All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Friday, February 28, 2020

Highlights of the News



Donald John Trump is still our president.

ITEM 1: ABC reported, "For nearly 20 years as an up and coming politician, Bernie Sanders supported ideas on what causes cancer outside of the mainstream, such as sexual inactivity as a cause of breast cancer.

"'The manner in which you bring up your daughter with regard to sexual attitudes may very well determine whether or not she will develop breast cancer, among other things,' Sanders wrote in an essay headlined 'Cancer, Disease and Society' in 1969. 'How much guilt, nervousness have you imbued in your daughter with regard to sex?'"

It's even worse.

Breadline Bernie believes the air you exhale causes floods, droughts, forest fires, and global warming.

ITEM 2: The Independent reported, "NHS patients could be denied lifesaving care during a severe corona virus outbreak in Britain if intensive care units are struggling to cope, senior doctors have warned.

"Under a so-called three wise men protocol, three senior consultants in each hospital would be forced to make decisions on rationing care such as ventilators and beds, in the event hospitals were overwhelmed with patients.

"The medics spoke out amid frustration over what one said was the government’s dishonest spin that the health service was well prepared for a major pandemic outbreak."

Government-run health care is putting your life in the government's hands. I suggest if you get this flu in Britain, you bring frankincense, gold, and myrrh for the wise men.

ITEM 3: The Associated Press reported, "Democratic presidential contenders are describing the federal infectious-disease bureaucracy as rudderless and ill-prepared for the corona virus threat because of budget cuts and ham-handed leadership by President Donald Trump. That’s a distorted picture. For starters, Trump hasn’t succeeded in cutting the budget.

"He’s proposed cuts but Congress ignored him and increased financing instead. The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aren’t suffering from budget cuts that never took effect."

This is how you rebuild credibility: by telling the truth one story at a time.

ITEM 4: Democrats used to root for the collapse of the American economy.



Now they openly wish for our death.

ITEM 5: CBS reported, "New Mexico Goveror Michelle Lujan Grisham signed a red-flag gun bill Tuesday that will allow state district courts to order the temporary surrender of firearms, and she urged sheriffs to resign if they still refuse to enforce it.

"Flanked by advocates for stricter gun control and supportive law enforcement officials at a signing ceremony, Lujan Grisham said the legislation provides law enforcement authorities with an urgently needed tool to deter deadly violence by temporarily removing firearms from people who pose a threat to themselves or others.

"Some sheriffs from mostly rural areas opposed the bill in committee hearings as a violation of constitutional guarantees to due process, free speech and the right to bear arms. Public rallies were held for and against the legislation."

She should demand the sheriffs of Bernalillo County and New Mexico County, and the police chief of San Miguel resign because they refuse to enforce immigration laws.

ITEM 6: Grist reported, "Major news networks devoted less than 4 hours to climate change in 2019. Total."

The story said, "The analysis focused on four nightly news programs — ABC’s World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, NBC’s Nightly News, and public broadcaster PBS’s NewsHour — as well as four Sunday morning political shows: ABC’s This Week With George Stephanopoulos, CBS’s Face the Nation, NBC’s Meet the Press, and Fox Broadcasting Co.’s Fox News Sunday."

Climate change advocates hardest hit. Sasquatch and the Easter Bunny feel their pain.

ITEM 7The Washington Examiner reported, "Facebook’s welcoming of political advertising has helped it corner about 60% of the digital market for the 2020 elections, or nearly $800 million, according to a new marketing analysis.

"The report from eMarketer added that Google captured 18.2% of ads during the 2020 election period.

"'Facebook is the dominant digital platform for political ads, capturing a 59.4% share during the 2019-20 election cycle. That equates to $796.8 million,' said eMarketer.

"Google’s take so far is $243.7 million."

Conservatives don't trust Google to be fair. Zuckerberg at least tries to appear to be fair in a sort of I-am-too-goofy-to-be-partisan way.

ITEM 8: Task & Purpose reported, "Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger has ordered all Confederate-related paraphernalia to be removed from Marine Corps installations, his spokesman confirmed on Wednesday.

"A document showing the commandant’s decision appeared online on Wednesday, though it did not say when all of the Confederate-related paraphernalia needed to be removed by.

"Berger’s spokesman confirmed to Task & Purpose that the commandant had sent a directive to his senior staff ordering all installations to get rid of symbols of the Confederate States of America."

This should have been done 154 years ago, in fact, there never should have been Confederate-related paraphernalia on any Marine installation. I get that Confederate soldiers are considered veterans but the Confederate cause was as unAmerican as the Nazi cause.

ITEM 9: The Daily Caller reported, "A CNN report on pro-life legislation described a baby who survived an abortion as a 'fetus that was born.'"

A fetus that was born describes most of their anchors and panelists. Dumb as rocks and not as interesting.

By the way, these are the sames fetuses who were born that clutched their pearls because Warren said she heard Bloomberg told a pregnant woman to "kill it."

