Bag of Randomness for Wednesday, June 10, 2020


Is Mexico also paying for that new wall around the White House?


Presidential trivia – An only child has never been president of the United States.


After the last presidential election, I don’t trust any polling data. Supposedly, a lot of people who vote for Trump just don’t like to admit or showcase it.


When you are the President of the United States and have the resources of the FBI, CIA, NSA, and everything else, there’s no need to tweet about conspiracy theories.


Fort Hood is one of the largest military bases in the world but I didn’t have any idea it was named after a Confederate general, John Bell Hood. That’s absurd. Insanely absurd. Think about it, everyone who joins the U.S. military has one thing in common, they swear-in by an oath to honor and protect it. Hood would have said the following:

“I, _____, appointed a _____ in the Army of the United States, do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever, and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States, and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the rules and articles for the government of the Armies of the United States.”

So, even though he swore an oath to the U.S. and betrayed his country by going to war against it, the U.S. Army is going to honor him by naming a military base after him? I’m trying to wrap my head around how absurd that is. Soldiers are now stationed at a fort named in honor after a traitor, a traitor who led troops to kill men who actually defended the oath he shat on.

On a related now, I keep thinking about that six-hour Ulysses S. Grant documentary on the History channel. I think about how interesting it would be to listen to a conversation between him and Washington. One man led an army of rebels to start a country, the other led an army against rebels to keep the country together. One man presided over a new nation, the other presided during that nation’s reconstruction. Also, while I can’t prove it, I bet Robert E. Lee has been honored more (statues, schools, etc.) than the man he surrendered to, who later served two terms as president and led its reconstruction.


Hell’s four-day forecast has a chance of frost and maybe even snow – Jerry Falwell Jr. apologizes for tweet with racist photo after black students and alumni denounced him


‘What I saw was just absolutely wrong’: National Guardsmen struggle with their role in controlling protestsPOLITICO spoke to 10 National Guardsmen who have taken part in the protest response across the country since the killing of George Floyd while in police custody.



Eric Money is the only player in NBA history to officially score for two teams (76ers and Nets) in the same game. That game was also Phil Jackson’s first as head coach. He was an assistant coach for the Nets and became the head coach after two coaches were ejected.


‘Miss Hitler’ pageant entrant and her partner jailed for belonging to neo-Nazi groupA former “Miss Hitler” pageant entrant and her partner have been jailed in the UK for belonging to the extreme right-wing neo-Nazi group National Action.


This entry was posted in Personal. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Bag of Randomness for Wednesday, June 10, 2020

  1. wordkyle says:

    Do you also consider the signers of the Declaration of Independence traitors?

    • Geeding says:

      Certainly, and I’m certain most in the United Kingdom considered the Founding Fathers of the US to be traitors. But since the Founders won, and since Great Britain signed the Treaty of Paris, legally the Founders were not considered to be traitors to the crown but rather citizens of a foreign nation. The current AG recently stated history is written by the winners, but we know that’s not entirely true in regards to the Southern states. But your question, as it relates to what I wrote, is off-topic. To the best of my knowledge, there are no British military bases named after any of our Founding Fathers and members of their military don’t proudly display the U.S. flag. To the best of my knowledge, the German Army (or whatever their armed forces are called) don’t have any military establishments named after Nazis and the Nazi flag isn’t proudly displayed. It’s my belief that military bases are named (or should be named) after people we’d like our soldiers to emulate, people who upheld the same oath they took, perhaps the ones they died for.

      • Scooter says:

        You have went completely off the rails Amigo. The signers of the Declaration of Independence are traitors? So as a liberal mindset, we should re write history to fit the liberal agenda.

        • Geeding says:

          From an American point of view they are seen as heroes and patriots. I am an American and that’s how I view them, but from a British point of view they are viewed as traders. That’s all I was saying, I thought that was implied in my answer.

          • Scooter says:

            All Confederate soldiers and sailors were made US veterans by an act of Congress in 1958 (see below). Snopes tries to say that this is false but Snopes is trying to split hairs as to what the act does and they only reference the part of it that confers veteran benefits onto confederate soldiers. However in 85-425, section 3, subsection (e), it explicitly states that “For the purposes of this section, and section 433, the term ‘veteran’ includes a person who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, and the term “’active, military r naval service’ includes active service in such forces.”
            https://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/85/425.pdf

            I hate the argument that “well they were traitors who fought against the US to preserve slavery.” The American Indians also fought against the US government to preserve their culture and customs, which included holding slaves and concubines (sex slaves). Keep in mind that all Indians born in the Louisiana Purchase after 1803 were born on US soil. Therefore when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, all of said Native Americans became natural-born US citizens. Therefore, the Native Americans were just as “treasonous” as the confederates were especially the ones fighting the US after 1868.

            Rewriting history is not the answer in my humble musings.

