Romney keeping his promise to the left?

According to the Washington Post, when Mitt Romney was governor, he reassured pro-abortionists, gay rights activists, and environmentalists that as he rose through the ranks, he would change the Republican party’s hard-line stance on these issues:

Mitt Romney was firm and direct with the abortion rights advocates sitting in his office nine years ago, assuring the group that if elected Massachusetts governor, he would protect the state’s abortion laws.

Then, as the meeting drew to a close, the businessman offered an intriguing suggestion — that he would rise to national prominence in the Republican Party as a victor in a liberal state and could use his influence to soften the GOP’s hard-line opposition to abortion.

He would be a “good voice in the party” for their cause, and his moderation on the issue would be “widely written about,” he said, according to detailed notes taken by an officer of the group, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts.

“You need someone like me in Washington,” several participants recalled Romney saying that day in September 2002, an apparent reference to his future ambitions.

Romney made similar assurances to activists for gay rights and the environment, according to people familiar with the discussions, both as a candidate for governor and then in the early days of his term.

The encounters with liberal advocates offer some revealing insights into the ever-evolving ideology of Romney, who as a presidential candidate now espouses the hard-line opposition to abortion that he seemed to disparage less than a decade ago.

via As governor, Romney worked to reassure liberals – The Washington Post.

 

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Mary

    Newt is looking better every day.

  • Mary

    Newt is looking better every day.

  • Mary

    Oh, and Romney reminds me of the liberal RC candidates on the abortion issue. Personally opposed but… Sounds like he doesn’t agree with his church’s teachings on gay rights either. Guess we don’t need to worry about him answering to Salt Lake City.

  • Mary

    Oh, and Romney reminds me of the liberal RC candidates on the abortion issue. Personally opposed but… Sounds like he doesn’t agree with his church’s teachings on gay rights either. Guess we don’t need to worry about him answering to Salt Lake City.

  • Michael B.

    This is simplifying the issue, but I’ve noticed that it is not common to find someone who is successful and educated and is also passionate about ending gay marriage and abortion. Suppose it were still a bad economy, but rights for women and gays hadn’t progressed as much. A non-educated person down in the dumps could say to themselves, “look, things are bad, but at least I’m better than some people, like those queers”. But with the government taking an active role in promoting gay rights and women’s rights, the status of women and gays are improving. And for many people, this adds injury to insult. Not only are they themselves doing badly, but they have to look over at a class to whom they regard themselves as superior, and see they are no worse off, and sometimes doing better. Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job. In any event, I don’t think a Republican can win by enacting a truce with Democrats on social issues and just focusing on the economy.

  • Michael B.

    This is simplifying the issue, but I’ve noticed that it is not common to find someone who is successful and educated and is also passionate about ending gay marriage and abortion. Suppose it were still a bad economy, but rights for women and gays hadn’t progressed as much. A non-educated person down in the dumps could say to themselves, “look, things are bad, but at least I’m better than some people, like those queers”. But with the government taking an active role in promoting gay rights and women’s rights, the status of women and gays are improving. And for many people, this adds injury to insult. Not only are they themselves doing badly, but they have to look over at a class to whom they regard themselves as superior, and see they are no worse off, and sometimes doing better. Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job. In any event, I don’t think a Republican can win by enacting a truce with Democrats on social issues and just focusing on the economy.

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    Ah… to be a Democrat.

    Where just anybody (who’s not a Republican) will do just fine.

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    Ah… to be a Democrat.

    Where just anybody (who’s not a Republican) will do just fine.

  • Mary

    re Michael at #3
    “I’ve noticed that it is not common to find someone who is successful and educated and is also passionate about ending gay marriage and abortion”
    Perhaps you need to come over to this site more often! You could find your misconceptions put to the test.

  • Mary

    re Michael at #3
    “I’ve noticed that it is not common to find someone who is successful and educated and is also passionate about ending gay marriage and abortion”
    Perhaps you need to come over to this site more often! You could find your misconceptions put to the test.

  • Jonathan

    This is just it. There’s something faux about him. I don’t think he can convince me.

