I flew to NYC in October of '01 to see my family.  It was a little scary, but everything went fine.  I've been on planes easily a dozen times since then.  I don't think twice about it.  But...I can see why you are hesitant too. 


I already had a crippling fear of flying prior to getting on a plane pre-9/11.  Even going to an airport makes me break out into hives.  If I can't get there by car or train, I don't go there. 

Thank God, Praise Allah, and Bless the Earth Goddess the Brits busted those bombers!!!!
If those murderous thugs had succeeded in blowing up even one of the 21 planes they wanted to detonate, they would have succeeded only in increasing the suffering on our sad blue planet, and accelerated further our fast-track to fascism.  The only winners would have been ham-fisted authoritarians looking to impose a police state on the rest of us.

Speaking of police...it turns out "law enforcement" (as opposed to warfare)  really isn't such a bad way to prevent terrorism.

At the same time as I am relieved this dastardly plot was thwarted before anybody got hurt.  I am fearful of the effect the deepened vigilence will have on individual liberties.  Already the Right is talking about the need to sacrifice civil liberties in the name of state security.

Fundamentalist religion plays a part in the terroristic tendencies, but I believe religous rhetoric merely serves as cover for terrorism.  They say war is just politics with bloodshed.  So is terrorism.  Terrorism is not just, moral, or effective.  Neither is the occupation of Iraq.

I already had a crippling fear of flying prior to getting on a plane pre-9/11.  Even going to an airport makes me break out into hives.  If I can't get there by car or train, I don't go there. 


Not contradict what I just said, but Terrorism does work in that it makes civilians fearful.  The whole idea of booking a flight and going to the airport makes me nervous.  Never mind the departure.  I don't want those National Guard troops staring at me.  I don't want  all my privacy invaded and all my belongings rifled through just to board a flight.  Sure, it's necessary, but I don't f**kig want to do it!  Now we cannot carry a bottle of Scope in a handbag!  What's next? We all have to fly buck naked, handcuffed, and shackled?

Nobody died today, and yet just the threat of terrorism has chilled me on the idea of flying at all.

No, it is about terrorism, just as the KKK and the Spanish Inquisition were not about Christianity, this is not about Islam.  The people involved may use religion as a justification, that doesn't mean that the religion is at fault.  The people are.


The spanish inquisition was, in fact, about religion and it was conducted with the full support of religious figures, as were any number of other organized persecutions that took place under the Catholic church.

That does not make it right.  Just religious.

These moslems are blowing people up (usually themselves and fellow moslems, interestingly enough) and it is in fact a RELIGIOUS issue.  They shout Allah Akbar before they do their dirty deeds.  That's religion.  They are recruited in mosques by "imams".  That's religion.  They claim to be met after death by 72 virgins.  That's religion.  They talk jihad.  That's a religious term from the Koran.  We do not have Baptists machine-gunning Lutherans in the name of their religion, nor athiests bombing Episcopal churches.  Buddhist Monks are not terroring Confucians.

On a local basis, people of all faiths are blowing each other up, but usually in the name of general crime and mayhem, not in the name of their respective religions.  And every religion has a whack-job or two who does bad things, in the name of their religion.  Only with Moslems do we see a worldwide, well financed, long-term organized effort to kill innocent people in the name of religion.  And damned few marches by Moslems in protest of the violence of their fellow Moslems.

As for the KKK?  I do not know enuf about them to comment on if it were or were not a religious force.  I know they sure did not like Catholics or Jews.  But alot of people who hate Jews hate them simply because they need to hate somebody as opposed to any sort of religious rivalry, I think.  (I could be wrong on that count of course. I do not know any Jew haters at least that I know of, nor have I known any KKK-ers.)

Not contradict what I just said, but Terrorism does work in that it makes civilians fearful.  The whole idea of booking a flight and going to the airport makes me nervous.  Never mind the departure.  I don't want those National Guard troops staring at me.  I don't want  all my privacy invaded and all my belongings rifled through just to board a flight.  Sure, it's necessary, but I don't f**kig want to do it!  Now we cannot carry a bottle of Scope in a handbag!  What's next? We all have to fly buck naked, handcuffed, and shackled?

Nobody died today, and yet just the threat of terrorism has chilled me on the idea of flying at all.



I was scared of flying PRIOR to 9/11.  All 9/11 did was reinforce the fear and make me even less likely to fly.  I don't care if I never go to my high school reunion in 4 years; if I can't find a way to drive there, I won't be going.  The reward to me, is not worth the risk.

