Rockhead
October 3, 2005 3:47 PM Subscribe

Roy Moore – the “Ten Commandments Judge” – has announced his intentions to run for Governor of Alabama. Moore has followed closely in George Wallace’s shoes both as a judge (each began court with prayer) and with attention getting antics. As The Atlantic noted recently, “In style if not in substance, Moore's religious populism is a lineal descendant of the race-baiting that propelled Wallace to the statehouse a generation ago.” Here’s hoping level heads prevail in Alabama in ’06.
posted by wfrgms (52 comments total)

Here's hoping level heads prevail EVERYWHERE in '06.
posted by davelog at 3:49 PM on October 3, 2005

From the Atlantic article:

"After graduation Moore was sent first to Germany and then to Vietnam, where he commanded a military-police company supervising a stockade in Da Nang.
"By his own account Moore was so much disliked that he feared being killed by his own troops, and slept on a bed of sandbags so that he couldn't be fragged by a grenade rolled under his bed."

I'm guessing he doesn't like potheads.
posted by recurve at 3:56 PM on October 3, 2005

Coming soon to South Carolina as well. Phase One of the Christian Exodus movement has already begun:

The first move of ChristianExodus.org members has commenced. Our research committee selected two city/county combinations for Phase One. We believe we can reestablish constitutionally limited government in these two counties with the relocation of 500 Christians to one and 2,000 to the other. That number of activist émigrés, when combined with the present Christian electorate, will enable constitutionalists to win the city council, the county council, elected law enforcement positions, and elected judgeships. We will then be able to protect our God-given and constitutionally protected rights within our local community.
posted by leapingsheep at 4:02 PM on October 3, 2005

I couldn't care less who's the Governor of Alabama. They want a religious nutjob, more power to them.

Problem comes when the bible belt states (NC -> MS) have the same population as CA but 6x the number of Senators, so there is some spillover effect, like how for every tax $1 they send to DC they get $1.50 in federal spending...
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:14 PM on October 3, 2005

I'm moving to Canada anyway.
posted by j-urb at 4:16 PM on October 3, 2005

The first move of ChristianExodus.org members

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:19 PM on October 3, 2005

"By his own account Moore was so much disliked that he feared being killed by his own troops, and slept on a bed of sandbags so that he couldn't be fragged by a grenade rolled under his bed."

I wonder why his own troops disliked him so much? Maybe he stuck his soap carving of the Ten Commandments in the middle of the barracks and refused to remove it.
posted by fandango_matt at 4:24 PM on October 3, 2005

level heads in politics ?
posted by mishaco at 4:27 PM on October 3, 2005

Meanwhile, Jewish people everyone just can't stop laughing. Or crying.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 4:28 PM on October 3, 2005

Everyone here seems to be so down on the Christian Exodus people, but have you considered for a moment all of the fun picnics and three-legged races they're going to have? Hmmm?? Yeah, well, jokes on you. And then when they finally do take over your neighborhood with Fun Activities, you'll be all mad because you weren't invited, and you'll be standing in the corner with your frisbee like, "hey, what about me, I want to play, too," but it'll be too late, everybody will have already paired off with a partner for the balloon toss.
posted by billysumday at 4:32 PM on October 3, 2005

That Christian Exodus crap sounds like a one way ticket to another civil war.
posted by ddf at 4:57 PM on October 3, 2005

Okay, so I live in Alabama and I think he's going to have a tough time winning. The cities with the largest populations don't really care for him (a recent Berkley study rated Birmingham the 19th most liberal city in America (!)) and Riley (current govenor and Republican) has pretty good standing and has done a good job getting jobs from foreign manufacturers in the state. I'm not sure Moore can even win the primary. He stands no chance as a 3rd party candidate (although he could tip it to a Dem).
posted by dig_duggler at 4:58 PM on October 3, 2005

Also, for all those slamming my state, please note that we kicked him out of the alabama supreme court. Make all the hee haw jokes you want, but if you've never been down here you kind of sound like an idiot. There are backwoods areas that scare even me, but I've seen those in New York as well...
posted by dig_duggler at 5:02 PM on October 3, 2005

better a governer then a Judge, IMO.
posted by delmoi at 5:05 PM on October 3, 2005

Nobody saw this one coming!

Seriously. Nobody.
posted by I Love Tacos at 5:14 PM on October 3, 2005

I Love Tacos writes "Nobody saw this one coming!"

Except this guy with a blog back in February, this web site back in April, CBS News in June, etc.
posted by clevershark at 5:20 PM on October 3, 2005

Yeah I'm with Dig. I don't know about any really liberal cities down here, The majority of the populace does want a conservative, but it is pretty obvious to the not-crazy folk that Moore is a few commandments short of a monument. And Riley is very popular right now, I don't think Moore would stand a chance against him.
posted by SomeOneElse at 5:22 PM on October 3, 2005

That Christian Exodus crap sounds like a one way ticket to another civil war.