  • Jonathan

    This is just it. There’s something faux about him. I don’t think he can convince me.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    He’s playing the Palpatine card.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    He’s playing the Palpatine card.

  • Bob

    Here’s all you need to know to figure out Romney:

    “Mitt Romney is a perfectly lubricated weather vane.”

    – Jon Huntsman

  • Bob

    Here’s all you need to know to figure out Romney:

    “Mitt Romney is a perfectly lubricated weather vane.”

    – Jon Huntsman

  • Dan Kempin

    J. Dean, #7,

    I’m unfamiliar with the idiom, “playing the Palpatine card.” What does it mean?

    Michael B, #3,

    “Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job.”

    I’m not tracking with you here, Michael. Are you making a serious point or just poking fun? Are you suggesting that lesbians are less qualified to be successful in the job market?

  • Dan Kempin

    J. Dean, #7,

    I’m unfamiliar with the idiom, “playing the Palpatine card.” What does it mean?

    Michael B, #3,

    “Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job.”

    I’m not tracking with you here, Michael. Are you making a serious point or just poking fun? Are you suggesting that lesbians are less qualified to be successful in the job market?

  • Jerry

    Repeating what someone said here a short while ago…the country is evenly divided by principled people on the left and right , so to get elected politicians appeal to the unprincipled…

  • Jerry

    Repeating what someone said here a short while ago…the country is evenly divided by principled people on the left and right , so to get elected politicians appeal to the unprincipled…

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job.”

    Yet another iteration of the ad hominem fallacy. If there is even one successful x in any field anywhere, therefore the defining behavior of x contributes to success. Further, society should condone such behavior.

    There are very successful cheaters, therefore we should defend and promote cheating.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Seeing a successful lesbian is a real slap in the face for a guy like this who just lost his job.”

    Yet another iteration of the ad hominem fallacy. If there is even one successful x in any field anywhere, therefore the defining behavior of x contributes to success. Further, society should condone such behavior.

    There are very successful cheaters, therefore we should defend and promote cheating.

  • Kimberly

    @ Dan, #9

    I believe “playing the Palpatine card” is a Star Wars prequel reference. Senator Palpatine told everyone what they wanted to hear: “I’ll make things better; I agree with and will support your position; you can trust me to rule” when all along his plan was to subvert the relative galactic order of the Republic and become the Evil Emperor. I’m not sure that last part is comparable to Romney, but the possible deceitfulness may well be.

  • Kimberly

    @ Dan, #9

    I believe “playing the Palpatine card” is a Star Wars prequel reference. Senator Palpatine told everyone what they wanted to hear: “I’ll make things better; I agree with and will support your position; you can trust me to rule” when all along his plan was to subvert the relative galactic order of the Republic and become the Evil Emperor. I’m not sure that last part is comparable to Romney, but the possible deceitfulness may well be.

  • DonS

    Romney knew he needed to assuage the liberals who own Massachusetts to have a shot of winning the governorship in that state.

    This says more about his political ambition than it does about his views on abortion. The sad thing is, what it says is that his views are fungible, depending upon his political needs.

  • DonS

    Romney knew he needed to assuage the liberals who own Massachusetts to have a shot of winning the governorship in that state.

    This says more about his political ambition than it does about his views on abortion. The sad thing is, what it says is that his views are fungible, depending upon his political needs.

  • steve

    I’ve noticed it’s not common to find a liberal who thinks one can be educated and successful while holding conservative values.

  • steve

    I’ve noticed it’s not common to find a liberal who thinks one can be educated and successful while holding conservative values.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Kimbery @12
    Yes, that’s correct. Playing both sides against the middle in order to get political power.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Kimbery @12
    Yes, that’s correct. Playing both sides against the middle in order to get political power.

  • SKPeterson

    Lesbian Face Slappers of the World Unite! When the Oppressive White Male Oligarchy turns its cheek, Slap the Patriarchy Down!

    A vote for Mitt is a successful and educated vote for ending oppression.

  • SKPeterson

    Lesbian Face Slappers of the World Unite! When the Oppressive White Male Oligarchy turns its cheek, Slap the Patriarchy Down!

    A vote for Mitt is a successful and educated vote for ending oppression.

