46% Of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned!

[Silcc69]

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/04/barbour-bryant-lead-in-mississippi.html

Would they hang me if I slept with a white girl? What about a white tranny? Shit they'd hang both of us ouch.

[south ov da border]

guess they've had enough of Obama...

[Stavros]

Over many years and hundreds if not thousands of reports on polls, I have yet to be asked a question by anyone doing the polling, I think they sit in an office and phone a list of people selected because they are old-young-middle aged-black-white etc etc: probably the same list they have had for years. But I could be wrong. Anyway, Thomas Jefferson wouldn't approve, I assume, and what is race?

[Prospero]

They may not want interacial marriage in Mississippi but I heard they are fully in favour of inter-species sex them good old boys.

[Stavros]

Must be something in the water...

[onmyknees]

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/04/barbour-bryant-lead-in-mississippi.html

Would they hang me if I slept with a white girl? What about a white tranny? Shit they'd hang both of us ouch.


Interesting...but your habit of reaching for the
superficial and sensational to paint those who disagree with you politically as racist and rednecks is as usual pretty evident, so let's dive a little deeper below the superficial...and maybe you'll learn something.

First off...I'm not going to dispute the results of the poll, but as anyone knows...one must be careful putting too much emphasis on polls...For example, I'm curious as to if the polling company also asked the question of Democrats in Mississippi...where's that data? Did they do that poll and find it didn't suit their agenda so didn't publish the results? Further, I suspect if they took a poll of black women and asked the very same question...the results would exceed the 46% . Does that make them racist as you would like us to believe the results of this poll point to? Hardly.

The results aren't surprising.....in fact an analysis of a much more broader nationwide poll and cumulative date from 1972-2002 shows that 51% of all those in the South Central US ( which includes Mississippi) and was asked of blacks, whites, Hispanics, republicans and democrats show that 51% say it should be illegal.

Analysis of the same data show only a 10% difference between those identifying themselves as liberal and those conservative. So your shocking headline really isn't so shocking !

your cheap attempt to paint southern whites as racist buffoons is as usual a sophomoric FAIL. Maybe politics just isn't your thing? LMAO
And BTW....I'd gladly supply you with the link I researched for this response if I thought it would help...but you're more comfortable putting out half truths and political propaganda.

[Silcc69]

Interesting...but your habit of reaching for the
superficial and sensational to paint those who disagree with you politically as racist and rednecks is as usual pretty evident, so let's dive a little deeper below the superficial...and maybe you'll learn something.

First off...I'm not going to dispute the results of the poll, but as anyone knows...one must be careful putting too much emphasis on polls...For example, I'm curious as to if the polling company also asked the question of Democrats in Mississippi...where's that data? Did they do that poll and find it didn't suit their agenda so didn't publish the results? Further, I suspect if they took a poll of black women and asked the very same question...the results would exceed the 46% . Does that make them racist as you would like us to believe the results of this poll point to? Hardly.

The results aren't surprising.....in fact an analysis of a much more broader nationwide poll and cumulative date from 1972-2002 shows that 51% of all those in the South Central US ( which includes Mississippi) and was asked of blacks, whites, Hispanics, republicans and democrats show that 51% say it should be illegal.

Analysis of the same data show only a 10% difference between those identifying themselves as liberal and those conservative. So your shocking headline really isn't so shocking !

your cheap attempt to paint southern whites as racist buffoons is as usual a sophomoric FAIL. Maybe politics just isn't your thing? LMAO
And BTW....I'd gladly supply you with the link I researched for this response if I thought it would help...but you're more comfortable putting out half truths and political propaganda.

You know I had NO CLUE that Mississippi was the ENTIRE south! I mean wow since when did that happen or are you cherry picking again hmmmmmm.....

[envivision]

The south is rising .... to HELL

[Prospero]

YouTube - Billie Holiday - Strange Fruit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ZyuULy9zs)

[robertlouis]

Spot on, Prospero

So the wedding I went to last month in Cambridge between a white lad and an Afro-Caribbean black girl - and a joyous occasion it was for both families - wouldn't be allowed in Mississippi if these people had their way.

