Alabama has done it again

[TheWildcat]

When the health care law passed, the first thing that happened was the attorney general of Alabama led the AG's of a number of other states to file suit to block it. After that, for the most part, failed, what happened? On election day, Alabama did what they have done best for the past hundred years: they shot Uncle Sam the bird. Amendment 6 was on the ballot, and it read "An amendment to the constitution of the state of Alabama prohibiting any person or corporation in this state from being required to participate in any mandatory health care program- yes or no?" It would ultimately pass, and now it's only a matter of time before another legal battle on the same issue is fought. My question is this: am I wrong in thinking that the amendment that says "the Federal Government's passage of a lawc shall not render ineffective a previously enacted state law" is not retroactive, and that Alabama basically just pulled another George Wallace?

[Lux12]

You would be right and those who bought into it were convinced by buzz words and fears of conspiracies created in the propaganda factories of the GOP.It also lowers my confidence in the southern voter in general.

[Trieste]

I've only lived in Alabama for about six months now, but the more I know about it, the more I have respect for their legal system. It could use improvement, like any other state, but currently their forensics ability is unparalleled (which is why I'm here) in the US. Especially with cutting-edge digital forensics. Backwards, indeed.

Alabama is only one of at least five states to have anti-ACA legislation on the ballot. The various ballot questions show a serious lack of understanding of the ACA and how it will implement. There are many questions about the ACA and how it will effect the everyday person. Pretty much every single US citizen outside of Massachusetts is asking themselves, "How will this affect me?" These ballot questions are an extension of that question.

Alabama is not the only one to have passed ballot measures at odds with federal regulations. Three states famously legalized marijuana, and the legal fight between the federal government and the state governments over that will also cost money. If you'd like to talk about backwards, you might take a look at Oklahoma's ballot measure that bans affirmative action. Or you could talk about the various states that had voter ID laws on their ballot. Every state has its quirks.

So before you single out Alabama and decide that it's a bunch of hicks, maybe you could take a little bit of a more balanced look at how fucked up some of the ballot measures were across the country, and how taken as a whole it's pretty clear that people are uneasy, unsettled, and reacting to a nationwide lack of appropriate education about what these national reforms mean for the everyman.

[TheWildcat]

You make a very valid argument, although I myself live in the Heart of Dixie, born and raised. I've seen the positives, such as the excellence of the Department of Forensics, as you mentioned, and I have also seen the negatives, such as HB 56, Amendment 6, heck, even back to Richard Arrington's MAPS initiative getting defeated by people it didn't affect and Don Siegelman losing the battle for a state lottery. I absolutely love this state, but we tend to do silly things.

[Kythia]

You would be right and those who bought into it were convinced by buzz words and fears of conspiracies created in the propaganda factories of the GOP.It also lowers my confidence in the southern voter in general.

I have friends in Louisiana.  Their kids are US citizens, currently they are way too young to vote but will eventually grow to become southern voters.  Even were that not the case I would still be... amazed by this statement. 

Alabama passed a ballot measure that went against federal law, exactly as those states that legalized weed did.  But somehow Alabama's actions make you think not only worse of the x% of voters who supported it, not only the entire voting population of Alabama including those who voted against but in fact the voters of an entire swathe of your country comprising an area considerably larger than most countries?

I hope that you're exageratting for the sake of effect, I really do.  Because that statement is just unbelievable.

[Trieste]

You make a very valid argument, although I myself live in the Heart of Dixie, born and raised. I've seen the positives, such as the excellence of the Department of Forensics, as you mentioned, and I have also seen the negatives, such as HB 56, Amendment 6, heck, even back to Richard Arrington's MAPS initiative getting defeated by people it didn't affect and Don Siegelman losing the battle for a state lottery. I absolutely love this state, but we tend to do silly things.

I just don't understand the lottery thing. I don't pretend to get it. :P

The way I see it, people do silly things when they're feeling insecure or scared. These ballot measures say, to me, that people really haven't been educated well enough on the issues. First of all, the SCOTUS hasn't ruled in favor of a state over a federal law in the last hundred years or more, so passing such a ballot measure is pretty much pointless given that it is almost guaranteed to be struck down. Second of all, voting in favor of blocking the ACA is essentially voting against one's own self-interest, and people who know the facts are going to know that. So I really think that the Obama administration needs to saddle up and put as much effort into educating the American people about the specific impact of the ACA as they did in winning the election. Their election campaign showed an impressive capacity for infrastructure... so they need to do that with the ACA.

* Trieste didn't mean to come off as harsh, apologizes for that.

[TheWildcat]

Definitely. I actually wrote Senator Bacchus a letter supporting ACA, and got a bunch of B.S. back. Wrote him again with graphs and stats that showed every point his letter made was wrong, and got the exact same letter back. I remember that ACA was supposed to make Medicaid available to everyone through subsidies, but that SCOTUS made that part optional, so we both know that's not happening in Alabama. Governor Bentley will make sure of it. Which reminds me, has he started getting paid yet?

[TheWildcat]

My understanding of the lottery plan Siegelman had was basically the same kind of lottery that Florida has, which is all the money from lottery ticket sales not being paid to winners or being used for the amazingly miniscule operating overhead of the lottery would be paid directly to the state department of education to be divided up among the state's local school boards (which is decided every year by attendance about a month after the start of the school year). However, it was defeated for the same reasons that electronic bingo keeps getting shot down (although it is really similar to a bingo-slots hybrid): this is the Bible Belt, where we absolutely hate gambling and such, and yet go to Mississippi and do it, on CHURCH TRIPS no less.

[Lux12]

I have friends in Louisiana.  Their kids are US citizens, currently they are way too young to vote but will eventually grow to become southern voters.  Even were that not the case I would still be... amazed by this statement. 