  • Jonathan

    @9 Dan K, Re: Palpatine–See Star Wars. The Emperor who starts out nice, turns to the dark side.

  • Jonathan

    @9 Dan K, Re: Palpatine–See Star Wars. The Emperor who starts out nice, turns to the dark side.

  • Michael B.

    @Dan Kempin

    You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors, and when times are hard, they can find comfort in this. These social conservatives might have a lousy job and lousy marriage, but at least they “know” they’re better than those gays. Then along comes the government and tries to normalize homosexuality with gay marriage, as if gays aren’t inferior.

    If you ever watch Mississippi Burning, you’ll see a similar theme play out when Gene Hackman plays an FBI agent who questions a fortune-less Klansman and tries to understand why he is so against blacks. Finally, Gene Hackman says, “I just don’t understand you. You don’t make any sense.”. And the Klansman reply is, “Look, if I ain’t no better than a n*****, who am I better than?”

  • Michael B.

    @Dan Kempin

    You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors, and when times are hard, they can find comfort in this. These social conservatives might have a lousy job and lousy marriage, but at least they “know” they’re better than those gays. Then along comes the government and tries to normalize homosexuality with gay marriage, as if gays aren’t inferior.

    If you ever watch Mississippi Burning, you’ll see a similar theme play out when Gene Hackman plays an FBI agent who questions a fortune-less Klansman and tries to understand why he is so against blacks. Finally, Gene Hackman says, “I just don’t understand you. You don’t make any sense.”. And the Klansman reply is, “Look, if I ain’t no better than a n*****, who am I better than?”

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors,”

    What a load of crap.

    Michael B. are you a liberal who regards social conservatives as your inferiors?

    Mississippi Burning is a work of fiction. You got that? Fiction. It was written by a play writer who wanted to portray southern whites as bad guys. It is just like that goofy film The Help. None of that dialogue ever happened either. It came out of the imagination of a writer.

    Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.

    A writer pens a piece of fiction and you want to use it as evidence to smear whole groups of people. What a joke.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors,”

    What a load of crap.

    Michael B. are you a liberal who regards social conservatives as your inferiors?

    Mississippi Burning is a work of fiction. You got that? Fiction. It was written by a play writer who wanted to portray southern whites as bad guys. It is just like that goofy film The Help. None of that dialogue ever happened either. It came out of the imagination of a writer.

    Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.

    A writer pens a piece of fiction and you want to use it as evidence to smear whole groups of people. What a joke.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    LOL

    The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard. Shocking that he would hate poor southerners. More likely he considers them his social inferiors. I mean if ain’t better than poor whites in the south, then who is he better than?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    LOL

    The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard. Shocking that he would hate poor southerners. More likely he considers them his social inferiors. I mean if ain’t better than poor whites in the south, then who is he better than?

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    will be ‘swiping’ this- giving you credit though!
    So-for me -No on Romney- No on Newt-
    and to the R Party elite:
    NO VOTE for the LOTE (Lesser of Two Evils) (copy write – Carol-CS)
    Where is the true Constitutionalist..
    waiting—-
    Carol-CS-
    LA-Lutherans for Life

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    will be ‘swiping’ this- giving you credit though!
    So-for me -No on Romney- No on Newt-
    and to the R Party elite:
    NO VOTE for the LOTE (Lesser of Two Evils) (copy write – Carol-CS)
    Where is the true Constitutionalist..
    waiting—-
    Carol-CS-
    LA-Lutherans for Life

  • JunkerGeorg

    @Mary, #1

    “Newt is looking better every day.”
    ————————————-
    Gingrich is an excellent debater, no doubt. But I think it may be unwise to think he is perfectly trustworthy and/or doesn’t play different ways to different audiences. He flip-flops.

    For example, on the recent Iraqi withdrawal decision by Obama, Gingrich told a reporter in Florida back on Friday, Oct. 21st that Obama’s decision was the right one:

    “This is not about Obama,” Gingrich stated. “This is about the general effort that far transcends Iraq. That we have to really reassess our strategies in the region and what we think we’re accomplish. The president is right. You can’t just leave 3,000 or 5,000 troops there. They would simply become targets. If you’re not going to occupy the country, you have to withdraw.”

