Needed: A New Boogeyman

For the last couple of years, leftie editorialists at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and local alt-weekly Creative Loafing have been tossing out dire predictions that Roy Moore, the deposed former Chief Justice of Alabama’s Supreme Court, was, ‘the likely next governor’ of the neighboring state. Moore’s supposedly-certain victory was oft-hailed as the harbinger of a coming “theocracy” from sea to shining sea–and of course, proof that anybody employed by even a free newspaper was by definition smarter and more sensible than those redneck boobs over in “Alabamistan.”

I can only guess that they weren’t quite smart enough to read the polling numbers, since Moore never got within even low double-digits of the uninspiring incumbent, Bob Riley. Riley destroyed Moore in yesterday’s Republican primary, winning by a two-to-one margin.

As a native of Alabama living in metro Atlanta, I can’t help but grin at the outcome. Moore’s political career is dead, and the clouds of Smug over the AJC and CL are notably deflated. What’s not to love?

Advertisements

18 Responses to “Needed: A New Boogeyman”

  1. me Says:

    They got what they wanted.

  2. Silicon Valley Jim Says:

    Maybe they did get what they wanted, or maybe they wanted Roy Moore in so they could point to him as an example of “theocracy”. I think that anybody who’s actually a conservative got what he wanted. Roy Moore’s refusal to abide by the decisions of federal courts is not conservative.

  3. Bean Says:

    Theocracy, facist state, totalitarian dictatorship…

    …will someone please wake me up when America actually becomes any of these things?

  4. richard mcenroe Says:

    Dude, they held a vote on 6/6/6 and a bible-thumping judge waving a gavel in one hand and the ten commandments in the other was defeated?

    And this is a surprise how?

  5. michael farris Says:

    And didn’t some white supremacist ne nazi get 43% of the vote?

    He lost, thatnkfully, but 43% is way too high to be comfortable about the voting instincts of the fine people of Alabama, who IIRC still keep voting for segregation (objectively speaking).

  6. Tom Says:

    Michael,

    I assume you are referring to Larry Darby, who lost the Democrat primary for Attorney General. That means that 43% of Democrat voters chose the notorious Holocaust denier, not 43% of Alabamians. The Republicans meanwhile were voting 2 to 1 for a boring (read apparently effective and minimally corrupt) Governor over the 10 Commandments Judge. But what do we know? We’s just a bunch of Bible thumping bigots.

  7. Dishman Says:

    The AJC and CL won’t suffer too much. They just won’t mention their past editorials, counting on people to forget what idiots they are.

  8. Donald Says:

    Exactly, it was the DEMOCRATIC nominee in the DEMOCRATIC primary who happened to be a nazi holocaust denier/jew hater. Just like always by the way (The jew hater part, I just look at the record it’s kinda apparent). Further proof that the democratic party just can’t escape the 60’s!

  9. michael farris Says:

    Uhh I don’t care what party Darby belongs to (for the record, I’m independent), it’s a disgrace that he could get that many votes… what do they put into the water there?

  10. Tom Says:

    Must be some of the same stuff that Georgia (Cynthia McKinney) and New York (Al Sharpton) put in theirs. At least our racists lose. Independent huh? Riiight.

  11. Donald Says:

    Michael,

    You damned sure would if you could put an R in front of his name. That said, they’re real similar to those people in Boston and NY that want to keep the darkies in their neighborhoods. There is no worse racial bigotry exhibited in this country than in Boston Massachussetts. What is it about those democratic strongholds. As far as I know the active ingredient in the water up their…?

  12. michael farris Says:

    Tom, Donald,

    Life must be very interesting for people who think they can read other people’s minds.

  13. Tom Says:

    Perhaps you could tell us something about reading peoples minds, since you are the one implying that the people of
    Alabama are racists based on this election. Think about this: One of the main reasons that the election was that close was because Joe Reed, Chairman of the Alabama Democratic Conference, refused to endorse Darby’s opponent, John Tyson, because Tyson impeached a black Mobile School Board member for corruption. Now, who is the racist here? Tyson, who sucessfully impeached a man who illegally used school board money to purchase over $9,000 in Mardi Gras throws, or Joe Reed, who refused to endorse Tyson because he prosecuted a fellow black?

  14. michael farris Says:

    I find it disturbing that Darby got as many votes as he did for any reason in any party in any state. I’m surprised that you’re not concerned that he got so many votes. So he was running as a democract, just how exactly does that make the situation any better?

    Joe Reed sounds like an unpleasant piece of work too.

    I find it strange that Darby used to be a self-identified … libertarian (a party I occasionally have some sympathy for).

  15. Donald Says:

    No Mike, it doesn’t take mind reading. There’s some things that are just “tells” and you got ’em.

  16. Donald Says:

    And no I’m not concerned, because I know that the democratic party is infected with blatant hatred and bigotry to anybody that doesn’t toe the party line. Just in this case, in Alabama, it’s jew hatin’ white supremacy. Keep ’em on the plantation baby, that’s what it’s all about.

  17. tsmonk Says:

    As I posted on War Liberal’s site, it’s not too different here in uber-enlightened California, where Pete McCloskey (probable anti-semite (see Volokh’s site if you haven’t already) lost to Pombo – but not wihtout the approval of both the SF Chronicle and LA Times.

  18. John Thacker Says:

    The anti-semitic Democratic party guy who ran in the primary got 43% partially because the other guy hardly bothered to run any ads (saving for the general), so voters had no idea of the other guy’s crazy stands. It’s a real stretch to say that 43% of the Dem primary voters would actually agree with the nutball, if they knew what he stood for.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: