George Washington
A Special Thanksgiving Quote of the Day
George Washington
All the Secrets of the Universe and Some Really Important Stuff Too!
For an American man with traditional beliefs living in New England or for that matter anywhere in the Northeast is depressing. In an earlier post I described it as living behind enemy lines or in occupied territory. So, for a long time I’ve been contemplating a move. Much is linked to employment, of course. But equally important is ending up in a place that maximizes the improvement in quality of life. I did a search and found a 2016 survey that listed the top ten conservative states.
Wyoming +35
North Dakota +31
Mississippi +31
Oklahoma +30
Alabama +30
Arkansas +28
Idaho +28
Louisiana +27
Montana +26
Utah +26
Tennessee +26
In order to narrow the search, I added the climate requirements to the mix. Living in New England has hammered home the disadvantages of living in an area that has frequent and deep snowfalls. And in general, very cold climates are a definite negative selection factor for me. That eliminated Wyoming, North Dakota and Montana. And while not completely eliminated I give lesser preference to extremely hot, humid areas that are also prone to hurricanes. Until further consideration, let’s put aside Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. That leaves Oklahoma, Arkansas, Idaho, Utah and Tennessee. Five seems like a manageable number of choices. Generally speaking, that gives me two southeastern choices, two western choices and one somewhere in the middle.
This is a very rudimentary beginning to my search but it seems to be moving me off the mark pretty quickly. I was interested in getting some feedback from the OCF audience to help evaluate these five states or any other candidates that maybe I should add to the list. I intend to make this an ongoing process and I’ll return back to folks here to get additional information if it exists.
And just to make sure it doesn’t get buried I’m giving it a category of its own and a spot on the front page.
The only places you will find this on the Internet are a couple of Cold War casualty websites. The news is remarkably blank on the subject as they were caught doing bad reporting (no reporting at all, really). The news media at the time basically ran a story based on what they heard, not an investigation of the facts (sound familiar?).
I was stationed in (then) West Germany when this happened. There was some difference of opinion whether or not it was over a card game or a love triangle, but the rest of the facts were clear. A GI put a sabot round into his M60 tank’s gun and fired it into another M60 directly behind him at the rail head.
By the time the story got back to the USA and the American media coverage was repeated on Armed Forces Radio and Television, this story would not have been recognized by its own mother. It was variously portrayed as a terror attack, as communist infiltration within our ranks, in fact, almost everything but what it was.
I admit I trusted the US media when I was young. Walter Cronkite and the rest. That trust was shaken during Vietnam and finally destroyed in West Germany. The reporting in Vietnam was slanted, we all realized that, but the reporting from West Germany on this incident was so far off the mark I realized they were just making it up. And it as all of them back then. All three networks. I’ve never trusted the Fourth Estate since. I always insist on backup, then backup for the backup. Having the mainstream media decide what you should hear and how it should be spun is a bad idea. That’s why I like the Internet. It can, and has, held the media’s feet to the fire and caught them being wrong, lazy, and out & out lying and/or making stuff up. That is also why I am worried about the big Internet companies censoring people for political views which hold the liberal media up to scrutiny. We need freedom to challenge opinion, even (or especially) the media’s. I find it strange that the big Internet companies allow flat-earthers and anti-vaxxers free forums, yet censor conservative political views.
Here’s the real scoop from the Association of the 3rd Armored Division. I looked all morning for news reports on this but there are none I can find. Only other Cold War casualty websites:
1980
SP4 Gregory “Frank” Montoya & SP4 Patrick Romero, A Company 3rd Battalion 32 Armor. were killed on 4 November 1980 at the Hohenfels rail head when (name deleted) climbed into a tank during rail loading, loaded the M60A3 main gun with an armor piercing round (Sabot) & fired the main gun into the tank behind his. All tanks are rail loaded with the main gun in a travel lock position over the back deck. There was apparently a lot of confusion about the whole incident with reports of a lighting strike causing rounds to explode. The incident was finally solved when the tank main gun rounds were counted & inventoried. SGT Jeffrey Young & PVT David Park were also badly burned during this incident. *****The SOB convicted of this murder was sentenced to 20 yrs in Leavenworth but only served 8 years!!
Additional information provided by CPT Mark S. Atwood: The 1980 incident in 3/32, when the sabot round was fired into the turret of another tank during movement by rail, it is my understanding there was bad blood between the shooter and some/all members of the other crew over a card game. During rail movements the troops played cards, D and D, etc to pass the time. The shooter had been the big loser and I believe, thought he had been cheated. Here is additional information on this incident from Ken Armstrong: I served with 3/32 in 1979-1981 and was stationed in Freidburg at Ray Barracks. I also served with Greg Montoya and Pat Romero and was present when they were killed in November of 1980. Pat was a good friend and we drank many a beer together. Additional information on this event from Richard Zipse: I didn’t know Pat Romero but Frank was not only a great guy but getting very short. It was sad indeed that the filthy **** that killed him got out of Germany, much less Leavenworth, alive. As I remember it, he had been chasing a section 8 for months. I’m pretty sure Sgt. Young and I were on 14 together for a bit before he made rank and moved over to the third platoon; and, also that Park was very new to the unit and had just arrived as they needed crewmen. I’m thinking SSGT Able got him out of the smoked vehicle but not certain…also I’m thinking he was flown to Walter Reed Hospital due to the extent of his burns and later passed on….though this obviously may be incorrect.
Somebody really should chop down that tree in the middle. It really spoils the shot.