I already had a crippling fear of flying prior to getting on a plane pre-9/11.  Even going to an airport makes me break out into hives.  If I can't get there by car or train, I don't go there. 


Sorry to hear that.  Sounds awful.  And certainly with things as they are, I can see that you'd definitely not go near an airport.  I'm glad I don't have that issue, since so much of my family lives 2000 miles away!  If I couldn't use air transport, I'm not sure what I'd do.

Sorry to hear that.  Sounds awful.


I'm not a fan of crippling phobias, but I've learned to live with it.  Like I said, if I don't go to my H.S., I don't really care.  Flying to me is right up there with doing porn and injecting heroin; you'd have to knock me out to get me to do it.  I'll get on plane and fly somewhere provided I am completely unconscious the whole time.  That way if something happens, I won't know.

The spanish inquisition was, in fact, about religion and it was conducted with the full support of religious figures, as were any number of other organized persecutions that took place under the Catholic church.

That does not make it right.  Just religious.
Not so sure about that. I think if you look beyond the extant reasons for the "Spanish Inquisition" you'll find it was more about political power of the state and control over the lives of individuals.  That's why I am for the total separation of church and state.

These moslems are blowing people up (usually themselves and fellow moslems, interestingly enough) and it is in fact a RELIGIOUS issue.  They shout Allah Akbar before they do their dirty deeds.  That's religion.  They are recruited in mosques by "imams".  That's religion.  They claim to be met after death by 72 virgins.  That's religion.  They talk jihad.  That's a religious term from the Koran.  We do not have Baptists machine-gunning Lutherans in the name of their religion, nor athiests bombing Episcopal churches.  Buddhist Monks are not terroring Confucians.
No major religion has clean hands.  History shows that.  There are several million American evangelicals who would take arms for a Christian holy war if they got the chance.  I too wish the Muslims were more demontrative in their opposition to terrorist violence.  It would be a great PR move.  But you know what?  It wouldn't stop terrorism by terrorists who co-opted Islam as a cover for violence.  The angry Imams would call the protesters "infidels" and the angry young men would continue building their bombs. Take the ADC, for instance.  I'm on the emailing list for the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (a guy I know used to be their media spokesman).  The ADC condemns terrorst acts by Muslims.  Terrorism only hurts their cause.  They could expend far more of their resources organizing actual demonstrations against terrorism, but what for?  Terrorists don't listen!  Terrorists think they're the truly righteous ones.  Protests against them might just serve to embolden the terrorists.


As for the KKK?  I do not know enuf about them to comment on if it were or were not a religious force.  I know they sure did not like Catholics or Jews.  But alot of people who hate Jews hate them simply because they need to hate somebody as opposed to any sort of religious rivalry, I think.  (I could be wrong on that count of course. I do not know any Jew haters at least that I know of, nor have I known any KKK-ers.)

If your were not a white Protestant who agreed with the Klan, you were the enemy!  The KKK had a lot of enemies.  The claimed to be Christian, and their legacy of angry, bigoted Protestantism still exists in Southern culture.

You had better do some homework. You could not get 200 Suni's and 200 Shiites in the same room for 5 minutes without a fight breaking out. throw  in 100 Bedouin tribesmen and you really have a war...All three of the same faith yet they will fight each other at the drop of a hat. Why?


Guilt-based cultures vs. Shame-based cultures.

There are dozens  of essays on the subject. 

Strategic bombing (the systematic razing of every military and civilian target within range) has a poor record against guilt-based cultures.  The London Blitz didn't break the will of the British people.  The Dresden firebombings didn't break the will of the German people.  But it did break the will of the Japanese -- Hiroshima and Nagasaki were merely the last of the two Japanese industrial centers to be incinerated, and conventional weaponry killed far more Japanese than nuclear weaponry. 

Guilt-based cultures are composed of individuals who can (and will) individually acknowledge that it is better to surrender than to die in defense of a futile cause.  Shame-based culture are tribal collectives -- in a shame-based culture, to surrender to save your own life is unthinkable; the only thing to which one may honorably surrender is overwhelming force.

Time to think the unthinkable?

Thank God, Praise Allah, and Bless the Earth Goddess the Brits busted those bombers!!!!
If those murderous thugs had succeeded in blowing up even one of the 21 planes they wanted to detonate, they would have succeeded only in increasing the suffering on our sad blue planet, and accelerated further our fast-track to fascism.  The only winners would have been ham-fisted authoritarians looking to impose a police state on the rest of us.