Savages.

[Ben]

I drove through Mississippi... with a friend -- once -- ha! ha! Obviously the bigotry is very upsetting -- and extremely worrisome.
I'm starting to agree with George Carlin: when you're born you're given a ticket to a freakshow.
Toward the end of his life he said that he wasn't emotionally involved in/with the human race anymore. He was simply a spectator. Just observing the tragicomedy of the human race.

[Faldur]

Never been through Mississippi, but I have been to Rhode Island. That has to be the most prejudice place in the world. Its as if they just stepped off the Mayflower or something. All this hushed "those people" talk. Glad I come from the west coast.

[Ineeda SM]

I drove to Florida just last summer. I got gas in Savannah, Georgia. The gas station proudly displayed the Confederate rebel flag.(The symbol of black slavery in America.) A black kid (Maybe 19 or 20) came out and did all the work. At the end, an older white guy came out, pushed the black kid aside so he could collect my money. He took my cash and left without a single word. The black kid asked if there was anything else. I said no, winked, and quietly slipped him my $2 change from the fill-up. He smiled with wide surprised eyes and mouthed the words thank you.

Racism is still rampant in the south. It like being in another world down there. I couldn't wait to get back to the north.

[onmyknees]

You know I had NO CLUE that Mississippi was the ENTIRE south! I mean wow since when did that happen or are you cherry picking again hmmmmmm.....

your post was a major fail, as I explained...but I'm sure you'll be trying again.....and I'll be right there to seperate you from your lefty fantasies ! LOL

[onmyknees]

I drove to Florida just last summer. I got gas in Savannah, Georgia. The gas station proudly displayed the Confederate rebel flag.(The symbol of black slavery in America.) A black kid (Maybe 19 or 20) came out and did all the work. At the end, an older white guy came out, pushed the black kid aside so he could collect my money. He took my cash and left without a single word. The black kid asked if there was anything else. I said no, winked, and quietly slipped him my $2 change from the fill-up. He smiled with wide surprised eyes and mouthed the words thank you.

Racism is still rampant in the south. It like being in another world down there. I couldn't wait to get back to the north.

Wow...how white of you...giving a black dude 2 bucks. LMFAO
And we are to take what from this story ...you're a benevolent white dude and just wanted to make things right for slavery?

I see you're from PA....interesting that you have a hard on for the south because last year I hire a couple of good old boys from out near the plateau in Altoona. I sent them to Baltimore to do a job, and later met them there. Two of them confided in me they had never seen a black person before. Last I checked...PA was well north of the Mason-Dixon line.

[Silcc69]

your post was a major fail, as I explained...but I'm sure you'll be trying again.....and I'll be right there to seperate you from your lefty fantasies ! LOL

Boy you sure do LOL at your on posts more than anybody I kno. You also love to cherry pick more than anybody I know, so again explain to me Mississippi is the ENTIRE south? Oh yeah you can't see the world past those thick ass right wing glasses that you have on SMFH.

[Ineeda SM]

Wow...how white of you...giving a black dude 2 bucks. LMFAO
And we are to take what from this story ...you're a benevolent white dude and just wanted to make things right for slavery?

I see you're from PA....interesting that you have a hard on for the south because last year I hire a couple of good old boys from out near the plateau in Altoona. I sent them to Baltimore to do a job, and later met them there. Two of them confided in me they had never seen a black person before. Last I checked...PA was well north of the Mason-Dixon line.

You are really good at that. Taking what people say and deriving your own twisted idea of what they meant. You are the perfect republican. They twist the words of people often so they can distort the truth to make themselves look valid. Intelligent people see through that crap.