ITEM 10: WIS reported, "Cole Kazmarski and thousands of other voters in South Carolina will be casting their ballots in the Democratic Presidential Preference Primary on Saturday.

"Kazmarski is the Vice Chair for the Midlands Republican Liberty Caucus. 'This coming Saturday I plan to vote for Bernie,' she said.

"Kazmarski is taking part in Operation Chaos 2020. Some conservative Republicans in South Carolina are protesting open primaries in the Palmetto State by voting on Saturday. "The only thing you have to lose is you get on their mailing list and they spend a little ad money on you in the future."

"Pressley Stutts is the Chairman of the Greenville Tea Party. He is urging fellow Republicans to vote for Senator Bernie Sanders in Saturday's primary. 'We are open and proud about it,' he said.

"Stutts said if Sen. Sanders were to become the Democratic nominee, he believes President Donald Trump would have an easier path to reelection."

A far more effective move would be to vote for Andrew Yang, If he were to win the primary after dropping out, open primaries would be gone with the wind. But frankly, my dear...

ITEM 11: The New York Times reported, "Dozens of interviews with Democratic establishment leaders this week show that they are not just worried about Mr. Sanders’s candidacy, but are also willing to risk intraparty damage to stop his nomination at the national convention in July if they get the chance.

"Since Mr. Sanders’s victory in Nevada’s caucuses on Saturday, The Times has interviewed 93 party officials — all of them superdelegates, who could have a say on the nominee at the convention — and found overwhelming opposition to handing the Vermont senator the nomination if he arrived with the most delegates but fell short of a majority.

The story also said, "From California to the Carolinas, and North Dakota to Ohio, the party leaders say they worry that Mr. Sanders, a democratic socialist with passionate but limited support so far, will lose to President Trump, and drag down moderate House and Senate candidates in swing states with his left-wing agenda of Medicare for All and free four-year public college."

If they want to burn down their house, let's hand them some matches and a few gallons of gasoline.

ITEM 12: Warren tried to politicize the flu.
The WWE doffed its cap to that smackdown.

ITEM 13: UCLA declares a high school student a leading scholar.
Every graduate of that college should demand a full refund.

ITEM 14: Too many people have the Jack Benny approach to health care.
MUGGER: Your money or your life.

No reply.

MUGGER: I said, your money or your life.

BENNY: I'm thinking, I'm thinking.

The thread referred to in the tweet.

ITEM 15: Ah, the professionalism of reporters.
How's her Hindi?

83 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. #8 The last great remnant of the Confederate States of America was the Democrat party.
      I say was rather than is because the Dem party of today has morphed from jim crow and kkk to a party on the brink of socialist utopia.
      Garbage either way.

      Delete
  2. "I get that Confederate soldiers are considered veterans but the Confederate cause was as unAmerican as the Nazi cause."

    Huh?

    It's way too early in the day to blame that remark on drinking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed; the only excuse for such an outrageous assertion is bigotry of the most proudly ignorant sort, imho.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Surber is from West Virginia. Anyone remember why West Virginia is not part of Virginia any more? Anyone? Anyone? Robert Bacjand? Robert Bacjand? Anyone?

      Given the state's origin, I'd say Mr. Surber's attitude is unsurprising.

      (What do they teach them at these schools?}

      Delete
    3. A Seawriter:
      Unless I am mistaken, your defense of the bigotry and outright hatred shown by Mr Surber rests on the lack of education in his ignorant upbringing?

      Bigotry is bigotry regardless of cause.

      Defense of bigotry is no virtue, regardless of motive.

      Delete
    4. I grew up in Cleveland. The valor of the soldiers I do not question. We acknowledged them as veterans in the 1950s. But slavery was wrong and ending it was good. If that is bigotry, so be it.

      Delete
    5. Your deliberate(?) conflation of your bigotry regarding the motives of Confederate soldiers with the issue of slavery in America is almost universal among such haters of all things Southern American, and just as specious and as ungermane to the issue as always when used thus.

      Ending slavery is not the question under discussion, sir; nor is your provenance; the question is your refusal to retract your outrageous equation of those fought for the Confederacy as nazi-like in their motivation, is the issue under discussion.

      You have made by my count 3 replies to this question.

      In none of those replies have you even acknowledged your insult, careless or otherwise, to the motives, memory, and the honor, of those who fought and died for their homes, their families, and for their homeland States.

      Will you retract your blindly bigoted, ignorant, and outrageous assertion equating Southern patriots with nazis, or no, sir?

      Also, you will greatly enjoy 'Freedom Road', should you so read, Don; it was written by Howard Fast, an openly commie American patriot who also wrote the novel 'Spartacus', yes -the- Spartacus...

