Are Free Speech and the First Amendment Under Attack? (Is the grass green?)

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Free speech has always been under attack throughout history, and mostly the attackers have been those in power who wanted to make sure they stayed in power. Regardless of what those who promote censorship and speech restrictions say, this is not about the “public good.” It is usually about hiding the truth, and the censors are usually those who claim that the public, for their “own good” just doesn’t need to know about this scandal or that. What this really means is that the censors already have done, or are in the process of doing something shady (of financial benefit to themselves) and they don’t want you to be aware of that. Does the Uranium One scandal come to mind here? So the doers of these evil deeds either try to sugarcoat them or just outright lie about them, or, if confronted, their friends in the “Fake News” media try to hide it “on page 46 under the obituaries” where almost no one will ever see it.

An article on for January 25, 2018 observed: “Free speech is under attack on college campuses across the country. The problem is not limited to a few colleges banning radical speakers to avoid a riot. Universities large and small, public and private,  are restricting students’ and professors’ speech or enabling others to silence speech with which they disagree. These restrictions take a variety of forms. For example,  free speech codes at many colleges ban speech that is ‘offensive,’ a subjective standard that allows college administrators to arbitrarily ban speech they find disagreeable.” In other words, under the guise of “free speech” they really get to say who says what and who doesn’t get to say anything! Although this is current, it is hardly a new problem. I have seen colleges in the East, years ago, that had no problem whatever with having an identified Communist speak to their students but wouldn’t, for all the gold in Fort Knox, dream of having someone from the John Birch Society come and speak to those same students. A Communist speaker was just fine and as one college official stated, his school “wanted to expose students to all kinds of thought.” However, that standard would never have included a speaker from the JBS. They didn’t want to expose the kids to “all kinds of thought” that much!

Back on August 28, 2017 an article appeared on which said: “The Senate Intelligence Committee recently passed its Intelligence Authorization Act for 2018 that contains a chilling attack on the First Amendment. Section 623 of the act expresses the ‘sense of Congress’ that WikiLeaks resembles a ‘non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors and should be treated as such. The language is designed to delegitimize  WikiLeaks, encourage the federal government to spy on individuals working with WikiLeaks, and block access to WikiLeaks’ website…WikiLeaks critics claim that the organization’s leaks harm US national security. However, these critics are unable to provide a single specific example of WikiLeaks’ actions harming the American people. WikiLeaks does harm the reputations of government agencies and politicians, however…” That’s really where the rub is! Too many Leftist politicians are getting exposed for the frauds they really are and people are starting to find out that what some of these Leftist and Deep State turkeys have done has harmed out national security and sovereignty, so they’d rather just sweep all that under the rug so we don’t find out about it–all for “our own good” of course. Or is it really for their own good?

Wesley Pruden wrote on on 4/27/17 that: “The only thing anyone is allowed to hear on campus is a slogan. Thinking is so 20th century (and early 20th century at that). The adults paid to be in charge have retreated to a safe place, where never is heard an encouraging word and the skies are cloudy all day…” Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont and onetime chairman of the Democratic Party has noted that, where free speech is  concerned, that does not always include “extending it to everyone who disagrees with them.” In other words–if you agree with me and my agenda you get to talk (maybe). Otherwise, forget it because we don’t want anyone to hear what you might have to say.

There has been a lot on the Internet of late about how the big media sites, Facebook, Twitter, and others have been changing their algorithms so that conservative sites that use them get less traffic.

I am not a “technical” person, so I am not sure I understand how all this works, but, however it works, what it seems to do is end up taking conservative and patriotic sites and putting their material on pages 10 or 12 rather than on pages 1 or 2 where it had been previously. That does cut down on their viewership because most folks just don’t have the patience to scroll all the way down to page 10 to get what they used to get on page 2. So, leading conservative and nationalist sites like, the Drudge Report, WorldNet Daily and a host of others will start to see their sites consigned to an internet netherworld, buried somewhere in a hundred pages of listings which most folks will not take the trouble to go into. This is designed to cut way down on the influence they have and the audience they are able to reach. It’s not that these big liberal/Left sites actually remove the material–they just bury it!

