1. Gaines wrote:

Hi Prof,

Can you expound?

2. Nubian King wrote:

unimpressed????? Is this Dr. Hill or Garrett (aka Karl Rove)?

3. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

I’m going to write a piece about it and post tomorrow, i expect…

4. Blaxx wrote:

I think it’s kinda late in the game but I guess this kind of support would be good for President Obama.

5. Clifton Harrison wrote:

but do you think it being late in the game is more beneficial for Obama? It’s forcing the McCain camp to try an downplay it’s importance and it takes away from time to attack Obama

6. Blaxx wrote:

I can totally respect that his endorsement came after all of the debates are done and he’s heard all the arguments from both sides. I really don’t know if the timing benefits one side of the other more, I just believe that the backing of someone like Colin Powell cannot be a hindrance. Maybe Dr. Hill will prove me wrong with his editorial tomorrow.

7. Tanya wrote:

I love, love, love Colin Powell!!! A West Indian Conservative from New York; it doesn’t get any better than that! (I wish his sons were younger, or his grandsons a little older!)

It appears that the head of Colin’s monologue here was very much tailored by the Obama camp (or maybe even drafted by…). But the tail bit was very touching (the *Muslim* US solider, should we tell a 7 yr old American born Muslim kid they can’t be President some day?).

Marc why were you “unimpressed by this”???

If Colin was endorsing YOU, would you then be impressed? (You still hating on Barack?) If Colin was a liberal, would you then be impressed? (I know you’re crazy partisan!)

Just curious!

8. Blaxx wrote:

Tanya, do you really have to come back and be a shit disturber? Marc already said that he’ll explain why he’s unimpressed tomorrow.

9. Tanya wrote:

I actually think the timing was perfect!

I read an article (I forget where) about 2 weeks before the Democratic Convention that said Powell would be publicly endorsing Barack and that Powell was slated to speak at the Convention to make it official.

But as we know, that didn’t happen! Who knows why?

All I know is that I am confused as all hell.

This election is beginning to weigh heavy on my heart. I don’t know who to vote for! I love Barack, but he’s starting to scare me. I’m not a huge fan of McCain, but I want more Conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, I don’t want gays to marry, and I don’t want my taxes to go up (250k is NOT rich!)

I’ve been back and forth a bit after the Palin designation, and then I got over it and came back to Obama-mania; then Barack goes and says “we need to spread the wealth”. WTF! It got me re-thinking Barack’s policies and re-evaluating his associations, and the dude does come across Soc. (something I am totally against).

Now, in the midst of my confusion, and at my stage of greatest inclination to vote for McCain, my buddy Powell comes out and endorses Barack.

I have a political headache! I may just skip The Polls!

The only thing I am sure about is that whoever is orchestrating the PR push in Obama’s campaign, has EARNED THEIR PAY, times 10!

10. Tanya wrote:

Blaxx,

I am soooo sorry! Please forgive me! I did not read the comments before I posted mine!

Please don’t have me banned! lol

(Blaxx, the new Barbershop Comment Sheriff! Did Marc give you a badge and everything?!?!) j/k

11. Blaxx wrote:

Somebody gotta patrol this spot and keep the haters down. Actually Marc has declined all of my ideas on how to thwart you and the haters on many occasions so think of me of the “Unauthorized Nigga keepin yall in check”

12. Tanya wrote:

LMAO!

13. manchild wrote:

Face it Doc…come to realize Barack Obama will win,
then move on…..

14. clifton harrison wrote:

Wait, I never read or seen via youtube/fox news that Marc was against Obama. Marc, have you made your endorsement?

15. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

I thought this was right on time. What a way to start off the news cycle this week with more good news for the Obama camp. The one thing that I am hating is the continuous backlash and hate comming from the right. Rush Limbaugh’s comments were way out of line and I’m getting so sick of the ‘because he’s black’ argument.

Tanya, before you make your decision really think if a Gay person’s PERSONAL decision to get married outweighs racist bigots (feeling more comfortable than ever to express their views openly) threating and chanting to ‘hang Obama’. Why would you side with a party that hates anything and everything that doesnt look like or worship like them? Taxes will be high regardless who is in office. We’re in debt and the only way to balance it, is to pay it off. But I guess if you’d rather continue to borrow money from China to only ship it overseas to pay for a pointless war, instead of helping out your fellow American brothers and sisters then I see your point. . . .