    Ok Newt. Then why did you two days later on Sunday Oct. 23rd, in a speech given at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition’s presidential candidate forum, suggest that Obama is ushering defeat by withdrawing??? Gingrich had stated:

    “The president has announced what will be seen by historians as a decisive defeat for the U.S. in Iraq. … After eight years, thousands of lives, hundreds of billions of dollars, we will leave in defeat. Don’t kid yourself, it is defeat. Iran is stronger.”
    ——
    Can you see the pandering? Newt is no choir boy. There is only one candidate who has been completely consistent for 30 years in politics. But of course few would want to learn the Constitution or study macro-economics. Trust whatever Fox News tells you instead. ;)

  • JunkerGeorg

    @Mary, #1

    “Newt is looking better every day.”
    ————————————-
    Gingrich is an excellent debater, no doubt. But I think it may be unwise to think he is perfectly trustworthy and/or doesn’t play different ways to different audiences. He flip-flops.

    For example, on the recent Iraqi withdrawal decision by Obama, Gingrich told a reporter in Florida back on Friday, Oct. 21st that Obama’s decision was the right one:

    “This is not about Obama,” Gingrich stated. “This is about the general effort that far transcends Iraq. That we have to really reassess our strategies in the region and what we think we’re accomplish. The president is right. You can’t just leave 3,000 or 5,000 troops there. They would simply become targets. If you’re not going to occupy the country, you have to withdraw.”

    Ok Newt. Then why did you two days later on Sunday Oct. 23rd, in a speech given at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition’s presidential candidate forum, suggest that Obama is ushering defeat by withdrawing??? Gingrich had stated:

    “The president has announced what will be seen by historians as a decisive defeat for the U.S. in Iraq. … After eight years, thousands of lives, hundreds of billions of dollars, we will leave in defeat. Don’t kid yourself, it is defeat. Iran is stronger.”
    ——
    Can you see the pandering? Newt is no choir boy. There is only one candidate who has been completely consistent for 30 years in politics. But of course few would want to learn the Constitution or study macro-economics. Trust whatever Fox News tells you instead. ;)

  • Dan Kempin

    OK, I’ll take a stab at being snarky, but I warn you–I’m not very good at it:

    J. Dean, Kimberly, Jonathan,

    Palpatine was a fictional character. In a movie. Also, he was an evil Jedi who could shoot lightning out of his fingers. So I’m still not seeing the connection to Mitt Romney. Or were the Sith really advanced Mormons?

    Michael B., #18,

    “You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors . . . If you ever watch Mississippi Burning, you’ll see a similar theme play out”

    Yeah, Mississippi Burning was also a movie. You can find a lot of things in movies, including evil Jedi who can shoot lightning out of their fingers. I was more interested in real life.

    (See? I just don’t think I am pulling off the witty snark! I feel more like Dr. Doofenshmirtz than Oscar Wilde. Oh well, I guess I’ll leave it to the professionals.)

  • Dan Kempin

    OK, I’ll take a stab at being snarky, but I warn you–I’m not very good at it:

    J. Dean, Kimberly, Jonathan,

    Palpatine was a fictional character. In a movie. Also, he was an evil Jedi who could shoot lightning out of his fingers. So I’m still not seeing the connection to Mitt Romney. Or were the Sith really advanced Mormons?

    Michael B., #18,

    “You find a lot of social conservatives who regard gays as their inferiors . . . If you ever watch Mississippi Burning, you’ll see a similar theme play out”

    Yeah, Mississippi Burning was also a movie. You can find a lot of things in movies, including evil Jedi who can shoot lightning out of their fingers. I was more interested in real life.

    (See? I just don’t think I am pulling off the witty snark! I feel more like Dr. Doofenshmirtz than Oscar Wilde. Oh well, I guess I’ll leave it to the professionals.)

  • Bob

    ‘It was written by a play writer who wanted to portray southern whites as bad guys.’

    Well, I guess we have a mind reader on this thread.

    Prove it.

    ‘Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.’

    Again…

    Prove it. You made the assertion, back it up or it means nothing.
    Talk is cheap, especially in the blogosphere.