Alabama passed a ballot measure that went against federal law, exactly as those states that legalized weed did.  But somehow Alabama's actions make you think not only worse of the x% of voters who supported it, not only the entire voting population of Alabama including those who voted against but in fact the voters of an entire swathe of your country comprising an area considerably larger than most countries?

I hope that you're exageratting for the sake of effect, I really do.  Because that statement is just unbelievable.

My respect for the south has been pretty low since the catastrophe known as the Bush regime.That and the general social attitudes of many people down there haven't helped.Alabama is playing into the hands of the "I am John Galt" Ayne Rand worshipers and that is something I dislike.I'm sick of this so called "states rights" crap too.States rights led to war, discrimination, and a social nightmare the last time people championed them. We're one nation and people ought to start acting like it. As far as I am concerned there is no Alabama, there is no New York, there is no California, there is no Ohio, there is only America. They would require a sudden and profound shift to more progressive ideals in order for me to forgive them in full any time soon.

As for the pot legalization. That is justified as there is an absolute benefit to gained. Those laws banning it were passed for less than honorable reasons to begin with and thus must be overturned.

[Callie Del Noire]

My respect for the south has been pretty low since the catastrophe known as the Bush regime.That and the general social attitudes of many people down there haven't helped.Alabama is playing into the hands of the "I am John Galt" Ayne Rand worshipers and that is something I dislike.I'm sick of this so called "states rights" crap too.States rights led to war, discrimination, and a social nightmare the last time people championed them. We're one nation and people ought to start acting like it. As far as I am concerned there is no Alabama, there is no New York, there is no California, there is no Ohio, there is only America. They would require a sudden and profound shift to more progressive ideals in order for me to forgive them in full any time soon.

As for the pot legalization. That is justified as there is an absolute benefit to gained. Those laws banning it were passed for less than honorable reasons to begin with and thus must be overturned.

You know I've said this before. I shall say it again. I'm tired of being told, directly or by inference, that the sins of the bush administration (as well as anything else back to the civil war) are due in no small part to people like me who have the gall to b white southern and male. Doubly so for folks like my family who have something like 4 centuries of living in the south. (I have found ties to he Royal colony of Virginia in the 1630s)

Bush got GOBs of help from the south to get elected. True. But not all of us stand around in trailer parks in trucker caps and wifebeaters with a fist full of chew in our mouth.

The south isn't a problem. And I'm tired of being punished for being white with a drawl.

Bush2 won twice, yeah with the help of the south and agricultural belt and places like the rust belt. Has it missed your notice that a LOT of the people who voted for him felt they were being ignored by the Democrats?  Look back to Reagan's victory with the help of organized Labor. Why did they back him over Carter?

[Kythia]

My respect for the south has been pretty low .. discrimination.

OK.  I'm really not willing to get into an argument here.  If I come across as confrontational I hope you can chalk it down to difficulties in tone of voice in writing rather than me being a psycho mega bitch.  I promise its the former, no matter what the fairly pithy edit job of your quote might make it look like.

"The catastrophe known as the Bush regime".  Clearly you have pretty strong political beliefs.  Thats a) groovilicious, b) spiffy and more importantly c) not a thing that effects me in the slightest and so not really any of my business.  And everyone casts themselves as the hero in their own life - just the other day I slightly injured my toe kicking an adorable puppy and I didn't have to pause for thought to make it into the villain of the piece.  But I wonder if its maybe not worth re-examining some of your (stated) opinions.  You are happy to write off the opinions of millions and millions of people.Happy to denigrate them because they voted for someone you dislike. 

I haven't followed the ACA debate with anything other than passing notice because it doesn't affect me in the slightest and I'm monumentally self-absorbed.  But Trieste's points above rang true to me - that this is a failure in educating people in the issues.  Your point seems to be that the South is a huge morass of people either too stupid not to fall for the Republican/Satanic line or whose souls are so laden with evil that they willingly follow.  Now, leaving aside the massive dangers of categorising opposing political beliefs as a moral issue rather than a political one, you are wrong here.  Not a single state voted 100% for anything.  There are a wide range of people in the South and all the other compass directions. 

Maybe look at why Republican arguments are ringing true for people.  Saying "oh there is no Ohio, no Alabama, etc" is all very fine and noble but its a fairly silly position to hold.  There are massive differences in the economies, cultures, political backgrounds of various places.

And, to (finally) get to the point, making sweeping statements where you dismiss these millions of people and saying that only massive changes can cause you to forgive them for disagreeing with you doesn't exactly make you look like the beacon of tolerance that I have no doubt you are in real life.

[Lux12]

Satanic is the right word for how I see that accursed party. I cannot think of a more perfect word to describe them since the death of the Lincoln Republican. It's not that they voted for someone I despise with a venom so terrible I'm not certain anyone can understand, but that they essentially voted for what he did. They voted for xenophobia, they voted for Christian fundamentalism, they voted for policies that favored the rich at the expense of the poor, they voted for violations of our constitution, they voted for a declining education system, they voted for a terrible deficit. For two terms no less and one would expect me to forgive and forget this when the policies they have been pushing would be a tremendous detriment to people who are very close to me? People with serious health conditions, people working in professional jobs who don't get the respect they deserve? For almost outright demanding another war when I have two friends in the military? For mocking rape victims when I know them? Major amends need to be made before I can come anywhere near forgiving that party or those who voted for them. For now they can only ask the Gods. That is their duty to forgive so willingly, not mine. Mine is to try and make sure such a thing does not happen again. These are the seeds of madness. I cannot think of a logical reason to follow through on any of these things.

Sorry if I sound overly venomous, but with all that has happened, it is very difficult for me to carry more amiable feelings toward them.

