Southern revolt on the ascent of Hillary

“Southern revolt on the ascent of Hillary
Tony Allen-Mills, Nashville

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C2089-1552437%2C00.html



THE first signs of a Democratic revolt against Senator Hillary Clinton’s much-anticipated march on the White House are emerging in the American South, where one of the party’s most successful state governors called last week for Democrats to consider other candidates.
In a calculated snub of Clinton’s accelerating bandwagon, Governor Philip Bredesen of Tennessee warned that voters were “kind of dissatisfied” with the Democrats’ current presidential contenders and that Clinton would face an “uphill road” to win the White House.



Bredesen also expressed dismay that speculation about the 2008 race was already focused on the wife of former president Bill Clinton and on Jeb, the brother of President George W Bush and governor of Florida. “Surely in the United States we can go further than having to have a single family dominate one side and a single family dominate the other,” he said.

Bredesen, 61, was giving his first interview to a foreign newspaper since his emergence earlier this year as a potential dark horse in the presidential race. It appeared to reflect an attempt to raise his international profile amid increasing speculation in Washington that he may become the next southern governor to come from obscurity to take the White House.

Like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton before him, Bredesen has established a formidable Democratic power base in the conservative south. Clinton came from Hope, Arkansas; Bredesen jokes that when he briefly worked in England in the 1970s, he lived in Hope Cottage, Oxfordshire. His careful stewardship of Tennessee’s economic growth has made him one of the most popular governors in the state’s history.

Bredesen is a soft-spoken, ruddy-faced figure who makes no effort to dodge potentially embarrassing questions. Asked about Clinton, most Democrats gush about how wonderfully she has performed as senator for New York.

Bredesen instead replied: “People love her or they hate her and I don’t know in the end how all that plays out. But I sure hope there are other people who would step forward.”

Who should those others be? “It may well be someone that nobody has thought of . . . the sense I get is that people are really hunting around and looking for something different.”

Bredesen, a former mayor of Nashville, believes his party has “somehow gotten itself divorced” from the blue-collar constituency it has always relied on for presidential success: “I’ve always felt the Democratic party was a kind of alliance between the academics and intellectuals and working-class men and women. I think what happened is that in my lifetime, the academics won.”

As a result, the governor said, the party had lost its broad appeal. He mocked other Democratic candidates who think connecting with middle America means quoting a few verses from the Bible or being photographed with guns.

Bredesen is a lifelong clay pigeon crackshot, and everyone in Tennessee knows that his attachment to guns is real.

He added: “I think a lot of the time the answer they are looking for is ‘Oh, if you just quote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John once in your speech’ that somehow everyone will think you’re one of them.”

Many Democrats have asked him about his “secret” in Tennessee, where voters gave Bush a 14-point victory over Senator John Kerry. Bredesen’s approval ratings are above

60% and he is a shoo-in for re-election next year.

His supporters attribute his success to his modest manner, small-town roots, personal integrity and the quiet competence that helped him transform Nashville from a backwater into a thriving cultural hub.

The Democrats’ problem, Bredesen believes, has little to do with bullets or the Bible. “The point I’m trying to make is that you’ve got to stand up for some clear things,” he said. He is tired of listening to members of his party attempting to appeal to both pro-gun and anti-gun voters: “When you do that, you’re left with nothing.”

In a recent speech to southern Democrats in Atlanta, Bredesen summed up the Republican party platform as follows: “A traditional view of family, no abortion, no gay marriage, a central role for faith, gun over the mantel, low taxes, an assertive and combative view of American interests abroad.”

He then challenged his colleagues to sum up the Democratic party in less than 30 words. Nobody could oblige. Asked what his 30 words would be, he replied: “I don’t have any yet. I’d be delighted to tell you if I did.” He may be waiting until after his re-election to unveil his national vision.

If the party finds a new world view, he added, “I think the other stuff happens. The organisation happens. The excitement happens. We just haven’t had that person yet.” Hillary Clinton seems sure to disagree.
...snip


I've never heard of this guy before. Interesting, he may just be the man for the job.”

“Interesting is right, Stovie!!

Very interesting that you post an article about a man you admit you know nothing about and that the article really tells nothing about except that he has a "grass roots" reputation, and say that he may be the man for the job. Did you think Bush's character through this thoroughly when you threw your support behind him?”

“Tree, tree, tree...
Unlike liberals, I do not restrict myself to strict dogma. I read many things and sources and keep an open mind to new things.”

“For a guy who reads so much, you come up short on substance way too much!”

“You liberals have such closed minds.”

“Name calling again?”

“OMG, you think calling a liberal a liberal is name calling.
So tree, why do you think 'liberals' are bad?”

