truly bad examples of -- and unfortunate excuses for -- Americans...

Dear Readers, when you scroll through the images below, keep in mind these words from the U.S. Code. (The "flag" referenced is, of course, the flag of the United States... Old Glory ... the Stars and Stripes....)

TITLE 4 - FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES
CHAPTER 1 - THE FLAG

The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free.

The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.

The flag should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, carrying, or delivering anything.

The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown.

No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations.

The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.

Are we to assume, Corey, that the SUV or any other patriotic Americans have the stuff below in mind when they run a U.S. flag up a pole somewhere?

...

Reckon the patriotic pair above will need one of these before the night's over?

Such honor to Old Glory!

...

At least it's colorful!

Hey! A flag you can kick around, Corey...

Might wanna wear one of these while your doing it. Website sez, "Great for 4th of July parades and patriotic events." (Like presidential candidate debates, maybe?)

How about Flag paper plates, so you can smear Old Glory with food goo, and then toss it in the nearest dumpster?

Just what every red-blooded, pro-American, anti-Confederate blogger needs to be truly patriotic! An American flag doo rag!

Ooooh, gonna need a super gonzo Pledge Fabric Sweeper For Pet Hair to keep Fido's American Flag Pet Bed up to U.S. Code standards!

Oops, Corey! Call Christina quick -- tell her the U.S. Code sez No carrying things in flags!

Aw, how cute! American flag-motif diapers for little American Patriots behinds... Reckon Christina stocked up on these lofty symbols of American Flag respect?

Reckon our blogger friends have one of these in their blog offices?

Wanna WEAR the flag? U.S. Code is easy to ignore, when flag clothes are THIS goodlookin', huh, antiConfederate blogger fellers?
Love them "Patriotic polar fleece pants", don'chu?

More patriotic American flag junk that critics of the Confederate flag will surely dig, here: American Flag Wall of Shame

Gentlemen, methinks you need to get your own house in order before you start criticizing others'. Remember ... pots and kettles, motes and beams, and all that.

Interesting (Repeat) Visitors

I don't pay a lot of attention to the hit counter/visitor log for 180 Degrees True South. I'm more interested in visits to ConnieChastain.com and Word Slinger Boutique. But I do check it every so often. I'm gratified by the occasional visit from a .mil domain, and I often wonder whether the Pentagon is keepin' and eye on me, or whether some Southern soldier, far away from home, visits to read a little about his heritage.

The hits from the State Department are a bit more intriguing. Why on earth...? I mean, I don't even own a passport....

But recently, doing a quick check of my visitor log, I noticed something really, really interesting. Here are the entries that caught my eye the past two days, from a screen grab of my visitor log. I've had to truncate some of the info and scrunch them up a little...





I wonder who's located in Gilbert, Arizona, and other locations in and around Phoenix... where the University of Arizona's various campuses are located... I've received visits from IP addresses in Scottsdale and Tempe, too... Hmmmm...

And who in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would be interested in little ol' moi's blog enough to visit ... 107 times! (West Roxbury, huh? Seems like I've read about that place not too long ago... Oh, yeah, I remember: http://cwmemory.com/2011/07/09/civil-war-memory-in-my-backyard/

But the most mystifying are the visits from two IP addresses in Galveston, Texas.... 108 visits from 98.196.150.124 and 146 from 129.109.21.67 (apparently an IP address of the University of Texas)...

So, does this mean One-Eighty is developing a ... following? Or what? LOL!

Playin' the Victim Card

High drammer, as my Daddy used to say.  Pore widdle Keffin....

KEVIN'S VICTIM CARD POST

I don't mind linking to his blog, or Perfesser Simpson's or Corey's. I don't mind folks seeing for themselves what those people are up to.... I pretty much don't pay attention to Andy anymore, since he's the only one who's stuck by his statement to ignore us. (The only caution I'd have about his Dead Confederates blog is to knock back some No-Doz or Vivarin a half-hour or so before you visit.)  As I recall, Levin didn't make such a statement, Perfesser Simpson did, and broke it in a matter of days -- or was it hours?  Corey held out the longest before his obsession with us Lost Causers and Mechanized Cavalry babes broke through and made it onto his blog screen....