[Kythia]

Mmmm.  We're not going to agree here I think and it kinda seems like arguing further would just be instinctive.  So I'll just bow out with a "Welcome to E, have fun!" until we bump into each other again.

Take care, hun.  *hugs*

[Callie Del Noire]

That's alright Lux, I'm used to being tarred by my party and outsiders alike. I noticed when Nancy Pelosi's house run was underway, she didn't do much to help the moral moderates in the GOP and greatly aided the double high authoritarians in consolidating their hold on my party. By I'm a RINO so I don't matter in the scheme of things.  I'm told to vote in lockstep with a party who refuse to listen to me, then sneered at when I admit I'm a republican to liberals.

RINO= Republican in Name Only.

[Oniya]

Satanic is the right word for how I see that accursed party.

Have you seen how they treat Satanists down there?  :o

;)

[Lux12]

Have you seen how they treat Satanists down there?  :o

;)

Trust me, the LaVeyans I know are closer to Jesus and God than many of them are, and I'm at best rather suspicious of them. They at least are content to let others do what they will so long as they do not harm them.

[Oniya]

I find that the most suitable epithet for the bogglingly far-right is to call them 'fundies' and leave it at that.  ;D  Not only can they not really argue the point, but it leaves out all of the fine, open-minded Southerners that this Damn Yankee has had the pleasure of meeting.

[Trieste]

I beg your pardon.

In 2000, Bush won with not only southern states voting for him but also states such as Colorado and New Hampshire. Please take your grudge against states due to their geographical location and rethink it.

Just because Bush came from a southern state doesn't mean that all southerners agree with him.

Same with Rick Perry.

Same with (insert any wackjob you want here).

As far as states' rights, I support them. I don't want the people of Texas determining the law in Massachusetts any more than the people of Texas want the converse. Most states have very, very different populations with very different ideologies. Maryland is often a blue state, whereas its neighbor Virginia is often red (this past election being an exception). Lumping the whole nation together as 'Merica gives me cold shivers - and I'm an independent.

[Lux12]

I consider Colorado southern. The New Hampshire thing was likely rigged.It's gonna take quite a bit more than asking me to reconsider when I do not seem to have sufficient evidence to the contrary to get me to give up my grudge.

Also I don't think you quite understand the damage states rights arguments have done.

[Callie Del Noire]

I consider Colorado southern. The New Hampshire thing was likely rigged.Until I have overwhelming evidence I feel little reason to reconsider.

Also I don't think you quite understand the damage states rights arguments have done.

I think you haven't considered the impact of Tyranny of the Majority/Minority either.

The whole system is a delicate balance of minding the minority and majority and their rights. Granting one side the most liberty without infringing the others.

It's not perfect..

The problem is.. for it to work..each and every citizen has an Obligation to do their part and inform themselves, watch the elected and VOTE.

[Trieste]

Also I don't think you quite understand the damage states rights arguments have done.

If you'd like to try to enlighten me, go for it.

I consider Colorado southern. The New Hampshire thing was likely rigged.There's gonna take quite a bit more than asking me to reconsider when I do not seem to have sufficient evidence to the contrary to get me to give up my grudge.

Montana. Idaho. North Dakota. Alaska. All red.

It's not just the southern US. Get over it.

[Lux12]

That still doesn't make me any less miffed.

Also what do slavery, the civil war, general discrimination, segregation, racism, and the opposition to gay marriage have in common? These have all been argued for on the grounds of or caused by the monster known as states rights.

[Trieste]

Are you aware that slaves were kept in more than just the states that seceded? Are you aware that the civil war was largely an economic fight rather than a fight over slaves? Are you aware that discrimination is a national problem and not just focused in the southern states? Are you aware that states rights also allow gay marriage to be legalized by state as well? Are you aware that states rights are what allow gays to get married at all while article 2 of the DOMA is in effect? Are you aware that states rights allow individual states to control things like gun ownership according to their populace and crime rates rather than forcing Congress to come up with a national standard that wouldn't fit anyone?

I think probably the answer to every question is no.

That still doesn't make me any less miffed.

Well, that's pretty much a personal problem, because it doesn't line up with the facts.

[Callie Del Noire]

That still doesn't make me any less miffed.

Also what do slavery, the civil war, general discrimination, segregation, racism, and the opposition to gay marriage have in common? These have all been argued for on the grounds of or caused by the monster known as states rights.

Opposition to gay marriage was caused by State's Rights? Please enlighten me on that one please. Then explain how general discrimination,segregation, racism are caused by it.

Sorry.. you got it backwards. It is used to oppose these issues.. Ironically SUPPORT of Gay marriage has benefited from State's rights too. As has the actions to legalized marjuianna.

So.. it's not a monster.. it's a tool. Used for good and bad.

As for the 'Southern states are evil and backwards and corrupt'. Please.  Stop.

[Oniya]

All generalities are false.

Chew on that for a little while, and then please re-read the stickies and the descriptor text for this board:

This forum is for discussing political climates, religion, and other controversial topics. Please do be aware of what you post and how it is phrased so that it is less likely to seem confrontational.

[Lux12]

States rights was a rallying cry for segregation (among other racist policies it was used to support) supporters back during the Civil Rights Movement and before it. It was also used to support the ownership of slaves before and during the Civil War. Rick Perry is also a notable supporter of states rights in the modern era.

Trieste-I'd like to know what facts you've been looking at. The words that have out many politicians mouths from that region have done little to inspire confidence in me. Especially all the talk about making anyone who looks like they could be of Hispanic descent carry papers (which is similar to something the nazis did with the Jews). Religious discrimination hardly seems to be dealt with at times. Sexism has more sway down there. There's still widespread discrimination against gay people down there. Oklahoma  banned all abortion. Then there's this:

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/texas-becomes-ground-zero-for-historical-revisionism-cms-15781

The region has some serious problems it needs to straighten out. With all this combined with living through the Bush era should it really surprise you that I have so little trust in them?