16. Ann wrote:

@Mrs. Rivers

Congrats on the nuptials and I love the new website!!!

17. DCI74 wrote:

Yeah Tanya Blaxx has been head of security detail since the Babershop’s beginning so be careful.

I think Powell’s endorsement is a one of quality but I also think it’s part of his way to get on the good side of the American people considering his role in the invasion on Iraq.

18. Logic wrote:

As a quick sidebar, a few friends and I have launched a new website (see the link in my name). It can be characterized as a user generated, black news and networking website, a Huffington Post style site targeting the Talented Masses (read Mission). Please support it by visiting and signing up.

The main draw is a section that we call “The Talented Post” that is a user contributed article/video section. This is where I know a lot of you guys can help. I have seen and read some thoughtful comments by a lot of posters here, and I know that you all write about issues and have Talent that can be displayed on our site. You benefit by having your work displayed (if chosen) and we benefit by providing quality content for our readers. Check it out and let me know what you guys think. Thanks and I look forward to posting some of your work.

One.

19. Blaxx wrote:

Bookmarked!

20. Brother Spotless wrote:

I too eagerly await Prof. Hill’s next post re: Colin Powell’s endorsement.

While overall I find this endorsement to be a positive, I worry about Obama’s claim that Powell would have a role in his administration. Powell brought the evidence to congress that led to our invasion of Iraq. However one feels concerning that invasion, it is clear that Obama has always been against it (and has benefited from that stance). So for Obama to now say that the person who played a large role in the invasion would have a role in Obama’s own foreign policy seems a bit…off, politically speaking.

Truth is, Powell was one of the few in the Bush Administration who began raising hell about the invasion after it began (which apparently had a direct effect on his “resignation”). So there is an explanation there, but it may be too nuanced to have a positive effect for Obama.

Other than that, I like the Powell endorsement. His specific reasons for not following his Party were clear and thoughtful (how many folks have actually publicly questioned “…so what if he is a Muslim?).

Is it easy to dismiss this as one black person voting for another (as Rush Limbaugh has done)? Sure. I’m not sure that matters at this point. I know it was a long time ago, but remember: in 1995, Powell was seen by many political pundits on both sides of the political aisle as a Republican who could beat Clinton, had he chosen to run. That should negate the “blacks vote for blacks” argument.

21. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

Let me be clear. I am not doubting that Obama will win. I am also not doubting the sincerity or value of Powell’s endorsement. Also, I agreed with most of what he said, particularly his critiques of McCain. I’m simply disappointed at the timing. Similarly, Bill Richardson also “went out on a limb” to support Obama after Hillary was all but eliminated. That’s not courageous to me, that’s expedient. According to my sources, Powell has known for some time but didn’t want to upset certain folk in the GOP. After supporting everything from Reagan to Bush to the WMD lies, I think he could have come out for Obama much sooner. It’s the least he could do.

22. Brother Spotless wrote:

To be clear, Powell expressly stated he knew who he was endorsing for about a month.

Question Prof. Hill: are you/we sure the Obama Campaign didn’t ask Powell to wait for a politically opportunistic moment before announcing support?

23. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

not 100% but my sources suggest otherwise….

24. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

Congrats Samara!!!

I missed you ’round these parts girl!!
i’m very happy for you and your husband…
may God shower you both with plenty of blessings!

logic, i’ll definitely be checking out your website…congratulations on the launch

I can’t wait for this election to be over already. . .

peace

25. Tanya wrote:

To be clear:

According to my sources, Powell knew he was supporting Obama for a VERY LONG time, and Powell had confirmed intentions on publicly endorsing Barack at the Democratic Convention.

It was Obama’s people who wanted to “save” Powell as their secret weapon for the “right” (pun intended) time!

Now is perfect timing! Now is the time people (myself included) are starting to think twice about the election. It’s getting down to the wire and people are re-evaluating and many are now looking into the candidates and their options for the FIRST time.

Barack has long secured his votes with the Dems., and he has just as well secured his votes with the Indies.

For Barack, right now it is incredibly crucial to work on bringing over the moderate Conservatives and the Jews. That’s why “The Great Schlep” is now kicking into high gear, and that is why now is the right time to have Powell try to pull in the right. Powell is countering those Ayers automated calls.

As I said in #9, Obama’s strategists have earned their pay!

26. Tanya wrote:

Marc, if you don’t think now was a good time for Powell to endorse than you need to just stick to advising Messy Jessy!

27. Tanya wrote:

Logic,

That site looks great! I’ll be sure to check it out often!

Do you guys plan on throwing a launch party? Throwing one in each of the major cities is a cheap and easy way to attain exposure and press, and garner support and a following!

Samara can do the event planning!

28. Tanya wrote:

Samara,

Congrats on the nuptials! All the best for a long and prosperous union!

In response to your #15:

Homosexuality and Racism are not comparable from a civil rights perspective.

Racists hate people (who are of GOD) just b/c ***THEY*** don’t have something against that race.

People who hate homosexuality are against it b/c ***GOD*** has condemned it.

Racist operate based on THEIR OWN guidelines.

People who reject homosexuality are operating based on GOD’s guidelines.

The Holy Bible DOES state that homosexuality is wrong and evil. The Holy Bible instructs us to dispel homosexuality.

Just like The Holy Bible states that murder and stealing is wrong.

Murders and Thieves are not as bold as the gays to try and say that what they are doing is right.

No one is out there fighting for murders’ rights or thieves’ rights.

Why would you support gay rights???

A gay life style MURDERS humanity and STEALS the love of a man-wife relationship that GOD designed for everyone.

I am against homosexuality b/c GOD is against homosexuality. PERIOD!

And just like their are laws to prevent people from murdering and stealing, I want a law to prevent gays from getting married.

29. Nubian King wrote:

One of the things that I think we are missing is that Powell is a SOLDIER. I believe it is extremely hard for him to do anything that he feels is “disloyal”. I can imagine that he thinks GW Bush is an idiot. But you will never see him make any public comments to that effect. I believe it is even more difficult to turn away from a fellow soldier in McCain. I think this was extremely courageous of Powell. He didn’t have to disclose who he intended to vote for? He could have easily stood on the sidelines. He scores no points talking about his party and especially his defense of muslim Americans, yet he spoke the truth yesterday. Forget all of this talk about voting black and his timing. Colin Powell is truly a man of substance.

30. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

Thanks Ann & WYLTK for the congrats. I missed yall too. I finally broke Marc’s super spam control and am back on the scene!

Logic I love the website and am ready to participate. Should you decide to include the West as apart of your audience, perhaps we could pull together a launch party for you!

31. Blaxx wrote:

There are 2 sides to every argument Tanya. And for Christ’s sake, can you ever offer a rebuttal without stooping down to attacking whoever it is you’re debating? You’re a bit too much and I was loving it while you were gone.

32. Tanya wrote:

“I think this was extremely courageous of Powell. He didn’t have to disclose who he intended to vote for? … Colin Powell is truly a man of substance.” – Nubian King

Agreed!

33. Tanya wrote:

Blaxx,

Who did I attack????????????????

34. Blaxx wrote:

People who hate homosexuality are against it b/c ***GOD*** has condemned it.

I don’t subscribe to any religious denomination and I don’t believe in God but I still dislike homosexuality so you’re argument is moot and void.

35. Nubian King wrote:

Tanya,
What about the conservative contention that “government should not interfere in the lives of the people”? Why can’t gay marriage be a decision of the individual? Conservatives use this stance when it comes to taxes, programs, and affirmative action. However, they want to government to interfere in gay marriage, abortion, etc.

Btw, Obama and Biden have stated repeatedly that they believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and would not support anything that undermines that definition.

Also, has the thought ever occurred that with today’s challenges, higher taxes are required? GW Bush promised lower taxes and a reduction in governement spending. Look at the condition that we are in now? Is it possible that 1980 Ronald Reagan policies (aka the Official Conservative Playbook) don’t work in today’s world???

36. Blaxx wrote:

Marc, if you don’t think now was a good time for Powell to endorse than you need to just stick to advising Messy Jessy!

