Quote:
Originally Posted by
groverat 
Attempting to explain away the wide variance in geographical response as having nothing to do with racism/xenophobia is meritless, which makes sense considering that this entire witch-hunt is meritless.
I gave a perfectly valid rational using the historical origins of many of those in the south. You dismissed it by claiming I was trying to conflate immigration with slavery, which I wasn't. Having a background where your claim to the land was often subjected to the whims of a higher authority (king versus regional lords) or tenuous claims of others makes for higher skepticism with regard to birthright claims.
Quote:
This is not the contention. You are attempting to equate the cultural attitudes of descendants of immigrants to the cultural attitude of descendants of slaves, or you are at least attempting to deny that there is a difference. Actions are not in question in this thread; attitudes are.
I'm not equating them at all. I'm simply noting that while the one group might have enjoyed a historical advantage here, they learned the rules about that advantage in a country where they were screwed over due to those same rules. To suggest they aren't going to forget the rules is not stretch nor is it an attempt to equate their experiences to slavery. Stop tossing dust into the air.
Quote:
While your explanation as to why Californians might not be quick to question another's nationality might make sense, it does not explain the regional variance.
However the history of those who immigrated to the south does explain it and does make sense.
Quote:
QUESTION: Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America or not?
% "No" or "Not Sure"
Northeast: 7%
South: 53%
Midwest: 10%
West: 13%
You explained that, in California, everyone is from somewhere else.
What is the explanation for the Midwest and the Northeast?
The midwest and northeast were not settled by white who were crapped on for a thousand years by the English.
Quote:
At some point you should be getting tired of flailing around wildly in your attempt to deny that the "birther" movement is mainly composed of either racists or those who enjoy baiting racists for partisan reasons.
Actually claiming they are racist and attempting to tar an entire party with that motive is the profoundly partisan reason you keep making logical leaps, tossing up strawmen and engaging in all manner of name calling/ad-homs in this thread.
Not all whites from Europe were the same. We know even in this day and age there were segments that were more prone to drinking, less prone to employment or education, or well even cleanliness with regard to keeping animals apart from living quarters. The differences in these values still show up today. When the South is more religious but also more promiscuous, we don't go claiming it is because they are racist. There is a reason we have phrases in our lexicon like Pennsylvania Dutch and not Mississippi Dutch. It is because different groups of white settled in different parts of the country and brought their culture with them.
Dozens of books and articles that look into factors that created the civil war noted that the North with industrialization and also with the building of more schools, etc. were out-competing and bringing and end to the very unproductive South and were doing so with those drunk Irish who were no better in terms of cultural values than the Scotts and other associated groups who settled in the South.
Quote:
You're right.
Yet you find yourself attempting to give an air of credibility to the "birther" movement.
More dust. They don't have to be credible to not be a racist. This has more to do with the ad-hom/intent game the left always plays. It cannot be a disagreement, it has to be a darker motive driven by hate. Thus you can't disagree on health care, you have to hate old people. You can't disagree on taxes, you have to be a rich, greedy bastard.
On the issue of the birth certificate, you can't just be wrong, you have to be a racist. The two are not linked in any fashion. The attempt to link them is pure partisan politics at play and it is you who are attempting to give an air of stigma to anyone who even discusses the topic.
Quote:
Fucking Christ...
Northeast: 7%
South: 53%
Midwest: 10%
West: 13%
The South is not 10x more Republican than these other areas. And this avoids the simple reality that South is more Republican largely because it is more racist.
I do find it interesting that you will purport that you understand California more than non-Californians ("Perhaps this is why folks like yourself didn't pick up on the Sotomayor dog whistles while so many others did."), but that you also know more about the South than actual Southerners.
You fail to see the sarcasm of me reflecting back your own bad reasoning at you. You are right that the South isn't ten times more Republican than the other areas, but those numbers also reflect no and not sure. Lot of folks are not engaged or don't care. That doesn't make them racist anymore than being skeptical doesn't make them racist. The thing that makes someone racist is believing one group superior or inferior to another. Questioning about a birth certificate has nothing to do with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
franksargent
... and all we do is run around in circles. Tangential rhetoric and dodgy logic at your end as is clearly present in several of your statements above.
The data are quite clear in that the South region is a real and true outlier, by 12-15 sigma even (Excel spreadsheet).
If you want to ad-hom via complaining, you have the choice not to respond nor even to read. No one is forcing your hands to the keyboard so shut up.
Yet you take their results here with one sample, without having the full methodology available, and also when noting they clearly under sample Republicans which can magnify results within that sample.
Quote:
Saying something is not so is not enough of an explanation for this outlier which is confined to one specific region with real well known past/present histories of racism and discrimination and historical hate groups that still exist in the South region as I write this. Please tell us all the date specific when the South region reduced their level of racism in line with the rest of the USofA.
Correlation isn't causation. Claiming a non-racial action is racist simply due to history is terrible reasoning. Also the rest of the country still has far fewer black people living in it. Is there less racism there or fewer black people there to report on and receive it? The South has 55% of the black population. The West has 7% of the black population. Given the same amount of racism there would be 700% more instances of racism in the South due to shear numbers. That wouldn't make the West any less racist as an example, it would mean there were simply fewer blacks to act racist towards or to have interactions with that might lead to racist outcomes.
Quote:
You can't teach an old dog new tricks. You can stick your head in the sand if you wish, I can't stop that.
Here is a new trick for you. Stop replying to stuff while bitching about the fact that you engage it.
Quote:
To say that there is no race/age/region differences (strongly suggesting racism/xenophobia in a systematic fashion by southern whites) is simply absurd by any stretch of the imagination.
We've had this discussion before. When the only model of prejudice one is willing to apply is that which implicates Southern Whites, they are going to look the worst in that measurement. When we call whites men wearing white sheets shooting black men racism, but won't call Hispanic gang members trying to clear the neighborhood of black men the same thing, we are automatically going to have a skewed result. If we have all the Filipinos fighting with all the Cambodians in a neighborhood, that is racism, and your failure to learn that new trick due to old dog tendencies which happen to lie close to your political affiliation won't change that fact either.
Quote:
Come up with a much stronger causal relationship to explain a 12-15 sigma outlier, then I would entertain that causal relationship over a known and well established causal relationship, that exists today and throughout the entire history of the South region.
I already did and posted it. Get a new trick beyond dismissal before demanding more typing to improve your understanding.
\