_________________________________________________

Well it proves one thing ...   It proves that you wealthy college
boys don't have education enough to admit when you're wrong.

                                                                 Sam Quint, Jaws

Unintended Humor (from the Humor Impaired)

So I make up this little poll while I'm waiting for content to upload to another of my websites...   I post it between 10 and 11 Tuesday morning. Blogspot always puts the wrong time on my blog entries -- not sure why, because the clock on my computer has the correct time.
 
At any rate, something like about three hours after I posted the poll, Perfesser Simpson is bloggin' about it (and he calls ME obsessed, LOL!)

Vote Early, Vote Often …. But Vote!

For those of you who don’t like Kevin Levin, here’s the poll you’ve all been waiting to see, prepared by a blogger whose obsession with other bloggers is legendary, judging from the contents of her blog.

Maybe now that some folks have gotten that out of their system, we can move on.
http://cwcrossroads.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/vote-early-vote-often-but-vote/#comments

Why is humor soooo much funnier when it comes from the humor impaired?  I mean, Perfesser, you could move on regardless of what I do or don't do.  You realize that, don't you?  Unless you're acknowledging that I have some ... power ... some  hold ... over whether you, or your blog, or your comment thread satellites, can move on....?
 
Speaking of comment threads, there are only four following the Perfesser's post as of this writing, but they're even funnier than the original “Vote Early, Vote Often …. But Vote!” post itself!  Take a gander:

Charles Persinger
November 1, 2011 @ 1:13 pm

I see nobody has participated in the poll as of yet—i guess when her blog only has a handful of followers there isn’t much participation.

Wow!  Nobody has participated in the first three hours of a poll that will be online until December 31? Oh, woe is me!

Brooks D. Simpson
November 1, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

When I visited to get the link, a grand total of thirteen people (one for each star on the CSA flag) had voted. You have to poke around the poll to discover that.

So, twenty-seven minutes after Charlie posts, Perfesser Simpson suddenly finds there have been thirteen respondants. Whoops.  I guess being able to count is what separates the perfessers from the sycophant comment-posters...  The perfesser continues: 

I think it’s an “unfortunate circumstance” that the poll’s results are not readily visible without a bit of poking around. :) That said … Kevin gets his own poll! Rats! :)*

  And Charlie responds: 

Charles Persinger
November 1, 2011 @ 2:13 pm
 
I should have looked harder but I’m afraid i will lose brain cells if i stay to long.

Whew!  Good thing he didn't hang around.  Doesn't look like he has a whole lot of brain cells to lose! 

James F. Epperson
November 1, 2011 @ 3:56 pm
 
This woman keeps finding ways to exceed herself …

  Why thank you, sir.
 
*(More about the "unfortunate circumstance" reference here:  http://members.cox.net/180dts/CensoredReplies.html)

Censored Replies Now Visible

Click the graphic below to read 'em.

Use your browser's BACK button to return here.

Vote in the Poll!

Poll------------------------------------------------------------------------->

Who does Kevin Levin love bashing the most? There are no right and wrong answers -- this is an opinion poll only. (More commentary to come later... I'm busy right now.)

Credit Where Credit is Due

Yesterday (October 14) I received the following private message through Facebook's message service:

Connie...

Someone passed this link onto me today....

http://xxxxx/xxxxxxx/xxxxx.html

Not quite sure what it all is, but the top seemed like it had some private information. Please advise me what to do with this, I honestly do not want to be recieving your personal information online and I will try to stop the person(s) from passing this around.

Corey

The URL was to my home page, an html page with a table of three rows and eight columns filled with live links (169 of them). These links are the quickest way for me to access websites I visit most frequently -- quicker, even, than using a browser's dropdown favorites/bookmarks menu.

Normally, the links page resides on my C: drive and loads automatically as the home page of whatever browser I'm using -- most often, IE or Firefox. (I also use Opera and Chrome to view the webpages I design for Word Slinger Boutique customers, but I rarely use them for my own browsing.)

Anyhoo, for the past several weeks, I've experienced much grief with my computers, as I've written about a couple of places. Because the disk drives on both machines were corrupted and/or unreliable, about three weeks ago I uploaded my home page/links page to private webspace provided by my ISP, so I would have access to it regardless of what computer I was using.

