It’s all been said and done before.

Yes, the higher percentage of British Borderers in the US relative to the UK are one of the things that set US politics apart from the UK. But the survival of a strong East Anglian/originally Puritan element in Greater New England is at least as important as a differentiator. The Bush family, coming from the latter background but transplanted to the former, combines a readiness to use military power with the Puritan conviction that they are doing God’s work, which means that bin Laden was particularly indiscrete in choosing this president to attack.

DS is overgeneralizing about the nature of England and Canada, as well as America. The Guardian is no more representative of English sentiment than Michael Moore is of America. Every component of America’s character is also present in the other principal English-speaking nations, but in different proportions. The difference in proportions accounts for most of the differences in the sociology of the various states. It’s also worth remembering that the broader old liberal tradition of England (optimistic and moralistic) is very similar to the Wilsonian tradition in America. Each of the British prime ministers who have had really successful relations with the US have had strong elements of that tradition in their backgrounds — Churchill, who was a Liberal cabinet minister before that party fell apart; Thatcher, who came from a traditionally Liberal and Methodist family; and Blair, who relates primiarily to the old Liberal tradition within labour rather than the socialist element.

The differences are important, (and get lots of air time) but so are the similarities, which are so pervasive that we tend to be as unaware of them as fish are of the water in which they swim.

Probably without knowing it the Scots-Irish portion of the American character is what Europeans hate most and understand least about America, this goes for Blue Staters as well. It’s no coincidence that the places with lots of red were once once populated by significant number of Scots-Irishmen, and vice-versa. Without that “meme” imbedded in our psyche, we’d probably look at Europe like Canadians do.

In my view, the Scots-Irish don’t account 100% for our culture, but they account for most the differences between us and Europe, and especially the British.

One value that conservatives have trying to preserve for the last 50 years is Federalism. Maybe dumping Roe v Wade will not look like such a bad idea to the left if the alternative is nationwide bans on abortion and gay marriage.

I have also hypothesized that if the democrats do not suicide as a socialist labor party. they will have to develop other themes that are more resonant with the broader trends in american society. as suggested above Isolationism and its ugly step-sister nativeism will be temtpting themes. Nativeism will be one way to keep the loyalty of the black community if the Republicans make off with too many Hispanics.

You can spin theories about which strain of American is most American or most essential, but in actual fact we got where we are today with all of the elements, and it can never be proven that it could have been done without any one of them. And niether political party is going to hold the lead position if it writes off big blocs of America, red, blue, or purple.

But the Jacksonians at heart are isolationsts, which doesn’t bode well for the Wilsonian foreign adventurism of the Bush administration long term. I hope the Republicans are aware of this or they could be having this same conversation in reverse in 4 years.

So, should we let Mendocino County back in the real world? They went from 75 Gore, 20 Nader, 5 Bush; to 68 or so Kerry, 30′s Bush.

What do you think, doc?

I suggest you read David Hackett Fischer’s Albion’s Seed for a persuasive argument against your position. I agreed with you till I read this book and looked at the persuasive evidence.

On Mather and the Witch Trials Mather agreed with the use of “spectral” evidence and that he condemned the trials very late in the day, well after his reputation, an thereby much of the moral authority of the puritan churches, was substantially eroded.

Texas does not have a right to seceed. It tried that in 1861, remember, and it wasn’t successful then, was it? What it does have is that a subdivision has already been approved by Congress, to be used when necessary. This provision was placed into the annexation treaty because Texans were afraid that two senators wasn’t enough representation for what they expected to be the largest state in terms of population.

(And we need a second amendment that says that no sitting Senator may receive an electoral vote.)

The “Blue” counties–home to tolerant and smart liberals–are dependent on water piped in from the “Red” counties.

So what happens if the “Red” California counties vote to remain in the Union, while the “Blue” ones secede?

I think the Republican vote there was a rebuke to cultural conservatives.

Bush did 18 points better than Keyes.

Not to mention a 130,000 undervote in the senate race.

The whole idea that this election was a victory for cultural conservatives is absurd.

http://www.greatlakesistan.com