Yeah, except that they won't get anywhere with it.
posted by oaf at 5:22 PM on October 3, 2005

It also makes me sad that the citizens of Bama are so uneducated as to be so affected by all of this. If there were just a few people who could look back to history and realize never has a good thing come from theocracy maybe there would be a brighter day for Alabama. But, sadly, there is nothing but darkness.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 5:34 PM on October 3, 2005

The Christian Exodus movement reminds me of that whole "Hey, Libertarians, let's all move to Vermont and take over" thing a couple years back. Didn't really work out to the best of my recollection.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:35 PM on October 3, 2005

clevershark writes "Except this guy with a blog back in February, this web site back in April, CBS News in June, etc."

I think you might want to check the calibration on your sarcasm detector, clevershark....
posted by mr_roboto at 5:38 PM on October 3, 2005

clevershark: I think you're sarcasm detector needs some sarcasm detector grease.
posted by delmoi at 5:58 PM on October 3, 2005

Hey, I heard Judy Miller's got a book deal!

All of this totally surprising news, all at once.... amazing!
posted by wakko at 6:01 PM on October 3, 2005

Didn't David Duke also run for Governor of Alabama at one point? Or am I thinking of another state?
posted by kosher_jenny at 6:33 PM on October 3, 2005

David Duke ran in Louisiana, prompting the (AFAIK unofficial) campaign slogan for Edwin Edwards: Vote For The Crook; It's Important.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:41 PM on October 3, 2005

How could he be in the army? The sixth commandment might cause some conflicts, one would think.

Don't forget the Daily Show take on Christian Exodus.
posted by fungible at 6:59 PM on October 3, 2005

Forget Governor--let him run for President! (peeling off a few million from the GOP candidate) : >
posted by amberglow at 7:13 PM on October 3, 2005

Moore's going to win. The Republican incumbent, Bob Reilly, pissed off conservatives when he pitched a tax package that included hikes in the corporate tax to be paid by Hyundai and Mercedes (both of whom have built plants here recently) and consumer taxes paid on such things as lodging and car repairs. The sad part is that this is the most progressive tax bill this state has seen since... well, in a very long time.

The Democrats won't come up with anything interesting. They might run Lucy Baxley; she's kind of an off-brand Ann Richards and the wife of a former governor. Or god help us, they could nominate George Wallace Jr.

But yeah, Moore will win.
posted by Clay201 at 7:18 PM on October 3, 2005

Um, no he won't. He's really not popular here. He may take a bunch of tiny 'red' counties (and red in Alabama, well that's RED) but a majority of people in Huntsville, Birmingham, Montgomery and Mobile think he's crackpot. And that's most of the peeps.
posted by dig_duggler at 7:54 PM on October 3, 2005

Here’s hoping level heads prevail.

If you examine Moore's supporters, I believe you'll find that their heads are almost entirely flat.
posted by SPrintF at 8:02 PM on October 3, 2005

Here’s hoping level heads prevail.

If you examine Moore's supporters, I believe you'll find that their heads are almost entirely flat.

like the earth?
posted by Miles Long at 8:07 PM on October 3, 2005

dig_duggler;

I don't believe that they're going to elect, in place of Moore, any Democrat the state party has to offer.

It's true that Moore's crusade never had all that much homegrown support. But when it becomes a showdown between The Conservative and The Liberal (and it won't matter how far to the right the Dem is; he'll still, somehow, become "The Liberal"), The Conservative will win. He'll get all the votes that went to Reilly last time plus some extra that his grass roots, fanatical, faith-based supporters drum up among the evengelical, home-schooling-for-christ crowd. Bush will come down here and campaign for him.

If I'm wrong, then next year you get to make fun of me publically, here on Metafilter. But I'm feeling pretty confident about this prediction.
posted by Clay201 at 12:43 AM on October 4, 2005

I admit I am a big Riley supporter. While not a big fan of increased taxes, I did support his initiative early in his term - not because of the taxes, but because it would have fundamentally changed the power structure and modus operandi in the State for the tax base - not to mention the sweeping changes involving accountability and responsibility for lawmakers.

Riley has been successful so far at attracting big business to the state, and has even worked well with the Dimocratic legislature. He has supported sensible changes to the State Constitution, which is the nations longest (not to mention archaic and conflicting). Personally, I think Moore will lose big in the Republican Primary.

Here's the "30 second view" from a politically knowledgeable friend, I think it's fairly representative of the general populace:

"Baxley- This woman knows less about areas above Montgomery than my 6 year old. Will not carry areas of North Alabama.

Siegleman - a liar and thief. Everyone knows it, yet the Democrats tolerate this good ole boy dealmaker.

