• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Republicans- the Party of the Bubbas and Billy Bobs?

A

Anonymous

Guest
Republicans Dominance in the South Masks Problems Elsewhere

Ron Brownstein has an interesting piece about the Republican's "Southern Strategy."
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cs_20090523_2195.php
By conforming to the conservative ideology popular among white Southern men, the Republicans are rapidly becoming a small minority everywhere else. Since 1992, the South has provided Republicans with nearly 60% of its electoral votes or more--despite the region holding only 30% of the total electoral votes. In the past five elections, Republicans have won an average of only 21% of the electoral votes outside the South. In reality, the Republicans are rapidly becoming a regional party--much like the Democrats were from 1896 to 1931, when Southerners voted Democratic because they still hated Lincoln for freeing the slaves.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Republicans Dominance in the South Masks Problems Elsewhere

Ron Brownstein has an interesting piece about the Republican's "Southern Strategy."
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cs_20090523_2195.php
By conforming to the conservative ideology popular among white Southern men, the Republicans are rapidly becoming a small minority everywhere else. Since 1992, the South has provided Republicans with nearly 60% of its electoral votes or more--despite the region holding only 30% of the total electoral votes. In the past five elections, Republicans have won an average of only 21% of the electoral votes outside the South. In reality, the Republicans are rapidly becoming a regional party--much like the Democrats were from 1896 to 1931, when Southerners voted Democratic because they still hated Lincoln for freeing the slaves.


Just plain ol' Southern ' men' are rare also.


We've got plenty of over 50+ Southern 'boys' though!! :roll: :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Glad someone thinks of Southern men as those who might sway policy.

Would scare the bejesus out of me to know that SOME men in Montana could have any say-so at all. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
A few months back there was some controversy in the state when my Repub Congressman Rehberg came out touting the meeting he'd had with Thomas Woods...Some questioned his relationship with a person that has actively promoted southern succession from the union...

It got me interested so I did a little reading on Woods and his group...
Absolutely surprised me- but I guess what really shocks me is the involvement the Republican party is getting in with these extremist successionist groups- like the one Palins husband belonged to..

He served as a history department faculty member at Suffolk County Community College in New York until 2006, and is now resident scholar and senior faculty member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), as well as a member of the editorial board for the institute's Journal of Libertarian Studies. He is also an associate scholar of the Abbeville Institute.
Woods was present at the founding of the League of the South. and has contributed to its newsletter. His past membership in the group has generated criticism, but Woods asserts his involvement was limited.

The League of the South is a Southern nationalist organization whose ultimate goal is "a free and independent Southern republic." The group defines the Southern United States as the states that made up the former Confederacy. While political independence ranks highly among the group's goals, it is also a religious and social movement, advocating a return to a more traditional, conservative Christian-oriented Southern culture.

Formed in 1994 by Michael Hill. The League of the South was named in reference to both the Lega Nord, an Italian political party which advocates autonomy for Northern Italy, and the League of United Southerners, a group organized in 1858 to shape Southern public opinion.

Seeking support in the American Declaration of Independence, the League believes the "Southern people" have the right to secede from the United States, and that they "must throw off the yoke of imperial [federal, or central government] oppression". The League promotes a Southern Confederation of sovereign, independent States that "work together... to conduct foreign affairs". It believes that the South's foreign policy should favor neutrality and trade with all states. Furthermore, the League favors strictly limited immigration, opposes standing armies and any regulation whatsoever of firearms. Though the ultimate goal of the League is to create an independent Southern nation, it sees this aim as the final step in an ongoing process:

Once we have planted the seeds of cultural, economic, and social renewal, then (and only then), should we begin to look to the South's political renewal. Political independence will come only when we have convinced the Southern people that they are indeed a nation in the historical, organic, and Biblical sense of the word, namely, that they are a distinct people with language, mores, and folkways that separate them from the rest of the world.

The League's current official activities focus on recruiting and encouraging "cultural secession" and "withholding our support from all institutions and objects of popular culture that are antithetical to our beliefs and heritage." In November 2006 its representatives attended the First North American Secessionist Convention which brought together secessionists from a broad political spectrum. In October 2007 it co-hosted the Second North American Secessionist Convention in Chattanooga, Tennessee
---------

The issue of race has become a source of controversy about, and dispute within, the League of the South. Newspaper columnist Thomas B. Edsall has characterized the League of the South as an “extreme right” organization and a “white nationalist” group. In the Summer of 2000 the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) labeled League of the South a "racist hate group" and issued a report filled with allegations of racist statements, especially by the League's President Michael Hill. According to a news article, Hill "welcomed the designation as a 'badge of honor'" and stated SPLC has "a very leftist agenda, these sorts of things are designed to discredit you publicly."

