{"id":82153,"date":"2020-06-16T22:43:03","date_gmt":"2020-06-17T02:43:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=82153"},"modified":"2020-06-16T22:43:08","modified_gmt":"2020-06-17T02:43:08","slug":"the-daily-gouge-archive-monday-june-15th-2020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=82153","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge Archive, Monday, June 15th, 2020"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Monday, June 15th, 2020…but before we begin, this headline from\u00a0<\/strong>FOX News<\/em>\u00a0offers further evidence choices and actions have<\/em> consequences<\/em><\/span>, at least for Republicans, as a…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Virginia GOP congressman who officiated same-sex wedding loses primary battle<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“A first-term Republican congressman in\u00a0Virginia\u00a0who drew the ire of social conservatives in his district<\/span><\/em> for officiating a\u00a0same-sex wedding lost his party\u2019s primary on Saturday. Rep. Denver Riggleman, R-Va., lost a GOP convention Saturday that was done via drive-thru because of the coronavirus pandemic.<\/span> He lost to Bob Good, a former official in the athletics department at Liberty University and a strong social conservative.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

…<\/span>Riggleman, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus<\/span><\/em>, upset many Republicans in his district last summer when he officiated the wedding of two male campaign aides<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0<\/span>President Trump endorsed Riggleman, as did Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr<\/strong><\/span>…”<\/p>\n

Assuming Riggleman’s officiation wasn’t mere politically-correct pandering, here’s to him acting on his principles.\u00a0 But the fact remains, unlike those of his district, they certainly aren’t Conservative<\/em><\/span> principles; so here’s to Democracy in action<\/em><\/span>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, here’s The Gouge<\/em>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up, since we’re on the subject of politically-correct pandering,\u00a0WBAL TV<\/em>\u00a0‘s Kata Amara is reporting Maryland Dimocratic congressman Dutch (pronounced “doosh”)…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ruppersberger calls to remove names of Confederates at Naval Academy<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/h1>\n

USNA is home to two buildings named after Naval officers who fought for Confederacy<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“…Ruppersberger [newly-elected chair of the USNA Board of Visitors] said the Pentagon should consider removing Confederate names from all military bases as Americans across the country rise up against decades of racial inequality and police brutality<\/span><\/em>. “This isn\u2019t about erasing history,” Ruppersberger said in a statement.<\/span> “We simply shouldn’t lift up traitors<\/em><\/span> who fought against<\/em> American values<\/em><\/span> like equality and tolerance<\/em><\/span>.”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The academy superintendent’s residence, which hosts thousands of visitors from around the world each year, is named after Franklin Buchanan, who left to join the Confederate Navy at the start of the war.<\/span> The academy’s Weapons and Systems Engineering division is housed in Maury Hall, named after Confederate fighter Matthew Fontaine Maury.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“There has been discussion of renaming these buildings since at least 2017,” Ruppersberger said.<\/span> “As the new chairman, the time for discussion<\/em><\/span> is over<\/em><\/span>. It’s time for action<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Midshipmen who have earned the privilege to study in one of our nation’s most prestigious institutions should not have to walk around campus and see buildings named for men who fought to uphold slavery and promote white supremacy<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>…”<\/p>\n

We don’t know who is the more ignorant: Ruppersberger or the reporter.\u00a0 After all, Ruppersberger has been on the Academy’s Board of Visitors since 2009<\/em><\/span>, which provided him plenty of time<\/em><\/span>\u00a0to familiarize himself in general<\/em> <\/span>with the annals of the institution he purports to protect, and more particularly<\/em><\/span> those whose character he so disingenuously recounts<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0 Then again, would it be asking too much<\/em><\/span> for a “journalist” to delve into<\/em> the background of the subjects of her story<\/em><\/span>?<\/strong><\/p>\n