Moore- no comment needed. A nutbag of the highest order, he's beginning to make even conservatives queasy.

Riley- like the guy, but he will be remembered for one thing come poll time. All I know, I feel that the state is a lot better than it was when he took office. "

Me? My biggest concern is that Moore will drop out to run as a third party candidate and draw far right conservative votes away from Riley (as Perot did in 1992). If that happens, look for Siegleman to get re-elected and a return to cronyism.
posted by insulglass at 4:39 AM on October 4, 2005

It's true that Moore's crusade never had all that much homegrown support. But when it becomes a showdown between The Conservative and The Liberal (and it won't matter how far to the right the Dem is; he'll still, somehow, become "The Liberal"), The Conservative will win. He'll get all the votes that went to Reilly last time plus some extra that his grass roots, fanatical, faith-based supporters drum up among the evengelical, home-schooling-for-christ crowd. Bush will come down here and campaign for him.

You are assuming he will get the Repulican nomination. Moore v Democrat, I might agree. I don' think he can get the nomination. People like Riley and won't want to rock the boat. Plus Bush has come down to help Riley campaign and I would be willing to bet would do so again.
posted by dig_duggler at 7:17 AM on October 4, 2005

And why would I want to make fun of you? I just strongly disagree about how crazy the Republican party is here...
posted by dig_duggler at 7:18 AM on October 4, 2005

I have a question for those who are arguing that most of the population centers in Alabama won't/don't like Moore because they are too liberal: if that is the case, then how come the state consistently votes conservative statewide? Voting history of the state (since Dixiecrats became Republicans) shows a clear indication that the Republican/conservative candidate will win easily in a statewide race. If that candidate is Moore, it seems clear that he will win.
posted by dios at 7:29 AM on October 4, 2005

Moore will win if he's nominated as the Republican. It's a three-way race, with anyone having a shot at winning, if he loses the primary and runs as an independent. A lot of Democrats in Alabama like Roy Moore types just fine, and might like him even more if he added a populist tinge to his general election campaign.
posted by MattD at 8:42 AM on October 4, 2005

Voting history of the state (since Dixiecrats became Republicans) shows a clear indication that the Republican/conservative candidate will win easily in a statewide race. If that candidate is Moore, it seems clear that he will win.

Well, we voted in a Democratic Govenor in 1998. He barely lost in 2002 after a pseudo recount (geeky aside - this was a file i/o error from one voting machine in one precinct that granted too many votes to the Dem causing him to prematurely declare victory) . Granted Sessions and Shelby consistenly win, but that's true of almost any long standing incumbent. We did vote for Bush in 2004, but so did most of the country.

Some seem to be making the case that since we vote Republican in recent elections that if someone is a bible thumper he is:

a). somehow more Republican
b). a better candidate because he's more Republican

So an extreme liberal would be most likely to win, in say, California (who I think has a Republican Govenor)?

I would counter that:

a). Moore is too far out there and won't win the primary
b). Alabama is becoming progressively more liberal due to the influx of foreign companies and workers in Alabama.

Huntsville probably has more PhDs per square mile than most cities in America (due to NASA and all of the engineers at the military base). Birmingham has had a Democratic African American mayor for the last 2 decades and has an extremely large gay population (as well as a movie festival - John C. Reily just came :). Montgomery has had an art house movie theatre and a Shakespeare festival for quite awhile.

There are very very country areas. The churces managed to counter a lottery effort in 1998. We are not New York in terms of politics. But most of the stereotypes that people have in their mind no longer apply.
posted by dig_duggler at 9:09 AM on October 4, 2005

Insulglass has my prediction. If Moore goes 3rd party, look for a Dem. to win, probably Don "Corleone" Siegleman.

Apparently the Courts did not see Siegleman in such black and white terms as insulglass did though when they acquitted him.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:12 AM on October 4, 2005

Oh, and incidentally, your liberal base in AL is not necessarily in the cities. The Black Belt is lefty country!
posted by Pollomacho at 9:16 AM on October 4, 2005

It also makes me sad that the citizens of Bama are so uneducated as to be so affected by all of this. If there were just a few people who could look back to history and realize never has a good thing come from theocracy maybe there would be a brighter day for Alabama. But, sadly, there is nothing but darkness.

Right, right, because this sort of thing only happens in Alabama -- danger of a conservative backed theocracy gaining headlines and/or political power (and a majority of the vote in elections). Yup, no where else. Just one tiny red state surrounded by a sea of blue...

"Hello in there Cliff... What color is the sky in your world?" -- Fraiser Crane
posted by jca at 9:23 AM on October 4, 2005

Here's another reason to dislike Roy Moore -- his support for keeping this in the Alabama constitution:

"Separate schools shall be established for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race."
posted by jca at 9:30 AM on October 4, 2005

jca, I don't know much about that, and I would like to see more, but that article doesn't exactly show the point that you are alluding to. That is, it doesn't say that Roy Moore supports separate schools. The part at issue in the story seems to be suggesting that Roy Moore was supporting a position based on a reaction against creating an opportunity for federal judges to enforce things upon Alabama.

