Welcome to the Blogosphere, Jerry Dunford!

It appears that Jerry Dunford of Urbanna, Virginia, recently discovered the internet and blogging. As Jerry puts it, he is “a man who loves God, his family and all of his Southern ancestors who sacrificed all they had to resist the Invaders Lincoln sent to kill and destroy the brave people of the South, both those that were members of The Confederate States Army and Navy, as well as many civilians. This was Immoral and illegal.”

Jerry’s been visiting blogs lately in an effort to spread the word. He’s also started his own blog. It’s here. And if you want to find out what Jerry thinks, you should visit him there. This passionate defender of the Virginia Flaggers appears to harbor concerns about gay people and non-Christians.  As he’s declared,

I am assuming the most of the anti-flagger, anti-South noise is coming from the following types of people,

* Homosexual
* Father- ?
* Religion- Catholic or non religious
* Democrat and Liberal
* No Military servise
* And most all of you support Obamas policies and character

Jerry’s convinced that people he doesn’t like have “sexual related internal issues that bother your manhood” and charges: “YOU LIBERALS ARE SO SCREWED UP.” That sounds a bit like fellow commenter Jefferson Moon, who also believes he’s been “barred” for his political views, but no mind. Some people need to believe what they believe.

I draw your attention to Jerry’s website because you’ll have to go elsewhere to learn what he believes and to see whether he retains his passion for the caps lock key. There are folks among you who find in his bigotry and his ignorance of history an easy target (especially as he loves those Virginia Flaggers), but I see no reason to allow him to spew his garbage here.

He’s compared Confederate heritage defenders to rape victims. That ought to draw Connie Chastain’s attention about false rape accusations, about which she’s a self-professed expert.

Take care, Jerry. Be sure to defend the Virginia Flaggers.


102 thoughts on “Welcome to the Blogosphere, Jerry Dunford!

  1. Jeffry Burden January 21, 2014 / 11:50 am

    Up side: when I’m feeling down or blue, I’ll have a new place to go to that will give me a chuckle. Maybe, someday, if I really work at it, I’ll be termed a “Faggot” too.

  2. Spelunker January 21, 2014 / 11:56 am

    Brooks you should put him in touch with Heimbach. Have you heard the latest craziness with that train wreck?

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 21, 2014 / 11:37 pm

      I understand that he has received the attention that Hathaway and Chastain crave.

  3. Brad January 21, 2014 / 12:05 pm

    I noticed that he has a certain “fondness” for Andy and devoted a post to him. You must be jealous Brooks!

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 21, 2014 / 12:08 pm

      I just don’t suffer fools gladly. If I really hated Confederate heritage advocates, I’d simply post his tripe.

      You just haven’t seen what I’ve declined to post. I’m waiting for the “freedom of speech” response.

  4. Al Mackey January 21, 2014 / 12:33 pm

    I can just imagine the semiliterate ravings Dumbford posts. Good for him. Since he’s made the troll roster of nearly every other blogger this appears to be the only way he’ll demonstrate his level of “intelligence.”

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 21, 2014 / 11:38 pm

      He’ll demonstrate it … that’s for sure. He’s about as smart as cackin’ Connie.

  5. Jimmy Dick January 21, 2014 / 1:36 pm

    I’m trying to hook Jerry up with Connie. Maybe between odiferous emissions of caps locked hatred of liberals and historians the two will strike sparks of mutual affection and discover an emotion stronger than the hate they share for people who use their brains.

    • Rob Baker January 21, 2014 / 6:17 pm

      You’ll never pull that off. Connie’s first love will always be Kevin.

      Sorry Brooks. 😦

      • Brooks D. Simpson January 21, 2014 / 11:40 pm

        Not only first love … but endless love.

        Sorry, Kevin. 😦

  6. BParks January 21, 2014 / 1:55 pm

    Jerry Dunford is proof that big dicks don’t always have them. Yeah I said that…

    • Jimmy Dick January 21, 2014 / 6:05 pm

      His reply to you on his site seems to indicate he is all in favor of advocating the forcible rape of women in order to prove his manliness and force his male supremacy views upon in addition to using rape and force as a means to prove his historical opinions. Judging by the fact he advocates conservative views I of course am not surprised that he would do so. He makes Todd Akin look progressive.

  7. Patrick Young January 21, 2014 / 5:29 pm

    I note that we Catholics like to think of ourselves as Christians.

  8. Bob Nelson January 21, 2014 / 6:07 pm

    Thanks but no thanks. Think I’ll have a manhattan instead.

  9. Jerry Sudduth January 21, 2014 / 6:25 pm

    First, I’d like to thank Dr. Simpson for giving us an avenue for discourse on the Civil War on the internet that discusses deeper issues of the war.

    I have seen the goings on of the Flagger folks on this and other Civil War forums and some of the vitriol is absurd. I don’t like talking about controversy, but it is just so aggravating when people argue points that fly in the face of facts so I thought I had to say something. I hope I don’t enflame matters, but I want to say something about this.

    I tend to base my views of the Civil War upon the evidence presented by historians who present their arguments based on sound reasoning with good supporting documentation from primary sources. My views have changed over time as reading further into topics and using reason has allowed me to see subjects objectively and on an even plane. I’ve allowed differing ideas to change my thinking if I see the reasoning to be sound. These tend to be academic sources, or well-researched campaign and battle narratives.

    That said, I tend to fundamentally disagree with some of the fatuous arguments presented by the Flagger/Heritage types on all levels. Their view of history is distorted. I don’t see the reasoning they get from the documents provided or where they get some of their information period.

