Here are a few pictures for you to discuss or simply admire…
Evidence of Trespassing
SCV CIC & Susan F. Hathaway of the Virginia Flaggers
If the UDC is concerned over their tax exempt status concerning the Virginia Flaggers, does CIC Given’s support on the sidewalks of Richmond effect the 501 c 3 tax exempt status of the SCV’s?
SCV CIC
It is all about respect for the SCV…sigh!
And last, but not least, my good friend David Tatum hard at work doing what he does best…for goodness sake David…smile…
It’s good to be the king!
Here are a few pictures for you to discuss or simply admire…
=== Evidence of Trespassing ===
Response: Fine-looking folks, beautiful flags!
=== SCV CIC & Susan F. Hathaway of the Virginia Flaggers — If the UDC is concerned over their tax exempt status concerning the Virginia Flaggers, does CIC Given’s support on the sidewalks of Richmond effect the 501 c 3 tax exempt status of the SCV’s? ===
Response: No. The UDC’s concern is fabricated to cover the real reason for the abandonment of their mission by some of their leaders — coercion by authoritarian political correctness.
=== It is all about respect for the SCV…sigh! ===
Response: (1) What has this photo got to do with the SCV? (2) Even if this person is affiliated with the SCV in some way, so what? It’s a big organization. Bound to be a crazy or two get in. (3) This is no worse than disrespect for the sovereign flag of the United States, which you’ve already said you don’t care about. Obviously, for you, it’s not about flags, or the SCV, or respect at all. It’s about (1) giving you an excuse to ogle T&A and (2) giving you an excuse for venting your hatred….
=== And last, but not least, my good friend David Tatum hard at work doing what he does best…for goodness sake David…smile… It’s good to be the king! ===
Response: That’s the difference between you and him, Corey. He doesn’t post pictures like this to denigrate women….
I AM BACK!!!! Sorry for my hiatus. The head wrestling Coach had a family emergency so I’ve been running the program at the high school I work at. When the wrestling team is the number one program in the state and top 25 in the country, it is incredibly time consuming.
Connie, I am working on a response to the bull crap you wrote about me. But I digress.
Connie: Fine-looking folks, beautiful flags!
Response: …..lol
Connie: No. The UDC’s concern is fabricated to cover the real reason for the abandonment of their mission by some of their leaders — coercion by authoritarian political correctness.
Response: I was unaware of a UDC conspiracy theory.
Connie: (1) What has this photo got to do with the SCV? (2) Even if this person is affiliated with the SCV in some way, so what? It’s a big organization. Bound to be a crazy or two get in. (3) This is no worse than disrespect for the sovereign flag of the United States, which you’ve already said you don’t care about. Obviously, for you, it’s not about flags, or the SCV, or respect at all. It’s about (1) giving you an excuse to ogle T&A and (2) giving you an excuse for venting your hatred….
Response: (1) http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/caldronspain/NEWSLETTERB.htm, Probably due to it being posted on a SCV website and signed by an SCV member. Pwned. (2) If you read the letter on that site, it speaks of an entire cruise ship…..pwned. (3) Addressing criticism with criticism is a logical fallacy. Apparently you didn’t learn. Your point carries no validity either. Corey stating that he doesn’t care, implies that he is not hypocritical about the flag as a bikini issue. Those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless,” and then are fine with wearing it as a string bikini (you) are hypocrites.
I like the direct attacks though Connie. It’s always funny to watch you fume when you can’t logically debate.
Connie: That’s the difference between you and him, Corey. He doesn’t post pictures like this to denigrate women….
Response: Adult response Connie. Trying to demonize Corey in order to win an argument. Seriously, you’re a joke.
The site says there were 2,100 people from all over the country on a cruise (five of which were identified as SCV members) who were evidently used as extras in the making of a music video. Corey dishonestly didn’t mention that. “It’s all about respect for the SCV” is dishonest when the event had nothing to do with the SCV.
“Those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless,” and then are fine with wearing it as a string bikini (you) are hypocrites.”
(1) Name anyone who treats Southern banners as sinless. Name someone who has even used that term in relation to the flags.
(2) Of those, name the ones who are “then fine” with wearing as a string bikini.
Do it, or continue to stand before us as a liar.
Connie,
If these men were part of the SCV’s why are they not more respectful to their sacred symbol?
They seem to use that sacred symbol for their personal gain and entertainment.
Rob: “I was unaware of a UDC conspiracy theory. ”
There’s a UDC conspiracy theory? Who sez?
Of couse, you’re one of those (like Cousin Perfesser) who thinks if you don’t know about it, it doesn’t exist.
No but it definitely is SCV advocated otherwise they would not have commented on it, or they would have made a statement about the misuse of the “sacred” symbol.
1.) You constantly advertise and advocate the South, and that flag, only in its brightest and positive light. You never mention the negatives and proclaim anyone who does as a South basher.
2.) You are hypocritical in the display of your apathy. If not, there would be multiple statements about how the flag’s misuse is ‘bad.’ Instead all anyone has is your finger pointing of the misuse of the U.S. flag that we never discredit. Again, I don’t have to defend it because I simply do not care, nor do I hold it in the limelight that you hold the CBF in.
Not sure how I was lying Connie. Of course, I could be in denial like you.
Connie, the UDC conspiracy statement was satire. As a writer I would expect you to recognize that, but I might be giving you too much credit. I was making fun of your constant defense of the South as you are now attacking those that spend more time defending it than you ever have.
Connie,
How am I denigrating women?
You’re breathing, Corey.
While it may not be a logical reason for why you are supposedly “denigrating women,” it will suffice until some actual evidence of such comes along.
Neil
Corey, you have a long history of venting your hatred of the SCV and Southern heritage by getting your kicks posting photos of T&A barely covered by little bitty Confederate flag garments. L-o-n-g history, here on your blog and in your various incarnations on Facebook.
So there are some wild folks in the MC… So what? What’s it to you? You’re no longer just a self-appointed civil war thought cop, but now you’re a Southern heritage/SCV thought cop? You know your hatred disqualifies you for that, don’t you?
Connie,
You just don’t get it do you. The SCV’s and the flaggers are so rightous in their defense of the flag…and we now see the merger of the two groups via Susan’s photos…that I find it very interesting to show, again through these pictures, how hypocritical they really are. It is just that simple…you are looking for a conspiracy where there is none.
She has a habit looking for conspiracies and atrocities against her or the South. She also exhibits serial hypocrisy. Connie complains and complains about censorship but now she censors. Her excuse is that she has been censored and now she will. It’s funny that the people she censors are those that never censored her (me, Joey, and Isabel). Connie now only allows the comments of those that agree with her. She’s too much of a coward to step out into the world with her arguments because they are, as exhibited above, full of logical fallacies and utter bullshit.
Corey: If these men were part of the SCV’s why are they not more respectful to their sacred symbol?
Connie: Hell if I know. Why don’t you ask them?
Corey: They seem to use that sacred symbol for their personal gain and entertainment.
Connie: Yep, seems that way. Perhaps they don’t see it as sacred. Reckon that ‘splains it?
Corey: “You just don’t get it do you. The SCV’s and the flaggers are so rightous in their defense of the flag…and we now see the merger of the two groups via Susan’s photos…that I find it very interesting to show, again through these pictures, how hypocritical they really are. It is just that simple…you are looking for a conspiracy where there is none.”
Connie: The SCV and the flaggers are so righteous in their defense of the flag? Righteous? To me they just look enthusiastic about it. Righteousness would be more discernable in words than pictures, Corey, so pasted some of their “righteous text” defending the flag.
So two groups are “merged” because some folks from each group show up at the same event? Representatives of a Baptist Church and a print shop showed up at a Blue Wahoos game a couple weeks ago. Are they now merged? Corey, please. The SCV and the Virginia Flaggers are not “merged.”
Are any of the folks in Susan’s photos the same ones in the beach photo? No? Then where’s the hypocrisy? I told you there are some wild folks in the MC. AND I asked you what’s it to you. I’m asking you again. Who made you the SCV thought police? Why do you care? There’s hypocrisy in this country from border to border and coast to coast. Why is it that only Southern heritage “hypocrisy” (most of which exists in your imagination) is the only kind that bothers you enough to blog about?
=====
Rob: No but it definitely is SCV advocated otherwise they would not have commented on it, or they would have made a statement about the misuse of the “sacred” symbol.
Connie: Apparently, this is in response to my challenge to Corey to (1) Name anyone who treats Southern banners as sinless and to name someone who has even used that term in relation to the flags, and, (2) Of those, name the ones who are “then fine” with wearing as a string bikini.
Actually, all it signifies is that people in the SCV, and in Southern heritage at large, have different views of the flag. Even I don’t view it as sacred, in the religious sense, but I don’t like seeing it trivialized or disrespected. However, the difference between me and Corey (and Rob and Cousin Perfesser and Andy and Kevin and all you self-appointed thought cops) is that I don’t have the dictatorial/conformist/totalitarian mentality you guys have. I sometimes express my disapproval of the flag on Facebook, but I don’t hold the “sacred-flag” folks responsible for disciplining the “entertainment-flag” folks — or vice versa. That’s a dictatorial mentality characteristic of the PC left and the sort of attitude that sends folks who won’t mentally conform to “re-education” camps. You won’t find much of that attitude in Southern heritage.
Rob: You constantly advertise and advocate the South, and that flag, only in its brightest and positive light. You never mention the negatives and proclaim anyone who does as a South basher.
Connie: So? Why’s that any of your business? There are already plenty of people focusing ONLY on the negative. That is the prevailing attitude in this country toward the flag and the South foisted upon the public by PC critics. Why would I aid that? And when are you going to chastize them for not presenting the positive side?
Rob: You are hypocritical in the display of your apathy. If not, there would be multiple statements about how the flag’s misuse is ‘bad.’ Instead all anyone has is your finger pointing of the misuse of the U.S. flag that we never discredit. Again, I don’t have to defend it because I simply do not care, nor do I hold it in the limelight that you hold the CBF in.
Connie: Again, so what? What’s it to ya? When were you appointed the Flag Cop? Actually, though, that’s not true. I have made statements about denigration of the flag on Facebook, usually pointing out that the misuse would have Confederate soldiers weeping and rolling over in their graves if they could know about it. What, you didn’t know I do that? LOL!
Rob sez: Not sure how I was lying Connie. Of course, I could be in denial like you.
Connie: Here’s how you lied: You implied that “…those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as ‘sinless’” are the SAME PEOPLE as those who are “then fine with wearing it as a string bikini …” without offering any proof. They would have to be the same people in order to be hypocrites.
Rob: Connie, the UDC conspiracy statement was satire. As a writer I would expect you to recognize that, but I might be giving you too much credit.
Connie: No, you just need to learn how to write satire.
Rob; I was making fun of your constant defense of the South as you are now attacking those that spend more time defending it than you ever have.
Connie: Whatever gives you your jollies, I guess….
=====
Rob: (1) She has a habit looking for conspiracies and atrocities against her or the South. She also exhibits serial hypocrisy. (2) Connie complains and complains about censorship but now she censors. (3) Her excuse is that she has been censored and now she will. (4) It’s funny that the people she censors are those that never censored her (me, Joey, and Isabel). (5) Connie now only allows the comments of those that agree with her. (6) She’s too much of a coward to step out into the world with her arguments because they are, as exhibited above, full of logical fallacies and utter bullshit.
Connie: (1) Not true. When I run across them, I may or may not post or blog about them. I’m no more hypocritical than you and your Dixie-bashin’ cronies.
(2) I don’t like censorship, but when it’s necessary, it’s necessary.
(3) My reason for moderating my blog comments is not because others do, but because a lot of what I disallow is garbage. I pointed out that I’m doing nothing more that what your buddies do to illustrate your hypocrisy in criticizing me for it but not them.
(4) Like I said, most of what I censor is garbage. Don’t put garbage in your comments, I might let them through.
(5) Since you don’t see all the comments I get, you don’t know what I allow and don’t allow.
(6) It’s a bit disingenuous to say I don’t step out into the world with my arguments since I have a website, two blogs, and membership in several Facebook groups where I present my arguments quite regularly….
“I don’t have the dictatorial/conformist/totalitarian mentality you guys have.”
Yes you do. We are pointing out hypocracies, you point out how it “should” be viewed. Which is funny considering how much you criticize us for being the “thought police.” Quite the opposite of PC really when you think about it. I literally said above I don’t care about the U.S. flag…..that’s PC?
“So? Why’s that any of your business? There are already plenty of people focusing ONLY on the negative. That is the prevailing attitude in this country toward the flag and the South foisted upon the public by PC critics. Why would I aid that? And when are you going to chastize them for not presenting the positive side?”
I care because I am a historian and I care about the truth. Contrary to your belief, history is not a soft subject of free opinions. I do not focus only on the negative nor does anyone else except for a reactionary response to the Lost Causers like you.
“Again, so what? What’s it to ya? When were you appointed the Flag Cop? Actually, though, that’s not true. I have made statements about denigration of the flag on Facebook, usually pointing out that the misuse would have Confederate soldiers weeping and rolling over in their graves if they could know about it. What, you didn’t know I do that? LOL!”
Again so what? That’s a way to respond to accusations of hypocrisy. Okay, yea, so what that you are a hypocrite. Thank you for invalidating all of your statements for us. As for your claim on Facebook, I’m glad but why isn’t it on here. This would have been a perfect time to display that consistency but instead you engaged in the fallacy of tu quoque. Thanks for playing.
“Here’s how you lied: You implied that “…those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as ‘sinless’” are the SAME PEOPLE as those who are “then fine with wearing it as a string bikini …” without offering any proof. They would have to be the same people in order to be hypocrites.”
I didn’t claim they were the same people I lumped them as Southern Heritage “defenders” (what a joke) into a static category. Very post modernist I know but it serves the purpose of debate and illustrates the lack of consistency in the “defense.” The proof is pretty much plain on the SCV site that both defends the flag and displays it unceremoniously. If there was such outrage coming from the “flaggers” a statement would have been made.
“No, you just need to learn how to write satire…..”
Aww, no response to defend your stupid statement?
“(1) Not true. When I run across them, I may or may not post or blog about them. I’m no more hypocritical than you and your Dixie-bashin’ cronies.”
Still waiting to see my hypocricies as you see them. I’ve been fairly consistent throughout.
“(2) I don’t like censorship, but when it’s necessary, it’s necessary.”