I noticed, and also had it commented on to me, how that, in 2017 a number of patriotic blogs had experienced a significant loss of viewership in 2017, compared with viewership in the previous 3 or 4 years when it had been expanding. So you have to wonder if such an occurrence might have been an “experiment” to see how this kind of thing would work for the Leftists and Deep State folks.

You folks who follow some of these sites that now seem to be getting posted three day’s journey from anything might have to start taking some of the important material from these sites and reposting it, with credit, on your own sites and for your own email lists so people can continue to read what the Deep State/Left does not want them to see.

Update: The internet censors have been at work on my article since I first posted it last evening (3/15/18).

When you read it you will notice I mentioned several websites you could click onto as sources for what I wrote. I also mentioned InfoWars and gave their link. When I clicked on their link in my article I ended up with someplace selling homes. I did the same this morning and ended up with an Amazon add, as well as a notice telling me I was trying to reach a “suspicious site.”

So I will type the link in here, again, and see what happens. If you try to click onto this and get some oddball substitute please let me know as then I will know that InfoWars is being censored off my blogs (for my own good, of course). Thanks.


“Maryland, my (home schooling) Maryland”

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Home schooling is one of those things that scares the living daylights out of the Educational Establishment and the Deep State. Home schooling, and Christian education in general tend to be areas where the participants  do not always (usually) accept the Establishment version of history and/or politics.

From time to time, as they feel they can get away with it, the “change agents” in the educational bureaucracy  seek to remedy this situation by trying to find reasons to enforce new controls that will give them more power and control over home schooling, its curriculums, and its participants.

During the 1980s Rev. Paul Lindstrom, of the Church of Christian Liberty in Illinois, traveled around the country testifying in various court cases that helped and enabled parents to regain their right to home school their children which had been usurped by the Educational Establishment. By the late 1980s, home schooling was legal, in one form or another, in all the 50 united States. That fact did not, and does not, however, prevent the Establishment Education Czars from looking for any chance they can to reverse that trend–and if they can’t reverse it they can at least try to again regulate home schooling almost out of any real existence.

So it was no surprise to me when I came across an article on  by Matt Agorist for March 11, 2018 that dealt with the latest attempted Establishment Educational usurpation in Maryland.

Mr. Agorist wrote: “Under the guise of preventing child abuse, lawmakers in Maryland have introduced a bill that will allow the state to intrude in the lives of innocent families, keeping tabs on them, and destroying their right to privacy. The bill, HB 1798–County Boards of Education–Home Instruction Program–Observation of Instruction and Reporting of Abuse and Neglect,  lays out some fairly ominous requirement that will persecute otherwise entirely innocent families for doing nothing other than teaching their children at home…The bill also lays out the framework for involuntary home inspections in which state agents will enter a family’s home multiple times a year–likely unannounced–and observe and inspect the homeschooling process.”

It seems as though there was a family in California that was guilty of massive child abuse and they were registered as home schoolers. So now the Education Czars in that “Sanctuary State” have automatically assumed that all home schools are probably guilty of those same abuses and need to be constantly regulated so they aren’t beating and starving their kids. It’s the same old bureaucratic “You’re guilty until you prove yourself innocent” routine that is practiced by so many government types in their efforts to gain control over other people’s lives. This is one thing politicians and bureaucrats always seek to do to justify their existence. They have to try to run everyone’s life, down to the minutest detail because, somehow, that seems to give them some sort of power trip. Being control freaks is what they live for. And it would seem that the “change agent” Educational Czars in Maryland have taken note of this instance in California and seen a real possibility in their state to assume more control over the lives of a group of people they only tolerate because the present state law forces them to.

It’s somewhat the same situation you see with all these school shootings. Some Leftist nut, usually on some exotic type of medication, kills a batch of kids and teachers in a school “gun free” zone and the bureaucratic  conclusion is that all gun owners must be potential terrorists and need to be regulated (and their weapons hopefully confiscated) as soon as possible, if not sooner!

Mr. Agorist accurately notes that: “Instead of realizing that the problem of child abuse has nothing at all to do with homeschooling,  lawmakers across the country are using this moment to demonize parents who wish to teach their children outside of the state…The audacity of the state to require that your children be inspected by them to prove that you are not guilty of child abuse is stunning and speaks to the nature of the cradle to grave mentality of the almighty controllers.” If this trend is allowed to continue it could, again, reduce the fundamental right of parents to home school their children back to the status of yet another state-regulated entity. I am sure that possibility has not been lost on the Educational Elite who seek to indoctrinate your children rather than letting you educate them.

