View Single Post
Old 08-06-2011, 11:05 PM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: The Week in Blog: The Debt Deal (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)

Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
Phoney race problem? Ok then, I'm glad that's settled!
Indeed it is. This is a bit tiresome, and I suppose that's how its supposed to be. After all, "insecure" people use violence to enforce their views. It is more progressive to whine, harangue, insult, and sneer them into submission. Picture a carefully manicured male foot in a woman's pink high heeled shoe stomping on a human face, forever.

You seem to be implying that racism is somehow a conservative trait - I'd call that calumny.l
I obviously do not. That would be like saying I believe Progressives are currently eugenicists. I do not, despite the fact that Progressives were eugenicists.

You also seem to have a problem with context; we're discussing the Republican party of 2011, after Nixon invented the Southern Strategy.
I'm saying that like most bouts of conventional wisdom, the Southern Strategy is more myth than reality. REAGAN is who converts the South broadly, and this is after the complete transformation of the Democrats into a total leftist party. Nixon loses the South in 1968, and while he wins it in 1972, he wins it as part of a 49 state landslide.

It is ridiculous to expect the South to vote for McGovern. Carter then wins more counties in the South than Ford. Reagan wins overwhelming electoral victories against both opponents. Then, in 1994, there is a great movement of Southern democrats switching parties. Louisiana, for example wouldn't popularly elect a Republican to the US until 2004 for God's sake. Republicans didn't have a majority of the Texan delegation until 2005.

You keep saying the same thing, "The southern strategy, the southern strategy", as if saying it over and over is some sort of argument. I have presented you with facts which counter that popular narrative. Can you explain away these facts?

Let me present you with a theory that is more in line with the facts. The movement of the national democratic party to the left ruined the Presidential chances of Democrats in the South, because they didn't have any interest in issues which were important to Southerners. That included, by the way, national defense and anti-Communist views. The Democrats were more than happy to continue to dominate the Southern political system, and elect representatives and Senators from the South to push the democrat agenda.

Life and politics are a lot more complicated than the revisionism of the modern left allows. Richard Nixon was probably one of the most "progressive" Presidents in the 20th century, but he is simultaneously a boogeyman for you people. He is the Magic Demon who invents an evil electoral strategy (Which consists primarily of stealing racists from...the ether, not the Democratic party...) and his malign evil perversion of democracy continues to this day.

Give me a break.

I'm pretty sure that irrelevant, showy complaining about "intellectuals" and elites (and "All The Right People" indeed! [still lovin' those caps, man!]) is as good an example of preening as anyone could name.
It has nothing to do with me, so it can hardly be preening.

I am glad you've found a nail to hang your anger, frustration and apparent feelings of inadequacy on. Congratulations, and good luck with those demons!
I like this game too. With the Internet, nothing is new under the sun.

My objections to your statements are a window into my "inadequacy". Just like the politics of critics of the President are windows into their "psychosis". Totalitarians used to do this about fifty years ago, deviancy from political orthodoxy was a sign of mental illness.

When I was younger, I saw this happen in real life. Some men would hit on a woman, and if she rejected him, he would say to his friends that she was a lesbian. After all, what other possible reason could there be for their dialogue not to go his way?
Reply With Quote