(03-08-2015 07:02 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:32 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

There are makers and takers. Republicans are all about the makers. If blacks want to join, I'd be thrilled. But we're not going to change our core values to get more votes.

Wouldn't have to change values at all. It's the attitude that needs to change. One particular attitude that needs to change is the line of thought that implies "black people are with us because they're takers". Do you think all black people are just interested in taking and that is the ONLY reason they don't vote GOP? And this is an honest question because I don't know you and don't know how you feel about it.

I agree 100%, tons of black folk that are conservative.

(03-08-2015 08:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 07:02 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:32 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

There are makers and takers. Republicans are all about the makers. If blacks want to join, I'd be thrilled. But we're not going to change our core values to get more votes.

Wouldn't have to change values at all. It's the attitude that needs to change. One particular attitude that needs to change is the line of thought that implies "black people are with us because they're takers". Do you think all black people are just interested in taking and that is the ONLY reason they don't vote GOP? And this is an honest question because I don't know you and don't know how you feel about it.

We have values and a message. I want 100% of Americans with us, but I'll take 51%.

Republicans are color blind. We don't have relationships with racial groups because we see people as *individuals* (how refreshing!). We're the party of the private sector. We're not going to pay off Reverend Al to win over blacks, and we're not going to promise more government benefits to win over blacks.

We can and should be proactive in getting our values and message across. That's not easy with the msm doing its best to conceal it and replace it with much darker portrayal of the Republican Party.

Do they care about the individual? They take special time to pander to groups all the time.

Again, the attitude that you need Al Sharpton to win over black people is exactly what I'm talking about. WhoTF respects Al Sharpton?

(03-08-2015 11:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 08:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 07:02 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:32 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

There are makers and takers. Republicans are all about the makers. If blacks want to join, I'd be thrilled. But we're not going to change our core values to get more votes.

Wouldn't have to change values at all. It's the attitude that needs to change. One particular attitude that needs to change is the line of thought that implies "black people are with us because they're takers". Do you think all black people are just interested in taking and that is the ONLY reason they don't vote GOP? And this is an honest question because I don't know you and don't know how you feel about it.

We have values and a message. I want 100% of Americans with us, but I'll take 51%.

Republicans are color blind. We don't have relationships with racial groups because we see people as *individuals* (how refreshing!). We're the party of the private sector. We're not going to pay off Reverend Al to win over blacks, and we're not going to promise more government benefits to win over blacks.

We can and should be proactive in getting our values and message across. That's not easy with the msm doing its best to conceal it and replace it with much darker portrayal of the Republican Party.

Do they care about the individual? They take special time to pander to groups all the time.

Again, the attitude that you need Al Sharpton to win over black people is exactly what I'm talking about. WhoTF respects Al Sharpton?

Apparently appeasing Al Sharpton wins black votes. Dems see him as a leader. Republicans see him as a charlatan ... and we get 5% of the black vote.

(03-08-2015 05:38 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 05:10 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:55 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

Name a republican that has said "blacks are the enemy"

You must be new to this forum.

How do troll posts like this go unpunished in this forum?

I generally take my weekends off of here, but the CAA Tourney is being played, so popped by.

WHAT IN THE **** is that?!?

If you've been around this forum, yes the same one moderated to keep schit in line, you'll see that "Blacks are the enemy"?!?

K. Here's where I's sees it. I'm a conservative. I's a southerner, though not deep South, only from the land of Presidents, Generals and historic Statesmen. You know, those who built this Country- Virginia.

That said, I'd bet dollars to donuts, my Momma's last nickel that I've had more minority, in relation to me as a cracker, roommates, co-workers, BBQ buddies and whatever else than this racist idjit Karataay boy misFit has even thought of.

Is this kind of bullschit now going to slide, yet bans on a whole host of people, who did far less I might add, are in place?

I'll pop back in Monday at some later point, maybe I'll be tossed too, but this, friends, is inexcusable.

"Blacks are the enemy"... Conservatives say that. Back it up bitcjh, or be reported. dipfit.

Hell of a speech Obama gave, I'll give him that.

(03-09-2015 08:22 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Hell of a speech Obama gave, I'll give him that.

It's the one tool in his skill set.

(03-09-2015 08:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 08:22 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Hell of a speech Obama gave, I'll give him that.

It's the one tool in his skill set.

as long as the teleprompter is working....

(03-09-2015 02:34 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 05:38 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 05:10 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:55 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

Name a republican that has said "blacks are the enemy"

You must be new to this forum.

