Do we really need the Red States?

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan
This is by far one of the dumbest things I've ever read and it makes sense coming from a dumbocrat. I don't even care who is on which side but I typically see this caliber of nonsense from you idiots in "Blue States". Probably why Apple targets your children.

See...other people can troll too.

Why do you red state folks like puns so much? It's a little embarrassing, dude.

 

[Chryso]

Somebody has to teach the blue states how to balance their budgets.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: SacrosanctFiend
Where would I fall with residences in both red and blue states? Do I get to pick? Dual citizenship?

Look at all of the gay kids who flee the south and head to New York City for a chance to live without getting harassed for who they are - we accept all refugees

 

[Billyzeke]

The red states would quickly invade and occupy the blue states, since left wing ninnies have nothing to defend themselves. Good luck with those ninjas!

 

[Billyzeke]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Originally posted by: SacrosanctFiend
Where would I fall with residences in both red and blue states? Do I get to pick? Dual citizenship?

Look at all of the gay kids who flee the south and head to New York City for a chance to live without getting harassed for who they are - we accept all refugees

Enjoy!

 

[SlitheryDee]

I'd be all for it except for the fact that the south would probably fashion itself into a damn theocracy. We'd be just fine without the north though.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: Billyzeke
The red states would quickly invade and occupy the blue states, since left wing ninnies have nothing to defend themselves. Good luck with those ninjas!

Do you remember the civil war, at all?

Edit: Of course I realize that Lincoln was a republican and that the country was a very different place than it was today. I have total respect for the roots of the republican party, I just don't respect how modern Replubicans should just be called the Christian party.

 

[JDub02]

I'm all for it. I'm ready for the South to secede again.

Then we'll really see what works. Massive government regulation and increased taxation or freedom and liberty. I'm going with freedom and liberty.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: yllus
Not if you don't want half your country's natural resources anymore?

No, you didn't read the post. All the blue states have all the resources because someone said they did! That have like 93.2908% of all resources, it has been proven in a mass email!

BTW, Timewarp FTW!

actually that is pretty close to true, the deep south is fairly resource poor, and the rest of it is grain land.

iirc, most of the top ag producing states are 'blue', i think texas would have been the only dissenter in 2008. the 'farm states' ie ND, sd, nebraska kansas, montana don't actually produce a huge amount of food.

How in the hell can you say that with a straight face? Wait, did you say that with a straight face? That was effectively one of the causes of the Civil War - the resources were in the South, but the manufacturing was in the North. For fuck's sake you have to be a dolt to actually think the "south is fairly resource poor."

Copper, ever hear of it? Primarily mined in the southwest. Oil, gold, silver, diamonds, are all also found in the southern states. The world's largest supply of known helium is in the panhandle of Texas. This is a very, very important gas for scientific research as well as used in medicinal instrumentations such as MRI machines. Tons of farming in red and southern states. Ever hear of citrus? They don't grow so well up north. Gulf coast fishing & shrimping are massive industries. Houston is one of the largest port of calls in the world.

These types of posts and threads just piss me the hell off. With all of the fucking troubles in the world we have douchebags in this country that want to be so decisive with what color their political map is.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: JDub02
I'm all for it. I'm ready for the South to secede again.

Then we'll really see what works. Massive government regulation and increased taxation or freedom and liberty. I'm going with freedom and liberty.

I'm confused - Europe is probably your definition of 'massive government regulation' - aren't they doing better than Republican run states here in the U.S.? What's the economy of Alabama like these days?

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Originally posted by: Billyzeke
The red states would quickly invade and occupy the blue states, since left wing ninnies have nothing to defend themselves. Good luck with those ninjas!

Do you remember the civil war, at all?

Edit: Of course I realize that Lincoln was a republican and that the country was a very different place than it was today. I have total respect for the roots of the republican party, I just don't respect how modern Replubicans should just be called the Christian party.

I wouldn't live in a state that doesn't allow me to buy 20 round mags for my rifle. So I put up with the christain nonsense to live more free.

Of course you forgot that in the civial war times no one even questioned the right to bear arms. In most blue states today like cali or Illinois 95% of the armed people are criminals.

If most libertarians were not crazy, I'd probably identify myself with them.

 

[Billyzeke]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Originally posted by: Billyzeke
The red states would quickly invade and occupy the blue states, since left wing ninnies have nothing to defend themselves. Good luck with those ninjas!

Do you remember the civil war, at all?

That was before politically correct loons were a major factor, and everyone was armed. If the south had just a little more resources back then it would have been a totally different story.

 

[Peelback79]

It's okay. Since he wants to paint anyone smart enough to not punch the Obama ticket as a complete hilljack moron, I'll play along.

Since the red states obviously consist of a bunch of gun toting hicks with more ammo than brain cells, sooner or later it's going to come to us that it will be easier to take what we want from the blue states. So rather than use our "sure to fail supply side economics" to better ourselves, we'll just round up Jimmy, Bubba and the rest of the boys and go on a crime spree in the blue city closest to our trailer park. No doubt guns will be banned and we look forward to pillage and plundering our weasley red guts out.....but only after NASCAR is done.

Ironically, does anyone remember when Democratic states were Red and Republican States were Blue. Then the media changed it when it was suggested that the color red carried more of a negative connotation than the color blue. Epic liberal luls.

 

[rgwalt]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: yllus
Not if you don't want half your country's natural resources anymore?

mostly in the blue states, except for oil

but guess what, we would have most of the border with canada (they have oil) plus its traded globally anyways.

Where are you going to refine it at? A large portion of the US refining capacity is on the gulf (aka red) coast.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: yllus
Not if you don't want half your country's natural resources anymore?

No, you didn't read the post. All the blue states have all the resources because someone said they did! That have like 93.2908% of all resources, it has been proven in a mass email!

BTW, Timewarp FTW!

actually that is pretty close to true, the deep south is fairly resource poor, and the rest of it is grain land.

iirc, most of the top ag producing states are 'blue', i think texas would have been the only dissenter in 2008. the 'farm states' ie ND, sd, nebraska kansas, montana don't actually produce a huge amount of food.

How in the hell can you say that with a straight face? Wait, did you say that with a straight face? That was effectively one of the causes of the Civil War - the resources were in the South, but the manufacturing was in the North. For fuck's sake you have to be a dolt to actually think the "south is fairly resource poor."

Copper, ever hear of it? Primarily mined in the southwest. Oil, gold, silver, diamonds, are all also found in the southern states. The world's largest supply of known helium is in the panhandle of Texas. This is a very, very important gas for scientific research as well as used in medicinal instrumentations such as MRI machines. Tons of farming in red and southern states. Ever hear of citrus? They don't grow so well up north. Gulf coast fishing & shrimping are massive industries. Houston is one of the largest port of calls in the world.

These types of posts and threads just piss me the hell off. With all of the fucking troubles in the world we have douchebags in this country that want to be so decisive with what color their political map is.

I hate division based politics as well, but I see this growing sentiment from "Red" states, clinging onto divisive issues such as homosexuality in a way to further separate themselves, continuing to blur church and state. It personally angers me, turning America from this wonderfully progressive bastion of Freedom into something else...

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: Peelback79

Ironically, does anyone remember when Democratic states were Red and Republican States were Blue. Then the media changed it when it was suggested that the color red carried more of a negative connotation than the color blue. Epic liberal luls.

When did that happen? I remember watching the election back in 2000 (I think) and I could have sworn I thought they Red/Blue colors were switched, but I thought maybe I was imagining it.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Wow, is that ever a stupid email forward. Partisan hackery FTL.

It's only partisan hackery if the libs are talking right? If it's the retardicans it's just fact right?

No, it's partisan hackery whenever it's partisan hackery
I happen to live in the heart of Dumbfuckistan and voted for one libertarian, two republicans, and two democrats in the last election

 

[Billyzeke]

I remember back in 1980 the map was all blue. Goodbye and good riddance carter! I'm not sure when they changed the colors, but they definitely did.

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Peelback79

Ironically, does anyone remember when Democratic states were Red and Republican States were Blue. Then the media changed it when it was suggested that the color red carried more of a negative connotation than the color blue. Epic liberal luls.

When did that happen? I remember watching the election back in 2000 (I think) and I could have sworn I thought they Red/Blue colors were switched, but I thought maybe I was imagining it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states

BTW, I think we should use this map instead to decide who gets what land. Purple is neutral.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...ionMapPurpleCounty.jpg

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: swbsam

I hate division based politics as well, but I see this growing sentiment from "Red" states, clinging onto divisive issues such as homosexuality in a way to further separate themselves, continuing to blur church and state. It personally angers me, turning America from this wonderfully progressive bastion of Freedom into something else...

I don't think that is a fair sentiment about "Red" states. I think there is a few loud voices, e.g. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, that makes great sound bites but fundamentally I don't think it is all that bad.

Think about it, the farming ag Red state of Iowa now has gay marriage, but a 'progressive' Blue State like California had their citizens ban gay marriage. Ohio has a constitutional amendment describing marriage as one man and one woman - granted Ohio is often a swing "purple" state, but it typically has been a northern state.

The McCain camp has been coming out to tell their fellow Republicans to "get over" the entire anti-gay stance. I do have my doubts on how well that message will permeate through, but at least something has been said.