    They can say and do what they want, as long as it doesn’t slander, libel, threaten or spread lies and misinformation about the topic being discussed. At the same time they’d better be able to defend their arguments with facts and research from legitimate sources. They don’t have to like the disagreeing viewpoint, but they cannot stifle it. I may disagree with their viewpoints but I don’t think they’re necessarily bad people and I don’t question anything about their personal lives, we just happen to disagree. No one here is trying that, they are presenting a differing viewpoint grounded in research and diligence. Their name-calling and questioning people’s proclivities and motives is weak sauce. I wish Mr. Dunford nothing but the best in his endeavors.

    Now, I don’t know if my history degree from Eastern Kentucky University or my ability to reason is satisfactory to discuss history, but if those credentials aren’t enough to satisfy Mr. Dunford and his cohorts, maybe these facts will. I am a veteran of the United States Army, being Honorably Discharged with the rank of Sergeant. I am a heterosexual, as my recent purchase of an engagement ring for my very female girlfriend will attest and I am from Kentucky, which while it didn’t secede, was a slave-state at the time of the Civil War. Now my Kentucky ancestors fought for the Union, so that alone may disqualify me.

    In spite of my credentials I hope my opinion will matter as much as the Flagger and Heritage crowd.

  10. Charles Lovejoy January 21, 2014 / 6:29 pm

    I’m southern accent and all, direct descendant of Confederate solders, I’m about as left as can be on most of issues, Vote Green party… but don’t post anti-flagger, anti-South noise. Please don’t tell Jerry Dunford,:-)

  11. Charles Lovejoy January 21, 2014 / 6:40 pm

    And in my lifetime, excluding JFK the most liberal presidents were southern, LBJ, Carter and Clinton.

  12. Ben Allen January 21, 2014 / 7:06 pm

    He’s anti-Catholic, eh? What time period are we in, before the Kennedy Administration? Or is he equating Catholicism to the “anti-flagger, anti-South” crowd because the Pope publicly denounced the alleged abuses of capitalism? He apparently is ignorant of the fact that many Southern sympathizers and opponents, at various degrees, of the Lincoln administration were Catholic, namely the poor Irish immigrants. As for the homosexuals, (transitions into German accent) he probablay toesn’t know dat der Fuhrer titn’t like dem eider unt triet to kill dem off also. (Am I the only one who sees irony in the fact that Putin’s father got wounded at Leningrad fighting against Hitler?)

    • Susan January 22, 2014 / 3:45 pm

      Matt Heimbac is Catholic is he not?

      Careful there Ben, the mention of Hitler confuses and upsets these flagger types. They were taught that he is bad, but they love all of his ideas, so when you force them to sit down and think about it, they get all in a huff.
      Former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Tom Metzger expressed this conundrum to white supremacist leader Craig Cobb who was flying both Nazi and Confederate flags over his whites only town of Leith, ND, “I warned him not to bring in the Hollywood-style Nazis, or everyone would go crazy,” Metzger said. “And that’s exactly what’s happened.”

      • Ben Allen January 22, 2014 / 6:32 pm

        Yes, Matt Hemibach is Catholic, and an embarrassment to my generation. There are Catholics of all personalities and persuasions; just like everyone else.

        Not all of “these flagger types… love all of his ideas.” In fact, the majority seem to believe that the war wasn’t about slavery at all, but states’ rights. Hence, the Black Confederate myth that so fascinates Kevin Levine.

        • Susan January 23, 2014 / 1:04 am

          I would like to believe that they are that stupid, and some might be, but I think they are trying to pull the wool over our eyes with that one. Just when you think someone might actually just believe in states rights they come out with some jaw dropping statement. But, I shall hold out hope.

          I certainly don’t mean to suggest that everyone who walks by with a Confederate flag is against diversity, woman’s rights and homosexuals, and whatever other crazy statements these flaggers have been known to make. Out here in California if we saw a costumed crew walk by with a Confederate flag we would probably just assume they are actors.

      • Jeffry Burden January 22, 2014 / 8:01 pm

        I met Tom Metzger once, in 1977, when my high school social studies teacher invited him to speak to our class (!). He was an up-and-coming Klansman from Fallbrook, Cal., and had a calm and steady demeanor. He always seemed to be the brainy one (relatively speaking) in any kind of Klan or Skinhead gathering. Imagine a high school teacher doing that now…

        • Thelibertylamp January 22, 2014 / 11:06 pm

          Metzger is also an informant, but I agree, he has more of a handle on his hate and how to appear more like a normal guy than most of them.

          Heimbach has that same talent of being approachable with a good gift of gab and a decent command of a crowd when he has a mic.
          He is not a complete moron either, although I still say his shadow Matt Parrott is more of the brains of the operation of their little group.

          Heimbach is now an Eastern Orthodox and thinks he is part of the Iron Guard, or at least that was last week, who knows what he will be next week…

  13. neukomment January 22, 2014 / 7:42 am

    For the record, this Unrepentant Yankee is an Evangelical Baptist and a moderate conservative politically…. This is what I hate about the extremes of political rhetoric now days… The extremes on both sides scream so loudly there is no room for those who fall somewhere in between….

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 22, 2014 / 12:25 pm

      Well, contrary to Jefferson Moon, people don’t get tossed from the comments section because of what they believe politically. However, I can see why some people need to believe this … it’s better than confronting that the real reason they were booted was something having to do with … shall we say … presentation. 🙂

  14. Thelibertylamp January 22, 2014 / 6:23 pm

    Connie is convinced I’m a gay man, I’m just going to let that fantasy ride… 😉

  15. Schroeder January 22, 2014 / 9:33 pm

    What the heck does Catholicism have to do with this? I’ll have to consider visiting this new ‘thunder mouth’s’ blog – but I’m sure it will be more of the Chastain type of nonsense – sans the dime store romance novels.

