actually, I believe Jacob has a pretty solid point, but it's a matter of semantics.
If you operate under the assumption that Republicans are conservative, than most outward racists lean conservative, and are therefore Republican-favoring people.
They make incessant complaints about the liberal media. Their advocacy groups, like the Council of Conservate Citizens (or CCC in lieu of KKK), welcome Republicans and garner the respect and admiration of the Trent Lotts and John Ashcroft types who grant interviews and endorsements as long as they aren't being watched by national media sources. They tend to lean pro-war like Republicans in order to make sure "that Bin Laden, Hussein, and all of them other non-English speaking blah blah blahs get theirs."
It's not a blanket generalization if the facts of the matter bear your point out, and all things considered, I think they bear out Jacob's point.
That's not to say that liberals and Democrats cannot be racist, for they most certainly can and are. BUT as far as outward, organized, and PHYSICALLY VIOLENT racists...they prefer to make theirs Republican.
The "Southern Democrat" archetype is just codespeak for a Republican "liberal," just as the Northeastern Republicans like Olympia Snowe and James Jeffords are more Liberal "Republicans."
But the funny thing is...this all rests on the fulcrum of modern day Republicans being conservative, and in the fidcal and civic senses of the word, they aren't in the least. Only in the social sense. But that's enough for most outwardly racist groups.
And that's why Bush can toe the line by saying after 9/11 that we shouldn't lump Muslims together, and then in the Iraqi buildup, he tried to blend them together to create some absurd terrorist coalition between Hussein, Al-Queda and other groups that never existed. Then, he gets the rep of being tolerant while placating the "Bomb 'em to hell, Dubya!" faction, too.
