I read the following item on Facebook today. It was clearly written before the 2008 election, but was posted today, likely in response to yesterday's election. It is an example of the kind of vitriol and arrogance that is not contributory to dialogue. This kind of writing is also quite distorted. Here it is-
"Dear Red States,
We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes... Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, New York, and all of the Northeastern states. After this election, we'll be adding Colorado and New Mexico. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, especially to the people of our new country - Nuevo California.
To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states; we get stem cell research, the best beaches, and the best ski resorts. We get the Statue of Liberty; you get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft; you get WorldCom. We get Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Cal Tech, MIT and Columbia; you get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs; you get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.
Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than that of the Christian Coalition, we get a bunch of happy families and you get a bunch of under-educated single moms.
Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we'll need all of our citizens back from Iraq at once.
If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They apparently have kids they're willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't mind if you don't televise their kid's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq and hope that those Weapons of Mass Destruction turn up for you, but we're not willing to spend any more of our money in Bush's Quagmire.
With the Blue States, we will control 80 percent of the country's fresh water, 90 percent of pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 97 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at your state dinners), 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, and all the Ivy League and Seven Sister schools. We also get New England, the Great Lakes and Yosemite, thank you very much.
In the Red States, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, 100 percent of tornadoes, 94 percent of hurricanes, 99 percent of Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, and Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bob Jones University, and Clemson.
Additionally, in the Red States, 38 percent actually believe Jonah was swallowed by a whale; 62 percent believe life is sacred unless it involves the death penalty or gun ownership; 44 percent claim that evolution is only a theory; 53 percent insist that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11; and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you have higher moral standards than those of us on the left.
By the way, we're taking all the good pot, too. You get that dirt weed from Mexico and Kansas ditches."
Here is my reply, in similar style, but I hope not so arrogant or angry.
It is easy to make coarse generalizations about red and blue states. The 'experiment' in so-called blue state social values has played out rather poorly in England, also in France and Spain.
While trashing the 'red' states, how are those states chosen? Which presidential election, or perhaps local election? Do you want the blue counties, which would include all the big cities, but very few of their suburbs? Do you want to base the choice on 2008, 2004, or perhaps 1972? We could base it on governors, in which case 2/3 of the country is red.
The red states, even ignoring dividing into counties, would control almost all the grain supplies, as well as beef.It would also control most productive fishing, a large portion of farm raised oysters, and US caviar. Is the calculation of fresh water ignoring the Ogallala aquifer, which is by a mile the largest in the US, and all in 'red' states? Perhaps control of the Great Lakes ignores Ohio and Indiana, as well as senatorially 'split' states. Also, the Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio river systems are largely in red states. The water math really doesn't seem accurate.
If you really want to divide up the country, let's do it by voters. While making generalizations about population, if we do this by county presidential vote, the blue states get 91% of the black vote, including almost all the unemployed urbanites, and the black vote of Mississippi and Alabama. A significant proportion of industrialists, bankers, insurance agents and doctors are 'red'. Blue gets lawyers, unionized labor and the overwhleming majority of unskilled labor and the unemployed. Those who voted republican can run their country on their money and values, and those who voted democratic can do the same. Doesn't look quite so good then. The dependency of red states on blue states taxes is often trumpeted. Who generates those taxes? Want to bet that more taxes are paid by Republicans than Democrats?
The post boasts of blue colleges. This conveniently ignores Vanderbilt, Duke, Emory, Baylor, Tulane, Washington University, Virginia and other institutions which are every bit as intellectually sophisticated as the Ivies or Seven Sisters, without the
Speaking of productivity, the blue states get all the unionized workers, the ancient auto plants and the biggest state governments. They also get California, soon to be bankrupt, and New York, not exactly a paragon of governance, and Illinois. All these states have huge, unfunded state debt to their service unions. If we divide New York into red and blue counties, the blue ones are urban and heavily dependent on taxes from upstate, which is all red. And the red states get Texas, a model of financial stability, also Louisiana and most of the US oil industry. The red states get the biggest and most productive importation ports too. Know why? Because unionized labor contracts made the northeastern ports too expensive.
Perhaps the blue states should get the governmental programs their politicians supported, and the red states get the ones they supported. The blue states would have an awful lot of debt to cover very quickly, what with Obamacare and the COLA expansions of Social Security. The red states would get the Medicare drug benefit to pay for, but would impose restrictions on payments that would be fiscally sustainable.
You are absolutely right that the red states get Hannity, Boortz and other commentators of this ilk. The blue states get NPR, which is not financially sustaining. The red states get Fox network, with all its top rated shows, and control of by far the most popular internet and cable news. The blue states get CNN and MSNBC. The red states get the Wall Street Journal. The blue get the New York Times.
The post rightly says the blue states get the redwoods and sequoias, and Yosemite. Did you deliberately forget Yellowstone and Old Faithful? Why pick Dollywood, except to reveal prejudice? How about Mammoth Cave in Kentucky, or all of Florida? Also Hilton Head Island, Charleston and its surrounding islands.
And the blue states can call all their soldiers home, and the red states can pay for and fight for their values. You will find many more volunteers, and they are just that, coming from red than blue states, fighting for the blue states' right to laugh at them. Good luck taking care of yourselves without the defense from those whom you despise.
It is so easy to make intellectual and social issues dichotomous because we have two political parties. Those parties, like society itself, are sharply divided at this time. It does remind me of conditions leading up to the Civil War. It may be that we can not stand as a nation in these political conditions. There is no question at all, however, that mean-spirited, condescending material such as the above will get all of us nowhere.
Ted
"Dear Red States,
We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes... Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, New York, and all of the Northeastern states. After this election, we'll be adding Colorado and New Mexico. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, especially to the people of our new country - Nuevo California.
To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states; we get stem cell research, the best beaches, and the best ski resorts. We get the Statue of Liberty; you get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft; you get WorldCom. We get Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Cal Tech, MIT and Columbia; you get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs; you get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.
Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than that of the Christian Coalition, we get a bunch of happy families and you get a bunch of under-educated single moms.
Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we'll need all of our citizens back from Iraq at once.
If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They apparently have kids they're willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't mind if you don't televise their kid's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq and hope that those Weapons of Mass Destruction turn up for you, but we're not willing to spend any more of our money in Bush's Quagmire.
With the Blue States, we will control 80 percent of the country's fresh water, 90 percent of pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 97 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at your state dinners), 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, and all the Ivy League and Seven Sister schools. We also get New England, the Great Lakes and Yosemite, thank you very much.
In the Red States, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, 100 percent of tornadoes, 94 percent of hurricanes, 99 percent of Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, and Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bob Jones University, and Clemson.
Additionally, in the Red States, 38 percent actually believe Jonah was swallowed by a whale; 62 percent believe life is sacred unless it involves the death penalty or gun ownership; 44 percent claim that evolution is only a theory; 53 percent insist that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11; and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you have higher moral standards than those of us on the left.
By the way, we're taking all the good pot, too. You get that dirt weed from Mexico and Kansas ditches."
Here is my reply, in similar style, but I hope not so arrogant or angry.
It is easy to make coarse generalizations about red and blue states. The 'experiment' in so-called blue state social values has played out rather poorly in England, also in France and Spain.
While trashing the 'red' states, how are those states chosen? Which presidential election, or perhaps local election? Do you want the blue counties, which would include all the big cities, but very few of their suburbs? Do you want to base the choice on 2008, 2004, or perhaps 1972? We could base it on governors, in which case 2/3 of the country is red.
The red states, even ignoring dividing into counties, would control almost all the grain supplies, as well as beef.It would also control most productive fishing, a large portion of farm raised oysters, and US caviar. Is the calculation of fresh water ignoring the Ogallala aquifer, which is by a mile the largest in the US, and all in 'red' states? Perhaps control of the Great Lakes ignores Ohio and Indiana, as well as senatorially 'split' states. Also, the Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio river systems are largely in red states. The water math really doesn't seem accurate.
If you really want to divide up the country, let's do it by voters. While making generalizations about population, if we do this by county presidential vote, the blue states get 91% of the black vote, including almost all the unemployed urbanites, and the black vote of Mississippi and Alabama. A significant proportion of industrialists, bankers, insurance agents and doctors are 'red'. Blue gets lawyers, unionized labor and the overwhleming majority of unskilled labor and the unemployed. Those who voted republican can run their country on their money and values, and those who voted democratic can do the same. Doesn't look quite so good then. The dependency of red states on blue states taxes is often trumpeted. Who generates those taxes? Want to bet that more taxes are paid by Republicans than Democrats?
The post boasts of blue colleges. This conveniently ignores Vanderbilt, Duke, Emory, Baylor, Tulane, Washington University, Virginia and other institutions which are every bit as intellectually sophisticated as the Ivies or Seven Sisters, without the
Speaking of productivity, the blue states get all the unionized workers, the ancient auto plants and the biggest state governments. They also get California, soon to be bankrupt, and New York, not exactly a paragon of governance, and Illinois. All these states have huge, unfunded state debt to their service unions. If we divide New York into red and blue counties, the blue ones are urban and heavily dependent on taxes from upstate, which is all red. And the red states get Texas, a model of financial stability, also Louisiana and most of the US oil industry. The red states get the biggest and most productive importation ports too. Know why? Because unionized labor contracts made the northeastern ports too expensive.
Perhaps the blue states should get the governmental programs their politicians supported, and the red states get the ones they supported. The blue states would have an awful lot of debt to cover very quickly, what with Obamacare and the COLA expansions of Social Security. The red states would get the Medicare drug benefit to pay for, but would impose restrictions on payments that would be fiscally sustainable.
You are absolutely right that the red states get Hannity, Boortz and other commentators of this ilk. The blue states get NPR, which is not financially sustaining. The red states get Fox network, with all its top rated shows, and control of by far the most popular internet and cable news. The blue states get CNN and MSNBC. The red states get the Wall Street Journal. The blue get the New York Times.
The post rightly says the blue states get the redwoods and sequoias, and Yosemite. Did you deliberately forget Yellowstone and Old Faithful? Why pick Dollywood, except to reveal prejudice? How about Mammoth Cave in Kentucky, or all of Florida? Also Hilton Head Island, Charleston and its surrounding islands.
And the blue states can call all their soldiers home, and the red states can pay for and fight for their values. You will find many more volunteers, and they are just that, coming from red than blue states, fighting for the blue states' right to laugh at them. Good luck taking care of yourselves without the defense from those whom you despise.
It is so easy to make intellectual and social issues dichotomous because we have two political parties. Those parties, like society itself, are sharply divided at this time. It does remind me of conditions leading up to the Civil War. It may be that we can not stand as a nation in these political conditions. There is no question at all, however, that mean-spirited, condescending material such as the above will get all of us nowhere.
Ted
Comments
Post a Comment