Vanderbei's Purple America

Well I finally pulled out of my funk with a little help from my friends.  Actually with a lot of help, but that's not how the song goes.  

I am very fortunate to have friends who refuse to lose hope and who do everything they can to realign the framework so that you can see things in perspective.  I've resolved to pass their help to others.

When I first saw Robert Vanderbie's Purple America, sent to me by a friend, I didn't realize the significance of what I was looking at.  The color purple just made me think about how much it cost us to have gays on our little foundering raft.  Fortunately the backlash was temporary and localized to my person.  I am completely restored to my faith in humanism. I blogged the (slow) progress of my understanding of Vanderbie's map here.  

•  It is Beautiful!

  Thank you...it is just beautiful. I feel better already!

  by etherapy on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 01:34:00 PM PDT

•  So how much gay bashing is going to be used

  on this blog to explain why Dems lost? I mean were there gays when Carter lose? What about Mondale? Maybe it was around when the others lost? What about the near win of 2000? The conservatives who voted on this issue made up 22 percent of bush's 53 percent win. What were the other 31 percent? Just an observation.

  by bruh1 on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 02:08:11 PM PDT

  •  I don't understand

    There's a very high correlation between the number of anti-gay referendums on battle state ballots.  What am I missing?  If the rethugnicans hadn't found this "moral values" wedge issue, they would have to stand on George's record and would have been blown them out of the water with the truth.  

    Rove dangled the gay issue like a cat toy and the morons chased it as if there were no other issues facing the nation.

    It's the only thing they had going besides keeping the 9-11 boogie man alive.  
    

    by servantsavant on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 02:29:59 PM PDT

    •  You might want to do research rather than trust

      the CW on these things. The truth is that if it were not gays, which was my point, they would have found another wedge issue. That's what they do, and we always react like deers in a head light with surprise because of folks who believe well if we change on this issue or that, then they will accept us. I really wish people knew a little bit about history (not to be condescending, but I get tired of having to go through a quick regurgitation of it). For example, let's go back to Nixon- do you know what he successfully ran on- Blacks, crime and national defense (commonly referred to as the Southern Strategy). What about Bush 1 in 1988 (prison furlows and the "welfare queen"). Reagan in 1984 was the first election that I can remember they truly suceed at demonizing the word liberal. In the 1960s Nixon also used the realignment of the white Dems (racist) down South to the Republicans b/c the Democratic Party defended Blacks by saying they deserved to not be treated as second class citizens under the oppressive force of Jim Crow.

      So, are you right- did they use gays? Sort of. But, it misses the point. If it wasn't gays, it would have been something else. They have been cultivating the Christian Right for years. I grew up in Virginia which is the birth place of some of these groups, including the one by Jerry Farwell and Pat Robinson was only like 80 miles from my hometown. Back then, it was abortion and the women who were the problem. Are you starting to see a pattern yet? In Arizona they just passed an anti-immigrant iniative. Do you know who lead that move- a member of the the Christian Right. Again, are you starting to see the point? If it's not one wedge issue. It's another. Once you realize this, it's hard to buy the line that it's the gays. The only people frankly buying it are the people in this society with issues with sexual orientation. It's like the Mary CHeney thing- remember that? Well, I do. The reactions to that were more a sign of where people stood of sexual orientation than it was about Kerry at all. If you had a problem it, you saw what he said as politically damaging, and the Republicans exploited that prejudice like a fiddle. Similar to what they did with the welfare mother and equating it to Blacks (although most people on welfare were and are white).

      by bruh1 on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 03:09:07 PM PDT

      •  i see your point(s)

        all of them good ones.  I was hoping, deludedly, that the majority of people had outgrown their junior high sniggering phase.  I live near DC and no one thinks twice about it.  In fact, you get tired of going to diversity training courses and listening to white males grousing about what a crock of shit it is.

        But there in lies the adjustment I need to make to my strategic framework.  More than half the country has never even heard the term "Diversity"   To me it's one of our core principles that needs to be emphasized more and more.  

        My delusion is that people actually track these things and learn something from watching Opera and Dr. Phil.  

        by servantsavant on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 05:24:07 PM PDT

•  PS

  the response in the 80s when people still were abivalent about Blacks? We should not cater to Blacks. In fact, do you remember the Sister Souljah incident in 1992. I do. It was felt the Dems needed jetison Blacks in order to win the South. Again, seeing a pattern here? Now, Blacks are considered central to the Dem base, and about the only group to have not abandoned the party. Which is ironic. Both gays and Latinos have been less faithful. I suspect in part because they realize the Dems are full of nothing but lip service- because whe the chips are down- they are blamed for the loses- rather than the fact we don't have a conherent message or a consisten backbone. I mean Kerry got one by October but it simply was not enough. Also we always wait until the election year- we need discipline throughout regardless of the year. We should be working now for 2008- not waiting until January of 2008. They certainly are and have the 30 years of machine building to do it. if you want to win- stop scapegoating- go out and run for a local office- find other Dems to run for office- realize that this is a long term  movement and most of all stop whining that some minority group lost you the election when in fact it was simply the realities of polical realignment.

  by bruh1 on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 03:14:25 PM PDT

  •  yep

    I just get tired of carrying all the moral wood while the Repugs take all the credit.
    

    by servantsavant on Sat Nov 06, 2004 at 05:30:15 PM PDT