I got $28 of gas and gave the white guy $30. He gave me my $2 back. So I simply gave the kid my change because it was a nice thing to do. I bet I was the first white guy to ever tip him. He seemed pretty thankful for it. I am not a republican racist, so I didn't have any ulterior motive. I was just being nice to a kid who gets treated like shit every day.

I don't have a hard on for the south. But I have been throughout the southern states several times. Some of them are fucking scary. The south is typically racist and full of brainwashed republican assholes like you. They think the south won the civil war. I am not saying that the entire southern population is like that, but the policies and beliefs of the Confederate States of America are very obvious there. Especially when you see the redneck rebel flag of slavery proudly flying everywhere.

If anyone from PA said they never met a black person before, they must never leave their basement, or they are as full of shit as you are. In fact, I don't believe your story because it is not possible for anyone in PA to have never met a black person. Pa has a high black and Latino population and widely dispersed. The state capitol (Harrisburg) is 9 miles from me, and whites are the minority there. My street in small town PA is about 50/50. The whole state is like that. There is always going to be prejudice, but it is very little to virtually non-existent here. All the races in PA actually get along well with each other. I live here. I know better. So I think you made that story up to make your point look valid. It didn't work. I'll use the words you seem to like so much. Your statements are a big FAIL!

And for your information, PA is not WELL NORTH of the Mason Dixon. The PA - MD boarder IS the Mason/Dixon line. I live 30 miles from it. Ever hear about that little conflict in Gettysburg PA where the south and north fought?

That's a good little republican. Good boy, gooooood booooy. Now roll over and play dead before you say something else stupid. But I'm sure that won't stop you.

[Prospero]

As a Brit I feel a little apart from this debate. But as a brit with many many months of being in the US - in the north and south - behind me I feel i can comment. Racism is endemic everyplace I've been (US and around the world) in more or less overt forms. It's often manifested here on this board too. But its sharply visible still in much of the South where the confederate flags flaps limply in that Southern wind. Memories seem to be cherished down there - as the side that lost in that awful and vicious war (150 years ago this coming week as i recall).

Surely part of the process of healing after such a conflict and healing the aftermath of racial hatred is to purge visible symbols of that hatred (so for instance the Swastika in its Nazi form (not the same as the Hindu Swashtika - a symbol of good fortune) cannot be show in germany). So why is the confederate flag still so visible in the South - as for example at the state house in South Carolina?

[Stavros]

I think its interesting that the US Civil War -in this thread anyway- is being used in a discussion on something called 'race', whereas I tend to see it as being a profound moment in American history and the development of capitalism. I wonder how much of the Dixieland symbols and myths that some people in the South retain is more a reflection of their disenchantment with 'big Government' in Washington rather than a nostalgia for the Cotton trade, slavery and whatever else is associated with the world depicted without much irony in 'Gone With the Wind', surely one of the most over-rated films ever.

The Wars of the Roses happened a couple of centuries before the American Civil War, but I recall someone from Lancashire on the BBC Radio -I think it was the 1960s- saying of people from Yorkshire 'they are not fit to sweep the streets'; and a Lancashire lass I knew in the 80s was simply dismissive of Yorkshire and the 'typical' people who lived there. There used to be a myth that people from Yorkshire were/are rude, cold, and aggressive where people from Lancashire are friendly, humourous and so on and so on, the truth being that it is a load of old rubbish.

However, we have also seen how the myths and symbols of 'Ireland' affected the language and behaviour of Protestants and Catholics north and south of the Border, but I doubt the Battle of the Boyne is much on people's minds this summer, its just an excuse for one sectarian group to claim superiority over another.

Anyway I like the US north and south -I would have thought the 'race' issue was as toxic in Los Angeles as it is in Raleigh or Charleston.

[Ineeda SM]

I think its interesting that the US Civil War -in this thread anyway- is being used in a discussion on something called 'race', whereas I tend to see it as being a profound moment in American history and the development of capitalism. I wonder how much of the Dixieland symbols and myths that some people in the South retain is more a reflection of their disenchantment with 'big Government' in Washington rather than a nostalgia for the Cotton trade, slavery and whatever else is associated with the world depicted without much irony in 'Gone With the Wind', surely one of the most over-rated films ever.