WOW! Great post, Max. I have yet to see any evidence, and we probably won't.

I am not afraid of terrorists, airports, or muslims. Never will be...
But the authoritarians put the fear of santeria in my soul.

Not to side-track here, but Bush made a HUGE mistake when he called them "Muslim fascists".
He will be crucified for that one...

dimpled chads?


    ;D :P

You had better do some homework. You could not get 200 Suni's and 200 Shiites in the same room for 5 minutes without a fight breaking out. throw  in 100 Bedouin tribesmen and you really have a war...All three of the same faith yet they will fight each other at the drop of a hat. Why?


Exactly and well put dude

Guilt-based cultures vs. Shame-based cultures.

There are dozens  of essays on the subject. 

Strategic bombing ,,,,,  But it did break the will of the Japanese -- Hiroshima and Nagasaki were merely the last of the two Japanese industrial centers to be incinerated, and conventional weaponry killed far more Japanese than nuclear weaponry. 

Time to think the unthinkable?


I recall reading that, towards the end of WW2, the Japanese already knew that they were losing the way, but felt it was their destiny to support the Emporer.  They expected that it would all end in sort of cataclysmic  "blaze of glory".  Something on the magnitude of Hiroshima and Nagasaki generally fit in with their view of the world dynamic it seems.

Eventually they got their blazes but no glory, and FINALLY threw in the towel.

Not so sure about that. I think if you look beyond the extant reasons for the "Spanish Inquisition" you'll find it was more about political power of the state and control over the lives of individuals.  That's why I am for the total separation of church and state.


No major religion has clean hands.  History shows that.  There are several million American evangelicals who would take arms for a Christian holy war if they got the chance.  I too wish the Muslims were more demontrative in their opposition to terrorist violence.  It would be a great PR move.  But you know what?  It wouldn't stop terrorism by terrorists who co-opted Islam as a cover for violence.  The angry Imams would call the protesters "infidels" and the angry young men would continue building their bombs. Take the ADC, for instance.  I'm on the emailing list for the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (a guy I know used to be their media spokesman).  The ADC condemns terrorst acts by Muslims.  Terrorism only hurts their cause.  They could expend far more of their resources organizing actual demonstrations against terrorism, but what for?  Terrorists don't listen!  Terrorists think they're the truly righteous ones.  Protests against them might just serve to embolden the terrorists.

If your were not a white Protestant who agreed with the Klan, you were the enemy!  The KKK had a lot of enemies.  The claimed to be Christian, and their legacy of angry, bigoted Protestantism still exists in Southern culture.


ditto....

The people who want power will use any tool possible to achieve it.  The use(abuse) of religion is a powerful tool.  The Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, The KKK, Hezbollah, Al Quada, The Crusades, Jim Jones at Jonestown, what you have are people with power using the religious fervor of ignorant, disillusioned and/or angry people in order secure more power for themselves.  Claiming to do something in the name of religion doesn't make it so. 

The spanish inquisition was, in fact, about religion and it was conducted with the full support of religious figures, as were any number of other organized persecutions that took place under the Catholic church.

That does not make it right.  Just religious.


"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!" - Monty Python

Actually, the Spanish Inquisition was very secular.  And it was not done at the request of the Catholic Church.  It was all started by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella.  And it had 3 main goals: 

Unify the nation under one religion, for easier controll.
Take over land and property the Crown wanted
Expell, drive out, or kill everybody who refused to conform to Catholicism (and through it, the Spanish Crown).  And in doing so, take over all their land, titles, and property.

Remember, when Ferdinand came to power, Spain was just leaving several hundred years of Moorish rule.  A lot of the property and money was owned by both Muslim and Jewish individuals, and the King did not like the idea that he could not controll them through Religion.  Therefore, they petitioned (and got) the Catholic Church to agree to let them have an Inquisition, in order to unify the country.

Under this, they could confiscate the land and property of any non-Catholic.  And if somebody converted to Catholicism, they were constantly watched.  If they did anything to make them suspect (refuse to eat pork, not do any work in Saturday, practice circumcision, etc), they were subject to forfiture, and even execution.