“Screw that. Let's get into the name calling thing, you dumbass Mississippi cracker! moohaahhaahhaahhaa!!!!”

“Money grubbing, repugnican! hooohhaahhaaahhaa!!!”

“Ha Ha!
I win!”

“Great!!

Let me know what you won, dumbass!”

“Ok, you win a date with...


















...ORYX!!!!


hooo hooo haah haahhahhaa!!”

“you two can hold hands and jump on the hate bandwagon together!!!!”

“LOL, only hate I hear is coming from you, tree.”

“I bet you say that to all the boys!”

“dumbass Mississippi cracker!
Money grubbing, repugnican!
dumbass - treebeard

Very 'intelligent' responses.
See, that's the difference between us.
I do not believe someone with an opinion different than myself is 'stupid', 'dumb', or 'evil' as you have shown.
Very boring and such a broken record.
It's a pity.”

“As usual: start something. Throw some sh_t in the faces of those you don't agree with. Then, take the high road with your phony, holier-than-thou attitude. You're right! Very boring and such a broken record!”

“SS - are you saying you're not a dumbass MS cracker?

btw-I've seen TB and MarkO throw cracker around. Could one of you actually define cracker for me? It doesn't mean anything to me. Sort of like being called a honkey.”

“DH, it's a bit of a parallel to his calling me a lib all the time. You see, he may not be a cracker, just as I may not be a lib (although bbw says he never encountered more of a lib than I). So, he uses the term to needle me a little, and I am returning the favor by needling him back. Consider it like playing hard, or rough-housing, if you will.”

“And, if you use the term in its strictest sense, then it would probably be equivalent to redneck, or something like that...”

“dumbass Mississippi cracker!

The hypocrisy behind such comments amazes me, since liberals are supposed to be "enlightened" and "tolerant" and not racist like they smear conservatives with whenever they get the chance.

The source behind the remark, though, is not surprising, as he's the only twit in my twitfile.”

“Did you say something?”

“"btw-I've seen TB and MarkO throw cracker around."
Cracker
Offensive.
1.Used as a disparaging term for a poor white person of the rural, especially southeast United States.
2.Used as a disparaging term for a white person.

Stove is simply an unrelenting @sshole.

I also favor "hillbilly" and "squarehead".
I have kin in West Virginia, Western Maryland, South Central Pennsylvania and Western Minnesota.
And let's not forget the far-flung Isles of Langerhans.

That entitles me to honorary crackerhood, hillbillydom and squareheadness.”

“And I thought it was a term of endearment!”

“....and as such I feel free to use such terms.

(I'm such a meanie)

What Treebeard said.
last edited: 4/05/05 8:07:43 AM”

“So this comes down to liberals calling someone the last acceptible derogatory group of names out there. Nice.

Hillbilly doesn't really work for SS since he lives on the Gulf Coast. I like the fact that SS has one of the most difficult degrees to obtain and yall throw out terms that also imply stupidity. When folks say redneck they also are implying idiot/stupid.”

“Like I said, I'm such a meanie.

Wouldn't that be the Guff Coast?

Stove ain't no dummy, he's just an unrelenting @sshole.

.....and a MUPPY”

“Talk about pot calling the kettle black. You're a bigger #&%!$ than bbw and that's really saying something. Kisses.”

“That was my whole point, DH. It's not the term, but the connotation behind it. I maintain that even when Stvie calls me a "lib", he has demonstrated that, according to him, "libs" are pretty much second class citizens. We're all full of sh_t, opinions mean nothing and he uses it with nothing but his usual derogatory meaning behind it. But, what does it come down to? It's just a word. Same thing with cracker. What's meant behind it is what counts. So, please, don't insult my intelligence by villifying me for my use of a term, when equally negative sentiments are constantly hurled this way. I am guilty as charged. I admit it. I just wish this guy had the balls to step off his high horse once in a while and admit to it also...”

“Witness the politically correct racism. This is an example of why the liberals are losing the war of ideas.”

“Humor ain't always pretty, my friend.

Still mad about me making fun of golf?”

“What's meant behind it is what counts.

I clicked on the right post! "There's good blacks, and then there's #&%!$s." According to liberal racism, that statement is completely acceptable because the intention behind is the only thing that counts.

How pathetic. Treebeard is racist, pure and simple.”

“DH, if you can't see the point, then fine. Just try and keep one standard here...



...without spin!”

“Humor ain't always pretty,

but hypocrisy never is!

That's the whole point here. Liberal PC racism at work again!”

“Why is it that when you call a liberal a liberal they get mad, but when you call someone a conservative it's not a problem?