      Delete
    6. Your name must be Jim Crow or a close cousin thereof. I know you probably don’t think of yourself as a racist and I might even agree with you. Such as some Germans in the German army of World War II really were not Nazis and probably thought it’s a damn shame that my Jewish acquaintances were sent off to God knows where and I really didn’t care for it, but by God it’s my country and if I’m called up to fight, then I’m going to do my duty. Now, most Confederates did not own slaves, but they still went ahead and fought for a country that had slavery enshrined in their founding documents. I don’t know that todays German Government honors the average German soldier, but they don’t allow the f***ing Nazi flag in their pathetic army of today. In fact, I’m pretty sure it’s banned in that country. There is no way that the Confederate flag has any place in our federal government and and deserves any iota of respect. Any time I drive by a house with a Confederate flag, I think “Loser” and, guess what, it’s true, the South f***ing lost and good riddance! I rage when I see Trump sign in that lawn because of that unfair association. Don’t get me started on the institute of Jim Crow, Reconstruction should have lasted 50 years instead of 5. So, if you, good sir (maybe) fly or admire the Confederate flag, then let me do my best Jim Carrey expression, “L-oooooooser!”

      Delete
    7. Yeah Nony! No one is as big a loser a someone that would post a disjointed reply as you have. You've joined the ignoramus club with that one. Lincoln, and his followers, were the closest thing to Nazis in 1861.

      By the by, the war was not about slavery. The question was whether or not the constitution was going to rule. Appomatox answered, "NO!" Those who love Lincoln, and hate the modern left are truly confused.

      Delete
    8. >>> Being on the wrong side of a war happens...The South was trying to hold onto an institution of human bondage by couching it in States' rights arguments. To parallel the Nazi debate; if the Germans in their Army argued they were fighting for their 'way of life' that happened to include gassing to death an entire race, would their argument carry the slavery validity in the Southern Confederate Army. No one flies Nazi flags in Germany. ZBest

      Delete
  3. 5 - a temporary confiscation that will last a lifetime.

    10 & 11 - I may become a Breadline Bernie Bro on Super Tuesday.

    15 - the reporter is too stupid to know how stupid she is.

    ReplyDelete
  4. #15 - Austrailian

    ReplyDelete
  5. If Trump is my president then why doesn't he act like it?

    You can't gaslight a pandemic. The markets know this. How did Trump's assurances play to those who live & die by risk? The markets speak for themselves. Heckuva job, Trumpy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OR....
      Soros, et al, who almost broke the Bank Of England some years ago, is now attempting to break the US economy using the very same tactics he did then, but now he has many many rich rich rich elitist allies to help begin the current selloff, and msm allies to fan hysteria into a real stock crash.

      One thing for sure: whomsoever is at the root of this obvious market manipulation, you can rest easy that they heartily appreciate all you do here assist their efforts to wreck the world...

      Delete
    2. Boo on Trump because he happened to be president at a peak moment in Chinese Communist incompetence.

      Delete
    3. 'Heckuva job, Trumpy....'
      Quoteth the troll

      I've seen this story play out several times, several ways:
      H1N1, sars, swine flu, mad cow, measles, mumps (thanks illegals and anti-vaxxers for those two), aids, and even legionaire's disease.
      In each case without exception, the world did not come to an end.

      But it's funny how you're worried about the stock market all of a sudden, guess you're just a capitalist after all.



      Delete
  6. '...the Confederate cause was as unAmerican as the Nazi cause.'
    Spoken like a true yankee.

    Rather a surprise to this avid Surber fan, given your seeming support for individual liberty, free association, and sovereignty of individual states of the union.

    Many among the descendants of those who rose against armed invaders of their homeland, and of their very homes; invaders loudly and repeatedly declaring their intent to rape every woman in every one of those homes, to plunder all wealth in those homes, and to pillage to utter annihilation every material vestige of that homeland, specifically to leave those still alive with literally NOTHING; may have some differing opinions regarding your equation of their defense of their lives, loved ones, and their homes, with WWII nazi attempt at world conquest, sir.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Individual liberty applies to slaves.
      I understand the valor of your people. They fought the wrong cause

      Delete
    2. THIS EXACTLY!!!

      Delete
    3. Please allow me to respectfully rejoin your reply, sir.

      Diaries, letters, and news articles of the period clearly and overwhelming show the motivation of almost every single man and woman, black and white, who fought for the Confederacy, did so out of love for home, family, and to shake of outright tyranny of Federal actions far more nazi-like than such persons are likely to ever admit.

      IOW, they fought for precisely the same reasons as did Our Founding Fathers.

      Howard Fast: 'Freedom Road'.

      Look it up, sir; a fine novel; and historically eye-opening to the shuttered minds of West Virginia smug bigots, sir.

      Delete
    4. No, Don. They fought for the right cause. Yankees fought to make the world safe for the deep state. Yankees fought for the wrong cause - tyranny.

      Funny the rest of the western world ended slavery without setting their country on fire and turning theirs against their founders. Lincoln did both.

      Delete
  7. Can't wait to see the commandant March into Arlington to remove this one:
    https://www.arlingtoncemetery.mil/Explore/Monuments-and-Memorials/Confederate-Memorial

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent rejoinder to the ignorant outright bigotry Mr. Surber aimed at desecrating the sacred memories of heroic sacrifices of myriad men defending their families, homes, and livelihoods from armed invaders operating as terrorists.

