Susan Hathaway Explains

In a break from tradition that nevertheless sounds traditional themes, Susan Hathaway of the Virginia Flaggers took to Facebook to share her reaction to the revelation that a Confederate heritage activist she had once praised for his action to protect children had been arrested on fifty counts of charges concerning child pornography transactions.

hathaway 070616 1

You can see I’ve gotten someone’s attention. 🙂

Susan Hathaway sure knows a lot about blogs she claims she hasn’t read in a year or so. Of course, she’s also made that claim in past years. But she also claims to know why people do what they do. Just like Connie Chastain does.

By the way, my speaking schedule remains as crowded as ever. My, my, but she can’t get anything straight.

But I do like that she’s finally admitted that she’s the head of the Flaggers. She’s not like Connie Chastain, who can’t make up her mind as to whether she’s a Flagger or knows what they say or do. Call that situational membership.

Susan continues:

hathaway 070616 2

Note the lack of concern about the victims of child pornography. But then the Flaggers were not concerned about a child who was kidnapped by a Flagger, or when a Flagger got himself arrested in front of his children (as they were videotaping him). So, nothing new here.

Of course, Hathaway did not just know Jason Sulser. She praised him:

Sulser and Hathaway (2)

Susan’s deepest respect? Must not be worth much. “You are the reason none of our women or children were seriously injured.” How ironic.

Susan concludes:

hathaway 070616 3

Yes, Susan, your words, deeds, and actions speak for themselves. Mind reminding us why you no longer appear at the War Memorial Chapel at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts? And let’s not forget the need to invoke God … that same God that brought you Rob Walker.

Next you’ll claim that none of you ever knew anything about Matthew Heimbach. Or that you had no idea that this was happening. And on, and on, and on …

We’ve seen this movie before, folks. No doubt we’ll see it again.

Once question remains for sincere advocates of Confederate heritage: Are you mad enough yet?



45 thoughts on “Susan Hathaway Explains

  1. Rblee22468 July 6, 2016 / 3:10 pm

    Didn’t she post something almost verbatim last year? Pretty sure she did.

  2. Sandi Saunders July 6, 2016 / 3:17 pm

    Her cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy is deep! You should not speak of them, denigrate their efforts, insult them, notice connections or speak about what they believe that isn’t so, but she should go all righteous indignation finger wagging doing exactly that at you… Got it.

  3. The Lamp July 6, 2016 / 3:30 pm

    She’s going to file lawsuits for reporting ?

    Why do these dumb hillbillies think that just because they don’t like something…it’s a lawsuit?

    Don’t the inbred Alabama flaggers try to do that too?

    Oh, and I love how she claims a PH.D. from UVA is an amateur but one of their “school of hard knocks” bumble heads is the real expert. Lol!

    • Brooks D. Simpson July 6, 2016 / 3:52 pm

      Well, my PhD is from Wisconsin. But my BA is from UVa. I understand Hathaway has little use for scholarship. It might disrupt her closely-held fictions. That’s what heritage correctness is all about.

      • The Lamp July 6, 2016 / 4:16 pm

        So should we look forward to Jim Rockford coming to our door with a lawsuit? LOL!!

        • Rblee22468 July 6, 2016 / 5:55 pm

          Oh, if I only had a dollar for every time I was going to be “brought up on full charges” by the Alabama Flunkies. I wonder if they are going to go with one of those foolproof 1st Amendmemt prosecutions?

        • Jimmy Dick July 6, 2016 / 7:14 pm

          I wish they would take me to court. I wouldn’t even need a lawyer to have the jury laughing at the ineptness of the flaggers. All I would need are primary sources to show the flaggers are liars. They would either take the Fifth or perjure themselves on the stand.

          Could you just see one of them on the stand reading the South Carolina Declaration of Secession and trying to say the delegates were not seceding over slavery? Or to be shown photographs and testimonies of people using the CBF as a racist symbol? Even better, to watch them defend secession as something that was treasonous when confronted by Supreme Court documents detailing secession as treason and that the Confederates were traitors?

          • The Lamp July 6, 2016 / 7:52 pm

            And I’m looking forward to the private investigator!

