Header Image (book)


Wednesday, August 16, 2017

This morning MSNBC reported that...

......President Trump stated on Tuesday, August 15, 2017, that some of the torch bearers in Charlottesville were good people. The MSNBC report included the word torches in quotation marks.

I went to YouTube and listened to the entire speech:

Did President Trump state what MSNBC reported as mentioned in the first paragraph of this blog post?

He did say (emphases mine):
TRUMP:...If you take a look at some of the groups, and you see – and you'd know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases you're not – but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. So this week it's Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

But they were there to protest -- excuse me, if you take a look, the night before they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee....


Reporter: Who are the good people? Sir, I just didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly? I just don’t understand what you were saying.

TRUMP: No, no. There were people in that rally -- and I looked the night before -- if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I’m sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough, bad people -- neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest -- because I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit. So I only tell you this: There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country -- a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country....
Read the entire transcript HERE at the Washington Post.

The words torch and torches were not included in any words uttered by President Trump.

Questions now arise in my mind....

1.  On Friday night, August 11, were there people quietly protesting the removal of the statue and not carrying torches, or was the only group there that evening the torch bearers a la the KKK?

2.  Does anyone here know the exact route of those carrying torches on Friday night?

3.  Does anyone here know if there were people surrounding the statue on Friday night so as to protect it from possible vandals?  I ask this because in 2006 I participated in a protective ring around the Vietnam Veterans Memorial when Code Pink came to Washington, D.C., in a stated attempt to vandalize the Wall.

[If you can answer the above questions, links greatly appreciated]



    Living loosely, tilting to the left,
    Eager to condemn with sneers and taunts,
    Sarcastic always right wing blogs he haunts
    Trolling for attention he is deft ––
    Excellent in fact –– like no one who since
    Rose of Tokyo fouled GI’s air.
    Eroding confidence and morale she’d tear ––
    An eloquently evil bloody nuisance.
    Termite-like this slimy creature chews
    Steadily besmirching others’ views.
    Snotty, sullen, he will not relent
    Harbingers of malice don’t repent.
    Instead, they thrive as they forever choose
    To propagate and spread their septic views.

    ~ FreeThinke

    Now that may not address the event featured in AOW's post specifically, but it DOES accurately characterize the mentality of the Left, which is proudly and fiercely displayed every hour of every day by the destructive, heavily-biased, agenda-driven machinations of the ENEMEDIA.

    The ENEMEDIA is in reality a far greater threat to America's fundamental Character, Identity, Culture, and Sovereignty than the forces of North Korea, the Islamists and Russia COMBINED.

    1. Hear Hear!

      Bravo, old man! Way to give it to them!

  2. I had the same question as to the purpose of the gathering. Was it in response to the take down of the statute, or a response to the protesters and their views. I suggest we may never know, but it appears about 500 showed up on Friday before the action. That appears to be early if the response was to counter the so called alt-right. Don't count on the media to try and figure it out.

    1. I suggest that when you have a large group of torch bearers shouting "Blood and Soil" it's time to admit just what message they wanted to convey.

    2. Ducky,

      Well and good. No way I would get anywhere near such a march (A Slavic Catholic with a Latin American wife wouldn't be welcome anyway). It's KKK.

      However, they have a right to march peacefully on public property, and no matter how abhorrent they are, committing violence against them is wrong.

      A peaceful counter-protest is not only righteousy right, it is an American institution and a God-given right.

      What say you?

    3. So, was the UVA march the "permitted" Unite the Right march, or just a bunch of goons flexing their muscles.

      btw - Did any of these people have a permit? Who do THEY represent? The "tolerant" Left?

    4. You can't condemn the KKK and embrace ANTIFA duckman. ANTIFA's ancestors gave birth to the NAZI brownshirt. Is Charlottesville their "Reichstag fire"? If not, when's Oppo-Krystalnacht?

    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    6. Nostradumbass, I want to know what "This One" was thanking you for!

      And I better get an answer. If I find out that you and he are in cahoots (like giving him a heads up when a blog isn't being moderated) your posting here is going to cease!

  3. "The sleep of reason produces monsters" -- Francisco Goya

    Social discourse in the US is an unhinged nuthouse, bereft of rationality, facts, intelligence, candor and goodwill.