At the risk of being labeled a racist<\/em><\/span>, we offer a few brief facts in defense<\/em><\/span> of Franklin Buchanan and Matthew Maury.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Buchanan was one of the guiding forces behind the creation of the United States Naval Academy, his efforts being initially recognized when he was appointed its first Superintendent.\u00a0 And while Maury, too, was a proponent of a Navy equivalent of West Point, his fame came in the area of science, being considered today the Father of Oceanography.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here’s the juice<\/span><\/em>: ALL<\/em><\/span> of their contributions to the Academy were made prior to<\/em><\/span> the first shots being fired in The<\/em>\u00a0War Between the States<\/em>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Though Buchanan was a native Marylander, and Maury born and raised in Virginia, we could find no record of either man owning slaves.\u00a0 Both<\/em><\/span> were career officers in the Naval service, yet both<\/em><\/span> left to join the Confederacy.\u00a0 What’s most important<\/em><\/span> is an understanding of what led both to do so<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0 And the answer lies in the very history Dutch (rhymes with “douche”) Ruppersberger may not wish to erase, but which he willfully ignores<\/em><\/span> or has no interest in learning<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Though Ruppersberger and the curiously uninquisitive Ms. Amara may not know it<\/em><\/span>, prior to and during<\/em><\/span> the Civil War, the average American male<\/em><\/span> was fiercely loyal to his native state<\/em><\/span>. Thus did Robert E. Lee write after being offered command of all Union forces in the field:<\/strong><\/p>\n

“I have therefore\u00a0resigned<\/b>\u00a0my commission in the Army, and save in defense of my native State, with the sincere hope that my poor services never be needed, I hope I may never be called on to draw my sword<\/em>.”<\/strong><\/p>\n

Buchanan resigned his commission in anticipation of Maryland’s imminent secession, while Maury, like Lee, followed Old Virginny.\u00a0 Once he realized Maryland would not secede, Buchanan in fact sought reinstatement, but was rebuffed by the rather vengeful Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles, who observed stated he didn’t want “traitors or half-hearted patriots” in the service.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Slavery<\/em><\/span> was certainly at the heart<\/em><\/span> of the issue of States Rights, and together<\/em><\/span> they created the fuel without which<\/em><\/span> the Civil War would not have been ignited<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

But to dismiss<\/em><\/span> the contributions of Buchanan and Maury to the Naval Academy while ignoring<\/em><\/span> the circumstances and<\/em><\/span> history surrounding their decisions to fight on the side of the Confederacy is sheer ignorance<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0 To suggest they fought to “promote white supremacy<\/em><\/span>” is character assassination<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a closely related item courtesy of James Nichols, writing at\u00a0The Daily Wire<\/em>, Matt Walsh offers a troubling forecast suggesting there be storm clouds on the national horizon:<\/strong><\/p>\n

It Is Time To Face The Facts<\/span><\/a>. We Cannot Be\u00a0United<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“One of the first articles I wrote for The Daily Wire was a typically optimistic and cheerful\u00a0piece<\/a><\/em><\/span>\u00a0titled \u201cThe United States Of America No Longer Exists.\u201d<\/span> It was not met with a warm reception by many readers<\/em><\/span>, who understandably<\/em><\/span> found it to be a tad bleak<\/em><\/span>. Three years later<\/em><\/span>, it brings me no pleasure<\/em><\/span> to say, \u201cI told you so<\/em><\/span>.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