          • Ed Shonk July 7, 2016 / 5:30 pm

            Wow! Yankee ‘myths’ keep growing and growing, and they are still going ‘nowhere.’ Secession is ‘treason?’ Confederates were ‘traitors?’ Our founding principle of “Consent of the governed” is just as true today, as it was in 1860-61, when Southerners chose to exercise their God-given right to self-determination via seceding from the malfunctioning Union. The States did not relinquish their sovereignty when they ratified the federal Constitution, and since the people granted their loyalty to their States, the people’s will was represented by their States. Thus, the Southern people granted their State representatives the authority to vote for secession from a union they no longer trusted. There is nothing ‘traitorous’ or ‘treasonous’ about a people choosing to change their government, since it is their God-given right to do so. Apparently, Northerners had forgotten the founding principle of the newly formed ‘Union,’ and believed that once a State ratified the federal Constitution, then its people were committed to remain in said Union forever. This was, and is, simply not true. Mankind’s God-given right to self-determination is an ‘eternal’ right, and is not subject to Mankind’s limitations or expectations, since this right is from God, not Mankind. This right to self-determination was carefully spelled-out in the Declaration of Independence, with the statement: “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” Our Revolutionary ancestors knew this to be true, just as Southerners knew this to be true in 1860-61. The real question is why don’t all Americans know this to be true in 2016? Why, Jimmy Dick, don’t you know this is true? Why are you still insisting that secession was treasonous, and that Confederates were traitors? Perhaps you no longer believe in Mankind’s God-given right to self-determination, and if so, why do you accept a government based on that premise?

          • Brooks D. Simpson July 7, 2016 / 7:17 pm

            Ed, you’re confused. If self-determination’s a God-given right (and we’ll set aside slavery for a moment, because that’s almost too easy a way to knock you off your pedestal), then why bother with all the claptrap about a constitutional right of secession? Otherwise you would be claiming that men can take away the rights God gives us, making men more powerful than God. Now, you may feel that way about yourself, but that’s a different issue.

            As you say, “Mankind’s God-given right to self-determination is an ‘eternal’ right, and is not subject to Mankind’s limitations or expectations, since this right is from God, not Mankind.” So why do you spend all this time talking about a constitutional (and thus mankind-created) right of secession?

            Of course, black southerners (indeed, all enslaved black Americans) knew this to be true in 1860-61 (as well as before and after), but you always seem concerned only about the rights of white people. Why is that?

          • Ed Shonk July 7, 2016 / 10:48 pm

            You must be having a ‘senior moment’ when you’re bringing slavery into the discussion. I didn’t mention slavery in my comments. Also, my statement re: the federal Constitution pointed-out the fact that the States didn’t relinquish their sovereignty, when they ratified the Foundation Document, and Mankind’s God-given right to self-determination is an ‘eternal’ right, since it is from God, not Mankind. Yes, the federal Constitution was the work of man, based on man’s God-given right to govern himself. Thus, Southerners had every right to exercise their God-given right to self-determination via seceding from the malfunctioning Union in 1860-61, and they were not committing treason in doing so, and Confederates were most certainly not traitors. Slavery is a topic unto itself, and is not part of my discussion.

          • Brooks D. Simpson July 8, 2016 / 1:09 am

            You’re right. I brought slavery into the discussion. It’s those people who forget to mention it that are having a “senior moment” when they ignore slavery while ranting about the God-given right of self-determination.

            As I’ve said before, you just care about the rights of white people. Only certain white people at that. But you basically concede that if the right of self-determination is a God-given right (although only for white people), you should set aside your yakking about the man-made right of secession … unless you want to insist again that man is more powerful then God. Take that to church and see what it gets you, alonmg with your notion that only whites have a right of self-determination.

            You seem confused by logical argument. I won’t attribute that to a senior “moment.” It’s long been a characteristic of yours, far exceeding a “moment.” When you bring your points here, it’s no longer “your discussion.” It is, however, my blog. Since you want to try to limit what people can discuss on my blog, back you go into the blocked pile. But enjoy that visit to church.

          • Sandi Saunders July 8, 2016 / 5:43 am

            Ed, you may discount history as “Yankee ‘myths’ but believe it or not, it does not change history because you choose a different perspective. Funny how that works, I know.

            If secession is not treason, then why would they call aiding or making war against the United States, treason in our Constitution? Foreign invaders were not capable of being traitors and committing treason. The Confederacy was treason, starting the war was treason, The fact that the surviving traitors were not hung is to our credit not theirs.

            If you do not concede that by ratifying the Constitution all states originally gave their “Consent of the governed” why would a vote to leave even be necessary?

            Even the Bible (you know, the word of God) tells us the purpose of government and to submit to it, so the notion of this “God-given right to self-determination” that ironically the Confederacy refused to black children of God, is clearly a white southern myth.

            And yes, by ratifying our Constitution the states most certainly did “relinquish their sovereignty” on the subject of going against the nation once a decision was made. What part of “ratified” has you confused? How is it you can respect a vote to leave when there was no process for any such thing yet reject a vote to join when there was a very clear process to do so and a sure knowledge of what that meant? Leaders only 70 years into the United States would have been even more aware of their commitment than we are today.

            Claiming “the Southern people granted their State representatives the authority to vote for secession” is really ridiculous. Unless they voted in the Congress where our form of government was designed to work, there was no vote. There was no nullification. There was only rebellion and treason and they chose that, so no whining about it now.