When our machines finally got stable enough to use fairly normally, I started using the home page on my C: drive again and used the one on my ISP's server only when my browsers were were being difficult ("Webpage cannot be displayed.") rather than precipitating a blue-screen crash. As the systems stabilized, the misbhaving occurred less frequently and, frankly, I forgot about the page being on my ISP's server.

When I got Corey's message, I hafta tell you, I flew into a bit of a tizzy. There was indeed private info (log-on info) to a couple of very important websites. I immediately deleted the page from my ISP's server and changed the log-ons at the websites.

Since Corey is a member of the loyal opposition, I assumed someone from his circle sent him the URL to my page. Right now, I am in the crosshairs at Crossroads, so I asked Professor Simpson if he was the one who sent the link to Corey. In reply, Andy Hall posted on the comment thread to explain to me that when I clicked one of those links, it would send the URL of my page to the site I was visiting, so likely my personal page had been sent to any number of sites and blogs. Anyone checking their hit log could see a live link, click it and go to my page. Of course, I knew this, but it didn't occur to me because I normally browse using my home page on my C: drive, which cannot be accessed that way.

Andy was right -- it's my doing, and my responsibility, that the URL went to people's visitor logs; but I was mainly curious about who would email the link around. Corey ain't sayin', which is certainly his prerogative, so I likely won't find out who it was.

In any case, through my own oversight, because of my almost total focus on these misbehaving machines, very sensitive personal, private information (mine and my husband's) is now floating around out in cyberspace. The log-ons are no longer functional, but they would be -- for no telling how long -- if Corey had not notified me.

So Corey, we may be on opposite sides of the Civil War, and we may irritate the hell out of each other, and frankly, I don't have a lot of patience with some folks in your cyber-circle, but I have to tell, I do appreciate what you've done. My gratitude is plentiful and sincere.

Thank you, sir.

Answering the Anti-Confederate Bloggers

At one time, I was amazed by the interest two academic Civil War bloggers show in an anonymous social networking group and other discussion/chat groups on the internet.

You see, at some point in my life, I had acquired the notion that academics sat in their ivory towers thinking lofty thoughts, far above the rest of us common folk with our conventions and contentions...

Boy, was I wrong. I've learned they can be as petty and thin-skinned as any plebian down here on the sidewalk of life.

Before my recent computer crashes and resultant time lost online, I had planned to address some posts and comments made by these guys and their myrmidons, but ... time moves on, and there's a whole new crop of lies, half-truths, idiocy and egoism -- and an infrequent honest question -- to address...

Stay tuned. I may or may not post what I'm replying to. If you get curious, consult the Index below and follow the links to the blog posts in question. My comments, replies and observations are in no particular order -- just whatever I feel like addressing at any given time.

I'll start here with some comments to/for/from/about Crossroads:

Professor Simpson, Connie is my given name. Chastain is my maiden name (also my author name). Have you ever heard of the convention in western culture of women who marry taking their husband's surname? That's where Ward comes from. It is my married name. Connie Reb is a nickname.

You're trying awful hard to be condescending and you're only making yourself look foolish in the process.

More information for those to whom this subject is unclear:
Given name: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/given+name
Maiden name: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maiden+name
Married name: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/married%20name
Nickname: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nickname

The GROUP believes there was a Confederate regiment of black cooks? There are over a thousand people in the group, and they all believe that? They're all mental clones? They would all HAVE to believe it for the GROUP to believe it, wouldn't they? Maybe that's how you group-think people operate, all thinking alike, so you attribute it to others but I see a great deal more discussion, diverse ideas, and even disagreement in SHPG than I do from the sycophants who post at your blog and Kevin's.

I know about that mistake Ann made, you know I know it, because we discussed it on Andy Hall's blog. What you're doing by unnecessarily bringing this up over and over is known as piling on, "... a phrase used in American football, where defenders throw themselves onto a pile of other defenders, under which is the ball carrier. It's a needless activity, since the ball carrier is already down and the play is over." (Found in an online forum.) The whistle has blown, Professor. Show a little class, a little gentlemanliness. Let it go.

