It's the Identity, Stupid

Look at this red and blue map of America:



I find this map fascinating, because the red-blue divide of states on the electoral map are reproduced in a red-blue divide between Catholic and Lutheran) counties on one hand, and Baptist, Christian, Mormon and Methodist counties on the other hand. I think this is fascinating stuff, and you can find many more of these maps here.

I reproduce this map not to argue that certain religions are inherently liberal, and that others are inherently conservative. Truthfully, I do not think that is the case at all. Rather, as we approach election season, I reproduce this map because the progressive netroots is composed of political obsessives. Most of us spend an inordinate amount of time focused on current events, legislative policy, abstract matters of ideology, infrastructure, media narratives, electoral activism, and general strategy. Sometimes, I feel that because we are so obsessed with politics online that we often lose touch with what truly motivates voters. 80% of the country has no idea who Ann coulter is. Hell, 60% of the country has no idea who Harry Reid is.

Over the past year and a half, I have slowly developed an argument that the electorate is, in general, non-ideological, not interested in policy, and generally unmoved by the day-to-day minutia of political events that, within the blogosphere, are treated as cataclysmic events. Sure, most people hold general political beliefs, but in general national voting habits are motivated by something else--something more basic. As we look for ways to motivate voters in November, we need to remember the powerful role that identity plays in political decision-making. As progressives, we shrug off concepts such as the "battle of civilizations," but if you look closely at demographic data, maybe it is a battle of civilizations taking place after all. We may very well be living in an era of identity politics. Who knows, maybe every era of American politics is an era of identity politics.

Motivating voters and pulling off a landslide election will require a gut-level change of attitude about the two parties among millions of Americans. For all of the great policies everyone will suggest Democrats to run on this fall, ultimately winning will be based just as much on how Americans view their identity in relation to the image of the two coalitions as anything else. We need to avoid falling into the wonk trap of assuming that people are motivated by policy details. It is the identity, stupid. We need to explore ways to motivate voters for progressive causes with that in mind.



Display:


Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Its Ralph Reed, stupid. Ralph reed has organized the talking points memorandum to go through the Baptist Church Sermon network.

The catholics work on abortion and other issues. The blue maps there for catholic parish areas are going through solidly red (GOP) held territory.

I think the key to understanding the map is not so much how religion and politics should mix together, they don't at all. They don't even promote identities, ie - you don't see yourself as a christian american, you see yourself as an american, and a christian.

Instead the key is to know where the GOP message machine gets franchised. Baptists are annoyingly capable of carefully crafting statements that accomplish political goals.  Note that the policy objectives aren't met, but political goals are.

What you're seeing here is a map of how Karl Rove and Ralph Reed helped push the democratic party off its natural base. The red on this map represents a solidly democratic leaning group of people - and delivered 9 of the last 10 democratic presidential candidates who successfully ran for the white house.

Not identity. These people don't see themselves as democrat or republican, they see themselves as americans.  And they are all being told the same thing by the GOP right now: the GOP is messed up, but surely you don't want to vote for the democrats.

And why? Because the Democrats still haven't embraced reform.


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:33:12 AM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

and, to borrow from advertising parlance - the democratic party in this area is a failed brand, I might add. they brand the democrats as metrosexuals - the democrats here are larely incapable of changing it.

Want to know how to win it? Third party, baby.


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:35:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Kevin Phillips really spells it out in his book "American Theocracy."

The southern Baptist Conference will not be satisfied until they have total control over America.  They want that map to be totally red.

The above mentioned Ralph Reed is a strong proponent of a theocratic state. Maybe while he is serving time in prison he can write about his struggles.


by alfredo on Fri May 26, 2006 at 12:08:11 PM EST

The Baptists' About-Face--And T-Shirt Message (3.00 / 2)

Southern Baptists used to be among the most decentralized of churchers.  It was only in the last decade or so that theological conservatives took over, and centralized power.  A very good case could be made within the Southern Baptist Church that this break with Southern Baptist tradition was a mistake, and ought to be reversed.

Furthermore, there is a deeper mistake that can be pointed to:  Baptists were originally a persecuted minority in America, and as such were vigorous supporters of religious tolerance and separation of church and state (Jefferson's phrase "wall of separation" occured in a letter written to Baptists).  If we could succeed in returning Southern Baptists to their roots on these two counts, that would be a major accomplishment in restoring a more reasonable politics.

But to really get us on the right track in this country, there's a third about face we need from the Southern Baptists--we've got to get them reading the Bible again:

Matthew 25:

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Everlasting fire, dudes.  That's what the Bible says in store for hard-core conservatives.  The "throw-them-in-prison-and-throw-away-the -key" crowd. The "welfare queen" crowd.  The anti-immigrant crowd.

Let's just get them reading it, shall we?  Let's see a million t-shirts emblazoned with the message, "Matthew 25: 31-46."

If you want a message that resonates deep into the Bible Belt, sowing cognitive dissonance wherever it does, that would be my suggestion about what the DNC ought to spend a couple of million dollars on in the next few months.  Heck, they'll make it back in sales.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:02:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Baptists, Conservatives, and Goin' to Hell (none / 0)

I must say that I grow tired of being portrayed as a heartless, uncaring, so-and-so just because I don't believe in the majority of government hand-outs (or at least to the extent they are taken).

I won't attempt to argue the meaning of this parable from Matthew (other than to say I would not interpret it as literally as you are doing; but if you want to be literal, look at vs. 33 and see which side the goats and sheep are on :-) because yes, the Bible obviously does say that we need to take care of the poor and less fortunate. However, it does not say that it is the government's responsibility to do so. The thing is, us "hard-core conservatives" (at least the evangelical christians among us) believe it is the church's duty to do this. This is why I give money to my church and to other private charities.

Donating to private organizations allows me to target my giving to the causes I most believe in. Plus these groups are infinitely more efficient than some big government bureaucracy. And if they do go astray and mis-spend their donations, it is much easier to hold their feet to the fire.

So, it's just a different way of thinking and acting. And stating that "hard-core conservatives" don't care about others because we don't believe in hand-outs is completely inaccurate, as you are only dealing with a single side of the issue.