    A Google engineer wrote an anodyne paper exploring questions surrounding women in the tech industry, and they ejected him from the hive. Go read it so you can gain an appreciation for just how hysterical, unhinged and completely out-of-proportion the reaction was.

    The Maoist left is setting up and US-Them situation where no one may be neutral:

    * If you are not vociferously for high school men who feel like women going to the bathroom and showering with your daugher, you are a transphobe

    * If you hold the scientifically-sound view that men and women are physically and biologically different, and point to data showing each of the two cohorts--while displaying much overlap--also display gender-specific tendencies to activites, employment preferences, while each also excels over the other in some categories, you are a misogynist troglodyte.

    So, what we are seeing now is one more Maoist redline in America where no one can remain neutral: Are you for or against the left's Taliban-style iconoclasm? If you're not for taking wrecking balls, jackhammers and dynamite to every last confederate painting, statue or monument, you are a racist.

    The left is a writhing troop of apes squatting on a stinking pile of logical fallacies where rational debate is not possible.

    "Hell is a place where there is no reason"

    1. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - F. Nietsche

    2. Then why can't we get to the real purpose of the statues.
      Why defend them at all?

      These statues went up in two primary periods:
      1. In the 1920's when the Klan was at its peak and Jim Crow was king. Those were a statement that the South had prevailed over time.
      2. During the civil rights period as an act of defiance.

      Why defend them at all?
      That is a question that will be dodged for good reason.
      The answer is embarrassing.

    3. Duck,
      Why defend them at all?
      That is a question that will be dodged for good reason.
      The answer is embarrassing.

      Off topic. Do it again, and deletion of your comment(s) will follow. Fair warning.

    4. AOW: I beg your indulgence as I respond to Ducky.

      First, Ducky, you are off-topic, but I answer you with two words: FREE SPEECH

      Now, I am also for power to be exercised at the lowest level possible, so if people at the state and local level vote to remove those symbols from their community, nobody else should have a say in it.

      The left demonizing everyone who doesn't agree with them is un-American and repellent.

    5. At another blog post here this week, Duck opined as follows:

      He [The federal judge granting the permit] felt the group was being censored because of content of speech rather than as a threat to public safety which could be maintained by a change of venue.
      Seems a reasonable ruling.

      Duck added this sentence at the end of the above (regarding the venue):

      He had no way to know how wrong he was on the latter point.

      IMO, banning the free speech of Unite the Right is either Constitutional or it is not Constitutional.

      Corollary One: If our courts allow free speech only for groups with which the courts or WE THE PEOPLE agree, then this is no longer a country of the free.

      Corollary Two: What is going on right now in America is not really about certain statues. Instead, what is going on right now is a test that our republic is failing. There will be freedom of expression for some but not for others.

      And, now, back to work I go. But know that I am carrying my trusty iPhone and can delete comments therefrom. ;^)

    6. Why not tear down the Union monuments, ducky? The Cleveland Monument is far too elaborate... and it honors a bunch of right-wing Republican fundamentalists, like my g-g-grandfather. Talk about H8ers!

    7. Besides, us "descendants" can always read about our ancestor's heroics. We don't need any "places" that might carry significance to remember them by.

    8. Well, we can read about them until the Left's safe<-spaces extend to the library bookshelves...

      Keep on privatizing the public sphere, duckman. You do you the "life of the mind" proud!

    9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    10. ... not after it's been suppressed, anyway!

    11. .Nostradumbass quacked:
      "Counter protesters were not there to deface the statue. That battle was won, it's being removed.

      If the battle was won then why was antifa there at all?
      Answer: Everyone knows, including them, that they were there to incite violence. There is no other reason for them to have been there.

    12. Antifa (along with many others) was there because the march was advertised and the Nazis were there.

      It's pretty clear that the statue is a McGuffin.

      People of Charlottesville wanted to make it known what they thought of the Hitler Youth and Klan marching through their town. Simple.

    13. Here, let me fix that for you.

      Antifa (along with many others) was there because the march was advertised and the Nazis were there and antifa wanted to incite violence.

      It's pretty clear from antifa's viewpoint that the statue is a McGuffin.

      I don't see where the "People of Charlottesville" had anything to do with it.