Maybe flaming liberal = neo-con in the realm of political put downs?

MarkO will counter that the middle isn't really the middle. Who on this board would you charactorize as middle? I'd probably peg HPM as a likely candidate.”

“Dayhiker, liberals can label conservatives all day scott free, but if a conservative labels a liberal, the cry-babying begins!”

“TB - I see your point. I also see that SS likes to debate you and waits until you get emotional and start name calling because you can't discuss things on an even keel any further. How many times has an exchange between the two of you ended with him saying "I won?" A dozen? I can always see it coming.”

“Well, "conservative" certainly isn't the "middle".

And "liberal" is hardly "the left", except for people who have prattled on for years in the media that it is.

If liberal is "the left", where does that leave communists?

Under your bed?”

“DH, I don't think any of us really know how to characterize one another. It's usually based on fewer factors than would be needed to answer that question. I know there are people like Oryx that, under those red plus signs, must be continuing his tirade about me as if he actually knew a damned thing about me. He doesn't know dick. Matter of fact, there are issues I have never discussed on here that some of the more conservative folks would be rather surprised to hear coming from me. But, these things have yet to come up. Hey, I may not be as worthy of the "kind" labels that Stovestomper lays on me virtually every chance he gets. So, I choose to rebuke his narrow-mindedness in this fashion. Sorry if it's playing a little rough for him. But, if the heat of the fuego is too much, then don't play. Pretty simple. When I am not in the mood to be bombarded on this level, I usually bow out of the discussion. It's a no-brainer...”

“Mark - I never said conservative was middle. I'd call that the right. I'd call liberal the left.

Are you trying to say that you're not liberal? Are you trying to say you're not left of center? Maybe you're center for your peer group. Surely you see from this board, where regional, educational, financial, and societal differences exist (as in the real world) that you're left of center and I'm right of center. That's really not that difficult of an admission, is it?”

“TB - good point. We are a mix of different things to make the total. If you did a series of questions about different topics I'm sure each of us would have multiple entries on both sides of the fence. But I think when you added it up, you would have more on the left of center and I would have more on the right.”

“Let the back pedaling begin?”

“Absolutely, my friend! No dispute about that. My more conservative issues are a bit fewer and further between. That is true...

And, as a side note: Stovie, I hope you read this and take it for what it's worth. I am sparring with you. That's part of the nature of fuego, But, I also know that it should not take away from the discussion to the point of losing context. If I go too far and I offend, I apologize. Just be man enough to admit some culpability for the degree of baiting that you put out...”

“OK pal, I'm a liberal.

Liberal is constantly painted as being "far left", which it is not.
It is not strict idealogy, like true leftist belief, but a more flexible frame work.

"Conservative" tends to be rigid and resistant to change.

Liberal policy is that which invests in people and embraces change.

I keep hearing "liberal left" and it is used disparagingly almost as an insult.

Liberal left would actually be close to the political center, as to liberalize the left would be to ease the rigidity of leftist ideology.”

“If liberal left is the center and Kerry was a far left liberal then why did he get his butt kicked?

I think you have liberals which is the left, and you have extreme liberals to the far left. Same with the conservative realm. I also thing the folks on the farthest left are just as rigid and resistant to change as those you accuse on the far right.

BR - who and where is someone backing up?”

“Liberal policy is that which invests in people and embraces change.

Yeah, it invests in keeping an underclass subjugated through government handouts - all to create a base of political support. Conservatives derive their political power from ideas - not from fear of losing handouts.”

“I also thing the folks on the farthest left are just as rigid and resistant to change as those you accuse on the far right.


Don't even compare the two - you're only validating liberal propaganda. The Far Left has been responsible for millions upon millions of deaths in the 20th century. The Far Right are no match for that kind of evil brutality.
last edited: 4/05/05 8:56:40 AM”

“"I also thing the folks on the farthest left are just as rigid and resistant to change."

That's pretty much what I said.

Some of you guys seem to have this notion that more liberal is further left and that is not the case.

When a communist regime liberalizes they move further from the extreme ideology.

The same is true at the other end of the political spectrum.

Are you saying that Kerry is somehow favoring communist ideology?”

“marko, nice try on the reversing of the terms.

the terms only mean what the context in which they are used allows them. in the current political arena of our country, liberal means left of center, conservative means right. i'm sure all on the left will see themselves as more centrist and the right being extreme, as will those on the right see the opposite.

ya damn liberal......”

“I guess my far left isn't far enough. I'm probably bounding my discussion between borderline socialist and whatever the equivalent on the right would be and not gettinf off the deep end. I guess I'm bounding between a few standard deviations of people or what would contain most of the populace and excluding the whackos on both sides.”