Outlaw gerrymandering? Absolutely a great idea. Gerrymandering is a states issue. They draw up the lines. We need a mathematically fair way to lay the lines down. A constitutional amendment or well played court case could make that happen.
But what do we do in the meantime? We need to make gerrymandering less effective by involving ourselves in highly gerrymandered districts. Gerrymandering gives a statistical advantage not a political certainty.
People don’t think, they don’t vote, they don’t write their representatives, they don’t write law, etc… They sit back and do nothing. I blame them because they are lazy. People have a duty to control their government. We are the masters. Representatives and government servants are the slaves.
Honestly, I would like to a religious left/right and a secular left/right making four viable parties, but I agree that right now the US political system has nothing to offer as an alternative. I also severely doubt I will see a true liberal party in place with how scared boomers are of socialism.
Yes! Get involved! The reason these people vote the way they do is because we’re not explaining it right!
Oh, make sure, when you do have your clipboard, that you keep a tally of how many times you get called faggot or are threatened with bodily harm. Also bonus: count the Confederate flags (“It’s about States’ rights, faggot!”) on jacked up trucks and divide that number by total churches to get a rough idea of how successful your efforts will be (the answer is always “not successful,” by the way).
As a native Alabamian, I’m pretty sure that’s how Howell Heflin stayed in office so long. Remember what a laugh riot he was interrogating Anita Hill during Clarence Thomas’ nomination to the Supreme Court?
“Now, in trying to determine whether you are telling falsehoods, or
not, I’ve got to determine what your motivation might be. Are you a
scorned woman?” Senator Howell Heflin asked.
Hill said “no” so softly her microphone barely picked it up. Heflin
continued his line of questioning: “Are you a zealot civil rights
believer?” No. “Do you have a militant attitude relative to the area
of civil rights?” No. “Do you have a martyr complex?”
Normally I tend to ignore the “you folks in the south are [insert derogatory comment here]” stuff that creeps up on message boards because we all understand generalizations are crap. But your comment implies that the Tea Party rubes (and they are rubes, on that we can definitely agree) all come from or work within southern states–this is hardly the case. I’m a southerner who has a rather fat stack of replies from various congresscritters I’ve written to over the last decade, and I’m happy to say that I’ve also voiced my opinion recently to my elected representatives.
There’s an old joke about southerners and northerners, and it has to do with the phrase, “How nice.” So, let me reread your lead sentence…ah yes, how nice.
Why do you save what I assume are pro forma letters from congresscritters?
As for the dig at southerners, if you’re not the kind of southerner being dug at, why does it bother you? People outside the south know that of course not ALL white southerners are “like that.”
I think it’s usually worthwhile to avoid stereotyping folks, though. Although one’s place of residence is obviously easier to change than the color of one’s skin or one’s gender it’s still not necessarily easy for any number of reasons and I feel like it is probably easier to make common cause with the many sensible southerners if we northerners project sympathy and understanding for their plight rather than implying they share in the blame for their dubious electoral results.
I absolutely agree that generalizing about the location of Tea Party districts. Rural districts in lots of states, including the northern tier state I’m in, have sent the likes of Mike Rogers to the House.
It might surprise you to know that your assumption is incorrect by a wide margin. I think it’s probably 70/30 in favor of actual responses to my inquiry rather than a stock reply, with the best response I can recall being a letter from Senator Elizabeth Dole about her feelings on Iran. And despite my kneejerk reaction to tell you that I keep them because I damned well want to keep them, I’ll say that I enjoy paper correspondence for many of the same reasons people like to write letters to one another. I definitely appreciate the fact that Congressman/Senator/Secretary X actually took the time to reply to little ‘ole me, and hell, I really like paper, and especially good writing paper, for that matter.
Secondly, it bothers me because unless someone speaks out against generalizations, they’ll never change, will they? While I agreed with much of what the OP wrote, the dig against southerners seemed out of place, and if I might borrow a phrase from “Raising Arizona”, he was provokin’ me.
I found ‘The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right’ which is right at the beginning of On Civil Disobedience. I think the quotation is a paraphrase.
Anyway, it’s interesting to see that Henry is now perceived as having gone over to the Dark Side, even if only satirically.
LOL - did someone hack your account or are you just being sarcastic? For someone who gets bent out of shape pretty easily over stereotyping of race or sex, this is either master sarcasm, or one of the best examples of hypocrisy I’ve seen.
Yup, you guys are basically fucked. And, given that our government has spent the last 30 years doing everything it could to prostrate our economy before your own, I guess that means we Canadians are also fucked, though indirectly.