            • Geeding says:

              Your comment has me very perplexed. You are inferring things I never said or implied. Seriously, go back and look at what I wrote in this post and the comments. I never stated anything about slavery. It feels like you are looking for something to disagree with me about just to defend a position you may feel passionate about. You called me out for stating that the Founding Fathers are traitors, but failed to realize I was only doing so from the British perspective, never did I imply they were traitors to the U.S. The British, of course, thought they were traitors, I don’t think there should be any disagreement about that, and that was my point. Then, you write and provide a link about Confederates and veteran benefits and write something more about slavery. I’m all up for healthy debate and discussion for anything I wrote, but I’m not when it comes to things I didn’t.

              Of course, I have thoughts about slavery as it relates to the Confederacy, those I’m sure you will disagree with, but I specifically didn’t refer to any of that in this post or its comments. I feel like you are putting words in my mouth. I still stand by my comments referring to Confederates as traitors, and you are more than welcome to disagree with me about that. To me, it’s about honoring a solemn oath. As for your thoughts and interpretations regarding the 1958 act and American Indians, I don’t think they apply to this conversation for reasons states above, though I do disagree with your assessment. But just because I don’t agree with your interpretation of history doesn’t mean I’m trying to rewrite history, and I think you know me well enough to know I’m not trying to twist things.

      • wordkyle says:

        I’m not sure of this position, but it appears that if the Confederacy had won, and another nation formed, the men who are the subjects of statues would be “founders” rather than traitors. I understand your point, I think, but consider if the United States had failed in their revolution. Would the motives of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, et al have been as maligned as those of Lee? Were the f0unders still not honorable men? Of course slavery was a large part of it, and that’s shameful, but isn’t it possible that those men acted with honor in defense of items other than slavery? I’m not trying to sell this as a rebuttal, but things maybe to think about.

        • Bizarro Big Tex says:

          I stand with Geeding. His analysis is sound and opinions well grounded.

        • Geeding says:

          I appreciate you giving me things to think about int he friendly manner that you did, it gives me a chance to realize if I need perspective or need to do research on a subject or if I’m for or against something, why is that and am I able to explain it reasonably.

          • wordkyle says:

            I’ve been pretty clear throughout the years that I hold certain positions and opinions. Often, replies to my comments are rude and attacking. In those cases I respond in kind. I’m not interested in being a punching bag. While I oppose most of your political opinions, you’re always polite, so there’s no need for me to be otherwise.

            • Geeding says:

              Here’s some unwarranted feedback. It’s taken me a while to get to know you and understand that you don’t intend to come off negatively, that you are simply trying to express yourself. But a lot of times, your writing will come off as a bit pointed or blunt and seem argumentative at first. It doesn’t help that the written text itself doesn’t really convey tone. I’ll admit at times I thought all you wanted to do was attack me or just be mean, but I think I know where you coming from, now. It takes a while to get to know someone, especially if you only communicate through typed text. And while I never read the comments on Barry’s blog, I knew it could get pretty heated, so maybe some of that has traveled over here since we share viewership. Some folks are just tying to goat you and that’s uncool. I prefer to have things toned down and friendlier, and I try to promote it, for the most part. I’d like to politely and respectfully ask, perhaps even challenge you, to continue to stand firm in your beliefs but just soften the edges a tiny bit.

  2. Bizarro Big Tex says:

    Are there swimsuit and talent portions to the Miss Hitler Beauty Pageant? Bet the interview portion is boring. All the participants have the same answers – Aryan purity, blame the Jews, Richard Wagner is musical genius, a little blitzkrieg never hurt anybody, jackboots go with any fashion, etc.

  3. Dude says:

    It’s only been in recent years that I learned about the very real and true events that make up our nation’s complex history from books and movies. Whether semi- fictionalized (like Hidden Figures or the Tulsa events in Watchmen) or documentary style (like 15th) or books like “Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI”, I continue to be flabbergasted at what was considered ‘normal’ behavior by our forefathers. We have been indoctrinated into a veneration of men who arguably did great things. What was never acknowledged or answered was “at what expense?”. What that has changed in me is my desire to reflexively try to defend the “honor” of these men, or excuse or explain away these events. I understand now that I reflexively do this because I was raised/taught to do it. I HAD THE LUXURY OF NOT HAVING TO THINK ABOUT IT, OR BE REMINDED OF THE COSTS.

    So I would invite those who give a damn about taking down Confederate monuments or renaming things named after Confederate generals to get educated about how and why they got those names in the first place. Then do some soul searching as to why any of this matters so deeply to you. So maybe you don’t mind the CFA statue by the courthouse, but know that it troubles people of color because it was put up to remind them of their place in this world and THAT’S why they want it moved or the name changed.

    I see the argument about “this is history and if we remove it we are doomed to repeat it” a lot as well. This argument supposes that “we’ve fixed racism… we’re in post-racist times…etc”. Recent events show this isn’t the case. Leaving stuff up that was supposed to remind people of a bad time for 100 years now hasn’t “fixed” anything. Arguably it’s making things worse.

    I don’t think I am suffering from “white liberal guilt”, I just think being exposed to different opinions/experiences has shown up in my natural empathy as a desire to do better. If you know your fellow man is hurting, why continue to hurt them for something so stupid as a chiseled rock or a name of a building. It seems deliberate and cruel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.