Let’s don’t kid ourselves. This, in spite of the Establishment’s pious pleading, is not about the welfare of children–it is about who will control how they are educated and what they are taught. To educate your children is a parental right, and the Educational Elite (a major part of the Deep State Swamp) is not about to allow parents to assume this God-given responsibility  without a struggle to deprive those parents of that right.

Why I Couldn’t Agree With Bruce Catton

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Over the years I have read a bit of “Civil War” history from a lot of authors with divergent opinions on many things. Somehow, though, Bruce Catton’s view of the War was just not one I could get comfortable with. It was sort of like James M. McPherson’s view of the War, and you all know who he was. If you ever read anything I wrote about the War you will recall I couldn’t get comfortable with McPherson’s worldview regarding the War and the reasons for it either. And while McPherson’s books have often been cited on the World Socialist Website in the past, I couldn’t find anything in that regard about Bruce Catton.

However, McPherson’s and Catton’s views appear quite similar when it comes to the notorious Forty-Eighters that Donnie Kennedy and I wrote about in Lincoln’s Marxists.

A friend in New Jersey recently sent me a paragraph out of Catton’s The Army of the Potomac: Glory Road, from page 172 of the book. This is one I had not read, and it probably explains why I am glad I did not make the effort. Even when you research history,  there are times when you can only stand so much propaganda and, though he probably did not intend to do it, that’s exactly what Mr. Catton gave us in this instance. I will comment here on some of what he said in this paragraph.

He started out with: The nation inherited something rich and strange when the German revolutionary movement broke up in blood and proscription lists,  with the best men of a dozen German states hastening to America.   The 1848 revolts in Germany and several other European countries were socialist revolts. That being the case, it would seem that Catton is trying to tell us that the “best men” from a dozen German states were all socialists or communists, because that’s what took part in this revolution. Catton may not be aware of this–in which case you might do well to ask just what else he is unaware of. Either that or his worldview has no problem with socialists. I can’t say definitively either way.

He continues: These Germans were deadly serious about words which Americans took blithely for granted, words like liberty and like freedom and democracy.  It seems as if Catton is totally unaware of the fact that these words do not mean the same things to socialists and communists that they mean to us. When they use such terms they are not saying  what we say when we use them. Lots of ignorant people who eulogize the Forty-Eighters make this grave error. They do not understand how the Leftists use language to confuse their adversaries–and if we are not Leftists, then we are all their adversaries.

Catton says: They (the Forty-Eighters) made up a substantial part of the ground which the free-soil men had cultivated in the 1850s and when the war came they had seen the Union cause as their own cause, with freedom for the black man as one of its sure ultimate goals. This is yet another confirmation that the socialists/communists  saw the Union cause as their own. As for “freeing the slaves” their motives were hardly humanitarian no matter what they said. They were every bit as “racist” as those Southern folks they accused of “racism.” They felt that “freeing” the slaves would uproot the South and cause major problems for the Confederacy and so they endorsed it. The South was the part of the country that was the most Christian and conservative and the most opposed to the socialist designs of both the Establishment in Washington, New York and London.

As Catton wound down in this paragraph he stated:  Their leaders were men who had lost their fortunes and risked their necks, taking up arms for liberty in a land of kings who resisted change, and these leaders called the Germans to the colors as soon as Fort Sumter was bombarded.  Almost sounds as if Sumter was their signal to be up and moving!

What Catton seemed unable to grasp here is that the socialists/communists in Germany, as well as in the rest of Europe, did not fight for liberty for the common man, as we know it. They fought to centralize all the German states into one collectivist entity–with their friends in control of it! The same held true for what they sought to do all over Europe. They fought for collectivization–not liberty. And that’s what they fought for here also. They knew, at least at the leadership levels, where Lincoln was coming from and they knew they had a shot at doing here what they had failed to do in Europe, because they had a leader in Washington that agreed with them!

Until we learn to get this history straight we will continue to make the same stupid errors that we have seen, purposely or otherwise, for the last 150 years. Unfortunately, authors like Mr. Catton who end up glorifying socialists and communists don’t help us much!

