Hicks & Slicks: Principles Drive Us Rural Voters or "Hicks" as some "Slicks" Like to Say

If you look at the results of last year's congressional elections you can't help but notice that the rural areas or the "STICKS" across the country heavily favored the GOP.

I suspect that for farmers and ranchers it turns less on partisan politics, and more on practical considerations and values that guide their lives and their businesses.

These voters did not cast their ballots in fear or ignorance. No they didn't! You know, as I was thinking, part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared.

People such as farmers who wager their livelihood on the weather and the markets each growing season don't run scared every time the economy tanks. They deal with the issues up close and personal every day, and they have a clear understanding of the facts.

They are not against government. Even the most conservative farmer or rancher understands that there are a few big things government does well -- defense, air traffic control and law enforcement, for instance. They are against a big, intrusive government that reaches into the smallest aspects of their lives.

They resist unreasonable rules and regulations formulated by unelected and unseen functionaries or "SLICKS". They resent the patronizing paternalism of the nanny state. Look what happened to Rep Sanford Bishop in 2010. After voting for Cap and Trade, the Healthcare Legislation, he almost had his goose cooked by the HICKS who live in the rural areas of the district, had not been for the SLICKS in the cities of Columbus & Albany who bailed him out by a hair.....Farmers abandoned him in droves despite being the go-to guy when it comes to Agriculture in this district & probably the entire state

The "HICKS" are unwilling to surrender their independence. They don't want a government that dictates what they should eat, what they should think, what they should do with their own property. They are tired of the arrogance of the SLICKS, that assumes bureaucrats know better than the rest of us how we should live.

The SLICKS might say it's simplistic, but farmers and ranchers really do expect a legislator to read and understand those 2,000-page pieces of legislation before voting "yes." It's just common sense.

When times are hard, farmers and ranchers cut back. They do without. They have a hard time understanding why government doesn't do the same. They can't accept that government employees are an elite class whose pay and benefits are protected from the harsh economic realities that impact their neighbors.

Many farmers and ranchers still unapologetically believe in America's exceptionalism. To them this is still a special place, where great things happen. It's a country where people of the most humble origins can make something of themselves if they are willing to work hard. They believe in providing a helping hand to those in need, but balk at creating ever larger groups dependent on entitlements.

Farmers and ranchers are the epitome of individual responsibility and self-reliance. Faith in themselves, and in the grace of God, drive them to plant the next crop, raise their families and provide stewardship for the resources in their care. And rather than bitterly clinging to these values, they happily embrace them as the guiding force of their lives.

Candidates, especially democratic who hold similar values earn their support.

For Some Republicans, Distortions & Lies are the Only Way to Win an Election

Once considered liberal and progressive Pre-1964, the Republican Party has been taken over by right-wing conservative con artists who lie, cheat and steal to gain and maintain power. From voter fraud and suppression to smear campaigns, personal attacks and media manipulation, they have been using the same strategies for more than a hundred years.

While Democratic Dirty Tricks showed up around FDR's first election in '32, Kennedy/Nixon (Chicago) in '60 and Lyndon Johnson in '64, these lead to The New Deal, Social Security and Civil Rights while Republican Party Dirty Tricks gave us depressions, poverty and massive national debt.

Some Republicans know if most people vote, they would never win so they try to demoralize the Democratic base and suppress the vote as much as possible, they buy some people off with tax cuts and scare the rest into voting against their own interests and that's how they win. It's a divide and conquer strategy that has worked well and they refine and expand it every election year. Hey if ain't broke, don't fix it! Its been a success for them, so I wouldn't blame them for re-creating the same strategy

• Demoralize the Democratic base with phony press releases and whisper campaigns.
• Attack opponents strength with character assassination.
• Suppress the vote in every possible way.
• Buy some people off with tax cuts.
• Scare the hell out of the rest of the voters into voting against their own interests.

Republicans today have two major factors on their side; a fanatical base willing to carry out the dirty tricks and the greediest billionaires to finance them. They deceive good people by raising the red flag of abortion and gay marriage to divert attention away from their arrogant and greedy policies which cause the poverty, war and destroying our Natural Resources we are facing today.

Now look, Democrats stretch the truth and even lie outright as well, especially when an embarrassing personal fact comes to light (Case in point, John Edwards, Anthony Weiner).

But lord knows some republicans lie alot and unashamedly, both on the campaign trail and when they're in office, and they slander their opponents whenever they get the chance. If political lying were a criminal offense, Democrats would be guilty of misdemeanors and parking violations, while Republicans would be guilty of the worst kind of felonies, aggravated assaults, Kidnapping, or worse.