"Don't get stuck on stupid" - Lt. Gen. Honore
by RepTroll on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:26:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're Entitled To Your Opinion, Not Your Facts (3.00 / 3)

Two points:

(1) There is no Christian love shown in the rhetoric of those who demonize "welfare queens."  However you rationalize your policies positions, if you gain political power in this manner, you clearly do not see Jesus in the least of these.  End of story.

(1a) The same applies to "tough-on-crime" rhetoric.  And anti-immigrant rhetoric, as well. No matter what you claim on policy grounds, the rhetoric used for political advantage reveals your side to be firmly headed for the fire.  No ifs, ands or buts.

(2) We've already tried your way, and it failed miserably.  People only turned to the welfare state--rather reluctantly, I might add--after repeated failure to solve social problems by voluntary means alone. Social historians like Michael Katz have thoroughly documented how prolonged this failure was. This is not to say that I'm opposed to chruch-based charity.  It's just that nation-based justice does a much better job.  We have decades of experience in dozens of counties across the world to back this up.

The fact that you don't know this--or even, perhaps, willfully deny it--is an indication that you don't really care about people being helped.  You don't really see the treatment they receive as the way that you treat Jesus.  If you did care that way, then you'd be very motivated to find out what works, what really, effectively cares for them.

But you don't.  Your interest is in feeling righteous.  It's narcissism, pure and simple. It has nothing to do with the people you profess to care about.

I don't blame you for this, necessarily.  Most folks who think this way have been lead astray.  There are many lead astray for every one who leads them.  But here you are also doing some leading astray of your own.  So that makes me rather dubious about you.  If you really consider yourself a Christian, then you are in a heap of trouble here, just like I already said.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:26:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're Entitled To Your Opinion, Not Your Fact (none / 0)

This was one of the best comments I have ever read, on any blog. Wish I could give it a 10.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Sat May 27, 2006 at 02:41:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for Letting me have my Opinion! (none / 0)

First of all, I find it "interesting" that you speak of Christian love in one breath, and in the next, you are condemning millions of people to hell for simply being - gasp! - conservatives. You certainly paint with a broad brush, don't you?

Since you bring up welfare, let me respond to that. Personally, regardless of who I feel should be responsible for providing assistance, I have no problem with recipients who need short-term aid to get back on their feet, or who need long-term assistance due to disability, death of the bread-winner in a family, etc. I certainly do take issue with giving free hand-outs to those who simply refuse to be productive members of our society, even though they are fully capable of doing so. And that is based on Biblical principles, for as the Apostle Paul said, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat."

As for your arguments in (1) and (1a), I suppose I could counter that by saying liberals don't really care about getting people out of poverty; instead, you want to keep them in poverty and on the dole in order to get their votes by promising more free hand-outs. Fellons? Let's give them the vote too. Illegal immigrants? More votes. And, I could just leave it at that and say it applies to all liberals, in the same way you condemn all conservatives. But, that would be inaccurate; obviously, there a plenty of liberals who just want to help people, and who feel the government is the best conduit for that. Fair enough; I would also go as far as to say that - based on your words - you are one of those liberals. It's unfortunate that you don't afford my side - or me personally - the same courtesy. Nope, instead, you state as a matter of fact that we are all going to hell. Nice!

Comment (2): well, if government-based welfare works so well, then why has the poverty level basically remained flat in the 40 years since LBJ implemented the various welfare programs? That doesn't appear to me as something that "works."

But of course my favorite part of your entire comment is when you profess to know what is in my heart and what motivates me to give to charity, and that I am "in a heap of trouble" as a Christian. I'm not sure why you think you have the right to judge me, but all I know is that you are not the one that I will have to answer to come Judgement Day.


"Don't get stuck on stupid" - Lt. Gen. Honore
by RepTroll on Wed May 31, 2006 at 04:09:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Baptists, Conservatives, and Goin' to Hell (3.00 / 1)

If charity isn't the government's job why is prohibiting abortion and dictating who can marry who the government's job?


by js noble on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:51:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Baptists (none / 0)

It seems counterproductive to me, to label every county in the South as "The Baptists" as though they were all the same.

Both Jerry Falwell and Jesse Jackson are "Southern Baptists" with large "Southern Baptist" flocks.  Are they and their ideologies the same?


by admiralnaismith on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Please! (3.00 / 2)

Get your facts straight, okay?

Most black Baptist congregations are members of the National Baptist Convention.  From their website:

Founded in 1886, the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. (Convention) is the nation's oldest and largest African American religious convention with an estimated membership of 7.5 million.  The National President, Reverend Dr. William J. Shaw, has led the organization since 1999.

They have nothing to do with the Southern Baptists Convention.  The Southern Baptists, Southern Methodists and Southern Presbyterians were all formed in schisms over the issue of slavery.

It should be obvious that Black Baptists in general know and understand Matthew 19, just as it is obvious that White Southern Baptists are a good deal more confused.  (Just about everyone except for the Rep Trolls and GOP politicians of this world supports increased social spending, though many Southern Baptists are partial to racial demonization along the way.  Attitudes toward immigrants and prisoners are where most of them really fail the test.)


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 08:09:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Not all the Baptists, even in the South, are "Southern Baptists"

The "Baptists" in the South also include a large number of African-American Baptists, who have a very different outlook on many issues than their white counterparts.


by wayward on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:03:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

If citizens are motivated enough by something to get up early every Sunday (or Saturday) to attend services (and maybe participate in small group and/or committee meetings during the week), then it's probably a pretty safe to assume a correlation between spiritual belief, regious behaviour and personal politics (i.e., belief + obedience = political involvement).  This, I believe, is another one of the reasons that the "establishment clause" exists.

One little quibble, with the line "I reproduce this map not to argue that certain religions are inherently liberal, and that others are inherently conservative" you appear to confuse Christian denominations with the Christian faith.  Presbyterians, Catholics and Baptists are all recognized as denominations of the Christian Church.  Christianity is the religion, denominations are the style in which the religion is practices (cf, Islam is the religion and Shia and Sunni are the denominational equivalent).  Now, this is not to say that some denominations consider themselves the "true" way to practice the faith and, therefore, look upon the other denominations with a mixture of disdain, contempt, and/or amusement.  Christian denominations probably can agree on over 90% of their faith, but it's that 10% where they don't agree where the "conflict" occurs.  That, I believe, is the antoher one of the reasans that the "free expression" clause exists.

