Bush was a TN congressman for awhile. He has been VP for 8 years. That's my point.
Bush was never a TN congressman. And he has never been VP. Have you been drinking again?
Oops. My fingers keep getting ahead of my brain. Sorry. Thanks for staying civil when I open myself up like that.
If I argue much more with you, I may not get to birdhunt, but here goes:
The reason that the South is going Republican is more complex than what you state.
The South has not been, overall, liberal in the past couple of hundred years. But after the civil war, which resulted in the loss of very cheap labor upon which, in large part, the Southern economy depended, and the destruction of what infrastructure there was in the South, the Democratic party of FDR and to a lesser degree, JFK, gave the South economic hope (SSA, TVA, WPA, NASA) by putting people to work and building infrastructure and providing a "safety net" for the working person's retirement. And, after all, it was a Republican that was the Commander-in-Chief of an Army that defeated the South's attempt to leave the Union and preserve its economic system.
Since WWII, the South has prospered and those whose lives were touched by these federal projects are passing on.
LBJ's support of the Civil Rights Act did the Democratic Party much damage in the South. That law was not a popular law here, at the time. The economic prosperity of the South no longer requires the government programs of a liberal government.yadayadayada I'm sure you've heard all this before. But the effect of the civil rights act was to switch the chairs between the Democrats and the Republicans in the South.
The dynamics between conservative political organizations and conservate Southern "church" organizations is really fascinating. It is particularly fascinating if one recalls the role of conservative Southern churces during the political struggle around civil rights.
I see a similar struggle developing now. There are those that believe that people who do not meet their standards for _______(fill in the blank) should not be allowed to vote or that their vote is not important. Those who lean this way are "conservatives"--about this issue, anyway. Those who believe the issues we are struggling with in this election are at least in part due to mistakes, bad decisions, and questionable actions by the people responsible for conduting a national election in their political territory.
The result, according to many of "us liberals", is that many citizens seem to have have been denied their right to vote or for their vote to count. This is an important right that must be defended under any circumstance. But in the current circumstance, we believe that if the violations are as they appear, then their result is affecting the outcome of a national election for the President of the US.
The fact that if Bush wins the electoral vote and Bush wins the popular vote and Bush is the new President, really aggravates the issue. This circumstance also lends a moral foundation to the efforts to get the popular vote count at the voting precinct level as accurate as possible.
Your perspective of liberal leanings versus conservative leanings is a personal one. You can see that I do not consider myself conservative, nor am I a leftist (commie, pinko, fag) either. I am a moderate, by my measure. |