Is Democratic policy is beneficial to more people than Republican policy??? Democrats have a distinct advantage in an election on the bread & butter issues. The majority of people in this country want good wages, employee and consumer protection, affordable health care, a well maintained infrastructure, and so on. They only want us to put our soldiers in harm's way when it's absolutely necessary.

Those are the kinds of things Democratic policy is all about, so Democrats believe if they more-or-less tell the truth, throwing in some exaggeration along the way and hiding their personal faults, they should win elections -- that is, if the elections are won on the issues.

The Republican philosophy is entirely different. It believes that what's good for the ruling class (The Upper Bracket) is good for the country. That's what keeps America strong. Low wages help businesses prosper, which makes the country richer, so low wages are a good thing...let's see an unemployment level of 6% or higher helps keep workers afraid of losing their jobs, so they work harder for less pay......or worker illness doesn't hurt the bottom line since there are always plenty of others to take their place, so affordable health care is an unneeded expense. Social welfare programs make people lazy and less willing to take bad jobs for low wages, so they're counterproductive. Now Social Welfare does make "SOME" people lazy, but not everyone who's on it....

How many people would vote for the Republican Party if it admitted to its core philosophy? 35%? 45%? Truly doctrinaire Republicans believe they must be in power, not just for their own personal gain, but for the good of the country. If the bleeding heart Democrats took over, they honestly believe, we would lose our wealth and our ascendancy in the world. So it's their patriotic duty to win by any means necessary. Since they can't win elections by running on their real agenda, they win by lying about their agenda and smearing their opponents with as much mud as they can. (They also do everything they can to divert people's attention, of course, by claiming to stand for morality, motherhood and apple pie and making people believe they're in danger and only the Republicans can keep the country safe)

When they want to pass tax cuts for the rich, they say the cuts are for the middle class. When they want to bankrupt Social Security, they say they want people to have more money for their retirement, and on and on.

A republican friend of mine who I've known for over 6 years said this..."We're (Republicans) the Daddy Party that knows what's best for the country, even if the people are too childish to understand. We may....stretch it a lil' bit, but they're doing it for all of us. Father Knows Best". I was taken aback by that statement, but he's still my boy & we don't let our politics get in the way of friendship, (he's a unabashed Tea Partier...me, a rural conservative democrat). That statement makes me think how many actually think like that? Who knows!

Anyway, I know I can be sarcastic sometimes when I write blog posts on this blog, but this is not one of those times. I'm being deadly earnest. This is the way things are. And it's why Democrats are always so frustrated and befuddled when the Republicans come after them with jaw-dropping lies and the nastiest of smears. Democrats can't believe anyone would stoop so low, because the Democrats' desire to tell the truth makes it difficult for them to understand how anyone can lie with such abandon. Hardcore Republicans, on the other hand, probably know deep down in their DNA that lying is the only way for them to stay in power.

A Politically Segregated Georgia is Not in the Best Interest of the People

These days, with blacks comprising a majority of Democratic state lawmakers in the Democratic Caucuses of the House & Senate black now equals Democrat. And the white Southern Democrat is becoming an endangered species. For blacks here in Georgia, that in itself is not a problem. Many enjoyed being in the Democratic majority through the 1990s and up until the early 2000s. But Republicans, for now, are the only game in town. And in the former Confederacy, legislative black caucuses find themselves in the same kind of wilderness that led to their formation in the first place.

Meanwhile, Blacks vote their interests, which do not lie within the ultra-conservative, Tea Party-infused, Republican Party. Although some Republicans would claim to vote in their interests, they would have to ask themselves why their Republican-controlled states suffer from some of the highest levels of poverty, and the lowest educational and health standards in the nation?

The story of the GOP in the South is one of white Democrats or "Dixiecrats" some like to call them, trading donkeys for elephants. After Lyndon Johnson passed the historic civil right legislation of the mid-1960s, disaffected conservative Southerners commenced the process of white flight from the Democratic Party. Voting rights and redistricting led to black power in the form of majority black districts. However, the unintended consequences were whiter, more conservative districts where Democrats -- particularly moderate and liberal white Democrats -- are unable to compete, where only moderate and conservative have the best shot at winning those type of districts.

Meanwhile, Republican majorities put themselves in charge of a process of racial gerrymandering, such as the case in the 2nd Congressional District,& a slew of legislative districts, allowing them to stoke the fires of racial polarization, and further segregate the state of Georgia for political gain. They say they are only following the guidelines of the Voting Rights Act & maybe so, but let's be real here, the more blacks you can put into a particular district, the more it increases the GOP stronghold on Georgia.