My basic thesis in that<\/span><\/em> piece was that our country<\/em><\/span>, though existing still<\/em><\/span> as a legal and geographic entity<\/em><\/span>, cannot<\/em><\/span> be meaningfully described as \u201cunited.\u201d We have nothing but the law and the land holding us together anymore<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> That is not enough<\/em><\/span> to make a nation or<\/em><\/span> a people. There needs to be something else<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Some uniting principle<\/em><\/span>. Some defining commonality<\/em> that binds us<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> If we are going to be<\/em><\/span> united, we must be united\u00a0around<\/em><\/span>\u00a0something or\u00a0by<\/em><\/span>\u00a0something.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Today<\/span><\/em>, all of this holds true, only more so<\/span><\/em>.<\/span> The key difference<\/em><\/span> between now and three years ago is that we no longer have the law<\/em><\/span>. Between the unconstitutional lockdowns<\/em><\/span> and the sudden abandonment of those policies in order to allow rampaging leftist mobs to wreak havoc in the streets for weeks on end<\/em><\/span>, the rule of law has broken down<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0(Or<\/span> been deliberately dismantled<\/span>!<\/em>)<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

…<\/span>If we cannot be united around tradition, language, or heritage<\/em><\/span>, and we also cannot be united around a shared belief in freedom and human rights<\/em><\/span>, then what is left<\/em><\/span>? We would appear<\/em><\/span> to be, already<\/em><\/span>, two different countries<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Or perhaps several<\/em><\/span> different countries. Even that<\/em><\/span> may be an overly generous way of describing our current state.<\/span> Really, when a man tells me that he believes babies aren\u2019t people, biological sex doesn\u2019t exist, men can get pregnant, police departments should be abolished, America is racist to its core, and I am a white supremacist because I disagree with him on these points<\/em><\/span>, I find myself questioning<\/em><\/span> whether we are from the same planet, or the same universe, let alone the same country<\/em><\/span>. That<\/em><\/span> is how absolutely opposed we are<\/em><\/span>, on all levels<\/em><\/span>, with almost no common ground<\/em><\/span>, or shared frame of reference<\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

It is not hard to see why our debates are fruitless and our conversations go nowhere<\/em><\/span>. We are speaking different languages<\/em><\/span>, both literally and<\/em><\/span> metaphorically.<\/span> We are a people divided by gaps that cannot be closed<\/em><\/span>. There is no bridge that can connect the Left to the Right<\/em><\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0(Save God Himself<\/span> through his ONLY Son\u00a0Jesus Christ<\/span>!<\/em>)<\/span> The differences <\/em><\/span>are too deep<\/span>, too wide<\/span><\/em>.\u00a0(Primarily because Socialists know so much<\/span> that just isn’t so<\/span>!<\/em>)<\/span>\u00a0For unity to occur, one side or the other must simply abandon almost everything they believe and profess, and join the ranks of the other.<\/span> That<\/em><\/span> is not likely to happen any time soon<\/em><\/span>. So the divisions will remain, and grow deeper<\/em><\/span>, and we will be less united over time<\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know where<\/em><\/span> to go from here, or how<\/em><\/span> to fix it, or if<\/em><\/span> it can<\/em><\/span> be fixed at all, but I know that any<\/em><\/span> path forward must begin<\/em><\/span> with an honest assessment of the situation<\/em><\/span>. This is my honest assessment, for what it\u2019s worth.<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

To borrow a phrase from The Bard, “Aye, there’s the rub”!\u00a0 For the odds of finding an honest Socialist are about the same as discovering chastity in a cathouse.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Since we’re on the subject of dissimulating Socialists, courtesy of Tom Bakke, ZeroHedge<\/em>‘s Tyler Durden relates how a letter, purportedly written by an…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Anonymous Berkeley Professor Shreds BLM Injustice Narrative; Berkeley Responds<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“U.C. Berkeley’s history department has issued a statement regarding the anonymous letter, and instead of addressing – or inviting a vigorous debate over its content,\u00a0Berkeley’s response validates one of the letter’s core claims that dissent outside “a tightly policed, narrow discourse” is not welcome<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>…”<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And while we question the accuracy of one sentence contained in the letter, specifically the writer’s assertion, “Arab Americans have been viciously demonized since 9\/11, as have Chinese Americans more recently<\/em>” (Objection, your Honor, the statement assumes facts not in evidence!), the rest is dead on, balls-accurate.<\/strong><\/p>\n