Now with that being said the invasion of religion into politics bothers the hell out of me but I don't think it is necessarily as decisive as many partisan hacks like to portray it.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Originally posted by: Billyzeke
The red states would quickly invade and occupy the blue states, since left wing ninnies have nothing to defend themselves. Good luck with those ninjas!

Do you remember the civil war, at all?

Edit: Of course I realize that Lincoln was a republican and that the country was a very different place than it was today. I have total respect for the roots of the republican party, I just don't respect how modern Replubicans should just be called the Christian party.

Different time. The north wasn't afraid of big, bad guns back then. BTW, I am a Republican but not a Christian.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: swbsam

I hate division based politics as well, but I see this growing sentiment from "Red" states, clinging onto divisive issues such as homosexuality in a way to further separate themselves, continuing to blur church and state. It personally angers me, turning America from this wonderfully progressive bastion of Freedom into something else...

I don't think that is a fair sentiment about "Red" states. I think there is a few loud voices, e.g. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, that makes great sound bites but fundamentally I don't think it is all that bad.

Think about it, the farming ag Red state of Iowa now has gay marriage, but a 'progressive' Blue State like California had their citizens ban gay marriage. Ohio has a constitutional amendment describing marriage as one man and one woman - granted Ohio is often a swing "purple" state, but it typically has been a northern state.

The McCain camp has been coming out to tell their fellow Republicans to "get over" the entire anti-gay stance. I do have my doubts on how well that message will permeate through, but at least something has been said.

Now with that being said the invasion of religion into politics bothers the hell out of me but I don't think it is necessarily as decisive as many partisan hacks like to portray it.

I think the Republican party is at an interesting turning point - they can treat the major loss last november two ways: progress socially, embrace the need to move away from Religion and stop relying on issues such as stem cell research and homosexuality and instead focus on their core ideology (small government, put an end to needless spending, etc.) OR they can clench that cross even closer to their hearts...

It worries me that the undercurrent right now suggests that they're going the wrong way, but I hope I'm wrong.

I've voted for more Republicans than democrats, fyi... But Bush took the party back 50 years in my opinion.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Babbles
Think about it, the farming ag Red state of Iowa now has gay marriage, but a 'progressive' Blue State like California had their citizens ban gay marriage. Ohio has a constitutional amendment describing marriage as one man and one woman - granted Ohio is often a swing "purple" state, but it typically has been a northern state.

Did you happen to see what color Iowa was in the last Presidential election?

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: swbsam

I hate division based politics as well, but I see this growing sentiment from "Red" states, clinging onto divisive issues such as homosexuality in a way to further separate themselves, continuing to blur church and state. It personally angers me, turning America from this wonderfully progressive bastion of Freedom into something else...

I don't think that is a fair sentiment about "Red" states. I think there is a few loud voices, e.g. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, that makes great sound bites but fundamentally I don't think it is all that bad.

Think about it, the farming ag Red state of Iowa now has gay marriage, but a 'progressive' Blue State like California had their citizens ban gay marriage. Ohio has a constitutional amendment describing marriage as one man and one woman - granted Ohio is often a swing "purple" state, but it typically has been a northern state.

The McCain camp has been coming out to tell their fellow Republicans to "get over" the entire anti-gay stance. I do have my doubts on how well that message will permeate through, but at least something has been said.

Now with that being said the invasion of religion into politics bothers the hell out of me but I don't think it is necessarily as decisive as many partisan hacks like to portray it.

I think the Republican party is at an interesting turning point - they can treat the major loss last november two ways: progress socially, embrace the need to move away from Religion and stop relying on issues such as stem cell research and homosexuality and instead focus on their core ideology (small government, put an end to needless spending, etc.) OR they can clench that cross even closer to their hearts...

It worries me that the undercurrent right now suggests that they're going the wrong way, but I hope I'm wrong.

I've voted for more Republicans than democrats, fyi... But Bush took the party back 50 years in my opinion.

I do not think that is reasonable or fair to say. I am no fan of Bush, but really what did he fundamentally do that set us back 50 years?

He put more minorities into his cabinet, or otherwise high-level federal positions, than any previous President. That sure as shit wasn't seen 50 years ago. He did get us bogged down with some screwed up war. . . hello, Korea, 50 years ago.

The current climate, even during the screwed up Bush years, is so very much more progressive than society was 50 years ago. I think it is just silly and intellectually dishonest for you to claim that he set us back 50 years.

 

[lupi]

Yeah, we should go back to when there were only 13 red states, that was a great time.

Originally posted by: acheron
um, you know that the whole "blue state/red state" thing is a bunch of bullshit, right?

Oh come on, let's not let partisan hackery be interrupted by silly little facts where a state can be a blue state by voting 52/48 for the "blue" candidate.