Comment by Tanya — October 20, 2008 @ 2:38 pm

What is mature or constructive about this comment Tanya?

37. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

Perhaps you misunderstood my point Tanya. I was not comparing racism to gay rights. I was making a point of priorities that we have to place within our decision for electing our next president. Clearly it is your priority to not see homosexuals have the basic human right of happiness and freedom of expression in this country. But does your beleif outweigh the fact that the Republican party has become extremely hostile, angry, and irrational in their approach to all thing that are not White and Christian? Can you side with a party that calls your brothers and sisters ‘Nigga’, ‘Boy’, ‘That One’ without hesitation? Can you side with a party that equates all Muslims and Arabs with Terrorists? If you state to be the devout Christian you are, can you undoubtedly side with a political party who’s rallies look more like lynch mobs and hatefests than peaceful demonstrations of polital change?

What I think does not matter. Its truly your personal decision and where you place your priorities. For me, siding with a party that seems to be spewing hate and segregating Americans by the minute is not worth voting against Obama’s tax plans or if he nominates liberal judges to the Supreme Court. But those are my priorities. . . .

Also let the record show — the KKK was also founded on Christian principles as well. Just because you throw GOD in there doesnt mean its justified.

38. Blaxx wrote:

I don’t even see why we engage in these broken pencil arguments with Tanya.

39. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

point well taken Blaxx. Its like a black hole. It sucks you in whether you like it or not. . . .

40. Bronze Trinity wrote:

I think its good timing. It takes attention away from McCain and makes it look like his own party doesn’t support him. Now the pundits will be talking about this instead of Acorn or Ayers. Its great!

41. Clifton Harrison wrote:

So true. I stepped away from the computer after reading the “God” comments. any debate that brings religion into the conversation (especially online) never seems to end well.

42. Tanya wrote:

Oh gosh, so much to respond to here!

43. Blaxx wrote:

You could always not respond and say you did.

44. Tanya wrote:

Blaxx,

“People who hate homosexuality are against it b/c ***GOD*** has condemned it.

I don’t subscribe to any religious denomination and I don’t believe in God but I still dislike homosexuality so you’re argument is moot and void.”

Maybe I should have said “I” instead of “People”.

But many people I know, and from the arguments against homosexuality that I’ve read from people I DON’T know, have referenced the Bible or GOD in their reasoning.

Please understand I NEVER attempt to speak for everyone. And I certainly was NOT attempting to speak for YOU! Whatever reason you are against it is your business.

I just shared the reasons why I and many other people are against it.

45. Blaxx wrote:

You certainly started a lot of those sentences with “People” considering you were talking about yourself

46. Piscean Princess wrote:

LOL @ #43.

47. Tanya wrote:

Blaxx,

“Marc, if you don’t think now was a good time for Powell to endorse than you need to just stick to advising Messy Jessy!

Comment by Tanya — October 20, 2008 @ 2:38 pm

What is mature or constructive about this comment Tanya?”

What is mature or constructive about your over analysis of my comment???

I have nothing against Marc. If I did, I would not support his blog. I think Marc is a smart dude and I respect him, I just tend to disagree with him fundamentally. But his perspective keeps me on my toes. I’m sure he will come up with an intelligent response to why he thinks it’s bad timing, and I look forward to reading it.

My comment was made in jest! I know it may be hard to gauge intentions behind written comments, but I was joking.

I’ve read comments of yours Blaxx directed to other people and Marc that could be viewed as rude and insulting, but I didn’t think you were trying to attack them, I read it as you being playful.

Why would you think that was me attacking Marc???

48. Tanya wrote:

Nubian King,

“What about the conservative contention that “government should not interfere in the lives of the people”? Why can’t gay marriage be a decision of the individual?”

For the same reason why murder and stealing is not left up to the individual.

Let’s not get too silly here. Interference with personal income and market operations is not the same as constructing laws to restrain people from making bad decisions.

You may think it is a good decision to kill someone for whatever reason, but the government is not going to let you do it. Not even if you say you were born a murder, or born to kill!

And I’m very sure if someone was trying to kill you or steal from you, you would want the government to interfere!

