For me, the big elephant in the room is that when I say 'our blacks' or 'their blacks' it takes on an entirely different meaning than when Ann Coulter says it in front of a national audience because I am black. Right or wrong that's the way it is. She's smart enough to know the controversy her words will cause. That's why she said it. If I was on a national news channel or writing for a paper I would censor myself appropriately. It's not hard at all. She could have used the words black republicans instead of our blacks and this thread wouldn't be as popular as it is now.

 

I understand Clyde's shock at 75's post but I know what 75's intention is behind the post. At least I think I do anyways. It's all good. I love going back and forth with 75 and this time we are going back and forth and not even participating. :lol:

Sorry, I've gotten off topic a bit, but one more thing I read. In the mid '60's the congress and senate voted along party lines 64% of the time, while sometime in the 2000's that number had risen to 89%. It also noted how these people stated that they faced a lot of resistance and backlash from their own base when they worked with the other side. We have to find a way to move past this.

 

Since you're already off topic....And what has happened to the country as a result of all this "crossing the aisle" that occurred in the '60's & '70's? The size and scope of government has exploded, the average citizen has become less self-reliant & more dependent on government, and the government at all levels now reaches wider and deeper into the lives of our citizens than anyone even 50 years ago could have possibly imagined. "Bipartisanship" has done nothing but increase the position of liberals, and decrease that of conservatives. Sure conservatives have done a good job banging their chests over electoral victories beginning with Reagan, but a truly conservative direction for this country has not come about because of these victories. Every growth in government from 1950 until now has stuck, and all conservatives have truthfully succeeded in doing is slowing that rate of growth from time to time. It's time to SHRINK the federal government. I like and desire partisanship out of those I elect to represent me in government, and it's my goal to get enough peoples elected that represent my views so that my views will be enacted. Plain & simple, that's what I want. Compromise has moved the federal government in one direction, and one direction only, left.

For me, the big elephant in the room is that when I say 'our blacks' or 'their blacks' it takes on an entirely different meaning than when Ann Coulter says it in front of a national audience because I am black. Right or wrong that's the way it is. She's smart enough to know the controversy her words will cause. That's why she said it. If I was on a national news channel or writing for a paper I would censor myself appropriately. It's not hard at all. She could have used the words black republicans instead of our blacks and this thread wouldn't be as popular as it is now. :lol:

 

We are in complete agreement on that one. She knew exactly what she was doing.

I agree with you. Too add a thought to the issue of race, I think both sides are guilty of hindering progress in this area. As you noted, many of the conservatives live in an alternate reality that denies the existence of racism, apparently with the exception of black conservatives. .On the flipside, many of the liberals cry racism at any and every turn calling to mind the boy who cried wolf. Eventually, people start to tune it out and ignore it, meaning instances that are worthy of discussion get lost in the fray.

 

I think so too. It's turned into a political football. I think it's an uncomfortable issue in general, one that a lot of people would rather not think about because there is some very bad history there. I also think a lot of white people feel unfairly maligned when race is discussed and it makes them defensive rather than understanding. At the same time I think there are some who revel in making accusations of racism and turning any issue into a racial one, which doesn't make anyone more understanding or willing to listen. For instance, Jesse Jackson Jr. tried to have a House resolution passed last month declaring Rick Perry a racist, which was utterly absurd. When you have one side lining up one way and the other lining up the opposite on an issue as sensitive and as relevant to society as race, it's always ugly. A common and civil dialogue is needed, but maybe it starts with not only pointing out that these extreme voices are debilitating and regressive and condemning those who want to peddle it, but pointing out why what they say is so wrong.

 

This is a little off the path, but perhaps relevant. I read something recently about a neurological study conducted on liberals and conservatives regarding their responses to issues. Basically, the study found that for each side when they were given a statement that they agreed with, the area of the brain responsible for pleasure was most active, while the area responsible for logic and reason showed little activity. Likewise, on something they disagreed with, the area of the brain that triggers the fight or flight response was active, while logic and reason weren't. One conclusion is the possibility that we are wired to be narrow minded.

