From Rachel Maddow: Arizona’s “broken-on-purpose election”
These are crazy times.
Makes you wonder how we got where we are today, except that the evidence is everywhere. You just have to know where to look.
At the same time hundreds of thousands of voters are at risk for disenfranchisement thanks to Arizona’s Maricopa County and others, and the state of Texas, where talk of secession is out in the open again, we’ve moved back 50 years to a time when there were still “whites only” water fountains.
Want an interesting insight into what Arizona’s like these days? Have a look at the articles posted here. The top article: Arizona Election 2012: Did Every Vote Count? appears to be just the beginning.
Arizona Republic might be a liberal paper in a strictly conservative state (or not), but it seems to me that our country is suffering from a mad swing between conservative, moderate and liberal that looks more like the Sword of Damocles than a pendulum. At any moment, with enough provocation, we could find ourselves in the second Civil War.
Perhaps that’s too alarmist, but with petitions all around Maryland requesting secession over the fair-and-square re-election of President Obama, and the recent declaration by the standing Majority Leader that nothing will change, we are working rapidly toward a boil-over.
The really odd thing here is how few people represent the secession movement, but how our view revolves around these movements statewide. For a clearer picture of how this year’s election went, see the image here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/idvsolutions/8182119174/in/photostream/lightbox/
We’re not just a country of red and blue states. The mix is far more purple, when there’s anything to show at all. The image separates blue and red by counts of one dot for ever 100 voters (either blue or red). There’s an awful lot of “white” space in this map, though. The Electoral College, for all its faults, does fairly well with restricting the representative vote to the number of voters in each state. Popularity contest aside, it’s a sad thing when what was good for Bush isn’t good for Obama.
I’ve heard from more than one Tea Party voter that Obama’s majority does not represent a mandate. Even Obama himself says this. But others aren’t so sure. John Nichols of The Nation lays out the comparisons between Obama and Bush, and of their predecessors where a majority was clear. No matter how nasty the taste might be, there is no question who won the election, and talk now of secession smacks much more of sour grapes than of any meaningful discussion regarding infringement of rights.
Jim Wright, of Stonekettle Station (a blog EVERYONE should read immediately), gets it right again. Folks had better simmer down before they start something they’re going to regret.