    Interesting – there are many denominations under the Christianity umbrella – curious as to what his criteria may be in order to be a ‘god loving man who is Christian’.

    • Susan January 23, 2014 / 2:15 am

      I’m guessing he prefers the denominations with the word Southern in front of them, those crazy Northern fractions got it in their head that slavery was wrong.

      • Susan January 23, 2014 / 2:28 am

        Oh wait, I must be wrong about that, all those churches split over the issue of states rights. 😉

  16. George Purvis January 23, 2014 / 8:40 am

    Let me say this, I have a great disliking for most of your buddies because of their twisted views of history, their insults (you know who you are, their forwardness and their lies i.e., Levin, Mackey, Hall, and Meyer. The others I didn’t mention I can tolerate to some degree. That being said, and in the case of Dunford I have use of his language at all. I was going to make a halfhearted stand against some the comments you fellows made on his post, but after reading some of his comments to other people, I really don’t want my name associated with him.

    I do agree with one statement he made, if you insult me or my heritage expect the same in return

    George Purvis
    Website: Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education
    Blog: Cold Southern Steel

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 23, 2014 / 10:50 am

      I have not commented on the blog in question. It’s precisely the sort of blog for those people who like that sort of thing. However, I will be interested to see whether the Virginia Flaggers follow your lead and say they don’t appreciate his support or his brand of Confederate heritage. After all, several members of the group read this blog daily.

      Then again, they didn’t disavow Matthew Heimbach. They are just angry they got caught. Sometimes Susan Hathaway comes off sounding like Justin Bieber.

      • George Purvis January 24, 2014 / 10:15 am

        Has anyone notified the VA. Flaggers? In your opinion would it do good to complian to Word Press?

        George Purvis
        Website: Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education
        Blog: Cold Southern Steel

        • Brooks D. Simpson January 24, 2014 / 12:08 pm

          One of the most curious things about the blogosphere is how members of the Virginia Flaggers comment extensively about the contents of a blog they claim they don’t read. Having said that, when it’s been documented that they’ve played footsie with other unsavory folks, no one from the organization distances themselves from such people (and in a few cases they rush forward to embrace them). So it’s not clear to me that they wouldn’t accept Jerry’s support.

          • George Purvis January 25, 2014 / 7:40 am

            I see. This is the first time I have ever heard of the fellow. I am not not part of the VA. Flaggers, nor do I know very much about them. being that I am from Mississippi. As I stated in another post, I have my website which I keep a tight grip on and will not let such language go. I would also like to say that on you blog, as far as I can tell you very seldom let the situation get out of hand. That is a feather in hat.

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

    • Susan January 23, 2014 / 11:27 am

      Good luck with that George, the Russians had a similar tu quoque strategy known as, “А у вас негров линчуют, ‘but at your place Negroes are being lynched'”

      • George Purvis January 24, 2014 / 10:17 am

        Ah but negroes were being lynched at yiour place also!!!

        George Purvis
        Website: Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education
        Blog: Cold Southern Steel

        • Al Mackey January 28, 2014 / 11:51 am

          Susan’s point sailed right over your head, George.

          • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 10:00 am

            So???I asked for clarification she provided none

          • Al Mackey January 29, 2014 / 11:54 am

            Interesting claim, George. I see no request for clarification from you listed above. Perhaps you imagined it.

          • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 7:50 am

            You are correct. Perhaps you will be so kind as to provide clarification? It must not mean much to Susan since it doesn’t appear she has been back.

    • Al Mackey January 28, 2014 / 11:56 am

      You and Dumbford are peas in a pod, George. Embrace your inner Dumbford. 🙂

      • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 10:06 am

        Really??? I guess that is the reason you banned me. Or, in truth, it was because you could not provide any documents proving that slavery was a cause of the war!!! The thread I actually got banned on youwere hammering a book, and posted why you thought Sherman didn’t free the POWs aat Anderson ville was because the South cheated on the POW agreement. I posted the tuth and you banned me!!!! LOL LOL LOL

        Shall we revisit that page?

        • Brooks D. Simpson January 29, 2014 / 11:46 am

          George … I know from personal experience that the reason people are banned from the comments section is not always the reason they think they were banned.

          • Al Mackey January 29, 2014 / 11:53 am

            And George tends to remember events in a way different from what actually transpired.

          • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 7:51 am

            And you tend to present history in ways that never happened.

          • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 7:40 am

            I respectfully disagree with you in this case. I know exactly the thread Mackey banned me and the factual comment he banned me for posting.


  17. BParks January 23, 2014 / 11:14 am

    I admittedly feel into his trap and sunk to a level of profanity that I’m not exactly proud of. I was really upset when he spoke to Corey and Jim in that way and wanted to ‘hit back’ as a girl. Apologies to all who may read some of my ‘nasty’ replies over there, that were sprinkled with what I felt we intelligent counterpoints. I won’t be back there any time soon. Some men are just dirty in both mind and spirit. Jerry and his pal Carmichael represent the opposite of the very men they claim to protect. Robert E Lee and Thomas Jackson would certainly be disgusted with their language and treatment of women.

    • Susan January 23, 2014 / 12:27 pm

      I know how you feel BParks, getting us all mad at each other is not going to help. The angrier we all get the more we might overgeneralize, thus leading to more angry folks. But it’s hard to not get angry after reading some of the crazy stuff these people are posting. I feel like they are hoping we get mad so that they can prove we are no better, like the Emperor in Star Wars, “good, good, give into your anger. With each passing moment you make yourself more my servant..”

      • Spelunker January 23, 2014 / 1:09 pm

        Susan they are absolutely lying in wait waiting for anyone to take the bait. They love to make examples of people.