Plus, the Obama era has created a far more conservative Republican Party than the one that came to power during the Bush presidency.

Such an environment makes it increasingly difficult for a black candidate for statewide office in the future like former Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond who could be a candidate for statewide office in 2014. The old democratic party for the longest time remained democratic despite voting republican on the federal level for president & that was due to the crafty late House Speaker Tom Murphy who held together a fragile coalition of rural white & urban black democrats until his defeat in 2002. Georgia under democratic rule was the leading state in the south as far as progress. A business-friendly environment, lead by the quality of life led many citizens from across the nation to relocate to Georgia.

But the Party failed to educate these new voters the role the democratic party played in making Georgia the one, if not, the place to live, raise a family, open a business, etc, etc. That, in my opinion is one of the reasons the party fell like a house of cards in a matter of a few years. As the State Party drifted more & more to the left, mimicking the National Party, it became less whiter, oh wait, less diverse & more blacker & browner by the defections of rural moderate/ conservative democrats.......NOT A GOOD SIGN!

Let me end this by saying that the state HAS re-segregated politically due to racial gerrymandering. Black=Democrat, White =Republican & that my friends is not healthy for our great state.

Louisiana Gov. Huey Long (D) 1935.. Share the Wealth

Now you wonder where did President Obama get the whole :Share of the Wealth Idea..here it is..

50/50 Obama gets re-elected..But what If President Obama DOES get Re-Elected in November?

Hmmmm......, as we learned in 2010 and as we’re learning to some extent during the early month of the 2012 election cycle, the Tea Party has also caused the party to go off on bizarre tangents at times and to take insane stands like appearing to be willing to take the nation to the brink of financial chaos back in August. The “no compromise” position that the Tea Party represents may be good for internal party consumption and it may make the true believers happy, but it’s not good government and it’s probably not a good long term political strategy. A loss in 2012 that gets pinned on the movement would likely re-energize the “establishment” and more traditional conservatives in the party and cause a backlash against some of the more radical elements of the Tea Party. In the long run, this would probably be good for the GOP.


If President Obama wins it will almost certainly be with less electoral votes and percentage of the popular vote than 2008, making him the first president to win reelection with less votes since Woodrow Wilson back in 1916. What would President Obama be able to do in his second term? He's been politically impotent since January 2011 and there's no reason to think that this election year will be different. With 23 of the of the 33 senate seats up for reelection in 2012 held by Democrats the Senate you can it's almost likely to be held by Republicans. The only possible Democratic pickups would be in Massachusetts and Nevada. Many of these Democratically held seats are open in 2012 due to retirements. It's possible for Democrats to take back the House but they need to gain 26 seats to do so.

Although it seems bleak for the president, there is an awful lot that he can accomplish using one simple tool: The Presidential Veto. A re-elected President Obama COULD veto any extension of the Bush Tax Cuts, but that'll hurt the economic recovery, oversee the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, around 2014, he could call for changes to the HealthCare Bill..let's face it, that bill will not be repealed, despite all the tough talk by those on the right & he and can start high profile fights with Republicans over issues like the closing of Guantanamo, the federal budget, and the future of entitlement programs. Obama's second term would be marked by his ability to ironically prevent change. His re-election will prevent the privatization of Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security, which is one of the top goals of the GOP. With the political center being so wide open, the president should drop anchor there while the hard left & the hard right battle it out, tearing each other apart....The odds are against the president winning re-election, but its very possible that he will win a second term.

Barack Obama: The obstructionist for Republican change.

Robert Patillo Announces Bid For State House

Press Release from the campaign of Robert Patillo

Democrat Robert Patillo Enters Georgia's State House District 44 Race


Atlanta, GA – As the 2012 Georgia Legislative Session opens and just days before the nation celebrates the Dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., former democratic operative and attorney Robert Hillard Patillo, II has filed his campaign committee paperwork, Patillo for Georgia, with the State Democratic Party. Patillo told supporters, “This election is about working towards an agenda to restore Jobs, Justice and the American Dream in Georgia. It is time we put our dreams into action with new ideas and fresh leadership. Voters want to see leaders who will fight for their best interest. They realize candidates in the Democratic Party went to the Capitol and voted to cut programs like the HOPE Scholarship fund should be disqualified from representing this party and the needs of our community.”

Patillo's committee Treasurer Janice Mathis currently serves as the Executive Director of RainbowPUSH Coalition Atlanta Bureau as well as the RainbowPUSH Coalition National Vice President. Mathis noted, “I've worked with Robert on several legal issues. I know no one better to serve the citizens of Georgia. “Dwayne Brown will be serving as Campaign Chairman for Patillo's state house bid. “It is an honor to help elect a democrat that won't forget our shared ideals when he gets to the capitol. The top issues in this state are to restore jobs and support education and we need Democrats who won’t compromise in our pursuit of the American dream.”

Robert Patillo is a graduate of Clark-Atlanta University and Chicago-Kent College of Law in 2009 where he served as President of the Black Law Students Association. Previously, Patillo served as a Field Manager for Grassroots Campaigns, Inc. in fundraising for the Democratic National Committee in 2004, lead workers’ rights campaigns during the Student Labor Week of Action in 2005 and assisted Rainbow/PUSH in the 2005 initiative to re-authorize the Voters Rights Act in addition to working on issues of corporate diversity and minority representation in Fortune 500 companies. He recently served as the Statewide Field Director for Ken Hodges Campaign for Attorney General and currently works as a practicing attorney in Atlanta at The Patillo Law Group, LLC.

Prisons as Economic Development: Boom or Bust for Rural Georgia?

In Georgia today there are more prisoners than farmers. And while most prisoners in Georgia are from urban communities, most prisons are now in rural areas with high levels of poverty & a unskilled, uneducated workforce. During the last two decades, the large-scale use of incarceration to solve social problems has combined with the fall-out of globalization to produce an ominous trend: prisons have become a "growth industry" in rural Georgia, in fact Rural America.

Communities in isolated regions of the state began suffering from declines in farming, mining, timber-work and manufacturing are now begging for prisons to be built in their backyards. The economic restructuring that began in the troubled decade of the 1980s has had dramatic social and economic consequences for rural communities and small towns. Together the farm crises, factory closings, corporate downsizing, shift to service sector employment and the substitution of major regional and national chains for local, main-street businesses have triggered profound change in these areas.

The acquisition of prisons as a conscious economic development strategy for depressed rural communities and small towns in Georgia has become widespread. Many small rural towns have become dependent on an industry which itself is dependent on the continuation of crime-producing conditions.

Ironically, while rural areas pursue prisons as a growth strategy, whether this is a wise or effective strategy is far from clear. Increasing evidence suggests that by many measures prisons do not produce economic growth for local economies and can, over the long term, have detrimental effects on the social fabric and environment of rural communities. Moreover, this massive penetration of prisons into rural Georgia portends dramatic consequences for the entire state as huge numbers of inmates from urban areas of the state become rural residents for the purposes of Census-based formulas used to allocate government dollars and political representation.

Despite a lack of studies documenting the effects of prisons on rural areas and small towns over time, prisons are now heralded by economic development professionals and politicians of all stripes as beneficial economic engines for depressed rural economies like the one up in Baldwin County which was hyped by then governor Sonny Perdue, & State Senator Johnny Grant in 2010. Along with gambling casinos and huge animal confinement units for raising or processing hogs and poultry, prisons have become one of the three leading rural economic enterprises as Georgia and localities seek industries which provide large scale and quick opportunities.

The competition for prison "development projects" has become fierce and political. In order to be considered competitive in the bidding wars for public prisons, rural counties and small towns give up a lot to gain what they hope will be more: offering financial assistance and concessions such as donated land, upgraded sewer and water systems, housing subsidies, and, in the case of private prisons, property and other tax abatements.

A significant development in rural incarceration is the advent of private prisons. While private prisons do fill most jobs with new recruits when they open, and they sometimes give a hiring preference to local residents, they fail to provide a stable employment base in their host communities because they suffer extremely high rates of job turnover -- three times higher than the rate for public prisons. Correctional officer turnover rates in for-profit facilities are due mostly to poor training and low wages. This rapid turnover can create staffing problems that play out in understaffed shifts, low morale, and a sense of instability in the facility and the surrounding community.

While the growth in prisoner population and new prisons have increased dramatically, without other interventions such as changes in mandatory sentencing laws and parole policies, or more extensive use of alternatives to incarceration, prisoner populations and prison-building may climb upward again.

As well, the use of prisons as money-makers for struggling rural communities has become a major force driving criminal justice policy toward mass incarceration of the urban poor regardless of policy rationales like rising crime and prison overcrowding. In my opinion, When legislators cry 'Lock 'em up!,' they often mean 'Lock 'em up in my district!.'" LOL!! Indeed, the rural prison boom occurred at a time of falling crime rates and experience shows that the federal and state governments are reluctant to pull the plug on the many interests that now lobby for and feed off prisons. Allowed to continue, this cycle will have catastrophic consequences for the health and welfare of individuals, families, and communities in urban and rural areas, and indeed for the nation.