The Obama/Trump Gun Control Act of 2018

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I hate to say this, but it is beginning to look like, when push comes to shove, the Donald Trump support for the Second Amendment is starting to resemble the Platte River in Nebraska–“a mile wide and an inch deep.” Mr. Trump seems about to collapse on every Second Amendment issue now coming up and the socialists in government are just loving him for every minute of it. They are hoping to get the gun control under Trump that even eluded them while their Marxist-in-Chief, Obama sat on the throne.

A headline on Breitbart for Wednesday, February 28th said: “President Donald Trump embraced Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-WV) gun control bill but rejected Rep. Steve Scalise’s (R-LA) push for national reciprocity during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers Wednesday afternoon.”

The revealing part of the article was this: “The Manchin/Toomey gun control bill is the same universal background check legislation supported by Barack Obama in the wake of the heinous attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School. It is the very bill that was defeated in the Democrat-controlled Senate on April 17, 2013.”

So Trump is now endorsing a gun control bill that was embraced by Barack Obama. Maybe we should rename it The Obama/Trump Gun Control bill of 2018 because it now seems that Trump the nationalist is willing to support the same thing as Obama the Marxist.

Does anyone see anything wrong with this picture, or is it just me?

And, according to “Major gun-control groups on Thursday heaped praise on President Donald Trump for his advocacy for new gun-control laws during a televised meeting with top lawmakers…Trump advocated for adding proposals like extending FBI background checks to used gun sales between private parties, a ban on gun ownership for those under 21–especially ownership of assault weapons–to a bipartisan proposal to improve the current background check system. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said they were happy with Trump’s performance at the meeting.” They just oohed and aahed at Trump’s “full-throated support of gun violence prevention laws today,…”

Whether Mr. Trump realizes it or not, he is now supporting fully the means that will lead to registering everyone’s firearms of any sort with the federal government, which will lead to eventual confiscation of all guns. He is setting us on the path to eventual confiscation that Comrade Obama could only dream about! You have to wonder if he knows what he is doing. I hope not, but he’s going to do it anyway.

The Deep State and the Far Left have finally give us enough false flag shootings that they’ve gotten to Mr. Trump and he is willing to go along with whatever garbage they throw at him, supposedly to save lives.

Just think of how many lives can be saved when the feds have all the guns and they can just haul us off to the FEMA camps and not have to worry about resistance. The country will be one giant gun-free zone and if you think that will stop the killings I have a bridge in the desert in Arizona I’d love to sell you!

You have to wonder what happened to Trump on this issue. Something did. This is not the same man that spoke to CPAC a couple weeks ago and pledged to defend the Second Amendment–this is a man willing to toss all that away for the praise of the socialist gun-grabbers–so something has happened to him since that speech. We can speculate just what, but that seems an exercise in futility. Better we should spend our time contacting our senators and representatives and tell them to vote against any new gun control measures that come up and if they won’t then we better find someplace else to cast our votes.

Can anyone spell S E L L O U T ???

Just remember one thing–without the Second Amendment you have no way of protecting the other 9!

Update:  According to  “Rand Paul…introduced legislation on Thursday that would repeal a 1990 law banning guns from school zones…Paul’s bill would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones act of 1990 and all amendments to that law.” If this bill makes it out of committee and gets passed it will be interesting to see what Mr. Trump will do with it. My first thought is, now that he has been turned, he will find some plausible reason to veto it. From tidbits I heard on the internet today it seems that in some way, Trump has now been compromised and may have to do what the gun grabbers want of him or they will find a way to expose whatever it is they seem to have on him. I hope I am in error, but this is how it looks at this point.

Eighteen School Shootings This Year? That Number Is Rather Tenuous

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

We have been “informed” by several gun control freaks in recent days that there have already been eighteen school shootings around the country in the first two months of this year. These “artful dodgers” howl (according to script) about our crying need for gun control (actually confiscation) to prevent the carnage from growing even worse.

Thankfully, there have been some doubting souls that have questioned their figures, which turns out to be a good thing. Once you take a realistic look at their number (18) it turns out to be wildly inflated. Of course, for the Far Left, it all depends on how you define the term “school shootings” because, let’s face it,  the Leftists don’t define it the way normal people do. That’s because the Leftists are not normal people.