      • George Purvis January 24, 2014 / 10:49 am

        “after reading some of the crazy stuff these people are posting.”

        I feel the same way when people distort facts to fit their agenda. I get really teed off with the insults especially when it comes from those in the field of education.

    • George Purvis January 24, 2014 / 10:43 am


      The thing about these blogs is really something else. It is not acceptable to go to any blog and exchange facts without being insulted. It seems to be the nature of the beast. Al Mackey and Andy Hall’s pages are the worst and yes I have been banned from both. They love to use the edit button and ban people that can’t out insult. That being said, on my blog, I have hit back at Mackey pretty good. Let it be known, I will not let anyone insult me or my heritage without a like response although I will not use the foul language.

      Take this example for Instance, Rob Baker just got back up and running as result of some surgery. He made a post which leads me here and to the offending post. I posted to his page exactly what I posted to Brook’s page. His response to me is that that my Southern Heritage is only good for insulting because it is wrong. Read it an http://historicstruggle.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/stupid-things-people-say-about-the-civil-war-part-4/?replytocom=2225#respond Right now Baker and Jimmy Dick are having a field day with insults while I get a warning. Now let me say this neither of the two have been able to prove me wrong or any issue. Isn’t it amazing how it is the folks who wave Old Glory and scream the loudest about being right is the first ones to insult/

      Now I make you or anyone else an offer. If you would like to discuss any point in history in a civil and factual matter you are welcome at either my website or my blog. The website I keep tighter standards on it because of the number of hits I get from kids. The blog I will allow some insults but nothing extreme.

      George Purvis
      Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education
      Cold Southern Steel


      • Jimmy Dick January 24, 2014 / 12:46 pm

        Excuse me? Haven’t proven you wrong? Are you kidding me? You haven’t provided a single shred of proof to support anything you’ve said. We’ve proven you wrong constantly. You’ve been shredded in every blog I’ve been involved with by multiple people. The only thing you do is offer insults to everyone.

        I’ve challenged you multiple times to present your so called facts. You won’t do it. That is because you don’t have any. So what you typed in this blog post is an outright lie.

        • George Purvis January 25, 2014 / 7:54 am

          No you haven’t proved me wrong. I only insult after an attack has been made on me or my heritage as I posted above. I have no need to present any facts when I haven’t made any statements that need defending. Take for instance you on another of Rob’s pages told me secession was illegal, if that is the case present the evidence, show us where the constitution says secession is illegal. Remember that? You couldn’t produce the document and screamed at me Now Shut Up. You also say the war was about slavery, post any of your 8,000 documents that prove any major player who says we are going to war either to free the slaves or to maintain the institution.

          Now please don’t post me something by a NPS ranger said in an interview, or another person’s opinion. Just post these documents
          and you win. Simple

          Oh yeah what does the Tea Party have to do with the WBTS and ones views on that conflict????

          George Purvis
          Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

          • Jimmy Dick January 25, 2014 / 11:38 am

            Oh look, not a single fact from George. Just more of his denials with nothing to back his lies up.

            Documents are posted, George. If you do not have the ability to look at them, then go to college and learn. Secession is still unconstitutional, but you are too ignorant to understand that concept because you chant your mantra about it not being in the Constitution. You lost that argument, but you can’t accept it because it doesn’t fit in with your beliefs so you continue to live in denial.

            Let’s just ask James Madison, Father of the Constitution, what he had to say about secession. He said it was unconstitutional. Let’s see, he practically wrote the thing so I think his opinion counts for a lot.

            TO N. P. TRIST. … MAD. MSS.

            Montpellier, Decr 23, 1832.

            Dr. Sir I have received yours of the 19th, inclosing some of the South Carolina papers. There are in one of them some interesting views of the doctrine of secession; one that had occurred to me, and which for the first time I have seen in print; namely that if one State can at will withdraw from the others, the others can at will withdraw from her, and turn her, nolentem, volentem, out of the union. Until of late, there is not a State that would have abhorred such a doctrine more than South Carolina, or more dreaded an application of it to herself. The same may be said of the doctrine of nullification, which she now preaches as the only faith by which the Union can be saved.

            I partake of the wonder that the men you name should view secession in the light mentioned. The essential difference between a free Government and Governments not free, is that the former is founded in compact, the parties to which are mutually and equally bound by it. Neither of them therefore can have a greater fight to break off from the bargain, than the other or others have to hold them to it. And certainly there is nothing in the Virginia resolutions of –98, adverse to this principle, which is that of common sense and common justice. The fallacy which draws a different conclusion from them lies in confounding a single party, with the parties to the Constitutional compact of the United States. The latter having made the compact may do what they will with it. The former as one only of the parties, owes fidelity to it, till released by consent, or absolved by an intolerable abuse of the power created. In the Virginia Resolutions and Report the plural number, States, is in every instance used where reference is made to the authority which presided over the Government. As I am now known to have drawn those documents, I may say as I do with a distinct recollection, that the distinction was intentional. It was in fact required by the course of reasoning employed on the occasion. The Kentucky resolutions being less guarded have been more easily perverted. The pretext for the liberty taken with those of Virginia is the word respective, prefixed to the “rights” &c to be secured within the States. Could the abuse of the expression have been foreseen or suspected, the form of it would doubtless have been varied. But what can be more consistent with common sense, than that all having the same rights &c, should unite in contending for the security of them to each.

            It is remarkable how closely the nullifiers who make the name of Mr. Jefferson the pedestal for their colossal heresy, shut their eyes and lips, whenever his authority is ever so clearly and emphatically against them. You have noticed what he says in his letters to Monroe & Carrington Pages 43 & 203, vol. 2,1 with respect to the powers of the old Congress to coerce delinquent States, and his reasons for preferring for the purpose a naval to a military force; and moreover that it was not necessary to find a right to coerce in the Federal Articles, that being inherent in the nature of a compact. It is high time that the claim to secede at will should be put down by the public opinion; and I shall be glad to see the task commenced by one who understands the subject.