No, the Inquisition had nothing to do about Religion, it was all about Money and Power.  And the Spanish Crown got imensely wealthy during it.  In addition, it let them remove some troublesome nobels, and replace them with people loyal to the Crown.  In fact, a lot of Spaniards that emmigrated to the "New World" were trying to remove themselves from direct control of Spain.  Several members of the Colombus Expidition were people who were suspect by the Inquisition. 


As for the KKK?  I do not know enuf about them to comment on if it were or were not a religious force.  I know they sure did not like Catholics or Jews.  But alot of people who hate Jews hate them simply because they need to hate somebody as opposed to any sort of religious rivalry, I think.  (I could be wrong on that count of course. I do not know any Jew haters at least that I know of, nor have I known any KKK-ers.)


The Klukkers claim to be a "Religious Order", and that everything they do is done for "Jesus Christ".  They claim that the US has become "Godless, controlled by ZOG", and that they are preparing the way for the return of Jesus.  They claim they hate Jews, because they are the ones who killed Jesus.  I guess it somehow escapes their ideology that Jesus himself was Jewish, and was often called "King of the Jews".

No major religion has clean hands.  History shows that.  There are several million American evangelicals who would take arms for a Christian holy war if they got the chance. 

If your were not a white Protestant who agreed with the Klan, you were the enemy!  The KKK had a lot of enemies.  The claimed to be Christian, and their legacy of angry, bigoted Protestantism still exists in Southern culture.


Max, I would be surprised if there were more then a few thousand who would "take up arms".  In fact, I am sure the number is closer to "a few hundred" once you remove the hate groups that pretend to be religious (like the Klukkers).  Most "Fundamentalists" in this country will willingly protest something they oppose, but will draw the line at violence.  Otherwise, we would have thousands of Eric Robert Rudolph's running around, blowing up gay nightclubs, abortion clinics, and churches of religions they oppose.

But we do not have thousands like Eric Robert Rudolph.  We only hear of a small handfull every decade.  Most other events like that are really racist events, disguised as religion (Buffurd Furrows, Robert Matthews, etc).

And I find that last statement interesting.  ...angry, bigoted Protestantism still exists in Southern culture.  Am I the only one that sees that is in and of itself a bigoted statement?

Max, I just have to assume that everything you know about "Southern Culture" comes from watching "Dukes Of Hazard" reruns and the movie "Deliverance".  I assure you, that is not what it is like down here.  Yes, you still have some things that make us cringe, like the fact that the KKK even exists.  But guess what?  There are more Klukkers in the West Coast then there are in the Deep South.  In fact, I would not be surprised to learn there were more in the North East then there are in the South East.

I only know 2 or 3 people who I know are in the Klan.  And for every one of those, I know at least 20 who absolutely hate them, and everything they stand for.  Remember, this is not our "Grandfathers South" anymore.  The generation of "Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever" are all old men now, collecting their Social Security and talking about the "Good Old Days".  Heck, even Governor Wallace's son is an old man, and is fighting a loosing battle to become Lt. Governor.

We are the children of the 1970's and 1980's.  We grew up in a different time then our fathers and grandfathers.  Country music battles with Rap for what the kids listen to most, and among the generation younger then me, Rap is winning.  We do not want people like the Klukkers messing with our lives.  When they do go on marches, they are generally razzed and berated.  Last year a few tried to do a membership drive in Mobile, and the Police actually had to step in and protect them from a crowd of white kids who attacked them!

Your impression of "The South" is about 40 years out of date.  It might have been accurate in the 1960's, but it is no longer valid.  Time to wake up and smell the 21st Century.

Bush knew on Friday of last week. So before the Brits announced it publicly, his administration:

a) beefed up airport security
b) raised the "threat level"
c) begin attacking Democrats as weak on terror in the press

the answer won't surprise anyone at this point will it?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060810/pl_afp/britainattacksairline

Bush knew on Friday of last week. So before the Brits announced it publicly, his administration:

a) beefed up airport security
b) raised the "threat level"
c) begin attacking Democrats as weak on terror in the press

the answer won't surprise anyone at this point will it?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060810/pl_afp/britainattacksairline



   I wondered about that, yesterday...

   Perfect timing to divert attention from current MidEast crisis...
   
   O-h-h-h... another plot foiled by MI5 and CIA!  Perfect timing!  No more ME headlines..!  Bah...

    Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outta meh hat...groove ;) on...

  Edited: typo...