So says the totalitarian regime. Interesting that you accuse us (Me, Meyer, etc.) of PC/Fascist/Totalitarianism (which are not the same concepts) but then engage in it yourself. Hypocrite.
“(3) My reason for moderating my blog comments is not because others do, but because a lot of what I disallow is garbage. I pointed out that I’m doing nothing more that what your buddies do to illustrate your hypocrisy in criticizing me for it but not them.”
I’ve criticized for it before and stated that I disagreed with it as well. So what about my hypocrisy? Seriously Connie, do your homework.
“(4) Like I said, most of what I censor is garbage. Don’t put garbage in your comments, I might let them through.”
Define garbage. All of what I say is directly related to the “argument” that you spew.
“(5) Since you don’t see all the comments I get, you don’t know what I allow and don’t allow.”
I receive private messages informing me of the comments not posted. They come from the people that posted the comments.
“(6) It’s a bit disingenuous to say I don’t step out into the world with my arguments since I have a website, two blogs, and membership in several Facebook groups where I present my arguments quite regularly….”
You don’t step into the world. You hide behind your “blog moderation” and your private Facebook group. It’s not disingenuous to say what I did at all. You avoid peer review and instead keep comments to where you can either control them or ignore them keeping your ignorant mass in the dark.
You’re slipping Connie. You used to be halfway fun to debate. Tisk tisk.
Rob,
Got that book deal yet?
Border Ruffian,
Didn’t know I was writing a book.
Rob: We are pointing out hypocracies, you point out how it “should” be viewed
Connie: You’re not pointing out hypocrisies because that would require the same people urging respect for the flag while showing it disrespect. Clearly, as the photos show, they’re not the same people.
You not only dictate to people how the flag AND it’s history should be viewed; You also exhibit a dictatorial mindset by expecting the flaggers, or the SCV or whoever, to police anyone and everyone who displays the CBF.
Political correctness has nothing to do with whether you respect the US flag or not.
You don’t care about the truth, Rob. It’s laughable for you to call yourself a historian. What you are is an Orwellian self-appointed, civil war thought cop. You think “history” only comes through some college professer educated at a PC university, teaching students out of a book written by some PC historian. People like you reject any other method of passing down history with heritage through family stories and records, for example.
Rob: Okay, yea, so what that you are a hypocrite. Thank you for invalidating all of your statements for us. As for your claim on Facebook, I’m glad but why isn’t it on here. This would have been a perfect time to display that consistency but instead you engaged in the fallacy of tu quoque. Thanks for playing.
Connie: I didn’t invalidate my statements; not my fault you have difficulty conceptualizing things. I’m not going to go hunting up my Facebook posts criticizing denigration of the flag. (1) I don’t have to prove anything to you and (2) you are a walking logical fallacy, Rob. Worse, you’re a deliberate deceiver.
Rob: I didn’t claim they were the same people I lumped them as Southern Heritage “defenders” (what a joke) into a static category.
Connie; No you did not, Rob. You’re lying, big time. You didn’t mention Southern heritage at all, and you didn’t mention static categories. You said, plain as day, “Those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless,” and then are fine with wearing it as a string bikini (you) are hypocrites.”
PAY ATTENTION. I’LL TYPE SLOW AND BIG, SO YOU’LL GET IT. YOU ARE SAYING THAT FLAGGERS AND SCV MEMBERS TREAT THE SOUTHERN BANNERS AS SINLESS ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE FINE WITH WEARING IT AS A STRING BIKINI.
Rob: Very post modernist I know but it serves the purpose of debate and illustrates the lack of consistency in the “defense.”
Connie: What it shows is that you’re trying to say two different groups of people are the same people in order to lie about the Virginia flaggers.
Rob: The proof is pretty much plain on the SCV site that both defends the flag and displays it unceremoniously. If there was such outrage coming from the “flaggers” a statement would have been made.
Connie: The Mechanized Cavalry site that Corey is so obsessed with is not the entire SCV, as you will know. It repsresents its small segment of the organization, not the whole thing.
Rob: Still waiting to see my hypocricies as you see them. I’ve been fairly consistent throughout
Connie: Yeah, consistenly slippery, dishonest and cowardly. You tried to palm off the Virginia Flaggers folks and the Mechanized Cavalry folks AS THE SAME PEOPLE in order to lie and call the flaggers hypocrites.
Rob: I’ve criticized for it before and stated that I disagreed with it as well.
Connie: So you say.
Rob: Define garbage. All of what I say is directly related to the “argument” that you spew.
Connie: That doesn’t mean it isn’t garbage. And I’m sure you THINK that what you say is related; that doesn’t mean it is.
Rob: I receive private messages informing me of the comments not posted. They come from the people that posted the comments.
Connie: Izzat right? What did Aliah tell you in her private message? What did J. Kelvin tell you in his?
Rob: You don’t step into the world. You hide behind your “blog moderation” and your private Facebook group.