—
Barack Obama has stated several times that he is in favor of Civil Unions.

—
Nubian, I’m not sure if you caught the exchanges I’ve had with Garrett regarding Obama’s tax plans, but I’ve stated several times that I think a slight increase is necessary.

However, after Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment, I’m concerned that he might get over zealous with it.

I own a small business, and apparently, I’m a target for Obama fiscal plans.

49. Tanya wrote:

Mrs. Rivers,

If I misunderstood your point, my bad! Glad to know you weren’t comparing racism to gay rights.

I agree with you about priorities, and GOD’s word is my priority.

“Clearly it is your priority to not see homosexuals have the basic human right of happiness and freedom of expression in this country.”

That my dear, is what I would call effective spin!

I’m sure there are murders, rapists, pedophiles that believe engaging in that behavior brings them happiness and provides them with freedom of expression.

But anyone spiritually connected would know it doesn’t!

Homosexuality is wrong. PERIOD. That is my stance.

If you want people to do whatever makes them happy then I’m sure you will support a 50 year old man marrying a 10 year old girl b/c it makes him happy. And I’m sure you will support a man marrying his dog, b/c it makes him happy.

But NOT me!

—

“But does your beleif outweigh the fact that the Republican party has become extremely hostile, angry, and irrational in their approach to all thing that are not White and Christian?”

That’s a fact?!?!?! Really?!?! In what world?!?!?!

You CAN NOT say, with substance and rationale, that the ENTIRE Republican Party is hostile, etc…..

Are their racist in the Republican Party? Hell yeah! But guess what?????

THERE ARE RACISTS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AS WELL!!!!!!

“Can you side with a party that calls your brothers and sisters ‘Nigga’, ‘Boy’, ‘That One’ without hesitation?”

Can you?????

There are countless Democrats that have said very racist and hateful things.

As a member of the black race Samara, I know you don’t believe in judging an entire group based on the actions of a few!!!

I’m a Republican NOT b/c of the members of the Republican Party, I’m a Republican b/c I strongly believe in conservative principles. I think I’ve made those principles clear in my exchanges on this blog. If you disagree with my fundamentals, fine. But don’t chalk of the entire party as spewing hate b/c of your opinion of few people.

50. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

SO . . . . Blaxx, how about those Phillies. Do you think they have a shot at winning the World Series?

51. DCI74 wrote:

The site looks good Logic, I’ll definitely check it out on the reg.

52. Tanya wrote:

@ #50 – When at a disadvantage, change the subject!

53. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

you just dont get it.. . .
every comment on this board does not need moderation by you. i may not speak for all, but i will speak for many. your responses are annoying and most of time so bogus its not worth going back and forth with you. i think Blaxx put it best — ‘pencil broken arguments’. I am not going to respond to your comments when you say silly things like “I’m sure you will support a man marrying a dog because it makes him happy”. The Christian in me wont allow me to stoop to your level of conversation. SO yes, Tanya. Take it as my disadvantage. THE SUBJECT HAS CHANGED.

54. Blaxx wrote:

I’ve read comments of yours Blaxx directed to other people and Marc that could be viewed as rude and insulting, but I didn’t think you were trying to attack them, I read it as you being playful.

You must have read into that wrong, if it sounds like I’m being rude or insulting a person, I usually am with the exception of the comment I made to WYLTK last week. That was uncalled for and out of line and I apologized for it but I will not hesitate to go in on some of y’all.

Samara, since the American League is leaps and bounds better than the National League I’m leaning towards Rays in 5 but the Phillies have shocked me already.

55. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

Rays in 5?

you are an evil canadian hater!

56. Logic wrote:

Thanks for the encouraging comments! We are working on a shoestring budget but we plan on getting more funding. Ultimately, we want to cater to the whole U.S. Don’t forget to submit your articles. I wanna get Marc on board as a regular, but we’ll see. Thanks Marc for letting me promo the site.

One.

57. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

OMG it’s only MONDAY y’all! whew wee. . .

Mrs. Rivers, did i mention that i fuckin’ missed you?

58. Tanya wrote:

Mrs. Rivers,

“every comment on this board does not need moderation by you.”