[Callie Del Noire]

States rights was a rallying cry for segregation (among other racist policies it was used to support) supporters back during the Civil Rights Movement and before it. It was also used to support the ownership of slaves before and during the Civil War. Rick Perry is also a notable supporter of states rights in the modern era.

Trieste-I'd like to know what facts you've been looking at. The words that have out many politicians mouths from that region have done little to inspire confidence in me. Especially all the talk about making anyone who looks like they could be of Hispanic descent carry papers (which is similar to something the nazis did with the Jews). Religious discrimination hardly seems to be dealt with at times. Sexism has more sway down there. There's still widespread discrimination against gay people down there. Oklahoma  banned all abortion. Then there's this:

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/texas-becomes-ground-zero-for-historical-revisionism-cms-15781

The region has some serious problems it needs to straighten out. With all this combined with living through the Bush era should it really surprise you that I have so little trust in them?

So you're going to ignore my comments on how state's rights HAS HELPED Gay Marriage, and the other issues I mention and remain stuck on the bad facets of the methodology only?

And trust me.. 8 years of Bush wasn't the worst thing we've ever had. Or will have.

I'd argue the 25+ years (with a short pause under Nancy Pelosi) of the GOP dominating the house did more than the president did.

[Trieste]

So you're going to ignore my comments on how state's rights HAS HELPED Gay Marriage, and the other issues I mention and remain stuck on the bad facets of the methodology only?

You and me both, Callie. It's probably because everyone knows that people below the Mason/Dixon line can't read. The illiteracy level makes all your points invalid. ::)

[Callie Del Noire]

You and me both, Callie. It's probably because everyone knows that people below the Mason/Dixon line can't read. The illiteracy level makes all your points invalid. ::)

And people wondered why I microwaved my chiefs and officers from up North while I was in the navy.

[Trieste]

And people wondered why I microwaved my chiefs and officers from up North while I was in the navy.

Discrimination against Native Americans!! *points finger at Callie*

[Callie Del Noire]

Discrimination against Native Americans!! *points finger at Callie*

CHIEF PETTY OFFICERS..

(Callie is part Cherokee... )

[Trieste]

CHIEF PETTY OFFICERS..

(Callie is part Cherokee... )

You're so infected by local thinking that you're discriminating against yourself, see. ::)

[Lux12]

Are you even going to acknowledge that the region does have very real problems?

[Callie Del Noire]

Are you even going to acknowledge that the region does have very real problems?

I acknowlege that ALL the country has problems. You're saying it's like there is nothing but a bunch of rich white folks going to the country club and the poor white folks are all trailer park trash and that if you're white and southern. you must A. Be Republican. B. Be racist C. Stupid and illiterate.

[Stattick]

Are you even going to acknowledge that the region does have very real problems?

I've said before that the region has some very real problems, and I stand by that. Bigotry, anti-intellectualism, etc. It's easy to forget that those are real people that we're talking about there though, and that there are plenty of people that live in the South that are very much against the fundies, the bigotry, and all the other problems down there. It's true that some of those states have a fairly high proportion of Republican leaning voters. IIRC, several of the southern states only went around 37% for Obama, while many were closer to 45%. The states that went less for Obama then that weren't in the South - Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, etc.

You have to consider that in the big cities in the South, that the people tend to much like the people in the big cities all across the country - they lean liberal, like fancy coffee, ethnic food, and so forth. They tend to have a lot in common with people from New York City, L.A., and so forth. As the demographics shift, the South is slowly turning more liberal as well. If the GOP doesn't change, they're going to be in a hell of a lot of hurt as they start loosing Southern states.

It's easy to paint the South as a bastion of willful ignorance. It's a stereotype. Like many stereotypes, there's some truth to it. But a great many people in the South do not live up to that stereotype. Hell, I'd even venture to guess that most of the people down there don't live up to all of the stereotypes. Those that do tend toward the stereotypes very likely only tend toward one or two of those stereotypes instead of all of them. Sure, if you look hard enough, you'll find a few knuckle draggers that fit all the stereotypes, but I'd guess that they account for fewer than 1% of the population in the South. It's probably pretty close to the same percentage of knuckle draggers you'd find in any state.

Does the South still have some more growing up to do? Yep. So does the rest of the country too. The difference between most Southern States and most of the liberal states in this country are less than 15% of the populous. In both areas, you find knuckle draggers, and in both areas you find ultra liberals. You find all the same sorts of people in both areas. It's just that the proportions are little different in some areas than in others. Probably in ten years, we're going to have a few Southern States that will have flipped blue instead of red, and a few more that are swing states.

The fault for many of the problems we have in this country, and the problems in the South are more due to some elements of the Republican Party than to intractable and intrinsic Southern Racism. I don't try to deny that Southern Racism is a real thing - hell, I've seen it with my own eyes. But this isn't Mississippi Burning anymore. Things are changing and continue to change. The GOP has molded itself to appeal to racists, and that's how they took the South in the 60's once the Democrats stopped supporting segregation and a racist agenda. But if I had to make a guess, I'd guess that today that a racist agenda is only a small part of how the Republican Party retains its hold. Many Republicans are not racists, and many of them find the racist elements of their party to be repugnant.

It's easy to loose sight of the fact that when you talk about the problems of the South, Southern Racism, and so forth, that you're talking about real people, and painting them with a broad brush that doesn't apply to many of them. It's easy to loose sight of the fact that some of the people that you're painting with that brush are members here. Like all stereotypes, when you paint them with that broad brush, it hurts. It might anger them, and they lash out, or it might make them feel like shit. Probably most of them don't even say anything. Some of them might just write you off as being a bigot, one that's bigoted against them because they come from the wrong part of the country in your opinion.