Connie: Backsass isn’t private. My wall is not private. My blog posts are not moderated — anybody and everybody can read ‘em. Try again.
Rob: It’s not disingenuous to say what I did at all.
Connie: Yeah it is.
Rob: You avoid peer review and instead keep comments to where you can either control them or ignore them keeping your ignorant mass in the dark.
Connie: Avoid peer review? Blogger hasn’t had me arrested yet. I guess that means peer review isn’t required. You’re just pissed because I’m not letting you post your mendacity and incoherrence in my comments.
Rob: You’re slipping Connie. You used to be halfway fun to debate. Tisk tisk.
Connie: Then why are you wasting your time posting these long, long comments to me?
Connie,
Please stop claiming that I am responsible for some obscene confederate flag blog. I am not. End of discussion.
Thanks!
Her conspiracy theories know no ends.
That may be true now, because the blog has been removed. But using your fake Robert Billy profile, you messaged me the URL back in May and told me I should add it to my list of prey. Remember? I still have the message thread. I told you it wasn’t prey, it was carrion. You said, “Well I think is should be added as well.”
You were promoting it because it was yours.
Why would I promote filth like that… besides a few bikini pictures have I ever posted anything like what was on that site…NO! So don’t blame me!
Connie,
You are hereby banned from The Blood of My Kindred. You continue to accuse me of doing things that I have not done. Your latest is a photoshop image of a Facebook page where I “claim” to be a person named “Robert Billy”…nice bit of work Connie, you should work in the computer industry for some two-bit dictator doctoring documents.
From this point on Connie you will have no access to comments on this site…post all you want, none of them will see the light of day.
Corey Meyer
Corey I’m against this. Although her badgering and constant fallacies are tiring, ultimately her false accusations serve only to harm her credibility.
Rob,
Sorry, but I have had enough of her shit!
You realize this is what she wants? Now she can run back an claim the leftist/fascist/totalitarian/authoritarian/orwellian/PC censorship she bitches about anyways.
Good, let her….she can also take a flying leap off a bridge while she is at it.
Connie: You’re not pointing out hypocrisies because that would require the same people urging respect for the flag while showing it disrespect. Clearly, as the photos show, they’re not the same people.
Response: Advocated by the same people.
Connie: You not only dictate to people how the flag AND it’s history should be viewed; You also exhibit a dictatorial mindset by expecting the flaggers, or the SCV or whoever, to police anyone and everyone who displays the CBF.
Response: Quite the contrary actually, as one of my blog posts indicates.
http://www.historicstruggle.com/2012/03/is-confederate-flag-hate-symbol.html
http://www.historicstruggle.com/2011/11/what-does-battle-flag-mean.html
Connie: Political correctness has nothing to do with whether you respect the US flag or not.
Response: Yes it does. My statement of not “respecting” the U.S. flag may be offensive to some, if not a lot of Americans. Look up the definition of political correctness.
Connie: You don’t care about the truth, Rob. It’s laughable for you to call yourself a historian. What you are is an Orwellian self-appointed, civil war thought cop. You think “history” only comes through some college professer educated at a PC university, teaching students out of a book written by some PC historian. People like you reject any other method of passing down history with heritage through family stories and records, for example.
Response: My degree in History says otherwise. My current Masters work says otherwise as well. For some reason you are fixated on labeling historical accuracy or truth as Orwellian in an attempt to label Historians and College Professors as authoritarian is beyond me. This only demonstrates your lack of actual historical knowledge. There is a right and a wrong answer. It is laid out through arguments and peer review. You are also wrong about family history. Family history can align with history but it can differ. Why? Because stories deviate often. By your acceptance of any family story as fact you demonstrate again the lack of knowledge in historiography. Things have to be cross examined and that includes heritage. When heritage does not match the evidence, that makes it wrong. That isn’t “orwellian,” that is the scientific theory as advanced by Bacon.
Connie: I didn’t invalidate my statements; not my fault you have difficulty conceptualizing things. I’m not going to go hunting up my Facebook posts criticizing denigration of the flag. (1) I don’t have to prove anything to you and (2) you are a walking logical fallacy, Rob. Worse, you’re a deliberate deceiver.
Response: I don’t have difficulty conceptualizing anything. It appears you have a difficulty understanding the definition of hypocrite. If you don’t want to go digging into Facebook comments, simply state you position unequivocally here. I’m not the one engaging in tu quoque; name call and rant all you want but it isn’t winning you this debate.
Connie; No you did not, Rob. You’re lying, big time. You didn’t mention Southern heritage at all, and you didn’t mention static categories. You said, plain as day, “Those like the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless,” and then are fine with wearing it as a string bikini (you) are hypocrites.”
Response: I stand by that statement until you prove otherwise. “Those like the….” Get the picture Connie? A lump of like minded groups? It’s okay if it takes you a minute.