 

The point being, we (all of us) have to move past this tit for tat mindset and apply reason to the issues that face our country. We have to work together and move forward. It may be considered cheesy, but slogan "United we stand, divided we fall" is applicable in my opinion. I think the divide between left and right, liberal and conservative is a bigger threat and problem to our nation than any racism that exists.

 

Listening to people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh isn't the answer. They thrive on this division. Trying to bring people together from their viewpoint would essentially be killing the golden goose.

 

Sorry, I've gotten off topic a bit, but one more thing I read. In the mid '60's the congress and senate voted along party lines 64% of the time, while sometime in the 2000's that number had risen to 89%. It also noted how these people stated that they faced a lot of resistance and backlash from their own base when they worked with the other side. We have to find a way to move past this.

 

I've read about that study too. It's fascinating and it rings true. I think it explains why so many people tune into O'Reilly or Hannity or Olbermann or Stewart - there's a great deal of satisfaction there. I think it also explains why people get so frustrated and angry over political issues. It literally does set us off when someone espouses views we don't agree with. And it's much easier to insult and disparage someone else, then tune into those we already agree with so we can nod our heads in satisfaction than it is to hash out the differences civilly.

 

Good post, 5wide.

That's a bunch of crap. I guarantee you I've been fairer to this President than 90% of Obama's supporters on here were to Bush. You find a post where I've been unfairly and harshly critical of President Obama and I'll kiss your patooey at Ft. Harrodsburg on a Saturday at noon. As for me being a conservative, I am on certain things; on others I'm not.

 

I'm not opposed to gay relationships. I couldn't care less about what individuals do amongst themselves. It's none of my business. On abortion, I vascillate back and forth between the right of a woman to do what she wants to do to her body and the right to protect the child. If I lean towards anti abortion, its because of legal not moral reasons. I don't support far right candidates. I have voted and will vote for moderate Dems over far right Republicans. I support Romney, not Perry or any of the other far right Republican candidates. I supported McCain when he ran against Bush in the primary years ago because I thought McCain was a more moderate candidate. I am pro national defense, but I hope that doesn't make me a conservative because that means liberals are anti national defense. I am against a welfare system filled with fraud, but I hope that doesn't make me a conservative because that means liberals support a welfare system filled with fraud. I believe in personal responsibility, but I hope that doesn't make me a conservative because that means liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. If anything, I'm closer to a libertarian than I am a conservative.

 

Get over the Highlands crap also and don't attempt to portray me as someone who thinks Highlands is the only good football program in the state and everyone has to be a Highlands fan. I've never made one post disrespectful of another football program in this state and have a reputation within the Highlands posters of busting the chops of the overzealous Highlands posters on here. You got bent out of shape with me years ago because I posted that I'd like Lamar to have gone to UK. Through PMs, you explained why it was good for him to go to USC and I never brought it up again once you explained why. You are wrong PP92 about me not being able to accept people with views differing from me. I quite enjoy good intellectual discussions about issues confronting our country and society. Unfortunately, at least for me, I rarely see it on here. You paid your money to express your views and I paid money to express my views, one of which is that a lot of the posters in this forum that criticize Congress as being full of partisan hacks unwilling to see the merits of the other side's position and looking to find fault in the statements of others for political points are huge hypocrits, and I'm directing that at a lot of both Rs and Ds on here.

 

 

It's Ft. Harrod. Not Ft. Harrodsburg.

 

 

Forgive me. It wasn't years ago when I got bent out of shape(not even, just set in my opinion on that situation) about Lamar. That was this spring. I haven't had any real beef with you but this is the second or third time in the last ten months I have seen you go on a tirade about people's postings and how you wish people would act on here. Maybe you should do what you have done before and send a PM to the person bothering you so much. Or start your own thread about how you feel the direction of BGP is. I don't know what to tell you but even if it's possible I am not going to go back through your thousands of posts to prove you wrong. I'd rather you jump in the conversation and offer your perspective without going on a tirade about who is a hypocrite and who isn't. There are many great conversations with many different opinions but dude, why are you so serious? Relax, big guy. It's all good.