    14. 1. In the 1920's when the Klan was at its peak and Jim Crow was king. Those were a statement that the South had prevailed over time.
      2. During the civil rights period as an act of defiance.

      1. Ah yes, the progressive era of Woodrow Wilson (Democrat) and his federal funding of ressurecting the KKK and endorsing the movie "Birth of a Nation" and
      2. The shit-fit of Southern New Deal Democrats when Republicans started desegregating schools (the South didn't swing Republicans into Congress and state legislatures until the late 1980s early 1990s, look it up)

      Maybe progressivism... isn't progress.

    15. Considering that in the Civil War, the North had a series of epic fails in combat against the South (the South having taken the bulk of the US military's professional soldiers as officers and commanders in the CSA) so much that the North turned to attacking Southern civilians and burning cities rather than fighting soldiers in battle, should we now remove the monuments to the war criminal Sherman?

      Some anecdotes....

      Years ago, when I was in high school, I dropped trou and left a big brown and steamy one on General William Tecumseh Sherman's headstone. Regretably cellphone cameras were still sci-fi then.

      Here's a joke. If we put the names of Confederate generals on potholes in New Orleans, will they fix the friggin roads? - Beamish

    16. BTW - Donald Trump paid to gold plate the statue of Sherman on his horse that stands in NYC...

    17. Beamish,
      Donald Trump paid to gold plate the statue of Sherman on his horse that stands in NYC.

      Do you have links for that? I found this link but not another one.

    18. I've found reports denying it, and I've found stories stating the refurb work was paid for "anonymously." Trump owns or did own building(s) around that statue, and it's just likely to me that Trump was that "anonymous" donor.

  4. AOW, Great questions. If we had a real press determined to dig out the facts and bring us the news, instead of bombarding us with progressive propaganda 24/7, we would already have the answers.

    1. The questions are moot.

      Why defend the statues (to the point of running people down with your car)?
      It all starts there and from that point you seek grnularity.

    2. Duck,
      The questions are moot.

      Typical Leftist response.

      As far as I'm concerned, the questions I listed matter. If they did not, I wouldn't have posted them.

      Quit trying to deflect. Now.

    3. Why defend the statues (to the point of running people down with your car)?

      You expect a NAZI to accept his "punch in the face" and just go home? Who knew?

    4. The confederate veterans who fought for the South and killed Union soldiers were eventually all given a general amnesty by the Union. It's being revoked, now. They're no longer "AMericans". They're "racist traitors".

    5. Ducky, aren't you late for the People's Correct Artistry Panel meeting?

    6. I just hope that when the Democrats succeed in getting the Republican Party banned, that they don't tear down this monument out of spite, too.

    7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    8. You tell me, ducky. When I was a freshman midshipman at the USMMA I attended the NY State "Old Guard Ball" in NYC. My Father-in-law was then a colonel in charge of an all white-officer, all black-enlisted man, unit in Harlem. Many would take offense at his "unit" photos. In fact, you'd have a hard time finding any of them on NY State Guard web pages.

    9. The idea that they were needed to protect the statue is as specious...

      The "tolerant" Left would never think of removing a statue to one of Virginia's most famous "favorite son's". Can the renaming of Leesburg, Lee's Corner, and Lee's Hill be far behind?

  5. Here's a question for the Duck that defecates all over this fine blog:

    Which organization has killed more minority babies? KKK or Planned Parenthood?

  6. This is precisely why Larry Elder calls them "MSNB Hee Haw." I doubt it's a mistake.

    The New York Times likewise just reported that Dennis Prager said he's against same-sex marriage because it will lead to incest. Never said that! They just made it up and, in fact, their quote from Dennis - buried deeper in the article than most people tend to read - shows that he didn't say that. They're liars, and it's nothing new. The NYT led the liars brigade against the Vietnam war. Check it out in The Lost Mandate of Heaven.

    SF - a GREAT Goya quote!

    1. Thanks. I have a copy of Los Caprichos. Some are specific to time and place, and some, like "Sleep of Reason" are universal.

  7. Half the nation is still in total meltdown over the reality of President Donald J. Trump, and I am concluding that includes most of the political establishment and their confreres in the Infotainment Media Complex.

    Their hysteria over the President's statements is embarrassing. He has explicitly condemned the racist groups by name. His departure from the hive narrative to say that there is violence and hatred on "many sides" is what has triggered the latest bout of foaming derangement.