Connie: PAY ATTENTION. I’LL TYPE SLOW AND BIG, SO YOU’LL GET IT. YOU ARE SAYING THAT FLAGGERS AND SCV MEMBERS TREAT THE SOUTHERN BANNERS AS SINLESS ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE FINE WITH WEARING IT AS A STRING BIKINI.
Response: Actually I said “Those like.” Wow. Are you ok today?
Connie: What it shows is that you’re trying to say two different groups of people are the same people in order to lie about the Virginia flaggers.
Response: Hence the use of the word “lump.” Until there is a statement made otherwise, and due to the fact that SCV members are amongst and support the flaggers, it hardly makes it lying. But you keep on beating the straw man argument if it helps.
Connie: The Mechanized Cavalry site that Corey is so obsessed with is not the entire SCV, as you will know. It repsresents its small segment of the organization, not the whole thing.
Response: If the hierarchy disagreed, or if more SCV members disagreed, there probably would be statements.
Connie: Yeah, consistenly slippery, dishonest and cowardly. You tried to palm off the Virginia Flaggers folks and the Mechanized Cavalry folks AS THE SAME PEOPLE in order to lie and call the flaggers hypocrites.
Response: Cowardly? Ummmm, I’m not the one that censors people out. I also never “palmed” anyone off. I said, “Those like…”
Connie: So you say.
Response: I have. It’s in digital text. .
Connie: That doesn’t mean it isn’t garbage. And I’m sure you THINK that what you say is related; that doesn’t mean it is.
Response: Again, define garbage.
Connie: Izzat right? What did Aliah tell you in her private message? What did J. Kelvin tell you in his?
Response: I didn’t say that I have received private messages from all people that comments on your blog. I said I have received messages.
Connie: Backsass isn’t private. My wall is not private. My blog posts are not moderated — anybody and everybody can read ‘em. Try again.
Response: How many times have you blocked or kicked people off of “180″ which is now Backsass for not “defending heritage?”
Connie: Avoid peer review? Blogger hasn’t had me arrested yet. I guess that means peer review isn’t required. You’re just pissed because I’m not letting you post your mendacity and incoherrence in my comments.
Response: Sure Connie. Keep telling yourself that. And why did I continue to post comments? It’s funny watching attempt to debate.
Connie: You’re not pointing out hypocrisies because that would require the same people urging respect for the flag while showing it disrespect. Clearly, as the photos show, they’re not the same people.
Rob: Advocated by the same people.
Rob, the people in the Virginia Flaggers photos and the people in the beach photos ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE.
Those who invented political correctness did so as part of the “long march through the institutions” designed to destroy the USA and western civilization. They don’t give a damn about the US flag OR those who denigrate it.
Degrees can be bought, or achieved by cheating, so I’m not impressed with you waving around your “credentials” — particularly in view of your oft-exhibited narrow-mindedness and incoherence. “Historical accuracy,” as determined by “historians and college professors,” is what a bunch of leftists in liberal academia have agreed on (or knuckle under to, as the case may be). The answer is “right” or “wrong” depending on whether it conforms to what they’ve chosen to label as “truth” and “historical accuracy.”
Heritage is an INHERITANCE. You don’t determine whether an inheritance is an inheritance by comparing it to fake or incomplete history cooked up in left-leaning universities. and designed to promote or support a particular political/cultural mindset.
You don’t know that family histories differ — there are countless family histories out there you are totally unaware of, but you blanket condemn them anyway because you worship manipulative education.
I understand what hypocrite means, and I can look at you — i.e., your writings and online presence — and know I’m seeing one. I don’t have to prove anything to you, Rob, regardless of how much “Tu quoque!” silliness you scream.
You haven’t proven likemindedness. And your “those like the” phrase doesn’t get your behind out of the crack you wedged it in, Rob. You still attempted to say the flaggers and string bikini-ers were the same people, and they clearly are not, by the photographic proof presented.
So, then, who are the “those like” the Flaggers and SCVers who treat the Southern flag as sinless? Be sure to show that they are the SAME PEOPLE who are fine with wearing it as a string bikini. If you aren’t talking about the people in the photos who are identified BY NAME, then identify who are ARE talking about. “Those like” is not sufficient identification.
You did identify ME as one who who is fine with wearing the Confederate flag as a string bikini. Since you made the accusation, it is up to you to prove it, or withdraw it.
Why would there be statements from the hierarchy? Maybe they do disagree and disapprove, but they don’t have a totalitarian, dictatorial thought-cop mentality like you and your Dixie-bashing buddies. Maybe, unlike y’all, they really do take free expression seriously, even for expression they don’t approve of. This is why your silly bellyaching about my “censorship” is so much sound and fury, signifying nothing. You LIKE some censorship and you get pissed of when it isn’t enforced.