            I know nothing of what is passing at Richmond, more than what is seen in the newspapers. You were right in your foresight of the effect of the passages in the late Proclamation. They have proved a leaven for much fermentation there, and created an alarm against the danger of consolidation, balancing that of disunion. I wish with you the Legislature may not seriously injure itself by assuming the high character of mediator. They will certainly do so if they forget that their real influence will be in the inverse ratio of a boastful interposition of it.

            If you can fix, and will name the day of your arrival at Orange Court House, we will have a horse there for you; and if you have more baggage than can be otherwise brought than on wheels, we will send such a vehicle for it. Such is the state of the roads produced by the wagons hurrying flour to market, that it may be impossible to send our carriage which would answer both purposes.

            Come on George! Show me the document that makes secession legal. It is not the Constitution. So come up with another one of your lies. Come up with some proof which you don’t have. I’ve given you proof so you better start coming up some of your own if you want to stay in this game.

          • gpthelastrebel January 27, 2014 / 9:18 am

            can you tell me where that is found in the Constitution?

          • Jimmy Dicick January 27, 2014 / 1:28 pm

            Show me where it says secession is legal.

          • gpthelastrebel January 28, 2014 / 9:11 am

            It is not found, that why it is not illegal. And I already know you next comment go ahead I will answer it.

            By the way why do you keep dodging my question about the Tea Party? Are you in the habit of profiling people?

            George Purvis
            Southern heritage advancement Preservation and Education

          • Jimmy Dick January 28, 2014 / 12:31 pm

            The Tea Party? Where do I begin? With their flawed and extremely erroneous depiction of American History? With their appropriation of American Revolution symbols in an attempt to give their ideology validity and legitimacy? With the fact that quite a few of them seem to equate modern libertarianism with the slave owners of the 1860s? That a large part of that base is nothing but uneducated white supremacists and racists who are closer to fascism than democracy? And finally, that the Tea Party is the modern equivalent to the Populist Party of the 1890s and 1900s that failed to do much of anything on a national level and withered away as people got tired of their antics?

            I could also say that the Tea Party folks haven’t advocated a single idea deemed worthy by the majority of the people of this country as of yet and that they failed to elect a different president in 2012 with a poor economy, a national health plan they campaigned against, and while that president was sitting with barely even favorable ratings coupled with the highest unemployment levels in over 30 years. To me, if they couldn’t accomplish that while losing seats in both the House and Senate, that tells me that ideology is being rejected very soundly.

            Of course given your track record, I’m sure you feel differently, George.

          • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 10:08 am

            and shirts. Some of them even have beards!!!!!!!!!!! gasp!!!!!!!!!!

          • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 7:42 am

            Just saying if you turn your head and smile——–

          • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 9:51 am

            So how is dunford a typical tea party member? Sounds to me like you just love lumping people togetjher becasue of the actions of one or two. Oh well it wasn’t the Tea Part that said ” we need to pass it to know what’s in it.

            Now this isn’t a political forum so I will make this short and sweet. Fast and furious, IRS, NSA, Bengazi, food stamps, un-employed, dept, Philly, I ahve a pen. Even Rev. Wright said on MLK –I have a dream on Obama i have a drone.

            You get the pictyure. Now the question is — are you in the habit of lumping folks together because of the actions of a few?

          • Jimmy Dick January 25, 2014 / 11:42 am

            I think we ought to take a little vote on whether George has proven that secession is constitutional. Let’s take another one on whether he has provided any evidence to support his Lost Cause lies.

            Come on George. Put up or shut up. You omitted the secession declarations which you do every time because you cannot refute them as proof that secession was about slavery. What’s the matter George? Is the truth too much for you?

            Tune in to C-SPAN3 tonight and watch the Lectures in History on the Lost Cause. I’m sure you won’t because the truth is too much for you.

          • gpthelastrebel January 27, 2014 / 9:16 am

            LOL LOL LOL well Dick that just ain’t gonna work. You see when you provide documentation that secession was illegal under the Constitution, then I will provide documentation that says it was not.

            Now as far as the secession documents that are exactly what they say they are secession documents, nothing more. They are not war declarations. I have never said that slavery wasn’t a issue to secession, (so was Indian raids) but it had nothing to do with the war.

            Now what about that comment on Bakers blog about the Tea Party? Do you always profile and paint a group of peole with the same huge bruch as you have with that statement?

            Now it is your turn. Prove that slavery caused the war and post the passage in the Constitution that says secession was illegal. Don’t go finding someone elses thoughts or opinions, just the constitution.

            You have the spotlight.

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage advancement Preservation and Education.

          • Jimmy Dicick January 27, 2014 / 1:27 pm

            I have already given you the information. I cannot help that you are too lazy to read. I also cannot help that you refuse to interpret the Constitution the way most others do. You stick to an inaccurate version that is rejected by James Madison. So once again, you have done nothing and given no documentation to prove anything you say.

          • gpthelastrebel January 28, 2014 / 9:07 am

            Yes yes ho hummm. You think you have already posted the info. but really you have posted nothing. Post the exact passage in the Constitution that states secession is illegal. What is so hard in doing that? It is just a matter of copy and paste since you already have the info on hand.

            Oh you should know, on Baker’s page he has conceded that such as passage does not exist in the Constitution. Educate us.