So, you doubt the WPA Slave Narratives? You think Prince Johnson ought to be "worked"? Did you actually mean "worked over"? That's slang, btw, which means to inflict severe physical damage on; beat up. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/work+over) Perhaps Prince needs a severe academic beating -- to show he's lying? Since he presents ideas you slavery-focused anti-Confederates disapprove of, he needs to be run through the academic wringer, beaten into submission and come out "proving" what you all believe -- or at least come out neutralized....

__________________________

Simpson told one of his commenters: "Connie’s had her say (and can continue to have it on her own blog). Among those who appreciate her message is Michael Hill of the League of the South, an organization Connie holds in high esteem. Connie waffled about her feelings about the League when I confronted her with this material, although she gladly links to it … but when Hill complimented her work, she did not object. I don’t think anyone’s fooled about how she feels about the League of the South, even if she lacks the courage to just come out and endorse Hill’s view of matters."

This is incredible! Truly astounding! Professor Simpson knows all this just from seeing a link on a blog. Isn't that amazing? He can just look a link on the Internet and know what the person who put it there thinks and feels... Doesn't have to consult a crystal ball, doesn't have to call Miss Clio, doesn't have to throw chicken bones -- He. Just. Knows.

This post from him illustrates the truth that you don't have to have common sense to be an academic. He apparently doesn't realize that I didn't waffle or lack courage when he "confronted" me (smirk) several weeks ago with this material -- "this material" being a link to the League, which you can see by scrolling down and looking on the righthand side bar for "Interesting Websites." There, you will also find links to Patriot Press Books, Black Confederate Soldiers, Discriminatory Freight Rates, Douglas Harper's Civil War Essays, United Daughters of the Confederacy, Sons of Confederate Veterans and Author Nancy Brewer. (Wonder what THOSE links "tell" him.)

The fact that Simpson ignored them all to focus solely on the League tells you a whole lot more about him than it does about me. At any rate, my response, or non-response, was not from waffling or a lack of courage -- it was from my extreme contempt for his ludicrous demand.

However, since it really isn't an earth-shattering revelation, I don't mind providing information about my involvement with the League and my thoughts on its principles.

If memory serves, I have been a member of the League twice, possibly three times, in the past twelve years. I once served as the chairman and webmaster of a small, local chapter. I am not currently a member.

I originally joined the League after observing it for 18 months. Shortly after I discovered DixieNet on the web, I came across a claim that the League was a "racist hate group" and I wanted nothing to do with one of those. The claim came from a wholly unreliable source and I suspected it was dismissible, but I wanted to make sure, so I read League literature and observed League activities both online and in person, for a year and a half. I concluded that the claim was not true, so I joined for the following reasons:

1. I believe in the right of secession, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence (the right of the people, endowed upon them by their Creator, to alter or abolish their government and to create another that suits them better). I believe it is the only way to keep a government from becoming tyrannical. (Well, revolution is another way, but I prefer peaceful secession to violent revolution.)

2. I believe the South would be better off as a nation on its own.

3. I believe the South has always been culturally distinct from the rest of the United States (which is why it has been known as "a nation within a nation") and I support the cultural strengthening required to keep it that way, particularly in the face of efforts, deliberate and inadvertent, to amalgamate and homogenize it into the rest of the country.

The League of the South supports the right of secession, and particularly the right of the Southern states to secede and form their own nation, and the renewal and strengthening of the South's unique culture.

And I certainly do not object to Dr. Hill's compliment about my writing.

~TO BE CONTINUED~

__________________________

INDEX

Civil War Memory, Kevin Levin
It’s Not a Good Day For the Black Confederate Myth Makers
http://cwmemory.com/2011/10/12/its-not-a-good-day-for-the-black-confederate-myth-makers/
History Detectives Embrace Reconciliation at the Expense of History
http://cwmemory.com/2011/10/12/history-detectives-embrace-reconciliation-at-the-expense-of-history/
History Detectives Tell Us What We Already Know
http://cwmemory.com/2011/10/11/history-detectives-tell-us-what-we-already-know/
Portraying Silas and Andrew Chandler
http://cwmemory.com/2011/10/11/portraying-silas-and-andrew-chandler/

The Blood of My Kindred, Corey Meyer

Black Confederate Researcher Fails To Read Her Own Discoveries
http://kindredblood.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/black-confederate-researcher-fails-to-read-her-own-discoveries/
Connie Chastain Forces a Long Post…as Usual!
http://kindredblood.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/connie-chastain-forces-a-long-post-as-usual/

Crossroads, Brooks Simpson

Facts? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Facts!
http://cwcrossroads.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/facts-we-dont-need-no-stinking-facts/
Denial’s Not Just a River in Egypt
http://cwcrossroads.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/denials-not-just-a-river-in-egypt/
The Flag Question, Confederate Heritage, and Southern Heritage
http://cwcrossroads.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/the-flag-question-confederate-heritage-and-southern-heritage/

Satire and Video

It's September -- School Days --  and our favorite Civil War bloggers, the Four Horsemen of the Apoplectic, have evidently gotten too busy to write blog entries, because they've fallen back on posting videos.  Brooks is an academic, and Corey claims to be a school teacher, but I'm not sure what's going on with the other two. Levin doesn't teach anymore, since he relocated to Beantown, and I've never known Andy's occupation, so I don't know if he's in academia.

Aside from possibly a busy new school year, I don't know what has prompted Perfesser Simpson's string of outdated videos (the McPherson interview video displaying as I write this, is from 2009) , one-line blog entries and a rehash of Levin's Sebesta essay.  Nevertheless, he manages to find time to post snide comments about me on other bloggers' comment threads.

Levin recently posted a video titled "How the South Was Lost" -- an amateur production ridiculing Confederate soldiers (the video has them killing each other and their lieutenant or whatever, making like a coward and running away).  Sed Levin, "This has got to be my favorite Civil War video.  I’ve posted it before, but many of you who are relatively new to the blog have probably not seen it.  It’s a classic.  Enjoy."

I posted a link to it on Southern Heritage Preservation Group's Facebook page, along with photos of battlefields strewn with the bodies of Confederate soldiers, to show what Levin and the video are ridiculing.  In reply, he made another blog post, showing a screenshot of my SHPG entry along with a comment by a Lucas Bernard.

Levin's short blog post said, "The other day my friends at Facebook’s SHPG page got all worked up about a stupid video that I posted on Thursday.  Apparently, the members of this group have completely lost their ability to laugh in their zeal to stamp out the enemy that they see all around them.  Funny that they never speak out when I post videos about Abraham Lincoln that others have found problematic.  Oh well.  Lucas looks like he is right out of high school and I suspect he has little in common with the political and cultural baggage that the majority of these members carry around with them.  I anticipate that he won’t last long in this group.  Either Lucas will leave on his own or he will be forced out.  Good luck, dude." 

 So, in a mere two days, the video has gone from his "favorite" video and "classic" to... "stupid."  Looks kinda schizoid to me -- unless he really likes stupid videos (which shouldn't surprise any of us). Anyhoo, at the time, there were 55 comments, but he chose to display only this one by the aforementioned Lucas:

"It's just satire, my goodness.  So he as anti-Southern opinions, many of you have anti-Northern opinions. Why can't we enjoy satire for satire's sake, why take it so serious when it doesn't even take itself seriously? I thought it was hilarious, but hey, I'm a Mark Twain type of Southern guy, and I love a good piece of satire.  If you can make fun of yourself then you never learn to really laugh. Both sides did terrible things during the war, it's war, and war is terrible. No one comes out of it without transgression. To quote a great man, 'It is well that war is so terrible, lest we should grow too fond of it.'"

Where to start....  Does Levin no longer recognize lies when he tells them, I wonder?  Or does he know it, and do it anyway, specifically: Apparently, the members of this group have completely lost their ability to laugh in their zeal to stamp out the enemy that they see all around them.

Why, no. We have lots of fun over there.  Consider these comments made after Levin displayed his zeal to stamp out H.K. Edgerton's efforts on behalf of Southern heritage.