The Wars of the Roses happened a couple of centuries before the American Civil War, but I recall someone from Lancashire on the BBC Radio -I think it was the 1960s- saying of people from Yorkshire 'they are not fit to sweep the streets'; and a Lancashire lass I knew in the 80s was simply dismissive of Yorkshire and the 'typical' people who lived there. There used to be a myth that people from Yorkshire were/are rude, cold, and aggressive where people from Lancashire are friendly, humourous and so on and so on, the truth being that it is a load of old rubbish.

However, we have also seen how the myths and symbols of 'Ireland' affected the language and behaviour of Protestants and Catholics north and south of the Border, but I doubt the Battle of the Boyne is much on people's minds this summer, its just an excuse for one sectarian group to claim superiority over another.

Anyway I like the US north and south -I would have thought the 'race' issue was as toxic in Los Angeles as it is in Raleigh or Charleston.

Capitolism was going strong long before the civil war.

The very reason for the American Civil War was slavery. Any other disagreements were infinitesimal by comparison. The north wanted to free the slaves, and the south wanted slaves to take care of their farms and ranches, and build the south. That was it. Thousands of people fought and died in very bloody battles over slavery. Brother against brother, families against others in their own families killing each other over slavery.

After the war ended, Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth, a confederate sympathiser who killed Lincoln simply as revenge. The problem is, the south still hasn't gotten over that they lost the war and the slaves are free. So they pretend nothing has changed.

There are still public bathrooms, drinking fountains, and restaurants that have separate and clearly labled entrances for White and Black people. The rebel flag which stands for the right to own slaves, is flying at many government buildings and over almost every garage in the south.

I have another story about my travels in the south. I stayed overnight at a hotel in Asheville North Carolina. A bunch of guys were gathered around the pool just BS'ing, so to kill some time, I joined them and was getting along OK. Somebody mentioned the "N" word. This guy named Bill looked at me laughing, and turned to his buddy and said, "Hey Joe, tell him about the "N" last week in the old car." Joe looked at me and started laughing and said, "Oh yeah! This "N" drove up to us out front and asked me were the black folks hang out around here. We just smiled and we all pointed to the big branch from a tall tree. next door. Man you should have seen that "N" burn his tires gettin the hell out of our nice little town."

Keep in mind he didn't actually say the letter "N". He used the full word. They were quite proud of that story and I didn't want to upset them, so after a few more minutes, I excused myself and went back to my room with the door locked and my gun loaded. This is not that unusual throughout the south. As I said before, not everyone in the south is like that. I met several very nice people in the southern states. But the majority were as racist as you could be. The rebel flag on their trucks, cars, mailboxes, belt buckles, rings, watches, shirt patches, backs of jackets, cigarette cases, boots, back pants pockets.........let's just say, they make sure that you know you are visiting the Confederate States of America.

The civil war is 99% about slavery. They go hand in hand.

[Stavros]

I find myself in agreement with you, but wanting a deeper or broader, more structural explanation of the Civil War. Although slavery is the lodestar of the conflict, two-thirds of the slaves in the southern states were owned by a minority of plantation owners, but people who effectively controlled most of the economy -I tend to see the differences between the south, the north and the west as being different types of capitalism, with the additional factor that the growth of the north through industry and the growth of the west through freely owned smallholdings, undermined what had been the supremacy of the south -after all, the North couldn't do without the cotton and tobacco of the south and the south needed the markets, the workshops, and the port of New York as part of its cotton business. There was, therefore, a growing mis-match or disharmony in these micro-economies one expression of which was Lincoln's election, as he was not even on the ballot of some southern states but owed his victory to a larger and more diverse electorate in the other states.