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and education

          • Jimmy Dick January 28, 2014 / 12:20 pm

            I just love the way you constantly skip over the stuff that you don’t like, George. Rob has not conceded anything to you. He as I, have explained why your literal translation of the Constitution fails to be recognized by pretty much 99% of America. Let me repeat what I posted on his site about you.

            “I’m fine with that, Rob. He does the same thing in every blog with the Constitution. It is a colossal waste of time telling him he is wrong, providing him the facts that prove him wrong, and then watching him continue to repeat his mantra. It is all he has. It is part of the Confederate Catechism and they follow it like Pavlov’s dogs. Part of this has to do with the fact that he seems to be following the literal interpretation of the Constitution which hasn’t been the way it has been interpreted for over two centuries. It is impossible to do so and the Louisiana Purchase shows how and why that happened.

            This also illustrates the impossibility of convincing George and a few others that they’re wrong. They absolutely refuse to accept any facts that prove them wrong. Reality shows us that the general public is rejecting the Lost Cause mentality because it has no factual evidence to back it up. I looked up the Confederate Catechism the other day and went through some of its claims. Most of it appears to have been developed from carefully manipulated information on history such as the Hartford Convention where a real event’s actual details are altered to fit into the Lost Cause myth. A literal interpretation of the Constitution is required to accept some of the claims as well.

            Fortunately, most people want some facts to support claims and the Catechism’s claims fall apart when confronted by the light of truth. You really have to want to believe in it to accept it and that involves a degree of fanaticism which as we’ve seen over history defies education and reality. George falls into that group. So really, even speaking with him becomes a rather pointless exercise as he cannot accept history that doesn’t support his fanatical belief structure.”

          • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 9:59 am

            And still you provide no proff. let me close this down for you and the sake of Brook’s sanity. here is how you provide sources for a statement. yes I know you are gonna call them cherry picked quotes,but prove them wrong.
            *************************************************************************************No law had ever been passed that explicitly outlawed secession, the argument simply having been sidestepped by events. From the legal point of view it would have been difficult to accuse Mr. Davis of having committed any crime. Judge Chase felt there was no strong legal case against him for having been the president of the Confederacy, and added, with a surprising wisdom: “Lincoln wanted Jefferson Davis to escape, and he was right. His capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason. Secession is settled. Let it stay settled.”

            The Chase quote is from “The Long Surrender”, 1985, by Burke Davis
            His sources are..
            Southern Historical Papers, Vol. 37, pp 244-52
            “Why Jefferson Davis Was Never Tried” by George S. Boutwell, is in ibid., Vol. 38. pp. 347-49.
            “The U.S. vs. Jefferson Davis,” by Ray F. Nichols, American Historical Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, January 1926, pp 266 ff.
            “The Trails and Trail of Jefferson Davis,” a paper read before the Virginia Bar Association 1900, and published by this organization.
            ************************************************************************************** I have more references at http://southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2009180.post

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

          • Jimmy Dick January 29, 2014 / 4:35 pm

            I do believe you when you claim that you will be admonished for cherry picking quotes. You do cherrypick. One of those source, Ray Nichols was not defending Jefferson Davis, but rather saying no trial in Virginia would convict him as there was no possible way a jury would do so. Our good friend Al Mackey, who proves you wrong far more than I ever could, posted this in an article on his blog a while ago.

            “Their decision raised the question which those who advocated the ‘constructive presence’ theory had wished to avoid, namely, could a jury be procured in Virginia or any state of the late Confederacy which would find Davis guilty?” Roy F. Nichols, “The United States vs. Jefferson Davis, American Historical Review, Vol. 31, No. 2, January, 1926, p. 267] There were certainly other difficulties for the prosecution, and Nichols details them. They had nothing whatsoever to do with the feeling that secession was in any way legal.

            You can read the entire article here. http://studycivilwar.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/a-book-with-no-credibility-chapter-twelve/
            Odd how you didn’t comment on that when Al pretty much shredded anything you would come up with.

            As for secession, since you want to bring up Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court as a source of knowledge, let us hear what he had to say about secession in his majority opinion in Texas v. White.

            “The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to ‘be perpetual.’ And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained ‘to form a more perfect Union.’ It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?”

            If you need to read the entire text of that opinion and case where absolutely NOTHING Chase wrote remotely comes even within a shade of saying secession was ever legal you can read it here. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/74/700

            Game over.

          • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 8:27 am

            First of all Al hasn’ shredded anything I posted. These pages are the first exchanges al and I have ahad for some time.

            Second if that is a cherry fact, what are the faso called facts yiou are presenting. It is a fact Chase made this statement. “no law has ver been passed. You and i were talking about laws and the constitution. You could not provide one passege from the constitution that outlawed secession and I posted Chase’s comment to prove my point.

            Texas vs white– 7. Considered as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention, and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give [p701] effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.

            I would expect as much out of Chase after all he was in cohorts with Lincoln as a member of his cabinet.Now if we continue to read this document Chase gives his opinion about waging war and so forth,
            he is doing nothing more than making an attempt to justify the invasion of the South. Still he does not specify a law that made secession illegal. If he does post it.

            Of course Chase’s opinion here takes care of the “traitor” and a few other remarks often made toward Confederate soldiers.

            And again the South did not leave the Union becasue of the Articles of Confederation, they left becasue of abuses of the constitution. Read the secession documents and note the number of time that document is referenced to.

            It is simple Chase new no law could be found in the Constitution either to try Davis or to reference to proving secession was illegal.

            Game over

            As you say game over

            So you are correct game over on that issue.

          • Jimmy Dick January 30, 2014 / 5:55 pm

            Look, more nonsense from George where he ignores everything that proves him wrong. Typical and the game is still over because you have been proven wrong, George. If you cannot comprehend the written word, that’s your problem. Ciao!