How do troll posts like this go unpunished in this forum?

I generally take my weekends off of here, but the CAA Tourney is being played, so popped by.

WHAT IN THE **** is that?!?

If you've been around this forum, yes the same one moderated to keep schit in line, you'll see that "Blacks are the enemy"?!?

K. Here's where I's sees it. I'm a conservative. I's a southerner, though not deep South, only from the land of Presidents, Generals and historic Statesmen. You know, those who built this Country- Virginia.

That said, I'd bet dollars to donuts, my Momma's last nickel that I've had more minority, in relation to me as a cracker, roommates, co-workers, BBQ buddies and whatever else than this racist idjit Karataay boy misFit has even thought of.

Is this kind of bullschit now going to slide, yet bans on a whole host of people, who did far less I might add, are in place?

I'll pop back in Monday at some later point, maybe I'll be tossed too, but this, friends, is inexcusable.

"Blacks are the enemy"... Conservatives say that. Back it up bitcjh, or be reported. dipfit.

Im gonna defend Fit on this. He sent me a link to Atwater's interview in 1981 that was very racially charged. I'd repost but im on my phone. Nowhere in the article does Atwater say republicans view blacks as the enemy, but it could be inferred.

Granted it is a 30 year old remark by an aging republican strategist, but he did pm me the link. Im sure many people, dem and republican held opinions similar to Atwater's back then as the civil righta movement wasn't that far removed from a current event. Thats not to excuse it, but today people i generally don't feel that way i would assume.

I should have clarified my request for information backing up Fit's link. I was of course looking for examples of current republicans that felt blacks were the enemy, not something from 30+years ago.

While i still don't agree with Fit's statement or necessarily feel the link satisfies his claim, he did respond so it's not like he juat flung poo amd ran off.

(03-08-2015 07:02 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:32 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because republicans aren't interested in appealing to Blacks. In their eyes, Blacks are the enemy.

There are makers and takers. Republicans are all about the makers. If blacks want to join, I'd be thrilled. But we're not going to change our core values to get more votes.

Wouldn't have to change values at all. It's the attitude that needs to change. One particular attitude that needs to change is the line of thought that implies "black people are with us because they're takers". Do you think all black people are just interested in taking and that is the ONLY reason they don't vote GOP? And this is an honest question because I don't know you and don't know how you feel about it.

What GOP attitudes needs to change IYO that would lead to an increase in black votes for Republicans? Because I would submit to you that as long as a majority of blacks remain convinced the GOP hates black people and is determined to re-institute Jim Crow laws despite ALL evidence to the contrary, that little traction can be made on that front.

(03-08-2015 10:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:31 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You didn't get banned Fit! Awesome!

Why would I get banned?

Because you never back any of your posts with substance? Ever.

Take a look at Lee Atwater's comments from 1981.

(03-09-2015 09:40 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 10:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:31 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You didn't get banned Fit! Awesome!

Why would I get banned?

Because you never back any of your posts with substance? Ever.

Take a look at Lee Atwater's comments from 1981.

Should I read it in conjunction with the mea culpa he wrote...

Quote:In 1991, Lee Atwater apologized for what he had done to Dukakis and other Democratic “enemies.” Dying from a brain tumor, he published an extended mea culpa in Life. “Long before I was struck with cancer, I felt something stirring in American society,” he wrote. “It was a sense among the people of the country—Republicans and Democrats alike—that something was missing from their lives, something crucial. I was trying to position the Republican Party to take advantage of it. But I wasn’t exactly sure what ‘it’ was. My illness helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing in me: a little heart, a lot of brotherhood.” With forgivable grandiosity, he called for the leaders of the nineties to “speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul.” Atwater’s vision is unfulfilled, but it looks a lot like what these candidates claim they want for the country.

Or should I ignore peoples ability to grow and change and recant and just point out that Sen. Byrd rocked the (D) until his death?

Let me say this, not everything needs or should be politicized! Now maybe I'm too close to the situation but that’s how I feel. The people who sacrificed during the Civil Rights era do not need their accomplishments to become a pawn in a political chess game. This event was not about democrats nor was it about republicans, it was about remembering what price people paid for fair treatment under the law and the right to vote. It was about remembering how far we have come as a nation. My grandmother and her sisters all took part in the original voting rights demonstrations and the Bloody Sunday march that took place 50 years ago. I spent all weekend in Selma along with about 70 other family members alongside my grandmother, my aunts, and about 200 or so others who took part in the original march. This was just not just black history this was American History and I look more at each individual that failed to show up not the party that they represent. Please do not trivialize this event into what party did what because it is minuscule in comparison to what it’s all about.