      Mr. Surber may well have most unnessecarily and most egregiously poked a hornet nest he should have avoided.

      Delete
    2. Removing the Confederate Battle Flag is not desecrating anyone. Rather this tells black Marines that they belong, that their heroism and sacrifices have meaning.

      Delete
    3. The commandant is just one more asshat general. Zero screwed up the Corps with dipshit officers and social change crap. Of course, that dippy GWB used them like the army. Marines are a naval landing force that goes ashore kills people and goes back aboard. Twenty years is a little too long to fight a successful war. Now our President is withdrawing from this 20 year crap. MAGA 2020

      Delete
    4. The Commandant is equating George Wallace's use of the symbol as its only meaning, which fits the "narrative" and proclaims his virtue, just in time for the SC primary.

      Delete
    5. Do, you are digging your hole deeper. You keep posting inanities. Removing the battle Flag tells everyone that no one is welcome. Those Black Marines, if they think it makes them unwelcome, are among the many that have been been filled hate a lies. Removing Confed paraphernalia does nothing to solve the problem. What you've posted on the issue is simply idiotic.

      Delete
  8. Quote,"Many among the descendants of those who rose against armed invaders of their homeland..."
    And who took the first shot in the Civil War? Oh yea, the South. Losers expect sympathy for starting a fight they can't finish. At least the Japanese had the class to apologize.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your ignorance matches perfectly with your hubris, sir.

      You may want to read up a bit more from sources other than anti-South, on causes and 'first shots'...

      Delete
  9. Oh lighten up on Don's quote about the Confederate/Nazis. Of course Slavery was wrong! Yes, I understand SC did have a right to leave the Union and the Federal government started it, blah blah blah.
    Bottom line Slavery bad. Don makes that obvious point. Move on!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Slavery bad, something no one argues against, is given as THE reason the South fought, precisely because the North won. Winners always dictate the results.

      By the way, as an Unknown poster referenced above, free blacks in the South (yes, there were some), fought for the South for reasons other than slavery, as did most of the private soldier level whites. Facts that had been suppressed by the North until research by others revealed those facts many years after the war. The South was taken to war by rich plantation owners, elites, and their stupid press. Very much like many of the wars conducted by this country.

      But, Don has the right to his opinion. This is his blog after all.

      FLOlson

      Delete
    2. FLOsen - I don't think anyone contests that Don has the right to post his opinion. But,ignorant opinion, like any other propaganda drives people away. Posting the stupidity he has about the War of Northern Aggression has the potential to negate the work he has built for years in this blog. Frankly, it's disgusting to anyone who is aware of the facts, and rejects the Lincolnian propaganda.

      Delete
    3. ...Hey QM call it the 'Civil War' for heaven sake. The Soviets called WWII the 'Great Patriotic War' after invading Poland with Hitler. Was anyone else in the World post WWII referring to a dictatorship that killed millions of its own subjects 'patriotic?' Let the Northern Aggression crap go. Firing on a U.S. military instillation was an act of war on a sovereign nation; and treasonous at best (e.g. Sumter). ZB

      Delete
  10. Equating the South to Nazism is where you went off the cliff, Don. That is about as Biden as Biden gets.

    I am willing to chalk it up to Corona Virus
    pre-pandemic jitters.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Let's be careful in throwing around a suspect work such as "bigot". We're all bigoted and in many ways. I don't like beets. Get to the higher view...what are the complexities surrounding any issue? What are the pros and cons? What are the evidences regarding results? Those would be better discussions.

    Compare with throwing around the word "cult".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, let's all be real careful throwing around such loaded terms as 'bigot'.

      Feel free,though, to use 'nazi' all you like; as it has the blog hosts' imprimatur...

      Delete
  12. 10 - Its a dangerous game

    ReplyDelete
  13. Item 8: During my time as a Marine I served with several people from Confederate states, most with tattoos proclaiming their allegiance to the honor of the South. I wonder if those tattoos will be part of the directed removal effort. Mildly off-topic, the people with the gaudiest Confederate tattoos were generally the least racist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. De Toqueville noted during his travels that those who had Negros present the most, hated them the least. Yankee land had a deep and abiding hate of the black race.That hasn't changed.

      Delete
  14. Millions of us Confederates vote Trump and other Born Again Christians , Don

    ReplyDelete
  15. I remember the Civil War. I was there, in the fields, in the ditches, covered in mud and blood. I don't regret a single minute of it because someone had to report live from the battle field!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bwahahahahahah! Good one!

      I would not put it past brainiac Brian to try that.

      FLOlson

      Delete
  16. WEN1963, Trump's owner:
    Try reading my posts.

    Nowhere do I make any reference to slavery, let alone to whether ending it was good or not.

    Again, for the simpleminded:
    The issue is not whether 'ending slavery' was good.

    The issue is whether Mr. Surbers' claim to know the motives of all who fought against Federal invasions of sovereign States is factual, or not.

    If he does not know those hearts and minds, is it an outrageous slur to equate their motives, (their 'cause'), as evil on par with motives of nazi WWII world conquest efforts?

    Does anyone here assert the insight of Mr. Surber into those hearts and minds is perfectly, or even remotely, factual?

    If so, plz link your sources for such claims.

    (pssst-no links will be found, cuz there -is- no factual basis in the historical record for such an assertion)

    A simple retraction of such a slur would obviate, even moot, further discussion, yet despite at least 3 replies, Mr. Surber has yet to even acknowledge his slur is unfactual, presumptious, and an error in judgement.

    The issue is ignorance among yankees, breeding such bigotry as shown herein by yourselves and by Mr. Surber, regarding the motives and causes of that war between states.

    Even your usage of such an invalid and unfactual term as 'civil war' shows ignorance of historical fact, or deliberate obfuscatory intent, re the actual history of what was a war of governments and organized military arms between States just as any war between nations.

    NOT in any way, shape, nor form a 'civil war', in which unorganized gangs and factions fight in the streets against an establishment of governing authority, haphazardly killing any and all in their sights.

    Mr. Surber declared those who fought Fed invaders did so motivated by '...the wrong cause.'

    Such an assertion must rest on his all too common yankee presumption that retaining slavery was the prime, if not sole, motive of almost all, if not all, who did fight for their State against Federal terrorist invaders.

    The issue here is not whether 'ending slavery' was good or not, it is the bigotry promoted and spread herein by Mr. Surber in claiming to know the hearts and minds of every man who fought against Federal invasions, because there are literally NO facts in the historical record to support his slur.

    (Were those slaves who took up arms for the South doing so in order to preserve their own slavery?
    The question answers itself, does it not?)

    As such, the reasonable and adult response to such mistakes is to retract, not dig your heels in.

    (BTW, 'Trump's owner', 'Trump's' as you spell it, means 'Trump is'. If you want to show you own Trump, the apostrophe goes AFTER the 's'.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I named my dog Trump in October 2016 after the now greatest president in 100+ years so I am in fact Trump's owner.

      Delete
  17. Lincoln won in 1860 on a platform of halting the spread of slavery to the territories. He was quite clear that the Federal Government had no authority to interfere with slavery in the slave states.

    Everyone knew that there were going to be US states from sea to shining sea by the end of the century.

    No more slave states meant a change in the balance of power and the possibility of ending slavery by Constitutional amendment.

    The slave power forced secession because it saw the handwriting on the wall.

    The blather about States Righrs was and is smoke and mirrors. No one was proposing to violate the rights of any states - except probably for Democrats who wanted to use the Dred Scott decision as a wedge to force slavery on the free states.

    Secession is completely incompatible with the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. The Constitution and laws made under it are supreme over state laws *and state constitutions.*

    There is no more authoritative political act of a state than a constitutional convention. A secession convention is the same thing, trying to assert the state's political authority to break the federal constitutional compact. Illegal on the face of it. If you don't believe me ask James Madison.

    Confederate soldiers were often brave men who had their own reasons for fighting. But they were plunged into a horrible war by slave owning elites who were just as feckless and self-interested as our elites today.

    Slavery, socialism, it's all "You work and I eat." Same cause and oddly enough, same party.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing in the Constitution about states leaving. The Federalist Papers put forth secession as the last defense against a tyrannical national government.

      Amendment IX
      The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

      Amendment X
      The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

      Yeah, they had the right.

      Delete
    2. Depends on what you call tyrannical. Lincoln was against slavery, but he made it VERY clear that he would not ban it in states where it already legally existed. What he was against was allowing it to spread to other territories and states. That wasn't enough for Davis, Stephens, Breckenridge, et al. They wanted slavery to be legal everywhere, and used states rights as the vehicle to legitimize their secession. The North opposed secession because they and the Founding Fathers before them realized that allowing secession at will would inevitably lead to the destruction of the union followed by bloody wars of conquest and defense among the separate states or combination of states against one another. likely accompanied by foreign intervention. The Southern Rebellion was bloody, but its death toll pales in comparison to the wars Europe has seen since that time.

      TarsTarkas

      Delete
    3. Tars, There was no "southern rebellion." That is simply propaganda. The south had the right to leave, no matter the reason, or having no reason at all. Lincoln was widely regarded as a tyrant in the north, not just the south. Those holding that evaluation of the man have been proven right.