Thus, when I say it was profound moment, I think of it as being a correction to the imbalance of plantation economics, bringing the southern states into a more integrated national economy and, incredible though it may seem, on a more equal footing -it was the southerners inability/unwillingess to engage in a more entrepreneurial type of capitalism (symbolised by the 'carpetbaggers') that meant an already distorted economic bloc within the USA became a more like a 'third-world' dependant satellite of the north after it -the very consequence of the static, plantation economics that could not be held back by the 'march of progress'.

Thus, I tend to wonder if the south retains its nostalgia for the 'good old days' in spite of the reality that their useless economic model was based on slavery, or because of some deep-seated resentment that they lost -slavery itself was not universally practised or even welcomed across the south; and the status of 'black' people was hardly improved by the end of it, and not just in the south.

The bitterness of defeat? And isn't that what often drives the Republicans -to take one example- to go so awol from reason when a Democrat is in the White House?

[Ineeda SM]

I find myself in agreement with you, but wanting a deeper or broader, more structural explanation of the Civil War. Although slavery is the lodestar of the conflict, two-thirds of the slaves in the southern states were owned by a minority of plantation owners, but people who effectively controlled most of the economy -I tend to see the differences between the south, the north and the west as being different types of capitalism, with the additional factor that the growth of the north through industry and the growth of the west through freely owned smallholdings, undermined what had been the supremacy of the south -after all, the North couldn't do without the cotton and tobacco of the south and the south needed the markets, the workshops, and the port of New York as part of its cotton business. There was, therefore, a growing mis-match or disharmony in these micro-economies one expression of which was Lincoln's election, as he was not even on the ballot of some southern states but owed his victory to a larger and more diverse electorate in the other states.

Thus, when I say it was profound moment, I think of it as being a correction to the imbalance of plantation economics, bringing the southern states into a more integrated national economy and, incredible though it may seem, on a more equal footing -it was the southerners inability/unwillingess to engage in a more entrepreneurial type of capitalism (symbolised by the 'carpetbaggers') that meant an already distorted economic bloc within the USA became a more like a 'third-world' dependant satellite of the north after it -the very consequence of the static, plantation economics that could not be held back by the 'march of progress'.

Thus, I tend to wonder if the south retains its nostalgia for the 'good old days' in spite of the reality that their useless economic model was based on slavery, or because of some deep-seated resentment that they lost -slavery itself was not universally practised or even welcomed across the south; and the status of 'black' people was hardly improved by the end of it, and not just in the south.

The bitterness of defeat? And isn't that what often drives the Republicans -to take one example- to go so awol from reason when a Democrat is in the White House?

Just Google "The American Civil War" You will find a lot of history to sooth your need for information on the subject.

Bitterness of defeat is a major part of todays resentments from the south, but I am not sure it is the total cause for republicans to go awol from reason. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were both democrats from the south. Clinton was Governor of Arkansas, and Carter was Governor of Georgia. Obama is the first northerner since John F. Kennedy to be elected president. So for over 40 years our presidents were mostly southerners. The slight exception was Nixon from California. Reagan was from California too but born in Iowa. Most of the southern states are republican states. Obama is from the north, and is black. The south is not happy about this. So they go out of their way to hurt him because of race hate. If Obama was a skinny little white guy, we would not see the racist crap from the right.

[Stavros]

Google for a subject like the Civil War only works if you have an ancillary keyword for whatever topic you want to investigate and then it usually goes straight to Wikipedia which is ok for narrative but rarely for analysis. My argument was derived from Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, first published in 1966 but still a compelling analysis of the route different states have taken to democracy on the one hand, dictatorship on the other. It remains fruitful in my view, only the work of Michael Mann in recent years has attempted a cross-cultural historical-sociological analysis of the modern state (Social Sources of Power vols I and II).
The point is that the paradox of the USA is that it is 'one nation' and fifty at the same time, I was once advised by a lecturer to even think of the US as 'fifty countries', and I don't doubt that, probably in a light-hearted way many Americans from one state make disparaging remarks about the state next door much as people from Lancashire are apt to make snide comments about people from Yorkshire and vice versa (north -vs- south is a common one here in the Uk too). I did once encounter an American conservative from Omaha who told me he didn't consider New York to be typical of America which, in a way is right and wrong: a lot of America is made up of small towns with people like him, yet New York as a culturally diverse and dymamic-in-every-way town is exactly what America means to a lot of people.