It's easy to fall into that sort of bigotry. There are certainly problems in the South. There's certainly a lot of ugliness there historically, and even some today. But when you aren't careful with how you think, it's easy to lump all "those people" together, and to fall victim of the sin of bigotry that you accuse them of. When you aren't careful of how you speak or write, it's easy to misrepresent yourself, and to write in such a manner as to make it sound like you're lumping them all together when that's not your intention. I'm not sure which is going on here with Lux. Personally, I don't really care either. I understand where you're coming from Lux. I too have problems with the South. I understand that you intend well, and that you want the same sort of things that I want. But I hope that you'll realize that a great many of the Southerners that you're talking about are nothing like what you've said that they're like.  And we probably don't have a single long term member of E that's the knuckle dragging sort. Meanwhile, we do have at least one Southerner posting in this thread that I know, and likely more. And I'd venture to guess that where we have a just a few people that have spoken up here, that there's probably at least a dozen more that haven't said anything. Any one of them could be one of your friends, writing partners, or someone you chat, flirt, or game with. They're real people.

[Silverfyre]

But why cite facts when using generalizations and stereotypes is so much easier?!   ::)

Really, I've seen you haunt several threads now, Lux, and each time you have made nothing but generalizations and assumptions about the issues at hand.  Perhaps you shouldn't be so set in your prejudice and stop drawing upon such generalizations of entire cultures, states and people.  It only shows how ignorant of the entire situation you make yourself out to be.

[Lux12]

But why cite facts when using generalizations and stereotypes is so much easier?!   ::)

Really, I've seen you haunt several threads now, Lux, and each time you have made nothing but generalizations and assumptions about the issues at hand.  Perhaps you shouldn't be so set in your prejudice and stop drawing upon such generalizations of entire cultures, states and people.  It only shows how ignorant of the entire situation you make yourself out to be.

There are only two like that I can think of and sorry I don't feel like doing an MLA or APA style citation for every sentence I write when I've spent a good chunk of the year doing just that.I don't exactly see anyone else here going to such extraordinary lengths here either.

Stattick-That's all I wanted to hear!Someone here acknowledging that things are in fact screwed up down there and in desperate need of fixing! If someone had just said something more along those lines I probably wouldn't have gone on so long. If someone would have just have said that the social climate down there has some rather serious flaws and understood the very source of my frustration. You understand my anger. I'm just so disgusted by the thought that people like that exist anywhere on this planet. I'm mad as hell and I've been mad for years now as I watched this country fall apart at the seams. I'm mad that so many people did nothing to stop it. I'm mad that people seem to be increasingly apathetic to these issues these days. I'm mad that there are still so many people here and around the world who think in such ways. I'm furious that after years of suffering under similar policies the race was still so close between that greedy S.O.B. and Obama prior to Obama's presidency. The fact that even the most conservative part of this country would still largely cast their ballots for those policies makes me furious. It just seems like no matter how this country comes as a whole these days, something is always in the way. I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.

To be honest it's that damned party I despise more. In all honesty I would vote for southern democrat/green party/insert other progressive party here before I'd ever vote for a northern republican. That party has destroyed any trust I may ever have had in it many times over to the point where it would require a miracle of the divine for me to ever cast my ballot for one of them. To be honest, most of my rage against the south is probably me venting against them instead. The south just has the misfortune of being the base area of their most consistent supporters as of late. I can feel my self simmering down as I say this. However, I will never overlook the issues present there, nor do I think you would ask me to.

All this being said I'd still be hard pressed to show any affection for the state of Texas beyond admiring the natural landscape of the area...

[Chris Brady]

Why did they back him over Carter?

Um, the major reason was actually psychological.  Carter was shorter than Reagan.  And a lot of the general populace equate size with leadership qualities.  And Reagan used every 'dirty' trick to show that he was taller, and thus better equipped to lead than Carter did.  Carter's office never wanted him and Reagan to be shown together because of the severe size difference.  Reagan was 6' 2" or so, Carter was 5' 8".

Being a former member of the U.S. Armed Forces, Callie, you know better than that.  But most voters do not.  And Political Offices know this.  And will use it to help get them elected.

After all, there were people polled in the U.S. that wanted George Clooney to run for office.  Why?  No one said, but he has no training in politics, and yet people would have voted for him.  I have, or had, the article mentioning this.  I think I posted it somewhere else in here...

[Lux12]

Um, the major reason was actually psychological.  Carter was shorter than Reagan.  And a lot of the general populace equate size with leadership qualities.  And Reagan used every 'dirty' trick to show that he was taller, and thus better equipped to lead than Carter did.  Carter's office never wanted him and Reagan to be shown together because of the severe size difference.  Reagan was 6' 2" or so, Carter was 5' 8".

Being a former member of the U.S. Armed Forces, Callie, you know better than that.  But most voters do not.  And Political Offices know this.  And will use it to help get them elected.

After all, there were people polled in the U.S. that wanted George Clooney to run for office.  Why?  No one said, but he has no training in politics, and yet people would have voted for him.  I have, or had, the article mentioning this.  I think I posted it somewhere else in here...

That and the the unfortunate timing and the fact that Carter was a bit too honest for some people's tastes.

[Stattick]

There are only two like that I can think of and sorry I don't feel like doing an MLA or APA style citation for every sentence I write when I've spent a good chunk of the year doing just that.I don't exactly see anyone else here going to such extraordinary lengths here either.