This is not the first time Bush knew ahead of time, and it won't be the last.  I hear a lot of people say they are trying to scare people into voting Republican again.  I'm not so sure.  It may not be about getting more people to vote GOP.  Party operatives are disenfranchise just enough people who won't vote Republican.  They have also rigged the electronic voting machines.  The fix is in.  They are going to steal as many congressional seats as it takes this fall to retain a bicameral majority.  

    Perfect timing to divert attention from current MidEast crisis...
 
  O-h-h-h... another plot foiled by MI5 and CIA!  Perfect timing!  No more ME headlines..!  Bah...

So you're saying it's a smokescreen or it's made up?

You can expect this the next time you fly.


http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20060811/ljd060811.gif




Cat

Ha ha Cat! That would be one cosy flight!!! Just be sure the stewardess doesn't spill that hot "tea or coffee".

From general reports, it seems the planes would have been hit next Wednesday.

From general reports, it seems the planes would have been hit next Wednesday.


Yeah did you see the BBC News24 clips earlier regarding the names of these guys, as predicted they're all Islamic but more to the point all are between ages 20's/30's. Those radical scumbag heirarchy did a good recruiting job there

Max, I would be surprised if there were more then a few thousand who would "take up arms".  In fact, I am sure the number is closer to "a few hundred" once you remove the hate groups that pretend to be religious (like the Klukkers).  Most "Fundamentalists" in this country will willingly protest something they oppose, but will draw the line at violence.  Otherwise, we would have thousands of Eric Robert Rudolph's running around, blowing up gay nightclubs, abortion clinics, and churches of religions they oppose.

But we do not have thousands like Eric Robert Rudolph.  We only hear of a small handfull every decade.  Most other events like that are really racist events, disguised as religion (Buffurd Furrows, Robert Matthews, etc).

And I find that last statement interesting.  ...angry, bigoted Protestantism still exists in Southern culture.  Am I the only one that sees that is in and of itself a bigoted statement?

Max, I just have to assume that everything you know about "Southern Culture" comes from watching "Dukes Of Hazard" reruns and the movie "Deliverance".  I assure you, that is not what it is like down here.  Yes, you still have some things that make us cringe, like the fact that the KKK even exists.  But guess what?  There are more Klukkers in the West Coast then there are in the Deep South.  In fact, I would not be surprised to learn there were more in the North East then there are in the South East.

I only know 2 or 3 people who I know are in the Klan.  And for every one of those, I know at least 20 who absolutely hate them, and everything they stand for.  Remember, this is not our "Grandfathers South" anymore.  The generation of "Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever" are all old men now, collecting their Social Security and talking about the "Good Old Days".  Heck, even Governor Wallace's son is an old man, and is fighting a loosing battle to become Lt. Governor.

We are the children of the 1970's and 1980's.  We grew up in a different time then our fathers and grandfathers.  Country music battles with Rap for what the kids listen to most, and among the generation younger then me, Rap is winning.  We do not want people like the Klukkers messing with our lives.  When they do go on marches, they are generally razzed and berated.  Last year a few tried to do a membership drive in Mobile, and the Police actually had to step in and protect them from a crowd of white kids who attacked them!

Your impression of "The South" is about 40 years out of date.  It might have been accurate in the 1960's, but it is no longer valid.  Time to wake up and smell the 21st Century.

I confess I pulled a Mel Gibson last night.  I was posting under the influence of gin-and-tonics!
Let me rephrase.  I disagree that old TV shows and movies are what gives a lot of Yankees impressions of the South based on stereotypes.  It is pundits in New York City chattering in the FOX News studios.  It is the Ann Coulters of the of the country who lionize the South for being what I just implied it is, and you declared it is not.  I have been to the South---no, not really.  I have been to Florida!  What's a Northern boy supposed to think when the GOP invites Zell Miller to give a keynote address?  He did more damage to the to the South that speech than all the Dukes of Hazzard episodes combined!  Ditto Trent Lott.  We know Deliverance is just a movie.  Even in the context of the movie, the protagonists were businessmen from Atlanta, not Boston!

I know the Right likes to blame "Hollywood elites" for lampooning "middle America."  Sometimes they do, and I don't like it either.  For me it's  a class issue, not  a "cultural" issue.  However, it is the right-wing media that is doing Southerners the most harm.  The right-wing portrays the American Southerners thusly:
a. They all love NASCAR.
b. They all are flag-waving nationalists who never question their Republican commander-in-chief.
c. They all know how to recognize the rank of a military officer by the insignia on his uniform.
d. They all listen to Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood, and love to go line-dancing.
e. They all don't mind being overweight and underpaid.
d. They all believe in Biblical Creationism.
e. They all go to chuch at least once a week, say grace before meals, and pray before bed.
f.  They all disapprove of the gay lifestyle (that kinda stuff don't go 'round here, boy!)
g. They all are proud of their Confederate heritage and know the real meaning of the Stars and Bars.
h. They all eat cornbread, grits 'n' gravy, and southern-fried steak, and drink Coors.
i.  They all believe in "states' rights" (yeah, you kow what we mean!)
j.  They all believe in the traditional nuclear family and they don't get divorced.
k. They all love a large family; there's nothing a Southern gal wants more than to get married young and bear 12 children.
l.  SOUTHERNERS ARE THE SALT-OF-THE-EARTH TRUE BLUE AMERICANS AND REPRESENT THE IDEAL FOR WHAT OUR CHRISTIAN NATION SHOULD BE!
These are all examples of the stereotyped impression the New York City-based right-wing media has perpetuated about the South since the "Southerning" of America via Ronald Reagan.  You can trace the origin back to Nixon's "Southern strategy," but the pop cultural sea-change took place under the memes created by Ronald Reagan and his handlers.  Since the power of the television pundit increased one-hundrd fold in the '90s, the right-wing pundit class has drawn this utopian image of the South.  Some of these dozen stereotypes are things the pundits have said literally.  Others conclusions I have drawn from the pop-cultural memes.  The political sway of the South has quintupled in the past generation.  I don't hear Southerners complain about these stereotypes because they are meant as flattery.  The problem is they are not.  They allow Californians and New Yorkers to use a prejudicial short hand for "The South."  I think there is far more diversity across the South and less political, religious, and cultural conformity than Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham would have me believe.  The Right won't say so because it would do their political leverage a disservice.  There has to be a Jesus-filled cornpone South to contrast with West Coast elitists and Northeastern snobs (or West Coast snobs and Northeastern elitists), you know, "Blue State America."  If you want to gripe to anyone about Southern-stereotyping, take it to Roger Ailes and FOX News, take it to the RNC for chrissakes!

BTW, what movie did Dale Earnhardt, Jr., take his entire crew to see because Mr. Earnhardt believed it was such an important film?  "The Passion of the Christ"?  Nope.  "Fahrenheit 9/11."  So how d'ya like them apples in stereotype?
;D

I know the Right likes to blame "Hollywood elites" for lampooning "middle America."  Sometimes they do, and I don't like it either.  For me it's  a class issue, not  a "cultural" issue.  However, it is the right-wing media that is doing Southerners the most harm.  The right-wing portrays the American Southerners thusly:
a. They all love NASCAR.


That is pretty accurate.  NASCAR started in the south, as inforrmal races between moonshiners.  And most of the races are still held in "The South", although it is making large inroads on the West Coast, like California and Nevada.


b. They all are flag-waving nationalists who never question their Republican commander-in-chief.


There is a sense of Patriotism that is stronger here then in most of the country, but I would not call it "Nationalism".  After all, Tennessee is not called "The Volunteer State" for nothing, and you are much more likely to see children here do things because it is a "Family Tradition" then you will in other areas of the country.  I know of a lot of people who join the military for 1 term, because of "Family Tradition".  They then return home with some good skills, and use their VA loans to get a house.


c. They all know how to recognize the rank of a military officer by the insignia on his uniform.


Well, I bet that most people in the US can identify most Officer ranks, and some Enlisted.  We have all seen "Lieutenant", "Captain", "Dolonel", and "General" ranks in so many movies, that most civilians can probably recognize them.  And the same goes for "Corporal", "Sergeant", and often times "Gunnery Sergeant".  And anybody who remembers watching Major Dad can recognize what a Major emblem looks like.  But believe me, people here are normally just as confused as those in California when facing "Warrant Officer", "Staff Sergeant", and "Lieutenant Colonel".


d. They all listen to Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood, and love to go line-dancing.


Line Dancing?  Well, maybe 10 years ago, when Billy Ray Virus was a hit.  About the only difference I have seen between Alabama and California radio is that the ratio of Rock and Country stations is reversed.  But the number of "Urban" stations is about the same.  As for night clubs in my town, we have 1 Country, 2 Rock, 1 Goth-Metal, 2 Hip-Hop/Rap, and 3 that do dance, or alternate between Rap, Dance, and Rock.  Oh, and we have 2 gay bars, but I have no idea what they play, since I have never been to one of them.


e. They all don't mind being overweight and underpaid.


You really are off-base there.  People here are just as health-conscience as anywhere else.  We have all sorts of health food places, natural foods places, and gyms.  If anything, I have seen a lower ratio of obesity in Alabama then I have in Los Angeles.

As for pay, the cost of living here is much lower then in most of the country.  I am renting part of a duplex, for $200 a month, water and trash included.  You can rent a 3 bedroom house for around $500.  An Acre of land in the country is normally around $7,000.  When your expenses are lower, you do not need to make as much to get by.  I know that I live better in Alabama at $8 an hour then I did in Los Angeles at $25 an hour.


d. They all believe in Biblical Creationism.


Once again, not true.  Remember, we have schools down here too, and they are not all one room affairs, with a 2-holer in the back.


e. They all go to chuch at least once a week, say grace before meals, and pray before bed.


The ratio of church goers is probably higher then in most areas of the country.  However, the population density is also much lower, and Church is often a "Family Thing".  Last year I lived in a really small town, maybe 5,000 people total.  On Sunday, the town pretty much closed up, and about the only thing to do was go to Church.  I go a handfull of times a year, and I am single.  It is also a great place to meet women, the kind that you do not find in the bars on Fri and Sat nights.  8)

I say a quiet, private grace before meals, but it is a private thing, and is only between myself and my "Higher Being" of choice.  I do not bring my hands together, or anything else.  In fact, unless you knew what I was doing, you would probably not even notice it.  My last GF went to church every Sunday, because it let her and her ex-husband spend time with their children together.  But she never said any kind of grace before meels, nor prayed outside of church that I was ever aware of.


f.  They all disapprove of the gay lifestyle (that kinda stuff don't go 'round here, boy!)


Well, I moved to Alabama because of a friend I met on-line.  She knew I wanted to get out of LA, and offered me a place to stay while I got on my feet.  A week later, I was living with her and her girlfriend.  She has never made a secret of her lifestyle, and she has told me that nobody has ever given her a problem.  In fact, for the last 2 years she has been coaching a girl's softball team.  And they all know she is a lesbian, since her girlfriend is the assistant coach.

In fact, her and her daughter go to church more often then I do, and nobody has ever given her a problem for her choice in lifestyle.

And for a town of just over 100,000 people, we have 2 gay clubs.  And none of them has ever been attacked, or burned.  We had 3 of them when I first moved here, but 1 closed due to lack of business.


g. They all are proud of their Confederate heritage and know the real meaning of the Stars and Bars.


This is something that a lot of people really do not understand.  The belief in the "Confederacy" is two parts.  One, it is heritage, a kind of regional pride.  It is not much different from the North-West (Oregon, Idaho, Montana) pride in their ancestors being pioneers and settlers.  Or Pennsylvania being the home of Quakers, or Texas for having been an independent nation and revolting against Mexico.

The other is the streak of Independence, and willingness to stand up for their principals.  That they will not sit back, and allow others to tell them how to live their lives.

And if you look around down here, you will see quite a few blacks with the Confederate Battle Flag on their cars and clothes as well.  To most down here it is about heritage, not racism.  Compare it to Texas, which is proud of being the "Six Flag State".  Yet, you never hear them screaming that they want to be independent again, or that they want to return to being ruled by Spain or Mexico.  Pride in Heritage does not mean blind obediance to everything that heritage stood for.


h. They all eat cornbread, grits 'n' gravy, and southern-fried steak, and drink Coors.


Well, Coors really is a NW thing, and is actually rather hard to find down here.  If you remember Smokey and the Bandit, it was about bringing Coors from Texas to Georgia.  Most people here tend to drink Budweiser.  And grits is served most normally with lots of butter, not gravy.  The gravy goes on biscuts.  And to be honest, Chicken Fried Steak is native to a lot of cultures, not just the South.  My ex introduced me to Milanesa, an Argentinian dish.  In many ways, it is similar to Chicken Fried Steak.


i.  They all believe in "states' rights" (yeah, you kow what we mean!)


I am not sure if "States Rights" is really accurate.  It is more that they fear the Federal Government.  And this is a tradition down here that stretches all the way back to the Whiskey Rebellion.  They fear "Big Brother", and do not want the Government, or anybody else telling them how to live their lives.  In this way, they are really not much different from attitudes in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Arizona, or most other Western States.


j.  They all believe in the traditional nuclear family and they don't get divorced.