A little background. H.K. spoke to the Lexington City Council before their vote to prohibit Confederate flags flying from city flagstaffs and Levin posted this shrill screed he titled, "Entertainment for White People."
http://cwmemory.com/2011/09/01/entertainment-for-white-people/

It included video of H.K. that had nothing to do with the Lexington issue and included this permissible racist observation about H.K. (leftist racism is acceptable, don'tcha know):  He comes from a long line of mythical black symbols that include “Mammy”, Aunt Jemimah, Uncle Ben, and countless other black minstrels during the twentieth century that perpetuated the myth of the loyal slave.  

In the SHPG comment thread about Levin's racist and disrespectful blog post, I noted, "You learn something new every day. I always just assumed that H.K. came from where all of us come from ... mamas and daddies. Wonder if Kevin has some scientific explanation, or at least a theory, about how a person can come from a line of symbols."

To which David Tatum replied, "So on HKs' birth certificate it should say, Father- Uncle Ben,  Mother-Aunt Jemimah!"

Ba-dum ching!

Can't laugh?  That absolutely Broke. Me. Up!  Southerners have a marvelous sense of humor, and of course we laugh ... when something is truly humorous.  Levin's problem is that he can't tell humor from ridicule and amusement from insult. At least, he pretends not to. Apparently.

The interesting thing about Bernard is that he'd never posted on SHPG before this thread, and very likely came to SHPG from Levin's site.  It's a safe bet the other new commenter on that thread also was directed to the SHPG by Levin's blog post.  They came over to set us hicks, rubes and scum-sucking racist Confederate flag flyers straight -- that the war was a laughing matter and the death of Confederate soldiers is a fit subject for parody, satire and ridicule. I don't think they were prepared for the vigorous defense with which we tore their arguments to shreds.

Anyhow, somebody at SHPG took the thread down -- not sure who or why. I wanted it to stay up, as I wasn't finished answering some of the comments.  However, it does provide me with the material to illustrate some rich irony....

Back over on Civil War Memory, Perfesser Simpson posted: Actually, what I found amusing is that a thread which complained about censorship ultimately disappeared when the owners of the group found that a few folks were hitting too close to home. ... BTW, I find perfectly understandable Ann DeWitt’s decision not to post under her own name given the quality of her scholarship. After all, Connie Ward/Chastain/Reb/whatever has problems sticking to one name as well. 

First, I started that thread and was involved in it throughout its existence, and I saw no complaints about censorship.  Second, the attacks on Ann DeWitt from this "academic" crowd, who apparently actually believe they know everyone's motives, thoughts, feelings (but claim nobody can know what black Confederates thought and felt) grow more and more breathtaking.  Finally, Brooks' comments about censorship at the SHPG is richly ironic, considering that he, like Levin, censors/blocks every comment I try to post at his blog and -- are you ready? -- he posted that to a thread at Levin's blog, from which my comment below had been blocked:

I know you won't let this comment through. It's too truthful and revealing. Nevertheless...

You and your commenters enjoy laughing about dead soldiers -- as long as they're Confederates? As for this blog entry, Mr. Levin, your motive is sooo clearly revealed -- in what you leave out. You put a link to YOUR blog entry with the video, and a screenshot of young Bernard's response -- but not mine. Not my point that this "favorite" video of yours ridicules Confederate soldiers who were killed defending their country. You like laughing about dead Southern soldiers?

 Mr. O'Hara, I don't go looking for video ridiculing dead yanks -- or dead American soldiers. Try to find anything even barely equivalent on my blog. Sorry if that disillusions you about me and my motives. Oh, and Mr. Lyons is a "they"? I thought he was a "he."

Michael, please go through the Southern Heritage Preservation Group http://www.facebook.com/groups/shpg1/ -- or my blog -- and try to find where we parody and satirize union deaths, and laugh at them. We are justifiably critical of the union army's brutality and their lack of moral authority for invading and warring upon the South, but we don't make "cute" videos laughing at their deaths. 

Mr. Simpson, we defend Confederate heritage because, as I've explained, and as you who monitor us ought to know, it is the part of Southern heritage that is under concerted and sustained attack -- which you, Levin, Meyer and others support and join in.

So I've been taken to task for my inability to laugh at satire. Maybe I should rethink my position...

Therefore, I'm considering seeking a bit of capital to finance the production of my own satirical video about union soldiers.  But not about them dying, oh, no.  About what living union soldiers did.  I'll call it "How the North Won the War" with a subtitle, "Bummin' with Sherman, Annihilating with Sheridan, Preying with Butler, Molesting with Turchin."


