:thumb:

 

Will do. I'd enjoy a conversation with you as well. Especially over beer. You coming down my way for the Boyle/Highlands game?

Possibility, but not for sure yet.

The 'you lie' from Wilson falls under the disrespect part in my sentence of 'disrespect and racial connotations'. Not once did I say Wilson was being racist. He was disrespectful and lacked civility by saying 'you lie' during Obama's speech. Ok, sure, it's disrespectful, it also happened before the civility speech. There's also been no shortage of disrespect for every past president, so this isn't something new because it's Obama. It also isn't calling a representative or congressman a terrorist.True, just pointing out that the lack of civility has been ongoing for some time now.

 

The word 'boy' when used by a white person to address or describe a grown black man is racist. Has been my whole life and will continue to be. For Obama to be addressed as 'boy' or even 'your boy' comes off as racist to me. Why did Buchanan apologize if no harm was meant? Because it appears racist that's why. Who uses the word 'boy' in 2011. Obviously folks who choose to disparage a grown black man who happens to president. Can they not find a more articulate manner to talk about him without being racially insulting? Even if they aren't being racial are they not smart enough to speak about Obama without using the word 'boy' in it? I can articulate my disgust with Bush and Cheney without giving the slightest racial insult about them. I think everybody over the age of 35 UNDERSTANDS that regardless of your intent when you use the word 'boy' to describe a grown black man it appears to be used in a racist manner. When did that change? I'm sorry, but that's baloney. Its only racist because you want it to be. Now, I realize it can be disparaging, yes. BUT, every time it's used just because someone is black does not mean its racist, that's ridiculous. Buchanan apologized because people made such a big deal about it, people that wanted to make it into something it wasn't. He also said he didn't intend it that way, but I guess that doesn't matter since in your opinion, you know what's in his heart and it HAD to be racist. It does matter, and for the record, my opinion should matter to these politicians. Why would they want to say anything that could be perceived as racist? I don't want it to be racist but no person alive will be able to convince my 63 year old father it wasn't racist and he is a highly intelligent man. If he thinks it's racist then I likely will too.

 

 

 

Now, the tar baby thing is spoken right when taken literally and for a brief nanosecond I didn't think it was too bad but let's be real....when have the words tar baby been used other than in its derogatory form? I mean if we are pulling out Webster's dictionary definitions here then I should be able use and say the word that means 'ignorant person' without getting suspended on here. But I can't because both words and terms are known more for derogatory meaning than their Webster's dictionary meanings. Whether Lamborn means anything racial or not it is completely irresponsible on his part to associate Obama with a tar baby. He has to be smarter than that. Lamborn could have all of the answers for the economy but I won't listen because I am going to believe Lamborn is disagreeing with Obama's skin color and not his brain because he had to use the words tar baby to make a point about Obama. If he isn't smart enough to refrain from that how can he be smart enough to fix anything? I've heard the term tar baby in it's literal form countless times over the years. In fact, there's a restaurant in Myrtle Beach named Tar Baby's, been there forever, no one seems to have a problem with it. Why? Because it's not meant to degrade anyone. You can't say the word that means 'ignorant person' on here because the word filter can't think, it can't decipher. You're intelligent and can. I've talked with you about quite a few diffident topics on here, politically we don't usually agree, and that's ok. But I think you're better than to take one comment like that and say you won't listen to anything he has to say now, especially when you're just jumping to a conclusion when it was obvious he didn't mean it as a racial slur. You're making a huge leap by claiming Lamborn is disagreeing with Obama's skin color and not his brain because he used the words tar baby.

When I read it, like I said, I briefly thought it wasn't that bad as seemed. However, the use of the term tar baby is just too conflicting and Lamborn should have known better. I don't believe there was any racially disparaging harm behind the comment but my thoughts are not the thoughts of the millions of black people in this country outraged that he would use the term tar baby when describing Obama. That is all I am saying. Lamborn will be painted as a racist and be called the tar baby guy(South Park reference) from now on by a lot of black people. His perception may not be his reality but because of those two words his perception will be a reality amongst black people.

 

 

I also can't listen to people who say that anyone who disagrees with Obama is racist. I know that isn't true. I also hate when people pull the race card about any and everything. These people I mentioned may not be racist but their words give them the appearance that they are or could be. I am just trying to see if you can understand why people such as myself would think they are. They have been really irresponsible in their choice of words when talking about Obama. That is the main point I am trying to make.I can understand why you might think that at first. But like I said, you're a bright guy, you have to realize that even if you at first think it sounds racist, it doesn't mean it IS racist. Try to realize that sometimes, an anecdote has nothing to do with skin color even if your first thought leans that way. Trust me, a lot of times I think people have brain farts when it comes to racial connotations. I do believe that everyone in some shape form or fashion has little bit of orneriness(did I spell that right?) in them and I think I could work in a racial jab against any race in the media and claim ignorance and apologize later. I am not saying these people did that. I do believe they were smart enough to know better. Are they racist? Who knows. I do know if they don't want to be perceived as racist or give half hearted apologies they should be smarter with their words in public forums. It's not that hard. Lamborn could have easily said that Obama is like superglue instead of using tar baby.

Possibility, but not for sure yet.

 

I think there may be a tailgate in the works. I'll definitely be there. I hope you can make it. It's always good to put a face with the name.

That's what I was wondering. I can see the argument on tar baby but "your boy"? Give me a break. I use that all the time. "I saw your boy the other day" when talking to a friend about seeing someone he knows. If he called Obama a boy then maybe I could understand but to say "he's your boy" is racist is beyond ridiculous.

 

It really just depends on who is saying it and how they say it. I haven't seen a clip of Buchanan saying it. Just looking at the words and knowing he was talking to Sharpton I can easily see how someone like my father would see racial disparaging intent behind the words. I use 'your boy' all of the time when talking to people of many races. Sometimes I do mean it disparagingly. Maybe not in a racially disparaging way but I am sure I could find a way to do so. When did Buchanan become hip with new age slang like 'your boy' anyways? I am sure he knows the history behind the word 'boy' and black men.

I think there may be a tailgate in the works. I'll definitely be there. I hope you can make it. It's always good to put a face with the name.

I just checked the date, I'll be in Gatlinburg then.

^ Priorities seem to be all out of whack.

I just checked the date, I'll be in Gatlinburg then.

 

^ Priorities seem to be all out of whack.

 

 

Yup.

 

We'll catch up sometime hopefully. I love good conversation and good beer. Maybe there will be a Boyle/Highlands part 2 this year.

He said they were acting like terrorists, I don't see where it's significant. The fact that a Vice President would say it, that's significant.

 

Semantics, I guess.

 

During the runup to the compromise and shortly thereafter, I heard the phrase "held hostage" several times. Something a terrorist would do. However, I'm not hearing that trotted out as an example of a shortage of civility.

 

Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but to say someone is acting like a (fill in the blank), that is much different (to me, at least) than saying that someone is a (fill in the blank). They're not a (fill in the blank), they're just acting like one.

 

Much different than saying someone is a Communist, Socialist, Terrorist, etc.

^ Priorities seem to be all out of whack.

I know, I know, but what momma wants, momma gets.