Posted on 12/31/2013 8:14:54 AM PST by RoosterRedux
The left has long sought to nationalize government, which means a subordination of the states. In the meantime, liberals aren't blind to the advantages red states enjoy over blue states, in terms of siphoning off blue states' productive citizens and enterprises. Liberals see where many businesses choose to relocate. They appreciate that red states are often more affordable to Americans.
Critical to the nation's ongoing experiments in democracy is the imperative to roll back intrusive -- and often coercive -- national government. Washington is an informal ally of blue states, like Maryland, at the expense of red states, via legislation, court rulings, or executive fiat. What Washington can't annex from states outright, it uses taxpayers' dollars to leverage compliance with federal rules and regulations.
The Obama presidency has been largely an attempt by the left to reenergize and reassert national government at the expense of true federalism. President Obama is the "anti-Reagan." The left wants leftism regnant in every state and locality and is using a bolder national government to impose itself.
But the left's error may be in thinking that conservative Americans will eventually go quietly into the good night, permitting the left to work its will. Big fights loom if the left continues to try to ram its agendas down the throats of red state Americans (ObamaCare is a first critical battle). There's now a long history of leftism in America. The right's rejection of leftism is grounded in the left's demonstrated failures and in cultural and societal constructs that conservative Americans view as wrong-headed and deficient. The lines have been drawn and set.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Post #34.
It was switched each election for media maps once upon a national election
I thought the permanent shift to red for us and blue for them was later than 80
Its obvious they would never stand to be Red....like commies
So much propaganda in this land is our land....whoops. more agit prop right there btw
The permanent switch took place in 2000 BTW....before that it alternated
Pity....if a few notable GOP had been willing to fight it then
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states
We can easily evolve into 50 separate countries, try to understand the original intent of the USC and the republic as founded. As a matter of fact each state has the power no to become a country thru secession. Some states can unite and form a Confederacy -again. It was done the first time in an orderly and well established referendum and can be done that way again. These blue staters don't have the cojones to "March to the Sea". These are not your GGGF Yankees.
Thanks! yes, now I remember it! I hadn’t read that far......and it was 10 - 15 years ago!
Good points.
Some with an obvious agenda encouraged the broader MSM to pervert the usage of the word “red”, in the context of politics. The corruption, which offends most clear thinking Americans tends to allow traditional reds that wish to do so, to hide in plain sight. Further it allows certain residents to avoid confronting the fact their beloved state has developed socialist tendencies.
Perhaps the way for us to reclaim the historical political meaning of “red” is for each of us to encourage those we know, including influential national writers and media personalities, to use the terms “socialist red states” and “true blue states”. For example, can there now be any doubt that NY is a “socialist red state”?
I propose “socialist” rather than “commie” because the left seemed successful earlier in dodging the latter label. With so many out of the closet socialists now active at the state level, it is doubtful they would be able to dodge the “socialist” label.
Problem is, we’re well past that. The Republican Party (or at least the establishment and leadership) is Socialist. They seek to manage, often gleefully so, the policies and initiatives of the Democrat Party. The Democrats ? They’re already clearly Communist-Totalitarian. All things run by the government, dictated by the government, with no dissent to be tolerated. Christianity is the enemy.
Correct, and what changed that dynamic? It was the last immigration "reform" (IRCA)in 1986.
Now the Rinos want to do it again and perhaps make Texas blue along with several other states.
Actually, we in the Southern states think of `red state’ as referring to the red clay of Alabama, Georgia, & the Carolinas.
So many liberals are northeastern blueblood aristocrats that maybe blue could apply to them.
Conservatives do often have trouble with identification labels as the dominant media culture is the one doing the labeling & identifying, this is true.
I’m in a Southern state, and “Red” has only ever meant one thing when it comes to politics (and it ain’t anything remotely resembling freedom).
Red vs. Blue bump for later......
Secede and build a friggin’ moat.
Well, they may be FORCED to get off the couch when their FEMA-trained pastor starts using Romans 13 to justify giving up their guns to relocate to a place of the Feds choosing.
They’re training a Clergy Response Team to “ease public dissent and quell fears” in an unexpected case of martial law.
For emergency responses, FEMA trains pastors
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=keLRXZJ-yWg#
Didn’t Hitler and Mussolini try to use Romans 13 for the same thing?
They’re training a Clergy Response Team to “ease public dissent and quell fears” in an unexpected case of martial law.
***********
I’m not so sure martial law is unexpected. More like a plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.