    Americans flock to Therapists amid President Trump Stress Disorder

    1. Even Clinton boy-child Terry McAullif is not immune from the hysteria. A CNN propagandist takes him to task for his "gaffe." After condemning the violence in politburo-approved language (good boy, Terry!) he slipped up...

      McAuliffe was saying many of the things we needed to hear, and the black man standing behind him in the white "Menace II Supremacy" shirt was nodding emphatically.

      "You want to talk about patriots, talk about Thomas Jefferson and George Washington who brought our country together," he added. The man in the t-shirt, who I later learned was Charlottesville Vice Mayor Wes Bellamy, stopped nodding, maybe coincidentally, but I felt punched in the stomach.

      At a time when it is important to condemn white nationalists and supremacists unequivocally, invoking Thomas Jefferson is a mistake.

      My advice to President Trump: Do not try to appease crazy people; they'll just drag you down into the slobber pit with them.


    2. This poor woman's honesty puts her in danger:

      To her credit, at least one New York Times reporter, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, acknowledged antifa’s role in the mayhem on Twitter, noting that “the hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.”

      Will the New York Times force her to retract? Edit and revise?


    3. SF,
      Thanks for that information about Sheryl Gal Stolberg.

      HERE is the link to Sheryl Gay Stolberg's Tweet.

    4. Typo alert!

      Make that Sheryl Gay Stolberg. Damn auto-correct.

    5. Well, you can believe "Jason Wilson" who happens to be a leftist apologist, academic and the writer of such screeds as,

      Cultural Marxism: a uniting theory for right-wingers who love to play the victim, The right has won control of the English-speaking world, Do Australia's rightwingers hate it because they don't know their own readers (which is about “right-wing racism against Muslims in Australia),

      Charlie Hebdo could be published in Australia (which argues against free speech on issues of “religion or religious identity”)

      Or you could believe someone who wasn't pretending to just happen to be there.

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. TS/WS,
      I'd appreciate it if you didn't post the same comment in two different posts.

      Intent aside, it looks like spamming.


  9. More refutations of Clintonista McAuliffe's blathering stupidity (which also refutes Duck's blathering stupidity, since his comments were obviously based upon the same propaganda outlets:

    "Contradicting statements by Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the Virginia State Police say they did not find caches of weapons stashed around Charlottesville in advance of last Saturday's deadly white nationalist rally."

    The Virginia State Police also disputed McAuliffe's claims that Virginia State Police were underequipped to deal with the heavily armed militia members at Saturday's rally.

    "I can assure you that the Virginia State Police personnel were equipped with more-than-adequate specialized tactical and protective gear for the purpose of fulfilling their duties to serve and protect those in attendance of the August 12 event in Charlottesville."


    I realize the thread is dead, but I post this for anyone who happens later to stumble across Ducky's towering totems of lies, red propaganda and outright bs.

    1. SF,
      Noted and marked -- and filed for future use.

      Thank you.

  10. Hey, Duck.

    I'm just now working through comment notification, and my curiosity is piqued.

    Why was it that commenter This One thanked you yesterday?

  11. I just got back from a stroll through the Liberal/Progressives cesspool of blogs.
    Though liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks them to learn that there ARE other points of view.
    Political correctness is a wonderful example of how liberals think. They pull some “offensive” (to them) idea out of the miasma of their minds and put government authority behind it. As a result, colleges are staffed with race relations police who monitor what is said and read body language. Infractions are handled with reeducation or expulsion.

    The fetus is property and just cells.

    Enforcing immigration law is profiling.

    Opposing Obama is racism.

    Tax cuts are only doing the bidding of the super rich.

    Supporting business is crushing the employee.

    Fox News is Faux News.

    And the list goes on. There is no intelligent debate in these nuggets of liberal truth. You just dare not challenge them without proving to the world that you are an idiot.

    Progressives are, at their core, self-absorbed bullcrap artists. They are convinced of their moral and intellectual superiority, and above all, take whatever action they feel necessary to achieve whatever goal they decide needs to be achieved.
    One Progressive Shit House does nothing else but bitch, and moan about our President, but was right there to kiss Obamas Skinny Ass every time SHE had the opportunity to. Oh well that's Progressiveism for you!


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.