Rex Kickass Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 So the talk of this election is that the difference was one of values. Same sex marriage ballots, traditional values vs. "Hollywood values" etc. One red state decided to show the kind of values it believes in. Alabama Faces Recount Over Segregationist Laws (CNN) -- A proposed amendment that would remove long-unenforced segregationist provisions from the Alabama Constitution trailed by a razor-thin margin Thursday and faces a recount. Amendment 2 would remove language that provides for separate-but-equal schools for whites and blacks, authorizes poll taxes and specifies in a 1956 amendment that Alabamians have no constitutional right to public education. That 1956 amendment was at the center of the opposition to Amendment 2. Critics argued that repealing the old amendment would lead to higher school taxes. With nearly 99 percent of precincts reporting, unofficial results from Tuesday's general election showed Amendment 2 trailing by roughly 2,500 votes out of nearly 1.4 million ballots cast. A margin that narrow -- within one-half of 1 percent -- triggers an automatic recount, said Trey Granger, a spokesman for Alabama Secretary of State Nancy Worley. An unknown number of absentee and provisional ballots remain to be counted as well, Granger said. Gov. Bob Riley, who supported the measure, said Wednesday the outcome was too close to call. The measure was opposed by former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who was removed from the bench for defying a court order to remove a stone tablet of the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building. Moore and the Christian Coalition argued that repealing the segregationist 1956 amendment would open the door to court-ordered tax increases for education. Despite the narrow margin, Christian Coalition chief John Giles declared victory. "The Christian Coalition of Alabama will work to ensure that reckless trial lawyers and activist judges will not be able to open the floodgates to increase taxes and that private, Christian, parochial and home-school families will be protected," Giles said in a statement on the group's Web site. "The Christian Coalition will lead the way to remove the racist language in the next election." In 1993, amid a lawsuit over state education funding, a circuit judge in Montgomery struck down the amendment. The state Supreme Court upheld his ruling in 1997. But in 2002, during Moore's tenure as chief justice, the court reopened the case and reversed itself. A recount on Amendment 2 would be the first conducted under an Alabama law passed in 2003, Granger said. When the recount would take place was still to be determined. Worley asked the state attorney general's office to clarify whether it would begin when counties canvass their results, on November 12, or on November 24, when Riley, Worley and Attorney General Troy King certify statewide results. "We believe it's the statewide canvass day," Granger said. Riley, a Republican, blamed the state Legislature for the outcome, because lawmakers added to his proposal language to remove the 1956 provision. In a statement issued Wednesday, Riley said the Legislature's version "made people skeptical of the amendment." He said he will submit his original proposal to the Legislature. "It's unfortunate the change made by the Legislature generated so much confusion and doubt about the amendment's intentions," Riley said. "When I proposed this amendment to the Legislature, it simply removed segregationist language from our constitution -- something I hope all Alabamians would support." But state Rep. James Buskey of Mobile, the measure's sponsor in the Alabama House of Representatives, said lawmakers "did a good job in cleaning up language related to segregation." "The governor may be right," said Buskey. "But by the same token, the committee took care of its obligation to mark up a bill it thought should have been marked up -- and I'll add, I think it made it a better bill." The question was why are the red states belittled by the blue states earlier? Now, I think you know the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palehosefan Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 The question was why are the red states belittled by the blue states earlier? Now, I think you know the answer. So basically you are painting 31 states and over half of America as redneck hick's. Why stop there? Why just not just admit that the NE is better than the rest of the country and that the south is just lucky to be part of such a great NE nation, heck you could just give away the south to Mexico and we are too illiterate to read about it and would never know it happened. I applaud the judge for taking a stance for keeping the 10 ammendments, I strongly disagree with keep segregation laws. But, I do know that not all 31 red states believe the same way. You started off well by stating this, "One red state decided to show the kind of values it believes in." You should have stopped it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 hmm...looks like our whole nation bleeds a deep red. The minority of this country needs to wake up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 hmm...looks like our whole nation bleeds a deep red. The minority of this country needs to wake up. Didn't Kerry win Illinois by a landslide? If so the above graphic is BS. I didn't vote for Bush and I don't like him, but I will support him. Don't see why so many people like unemployment and high gas prices. Is Bin Laden still alive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 Didn't Kerry win Illinois by a landslide? If so the above graphic is BS. I didn't vote for Bush and I don't like him, but I will support him. Don't see why so many people like unemployment and high gas prices. Is Bin Laden still alive? I think it's more than I just hate people like you.... Chicago is the only reason why Kerry won Illinois... (see, there on the wrong side of the victory every time) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 If so the above graphic is BS lmao... I think that's every kerry fan's reaction to the truth. ever have a hertz donut? hurts... don't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 Let's look at a map of population in areas as well as proportions of the US population that voted for Kerry and the other more liberal candidates vs Bush and the other more conservative candidates (like Peroutka) In the map that winodj posted from before shows just that and that the country is more purple (mixture of red counties and blue counties) than a "bleeding of deep red". Take off the partisan hack glasses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 hmm...looks like our whole nation bleeds a deep red. The minority of this country needs to wake up. Using maps like this as evidence of anything are hilarious. You think, by putting up a map, you can magically make Bush's 3% majority a 50% majority. Cities are more important b/c there are more people. People are more important than land mass. If you think this map has any meaning about the overall mood of the country, you need to wake up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 lmao... I think that's every kerry fan's reaction to the truth. ever have a hertz donut? hurts... don't it? What are you? 10 years old? Maybe if you stopped talking down to people, you wouldn't cause so much s*** lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 hmm...looks like our whole nation bleeds a deep red. No, it looks like counties with large area and small population bleed a deep red. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonkeyKongerko Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 More like Deep Purple... Smoooooke on the water Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 And guess what for the most part its more purply blue where people actually live! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted November 7, 2004 Author Share Posted November 7, 2004 Actually, I think my correlation is valid. Who led the fight against the constitutional changes in Alabama? The Christian Coalition. The ones who are doing their best to brag that this was a value based election. In the last three days, I've heard a ton of bashing about California, Massachussets and New York for being out of touch with the rest of America. Why? Because people on your side take quotes from people who happen to fall on my side of the fence politically that are stupid. Here, a whole state is stupid. When I was at the University of Kansas - the Republican party made it a political goal, and succeeded temporarily to remove the teaching of evolution from public schools. It wasn't even the compromise of putting ID teachings in public schools along evolution (which is equal bull s*** - but that's a whole other discussion). I could go into the fight about the rebel flag and how so many people in red states claim that the flying of it at state houses has to do with appreciation of the South and is an age old tradition - even though with many, it only dates back to the 1950's. Or was a reaction to reconstructionism to make clear that the black folk weren't gonna be in charge anytime soon. Attack me for painting a broad brush if you will - but you've attacked "culture." I've attacked policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palehosefan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 You will find very few of the state's still fly the rebel flag. I know Georgia had a fight over taking it down from public forums. But I do know Rebel flags aren't flown here in Texas, its taken as a sign of racism and it doesn't stand. So painting all red states, much less southern states with the same brush is ridiculous. I have no problem with the north's "culture", you guys have different views on things than in the south, doesn't mean you are all elitist ignorant bufoons or anything of the type. I'm not a fan of all out evolution because I'm a Christian, I do believe we have evolved from the time man was created, not that we came from a single celled organism from the ocean. I don't want to get into that either, I'll just simply say I'm not one in the group that wants to ban evolution from being taught. However, I'm also not one that agrees with taking down the 10 commandments and "In God We Trust" from money etc. Some people go too far on both issues. Don't join in with the ignorance portrayed from both "sides", help fight it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Looks like Kip actually remembered Alaska and Hawaii. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Looks like Kip actually remembered Alaska and Hawaii. puerto Rico too.... I heard that there are lawyers disputing the disenfranchised voter from there too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 puerto Rico too.... I heard that there are lawyers disputing the disenfranchised voter from there too. Now would that be part of Jesusland? (Now doubt Ned Flanders would live there) I want my state to be included in that as well ya' know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawaiisoxfn Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I think it's more than I just hate people like you.... Chicago is the only reason why Kerry won Illinois... (see, there on the wrong side of the victory every time) If you look, metropolitan areas are the only reasons Kerry won any states at all. Thats why he won Washington state, California, Illinois and Oregon. Even states he lost like Florida and Maryland he controlled the cities. But thats not enough. For the guy who said that land mass isnt as important as people, its not, but all that landmass adds up after a while in terms of people. As for the guy who started this thread, wheres your link to Bush? Bush is not mentioned at all in that article. And if he was such a bigot, I highly doubt that a black man would be the Secretary of State. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 If you look, metropolitan areas are the only reasons Kerry won any states at all. Thats why he won Washington state, California, Illinois and Oregon. Even states he lost like Florida and Maryland he controlled the cities. But thats not enough. For the guy who said that land mass isnt as important as people, its not, but all that landmass adds up after a while in terms of people. As for the guy who started this thread, wheres your link to Bush? Bush is not mentioned at all in that article. And if he was such a bigot, I highly doubt that a black man would be the Secretary of State. It's not that Bush per se is a bigot, just certain demographics of the Republican party that he actively tries to court like the Christian right are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Now all of you remember that Bush won the popular vote with the most votes ever...you know who is second on that list...Kerry. He got more votes than Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and Dubya the first time. Pretty impressive. My fear is that since Bush is a lame duck prez, he will try to force his WAY right wing agenda, which will do nothing but divide this country even more. Even though my state was a landslide for Bush, i still felt as though my vote counted more in this election than any other I've voted in. oh yeah, and about Alabama...let's just vote them out of the union...not the people, just the politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 As for the guy who started this thread, wheres your link to Bush? Bush is not mentioned at all in that article. And if he was such a bigot, I highly doubt that a black man would be the Secretary of State. People don't vote for a presidential candidate because of who he nominated for Sec. of State. But that's beside the point. Ralph Reed and Richard Viguerie and other folks on the right are quick to take ownership of the Bush victory and the election. They claim it was because of the values they represent. The same people who campaigned for Bush on the basis of values, campaigned to keep this language in the AL constitution. So these must be some of the values they care about. And that's just sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawaiisoxfn Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Well, Michael Moore, who believes that Americans are the stupidest people on Earth (but only when hes in England), campaigned for Kerry. Each side has some losers who claim that their party is based on their values, but in the end they are just losers. Theyre called radicals. Michael Savage, Michael Moore, these guys you mention, theyre all radicals. Dont stereotype all Republicans because of a few. Im sure you dont want me to characterize all democrats as fat, ugly, asskissing traitors, which Moore is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 For the guy who said that land mass isnt as important as people, its not, but all that landmass adds up after a while in terms of people. Well, we know exactly how many people voted for each candidate. (Heck, we even know this county-by-county.) So the map gives us no new information about the preferences of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Well, Michael Moore, who believes that Americans are the stupidest people on Earth (but only when hes in England), campaigned for Kerry. Each side has some losers who claim that their party is based on their values, but in the end they are just losers. Theyre called radicals. Michael Savage, Michael Moore, these guys you mention, theyre all radicals. Dont stereotype all Republicans because of a few. Im sure you dont want me to characterize all democrats as fat, ugly, asskissing traitors, which Moore is. Here's the difference, Michael Moore isn't represented by folks like Tom Coburn, Rick Santorum, the Ten Commandments judge, and other people with power in the government. The Christian Coalition is. The Christian Coalition actively organize with the GOP every year, not just this year. Four years ago, Michael Moore campaigned for Nader. And if Michael Moore supported this, he'd be wrong too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.