Rob: Cowardly? Ummmm, I’m not the one that censors people out. I also never “palmed” anyone off. I said, “Those like…”
Identify them, then. Name the people who ARE LIKE the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless” but who AREN’T in the posted photos. And name the people who ARE LIKE those who are then fine with wearing it as a string bikini., but who AREN’T in the posted photos.” If you aren’t talking about the people in the photos Corey posted, but somebody else LIKE THEM, then name who you are talking about. “Those like” is not sufficient identification. It’s not identification at all.
Generally, I prefer to make my groups and blog comments inaccessible to liars, disruptors and agents provocateurs intending to wreak havoc and destroy. That’s not “censoring people out.” Consider the lying and disrupting on a par with crying “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. It is NOT protected speech so disallowing it is not censorship.
Rob: I didn’t say that I have received private messages from all people that comments on your blog. I said I have received messages.
Then my statement, “Since you don’t see *ALL* the comments I get, you don’t know what I allow and don’t allow,” stands. (Emphasis added.)
You don’t know what you’re talking about. The Facebook group “180″ is not now Backsass. Backsass has never been 180. “180″ is now Due South. I have pretty much left it to itself. I repurposed it as an activism strategy group, took it private, and removed several members, or did not allow admission of several applicants, because that was not what they wanted to discuss. (“Defending heritage,” Rob, isn’t necessarily the same thing as strategizing activism.) But Facebook is a very inadequate format for that kind of effort, so I will eventually take strategizing activism to another venue. There are now are other admins at Due South, and it’s pretty much just another Southern group…
I created Backsass on purpose for ME to post to you Dixie-bashers my comments that are not allowed through moderation, and for similar observations and commentary.
I reiterate, Backsass isn’t private. My wall is not private. My blog posts are not moderated — anybody and everybody can read ‘em. I may not approve membership for everyone at Backsass, but anybody can read it.
That tree you’re barking up? Wrong one.
Connie: You’re not pointing out hypocrisies because that would require the same people urging respect for the flag while showing it disrespect. Clearly, as the photos show, they’re not the same people.
Response: I am pointing out your and the SCV group that posted these pictures hypocrisies. I am also lumping all SCV/Heritage “defenders” until they engage in debate on how not to use their little flag. Apathy condemns them.
Connie: Rob, the people in the Virginia Flaggers photos and the people in the beach photos ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE.
Response: The website advocates both. The website is SCV run. Again, advocated by the same people. Same people is referring to the SCV group that both advertised saving the flag, and wearing it as a bikini.
Connie: Those who invented political correctness did so as part of the “long march through the institutions” designed to destroy the USA and western civilization. They don’t give a damn about the US flag OR those who denigrate it.
Response: No. It was originally used with strict reference to the word “correctness” without a concentration on language that might be offensive. This was the norm in the 18th century. The “New Left” rhetoric, which seems to be what you are referencing without the knowledge of what it actually is, began in a new progressive movement and then evolved into self satire. It’s current usage is a term for Conservatives to put down what they deem as politically progressive education. An example of this is the New Right that dislikes the fact that America was not founded as a Christian nation, and they dislike that fact being taught in schools. It was not a movement created to “destroy America.” I’m sorry, I’m sort of dumfounded at how stupid your statement is.
Connie: Degrees can be bought, or achieved by cheating, so I’m not impressed with you waving around your “credentials” — particularly in view of your oft-exhibited narrow-mindedness and incoherence. “Historical accuracy,” as determined by “historians and college professors,” is what a bunch of leftists in liberal academia have agreed on (or knuckle under to, as the case may be). The answer is “right” or “wrong” depending on whether it conforms to what they’ve chosen to label as “truth” and “historical accuracy.”
Response: You pathetic attempt at demeaning my education is unwarranted. If you are implying that I somehow cheated my way through a B.A., an M.A., and my current M.A., I’d ask you to quit being a turd in an attempt to win a debate. Simply because you’ve heard of such things, does not mean that implies to me. Pushing my POV’s to the side as narrow mindedness is absurd at best. You are the one that has only one point of view without recognizing change over time. Your attempts at demonizing scholarship as “leftist” illustrates that you have no grasp of historical accuracy. Instead of advancing a new argument, you choose to verbally assault those that do. Sad really.
Connie: Heritage is an INHERITANCE. You don’t determine whether an inheritance is an inheritance by comparing it to fake or incomplete history cooked up in left-leaning universities. and designed to promote or support a particular political/cultural mindset.
Response: Heritage may be associated with inheritance, but that does not mean that inheritance is absolute. It is a silly notion to think otherwise. Whether or not the heritage is accurate or not based on the actual history, does not take away from the heritage. Cross examination simply proves that the inheritance might be wrong. Again you are hiding this fact by demonizing everyone that disagrees as “Leftist.” Connie, I’m a Libertarian; hardly a leftist.
Connie: You don’t know that family histories differ — there are countless family histories out there you are totally unaware of, but you blanket condemn them anyway because you worship manipulative education.
Response: That is what you call “a lie,” and an underhanded approach. Not all family histories are inaccurate but they are all subject to cross examination. I have a family history, and I cross examined it. To say that I condemn all family stories/history is simply deceitful.