----------------------------------

The League's Board of Directors is composed of Michael Hill, Jack Kershaw, Ray McBerry, Franklin Sanders, Rev. Eugene Cas, Mark Thomey, Mike Tuggle. Among the founding members were Thomas Fleming, Grady McWhiney and Clyde Wilson. Other prominent individuals who have been LoS members include Constitution Party presidential candidate Michael Peroutka (who was endorsed by the League), Michael Andrew Grissom, and Thomas Woods. Some prominent members, such as Woods and McWhiney, appear to have subsequently limited or ended their involvement with the organization.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Weren't a group of Secessionists the cause of the creation of the United States of America?

They didn't like being controlled by "Big Government" in England.

Quite a few similarities, if you ask me. States are fed up with the power grab going on in DC.



State Sovereignty Movement Quietly Growing

Posted on 09 February 2009

by Dave Nalle

You may not have heard much about it, but there’s a quiet movement afoot to reassert state sovereignty and stop the uncontrolled expansion of federal government power. Almost half of the state legislatures are considering or have representatives preparing to introduce resolutions which reassert the principles of the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution and the idea that federal power is strictly limited to specific areas detailed in the Constitution and that all other governmental authority rests with the states

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/02/09/state-sovereignty-movement-quietly-growing/
 

Mike

Well-known member
21 states at last count have and are adopting "Sovereignty" Resolutions for their respective states......

Looks like the League of the South are not too far off the mark. :lol:

I would sure be in favor of a secession of some sort to get out from under the thumb of D.C.

Just the thought of some fat, sloppy, liberal Moonbat in Montana and the Whackos in California voting for the very same Pres. as mine is enough to make me lose my supper.
 

Mike

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Weren't a group of Secessionists the cause of the creation of the United States of America?

They didn't like being controlled by "Big Government" in England.

Quite a few similarities, if you ask me. States are fed up with the power grab going on in DC.



State Sovereignty Movement Quietly Growing

Posted on 09 February 2009

by Dave Nalle

You may not have heard much about it, but there’s a quiet movement afoot to reassert state sovereignty and stop the uncontrolled expansion of federal government power. Almost half of the state legislatures are considering or have representatives preparing to introduce resolutions which reassert the principles of the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution and the idea that federal power is strictly limited to specific areas detailed in the Constitution and that all other governmental authority rests with the states

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/02/09/state-sovereignty-movement-quietly-growing/

Yep. And the "War Of Northern Agression" is also known as the "2nd Revolution".
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
They were sick of it after Bush, that's why they voted for CHANGE. Unfortunately Obama voters are just starting to see what they actually voted for. "Bigger Federal government at an accelerated pace"

Did you see the results of the "special election" in California, wow, and from a Democrat state.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) is standing behind his governor, Rick Perry, saying Perry was on firm Constitutional ground when he suggested the Lone Star State might secede to protest Democratic spending and tax policy.

Paul, in a video post on his Campaign for Liberty PAC, says the secession debate "is worth a discussion:"

"[Perry] really stirred some of the liberal media, where they started screaming about: 'what is going on here, this is un-American.' I heard one individual say 'this is treasonous to even talk about it.' Well, they don't know their history very well, because when you think about it... it is very American to talk about secession. That's how we came in being. Thirteen colonies seceded from the British and established a new country. So secession is a very much American principle. What about all the strong endorsements we have give the past decade or two to all the republics that seceded from the soviet system? We were delighted about it.

The libertarian Republican says "right now the American people are sick and tired of it all."
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Strategist: GOP to Lose Big Backing Palin, Limbaugh, Cheney in 2012

The Republican Party is in for a devastating defeat in 2012 if its leading voices are Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney, a top GOP strategist predicts.

John Weaver, a longtime John McCain adviser, said: "If it's 2012, and our party is defined by Palin and Limbaugh and Cheney, then we're headed for a blowout. That's just the truth."


Weaver was helping Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican moderate, prepare for a possible run for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012 before Huntsman accepted President Barack Obama's nomination to be the U.S. ambassador to China.

"He had not made a decision to run for president, but he had made a decision to prepare to run," Weaver told The Washington Examiner.

"I firmly believe that Huntsman and people like him are the prescription for what ails us. But I have the feeling that our party maybe won't order that prescription in 2012."

Huntsman's decision to accept the China post means he's out of the running for the 2012 nod, according to The Examiner.

Huntsman, son of a billionaire businessman, won the Utah governor's post in 2004 and was re-elected in 2008 with more than 77 percent of the vote. He served as a Mormon missionary in Taiwan and speaks fluent Chinese.