We'll have video vignettes of bluecoats brutally raping Southern women, black and white. Hilarious, huh?  Another quick scene of yanks burning a town, leaving the residents with nothing but the clothes on their backs. Hilarious!  How about another town-destroying scene filmed from the Southern POV of shells striking homes and buildings wherein civilians are cut in half by exploding shells and their bodies riddled with shrapnel?  Hilarous!

How about a series of flash scenes showing Sherman's bummers shooting family pets for fun?  Hilarous!  And another depicting yank soldiers burning homes -- after stealing the jewelry and silverware, taking what food they could carry and destroying the rest, leaving a family to starve!  Hilarious!

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

Now, who sez we got no sensahuma?

(Photos: Wikimedia Commons)

The Lexington Mentality

Okay, folks. Don't get yourselves in a tizzy over the illustrations below. They are SYMBOLIC graphic representations of the mentality shown by the Lexington City Council in its vote to prohibit Confederate flags from flying on city-owned flagpoles.

It's obviously repressive -- but how? It is contemptuous of its own past, so that gives us a clue. There comes to mind two examples from the previous century of repressive regimes hostile to the past -- the USSR under Joseph Stalin and Afghanistan under the Taliban. (Text continues below graphic.)

Stalin was infamous for his purges not only of those who opposed him politically, but of their very memory constructed in the past, carefully cutting their images out of photos in books and slicing away written references to them.

Likely we all remember the Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues almost 2,000 years old, to the dismay of most of the world.

The city council didn't vote to blow anything up yet, so at this point, Lexington looks more like Stalinton than Lexingstan.

Bloggers hostile to Southern heritage are having a field day, attempting to evilize (or, at least in this case, stupidize) Southerners who honor that heritage because they might have been misinformed about what the city's vote was intended to do. The shrill derision aimed at opponents of the ordinance inspired me to post the following at Civil War Memory.

This decision was reactionary -- it was instigated after, and because, the SCV flew flags from city owned staffs for their Lee-Jackson commemoration. It wasn't instigated after some Girl Scout flags were displayed, or GBLT Rainbow flags were displayed. The ordinance was designed specifically to prohibit Confederate flags from flying on those staffs -- everybody else's organizational flag-flying was collateral damage -- sacrificed for the sake of sticking it to the SCV and Confederate heritage. It was the city's (and some university faculty's) middle finger in the face of the SCV.

And this is my response to a gentlemen who explained things in terms a little less offensive than what is normally aimed at me over there:

Mr. S---, I have never claimed that it was unconstitutional. In fact, I have explained this to people on Facebook groups where I post -- that the ordinance is not a First Amendment, free-expression issue. It doesn't apply to personal displays of the flag. Yet.

For some of us, however, there is a problem with it, whether you see it or not. I clearly understand that the city did this purposely to prohibit Confederate flags displays on city property. (From the photos I've seen, these are small flagpoles mounted at an angle on larger poles, apparently lampposts.) It is the city -- officials elected to represent all the people of the town -- sitting in judgment of those who honor its history, at the behest of a few instigators, the primary one being an immigrant to this country motivated by a deliberate or inadvertent misunderstanding of Lexington's history and heritage.

This is an example of the ongoing official eradication of the South's Confederate heritage accomplished in tiny increments. There are people who say that's not happening but here's an instance of it going on before our very eyes. And if the city can do this, it can ban people carrying flags on city-owned sidewalks or displaying flags on vehicles that travel city-owned streets ("Oh, no, we're not encroaching on your First Amendment rights. You can still display your flags -- just not on our poles, or on our sidewalks or on our streets....")

So, do y'all like the graphic? I'd love to see photos of these things duct taped to "city property" (flag poles? lamp posts?) all over Lexington. I'd love to see them all over Dixie's corner of cyberspace, too. You can see a larger version by clicking the image; and you can download a .pdf version by clicking the link below. (Note: Download at your own risk. The image/pdf files and my personal webspace supplied by my ISP were virus- and malware-free at the time of uploading, but who knows what happens after that....)

STALINTON/LEXINGSTAN PDF IMAGE