Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[Neonivek]

All I know is that politics have not yet BEGUN to suck!

I am predicting that it is going to get much MUCH worse for everyone... Why? the internet.

Why? because it allows the party to no longer suffer from moderation nor be accountable to the public.

So all this American and Canadian Crazyness on the board? This will be the good times... we will recall this as "when politics was good".

[LordSlowpoke]

politics was never good.

[darkrider2]

Why? because it allows the party to no longer suffer from moderation nor be accountable to the public.

[Neonivek]

Why? because it allows the party to no longer suffer from moderation nor be accountable to the public.

Yeah, that is pretty bad. (I miss the days of Glenn Beck)

Actually... does anyone kind of wish Glenn Beck would return... JUST because he was entertaining in a "Totally crazy" sort of way?

[Loud Whispers]

You realize, of course, that with the fall of Silk Road the FBI may or may not have the necessary amount of Bitcoins to control the market.

Seems probable. Silk road is back online, and is being openly advertised [something Dread said would never happen]. At the same time a rise in bitcoin value has appeared so whoever owns any right now is moderately wealthy. Anyone stupid enough to use Silk Road are risking wiring/fraud and drug trafficking charges. Honeypot: Almost certainly so. Moderately wealthy people looking for admin roles or just getting drugs are likely to get noted and v&.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Actually... does anyone kind of wish Glenn Beck would return... JUST because he was entertaining in a "Totally crazy" sort of way?

That's why I'm subscribed to RWW. Beck has only gotten more crazy.

[FearfulJesuit]

No, Cuccinelli's defeat has not knocked sense into the Tea Party.

[darkrider2]

No, Cuccinelli's defeat has not knocked sense into the Tea Party.

“The Democrats weren’t happy with their candidate, but they were united. Ken Cuccinelli had to deal with Melrose Place.”

[Loud Whispers]

You know how America is a goldmine for conspiracy theories since many of them turn out to be true? Yeah, even the far fetched ones are starting to come to fruition.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/columbia-south-carolina-criminalizes-homelessness_n_3795397.html
They are actually rounding up people in 'emergency shelters,' for their own good. Which of course; they cannot leave from.

[GlyphGryph]

This is incredibly interesting:
http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

What do you guys think?

It certainly matches my experience pretty well, although I think it's a bit off on some of the New England cultural sources.

[Max White]

This is incredibly interesting:
http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

What do you guys think?

So basically what it is saying is that the north west part is the good part... What else is new?

[Owlbread]

I somewhat disagree with the article's suggestion that the South "is more violent than other parts of America" because of the strong influence of Scottish and Irish immigrants because we allegedly have some kind of "honour culture". That's a heavy presumption to make based on the fact that we were cattle herders.

If anything the "Scots-Irish" they refer to were defined more by their staunch religious radicalism than anything else, but perhaps it would help the author a bit if he actually understood that the American expression "Scotch-Irish" doesn't mean "Scottish and Irish" settlers. Instead it refers to a specific group, namely the "Ulster Scots" i.e. Protestant Lowland Scots who settled in Northern Ireland, many of them during the ethnic cleansing carried out by Cromwell. Those are a group very distinct from the cattle-herding Highland Scots and their honour codes that the author is probably thinking of. Though mainland Scotsmen did settle in that area, far less of them did so, the vast majority preferring to go to Canada because so many of them were Loyalists.

If said group had such a strong influence on the area then they'd be more likely to have given the South its Bible Belt than its alleged violent streak.

[Descan]

I don't know, man. I didn't get a "Scots and Irish are more violent", so much as a "Herding cultures are more violent, the Scots and Irish (at least periphery, where the immigration came from) are herding cultures."

[RedKing]

This is incredibly interesting:
http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

What do you guys think?

It certainly matches my experience pretty well, although I think it's a bit off on some of the New England cultural sources.

Interesting, but ultimately flawed by the broad-brushstroke approach and ignoring massive demographic shifts over the last 40 years. While the Tidewater region may have had its origins in English planter gentry society, the antebellum families that once held sway are almost demographically invisible today. (Oddly, he places Wilmington, NC in the Deep South region when it's actually one of the few areas of North Carolina that *does* still have some connection to its colonial and antebellum gentrified past.)

The running joke in the Triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill) is that no around here is actually *from* here. RTP brought massive influxes of population from places like New York, Pennsylvania and Ontario and many of them preferred to stay even after their jobs no longer required it. Likewise, the Norfolk naval complex and the bedroom communities of Washington DC bring large numbers of internal immigrants from other parts of the country, and have been for decades.

I somewhat disagree with the article's suggestion that the South "is more violent than other parts of America" because of the strong influence of Scottish and Irish immigrants.

Id' say it has more to do with the frontier aspect than the Scotch-Irish thing. Because his definition of "Greater Applachia" goes way beyond the normal definition, and encompasses a lot of territory not particularly high in Scotch-Irish ancestry. Eastern Kentucky does not have a whole hell of common history with North Texas.

[Owlbread]

I don't know, man. I didn't get a "Scots and Irish are more violent", so much as a "Herding cultures are more violent, the Scots and Irish (at least periphery, where the immigration came from) are herding cultures."

Not necessarily. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the Lowland periphery (where the immigration came from) were quite diverse in their agriculture. A lot of arable farming went on down in the Lowlands because the land is fertile. Though herding was very common in the Lowlands and the Highlands, it's the Highlands that are more defined by that than anywhere else. I can't speak for Ireland unfortunately.

I don't mean to sound thin skinned but I don't know if this strange sensation I'm feeling is... offense. Possibly, it shouldn't be though. Still, there's something about this whole thing that smells like that fucking awful "Glasgow's the stab capital of Europe" stereotype that gets forced on us; i.e. that we're some kind of race of wild, violent hard-men that live anarchically and have feuds and make excellent cannon fodder. We're just like any other nation out there, never mind whatever preconception people may have of us.

I'm sorry, this wasn't just an excuse for me to talk about Scottish shit again, this guy has put a lot of emphasis on it though in his description for why the South is the way that it is.  Really, this guy's just being overly simplistic and applying very broad brushstrokes. I agree in principle with the initial "nation" idea, my perception is that there are very different "Americas" within the USA, but this is very heavy handed and a bit vacuous in places.