      Delete
  18. From the author if the previous long post: I am a Southerner from the mountains, not a Yankee. I just refuse to accept Democrat propaganda, old or new.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. My wife and I have the same roots most of our Ancestors were for the Union-they were from Unionists from: Virginia,West Virginia, Kentucky,Tennessee.My North Carolina Cherokee ancestors were the ones who held slaves, passed for white and were pro-Confederacy. When My Gr.X2 Grandfather heard a Scots Presbyterian preacher preach on the evils of Slavery- he (this was just before the war and documented,) Sold the Tidewater plantation, freed his 20 Slaves and the family blew apart. the pro Union sons (Two) went west to Missouri along with one Sister and her Husband the Other Daughter and son Stayed as they were Pro South. My Wife's family on her Mom's side- were mainly Eastern Kentucky most of them Pro Union. However on her Cherokee side she was blood relative to Stand Waitie the last Confederate general to give up.-In Oklahoma..
      BTW My Grandma's family kept running into Trouble-in Misssouri Cantrill's raiders burned their farm.When Grandma and Grampa (this is my Pop's side moved to Oregon the ran headlong into Woodrow Wilson's Democrat Businessman's Klub-the KKK..
      Yes they flew Confederate flags at their meetings..
      with their hoods on Like Antifa-except Antifa doesn't have to wash the sheets-or themselves..

      Delete
  19. #8. I believe in freedom of expression and freedom of association. Let those who believed the democrats were right to revolt fly their banners. That way I know who not to associate with.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 2. Not sure what they mean by "not prepared." They've selected their "wise men" panels.
    4. I am sure soros is shorting the market making a ton of money supported by a fake media.
    5. She and the "supportive law enforcement officials" should resign for not supporting the second amendment.
    8. With the south losing the civil war, state's rights also suffered. The stars and bars represent support of state's rights. Is berger an obama general?
    11. Maybe the democrats will suffer the wrath of antifa. Will soros turn them loose in Milwaukee?

    ReplyDelete
  21. 4: Won't play in Peoria.

    8: The Marines answer to Congress. The House is run by Lefties. So they go along to get along.

    ReplyDelete
  22. You acknowledge that Confederate soldiers were considered veterans, Don, but did you know that the Department of the Army authorized a set of Civil War battle honors for units that had fought for the Confederacy? On the colors of the 141st Field Artillery Regiment, Louisiana National Guard, for example, you can see the campaign streamers for its service at battles like Cold Harbor, Gettysburg and Chickamauga serving with the C.S. Army alongside those it earned in the Mexican War, both World Wars and in Iraq serving with the U.S. Army.

    Should the Army Department take those away those, too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Honors earned in war, even if given to the wrong side, is one thing. Openly flying or displaying a flag of rebellion is another. And the Confederate flag isn't just a flag of rebellion; to many blacks it is the flag of Jim Crow. Discrimination by race. Separate and unequal. Flaunt it all you want in private. This country was founded in rebellion. But the Stars and Bars shouldn't be displayed on state or federal ground except as you described or as part of memorials. Just my opinion.

      TarsTarkas

      Delete
    2. Why? If the Confederate cause is as Mr. Surber describes it, as un-American as the Nazi cause, how can battle honors earned in the service to that cause be acknowledged and honored by the United States Army, the very army that those honors were earned against?

      If we take Don at his word, they can't.

      Delete
    3. It's just too bad, Tars, that there was no rebellion in the south. If there was rebellion, Lincoln led as he refounde the country, denigrating the states from the founding entities of FedGov, to mere departments. The country is still suffering for it. Some the biggest victims are those who joined Lincoln in his rebellion.

      Delete
  23. As with Gen. Lee, Southern people's first allegiance was to their state at that time. Jefferson in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and Madison in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, both wrote that states had the right to nullify federal laws such as the Alien and Sedition Act.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee was a traitor, and shouldda been hung after the WAR. The U.S. kept him around after the War like they did with the Japanese Emperor, post WWII. It made for an easier transition in occupied military governorship. ZB

      Delete
    2. So, exactly what law or laws were the Southern States trying to nullify?

      Delete
  24. Hooaaahhhh! Hot time on the ol' blog this morning Don. Lots of good and bad in the many comments above and I just have to weigh in. It is your blog Don, and whether we agree or disagree I respect your work. If we disagree we keep it civil and polite.
    That said, there is nothing "civil" about a war, any war. "War between the States" is about as neutral as we can get. I have many friends and family on BOTH sides of that Mason-Dixon line. I'm fifth-generation Oregonian, and while Oregon wasn't very close to the war, it still has a very conflicted history from statehood (1859) to this very day, from sundown laws and a very active KKK, to the leftoid lunacy we see dominating our state politics now. Our Republican legislature has walked out in order to deprive the Democrats of a quorum in driving their insane agenda right now.
    One of the best books I've read that gave me an entirely different perspective on American History than I'd ever encountered before was James Webb: "Born Fighting", a history of the Scots-Irish in America.
    Keep up the great bloggy goodness Don, even if it means swatting a few angry hornets now and then.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg_Kate may have a succession problem of her own if the Dems keep going. But more akin to the American Revolution.

      "Trump to Pendelton! 2020!" James Webb's book is great-got a copy..
      My wife and I's People...
      BTW if you get a chance, the Union Co. Historical Society has a display on the History of the KKK in NE Oregon. No Party metioned..