All I know about Republicans and race:

1) Republicans ended slavery.
2) Republicans were responsible for passing the 1960's civil rights legislation.
3) Republicans in the 21st century are color blind.

(03-09-2015 09:57 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 09:40 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 10:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 12:31 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You didn't get banned Fit! Awesome!

Why would I get banned?

Because you never back any of your posts with substance? Ever.

Take a look at Lee Atwater's comments from 1981.

Should I read it in conjunction with the mea culpa he wrote...

Quote:In 1991, Lee Atwater apologized for what he had done to Dukakis and other Democratic “enemies.” Dying from a brain tumor, he published an extended mea culpa in Life. “Long before I was struck with cancer, I felt something stirring in American society,” he wrote. “It was a sense among the people of the country—Republicans and Democrats alike—that something was missing from their lives, something crucial. I was trying to position the Republican Party to take advantage of it. But I wasn’t exactly sure what ‘it’ was. My illness helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing in me: a little heart, a lot of brotherhood.” With forgivable grandiosity, he called for the leaders of the nineties to “speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul.” Atwater’s vision is unfulfilled, but it looks a lot like what these candidates claim they want for the country.

Or should I ignore peoples ability to grow and change and recant and just point out that Sen. Byrd rocked the (D) until his death?

That didn't stop people from believing what Atwater said. Remember Rick Santorum when he slipped and said Blah people?

(03-09-2015 10:06 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  That didn't stop people from believing what Atwater said. Remember Rick Santorum when he slipped and said Blah people?

Well when the message is controlled the truth can be massaged itno nice convenient packages. Atwater apologized, why does his legacy remain the 1981 interview but I am constantly told to discount Byrd's KKK associations because he learned the error of his ways? Make no mistake, I felt Byrd's change of heart is was sincere, but I am more interested in proper decorum being observed.

Santorum apologized as well, but the media cycle wouldn't let that particular dog lay either.

Apologies are all well and good but it still speaks to the secret motives of those within the party. Byrd was a Dixicrat who stayed behind. You know where all the others went don't you?

(03-09-2015 10:28 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Apologies are all well and good but it still speaks to the secret motives of those within the party. Byrd was a Dixicrat who stayed behind. You know where all the others went don't you?

Both Byrd and Atwater's opinions and the examples you use them as seem far more like the exception than the rule.

You don't hear republican's invoking Atwater in every speech or trying to clearly define black people as the enemy. You can find one example of almost anything for any cause or against any cause. What you can't do it take any current republican platform and twist it enough to make it mean that blacks are the enemy.

(03-09-2015 10:28 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Apologies are all well and good but it still speaks to the secret motives of those within the party. Byrd was a Dixicrat who stayed behind. You know where all the others went don't you?

They didn't go to the GOP if that's what you're implying. The idea that there was some massive flip flop of the parties after the Civil Rights Act passed buggers believe. Why would George Wallace and Lester Maddox leave the DNC, which advocated the position of segregation for one that voted overwhelming for integration? And even if the entire South changed (and its quite easy to go and evaluate the political moves of those of all the congressmen from that era) how would they have been able to convince all the Representatives outside of the South to change? And please spare me the articles, I'm sure I have just as many that debunk the 'party switch' as you do that justify it.

(03-09-2015 10:36 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 10:28 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Apologies are all well and good but it still speaks to the secret motives of those within the party. Byrd was a Dixicrat who stayed behind. You know where all the others went don't you?

Both Byrd and Atwater's opinions and the examples you use them as seem far more like the exception than the rule.

You don't hear republican's invoking Atwater in every speech or trying to clearly define black people as the enemy. You can find one example of almost anything for any cause or against any cause. What you can't do it take any current republican platform and twist it enough to make it mean that blacks are the enemy.

Here's the problem:

The Democrat Party goes out of its way to coddle blacks with welfare, affirmative action, and fawning all over Al Sharpton. So when the color-blind Republicans treat blacks the same way they treat whites, Hispanics, & Asians, the Republicans appear to be cold and indifferent.

Blacks won't get any special treatment from Republicans. Blacks are just Americans like the rest of us; they're no better or worse than anyone else.

DNC Chief Wasserman Schultz Scrubs Bush From “Powerful And Moving Image” Of Obama At Selma Event…

A Republican scrubs Obama … raaaacist!



Pre-Bush scrubbing: