I didn't say the "sides" didn't exist and could never be mentioned. I'm only addressing "sides", because that is how this whole political debate has been framed. In this particular context, the conservatives are waging a battle against the liberals, over abortion, the economy, and a bunch of other stuff. And then race gets put into it.Eric, sorry to disappoint you, ol' buddy, but I'm a-typing away with a big smile on my face.
Apparently, there will be no grounds for agreement between us, on much of anything.
But I'm far too blessed to get upset at a post on an internet board.
I do find it humorous at your copious use of terms like "your side." All this time, I thought we were supposed to only criticize "our own side." And per Dr. King's speech, I thought the goal was to get beyond "sides."
Oh well. It is convenient to keep a bit of double-standard for times such as this, eh?
I believe I'll bow out now, as we appear to be headed in circles. Good day.
I'm not the one doing that. I wish these divisions would go away, but now that they are still on the table, all I am doing is dealing with what's already there. And I'm not making broad sweeping judgments such as accusing a group of people of having "more problems" than anyone else, or trying to get a free ride, or just trying to justify bad behavior. (all the stuff I have been dealing with). That was the point.
But of course, the whole method has been to misconstrue the statements into a double standard.
I'm not trying to make you upset. Rather, I have to wonder if you all have been pulling my leg (to see me get heated), the way you keep turning this stuff around like this.
I do not know what you want, in terms of "agreement". Perhaps you could reveal to us, what this mysterious "cause" of the problem is that Gina and I are not 'confessing', or perhaps point us to the sociologists your friend referred to, if you know which ones they are.