      Delete
    2. 'Fields of Fire' ---- a great work. He would've been my last Democrat vote as a Dino, if he'd stayed in the Presidential race

      Delete
  25. Come for the conservative view point, stay for the education in opinion differences, grammar and oxymorons.
    Jumbo shrimp = big little things
    military intelligence = action not thougt
    civil war = [there ain't no such a thing here either]
    Wow! What a can of worms got itself opened here.
    Remember, people, after ALL is said and argued, This nation was founded on the sovereign citizen, eg; I am my own final authority and responsibility for my actions is mine. [You ain't in charge of me, I am.] OK, now; fight nice.

    ReplyDelete
  26. As a yankee, Don is wrong about #8. The south was being wronged by the feds and the constitution clearly states it is well within states rights to part company should that occur.

    Lincoln was the great destroyer. The war did not start with the slaves as the cause and slavery was dying out as the founders knew it would eventually. B.S.G.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Best read the articles of separation penned by the states. Slavery is front and foremost.

      Delete
    2. The Constitution is silent on secession.

      Delete
    3. Because it is a states right. And the states in question agreed to leave. Lincoln crapped all over them and due to his illegal actions we have an overbearing federal government which is not what the founders intended, indeed went out of their way to try and prevent. B.S.G.

      Delete
    4. Oh, since ya are all about the Constitution, then Lincoln had explicit Constitutional authority to supress rebellion. And, yes, it was.


      But, let's say, it's ok to break up the US over policy decisions, the US had every right to take back their own property and that not just includes buildings and such, but land.


      Delete
    5. I grew-up in the West and Midwest, and never gave much thought to the Civil War. However, the discussions around removing Confederate monuments motivated me to read each Confederate state Secession Declaration, and the Emancipation Proclamation (EP). I also looked at maps of that era, post-WW1, post-WW2, and subsequent eras.

      I learned that :
      a) 27% (4 of 15) of the slave states did not try to succeed from the USA.
      b) 45% (5 of 11) of the Confederate states did not note Slavery as a reason for succeeding.
      c) 63% (7 of 11) of the Confederate states specifically mentioned Rights in their declarations of succession.
      d) the EP did not apply to all of the counties in the states that were part of the Confederacy (some were exempt).
      e) the EP did not free slaves that were in states that were not part of the Confederacy.
      f) Since 1861 changing political boundaries have been a constant (colonial expansion, collapse of empires, independence movements)- including the formation of dozens of new nations since 1990.

      I came to these conclusions:
      1) The motives behind heated debates of any era are rarely simple to explain - and more than one "thing" can be true.
      2) People of all eras know this simple truth: History is written by the victors.
      3) The political boundaries of 1861 were not carved in stone.
      4) Supporting leaving the various Confederate monuments in place means you are pro-American history, not pro-Slavery.

      Delete
  27. #2 I guess bribery can go a long way when you need it.

    #3 Typical of the do nothing Congress.

    #4 I for one wish for the death of the Far Left Fake News.

    #8 I won't weigh in on this one due to conflicting emotions.

    Kate

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mr. Surber, You really should apologize for that Nazi crap! I do enjoy your take on the news and you are USUALLY right on, but this time you have DEFINITELY gone too far! NOTHING that was done by the Confederate could be remotely equated to the persecution and EXTERMINATION done by Nazis! Many have pointed out that slavery was NOT the overriding issue of the war, it was the overbearing rule by the northern states! I've already been banned from a couple of sites due to calling out the authors on their wrong opinions - they would rather just ban you than realize that their readers overwhelmingly disagreed. I do hope you will retract that Nazi and UNAmerican slam! What's more American than standing up to an overbearing ruler? THAT is how we BECAME Americans!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The cruelty of slavery is akin to concentration camps. Your point about extermination is valid.

      As for an overbearing ruler, secession began before Lincoln took office.

      The South was rather overbearing as well. Dred Scott imposed upon the North an acceptance of slavery, which Notherners had ended. The 13 original colonies had slavery. In the 19th century, the Northern states gave it up.

      Delete
  29. Well Don, I guess you can go pull down some statues now. For a very long time the only people that could be joked about has been southerners. Fact is, southerners are a proud bunch and can deal with your hate for us. Just a basket of deplorables, huh Don.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Slavery was exactly the reason for the Civil War. Look up the stated reasons from the states that actually put pen to paper.

    Most state it is about slavery within the first few sentences. S. Carolina, on the other hand, takes it time and lays down the state's right foundation before asserting it's a right to own slaves.

    So, no matter if any Southerner owned slaves or not, the fact is they fought for the right to own slaves.

    That's a policy issue that the Democrats were losing on so they tried to tear the US apart and when vanquished claimed moral superiority.

    Just wow.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "I think it wiser, moreover, not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered."