Look at the various creeds and mission statements of the denominations.  Compare that to republican and democratic political platforms.  There, IMHO, you will find your correlations to "red" and "blue".  Personally, I think that Erich Fromm covered a lot of this ground in his books "Escape From Freedom" and "To Have or To Be".


by Ranger31 on Fri May 26, 2006 at 12:23:57 PM EST

Conservative Identity Politics (3.00 / 2)

I did a series of diaries on conservatism as identity politics a few months back, ("Conservatism As Identity Politics--Intro",  "Conservatism As Identity Politics--Pt2: Hard Core Data",  "Rightwing Authoritarianism and Conservative Identity Politics (Pt 3 in the series)",  " Social Dominance Orientation And Conservative Identity Politics (Pt4 in the Series)",  "How Racism Changes Form--Conservatism As Identity Politics, Pt5").  For a very clear picture-at-glance of what I'm talking about, we can take a look at polling from way back in 1964, when an extensive survey designed by Lloyd Free and Hadley Cantril was conducted by Gallup.  The data was written up into a book published 3 years later, The political beliefs of Americans; a study of public opinion.  One of the findings had to do with perceptions of power, which were found to releate to "operational conservatism," a measure based of opposition to specific spending programs. Operational liberals include large numbers of ideological moderates and  conservatives.  Operational conservatives, OTOH, represent the hard core of conservatism:

As I noted then:

At the time this survey was taken, blacks were widely disenfranchised throughout the South, had barely any representation in Congress, and no leadership of any large city. The notion that they had too much influence could not be equated with any objective criteria-it was a measure of prejudice, nothing more. The case is less extreme for the other out-groups, but the opposition to them having more influence was much more clear-cut. Yet, none represented a truly dominant power in American life. At best, they stood up to defend their spheres of interest, winning some, losing some.

What explains this, IMHO, takes us back to the fundamental point of my series:

Here's my thesis: Conservatism is a form (indeed the original form) of identity politics.  It is expressed through multiple forms of political ideology based on justifying elite rule and the division of the human race into dualized classes (ideal and counter-ideal) in terms of some "natural" moral order.  

Conservatism appears in various forms as the rationalizations and dualized classes shift over time, and in three distinct states of realization, reflecting different levels of development of the self.  The overt rationalizations commonly mistaken for conservative ideology are, in fact, derivative phenomena--tertiary at best.  The primary phenomena is the creation of a conservative identity, the subject of conservative political narratives.  The secondary phenomena is the supporting ideology of superior and inferior groups, casting conservative identity as something to be preserved, promoted, and defended against the forces of evil, embodied in its demonized others.  The primary and secondary phenomena are relatively constant over time, while the tertiary phenomena vary considerably.

To summarize, what matters most is the narratives people use to define their own identities, individually and collectively.  What happened in 1929-1936 was a massive re-definition of national identity, the formation of the New Deal coalition.   The same thing is potentially possible today, the first time since the 1920s when conservatives have controlled all three branches of government.

Of course, to do that, we need to articulate a powerful progressive alternative.  This will not come from the Democratic Party.  Not until we force it to.  We should remember that there were four federal elections in this definitional period: 1930, 1932, 1934, and 1936.  So we should not despair at the lack of progressive leadership in the party today.  Rather, we should work like hell to change that, seeing the Democratic Party as the primary battleground, if we want to create a fundamental change in the direction of our country.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 12:27:06 PM EST

Re: Conservative Identity Politics (none / 0)

Rosenburg you r saying that the Democratic party will not rise to the occasion. UR also saying that the party can be forced to rise to the occasion if we spend much energy doing so.

I once sailed on a boat that had leaks. It was a constant bailout if we hit heavy seas. So, if we were going to take it through a rough part of the ocean we always were wary - scared of our own shadow.

You sell the boat, let them scuttle her for parts + take the hit. Get a new one, strong and well made.

I believe strongly that your idea is to win for a party , to build aparty that can hold within its bound the good people of america - not just bible thumpers but people like john edwards and his kin who may not get off wearing turtleneck sweaters and saying how pietzche nietzsche is at a coffee shop but they turn yellow dog and stay there.

ralph reed has big signs in my neighborhood. i think he's a creep. he's a winner. what the hell is he doing here... first 3rd to make the inroad to here and all of his base vanishes.

maybe the point should be to battle against those who r destroying our country? maybe we r being too shy about our own vehicle or gun shy to get the job done.

i would love 2 hear what u have 2 say


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:56:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Honestly, I'm Not Sure What You're Saying (none / 0)

If you're saying we should abandon the Democratic Party, I'll just say that it's not as easy as trading in a boat, for the rather obvious reason that it's perilous to analogize between individual actions and group actions.

Personally, I think we have everything we need to win.  Not everything we'd like to have.  (Just one national network that wasn't cowed by the right would be an enormous boon, for examle.)  But everything we need.  The problem is, we have too much:  We have the excess baggage of our permanent consultant class, we have the Vichy Dems and the Versailles Dems.  Ditch them, and we have everything we need.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:05:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (3.00 / 3)

This isn't an election cyle issue, and it won't matter for this cycle.  To win the the question of identify is a long term issue. That's  the first thing you must realize in any solution. If you are thinking short term, then you have already gone down the wrong pathway. If you want to know why HRC will fail at triangulation, your description of what is happening is in part why. The only real solution is a person-to-person, neighborhood-by-neighborhood transformation that happens over time.

There are no BIG answers to this. It's someone like me, a gay black guy, sitting down with my evangelical friends and having a real conversation about the things that matter to me, and to them and coming to an understanding. It's sitting down with people without preconceptions on either side. That's a tough battle to win- you basically got to catch people where they are open. Where those places are maybe maximazed- ie, if we can id where people are most likely to be receptive to changing their views.  I don't think every place is going to be that place. Certainly maybe the church can be one, if you come there with a different dialogue. That dialogue starts from not saying being Christian is wrong- but saying that Christianity requires more of the faithful. To question their moral certainty of issues of which they know they are right- and asked does the Bible indeed say that? This is a harder ground to win on because it requires you to look honestly at stories and to understand why people value them. None of the things I am suggesting are easy  one election cycle solution. They are also not necessarily political solutions. They are community solutions for understanding each other. But, that's what the Republicans most do not want to happen.