Stattick-That's all I wanted to hear!Someone here acknowledging that things are in fact screwed up down there and in desperate need of fixing! If someone had just said something more along those lines I probably wouldn't have gone on so long. If someone would have just have said that the social climate down there has some rather serious flaws and understood the very source of my frustration. You understand my anger. I'm just so disgusted by the thought that people like that exist anywhere on this planet. I'm mad as hell and I've been mad for years now as I watched this country fall apart at the seams. I'm mad that so many people did nothing to stop it. I'm mad that people seem to be increasingly apathetic to these issues these days. I'm mad that there are still so many people here and around the world who think in such ways. I'm furious that after years of suffering under similar policies the race was still so close between that greedy S.O.B. and Obama prior to Obama's presidency. The fact that even the most conservative part of this country would still largely cast their ballots for those policies makes me furious. It just seems like no matter how this country comes as a whole these days, something is always in the way. I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.

To be honest it's that damned party I despise more. In all honesty I would vote for southern democrat/green party/insert other progressive party here before I'd ever vote for a northern republican. That party has destroyed any trust I may ever have had in it many times over to the point where it would require a miracle of the divine for me to ever cast my ballot for one of them. To be honest, most of my rage against the south is probably me venting against them instead. The south just has the misfortune of being the base area of their most consistent supporters as of late. I can feel my self simmering down as I say this. However, I will never overlook the issues present there, nor do I think you would ask me to.

All this being said I'd still be hard pressed to show any affection for the state of Texas beyond admiring the natural landscape of the area...

I don't think you understood what I was saying. I was trying to convey that you're coming off like a bigot, and that we have members posting in this very thread that are Southerners. I was trying to get you to see that although I agree with some of what you're saying, you're saying it in a way that makes it sound as if EVERY Southerner is part of the problem, when in fact it is a lot more complicated then that.

Try this. Imagine the same arguments that you made, but replace "Country" with "World", and replace "Southerners" with "Muslims". You'd be saying that EVERY Muslim is bad and part of the problem in fucking up the whole world. It's incontrovertible that some Muslims are part of some of the problems that are fucking up the world, but it's unfair and bigoted to say that ALL Muslims are part of the problem.

Or maybe try this: the same arguments that you made against Southerns, but replace "Southerners" with "White Men". The broad brush you used would make it sound like EVERY white male is ignorant, racist, anti-intellectual, sexist, and ruining the country.

[Callie Del Noire]

Um, the major reason was actually psychological.  Carter was shorter than Reagan.  And a lot of the general populace equate size with leadership qualities.  And Reagan used every 'dirty' trick to show that he was taller, and thus better equipped to lead than Carter did.  Carter's office never wanted him and Reagan to be shown together because of the severe size difference.  Reagan was 6' 2" or so, Carter was 5' 8".

Being a former member of the U.S. Armed Forces, Callie, you know better than that.  But most voters do not.  And Political Offices know this.  And will use it to help get them elected.

After all, there were people polled in the U.S. that wanted George Clooney to run for office.  Why?  No one said, but he has no training in politics, and yet people would have voted for him.  I have, or had, the article mentioning this.  I think I posted it somewhere else in here...

Not entirely. The reason that organized labor backed Reagan over Carter had as much to do with an Alienation of Organized Labor and the Farmer democrat. The change over in the personality of the Democratic party started during Carter's term and a lot of the 'intellectual elite' and 60s era 'hippie' reformers moved up in the party structure. There was a serious disconnect, and it was one that Reagan used.. it was the beginning of the end for Organized Labor and there hasn't been a lot done on either side to repair it since.

The more conservative farmers.. they stayed with the GOP but Labor hasn't had a champion in Congress and now they are getting it in the shorts with anti-labor legislation. This is a good part of the reason things haven't been easy for the Dem in congress.

I don't think you understood what I was saying. I was trying to convey that you're coming off like a bigot, and that we have members posting in this very thread that are Southerners. I was trying to get you to see that although I agree with some of what you're saying, you're saying it in a way that makes it sound as if EVERY Southerner is part of the problem, when in fact it is a lot more complicated then that.

Try this. Imagine the same arguments that you made, but replace "Country" with "World", and replace "Southerners" with "Muslims". You'd be saying that EVERY Muslim is bad and part of the problem in fucking up the whole world. It's incontrovertible that some Muslims are part of some of the problems that are fucking up the world, but it's unfair and bigoted to say that ALL Muslims are part of the problem.

Or maybe try this: the same arguments that you made against Southerns, but replace "Southerners" with "White Men". The broad brush you used would make it sound like EVERY white male is ignorant, racist, anti-intellectual, sexist, and ruining the country.

give it up Stattick.. he's set in the 'Southerners are evil' mode and given that he hadn't responded any of my statement or questions that I'm 'beneath' his notice. Of course I am the 'evil' southern.

FYI.. I have been slabbed with the 'Southern Cracker Racist' before in the Navy.. got hauled in front of my Master Chief by some black kid from Long Beach,Ca because my ''cracker ass' reported him for breaking quiet hours. Supposedly I picked on him because as a southern I dislike rap and let the guys on the 4th floor off cause they were playing country music.  The dance went something like this.

MC: "Petty Officer why did you right up Airman D.?"
Me: "He was playing music at a volume that I could hear two decks away after 10 pm Master Chief."
MC: "He says that you let the airmen on the 4th floor because they were white. Would you care to tell me what actually happened?"
Me: "I did as you directed Master Chief, contacted base security and this morning their command because they were in another squadron."
MC: "Airman.. stay a moment.. Petty Officer.. be about your business."

(The net result? I had the rep of being racist for a week after this.. TILL the chiefs started telling what really happened. And in my command.. that could be a problem. Racism isn't simply one way.. or from one region. I had to write up NINE airmen and junior petty officers for dereliction, subornination and one attempt at instigating a fight with me.. because one kid from LONG BEACH decided since I said words like 'Ya'll', 'Ain't' and like grits I MUST be a Racist white guy.. Airmen in question said 'I can't be racist.. I'm black'. Apparently his black supervisor from Compton disagreed.. he got sent to sensativity training..twice. And lost a rank for being abusive to a white subordinate.)

[Callie Del Noire]

My Point is this.. by setting one specific location, group, or whatever as 'racisit' and ONLY them.. you leave other abuses open without helping folks. I know several korean grocers in California who would argue that they deal with a LOT of racist behaviors that don't come from white folks.

[Oniya]

Not entirely. The reason that organized labor backed Reagan over Carter had as much to do with an Alienation of Organized Labor and the Farmer democrat. The change over in the personality of the Democratic party started during Carter's term and a lot of the 'intellectual elite' and 60s era 'hippie' reformers moved up in the party structure. There was a serious disconnect, and it was one that Reagan used.. it was the beginning of the end for Organized Labor and there hasn't been a lot done on either side to repair it since.

The more conservative farmers.. they stayed with the GOP but Labor hasn't had a champion in Congress and now they are getting it in the shorts with anti-labor legislation. This is a good part of the reason things haven't been easy for the Dem in congress.

There was also the fact that the Iranian Hostage situation occurred at the end of Carter's term.  People wanted someone who could get them home, Carter was having difficulties, and Reagan was a new face.  After the election results were in, there was a deliberate move on the part of the Iranians not to release the hostages until Reagan took office, just to make Carter look even worse.

[Callie Del Noire]

There was also the fact that the Iranian Hostage situation occurred at the end of Carter's term.  People wanted someone who could get them home, Carter was having difficulties, and Reagan was a new face.  After the election results were in, there was a deliberate move on the part of the Iranians not to release the hostages until Reagan took office, just to make Carter look even worse.

There is some issues that point towards Reagan's campaign might have interferred with the process as well. One of my teachers in my first attempt at college had worked for the Carter Campaign in Atlanta and there was a LOT of paperwork that was going missing during the time from about July to November.  Nothing that could be proven concretely.. but it was clear that someone was 'sneaking and peaking' but they never caught anyone.

There was a LOT of reasons that Carter lost to Reagan.. the Democrats losing Union support that year didn't help much at all.  I honestly think had it not been for watergate, Carter wouldn't have gotten nominated much less elected.

[Torch]

give it up Stattick.. he's set in the 'Southerners are evil' mode and given that he hadn't responded any of my statement or questions that I'm 'beneath' his notice. Of course I am the 'evil' southern.

In addition, when someone who is only 21 years old drones on about how he's been angry for "years", I tend to take that with a huge grain of salt.  ::)

[Silverfyre]

In addition, when someone who is only 21 years old drones on about how he's been angry for "years", I tend to take that with a huge grain of salt.  ::)

But isn't that what teenage years are all about?  Heh.

[Lux12]

In addition, when someone who is only 21 years old drones on about how he's been angry for "years", I tend to take that with a huge grain of salt.  ::)

One does not have to be much older to know when something is deeply wrong with a situation or to read.

Perhaps I am being a bit overly venomous when you put it that way.It still doesn't change my opinion of those who voted for Romney and his little friends or my disappointment with the social atmosphere down there.

[Silverfyre]

I honestly don't blame you for being as miffed as you are about the whole situation. I've seen it all too often down here in Florida, more than enough for me to want to get the hell out of this state.  But, the problem that is being presented here with your statements is how you basically generalized the entire southern region into one broad stereotype.  Nothing good comes from such generalizations as they are not only nonfactual but also misleading and judgmental against people who are quite the opposite. 

Be frustrated; I know I am.  Just don't think everyone who lives in a demographic of the United States can be fit into one category so easily.  I know I sure as hell don't enjoy being called ignorant and a racist because I live in the South.

[Serephino]

You don't like that people voted for Romney?  The guy you dislike so much is from Massachusetts.  His VP was from Wisconsin I think.  They held the same views, but aren't Southern.  People are people, and just because a state ended up blue didn't mean there weren't lots of people who voted Republican because they're bigots.  Ignorant religious zealots are a widespread problem.  Like Silverfyre said, be angry.  Many of us are.  Just don't go insulting like half the country. 

[Silverfyre]

We all see what happens when you insult 47% percent of the population.   ::)

[Trieste]

Just an aside, he's not 'from' Massachusetts. >.> He is from Michigan. And when he ran for governor of Massachusetts, he ran on a platform that included:

• Equal rights for all Americans regardless of sexual orientation (he didn't come out against gay marriage until about 04)
• The allowance of stem cell research, so long as the cells aren't obtained via the destruction of life
• Pro-choice support of Roe v. Wade
• Universal health care (MassCare is nicknamed RomneyCare in the same way that the ACA is nicknamed ObamaCare)

Does that sound like any GOP talking head you know? For that matter, does that sound like the Romney who ran for president this year? >.>

I didn't think so. >.>

[Callie Del Noire]

Just an aside, he's not 'from' Massachusetts. >.> He is from Michigan. And when he ran for governor of Massachusetts, he ran on a platform that included:

• Equal rights for all Americans regardless of sexual orientation (he didn't come out against gay marriage until about 04)
• The allowance of stem cell research, so long as the cells aren't obtained via the destruction of life
• Pro-choice support of Roe v. Wade
• Universal health care (MassCare is nicknamed RomneyCare in the same way that the ACA is nicknamed ObamaCare)

Does that sound like any GOP talking head you know? For that matter, does that sound like the Romney who ran for president this year? >.>

I didn't think so. >.>

I find myself wondering who would have won between the president and '04 Romney.

[Lux12]

I honestly don't trust the man.He's bounced around on issues so much and said such outrageous things about hardworking citizens I cannot trust him. I've found that he's more consistently towed the party line, but I cannot trust someone who won't own up to what he said. The many says whatever's necessary to get what he wants.I do not trust him let alone his many of his personal stances.