    - Robert E Lee, 1869

    http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/saxon/servlet/SaxonServlet?source=/xml_docs/valley_news/newspaper_catalog.xml&style=/xml_docs/valley_news/news_cat.xsl&level=edition&paper=rv&year=1869&month=09&day=03&edition=rv1869/va.au.rv.1869.09.03.xml

    ReplyDelete
  32. I grew-up in the West and Midwest, and never gave much thought to the Civil War. However, the discussions around removing Confederate monuments motivated me to do read each Confederate state Secession Declaration, and the Emancipation Proclamation (EP). I also looked at maps of that era, post-WW1, post-WW2, and subsequent eras.

    I learned that :
    a) 27% (4 of 15) of the slave states did not try to succeed from the USA.
    b) 45% (5 of 11) of the Confederate states did not note Slavery as a reason for succeeding.
    c) 63% (7 of 11) of the Confederate states specifically mentioned Rights in their declarations of succession.
    d) the EP did not apply to all of the counties in the states that were part of the Confederacy (some were exempt).
    e) the EP did not free slaves that were in states that were not part of the Confederacy.
    f) Since 1861 changing political boundaries have been a constant (colonial expansion, collapse of empires, independence movements)- including the formation of dozens of new nations since 1990.


    I came to these conclusions:
    1) The motives behind heated debates of any era are rarely simple to explain - and more than one "thing" can be true.
    2) People of all eras know this simple truth: History is written by the victors.
    3) The political boundaries of 1861 were not carved in stone.
    4) Supporting the various Confederate monuments means you are pro-American history, not pro-Slavery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only 6 states actually gave reasons.

      Excerpts ...

      Georgia (slavery starts with 2nd sentence) ...

      "The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic."


      Mississippi (slavery starts with 2nd Sentence) ...

      "In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

      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. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization."


      South Carolina's takes it's time, but even the first sentence is about slavery albeit veiled.

      "The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.

      ...

      The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

      This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.

      The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

      ...

      For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.

      ...

      On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States."


      (Continued ...)

      Delete
  33. Texas

    (Slavery starts with 4th sentence)

    "She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.

    ...

    In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."


    Virgina

    (An ordinance ... slavery starts with 1st sentence)

    "The people of Virginia, in their ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, adopted by them in Convention on the twenty-fifth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, having declared that the powers granted under the said Constitution were derived from the people of the United States, and might be resumed whensoever the same should be perverted to their injury and oppression; and the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States."

    Sorry, it was all about slavery.

    And, I mistyped, only 5 states gave reasons other than "me too"

    ReplyDelete
  34. The 5 major Southern states that I listed gave very specific reasons, all tied to slavery.

    Louisiana, North Carolina, Florida, and Tennessee just stated they were leaving with no attempts at justifying.

    Alabama and Arkansas hide their slavery stance by noting with the election of Lincoln and the growth of power by Lincoln's "sectional" party is hostile to the peace and domestic institutions of the state. Knowing full well what Lincoln ran on and the history of slave/non slave state compromises, it was about slavery.

    To assert that secession was not about slavery flies in the face of those that gave rationale for it. It is affront to our history up till that point.

    To assert a state has or had a right to leave per the Constitution ignores what the Framers did in conjoining federal with state.

    Madison, in 1833, clarified, that there was no inherent right to secession unless all parties agree or the compact was abrogated in some extreme fashion.

    S Carolina attempted to say that the part of the Constitution in which a person cannot go to another state to avoid debts or contractual service was an abrogation of the pact due to Northern states not returning slaves. This distorts what that part was about and, worse, makes the slave appear to be free to leave in the first place.

    The Fugitive Slave Act was a law passed as part of the Missouri Compromise. The law was ignored by Northen states. However, that law could have been strengthened, repealed, or replaced or the states sued in court. This in no way justfies secession.

    On and on it goes, the attempts to make the Civil War and it's justification moral and legal fell flat on it's face then and now.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >>> Facts are difficult things...Here endeth the lesson, Confederate defenders. ZB

      Delete
  35. My husband and I have been married for about 7 years now. We were happily married with two children, a boy and a girl. 3 months ago I started to notice strange behavior from him and a few weeks later I discovered that my husband was seeing someone. He started coming home late from work, he doesn't care about me or the kids anymore, sometimes he goes out and doesn't even come home for about 2-3 days. I did everything I could to correct this problem but to no avail. I became very worried and needed help. One day when I was surfing the Internet, I came across a website that suggested that Dr. Padman could help resolve marital problems, restore broken relationships, and so on. So I felt like I had to give it a try. I contacted him and he made a spell for me. Two days later, my husband came to see me and apologized for the wrongs he had committed and promised to never do it again. Since then, everything has returned to normal. My family and I live happily together again. All thanks to Dr. Padman. If you need a spellcaster capable of casting a spell that really works, I suggest you contact him. He will not disappoint you. Here is his email:

    padmanlovespell@yahoo.com or (info@padmanspell.com)

    WhatsApp +1 949 229 386
    website: https://padmanspell.com/index-3.html

    ReplyDelete