    ‘The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard’

    Name the logical fallacy here, anyone? Bueller?

    Opinions are like a***holes — everybody has one.

  • Bob

    ‘It was written by a play writer who wanted to portray southern whites as bad guys.’

    Well, I guess we have a mind reader on this thread.

    Prove it.

    ‘Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.’

    Again…

    Prove it. You made the assertion, back it up or it means nothing.
    Talk is cheap, especially in the blogosphere.

    ‘The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard’

    Name the logical fallacy here, anyone? Bueller?

    Opinions are like a***holes — everybody has one.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    J. Dean, Kimberly, Jonathan,
    Episodes I-III do not count.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    J. Dean, Kimberly, Jonathan,
    Episodes I-III do not count.

  • steve

    Bob, #24 “Name the logical fallacy here, anyone? Bueller?”

    Yes, the logical fallacy is the strawman argument. Michael B. used it in both of his posts. I’m glad you noticed too.

  • steve

    Bob, #24 “Name the logical fallacy here, anyone? Bueller?”

    Yes, the logical fallacy is the strawman argument. Michael B. used it in both of his posts. I’m glad you noticed too.

  • Michael B.

    By some of the responses, I see a few are misinterpreting what I’m saying. First, I’m pointing out a trend, and with every trend there are always deviations. It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights. I’m just claiming that this scenario isn’t the norm, and to ask yourself how often there are exceptions. Also, establishing a trend doesn’t prove homosexuals are our equals. It’s just merely a trend I’m pointing out.

    I found SG’s response kind of strange, as if I had some sort of geographical prejudice. I would point out that I was raised in the Alabama, and a fact about the Ku Klux Klan: The most influence the Klan ever achieved was in the state of Indiana. This theme I’m pointing out crosses all geographical lines.

    The issue of the Old South was on my mind because of 1 question that really ought to bother any Civil War historian: “Why wasn’t the antebellum South a hotbed of abolitionism?” Many associate the typical white southerner during this period as the owner of a large slave plantation. In truth, most southerners were too poor to own even 1 slave. In fact, slavery greatly drove down wages, as many poor white southerners performed the same tasks and had to compete with cheap (free) labor. One would think that the abolishment of slavery would be a very populist movement among whites, as it would decrease cheap labor. So why wasn’t it? How was the average white southerner convinced that slavery wasn’t something worth abolishing, even if it was in their best economic interests?

  • Michael B.

    By some of the responses, I see a few are misinterpreting what I’m saying. First, I’m pointing out a trend, and with every trend there are always deviations. It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights. I’m just claiming that this scenario isn’t the norm, and to ask yourself how often there are exceptions. Also, establishing a trend doesn’t prove homosexuals are our equals. It’s just merely a trend I’m pointing out.

    I found SG’s response kind of strange, as if I had some sort of geographical prejudice. I would point out that I was raised in the Alabama, and a fact about the Ku Klux Klan: The most influence the Klan ever achieved was in the state of Indiana. This theme I’m pointing out crosses all geographical lines.

    The issue of the Old South was on my mind because of 1 question that really ought to bother any Civil War historian: “Why wasn’t the antebellum South a hotbed of abolitionism?” Many associate the typical white southerner during this period as the owner of a large slave plantation. In truth, most southerners were too poor to own even 1 slave. In fact, slavery greatly drove down wages, as many poor white southerners performed the same tasks and had to compete with cheap (free) labor. One would think that the abolishment of slavery would be a very populist movement among whites, as it would decrease cheap labor. So why wasn’t it? How was the average white southerner convinced that slavery wasn’t something worth abolishing, even if it was in their best economic interests?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights. I’m just claiming that this scenario isn’t the norm, and to ask yourself how often there are exceptions. Also, establishing a trend doesn’t prove homosexuals are our equals. It’s just merely a trend I’m pointing out.

    There is no trend and you haven’t established anything in fact. You just defame people and use works of fiction as your basis for your fallacious analogies.

    ‘Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.’