[Trieste]

I find myself wondering who would have won between the president and '04 Romney.

Well, he may have been GOP while he was MA gov, but it's hard to get elected if you stick to the GOP party line in MA. Look at Scott Brown - he distanced himself from the party a couple years ago and got elected. Then he did crap-all in office and posted on his site about his anti-choice, anti-gay perspectives and oh look - Elizabeth Warren.

[Callie Del Noire]

Well, he may have been GOP while he was MA gov, but it's hard to get elected if you stick to the GOP party line in MA. Look at Scott Brown - he distanced himself from the party a couple years ago and got elected. Then he did crap-all in office and posted on his site about his anti-choice, anti-gay perspectives and oh look - Elizabeth Warren.

True. I'm surprised the 'N-word' didn't get used by someone this year. 

[Trieste]

True. I'm surprised the 'N-word' didn't get used by someone this year.

It was on Twitter. "Silly n*er, it's called the White House for a reason!"  :-\

[Lux12]

It was on Twitter. "Silly n*er, it's called the White House for a reason!"  :-\

I wouldn't be surprised if it was Romney himself.

[Callie Del Noire]

It was on Twitter. "Silly n*er, it's called the White House for a reason!"  :-\

I meant like a Jessie Jackson moment at a podium.  I don't see Mitt doing it but damn I could see some of these minion or Tea Party types doing it.

[Lux12]

I meant like a Jessie Jackson moment at a podium.  I don't see Mitt doing it but damn I could see some of these minion or Tea Party types doing it.

Definitely.I'd have to find the article, but I read somewhere that a group of them were harassing some African American politicians rather aggressively.

[Trieste]

I meant like a Jessie Jackson moment at a podium.  I don't see Mitt doing it but damn I could see some of these minion or Tea Party types doing it.

Yeah, it wasn't anyone associated with one of the campaigns (I think), just people on Twitter who apparently think racism is funny and/or acceptable.

[Torch]

One does not have to be much older to know when something is deeply wrong with a situation or to read.

No, one doesn't. If you are interested in social injustice, perhaps you should Google the Chicago Race Riots of the early 1900's, or the violence associated with the desegregation of the Boston Public Schools in the 1970's, or the rise and proliferation of neo-Nazi groups in the Pacific Northwest in the 1980's, or any other number of examples I could give you.

The South hardly has the monopoly on bigots and racists, and anyone who believes so is gravely misinformed.

[Stattick]

You know who was Southern? Jimmy Carter. Bill Clinton too.

[TheWildcat]

Exactly. Just because there are people in this state that don't have electric lights and go to klan meetings and burn crosses and prefer to "keep it in the family" does not mean we're all like that. Birmingham started as the Pittsburgh of the south, overnight, and after the civil war was over. It is now considered one of the major medical and banking centers of the nation, shoulder to shoulder with the likes of New York and Chicago, if not smaller, and of course it has its own problems.

[vtboy]

Opposition to gay marriage was caused by State's Rights? Please enlighten me on that one please. Then explain how general discrimination,segregation, racism are caused by it.

Sorry.. you got it backwards. It is used to oppose these issues.. Ironically SUPPORT of Gay marriage has benefited from State's rights too. As has the actions to legalized marijuana.

So.. it's not a monster.. it's a tool. Used for good and bad.

As for the 'Southern states are evil and backwards and corrupt'. Please.  Stop.

Monster or not, on any objective view of history, the doctrine of states' rights has overwhelmingly been invoked as an impediment to social progress and a defense of some of our more reactionary practices and institutions.

"States' rights" was the clarion call for opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, public school desegregation, and the ACA (remember Mitt's schizophrenic position that adoption of compulsory health insurance was  fine for the people of Massachusetts but not for the people of the United States). The doctrine also provided the ideological foundation for Arizona's semi-failed experimentation with immigration law. And, the attempts to disenfranchise voters in the recent election were exercises in state, not federal, law (in some cases, invalidated by federal courts).

Further, a host of judicial guarantees of civil liberty, some very near and dear to the hearts of many on this site, have come only at the expense of significant incursions into state hegemony through the 14h Amendment. These have notably included the rights to abort a pregnancy, to use contraception, to require the police have probable cause to arrest, to require the police obtain a warrant before ransacking a home, to be free of religious indoctrination in public schools, to speak and publish without state reprisal, and to engage in homosexual relations.     

It is also worth considering that DOMA, although a federal statute, protects the rights of states not to allow same sex marriages or even to recognize those conceived in other states.

"States' rights" is one of those phrases, like "white man's burden" and "the Jewish question." which make my scrotum shrivel. Our states are an artifact of the rather balkanized approach of the British to colonization of North America without which I often think we would have been far better off. But, then, our only legislative body would be the House of Representatives. Perish the thought.

[Callie Del Noire]

Don't get me wrong.. i think that State's Rights are pretty much a recessive tool rather than a progressive one. I found that I disagreed with Barry Goldwater on that point, he felt that things like Civil Rights, and the rest of the stuff of his time was better done on a state or local level than a federal. On one hand, he was right.. a ground level change would be less resented than one enforced from on high.. BUT it would have taken much much longer. Some points he brought up on state vs federal changes and impacts were fairly point on.. BUT I think some things need a universal point of coverage.

That being said.. I think that some things are regional, though growing less so as we become more and more intermixed. The world of Barry Goldwater is shrinking with growth of the internet and other technical advantages.

Progressive movements can, and are, using tools like this to empower change.

Legalizing gay marriages/unions, legalizing marijuana and other issues that have been gridlocked on the federal level. This can be used to move reforms forward.