Oh nonsense!!!!  They are as modern and diverse as families anywhere else.  I know one gal who just had her 3rd child.  She is still single, and all the kids have different fathers.  My best friend out here lives with her long-time girlfriend, anlong with her daughter and her girlfriend's 2 sons.  I see just as many divorced families, single families, and the like down here as I did in California.


k. They all love a large family; there's nothing a Southern gal wants more than to get married young and bear 12 children.


ROFL!  Well, that made sense when most people lived on a farm, and more kids meant more people to do the work.  Family sizes here mostly seem to be about the same as anywhere else that I have seen, with most having no more then 2 kids.  The largest family I met since I have been here (3 years) was my ex-gf, who had 5 siblings.  But she also lived on a farm, and most of the work was by hand.  She only has 2 kids, and all of her siblings have 1 or 2 children each.


l.  SOUTHERNERS ARE THE SALT-OF-THE-EARTH TRUE BLUE AMERICANS AND REPRESENT THE IDEAL FOR WHAT OUR CHRISTIAN NATION SHOULD BE!


Other then the accent, I really have not seen much difference beteen people in Alabama and people in California.  The biggest difference tends to be that they are more conservative (with a "little C", not "Capitolized").  If left on their own, they would vote for Conservative Democrats, and most still idolize Presidents of the past, like FDR anmd Truman.  Local candidates who win are almost always Democrats, and in national elections they will normally vote for moderate Republicans or Conservative Democrats.

Things down here do change, but they prefer the change to be slow and gradual, and not a sudden upheaval.  They value independence and self-sufficency.  But this is also an area where it is needed much more then in most of the nation.  A lot of the region is still rural, where help or supplies are often a long drive away.  For over a year and a half, I lived in small towns which still had "Volunteer Fire Departments".  We have hurricanes and tornadoes every year, which results in loss of power, and often other damage. 

People in the South may seem to be a bit Provincial, but that does not mean they are stupid.  If you spent some time in my town, you will not see much difference between it and Waterbury Connecticut, other then the accent.  They are just as divided over the War, politics, religion, and everything else.

I've lived in the South for 5 years now, and I 100% agree with Mushroom.  Of course there are always people who adhere to the "Southerner" stereotype, but I have truly seen very few of those people.

I've lived in the South for 5 years now, and I 100% agree with Mushroom.  Of course there are always people who adhere to the "Southerner" stereotype, but I have truly seen very few of those people.


You will always be able to find people who fit stereotypes, that is one reason the stereotype exists.

If you look in the South, you will find people who want to roll the clock back to 1940.  If you go to New York, you will find people who act like a John Travolta character.  In New Jersey, you will find people like Tony Soprano.  If you go to a 7-11 in Los Angeles, you will find people like Apu Nahasapeemapetilon and Jeff Spicoli.  And we all had teachers who acted like "Mr. Hand", or Ben Stein in Ferris Beuller.

You just have to realize those are stereotypes, and not intended to represent normal people.  I no more assume that all Muslims are fanatics who want to kill all Jews and Christians, then I assume that everybody in Brooklyn acts and talks like Vinnie Barbarino or Tony Manero.  Or all Cuban immigrants are like Tony Montana.

If you read all of Maxs' post you will see that he is agreeing with you, what the is saying is that there has been a manipulation by the media to make the people in other areas of the country believe all the points that you took time to refute.  I must agree with his media ideas because I, for one, am tired of having the version of the "down-home, common sense, more patriotic than though, southerner" versus the "elite, arrogant, commy-loving, northerner", and know that this isn't the way it is.

^ Thanks Danoota.  The enumerated stereotypes are not stereotypes I believe.  They are not stereotypes pushed by the entertainment industry, unless you count Jeff Foxworthy and his crew.  They are stereotypes pushed by divisive American politicians regardless of where they come from.  A lot of right-wing pundits and talk-show hosts are not based in NYC, many are based in the South.  I just find it humorous how the right-wing pundits villify the Northeast and the West Coast, but you don't find any of them tilling a cornfield in Iowa or cookin' upa mess o' catfish they caught in the creek in Georgia!

It is also true on the other side that their are zillions of right-wing Republicans in the Boston area.  Look up Howie Carr's website and listen to him online sometime.  You'll see!

The overweight/underpaid thing comes from Blake Hurst's "Letter from Missouri,"
Contentment with one