            And they did not want to “change their government”, they wanted to abolish the Constitution they ratified and create their own. Changing the government is done from within. They wanted a revolution because they thought they could win and when proved wrong they started revising the narrative until today we have people as confused and misled as you are.

            Of course people were “committed to remain in said Union forever”, otherwise there would have been a process to leave it. It was simply not the goal or the object of the United States to be the loose confederation of sovereign states any longer and the states ratified the US Constitution by choice. The children of the South, seeing their power wane and their slave economy threatened, went traitor and that will be the epitaph forever.. You cannot change it. And sounding like the crazed “Sovereign Citizen” movement is not helping your cause.

            If the South really believed so much in “Mankind’s God-given right to self-determination” they would have been the first to extend it to black slaves.

            Yes, the Declaration of Independence, did “spell it out” and when they “declare the causes” they should have been prepared for the consequences (just like we were) you are still denying today. “Sic Semper Tyrannis” only allows you to define the tyrant if you win AND if you are right. Which is why most Americans know your version of events and truth are subjective and wrong.

          • Jimmy Dick July 8, 2016 / 9:52 am

            The states did relinquish their sovereignty when they ratified the Constitution. Since then, every state that has joined the United States with the exception of Texas, which was an independent nation annexed by the US and relinquished its sovereignty as a result of that annexation, was not sovereign to begin with. They were parts of the US as territories.

            This is basic knowledge for anyone who studies US Government or US History. All you have to do is look up the primary sources for the ratification conventions. Patrick Henry was quite eloquent about it in several speeches.

            You are using the lost cause version of the past and it doesn’t hold up under analysis. We’ve discussed secession multiple times in this blog and the facts show that is was not and still is not constitutional. The people have the right to rebel against an oppressive government, but in 1860/61 the US government was not being oppressive to the slave owners. It made no move to do anything to oppress the slave owners in any way. There was absolutely no cause for secession, yet the slave owners desired it.

            When they seceded and tried to form a nation, they then used military force to attack the United States which had made no hostile action against them. Of course after the first year of that war the slave owners started, they had to use conscription to force white southerners to fight for the slave owners and then conducted a tax in kind system to seize supplies from everyone in the South to support that war.

            As for southerners wanting to leave the Union, over a third of them did not want to leave the Union. Yet, when it came time to make a choice, that third was not allowed to at the secession conventions for the most part. Later, when more and more southerners were questioning secession and voicing discontent and saying that they should not have left the Union, the slave owners used began a war to attempt to keep their secession movement going.

            We can go on and on with this, but the exercising of God given rights was not involved.

    • Leo July 6, 2016 / 9:42 pm

      Didn’t a member of the flaggers threaten lawsuits against the SCV for something? I honestly don’t remember exactly, but I vaguely recall one of then being upset with the SCV leadership.

      • The Lamp July 6, 2016 / 10:03 pm

        They are constantly threatening people. The AL Flaggers think the cops are their own personal army and that they can sue if people say mean things about them. Susan is only a slightly dressed up version of them.

        • Leo July 7, 2016 / 5:28 am

          We have The Mid-South flaggers. This group is a traveling circus who actually came to Mississippi State University to “flag” the Grant Library. They also “”flagged” a commemoration at Fort Pillow by the University of Memphis and several Tennessee departments because the massacre never really happened.

    • Andy Hall July 9, 2016 / 1:37 pm

      “Don’t the inbred Alabama flaggers try to do that too?”

      They threaten to sue people constantly. They’re shouty.

  4. Sandi Saunders July 6, 2016 / 4:40 pm

    As a Southern woman who takes my heritage very seriously but understands that heritage very differently than the neo confederates and Confederacy apologists, I just wonder where they went so wrong. I think the monuments they started erecting literally went to their heads and erased the actual events of history and the need to remember and honor the dead soldiers went so far off the rails.

    How you go from “they left their homes and families and marched off to defend their Constitutional liberty. They wanted their God given rights of freedom and independence” and “Let us pass the remainder of our days in such wise that nothing we shall do will bring shame and regret that we also were Confederate soldiers” to welcoming, including and even defending the racists, white supremacists, white separatists, secessionist anti-government yokels who propagate any discussion and slam the actual history in favor of histrionics, documented fact in favor of myth and truth in favor of lies? How do you not know how that will reflect on your “honor”?

    It is hard enough to grasp how confederate soldiers volunteered to fight their own nation and believed they had suffered some actual loss of the “original principals of the Constitutional Republic as given to our Confederate Ancestors by the founding fathers”. And yet I get it that afterward the movement was to honor and “vindicate” the confederate soldier’s “purity of motive, his fortitude, and his heroism” I just wonder where they left their Southern integrity that I think is just as important: to tell the whole truth.