My guess is (but I am prepared to be shown more to show me if this wrong) that Moore was opposing judicial activism, and saw the removal of language from the Alabama Constitution that "public education is not a right" would permit federal courts to impose legislation having to do with education. If public education is not a right in Alabama, then federal courts can't micromanage it. If it is, then federal courts can use it as a tool to manage it. Moore's crusade against federal courts would be consistent with this view.

I doubt Moore argues, and I think the article and you are trying to suggest he does, that he believes black schools should be differeent than white schools.
posted by dios at 9:43 AM on October 4, 2005

I doubt Moore argues, and I think the article and you are trying to suggest he does, that he believes black schools should be differeent than white schools.

Correct, that was his argument here locally. But I still have my doubts about his intentions...
posted by dig_duggler at 9:51 AM on October 4, 2005

whoops. wrongly referenced text.
posted by dig_duggler at 9:52 AM on October 4, 2005

His stance was that removing that "Jim Crow" language from the Alabama Constitution would open the doorway to new school taxes -- something that was already an issue in the state. He and other groups argued that they opposed removing the racist language so that "reckless trial lawyers and activist judges will not be able to open the flood gates to increase taxes and that private, Christian and parochial and home-school families will be protected."

Everyone else, including the sponsor of the bill, argued that wasn't the purpose of the legislation, especially since the provision in question (segregated schools) isn't enforceable under federal law anyway. They simply wanted the out-dated (?) racist language removed from our state's Constitution.

So yes, I think it is fair to question his motivates and support in this case. I don't know his views on segregation, but his outspoken stance on that ridiculous issue gives yet another clue as to what type of wingnut he might be.
posted by jca at 10:11 AM on October 4, 2005

(By the way, his success in getting that racist language amendment shot down -- even by the narrowist of voting margins -- points to how there isn't some overwhelming majority of "Blue State" voters in Huntsville and Birmingham ready to out-vote the "Red State" voters in the rest of the state.)
posted by jca at 10:18 AM on October 4, 2005

The Christian Exodus movement reminds me of that whole "Hey, Libertarians, let's all move to Vermont and take over" thing a couple years back. Didn't really work out to the best of my recollection.

It's still ongoing. And it's New Hampshire, not Vermont.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:33 AM on October 4, 2005

By the way, his success in getting that racist language amendment shot down -- even by the narrowist of voting margins -- points to how there isn't some overwhelming majority of "Blue State" voters in Huntsville and Birmingham ready to out-vote the "Red State" voters in the rest of the state

I would tend to agree except that I have voted :)

What I mean is that you know who candiate a and b for govenor are. If you aren't aware of what the amendments are really saying before you walk into the voting booth it is really easy to misinterpret, not to mention many people don't even vote on amendments. I see two states of mind here, but I guess we'll find out next year.
posted by dig_duggler at 11:25 AM on October 4, 2005

also, easy to get a religious base to outnumber regular voters in midterms. not so much in 'real' elections.

I'm going to shut up now.
posted by dig_duggler at 11:36 AM on October 4, 2005

I agree that Moore will only win if he's the Republican nominee. However, I'm pretty sure Moore sees it the same way and has no intention of running as a third party candidate. Nothing about Moore or any of the other neo-cons out there suggests that they're interested in a third party, just-to-make-a-point sort of strategy. They don't want to be Pat Buchanan or the right's answer to Ralph Nader. They want to own the Republican party and they're quite serious about winning elections.

As for the schools... Many white middle and upper middle class white Christians have taken their children out of public schools and put them in church run private schools. And these schools are multiplying like fucking rabbits; it's totally insane. Every church with over a few hundred congregation members has created an "academy." One parent told me - just in casual conversation - that she moved her kids to one of these schools because she cared more about the "values" that were being taught than the actual "education."

All of this has had a very noticeable effect on the public school system. In Montgomery, where fifty percent of the population is black, I'd be willing to bet that seventy percent or more of the public school students are as well. I know that the percentages in each individual school have changed quite a bit in the last ten years. And then, Riley got elected on the promise that he would cut - or at least not increase - funding for the schools. It's bizarre, but true.

And of course Moore - whether he publicly says so or not - is a big fan of the Christian, mostly white schools and the de-funding of public education. So, is he in favor of segregation? You bet your ass he is.
posted by Clay201 at 1:40 PM on October 4, 2005

« Older A second Texas grand jury... | Revisiting Spore... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

Rockhead October 3, 2005 3:47 PM Subscribe

Rockhead
October 3, 2005 3:47 PM Subscribe