Why the Zell Miller transformation?

[Joe Republic]

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

1950's Democrats from Georgia are certainly not to be revered in the 21st century.

Also, I take issue with your first sentence.  Compare Miller's keynote speech at the 1992 Democratic National Convention with his voting record on economic issues during his partial term in the Senate.

[Joe Republic]

You missed my point.  Read/listen to his 1992 speech - specifically the portions where he praised all the work the previous Democratic presidents had done to build a social safety net - and then look at his series of Senate votes to dismantle it.  Of course he changed.

The social policies of the Dixiecrats are an embarrassment to the modern day party, as they should be, so it's little wonder that they eventually realigned with the Republicans instead.  Miller is simply an anachronism.  But if he had followed everybody else, he wouldn't be notable or have sold so many of his books, so here we are.

[Joe Republic]

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Once again, that is not only inaccurate, but also pretty vile.