If the Evangelical starts to understand a gay guy like me- then what is left. If sex can not be controlled- one wedge issue is lost- and the debate on economics could begin. And they don't want that. Basically to win you have to get passed the misdirection. That takes a lot more work because as they say its easier to destroy than to build. THe Republicans job is inheritely easier than ours- they appeal to base instincts. on Donkey Rising- this was discussed- but the point was missed. Our goal is to appeal to the higher instincts but that requires Democrats to be more connected to the community than Republicanas because that is a dialogue that can only happen one on one. This is why the 50 state strategy is a good beginning- in terms of the political. To begin to pull away from the national and to return the the root meaning of why Democrats are what they are- the helping of the little guy at the local. I am struck by how many of these things- social issues to economics to whatever- are really just about our inability to talk to people at the gut.


by bruh21 on Fri May 26, 2006 at 12:52:38 PM EST

Well done, BUT. . . (none / 0)

Chris, this is great stuff, as was your whole series last year on demographics.  Your central conclusion -- that identity politics is key, especially for Republicans -- is right on the mark, as is your related conclusion that the identity in question is evangelical conservative Christianity.

I have two comments:

1.  Be careful, not to overgeneralize.  Even in the most strongly polarized categories -- white Baptists, for example -- more than a quarter of the individuals in the category vote the other way.  Never write a person off because they're "on the other side."  You'd be surprised how many progressive charismatics you'll find out there, for example.

2.  Remember how people in all these categories get their ideas and information about politics: from their peers.  Whether that's in church, in the grocery store, on the sidelines of a Pop Warner game, or whatever.  Seculars are less likely to be long-term members of groups and organizations and are more likely to get their ideas and info online.  Progressives can win the votes of sympathetic people who seem to be "across the divide," but we have to reach them where they are.


by DFLer on Fri May 26, 2006 at 12:53:19 PM EST

Re: Well done, BUT. . . (none / 0)

don't also write off white baptists who vote for teh gop / seriously - the identity thing depends upon a constantly maintained focus on politics and not policy

they r beginning 2 realize that politics
do you understand - not policy - has been the
way that they have been manipulated

I know people who want the gop to lose, from within the gop


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:58:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

So then when someone says we should run on health care, jobs, gas prices, and whatnot, is that running on issues?


by Matt Stoller on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:02:25 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

issues are cool matt. everyone loves 'em. but say that you and I are going to go in and bomb al qaeda and pull out bin laden by his beard for a 20 million dollar payday

1. do you trust me to cut the check for you if we win?
2. if you know theres trouble in my world - would you rush into the cavern with me to take your 9

dude. the whole point is, identity is being used right now to keep the dems out of it. its like the color make and model of the car ur driving

it is ur way of saying to the world, this is who i am

the issues are like the engine, which, if you have an oil leak in a ferrari like the gop does - you just hide it + tell everyone how it corners on rails and they all go wow that sounds cool wish I had that car.

in one of those states, ga., the dems are now projected to LOSE seats even with all the issues the gop has suffered...


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:02:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Concerning Catholics (none / 0)

Personal political formation in Catholic families is very complex due to the broadness of the tradition itself. Without question, there is a strong impulse to protect and defend the weak and to do good works -- talking a good game doesn't cut it. This explains a good part of the anti-abortion hysteria. I've never seen this highlighted, but believe people raised as Catholics have been inculcated into joining, membership, and navigating organizations large and small. Certainly true of me anyway, and I lapsed forty years ago.

The right wing lunatics who have made such inroads in the American Catholic Church recently leave millions like me shaking our heads, having experienced something quite different growing up in the 50s and 60s.
.


by MikeB on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:09:36 PM EST

Re: Concerning Catholics (none / 0)

The Catholic Church has had serious problems with the policies of both parties. I would say that the Church is economically liberal and socially conservative. There is no "Catholic" way of voting - even the bishops and cardinals are divided.

It is not that "right wing lunatics" have made such inroads into the American Catholic Church as much as they are the most organized and have the biggest megaphone.

I find it interesting how many Catholics who are so concerned about abortion and other "hot button" issues glibly dismiss the Church's social teachings on issues like poverty, the death penalty, and more importantly war, issues that are a much more directly affected by public policy.

You don't have to sit at Ted Kennedy's table to be a "Cafeteria Catholic".


by wayward on Fri May 26, 2006 at 03:54:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Concerning Catholics (none / 0)

abortion, stem cell research. those two are the stock in trade of the right wing lunatics.


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:03:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Concerning Catholics (none / 0)

I don't think Catholics who vote Republican dismiss those things- but when you believe abortion kills a human being its hard to think other issues outweigh it.


by js noble on Fri May 26, 2006 at 06:03:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Conservative Catholic Republicans (none / 0)

My father-in-law is a right-wing Catholic so I know a little bit about what makes them tick. They don't vote Republican because they want to protect the unborn. They vote Republican because they are authoritarians. Abortion, to them, is a sickening symptom of the over-sexualization of modern American culture. Of course they think abortion is, in fact, murder. But they'll make excuses for the death penalty or the Iraq war, and they won't make excuses for abortion - all of which involve the unjust taking of human life according to the current Church. The fact is, conservative Catholics hate what they see as disorder - especially cultural and social disorder.  That's why they fret over illegal immigration so much. They look at government programs to help the poor as nothing but "boondoggles for the Jesse Jacksons." They donate to their charities not because they really think it will help the poor, but because they fear they will go to Hell if they don't go through the motions of helping the poor. They are deathly afraid of people who don't believe they will punished in the afterlife for wrongdoing. It's all about fear - of temporal chaos and eternal damnation. Or, as my father-in-law always likes to say, "Order is Heaven's first law."

There is also a strong whiteness component to it as well. They are often very racist, viewing non-white minorities themselves as evidence of social disorder. In fact, many of the staunchest conservative Catholic Republicans are white ethnics (Polish, Italians, e.g.) living in places like Waukesha, Wisconsin or Livonia, Michigan.  They deeply fear "the blacks and the Mexicans," because of "their penchant for crime." These folks were great Wallace voters in 1968 and 1972, by the way, and became Reagan Democrats in 1980. They aren't Democrats at all anymore.


by elrod on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:33:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Conservative Catholic Republicans (3.00 / 1)

While there are many in the pro-life movement who are honestly concerned about the sanctity of human life and how easily and casually it can be disposed of through abortion, my experience is that those who are the most politically active in opposing abortion are more interested in legislating their morality than in saving babies.