There was an article on on February 15th by Siraj Hashmi that pretty well nailed where the Left is coming from.. The author noted: “However, the media has been trying to convince you that the type of shootings where there are mass casualties are happening every day…Many in both the media and politics have used it as a rallying cry to make some legislative push to impose new restrictions on guns.  The problem is that it’s not accurate. There haven’t been 18 of what we refer to as school shootings in 2018.”

One place they got this inflated figure from is a “gun control advocacy” group called Everytown  for gun safety. So let’s look at some of these “school shootings” they list to see what really took place. Megan Cerullo of the New York Daily News made a list, probably from Everytown’s site, because her list and theirs are just about identical. Only Ms. Cerullo gives you a little detail, which is quite revealing.

She stated: “Jan 3, St. Johns, Michigan–the first school shooting took place just three days into the new year, at East Olive Elementary School in St. Johns, Michigan. A 31 year-old man died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound in the former school’s parking lot.” This guy kills himself in the school’s parking lot and they classify it as a “school shooting.” I suppose, technically, you could say that in that he died on school property. But it doesn’t appear that he threatened or tried to harm anyone except himself. In another case, a 32 year-old man shot a pellet gun at a school bus and broke a window. No injuries listed. In Cochise County, Arizona a 14 year-old student shot and killed himself in the school bathroom. No other injuries listed.

The list goes on. On January 4th there was a gunshot fired through an office window at the New Start High School in Seattle. “The round entered an office window and ended up lodged in a three-ring binder.  No one was injured.” Do they even know if the shot came  from somewhere on the school grounds? It never says one way or the other. On January 10th in Denison, Texas “A bullet was accidentally fired through a classroom wall at the Grayson College Criminal Justice Center. No one was injured.” Hardly a student massacre!

On February 5th, in Maplewood, Minnesota, “A third grader pulled the trigger on a cop’s gun (while it was still in the holster) firing a shot at the Harmony Learning Center. No one was injured.” January 25th, Mobile, Alabama, Murphy High School student Jonah Neal fired a gun on campus. No one was injured. An unknown assailant drove by Net Charter School in Gentilly, Louisiana  and shot at a group of students. No real injuries. “A Winston-Salem State University football player was shot and killed at a sorority party following an argument.” In another instance a 12 year-old female student accidentally fired a real gun thinking it was a fake. Here, four students were injured, accidentally.  And in yet another case a teenage boy was shot in the chest and nearly killed by another student who was conspiring with the boy’s ex-girlfriend.

As tragic as some of these situations are, and I am not making light of them, (no one wants to see kids get hurt) they do not qualify to be considered as “school shootings” in the same way that Columbine or Parkland are. Some of these situations would have taken place somewhere else if the school had not been convenient for them. In that sense, they are not “school shootings.” Yet they are lumped together with what are school shootings because they help to inflate the number of “school shootings” so the Far Left will have something to throw out there at the “useful idiots” that will never bother doing the homework to verify the accuracy of the numbers the promoters and financiers of their protests hand them.

The real name of this game is eventual confiscation of all firearms and the abrogation of the Second Amendment, without which we have no way to defend ourselves from tyrannical government or local thugs. Sometimes you wonder if there’s much difference! Lots easier for the criminals, in government and out, to have their way with us if we can’t defend ourselves. In the final analysis, that’s what the Deep State and its Swamp critters really want–a helpless population!

It Wasn’t All About Slavery!

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Back in February of 2013 (five years ago now, doesn’t seem all that long ago) I did an article for this blog called The Lincoln/Corwin “Keep your Slaves” Amendment. It discussed the Corwin Amendment, which many of you all probably never heard of. After all, it’s not one of those things the “historians” or the media make a big deal out of because it doesn’t fit their agenda of a “saintly” Lincoln who loved all blacks, or a treasonous South. Scroll back and read that article. It’s still there. That will save me having to restate much of it here. It was a amendment to the Constitution, introduced by Thomas Corwin of Ohio that would have kept slaves in bondage in perpetuity. The sainted Mr. Lincoln was in favor of it, had no problems with it. If you find that hard to believe then go back to February 2, 2013 on this blog and read it.