    @ Bob
    http://www.prisonpolicy.org/importing/importing.html
    scroll down to Figure 6

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/07/americas-10-most-segregated-cities_n_845092.html#slide_image

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights. I’m just claiming that this scenario isn’t the norm, and to ask yourself how often there are exceptions. Also, establishing a trend doesn’t prove homosexuals are our equals. It’s just merely a trend I’m pointing out.

    There is no trend and you haven’t established anything in fact. You just defame people and use works of fiction as your basis for your fallacious analogies.

    ‘Contrast these fantasies with the current reality of crime statistics and segregation anywhere in the US but especially in the liberal northern states.’

    @ Bob
    http://www.prisonpolicy.org/importing/importing.html
    scroll down to Figure 6

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/07/americas-10-most-segregated-cities_n_845092.html#slide_image

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    First, I’m pointing out a trend, and with every trend there are always deviations. It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights.

    This is just pure imagination. First, there is no trend of which you speak. Second, people’s opposition to gay marriage, not gay rights, is not visceral in nature. It is grounded in analysis and future time orientation. No one cares what gays are doing, but they don’t feel that gay marriage is in the public interest certainly not in the long term. Others disagree with that assessment. Fine. But your crude assertion that it is visceral, is unfounded and utterly baseless. It is in your imagination.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    First, I’m pointing out a trend, and with every trend there are always deviations. It’s completely possible to be well-educated, with a good job and family, and be viscerally opposed to gay rights.

    This is just pure imagination. First, there is no trend of which you speak. Second, people’s opposition to gay marriage, not gay rights, is not visceral in nature. It is grounded in analysis and future time orientation. No one cares what gays are doing, but they don’t feel that gay marriage is in the public interest certainly not in the long term. Others disagree with that assessment. Fine. But your crude assertion that it is visceral, is unfounded and utterly baseless. It is in your imagination.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    ‘The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard’

    The point is that the writer is not particularly familiar with klansmen nor what they might say. He grew up rich in the north, not poor in the south. He writes from the absence of knowledge. Therefore, he depicts poor whites in the way that he feels about them. It is his opinion. The writer was never a poor white guy in the south and doesn’t know or perhaps even care what motivates such folks. Through the other character he invented, he admits he doesn’t understand the guy and then proceeds to invent a response that makes the guy a pretty unsympathetic character. And then Michael B. uses this contrived fiction to make an analogy to folks he doesn’t understand and perhaps doesn’t care to understand. His mind is closed and it is going to stay that way. No evidence from fact or reality means anything to folks who quote fiction as the basis of their false reasoning.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    ‘The writer of Mississippi Burning, Chris Gerolmo, went to Saint George’s elite boarding school in Newport Rhode Island (only $41,000 per year) then went to Harvard’

    The point is that the writer is not particularly familiar with klansmen nor what they might say. He grew up rich in the north, not poor in the south. He writes from the absence of knowledge. Therefore, he depicts poor whites in the way that he feels about them. It is his opinion. The writer was never a poor white guy in the south and doesn’t know or perhaps even care what motivates such folks. Through the other character he invented, he admits he doesn’t understand the guy and then proceeds to invent a response that makes the guy a pretty unsympathetic character. And then Michael B. uses this contrived fiction to make an analogy to folks he doesn’t understand and perhaps doesn’t care to understand. His mind is closed and it is going to stay that way. No evidence from fact or reality means anything to folks who quote fiction as the basis of their false reasoning.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “One would think that the abolishment of slavery would be a very populist movement among whites, as it would decrease cheap labor. So why wasn’t it? How was the average white southerner convinced that slavery wasn’t something worth abolishing, even if it was in their best economic interests?”

    Interesting question. Perhaps it is related to the law that prohibited the exportation of slaves. So, if the slaves were freed, the slave owners would still be rich enough to insulate themselves from the conditions that would ensue pursuant to the emancipation, but the poor whites would be extremely vulnerable and were afraid of what might happen. Just a guess based on what actually did happen and the ways in which poor whites reacted to the freed slaves.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “One would think that the abolishment of slavery would be a very populist movement among whites, as it would decrease cheap labor. So why wasn’t it? How was the average white southerner convinced that slavery wasn’t something worth abolishing, even if it was in their best economic interests?”