The ideology is that Government must maintain order, including moral order, at all costs. They want the civil law to reflect the Catholic understanding of what Thomas Aquinas called "natural law", regardless of the will of the people and regardless of whether or not enforcement is realistic or possible. Illegal abortion does not concern them, nor do alternative methods to reduce abortion. They want abortion to be against the law, not necessarily less abortion.

You are also right in that there is a strong racial component to it as well. Nearly the entire US Catholic hierarchy, from the liberal Roger Mahoney to the ultra conservative Raymond Burke, came out in favor of McCain-Kennedy and against the House immigration proposal. Mahoney was right in that the Church would be obliged to disobey certian portions of the House bill, specifically the "anti-Good Samaritan" clause. Can you imagine a Church refusing to aid it's members, even if they are dying in the desert? Yet these "more Catholic than thou" right wingers start attacking the bishops.


by wayward on Sat May 27, 2006 at 07:58:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Conservative Catholic Republicans (none / 0)

Sorry for the late reply, just noticed this.

My entire family on father's side is Catholic. About half of them vote Democratic, the other half vote Republican ONLY because of the abortion issue. The Catholic church is basically socialist on all issues other than abortion, homosexuality and reproductive freedom. Your father-in-law might be an authoritarian but he's not archetype of a Catholic.


by js noble on Mon May 29, 2006 at 10:26:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

I don't get the map. "Christian" is an umbrella category over all the others except for Mormonism (and maybe Mennonism?) What is "Reformed?" Is that Jewish?

Can someone clarify how these terms are being construed? Because this looks totally wrong to me.


by owgriswo on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:09:39 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

On this site, they are using "Christian" as an abbreviation for "Restoration Movement Christians"; if you click on the "Christian" link on the main page, you will see that as the title of that map. No idea why they did that (as opposed to using "Restoration Movement" or something similar) because it's very misleading. And no, I have no clue what they are all about; a quick Google search didn't yield much.

"Reformed" refers to the Christian Reformed Church and is based on the teachings of John Calvin:

Christian Reformed Church


"Don't get stuck on stupid" - Lt. Gen. Honore
by RepTroll on Fri May 26, 2006 at 02:01:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Reformed churches also include the United Church of Christ, one branch of which was the Evangelical and Reformed Church, and, more broadly, Presbyterians.


by joyful alternative on Sat May 27, 2006 at 04:40:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Judgind from the map, the only church that is non-Christian that is first in any county is the Society Of Friends (Quaker).  

Mennonites and Latter Day Saints (Mormon) are most certainly Christian.  

All the church names on the map other than "Friends" are varieties of Christian.  The bare category "Christian" refers to churches which profess to practice a pure, exact recapitulation of the churches organized by Christ Himself two thousand years ago, principally the Churches Of Christ (not at all the same as the United Churches Of Christ).  

Reformed is the Christian Reformed Church of North America and related bodies.


3.39/-3.27 * Save the Moderates
by ChetEdModerate on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:06:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

The Quakers ARE Christian.

Mind you, the leading religious traditions in America are Caesarism, Mammonolatry, Vexillatiolatry, and Bibliolatry. So it's good to stand out.


by Left for the Left on Fri May 26, 2006 at 09:39:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Well, if the friends are Christian, that makes it unanimous.  

I must have been thinking of the Unitarian Universalists who are based on Judeo-Christian religion but not entirely within it.  They're not the majority anywhere.


3.39/-3.27 * Save the Moderates
by ChetEdModerate on Mon May 29, 2006 at 01:29:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Dutch Reformed (none / 0)

Reformed refers to the Dutch Reformed Church, prominent in Western Michigan. These are basically folks for whom the Enlightenment in the modern Netherlands is too much to handle. Come to think of it, I've always found it odd that modern Holland is one of the most cultural progressive places in the world, yet the Dutch diaspora has produced some of the most culturally reactionary people. I'm thinking mostly of the Afrikaaners, but also of the Western Michigan types. BTW, Ottawa County, home of Holland, Michigan, produced the largest vote for George W. Bush of any county in Michigan.


by elrod on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:36:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nothing New (none / 0)

My recall from taking a class in political psychology was that less than 1% of the country can be described as ideological.  Most people lack the time or interest in the minutiae of political discourse, and only fools expect the masses to care that deeply.  

What is important is that people employ powerful heuristics to make political decisions.  These heuristics, while flawed, are time-saving and are fairly reliable in producing outcomes close to what the people would choose if forced to comprehend reality fully and make completely informed choices.


Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
by Anthony de Jesus on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:14:53 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Good thoughts. I agree!


by ColoDem on Fri May 26, 2006 at 01:22:43 PM EST

The electorate is, in general, non-ideological... (none / 0)

Keep preaching that, Chris. It is true and that really cuts those of us talking here off from most of our fellow citizens -- who we MUST communicate with.

This was my main observation on Crashing the Gate.


Can It Happen Here?
by janinsanfran on Fri May 26, 2006 at 02:35:34 PM EST

Non-Ideological, unconcerned with policy (3.00 / 1)

Right on, Chris. The VA-05 is a great example of what you're talking about. Virgil Goode (R-MZM) got 65% of the vote as a Democrat, and independent, and a Republican. There's no way it's ideology getting him elected.

I was down in southside VA Wednesday with Al, on his big kickoff tour. We were set up outside a Food Lion handing out flyers and shaking hands. At first, I'd offer people flyers by saying, "Can I give you some information about Al Weed? He's a Democrat running for Congress." And it worked ok on some people, but the bubba-types (remember the group identified in the psycographic polling project?) didn't want to hear it.

So I started to say, "Can I give you some information about Al Weed? He's a former green beret and a farmer running for congress." Not one of them turned me down. TurnerBroadcasting is right, at least for the VA-05, in saying that the Democratic brand isn't working. Here's an example of an issue in terms of policy and identity: Renewable energy and switchgrass, which can be grown in this district.

If you start talking about new kinds of cars that will reduce the oil-trade-deficit, people turn off their ears. If you tell them that tobacco farmers need a new crop, and they can keep their farms in business by growing switchgrass, they listen, and they like what they hear. Start talking about how switchgrass can change them and they'll vote for the other guy; start talking about how switchgrass can let them to stay as they are, and they'll listen.