          • George Purvis January 31, 2014 / 8:27 am

            Hey Dick it appears you are talking to yourself. Tell me what I have ignored. Please point out something specfic. I think I have taken the time to answer your questions and comments. While you are at it please provide a link where you have proved me wrong. That must be where you lost your cool and yelled Shut Up at me? Please provide a link where Al mackey has shredded my info. All I got to say if he did —IT WASN”T YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Jimmy Dick January 31, 2014 / 11:24 am

            Got your ass handed to you on this blog, on Rob’s blog, on Al’s blog, on Andy’s blog and pretty much any other you’ve been on. You don’t use primary sources to support opinions and try to pass off extremely erroneous secondary sources as facts. You don’t know history. You invent it. George, you lost this dust up a long time ago because you have not proven anything. You just parrot the same things over and over again.

            It is game over and has been for a while now.

          • George Purvis February 1, 2014 / 8:15 am

            Of course that is just an opinion, Any and Al hhides behind the edit?ban button so it is hard to post factual info. Rob, to his credit hangs in there toe to toe. I respect that.

            Now If I have had my my butt handed to me on these blogs, I just want to point out one thing ___ IT WASN”T BY YOU!!!!!!!! LOL LOL LOL>

            You are a legend in your own mind!!!!!!!!

            George Purvis
            Southern Hertitage Advancement Preservation and Education

            PS Post the passage in the Constitution making secession illegal.

          • Jimmy Dick January 31, 2014 / 3:14 pm

            You’re just parroting yourself. Again, you have provided nothing to prove anything. Game over.

          • George Purvis February 1, 2014 / 7:59 am

            Ah exactly what are you talking about? Yes Rob admitred that ” no law had evr been passed.” Go to his page look it up. If you don’t like it take it up with him. We have moved on, you are lagging behind.

            As for parroting, that is exactly what you do. Repeat incorrect info.

          • Jimmy Dick February 1, 2014 / 11:16 am

            When you learn what context means, George, you might start to learn what actual history is. You’ve been shredded and you’re too ignorant to even realize it. You parrot the same thing over and over again, get proven wrong every single time, and then say it again. I don’t give a damn how many times you repeat yourself. You only make yourself look like a horse’s ass.
            Keep saying the same thing over and over, George, if it makes you sleep better at night. The rest of the world will move on and you will be left in the dust along with the Lost Cause lies.

          • George Purvis February 3, 2014 / 8:26 am

            LOL LOL LOL I love it when you neo-yankees put your ignorance and bigotry on public display. Just to back up a bit, remember that Al Mackey came here and his very first post was insulting? I guess it is just fitting that you, as just another neo-yankee, be the first to use profanity in your posts.
            I have not been shredded on any blog, and as I said if I have it wasn’t BY YOU. That only happens in your dreams. As I said you are a legend in your own mind. Just want to point out something, not one person is supporting you—EXCEPT Al. Wonder why???

            I may parrot the same thing over and over the reason is you folks hated to answer questions. As proof of this you have stilled failed to post the passage from the Constitution that makes secession illegal. Better ask Al for some help.

            And speaking of Al, I give him credit he broke the sound barrier in getting that page up. I can’t post to his blog, I am banned remember? He likes to hide behind the admin tools that way he doesn’t have to face facts. Besides if I post to Al’s blog I will just prove him wrong again. My suggestion is you continue to posts your insults to that page and continue to ha ha it up while you can. I will post to Cold Southern Steel a rebuttal. If you and Al have the backbone you can come there and make civil comments. Not a coward are you?

            Once again remember if I have been proven wron g in any statement I have made remember – IT WASN”T BY YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education.

            Post the passage. That is simple enough for you isn’t it???

      • Al Mackey January 28, 2014 / 11:53 am

        Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt when it comes to George.

        • gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 9:44 am

          Thanks Al for making my point, It is your first visit to this page and you come right out with the first insult. Al just prove me wrong that is all you have to do to win. It is that simple.

          George Purvis
          Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

          • Al Mackey January 31, 2014 / 12:41 pm

            “It is a fact Chase made this statement. “no law has ver been passed.”

            No, it’s not a fact. It’s an unsupported allegation. You are the only one who claims Chase said “no law has ver [sic] been passed.” The quote Burke Davis alleges Chase made is, “If you bring these leaders to trial, it will concemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion.” and “Lincoln wanted Jefferson Davis to escape, and he was right. We cannot convict him of treason. Secession is settled. Let it stay settled.” I have yet to see the primary source that has that alleged quotation in it. Neither Burke Davis nor Shelby Foote identify where the alleged quote came from.

          • George Purvis February 1, 2014 / 8:09 am

            Not trying to be insulting but you are not known for posting the truth. At this time I am nopt gonna one one way or the other about Chase’s quote, I will simply say you need do do more research.

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

          • Al Mackey February 1, 2014 / 9:36 am

            Keep commenting, George, because with every comment you make yourself look more foolish. The kindest thing anyone can do for you is to not post your comments.
            People who are honest and/or knowledgeable believe I post the truth. People who are dishonest and/or uninformed claim I don’t post the truth. We’ll let you determine for yourself which one you are. 🙂
            All you need to do is post the primary source for the quotation, because neither Burke Davis nor Shelby Foote tell us from where it came. If you want to claim others need to do more research, then it’s on you to show you’ve done the research.

          • George Purvis February 3, 2014 / 8:49 am

            I will comment as long as Brooks Simpson will allow me to do so. It is not I who looks foolish; it is you and your bigoted insulting comments. I have proved that time and time again. Now you and I both know why you banned me, the reason is simple I would not take your insults and you couldn’t deal with the facts I was posting.