Connie: I understand what hypocrite means, and I can look at you — i.e., your writings and online presence — and know I’m seeing one. I don’t have to prove anything to you, Rob, regardless of how much “Tu quoque!” silliness you scream.
Response: Thank you for reiterating my point. You provide comedy for all onlookers.
Connie: You haven’t proven likemindedness. And your “those like the” phrase doesn’t get your behind out of the crack you wedged it in, Rob. You still attempted to say the flaggers and string bikini-ers were the same people, and they clearly are not, by the photographic proof presented.
Response: Pretty sure I said, “Those like,” insinuating common characteristics and not “clones.” Keep beating that strawman.
Connie: So, then, who are the “those like” the Flaggers and SCVers who treat the Southern flag as sinless? Be sure to show that they are the SAME PEOPLE who are fine with wearing it as a string bikini. If you aren’t talking about the people in the photos who are identified BY NAME, then identify who are ARE talking about. “Those like” is not sufficient identification.
Response: I never said, nor implied they were the same people but instead assert that they are alike.
Connie: You did identify ME as one who who is fine with wearing the Confederate flag as a string bikini. Since you made the accusation, it is up to you to prove it, or withdraw it.
Response: I made that argument and provided the proof by demonstrating your apathy. I even gave you a chance to comment here and say how you are against such use of the flag. Instead you refered to a random Facebook comment that you then refused to find. My statement stands.
Connie: Why would there be statements from the hierarchy? Maybe they do disagree and disapprove, but they don’t have a totalitarian, dictatorial thought-cop mentality like you and your Dixie-bashing buddies. Maybe, unlike y’all, they really do take free expression seriously, even for expression they don’t approve of. This is why your silly bellyaching about my “censorship” is so much sound and fury, signifying nothing. You LIKE some censorship and you get pissed of when it isn’t enforced.
Response: Interesting. No common goals? Each individual group is allowed to do what they want in complete anarchy? Why choose officers? Why have a National meeting? Why organize the organization into regions with “generals” etc. Honestly Connie do you think before you speak? The SCV is famous for provoking a bull crap narrative and condemning those that disagree? Free speech? What a joke. I despise censorship and I never use it. Not really sure why you are making this accusation. Keep in mind, you are the one that censors “free speech,” not I.
Connie: Identify them, then. Name the people who ARE LIKE the Flaggers or SCV members that treat the Southern banners as “sinless” but who AREN’T in the posted photos. And name the people who ARE LIKE those who are then fine with wearing it as a string bikini., but who AREN’T in the posted photos.” If you aren’t talking about the people in the photos Corey posted, but somebody else LIKE THEM, then name who you are talking about. “Those like” is not sufficient identification. It’s not identification at all.
Response: Judging by the apathy of those not caring who desecrates the flag; “those like” are you, the SCV, UDC, Flaggers etc and etc. Until you make a statement, you are just as condemnable as them in the hypocrisy that is “Southern Heritage.”
Connie: Generally, I prefer to make my groups and blog comments inaccessible to liars, disruptors and agents provocateurs intending to wreak havoc and destroy. That’s not “censoring people out.” Consider the lying and disrupting on a par with crying “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. It is NOT protected speech so disallowing it is not censorship.
Response: Word it how you want Connie, you are hiding behind your censorship.
Connie: Then my statement, “Since you don’t see *ALL* the comments I get, you don’t know what I allow and don’t allow,” stands. (Emphasis added.)
Response: I don’t need all comments to show your guilt, only a few.
Connie: You don’t know what you’re talking about. The Facebook group “180″ is not now Backsass. Backsass has never been 180. “180″ is now Due South. I have pretty much left it to itself. I repurposed it as an activism strategy group, took it private, and removed several members, or did not allow admission of several applicants, because that was not what they wanted to discuss. (“Defending heritage,” Rob, isn’t necessarily the same thing as strategizing activism.) But Facebook is a very inadequate format for that kind of effort, so I will eventually take strategizing activism to another venue. There are now are other admins at Due South, and it’s pretty much just another Southern group…
Response: Thanks for the clarification. But, it is still “defending heritage” by not actually defending. You are instead blocking people off of pages instead of debating.
Connie: I created Backsass on purpose for ME to post to you Dixie-bashers my comments that are not allowed through moderation, and for similar observations and commentary.
Response: You can post all the comments you want on my blog. I don’t censor people.
Connie: I reiterate, Backsass isn’t private. My wall is not private. My blog posts are not moderated — anybody and everybody can read ‘em. I may not approve membership for everyone at Backsass, but anybody can read it.
Response: It is private access hindering others from engagement. Your blog comments ARE moderated. Again, it is about your narcissistic control.
Connie: That tree you’re barking up? Wrong one.
Response: “That tree you’re barking up?” Sentence? Stop hiding in the trees Connie, people might not bark so much.