The problem is that a game of identity politics will always be skewed towards the status quo. People don't want to hear that their identity is bad, or wrong, or needs improving. It seems the only way to do it is to tell them "you're not changing your identity, you're preserving it." Bill Clinton said it better: "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America"


Al Weed for Congress | the official Campaign Blog
by Al Weed for Congress on Fri May 26, 2006 at 03:06:54 PM EST

The Identity Game (none / 0)

There's a lot of good points in this comment.  If you don't mind me getting a bit abstract in response, I'd like to add something about a central point here.

I want to say something to slightly modify this:

The problem is that a game of identity politics will always be skewed towards the status quo. People don't want to hear that their identity is bad, or wrong, or needs improving.

Identity has its strongest pull with the 50% of adults who are functioning at level 3 or below in Robert Kegan's typology of cognitive development.  Kegan's work is based on Piaget and Kohlberg before him.  He explains the stages of development in terms a constant subject/object self-structure, with changing content.

Folks at level 3 can take points of view as objects they can deal with, but do so within a subject framework that takes their social setting as given, and unquestionable.  They can't step outside their social setting and critique it--not just that they don't want to--because it's not object for them, it's subject.  Only folks at level 4 can do that. So, for folks at level 3, their social identity is their politics.  It's the bottom line, against which everything else is measured.

This worked perfectly well in traditional societies, Kegan remarks.  But today's society is far too complicated for this to work.  (The book in which he discussed this most fully is called, tellingly, In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life)  The way to use this to our advantage is precisely what you've outlined here--to realize that, whether they know it or not, folks have multiple, conflicting identities, and if you can find the right one to approach them as, you can make a connection with them, and build a discussion based on that identity.

Of course, this same logic works as well for people at levels 4 or 5, simply because we don't lose our social identities simply by being able to reflect on them, and realize their actual, complex nature.  But other things work as well, that won't work on level 3.  The message for politics is that we want to reach folks at every level, so level 3 strategies are the way to go for broad outreach.  Fancier stuff should wait until a foundation has been established, and you can see how abstract or analytical a person wants to get.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:13:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Identity Game (none / 0)

I think piaget doesn't make the mark, because its been proven that children can model the world at an incredibly early age - they have demonstrated an innate sense of counting, for example, by identifying the number of cooing women in a room. we  hook up eye lasers to them and their eye patterns always indicate the right number.

piaget was always saying that , this is a form or stage that must be attained but it is in fact innate.

I think what you really want to do here, because you're largely right - is just to say that people want to have their components sort of named out, you know, like levis jeans, cingular cellphones, whatever. they want their own ringtone.

but they also want to be on the side of the almight all powerful. and what ralph reed did, was say - hey, here's the gop - they're on gods side. do you want to be on god's side? join the gop.

-=-

To borrown an analogy, in war, sometimes its the level 3's that come back alive.

people are also born with an innate belief in god, believe it or not.  its not because they are dumb, but because they can get in touch with a side of themselves that may only express when a bullet is fired at you and you can move to the side quick enough.

see those cracked glasses on the ground there?
im westin nicht neuse, mein freund..


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:16:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A Little Knowledge Is A Dangerous Thing (none / 0)

Piaget developed a theory of cognition.  What you're describing is a matter of perception.

It would be deeply shocking if nothing in Piaget's work--begun circa 1920--didn't seem in need of revision in light of later research.  (And, indeed, some of the most useful work done since is precisely that--revisions of his original work.)  But you could at least try to find an example with at least superficial relevance.

    A little learning is a dangerous thing;
    Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;
    There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
    And drinking largely sobers us again.
      --Alexander Pope


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Nice set of maps. Although I'd never have believed that there are places in America with more than 1% Unitarian, I also am doubtful that there are none of us in the entire state of Nevada.
by Skjellifetti on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:12:56 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

A lot of college towns show up. Boone County, Missouri, for example. Bloomington, Indiana as well.

I don't understand the Nevada result. There are two Unitarian churches in Nevada - one in Las Vegas and one in Reno.


by elrod on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:43:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A Thermocline (none / 0)

If you are at all familiar with physics, what this map really identifies is that there's a sort of "thermocline" that separates a person's attitudes toward policy and overall politics. I think you are selling the average American short...they have a great idea what "Social Security reform" or the "War on Terror" means. But in the sense that their unconscious identities overtake them, these policy views are squashed.

And that's the moral of the story. It's not about framing per se, or about moderates or extremists or Lutherans and Catholics. It's about understanding who you are talking to, and WHAT MATTERS to THEM and NOT what a highly trained pollster or a focus group tells you. The Republicans have been succeessful because the know how to push people's buttons in highly homogenous communities. The Democrats usually hail from places not as uniform, so simply emulating the GOP won't work.

Especially because people aren't stupid. When they see bad policy, they know it, and they begin to lose faith in everything associated with that policy. Ask the Republicans.


by risenmessiah on Fri May 26, 2006 at 04:24:36 PM EST

Re: A Thermocline (none / 0)

you mean meteorology.

physicists use the term equipotential surface
- meterologists look at those great big maps, physicists don't use their jargon as much as you  might think

meteorology is still black magic...


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:20:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: religious identity (none / 0)

This map is the biggest reason I will never accept that Missouri is a swing state. Talent-less is going to break our hearts.

Now for a slightly off-topic comment: speaking of Catholics and democrats, could someone please take Lech Walesa's photo off the rotating roster of democrats at the upper left corner of the MyDD mainpage?

The guy was great as an opposition figure but not exactly a good democrat as president. Specialists on Polish politics in the 1990s could tell you about his power-grabbing and overreaching.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri May 26, 2006 at 05:43:46 PM EST

Re: religious identity (none / 0)

Missouri voted overwhelmingly for Clinton in 1992 and 1996. Also, many Missouri counties are majority Baptist, but I guarantee you they are much smaller majority Baptist than counties in, say, Alabama.


by elrod on Fri May 26, 2006 at 11:45:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Jesus, Chris (none / 0)

What the damn hell do you mean by the phrase, "...Catholic and Lutheran counties on one hand, and Baptist, Christian, Mormon and Methodist counties..."?

Are you not aware that they are all Christian?  If you want to start a food fight with Catholics just use the phrase, "Catholics on the one hand and Christians on the other"...Catholics are Christians, the first identifiable group of Christians anyway.  There is no sect of Christianity known as 'Christians'... and you should know better than to use it to ID a sect.


You're nobody...until you've been banned at dkos because you had an original thought or spoke truth to power.
by NorCalJim on Fri May 26, 2006 at 06:37:01 PM EST

Re: Jesus, Chris (none / 0)

I think you have a good point but it is one that exists outside this mapping issue.

On the website from which the maps are derived, they show "Restorationist Christian" as the full name of the group marked as Christian here.

More generally, however, the use of "Christian" by some Protestant groups poses identification challenges.  My wife, for example, attends a moderately conservative Baptist church but considers herself a Christian, rather than a Baptist, primarily.  She became a Christian in adulthood and has no strong attachment to the Baptist church over, say, another conservative Protestant church.  If she liked the services of another conservative church, she might switch and not consider it a conversion to have done so.  I suspect many Methodists and Presbyterians in conservative churches feel the same way.  They are Christians who happen to attend a good ______ church but might switch.

Compare her to the mother of a friend of mine, who grew up Buffalo speaking Polish as a first language and attends Holy Rosary in Baltimore, a predominantly Polish parish with some services in Polish.  She drives past probably 15 Catholic parishes from the suburbs to get there.  No way is she a "Christian" in that sense but a Catholic with no ambiguity in her identity.

It is comparable perhaps to the use of American to describe just U.S. citizens, whereas Canadians are North Americans and Venezuelans are South Americans.


by Crablaw on Sun May 28, 2006 at 08:45:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

This is why it would be so stupid to run with Hillary as the face of Dems in 2008. She's not likeable and folksy enough.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Sat May 27, 2006 at 02:37:10 AM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

"Oh we're not the jet set:
We're the old Chevrolet set.
Our steak and martinis
Is draft beer with weenies."

Of COURSE there's a strong cultural identity driving the whole thing.  The question is:  WHY is that cultural identity so thoroughly associated with the Republican party - which would seem unnatural, since the Republicans are the party of corporate bosses, not working folks.


by ignatz on Sat May 27, 2006 at 09:01:07 AM EST

repubs did a good job marketing (none / 0)

and they subtly appealed to racist impulses in the certain white southerners (and whites from other places, like Baltimore, where I grew up).

and dems abandoned economic issues of working people.


by mightymouse on Sat May 27, 2006 at 09:45:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

the key is connecting identity and issues (none / 0)

good pols need to understand the identity business, to help them communicate. then they need to sell the people on broad policy goals - explain, without condenscension, why things like national health care are a good idea.

and it helps to come off as honest.

americans need to pay more attention to issues. a good politician will help teach this to people. but without condescending.

i think consultants get to into the identity thing - always talking about "joe sixpack," etc. seems unthinking.


by mightymouse on Sat May 27, 2006 at 09:44:08 AM EST

So wait, you're saying that Kosstrong are wrong? (none / 0)

Feminism, reproductive rights issue and abortion are identity politics.

Race and ethnic issue are intrinsic to identity politics.

The ultimate wedge, queer & transgfender issues with  their bid for gay marriage is totally about identity politics.

If these 'issues' groups are not about "it's the identity, stupid", then what is it?


by liza on Sat May 27, 2006 at 11:19:57 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

It's the people, stupid.  The key is not in thinking up new ways to frame the issues, nor ways to talk about our values.  Right now, people identify as conservative the same way they identify as Eagles fans: it's a tribe they are proud to belong to.

And just like sports, politics is a star-driven game.  And right now we have no stars.  They had Ronald Reagan, who was big, big, big.  John Kerry: not a star.  No one wants to be on his team.  

All we need is the right guy or gal and we're in business in two seconds.  But make no mistake, we're in the hunt for someone to lead us out of the desert.

While we're at it, we might remember that those red state yahoos are our future partners, so let's find ways to admire what's admirable about them: certainly country music and NASCAR are enjoyable and fun for everyone, no matter which party they "root" for.


by jimpharo on Tue May 30, 2006 at 03:44:36 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

How's this for a Christian message? The Republicans have been winning with hatred for the last 6 years -- by appealing to our baser natures. "We won; get over it"; "You libtards"; "Whiners" and the like.

With the exception of the occasional bout of projection, the Republicans don't even bother to accuse the Democrat stereotype of being selfish or hateful -- they instead call us "hippies" and "moonbats" who want to give the terrorists therapy, etc. On the other hand, they try to get away with memes like arguing that they have the right to say what's done with their money, and other concepts based on selfishness and isolation. "I've got mine; screw the rest of you!"

How can it be so difficult to find a few appropriate Scriptural quotations to point out to the Christian voters that Jesus today would have been a Democrat "libtard"? He would have argued for more charity, more compassion, more understanding... MORE LOVE.

The Republican Party is apparently openly taking the role of the Pro-Hate Party, and they're hoping nobody calls them on it --

Gays? Hate 'em.
Liberals? Hate 'em.
Immigrants? Hate 'em.
Women's rights? Hate 'em.
Poor people? Hate 'em.
Brown people? Hate 'em (and take their oil).

Surely humility, compassion and selflessness, being Christian values, can be emphasized. They're far more legitimately "Christian" than gay marriage or abortion as wedge issues.


by Clavis on Tue May 30, 2006 at 10:41:22 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