    Interesting question. Perhaps it is related to the law that prohibited the exportation of slaves. So, if the slaves were freed, the slave owners would still be rich enough to insulate themselves from the conditions that would ensue pursuant to the emancipation, but the poor whites would be extremely vulnerable and were afraid of what might happen. Just a guess based on what actually did happen and the ways in which poor whites reacted to the freed slaves.

  • Michael B.

    I really want to understand the mind of my opponent and what motivates him. In the case of slavery, it’s easily understood why a slave-owner wouldn’t support abolitionism, but this doesn’t explain the overwhelming majority of southerners who were too poor to own any slaves. I don’t understand sg’s argument in #31 of what a poor southerner would have to lose from the freeing of slaves. One would think that poor southerners would all be abolitionists, if for no other reason than economic benefit. Once slavery is eliminated, simple supply and demand shows us that as the availability of free labor decreases, the cost of labor increases, thus increasing income for the poor white southerners. So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?

  • Michael B.

    I really want to understand the mind of my opponent and what motivates him. In the case of slavery, it’s easily understood why a slave-owner wouldn’t support abolitionism, but this doesn’t explain the overwhelming majority of southerners who were too poor to own any slaves. I don’t understand sg’s argument in #31 of what a poor southerner would have to lose from the freeing of slaves. One would think that poor southerners would all be abolitionists, if for no other reason than economic benefit. Once slavery is eliminated, simple supply and demand shows us that as the availability of free labor decreases, the cost of labor increases, thus increasing income for the poor white southerners. So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?

  • Joe

    Michael B – the freed slaves would cause an influx of labor into the market, which would have the effect of lowering the pay scale. This would be offset by the increase in the need to pay people to do the work the slaves used to do but would it completely off set it?

    Also, many of the freed slaves would be skilled labor and would compete with the poor whites for the better jobs. Thus, even if the wage scale was not significantly lowered by the introduction of the freedmen into the labor market, they could have the effect of displacing the poor whites from the better jobs with the result of the poor whites preforming the unskilled, lower paying jobs.

    Finally, the south was quasi-aristocratic and the slave was the only person lower on the social ladder than the poor white folk. That may have been reason enough for some.

  • Joe

    Michael B – the freed slaves would cause an influx of labor into the market, which would have the effect of lowering the pay scale. This would be offset by the increase in the need to pay people to do the work the slaves used to do but would it completely off set it?

    Also, many of the freed slaves would be skilled labor and would compete with the poor whites for the better jobs. Thus, even if the wage scale was not significantly lowered by the introduction of the freedmen into the labor market, they could have the effect of displacing the poor whites from the better jobs with the result of the poor whites preforming the unskilled, lower paying jobs.

    Finally, the south was quasi-aristocratic and the slave was the only person lower on the social ladder than the poor white folk. That may have been reason enough for some.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?”

    Personal safety.
    Slaves on the plantations were effectively incarcerated. Once they were freed and comprised half of the population, then everyone would have to provide their own security. They reacted by passing strict laws against the freed slaves and creating vigilante societies. All of this is in the historical record. It is not some mystery. Also, no need to speculate on the labor market. The South was severely depressed after the Civil War and it lasted largely until WWII. So, no there was no economic benefit. You don’t have to wonder what would happen because we have the record of what did happen.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?”

    Personal safety.
    Slaves on the plantations were effectively incarcerated. Once they were freed and comprised half of the population, then everyone would have to provide their own security. They reacted by passing strict laws against the freed slaves and creating vigilante societies. All of this is in the historical record. It is not some mystery. Also, no need to speculate on the labor market. The South was severely depressed after the Civil War and it lasted largely until WWII. So, no there was no economic benefit. You don’t have to wonder what would happen because we have the record of what did happen.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?”

    Okay, so why are liberal northern cities so much more segregated than conservative southern cites?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “So why was it the case that most poor whites in the South weren’t abolitionists?”

    Okay, so why are liberal northern cities so much more segregated than conservative southern cites?

  • Pingback: Kimberly veith | Seemusicvideos

  • Pingback: Kimberly veith | Seemusicvideos


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X