            Now as to Burke and Davis, let me just say this for now. If Chase did or did not make the statement “no law has ever been passed “it doesn’t really matter does it. Let’s go one step further, post on your blog page, which I have glanced at, George Purvis says and then attach the Chase quote to me. That is easy enough isn’t it? Then after posting that statement supposes you post the passage in the Constitution that outlaws secession. Simple isn’t it

            Oh yes I made the statement in the chatroom that slavery had nothing to do with the war. Perhaps you would like to try and prove me wrong?

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education

          • George Purvis February 3, 2014 / 10:32 am

            Will do Brooks. Thank you for the leeway you have given us.

            George Purvis

          • Jimmy Dick February 1, 2014 / 2:13 pm

            Say what? I haven’t found a single thing wrong with Al’s posts. YOU on the other hand lie left and right and ignore every fact you don’t like. For someone that doesn’t know anything about historical research to make a comment like you made, George, shows complete and total ignorance of the historical profession.

            You need to go to college and learn what history is. It is not the heritage crap you keep spewing. Here is a link that would help you if you had the guts to actually try to learn something about history. http://www.ysursa.com/history/pdf/Burke%20&%20Andews%20Five%20Cs%20of%20History.pdf It is the Five C’s of History by Burke and Andrews. Until you learn what these are and how we use them you need to shut your idiot mouth and stop lying to everyone.

          • George Purvis February 3, 2014 / 9:03 am

            “George, shows complete and total ignorance of the historical profession”

            That being the case, it should be no problem for YOU to prove me wrong. Use Al’s page if you need so desire. We all know you don’t have the info. It is just that obvious.
            You walked into a buzz saw; insults will not get you out of it.
            Now come on Mr. 8,000 documents, published, certified and bonafide, post the passage from the Constitution. What is so hard about a little copy and paste? Heck I am sure I am not the only one who would like to see the law.
            Oh did Al post a link back to this page? I didn’t see it when I glanced over his page. Maybe I was blinded by the smoke and mirrors???

            George Purvis
            Southern Heritage advancement Preservation and education

          • Brooks D. Simpson February 3, 2014 / 10:19 am

            Okay, folks. That’s enough. I directed this conversation to go to the chat room. I guess no one wants to take the hint.

  18. monochromejunkie January 24, 2014 / 11:07 pm

    “…and to see whether he retains his passion for the caps lock key.” <<< Haha. Too funny. :0) People are ignorant, eh? They live in their own 2 inch box, and if you don't fit into it, then you're immoral or bad because well, you don't into into that 2 inch box!

    I'm so used to dealing with people in bloggie-land who are afraid to upset the apple cart by injecting a bit of passion into their writing (God forbid if we upset the apple cart!) but I find your style refreshing and encouraging. :0) And, the fact that you're academic and a professor doesn't hurt either. Have to say I like that part. Pleasure to meet you!

  19. gpthelastrebel January 29, 2014 / 10:21 am

    I see al Mackey is spreading more manure on his page at. As usual he has been trolling the web looking for people to attack.

    http://studycivilwar.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/going-to-the-worst possible-source/#respond

    This time it is slavery as the cause of the war. Well since mackey has banned me, (he hates me returning his insults and posting facts) I cannot respond in to his page. So I will do the next best thing. Mmcakey I will give you all the space you need at Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education to prove your point. Only catch is you cannot use insults. If you don’t want to do that perhaps Brooks can set up a page dealing with slavery as the cause of the war and monitor the discussion. Are you willing?

    Either way I make the statement Slavery had nothing to do with the war. You ain’t scared are you?

    • Brooks D. Simpson January 29, 2014 / 11:45 am

      I designed the “Chat Room” option for people who wished to engage each other in that fashion (it’s not fair to have this blog’s comments section used as a way to carry on debates on other blogs, and I’m never pleased when other bloggers allow debates about this blog’s management to appear in their blogs while reserving the right to shut off those exchanges arbitrarily). So if folks want to poke at each other, I ask that they take it there, and having made that announcement, I reserve (as always) the right to decline to post responses that seem off-topic, crude, and so on. Thanks.

      You can access the “Chat Room” option from the bar by the heading of the blog.

      • gpthelastrebel January 30, 2014 / 7:37 am

        ThanksBrooks I will be there if anyone wishes to discuss slavery as a cause of the WAR.

        I assume I will get notices of any replies from that section?


  20. Charlie May 15, 2015 / 10:09 am

    Saying jerry dumbford is a Christian or “a man who loves God” is like saying Taylor swift has ever wrote or played country music!

    • Brooks D. Simpson May 15, 2015 / 10:12 am

      After a while Jerry became more boring, malicious, and nasty than funny, although he is a fierce supporter of the Virginia Flaggers. That should come as no surprise … although we expect Flagger advocates will try to sidestep that with a nasty comment of their own. Here’s a recent Jerry comment: “God never intended for Giraffes and Elephants to mix, or birds and fish, or blacks and whites, and the result will be more damaging.”

      • Jimmy Dick May 15, 2015 / 1:46 pm

        His blog started as the rantings of an old man and now have reached the status of the rantings of a racist, bigoted old man. I figure the posts about keeping off his lawn should be popping up any day now unless of course he has no lawn to tell people to keep off of.

        In many ways, his blog is a window into the minds of the type of people who join the KKK. Sociologists and psychologists are probably using him and his blog as case study material.

  21. Charlie May 15, 2015 / 12:17 pm

    Wonder if jerry knows that blacks and whites can have offspring together? Because their both human beings. I’ve never come across some type of fish-bird…..

    • Brooks D. Simpson May 15, 2015 / 12:52 pm

      Hey, he loves the Flaggers. So he’s got that going for him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s