“I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed!”
Gen. George S. Patton
“…
So I’ll meet ’im later on
At the place where ’e is gone—
Where it’s always double drill and no canteen.
’E’ll be squattin’ on the coals
Givin’ drink to poor damned souls,
An’ I’ll get a swig in hell from Gunga Din!
Yes, Din! Din! Din!
You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!
Though I’ve belted you and flayed you,
By the livin’ Gawd that made you,
You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!”
(Gunga Din by Rudyard Kipling)
Kipling’s poem celebrates the courage and loyalty of Indian water bearer Gunga Din. The 1939 film builds on the bare sketch of the poem and adds in the British soldiers from Kipling’s Soldiers Three stories. Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. portray Sergeants Cutter, MacChesney and Ballantine. The three sergeants are comedic partners in crime constantly in trouble for their off-duty brawling and ridiculous escapades. But they are also ferociously courageous and loyal to the British Army to their core. And attached to the regiment that the sergeants serve in is the regimental bhisti (or water carrier), Gunga Din. Gunga Din is also a minor partner in the sergeants’ syndicate. He convinces Cutter that they can cart off a temple made of solid gold that’s just there for the taking. Superimpose the sub-plot of Ballantine’s upcoming nuptials as a threat to the triumvirate and then top the whole thing off with a Thuggee Mutiny planning to drive the British out of India.
Sam Jaffe plays Gunga Din and along with the three co-stars they chew up the scenery and move the plot along smartly. By the climax we find out why Gunga Din is a better man they are. And we get to see the British Army (or the Hollywood version of it) unleashed on the Thugs.
The movie features a goodly amount of action adventure scenes but for me the stand out is the comedy. The exchanges between Cary Grant (featuring his most over the top cockney accent) and Victor McLaglen are very funny and make me wish they had co-starred in other action comedies.
It goes without saying that the movie could never be made today. It features language and plot elements that would be labelled, racist, sexist, colonialist and white supremacist. And if they got around to it, I’m sure the critics could come up with an angle that made it homophobic and transphobic too. But it is solid entertainment that creates a comedy adventure out of the reality of the British Raj. Of course, this is a Hollywood fantasy version of the Raj. In this version, the British Army is powerful and the generals are competent and all the good Indians are loyal subjects of the Queen-Empress and all the bad Indians are disloyal, murderous followers of Kali, the goddess of death. In this version the non-commissioned officers are anxious to re-enlist every 11 years without fail. But it’s got fight scenes, battle scenes, comedy, pathos, dynamite tossing and even an elephant-based jail break. What else could anybody ask for.
Just to get us in the mood.
Marley’s Ghost and Scrooge discuss business.
“But you were always a good man of business, Jacob,” faltered Scrooge, who now began to apply this to himself.
“Business!” cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again.
“Mankind was my business.
The common welfare was my business;
charity,
mercy,
forbearance,
and benevolence,
were, all, my business.
The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!”
It held up its chain at arm’s length, as if that were the cause of all its unavailing grief, and flung it heavily upon the ground again.
Here’s the best film version I’ve ever seen.
Much digital ink has been spent burying the spectre of the Alt-Right. Probably most of this is butt-covering going on trying to assure the powers that be that the individual in question is NOT of the Alt-Right and therefore not deserving of de-platforming.
Along with this interment is the surprising fact that most people (including myself) are not entirely sure what the definition and origins of the Alt-Right precisely are. I know that depending on the exact capitalization and hyphenation of the name it can be the Richard Spencer coined term for the white identitarian group that he belongs to. Other versions of this and similar expressions like Dissident Right have different emphases and appeal to different points of view.
But whatever names and whatever divisions these groups make between each other (and they certainly do that), one thing is undeniable. These were the groups that identified the real problems afflicting the United States and they were the ones who backed Donald Trump before anyone else even thought he was serious. Whatever else they are wrong about they were right about those things. To deny that is to deny the truth.
And the other thing that needs to be said and that is the central point of this post is that they along with President Trump are responsible for moving the Overton Window to the point where even the normies like me have heard the details of what the Alt-Right knew and have incorporated it into our world view. No one bothers to even dispute the platitudes of the Establishment GOP when they’re mouthed. We might give a sarcastic snort and then close the link and go to some useful website where actual thinking is going on. The Alt-Right and Donald Trump truly revealed why the right always lost. It was because our supposed leaders didn’t want to win. They just wanted the job of losing.
Now, all of this is old hat. We all know all of this. But it was hammered home to me when I was perusing an article in American Greatness by Christopher Roach entitled “The Radicalism of Conservatism, Inc.” Now it’s a very good article and it delves into the history of how the establishment right became so wrong on how to win. But reading the description of how Trump deconstructed the “illegal immigration is an act of love,” and describing establishment conservatives by saying, “that they function chiefly as the palace guard for yesterday’s liberalism” could have come directly out of a ZMan post from a year ago. What that tells me is the knowledge that the Alt-Right pioneered has been successfully dispersed into the bloodstream of the conservative body politic (if I may mangle a metaphor that far).
Whatever agreements or disagreements we may have with either the tactics or the substance of what the Alt-Right believes we have to acknowledge that they have red-pilled a significant part of the normie right. And that is without a doubt an enormous achievement. Without them maybe Clinton beats Trump and with a solid liberal majority on the Supreme Court we might now be watching as the First and Second Amendments were being effectively chloroformed.
“When in doubt, ATTACK!”
George S. Patton
