Posted on 11/06/2003 11:39:12 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
I haven't met every person on the planet. But I have met Zell Miller. So when I sat down and began to read Miller's new book, the very first paragraph made me laugh so hard that I practically spit my morning coffee. "The liberal Washington crowd," Miller writes, are "gold medalists in the Sneering Olympics." I'm sorry: When it comes to sneering, no human being on Earth can compete with Zell. This man does for the sneer what Julia Roberts does for the smile, what Benny Hill did for the leer. Read what Miller says in his book about today's Democratic Party, and even through the printed page, his trademark sneer is unmistakable: "If this is a national party, sushi is our national dish. If this is a national party, surfboarding has become our national pastime. . . . The biggest problem with the party leadership is that they know nothing about the modern South. They still see it as a land of magnolias and mint juleps, with the pointy-headed KKK lurking in the background, waiting to burn a cross or lynch blacks or Jews." That passage gets to the heart of Miller's dispute with Democrats. It is not, for the most part, a difference rooted in policy. Miller believes that his longtime party has become so elitist that it is no longer capable of appreciating and communicating with white Southerners. He believes the party condescends to the South, and if you know the man, you know that nothing angers him more than the thought that somebody, somewhere, might be looking down his nose at Zell Miller. Given that reality, it might be tempting to dismiss Miller's attack as the product of one man's personality disorder. But it's more than that. Miller's anger at the Democrats is also an accurate reflection of the disaffection felt by millions of other white Southerners toward their former party. Part of the explanation lies in race. Miller lacks the honesty to admit that fact, even though he brags shamelessly to his readers about having a conscience so tough that it's "on steroids, has a black belt and long fingernails and stomps around inside of me." In outlining the Democrats' decline, Miller does point out that while John F. Kennedy carried much of the South in 1960, by 1968 Hubert Humphrey carried none of the region except Texas. He doesn't mention that racist George Wallace carried five of those states, including Georgia. Nor does he mention that during that critical eight-year period, Democratic leaders pushed through civil-rights bills that broke the back of officially sanctioned racism, created the New South that Miller brags about, and in the process alienated at least two generations of white Southerners. As a result of that change, the Democratic Party became identified by many as the party of black Southerners, which in turn allowed the Republicans to market themselves as the party of whites. Miller knows that history better than anyone, because he lived it, and it is an act of fundamental dishonesty for him to now deny its lingering impact. Another part of the problem is style. On issues such as the economy, Social Security, health care and taxation, the Democratic Party ought to be at least competitive in attracting the votes of white Southerners. Too often, though, Democrats try to sell their populist policies by using elitist rhetoric, while Republicans sell elitist policies using populist rhetoric. Not surprisingly, the Republicans often win. Some Democrats are finally beginning to rethink that approach. Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean recently said he wants to be "the candidate for guys with Confederate flags and their pickup trucks. We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross section of Democrats." He's right: For too long, national leaders in the Democratic Party have indeed written off much of the white South in the mistaken belief that racial issues made their votes unattainable. Dean's point echoed that of Miller, who preaches the need to reach "Joe Six-pack in the Wal-Mart parking lot." But instead of welcoming a new ally, Miller once again reacted in abject terror that somebody might be making fun of him. He ripped Dean for stereotyping Southerners, claiming that "Howard Dean knows about as much about the South as a hog knows about Sunday." Like I said, in the Sneering Olympics, he has no peer.
And it's good that he doesn't mention those things because he would have to lie to do so. The Civil-rights legislation of the 60's was pushed thru by the GOP over the opposition from democrats in the south.
No retardation here, that is what he said. Another lie that has been repeated enough that it is now the "truth". This guy seems to have that problem with the truth, which is why he is trying so hard to discredit Miller. The truth is something "progressives" hide at all costs, and I do mean ALL costs.
... and this, mind you, from a staunch supporter of the party of the doddering and senile "Sheets" Byrd.
Irony, Be Not Proud. :)
This southerner has only to look at the Dim leadership of McAuful,Little Tommy Dashole,Peelousy, and the soon to be standard bearer Deano to know and understand why the South and thinking Democrats simply left.
As the recient elections show the southern color of choice is not pink.
Wonder why this guy doesn't mention that Wallace was a democrat....and a great friend of Sen. Robert Byrd?
Probably a bit of both. He's no doubt too young to have been around when the Civil Rights struggle was going on, or at least not cognizant, so he's been fed the Kool-Aid by his lib bretheren for so long he believes it. He's so cozy in his circle of friends that all believe the exact same things as he does that he's probably never even questioned some of what he THINKS he believes.
As for the headline, I thought it was about DENNIS Miller.
Michael
Democrats try to sell their populist liberal socialist communist Stalinist populist policies
Another redefinition by the Dims. They just won't call themselves what they are.
And for his trouble, Dean has gotten smacked around like a hockey puck during an NHL playoff game by Al Sharpton and others. While I do think the Republicans deserve some criticism for their racial attitudes during the late 1960s and 1970s (while it is true that many southern Democrats voted against civil rights, it is also true that many of those very same Democrats became Republicans during this period), it is the Democrats who have a racist problem right now. People like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in the mix will insure that racial issues keep making white Southern votes even more unattainable in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.