Lincoln stated, in his first inaugural address, on March 4, 1861 that, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

Lincoln pretty much told us what the war (for him) was all about, and it wasn’t slavery. Even the vaunted Emancipation Proclamation” (actually a war and propaganda measure) did not free any slaves in the slave states remaining in the Union, nor did it free any slaves in the Confederate States where it had no legal authority. In fact, you could really say it was the “nothingburger” of the 19th century. So, given all these considerations, it’s hard to believe that “historians” and “journalists” in our day seem unable to come to grips with the naked truth that Lincoln declared war on the South so he could drag them back into the Union and hang on to all that tariff money the South had heretofore pumped into the national economy. The South had paid for 87% of the national economy, and if the South remained out of the Union, then the Union would tank in very short order and Lincoln had to get the South back into the Union so they could continue to “remit the extortion money” to Washington so Washington  would have that money to finance all those internal improvements they wanted to make up north! And those lucky Southern folks would get to pay for all that! Weren’t they just blessed???

Years ago (in 2007 to be exact) someone sent me an article by James W. King and Lt. Col. Thomas M. Nelson entitled The Ten Causes of the War Between the States. It was a good article and I hung onto it. It stated, in part,  “There were 10 political causes of the war–one of which was slavery–which was a scapegoat for all the differences that existed between the North and South. The Northern industrialists had wanted a war since about 1830 to get the South’s resources (land-cotton-coal-timber-minerals) for pennies on the dollar. All wars are economic and are always between centralists and decentralists. The North would have found an excuse to invade the South even if slavery had never existed..”

Frank Conner said pretty much the same thing in his book  The South Under Siege 1830-2000.

King and Nelson, in their article, listed the ten reasons for the war. After going over all their reasons, I had to conclude that they were right on target. They started off by listing the tariff; centralization vs. states rights and Christianity vs. Secular Humanism. This last one is one that few historians, or anyone else for that matter, take into account, yet it is one of the most important and critical. Of course that may be why it is so ignored today.

They listed cultural differences–another one most folks don’t ever give a thought to. We haven’t been taught to think along those lines and so most of these really critical issues just go over our heads. All we’ve been taught (or conditioned) to do is to react to lurid tales of Southern cruelty to slaves–as though the South was the sole proprietor of the slavery issue. It’s not! The North has a big slice of the proprietorship there, too, though most will never admit it, and neither will today’s spin media (excuse me, I meant “news’ media).

I already mentioned the North’s desire for control over Southern resources. Then there was slander of the South by Northern newspapers; New England’s attempts to instigate massive slave revolts in the South. Does Harper’s Ferry, Virginia come to mind here? Just about all those who financed the actions of terrorist John Brown in that gory undertaking were either New England or New York Unitarians and/or socialists. That fact was not lost on Southern folks.

Way down the list, at number 9, was slavery, and while it was an indirect cause, it was not the cause of the war–contrary to the propaganda being promulgated  in today’s classrooms and newsrooms.

I expect some will not appreciate it that I keep hammering at this issue, but when you have had 150 years of propaganda passing as history and news, you have to keep hammering to create cracks in that wall of false propaganda. Until our people begin to get it right about the War of Northern Aggression we will never get it right about any of the events that followed that war. That war was our French Revolution and we have never recovered from the results of it, nor the propaganda spun about it that conditions our thinking today.

Slavery was not the cause of that war. Secession was not treason. “Racism” was every bit as prominent in the North as in the South, maybe even moreso. It just didn’t get the media attention up there. And don’t tell me it didn’t exist up there. I grew up in the North.

With the divisions we have in this country today, culturally and otherwise, it would seem that we might be better off as two separate countries. I doubt that the North will ever totally be able to purge itself of its Unitarian/socialist world view. Left to its own devices, the South might have a chance. And, if push came to shove–much of the West would be better off siding with the South, because we have the same common enemies and the same desire to just be left alone, free from bureaucracy, to live our lives as we feel God intended.


For a little more on this subject please check out my book review of Gene Kizer Jr.s book Slavery Was Not the Cause of the War Between the States published on the Abbeville Institute’s website on February 27, 2018.

First Lady Recognized Spiritual Dimensions of Political Battle

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Over the years I have heard some say that the two subjects you should never discuss in public are religion and politics. Unfortunately, the folks that take this position give the devil the entire playing field while they sit on the sidelines looking “spiritual.” It’s just where the devil wants them. They are not getting in his way over there.