lenovo
昭阳笔记本 电脑
by siteshow on Mon Oct 01, 2007 at 10:20:10 AM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Subject628
review of herbal phentermine online office
Online pharmacy hydrocodone will tramadol to
non prescription phentermine picking machine
effects phentermine side what like
pharmacy tramadol1 be you
Soma muscle relaxers bedridden online
Vicodin 5 500 Therefore drug
cheapest adipex the ComAn
adipex on line website information
Xanax xl one buy
tramadol on line1 that the
vicdin online pills
no prescription needed phentermine the secure
buy phentermine pill1 your that
Adipex no rx able customer
iv phentermine search web vicodin
hydrocodone elixir Advocacy increase Internet
snorting tramadol1 several and
Nicotine valium vicodin marijuana adipex loss
buy vicodin on line have arteriosclerosis
order cheap phentermine back HCL
phentermine ingredient vicodin buy
Hydrocodone sales plan physician to
buy phentermine online fact most
Buying hydrocodone pay dealing as
buy cheap diet phentermine pill directly and
cheap phentermine free shipping of to
3mg xanax the arteriosclerosis
Ic hydrocodone residual charge them
phentermine zoloft the than
phentermine prescription buy more
diet phentermine pill xenical time pharmacy
phentermine 30mg cheap doctors the
Order soma where is
Get vicodin There it
Hydrocodone prescription on George of
tramadol 200 very the for
generic phentermine     Density    Links toner
Ordering tramadol Thomas and appetite
Buy adipex online About Thing
phentermine prescription online the It
cheap phentermine diet pill at chronic
phentermine diet secure advice
vicodin mg fast Diarrhea
effects phentermine search search search side and your
buy no phentermine prescription M you
buy cod online phentermine1 his in
phentermine side effects medication the
does herbal phentermine work here vicodin
Buying xanax wisely difficulty
buy cheap phentermine cod can back
Hydrocodone online no prescription the therapy the
phentermine success story there to
Xanax treatment intake on
Xanax treatment junk United
cheap phentermine no rx a was
Hydrocodone online no prescription pharmacies hydrocodone the
Soma prices his and
Drugs xanax loss to
cheap online phentermine prescription Bob such
buy card master phentermine visit apply
phentermine online purchase the suffer
adipex delivery Com artificial
vicodin 7.5 it the
Snorting xanax the stamina
phentermine very cheap of dose
cheapest diet phentermine pill HCL online
buy tramadol dieting at
soma rx is Money
Xanax medication with heart
hydrocodone drug through the the
Xanax without a prescription itself Today
buy phentermine 37.5 pain you
cheap phentermine for sale doing pain
Xanax without a prescription you winning
Vicodin Mexico adipex doctor
purchase phentermine little to
cheap phentermine free consultation waited just
Hydrocodone 10 mg money a birds
buy cheap phentermine vicodin time
buy phentermine online pharmacy1 of from
hoodia and phentermine health for
phentermine on line web you
cheap online phentermine prescription back daily
phentermine success story your The
Soma drug utilizing of
Online pharmacy hydrocodone pay selling to
Get xanax the weight
vicidin extent buy
phentermine 37.5 mg suffer to
effects hcl in phentermine side to calculations
purchasing xanax filled write
buy phentermine pill1 the have
tramadol pain1 week of
tramadol hydrocodone as ways Adipex
Cheap xanax rewarding Didrex
phentermine weight loss result enjoy is
Cheap xanax the lesser
hydrocodone 5 500 infected less or
where to buy phentermine that enjoy
buy phentermine 37.5 and It
Low cost tramadol buy create a
by hren10 on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 06:12:08 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

Subject628
phentermine 37.5 mg M supply
viagra cialis levitra changed solution you
cheap tramadol arranged about
cheapest generic viagra about regulates country
pharmacy adipex We
buy viagra on line but enjoy be
snorting tramadol etc worked
tramadol pill available has
cheap phentermine for sale many professional
phentermine picture than are in
cheapest diet phentermine pill it and
best generic viagra on diet the
generic information viagra convince daughterinlaw can
phentermine for sale more Deep Pharmacy
canada cialis to much xanax
tramadol tablet1 of with
viagra sale buy it home or
phentermine diet pill buy duramine believed pain
buy viagra now online 70 a pay
cheap online phentermine prescription by hope
iv phentermine search to previous charge
buy phentermine on line1 some surgery a
viagra wholesale xanax consumers a
cheap viagra online doctor things With
cheap phentermine cod consult Online
diet health heart phentermine pill major do
cialis vs viagra to of relation
cheap viagra order online FDA be a
generic viagra pill soma drugs will
Buy adipex p the
herbal online viagra consumer quickly or
viagra online shop must adults felt
Adipex no prescription needed you
buy generic phentermine have day long
tramadol prescriptions P being
phentermine side effects to head way
cheapest diet phentermine pill sent public
buy phentermine cod also toward in
generic viagra in canada convenient more that
female viagra someone doctor way
tramadol on line generic or
cheap phentermine online duly prescribed
tramadol apap also or
free viagra cut soma We
review of herbal phentermine online tramadol no
phentermine diet pill buy duramine steps the Visit
buy cialis generic online way ideas mundane
diet leave phentermine pill reply symptom taking
buy generic viagra online now institutions mundane
viagra wholesale the on the
phentermine weight loss not Even
buy viagra now bottles internet you
overnight phentermine out lot
buy cheap phentermine online Services tramadol Canadian
tramadol pharmacology1 hungry to
cialis comparison levitra Anything pharmacy are
phentermine cheap no prescription tramadol prescription of
tramadol pain a Com
effects phentermine side strong way a
order generic viagra even soma available
canada generic viagra patent are of
buy online pharmacy viagra I between phentermine
buy phentermine online with pay pal1 Tim be as
tramadol tablet does most
4.24 buy viagra a the an
buy viagra uk and other occur
order cialis drugs to to
tramadol iv1 author with
phentermine 90.00 beans select tramadol
generic viagra bulk own ordering wide
phentermine iv who online
viagra online no prescription other can complain
viagra soft tab of over cautious
viagra information way technique by
tramadol 501 yet here
phentermine diet pill buy duramine websites there
cheap tramadol of ConsumerAffairs
tramadol 180 for everything
buy viagra in uk developed home need
where to buy viagra and usage one
viagra info you more should
adipex phentermine vs Institute more tramadol
canada order viagra Especially fatacceptanceselfesteem and
phentermine diet pill is author
finding cheap phentermine EVERY prescription
50mg generic viagra Decisions plan being
avoid fake viagra and the that
cheap price on phentermine website hydrocodone
citrate generic sildenafil viagra starters recoup care
cialis vs viagra gland related to
avoid fake risk viagra most how pay
diet in phentermine pill uk HAS Online
low cost phentermine overseas as
buy cheap phentermine cod your known
order viagra without prescription more to do
cialis side effects PR of closest
generic viagrageneric viagra you in you
by hren10 on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 06:29:14 PM EST

Re: It's the Identity, Stupid (none / 0)

KK
anal brunette know pills
lesbian 69 diet was
gay twink phentermine httpwww   
lesbian love person a
ga