So I find myself wondering why defeat can taste so bad after such a length of time, and assume that some people in the south have cultivated a culture of rebellion or conceit which makes them feel good to be 'outsiders'; in which Washington DC is the ultimate villain and 'big Government' the bogey regardless of the money that pours into the southern states from Federal projects, if it does. I understand one of the greatest transformations in the south that followed the Civil Rights legislation has empowered 'Black Americans' if signified by elected officials, but I also recall (not sure if it was Manning Marable) reading somewhere that after that first series of elections, the level of 'Black elected officials' had reached a zenith, typified by Atlanta but which could go no further. So in one way the end of slavery upended the structure so that 'white' citizens now had 'black' representatives rather than the other way round; I can only assume that in some places this hurts, and that having a 'Black' President is the ultimate humiliation; even if it is inevitably a temporary situation given that 8 years is the maximum any President can serve.

And, fundamentally, there are things which I doubt the South has changed, although if the worst comes to pass there is alway Austin, TX.

Finally, this timely article appears in today's New York Times; as if four hours of costumed tedium were not enough this poor woman spends years trying to get over it, although I suppose her house is worth a lot more, as long as it doesn't, er...burn down...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/us/13windies.html?hpw

[TJ347]

The very reason for the American Civil War was slavery. Any other disagreements were infinitesimal by comparison. The north wanted to free the slaves, and the south wanted slaves to take care of their farms and ranches, and build the south. That was it.

Seldom right, and wrong AGAIN. I am tired of people such as yourself continuing to spread the lie that white Union soldiers enlisted, fought and died in the Civil War because they gave a rat's ass about the situation of slaves. Oh, there were certainly those who were opposed to it, but freeing the slaves wasn't any more the reason behind the Civil War than Iraqi freedom was the reason we invaded that country.

Further, the fact (known, I believe, to most) is that the overwhelming majority of people in the south did not own slaves, and so again, they certainly had no reason to risk life and limb on their behalf. While seemingly arising from general ignorance as opposed to the intentional spreading of half-truths and blatant lies, your lack of factual knowledge continues to reach new lows daily. It is yet another reason I continue to support increasing our efforts to improve the public school system in this country.

[Silcc69]

Slavery was a reason but it wasn't the major reason. The south wanted to break away from the Union and do there own thing. I'm kinda shocked that haven't tried to do it again given who is in the white house now but oh well.

[TJ347]

Slavery was a reason but it wasn't the major reason. The south wanted to break away from the Union and do there own thing. I'm kinda shocked that haven't tried to do it again given who is in the white house now but oh well.

Slavery was a reason, but other than black Union soldiers, I doubt very many soldiers fought because they opposed slavery. As I'm sure you know, the Civil War was first and foremost about money, as most wars are. Lincoln may have wanted to end slavery, but he would not have been able to do so ultimately if that was the reason he had given from the outset to opposing Southern demands leading up to the war.

In a similar vein, just as race wasn't the reason for the Civil War, it wouldn't be used as a reason for states to secede in the modern day. However, if the government instituted economic affirmative action that infringed on enough white, rich and middle class people in favor of another ethnic group, that would probably do it, given that Southern disenfranchisement (or the belief of such) was what led to secession and the Civil War previously. Still, I can kind of see why you're "shocked", what with these birther idiots still running around.

As to the topic though, I'm not surprised. That said, many members of my family oppose interracial marriage, and I'm the only one who's a Republican. In fact, based on discussions I've had, I wouldn't be surprised to find that most black people who lived during Jim Crow are opposed to interracial marriage, particularly between blacks and whites.