Also, over the years, I have written several articles about the un-Christian influences in the White House and in Washington. Some of you that have followed my scribblings long enough may recall several articles I did about Spiritualist influence in the White House during the Lincoln administration, and how Mrs. Lincoln was having seances conducted there, sometimes attended by her husband and  various cabinet members. Many influential personages in the North at that time had been strongly influenced by Unitarianism and Spiritualism. I am not totally sure that influence ever entirely departed. There is so much the anti-Christs can do in the political field–why would they ever leave?

However, with the advent of the Trumps, some of that may be changing–which also might account for some of the reason for the strong Deep State opposition to Mr. Trump. Politics, like everything else, is spiritual at its root.

Michael W. Chapman published a blog article on the internet on February 8th dealing with comments made by Pastor Paul Begley which he made on February 2nd. Mr. Chapman observed: “While commenting on President Donald Trump’s very public support for Christianity, as well as the frequent Bible studies and prayer gatherings held at the White House, evangelical Pastor Paul Begley said first lady Melania Trump demanded that the White House be spiritually cleansed and that pagan, demonic items and artifacts from the Obama and Clinton years be removed…” Mrs. Trump stated she would not move into the White House until this had been done. You can say what you want, but she sounds like a smart lady to me.

Begley continued: “Because apparently during the eight years when Obama was there, and maybe even some of the presidents before him, there were all kinds of idol gods and images and all kinds of artifacts in there that were demonic, even some of the stuff from the Clinton era because they were really tied in with the Haitians.” Pastor Begley noted a book, Serpent and the Rainbow, which deals with voodoo in Haiti and he noted that, from this you could discern “…just how much Haitian witch-doctor influence was on Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton’s lives. They constantly went back there. They spent their honeymoon with a witch doctor. Who does that?” Good question. It seems the Clintons did.

An article from  by Karen Tumulty on March 20, 2015 seems to corroborate some of this. She noted: “In his memoir ‘My Life’ the former president wrote a vivid account of a trip, the couple’s first trip to Haiti in 1975–which had been a wedding gift from their friend David Edwards, who had some business to do there for Citibank and some extra frequent flyer miles. Bill Clinton wrote that ‘the most interesting day of the trip’ came when he, Hillary and Edwards got a chance to see voodoo in practice in a village near Port-au-Prince. The priest was Max Beauvoir, a former chemical engineer who had studied at the Sorbonne in Paris. Beauvoir had abandoned that career when his voodoo-priest grandfather died and named him as his successor. Beauvoir gave the three visitors what Clinton described as a ‘brief course in voodoo theology’.” Clinton also described a “ceremony” they attended at the time. He wrote: “After several minutes of rhythmic dancing to pounding drums, the spirits arrived, seizing a woman and a man. The man proceeded to rub a burning torch all over his body and walk on hot coals without being burned. The woman, in a frenzy, screamed repeatedly,  then grabbed  a live chicken and bit its head off. Then the spirits left and those who had been possessed fell to the ground.” The Clintons were quite fascinated with all this. So much for Bill Clinton walking out of church on the Lord’s Day with that big Bible under his arm–just the right prop for photo ops!

But you have to ask, with their fascination with voodoo, where were their hearts really at?

But, getting back to Mrs. Trump, as she wanted, the White House was cleansed–idols taken out and everything of a religious nature was removed, with the exception of one Christian cross. Pastor Begley made an interesting comment. He said: “This was a major spiritual–it might sound like overdoing it, a little excessive, but you have got to take the seat of authority when you go into spiritual warfare.” It would seem that Pastor Begley recognizes that the political realm is a major area for spiritual warfare, and quite possibly, the first lady does also. If so, that would be a major shift in direction and thinking for the White House in the past 160 plus years!!!

That shift may explain some of the intense opposition Mr. Trump has faced, whether he realizes it or not. Even  a small shift in the spiritual direction of the anti-Christ Swamp will engender severe opposition because, at root, the political battle is always a spiritual battle. And the devil’s disciples are all cultural Marxists!

Trump has made and will make mistakes. He won’t do it all perfectly–nobody does, because we are all sinners, but whether he fully grasps his mission or not, he and his wife have started to make a difference in the spiritual tone in Washington and the white House and the devils are not thrilled.

Christians need to lift Mr. Trump and his family up in prayer. If enough are willing to do that on a consistent basis it might make a difference.