    • Brooks D. Simpson July 6, 2016 / 4:52 pm

      We need to understand that the Virginia Flaggers are struggling to restore their own honor nowadays. Hathaway’s response reminds us why they find that to be so difficult. They ran out of excuses and countercharges long ago.

      They are neither honest nor honorable.

  5. Mousy Tongue July 6, 2016 / 5:25 pm

    Dennis Durham’s FB comment on Hathaway’s story:

    “It’s rather amusing the way they think anyone would knowingly associate with someone involved in such behavior.”

    Quickly moderated away. LOSing count of the layers of irony here.

  6. rortensie July 6, 2016 / 5:55 pm

    So, I could not get over the thought of you sitting in the basement blogging away.

  7. Shoshana Bee July 6, 2016 / 6:00 pm

    I know that it is pointing out the obvious, but the thing that bothers me more than anything, as that these flagger people are more worried about sanitizing their reputations than they are about the nature of the crime this guy is being charged with. The closest comment I found was that “this guy was accused of heinous crimes…but he only went to 3 of our events” or something to that nature.

    THIS is what they are worried about — not the guy’s accused crimes. Okay. I get it.

    • Brooks D. Simpson July 6, 2016 / 6:44 pm

      In every one of these matters, the Flaggers — and especially Hathaway — portray themselves as victims.

  8. Jimmy Dick July 6, 2016 / 7:09 pm

    Suzie can’t handle the truth. It is all about preserving her fake version of history. She rejects the facts and lies every time she speaks about the past.

    The flaggers have accomplished nothing in five years. They’ve put up some flags, waved some flags, and been ridiculed by the public. The followers they do attract are racists. The flaggers are so desperate for any support, they take the racists on as friends and supporters, and ignore anything that the racists do.

    The flaggers have no honor. They lack honesty. They lack integrity. It starts at the top of their group and permeates the group all the way to the bottom.

  9. C. Meyer July 6, 2016 / 7:55 pm

    Susan says….”but I won’t waste a minute of our time making statements about or reacting to their garbage.”

    Isn’t that what here whole post was about? She did very little addressing the allegations of one of the people she has praised for his flagging efforts.

    • Brooks D. Simpson July 6, 2016 / 10:01 pm

      Like Chastain, Hathaway’s confused … and she knows that these stories keep following her around like tin cans rattling on a car bumper.

  10. Goad Gatsby July 6, 2016 / 7:58 pm

    The Flaggers had a silent vigil to protest InLight at the VMFA. Sulser showed up and in my opinion he was drunk. He said harassing comments to those that opposed his views. The Flaggers were really only silent in regards to commenting about Sulser and you would think they would keep to that.

  11. Virginia Bourne July 6, 2016 / 9:30 pm

    Hathaway : “not because they think we are racists…they know for a fact that is not true”

    Ummmmm…..are we watching the same program?

    Yes. Yes I do think the Flaggers are racists. Rather, I know it. Like Hathaway says, by their words, deeds, and actions I know they are racists. Taking a broad view that’s probably # 1 on the list of Va Flagger offenses. #2 is continued, aggressively willful ignorance of history. #3 with a bullet is Hathaway, et al.’s piss poor efforts at organizing. Is she really the best they can muster? Control your message dumdums.

    • Shoshana Bee July 8, 2016 / 3:56 am

      Susan would like to presume that we “know” something other than the truth: that her organization is a cesspool that cultivates degenerates with the efficiency of an untreated cancer. In light of current events, I am quite certain that I know way less than I ever did about anything regarding what motivates people to do what they do (whether acting under the guise of “organizations” or acting purely rogue). The hate, malice, and violence just continues to fold upon itself. The feeble bleats from a self-deluded enabler is not going convince me that she cares about anything other than to protect and further her crusade. Maybe a couple of hours of sleep will offer some enlightenment regarding all of this. I seriously doubt it.

  12. Rob Baker July 7, 2016 / 5:07 am

    This issue brought Chastain out of the woodwork.

      • rortensie July 7, 2016 / 2:54 pm

        Thank! This has been rather comical.

    • Jimmy Dick July 7, 2016 / 1:51 pm

      She’s been repeating her racist and bigoted lies over on Restoring the Honor for a long time. She gets caught lying and just keeps on doing it. When she is confronted over her racist buddies and asked to rebuke them, she ignores the request and keeps on lying.

      I have to admit, it’s getting boring and repetitive pulling her chain to watch her squawk like the trained parrot she is. She is just a female version of George willing to ignore any fact that proves them wrong.

    • Andy Hall July 7, 2016 / 2:45 pm

      Rob, you know that Sulser is the one who got escorted out of the Trump rally with the Confederate flag, right? Amazing how these stories all intertwine.

      • Rob Baker July 7, 2016 / 7:14 pm

        I saw that this morning actually. I googled the guy and some restoring honor posts came up which identified him.

        Yea, amazing how these stories intertwine.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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