[Ineeda SM]

Seldom right, and wrong AGAIN. I am tired of people such as yourself continuing to spread the lie that white Union soldiers enlisted, fought and died in the Civil War because they gave a rat's ass about the situation of slaves. Oh, there were certainly those who were opposed to it, but freeing the slaves wasn't any more the reason behind the Civil War than Iraqi freedom was the reason we invaded that country.

Further, the fact (known, I believe, to most) is that the overwhelming majority of people in the south did not own slaves, and so again, they certainly had no reason to risk life and limb on their behalf. While seemingly arising from general ignorance as opposed to the intentional spreading of half-truths and blatant lies, your lack of factual knowledge continues to reach new lows daily. It is yet another reason I continue to support increasing our efforts to improve the public school system in this country.

Pick up a history book and read it for yourself. You are really proving to everyone how stupid and ignorant you really are. Yes White and Black Union soldiers fought the south to keep The USA together and free. Slavery was 99% of the reason for the war. The south wanted slaves, the USA did not. So the south decided to keep slaves, and the only way they could do it legally was to become a separate nation with their own laws. The USA could not allow that to happen, and fought the south to remain one nation of the USA. You can chose not to believe that, but you would further prove how ignorant you are. Before you make another stupid comment about this subject, it would be a wise decision for you to look it up and see for yourself that you can't argue with people who are right, just because you do not know anything about anything.

[w1s2x3]

Does this number assume there are no black republicans in Mississippi? On second thought maybe they agree with this too? Either way it appears that either votes and case reversals or a revolution would be required. Again, diversity of thought is trampled. Sounds like bigots are being bullied by the left.

[Yvonne183]

Sorry I deleted my post,, it didn't make sense

[Champ77]

So what...everybody has a right to their opinion. Freedom of expression, opinion, and thought for all of you, but not for the people of Mississippi??? Wow, so much hypocrisy so little time.

[hippifried]

So what...everybody has a right to their opinion. Freedom of expression, opinion, and thought for all of you, but not for the people of Mississippi??? Wow, so much hypocrisy so little time.
"The problem with fundamentalists & fanatics is not that they want me to think as they do. It's that they want me to do as they think."
~author unknown to me~

Freedom of expression? No problem. No problems with anybody's opinions. Just like assholes, everybody has one. However; A ban requires a law, & laws effect everybody. Mississippi is part of the United States, regardless of nostalgic confederate wishful thinking. Unless or until the crazies take over the assylum & repeal it, the Civil Rights Act is the law of the land. The Constitution was amended after the southern rebellion was put down, making Dred Scott moot, & the enabling legislation outlawed Jim Crowe laws.

What I find strange is that the people who want the State endowed with the power to control who people can choose as their mate, are usually the same ones who whine the loudest about "too much government" & government overreach.

[onmyknees]

"The problem with fundamentalists & fanatics is not that they want me to think as they do. It's that they want me to do as they think."
~author unknown to me~

Freedom of expression? No problem. No problems with anybody's opinions. Just like assholes, everybody has one. However; A ban requires a law, & laws effect everybody. Mississippi is part of the United States, regardless of nostalgic confederate wishful thinking. Unless or until the crazies take over the assylum & repeal it, the Civil Rights Act is the law of the land. The Constitution was amended after the southern rebellion was put down, making Dred Scott moot, & the enabling legislation outlawed Jim Crowe laws.

What I find strange is that the people who want the State endowed with the power to control who people can choose as their mate, are usually the same ones who whine the loudest about "too much government" & government overreach.


Thanks for the history lesson Professor, but the poll was flawed as I pointed out. No need to explain to us about the civil rights act...it's still safe. Speaking of polls...70% of Californians say cut benefits to public employee unions rather than raise taxes. I think it's probable that an interracial marriage ban in Mississippi occurs before we see public employee unions in California taking a hit.

[hippifried]

You're welcome, but I don't really care about the poll. I already expect polls like this to be bogus, regardless of where on the political sphere they originate.