One of the unwritten great things about the South is our obsession
with colorful nicknames.
Everybody’s got one, and some people are
blessed with several. If you’re Southern and you don’t have a nickname,
then there might be something wrong with you. Maybe it goes back to
the end of the Civil War when Yankee troops were stalking around looking
for various “war criminals,” and everybody started giving out fake,
life-saving aliases. You know, something like this:
Yankee soldier (in a high-pitched, nasal, pinched-off voice): “Hey,
you there! I’m looking for Robert. Have you seen Robert? He may also
be known as Bobby or Rob.”
Robert (in a deep, rich, resonant Southern accent): “No, sir, my name is Stinky Bean. I don’t know anybody named Robert.”
THIS BOOK TELLS THE SHOCKING STORY of this long forgotten chapter in
American history—the story of THE UNION LEAGUE, WASHINGTON’S KKK. The
“official” version of Southern Reconstruction is that there was a reign
of terror — a systematic murder and intimidation by the “white Southern
ruling class” who were determined to keep free people of colour in a
virtual state of slavery. The real picture is a good deal more
complicated. One can find plenty of material about conflict,
intimidation, and killing in America during the period 1865-1877; but
the Marxist class conflict formulary of history — also known as
Political Correctness—takes for granted as fact what is clearly partisan
propaganda of the time.
They never ask the essential factual and moral
question: Who initiated violence? John Chodes shows that the violence
was begun by the Republicans through the establishment of the Union
League. The Union League was a Northern organisation with the mission
of maintaining the illegal and undemocratic control of the Republican
Party in the South. Its mobs of Black “militia” led by Carpetbaggers
engaged in intimidation, theft, harassment of the innocent, and murder.
They deliberately provoked violent response. Their coercion was directed
not only at whites, but towards the freedmen who refused to support the
Republican regime. In other words, the Union League used the methods of
the Ku Klux Klan before the Klan came into existence — the Klan before
the Klan! *** This title is enrolled in Kindle MatchBook. FREE if print
edition is purchased on Amazon.
A 23-year-old black man armed with a stolen gun was fatally shot
Saturday afternoon by police in Milwaukee during a foot pursuit, authorities say.
The man has been identified as Sylville Smith, police said. Smith was
shot in the chest and arm, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said.
He fled from a car during a traffic stop Saturday about 2:30 p.m. in
the Wisconsin city’s North Side, police said in a press release. He was
chased by two officers and was shot during the foot pursuit, according
to police.
The Founders referred to their creation as a republic and built in safeguards against the rise of democracy, which they viewed as mob rule. Professor Donald Livingston instructs us that the United States is not a republic, but a federation of republics – and the federation itself cannot be referred to as a republic.
Jefferson’s revolution of 1800 election temporarily ended the Federalist Party’s quest to mold the United States into an aristocratic and centralized nation, though encroachments of federal power upon the States continued through the Supreme Court (“sappers and miners”), centralized banking, special interest protectionism — and finally the creation of the States, the federal agent — waging war upon States that rightly opposed the encroachments. The new Republican Party of Lincoln was an incarnation of Adam’s Federalist Party, and empowered by the protectionist and banking interests of New England.
Bernhard Thuersam, www.Circa1865.com The Great American Political Divide
A Court Party Living Off the Farmers
“Any system of government, from a democracy to an aristocracy to a monarchy, is capable of drowning its people in tyranny. “I see no infallible criterion for defining the nature of government, except its acts,” wrote John Taylor of Caroline in “Construction Construed and Constitutions Vindicated,” (1820). “If the acts of a monarchy, aristocracy and democracy are the same, these forms of government are to a nation essentially the same also. To contend for forms only, is to fight for shadows.”
How then, should we define the nature of a republic? The word itself was batted around by all the Founding Fathers, but its use varied. John Adams, who favored aristocracy and “balanced power,” wrote that the only “rational” definition of republic is “aa government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws.”
Taylor assailed this sort of “republic,” which puts its faith in the “rule of law.” Answering Adams in 1814 (An Inquiry into the Principles and Policy of the Government of the United States), he asked how this was any different from the government from which they had declared independence. What guarantees that the law to which everyone is “equally subject” is just – or good?
Adam’ imagined government would counter [inherent financial injustice] with a “balance of power,” by which each class, emerging “naturally” according to a divine distribution of talent, would find equal representation. But do such classes arise “by nature,” according to “God’s design?” Taylor argues that Adams’ classes are artificial – special interests created by laws and sustained by government. (Government’s creation of a standing army, for example, creates a “soldier class,” a military interest. Central banking, creates a banking interest. Etc.)
And man’s lust for power being what it is, these artificial classes would (did) seek to advance their standing among the others, if not dominate them altogether even; even taking the moral high ground for doing just so. “One tyrant may thank God that he is not another tyrant.”
During the infant days of the United States, the means by which the federal government was creating this phony aristocracy was, according to Taylor, its control of the economy, through central banking and taxation – unjust transfers of wealth from one interest to another.
“Wealth, established by law, violates the principle, which induced the American states to wage war with Britain. It separates the imposer from the payer of taxes. No nation would tax itself to enrich an order or separate interest. When therefore a nation is so taxed, it must proceed from the power of the order itself, which is invariably the imposer and receiver of the tax; whilst the rest of the nation is the payer.”
For Taylor, a true, sustainable republic is not characterized by a “balance of power” among artificial interest groups, but by self-government. “The distinguishing superiorities of our policy, are, the sovereignty of the people; a republican government, or a government producing publick or national good; and a thorough system of responsible representation.”
Who, then, were these sovereign “people,” and what is this “good.” The people are farmers. At the time of the War of Independence, 95 percent of Americans were engaged in farming. The prospect of owning a farm was what made the colonies attractive in the first place.
But this life had been threatened by a distant [British] central government that was cash-strapped and weary from financing its own imperial adventures. The small colonial farmer found it difficult to hold onto his land when the crown began to manipulate the money supply. Slapping taxes on his and stifling free trade only made things worse.
The Federalists’ “consolidated republic” threatened to do just the same. Federalist fiscal policy created new interests, a new Court Party of paper wealth. These sundry interests could not live without the farmers, yet they must live off them.
According to Jeffersonian tradition, of which Taylor was the greatest exemplar, the farmer is capable of self-government. His is the only vocation that is “natural” – that is not a creation of government. He depends upon God to sustain him . . . [and] he takes up his arms to defend hearth and home in the local militia, and the mantle of statesman when called upon – all the while eager, as Taylor was, to get back to his land, to the plow.
This is the true republican ideal [and] . . . its people are defined not by party affiliation or political law but by the mores majorum, the “customs of the fathers.”
(A Share in the Patria, Aaron D. Wolf, Chronicles, May 2009, excerpts, pp. 21-22)
Donald Trump gaslighted the left when he suggested the upcoming elections may be “rigged.” The usual comic trove of Democrats posing as academics, journalists,
and civil rights groups pounced on Trump. It's a revived “Southern
strategy” that tars “Democrats as cheaters,” wailed Rutgers professor
Lorraine Minnite.
Whether
Trump was correct or not depends on the meaning of “rigged.” If
“rigged” means a group of Democrats sit in central command and control
the output of voting machines from outer space, then no, the election
isn’t rigged.
But what Democrats are really doing is far more dangerous, far more diffuse, and far harder to fix than a conspiracy to control voting machines.
The
integrity of our elections is suffering from a coordinated,
multi-million dollar attack on multiple fronts. It’s far more
complicated than one centralized high-powered conspiracy to “rig” the
election.
A more sophisticated understanding of what is happening is
essential to combat the real threat to our elections.
Hillary Clinton’s long-time aide and campaign insider Huma Abedin may
have inadvertently confirmed that Hillary Clinton’s mental and physical
health are deteriorating. In a private email sent via
Clinton’s unsecured server and released after a Freedom of Information
request by Judicial Watch,
Abedin exchanges emails with State Department aide Monica Hanley and
notes that Hanley must go over material with Clinton because she is
often confused.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that a Ten Commandments’ monument had to be removed from
the State Capitol grounds in Oklahoma. Why are the courts so opposed to
the Ten Commandments?
Secular governments don’t want any competition.
Governments want to be free to establish their own laws without a law
that limits them.
The First Commandment states that there is only one God, and only He can save us.
Chicago has passed another grim milestone of violence with over 100 people shot in a single seven-day period.
Between Friday, August 5, and the following Friday, over 100 people were shot,
with 99 of those occurring from Friday to the next Thursday. This
brings the number of shootings to an incredible 800 more than this time
last year, according to the Chicago Tribune.
The dangerous week included one of the most deadly days seen in
Chicago in over a decade when Monday, August 8, groaned under the weight
of 19 shootings and nine killed. One of the victims was a ten-year-old
boy shot outside his home in the Lawndale neighborhood.
AJ I will hold all these arrogant "Never Trump" people accountable after they have sabotaged DT. They own the HRC CT
On Saturday Sean Hannity took a swipe at #NeverTrumper Jonah Goldberg who says he’s not for Hillary but his Twitter feed makes it look like he’s paid by the DNC.
Trump supporters will not soon forget how Sean Hannity fought for the
Republican nominee – Nor will we forget the disgraceful actions of the
#NeverTrump elitist Republicans.
Mainstream historians are both an incestuous and snarky bunch. They
latch on to trends–fads really–and pull those trends like mules lugging a
heavy cart to market (where they hope to sell books to their tens of
fans). In time, the mules give out, but unlike the mule, these
historians never realize they are whipped. They hire more mules like
them and cut and snipe at the stallions who bravely defy the yoke.
Unfortunately, these trends become ingrained in the academy and
become the catchy slogans and cliches of the “educated” elite. Our
history then becomes distorted, often unrecognizable from a traditional
viewpoint.
Every now and then a stallion is allowed to run free.
Sean Hannity