Obama nominated him for the China post on May 16.
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Huntsman's decision to accept the China post means he's out of the running for the 2012 nod, according to The Examiner.
What better way to get rid of any real competition :roll:
Get all your media to put stories out about how fractured the Republicans are and how they will lose. great line of defence But it will not work all the time.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Powell: GOP Must Be More Inclusive

Sunday, May 24, 2009 11:10 AM

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell says he's still a Republican, but the party needs to change and be more inclusive.


Powell is a moderate Republican who says he endorsed Democrat Barack Obama over Republican John McCain for president because he thought Obama was the better candidate.


Former Vice President Dick Cheney and radio personality Rush Limbaugh have openly mocked Powell's political leanings -- questioning whether he still is in the GOP.


Powell says if the GOP doesn't reach out to more people, then the party will rest on a narrow base of supporters. Powell says that by moving to the right, the GOP risks losing right-of-center Republicans to Democratic and independent parties.


On his presidential votes, Powell describes himself as having a long, solid record of voting for Republicans. But he says he did vote for Democrats John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.


Powell appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Powell: GOP Must Be More Inclusive

Sunday, May 24, 2009 11:10 AM

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell says he's still a Republican, but the party needs to change and be more inclusive.


Powell is a moderate Republican who says he endorsed Democrat Barack Obama over Republican John McCain for president because he thought Obama was the better candidate.


Former Vice President Dick Cheney and radio personality Rush Limbaugh have openly mocked Powell's political leanings -- questioning whether he still is in the GOP.


Powell says if the GOP doesn't reach out to more people, then the party will rest on a narrow base of supporters. Powell says that by moving to the right, the GOP risks losing right-of-center Republicans to Democratic and independent parties.


On his presidential votes, Powell describes himself as having a long, solid record of voting for Republicans. But he says he did vote for Democrats John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.


Powell appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation."

The man voted for Obama and we're supposed to take his opinions seriously?
 

don

Well-known member
the fact that the man came out with a reasoned, measured response to the rantings of cheney and limbaugh insures he will be taken seriously. surely you won't compare the integrity of a slug like limbaugh or human slime like cheney to a man who has served his country with courage and conviction. cheney ran and hid while powell was serving and who cares what limbaugh did - he's not worth a bullet.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
I have a hard time believing Powell is a Republican.
And I thought GWB made a mistake giving him a cabinet position.
He's a teacher for pete's sake and most teachers are liberals.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Anyone who attacks Powell should be ashamed of themselves. Show some consistency for heck's sake.

Exactly.

Unless you are a liberal and attacking his involvment with approving torture. Being on the Principles Group and signing off on "torture", is nullified when you vote for Obama.

Be patient, I'm sure Reader will show some consistency eventually and condemn Powell's involvment.

In an unsettling and inconclusive interview with former Secretary of State Colin Powell, one of the few members of the Bush team to escape broad public scorn, Rachel Maddow asks Powell about what involvement he and senior administration officials on the National Security Council's Principals Committee had in approving the well-documented torture of Guantanamo prisoners such as Abu Zubaydah.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
don said:
the fact that the man came out with a reasoned, measured response to the rantings of cheney and limbaugh insures he will be taken seriously. surely you won't compare the integrity of a slug like limbaugh or human slime like cheney to a man who has served his country with courage and conviction. cheney ran and hid while powell was serving and who cares what limbaugh did - he's not worth a bullet.

The man claims that he's a Republican but voted for a socialist. That doesn't add up.

What has Limbaugh or Cheney said that was wrong?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
don said:
the fact that the man came out with a reasoned, measured response to the rantings of cheney and limbaugh insures he will be taken seriously. surely you won't compare the integrity of a slug like limbaugh or human slime like cheney to a man who has served his country with courage and conviction. cheney ran and hid while powell was serving and who cares what limbaugh did - he's not worth a bullet.

The man claims that he's a Republican but voted for a socialist. That doesn't add up.

What has Limbaugh or Cheney said that was wrong?


You would take the advise of an ENTERTAINER, ACTOR, and an OUT OF WORK, DISGRUNTLED POLITICIAN , in regards to the running and security of our economy and country .......over a 4 star GENERAL, FORMER JOINT CHIEF, MBA ,A MAN WHO ACTUALLY FOUGHT A WAR???

( Let's not forget that Powell has 'executive' experience as where Rush does not...and we all remember that was a BIG issue earlier) :roll:


Then if you do.....YOU and your ilk are the problem with this country now and forever.


You are the kind to believe the last man you heard/spoke with is the best man you know.


There's no other discription for your condition then....Gluteus Maximus Stupidus would be that condition.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Seems that we had a pretty good actor / entertainer for our 40th President......

If you want to believe somebody who votes socialist but calls themself a Republican, you go right ahead. That's like somebody with a mouthful of steak calling themselves a vegan.

No again, what has Limbaugh or Cheney said that was wrong?
 
Top