What would I say here to make you believe me? Right. So I'll pass.

 

You want to debate the real issue at hand?

 

There is no issue as far as I'm concerned.

 

Why some of you want to make idiots like Ann Coulter relevant and voices for conservatives is beyond me.

For those that have forgotten what post #1 was here it is.

 

What will you notice:

 

No label of her being a racist.

No debate as to which party had more "impressive blacks."

No arguing her TRUE point - just the use of "our blacks."

Her crazy assertion that "you only hear racism...against conservative blacks."

Again, it's Ann Coulter. Do you really care what she thinks? She's a hack. No one I know gives a light about what she thinks.

Again, it's Ann Coulter. Do you really care what she thinks? She's a hack. No one I know gives a light about what she thinks.

 

My distaste for her is obvious.

 

This is less to do about her than about her comment.

My distaste for her is obvious.

 

This is less to do about her than about her comment.

I understand that, but consider the source. Any comment from her isn't worth the breath to argue it. She's a perfect example of one sided right winger. Anything she says bears no meaning in my book, and most people on here consider me a right winger.

Colin Powell is impressive and is perceived to be highly intelligent as well. I would vote for Colin Powell with little or no thought. I think he would make an excellent POTUS.

 

Condoleeza Rice is perceived to be an intellectual but I have never been impressed by her whatsoever. Her close ties to the Bush regime probably cloud my view of her. I would never vote for Condoleeza Rice for anything.

 

Michael Steele is another highly intelligent man but I despise him.

 

JC Watts seems kind of Herman Cainish to me.

 

 

Are there any others out there?

I honestly couldn't answer either way regarding whether I would vote for Condi or not. She hasn't ran for an elected public office that I'm aware of and I think there are a lot of issues where I haven't seen her thoughts on to really form an opinion. But I do consider her to be highly intelligent and an intellectual---not terribly concerned with her close ties to the Bush administration as she was just doing her job.

 

I was mainly curious as her and Powell immediately popped into my head as counter points to your assertion that prominent black members of the GOP weren't impressive or intellectual.

I honestly couldn't answer either way regarding whether I would vote for Condi or not. She hasn't ran for an elected public office that I'm aware of and I think there are a lot of issues where I haven't seen her thoughts on to really form an opinion. But I do consider her to be highly intelligent and an intellectual---not terribly concerned with her close ties to the Bush administration as she was just doing her job.

 

I was mainly curious as her and Powell immediately popped into my head as counter points to your assertion that prominent black members of the GOP weren't impressive or intellectual.

 

Gotcha. Naw. There aren't words to describe the amount of respect and admiration I have for Colin Powel. He always seems to be a man of reason. I'd love to see him run for a public office.

 

My impression of Condi could change if given a chance to truly see what she is all about. I can admit she is guilty by association in my eye.

I understand that, but consider the source. Any comment from her isn't worth the breath to argue it. She's a perfect example of one sided right winger. Anything she says bears no meaning in my book, and most people on here consider me a right winger.

 

 

 

Wait....you mean you aren't? Now I am really confused.

I understand that, but consider the source. Any comment from her isn't worth the breath to argue it. She's a perfect example of one sided right winger. Anything she says bears no meaning in my book, and most people on here consider me a right winger.

 

We all have issues that are very high in importance to us. Race is mine. If this was the Chickenhawk Express newspaper that said this it would be nothing. It's one of the main spokespersons for the far right on the biggest news network on TV. Her words have impact. They cannot be ignored and she has to be called out.

Wait....you mean you aren't? Now I am really confused.

:lol: Depends on who you ask and what the topic is. There are quite a few issues I don't take a conservative view of. Drugs would be one.

We all have issues that are very high in importance to us. Race is mine. If this was the Chickenhawk Express newspaper that said this it would be nothing. It's one of the main spokespersons for the far right on the biggest news network on TV. Her words have impact. They cannot be ignored and she has to be called out.

In who's mind? Certainly not mine. Honestly, it's folks like you that seem to give her that title, not any Conservatives I know.