WHAT are you talking about??? Blaxx is the self-proclaimed “Unauthorized Nigga keepin yall in check”! lol

I have NOT attempted to “moderate” anything on here.

If someone poses a question to me, I answer it. If someone comments in reference to my comments, I respond.

Just as EVERYONE else does in any conversation, exchange, discussion, dialogue, and just as everyone else does on here.

—

Do you not think I AM ANNOYED with the ignorance on this blog?!?!?!

The ridiculous comments, simply void of fact on here runneth over!

In fact, a lot of the comments anger me…

I.E. – “But does your beleif outweigh the fact that the Republican party has become extremely hostile, angry, and irrational in their approach to all thing that are not White and Christian?” – Samara #37

I mean some people (YOU) don’t know what a fact is!!! Look up FACT, dear!

“Also let the record show — the KKK was also founded on Christian principles as well.” – Samara #37

How ignorant is that????

Darling, the KKK was NOT founded on Christian principles. (As a Christian you should know that!) It was founded by people who CLAIMED to be Christians, and exerted THEIR OWN principles!

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the difference!

That argument you were trying to make there was bogus beyond belief!

—

“I am not going to respond to your comments when you say silly things like “I’m sure you will support a man marrying a dog because it makes him happy”.” – Samara #53

Call me crazy, but your statements imply that homosexual marriage is OK b/c it makes them happy and allows them free expression. You even referred to gay marriage as a basic human right. (talk about bogus)

“Clearly it is your priority to not see homosexuals have the basic human right of happiness and freedom of expression in this country.” – Samara #37

So obviously YOU support homosexual marriage b/c it makes others happy. Then why wouldn’t you support a man marrying a dog if it makes him happy????

Can you answer that question?????

I’ve offered scripture to validate my opposition to homosexuality. I have NEVER heard anyone make an argument to support homosexuality besides, “It makes them happy; people are entitled to be happy”.

Well maybe it made Charles Manson happy to put a bullet in someone’s head.

Emotion doesn’t discern right from wrong.

And please don’t interject the “Love your neighbor” thing. I LOVE all people, and of course you are to Love the sinner (we are all sinners), but you ARE NOT suppose to Love, support or encourage the sin.

Supporting gay marriage is supporting the sin.

Maybe the Christian in you can offer a substantial argument based on GOD’s Word and not man’s emotion.

—

Maybe you being banned from this blog was insight and cosmic intention!!!! (j/k)

59. Brother Spotless wrote:

ehem:

what does any of this talk concerning homosexual marriage have to do with Colin Powell’s endorsement?

I do not mean to pile on Tanya (well, I guess I do mean to pile on, but I don’t mean it with malice), but the problem I often run into when political-talk and religion-talk cross paths is that religion has an uncanny ability to force the believer to think in a very singular manner. Thus the believer’s side of the argument usually sounds like:

“yea, Obama is right that we shouldn’t have ever gone into Iraq, it is right that we cut taxes for everyone making under $250,000, and Obama is better at handling the economy for reasons X,Y, and Z, but he may allow gay marriage, and the Bible says that’s wrong.”

The point here is that voting on singular, narrowly-tailored issues at the expense of the issues that predominate over the entire nation in real terms hurts far more people than it helps. That is not to say that religion or spirituality has no place, but its place shouldn’t (in my opinion) have power over a nation that does not has not nationalized religion. So how do my comments here connect to Powell?

It seems as though Powell is disenchanted with the wing of the GOP that votes based on singular, narrowly-tailored issues (he expressly stated the that the Party is “Narrowing” to his chagrin). He knows that his taxes will rise, but he won’t let that single issue dominate his judgment concerning who to vote for.

I am not sure how one can be as big of a supporter of Powell and vote based on narrowly-tailored issues. But then again, that seems to be (one of) Tanya’s problems here…

60. Miss Martin wrote:

lmao @ tanya…wild as shit up on here…lol

61. Tanya wrote:

Brother Spotless,

“what does any of this talk concerning homosexual marriage have to do with Colin Powell’s endorsement?”

LOL! Not a damn thing!

I just stated in #9 that I was rethinking my support for Obama b/c of his support of Civil Unions, among other things!

And Samara felt the need to, basically, tell me to get my priorities together! lol

—

“…but the problem I often run into when political-talk and religion-talk cross paths is that religion has an uncanny ability to force the believer to think in a very singular manner.”

I actually agree with you on that!

But is a singular manner wrong??? It does cause problems, but is it wrong?

If I want to base MY vote on a single issue, is that not my right? If only one thing is important to me, do I not have that privilege?

Many people vote (and think) in a singular manner. Many people will be voting based ONLY on the economy!

*IF* I want to cast my vote based ONLY on who supports gay marriage and who doesn’t, why would you consider that a problem??? (”But then again, that seems to be (one of) Tanya’s problems here…”- Brother Spotless)

But TO BE CLEAR:

I am NOT casting my vote based on a singular issue.

In #9 I shared that I am rethinking my support of Barack b/c of his tax plan, b/c I want more Conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, *AND* b/c I don’t want gays to marry.

And honestly there are a few more issues regarding Obama that are causing me to rethink my support right NOW.

I admire Colin Powell, and from my years of study on his principles and positions, I know that Powell shares my views on damn near everything. So if Powell can “over look” certain things and endorse Obama, maybe Powell knows something I don’t. And that is why I said that Powell’s endorsement is confusing me.

I’ve been pulled away from Obama and Powell is kind of tugging me back.

I mean damn, why does my positions and opinions have to be a “problem”?!?!?!

62. Blaxx wrote:

Rays in 5?

Comment by Marc Lamont Hill — October 20, 2008 @ 5:24 pm

Watching the playoffs over the last month makes people forget that the National League was so weak this year. Out of the 16 teams they got, only 6 of them had a realistic shot at the playoffs since July, the rest were out of it before the summer was even over. Tampa Bay simply scares me, I thought all year they were going to fall apart sooner or later and they’ve just been getting better. Phils might not even get that 1 win, 2 if they’re very lucky and Tampa plays very bad.

63. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

amongst other things Brother Spotless. But I digress. . . .

Tanya –
Since you insist on going ‘toe to toe’ with me then fine, I will lower my standards to respond to your comments.

You may think that my opinion of the Republican Party is ignorant but when the campaign spends three weeks discussing issues of Ayers, ‘palling with terrorists’, and Joe the Plumber – its hard to tell if the Republicans have any platform to stand on BUT IGNORANCE. I think it is justified that the tone of the republican party has changed drastically over the past few weeks. Instead of hearing solutions to the problems facing our nation, all I here is “Obama is an ARAB”, “KILL HIM”, (and my favorite) “Obama will take our tax money and send welfare checks to Kenya”. Like Brother Spotless suggested, in keeping this in tune to the main subject at hand; even Gen. Powell sougt major issue with this fact. With the fact that not only were SOME members of the Republican Party shouting this at the rallies but that Palin and McCain were not correcting their audiences for using such harsh language. It IS A FACT that the polls for McCain/Palin have gone down drastically. IT IS A FACT that the unfavorability ratings for both Palin and McCain have skyrocketed. Most of this is because of the negative tone that has overcome the Republican party.

Moving on. . .
Yes, I do support Gay Marriage. I have very close friends and family members who are homosexual. And yes, I am a Christian but I do not use my bible as a tool to judge or tell people what they can or cannot do. This is a civil rights issue not a bible based issue. It is MY belief that as an American, we ALL should have equal rights and that includes the right to marry.

But lets get back to the main underlying issue here:
Tanya, your responses show very little respect towards the other commenters on here — including myself. You consistently become an attack dog and lack being able to have substantive conversation. This is why no one takes your responses seriously. Once you take issue with someone, you dont let up or try to compromise. Insead you insist on forcing your opinions down our throats. I get it. You’re a republican. You’re against Gay people/marriage/etc. You back all your points and validate yourself with bible quotes. I get you. Anything that does not agree with you, it wrong, ignorant, and irritates you. Frankly you sound unhappy.

Just one more thing –
I am not your Darling, nor your Dear. Please NEVER refer to me as such.
And with regards to your last comment, “Maybe you being banned from this blog was insight and cosmic intention!!!!”; – BITCH PLEASE.

64. Brother Spotless wrote:

I think that it is obvious that everyone has a “right to do whatever he/she wishes. So if one wishes to cast his/her vote solely on a candidates stance on same-sex marriage, taxes or his favorite color, by golly do you. And to follow that, no, it is not “wrong” to do so. But it is a problem.

In short, we live in a nation that is too big and too diverse to cast a vote solely based on one issue. There’s too much at stake to vote for someone b/c some idiot wants to ban gay marriage (I use gay marriage here b/c that seems to be the topic of discussion. There are other, non-religious singular issues people vote for. Additionally, this affliction doesn’t only plague Republicans…). We just lived through 8 years of such narrow-minded voting.

Obviously, once I stated that singular-issue voting is not wrong, the rest is simply my opinion.

But I’m right

65. Clifton Harrison wrote:

hahahaha…Mrs Rivers, trust me when i say that responding with thoughtful, clear points doesn’t help. What will happen is she will respond in another really long post, attack, and be even more sarcastic, (possibly questioning your intelligence and correct your speling).

66. Tanya wrote:

Mrs. Rivers,

“Yes, I do support Gay Marriage. I have very close friends and family members who are homosexual.”

AND THAT IS WHY YOU CAN NOT BE OBJECTIVE REGARDING HOMOSEXUALITY!!!!

Of course you want to appease, and see your family members and friends “happy”.

No one wants to accept that their family and friends, or themselves, are doing something wrong!

“I am a Christian but I do not use my bible as a tool to judge or tell people what they can or cannot do.”

Yes you do! Do you support murder and/or theft??? You use your Bible as a tool to judge and tell people what they can and can not do when you support LAWS that forbid murder and theft. You judge the murderer and the thief when you send them to jail and call them criminals.

“Tanya, your responses show very little respect towards the other commenters on here — including myself.”

I think it’s more the matter of you *feeling* disrespected by my positions, not by anything specifically I said to disrespect you.

Your family members are gay and you feel offended and probably hurt that I (anyone) could feel so strongly against their life style.

“BITCH PLEASE” – Samara #62

Don’t be a hypocrite dear! I’ve never called you disparaging names or said anything directly disrespectful to you, or anyone else on here. But you and others constantly curse and say rude things.

If I respond with something witty, you start crying a say I’m mean. Grow up!

If you review the comments here, and any of the “debates” I’ve had with anyone in the ‘Shop, you will notice my “disrespectful” comments are in response to their much more disrespectful comments.

I have NEVER “attacked” anyone FIRST! Can you blame me for defending myself and my positions?!?!?!?!

You can dish it, but your weak ass can’t take it!!!

Don’t be mad that my statements are more stinging and make more sense then yours!

Get over yourself!

67. DCI74 wrote:

Damn Samara, that’s the first time I’ve ever seen you go in on somebody out here like that.

Rays in 5 and New England over Denver tonight

68. Blaxx wrote:

Samara, where are the wedding pictures? Notice I am changing the subject and ignoring Tanya, please for the love of all that is good, the rest of you do the same.

69. DCI74 wrote:

#6 Tanya, you came in on full blast directly at Marc because of his “unimpressed” statement before even reading the comments. Now I have to agree with Samara even though I’ve noticed the tone of some of your comments recently have been less heated. But for real Tanya, too often you come to the thread with boxing gloves on ready to swing and nobody’s in the ring but you.

70. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

DC- as you know we’ve been on Marc’s blog almost since its inception. We used to have lively debates but because there was a consistent thread of respect amongst us; it never had to go there. With this new generation of bloggers on the site, the respect just isnt there anymore. From time to time, you have to throw on the gloves and vaseline and duke it out.

71. DCI74 wrote:

Subject change, my bad. Yeah where are the wedding pics?

72. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

Blaxx, I’ll see if Marc will let me post a few on the blog. If not, email me and I’ll send you a few. My email is on my website.

73. DCI74 wrote:

Exactly Sammy and I miss that, I love the growth and Marc should be proud of that but I agree the vibe recently is too adversarial and less constructive building. We could disagree and still laugh and it’s not like that anymore.

74. Tanya wrote:

PS –

” It IS A FACT that the polls for McCain/Palin have gone down drastically. IT IS A FACT that the unfavorability ratings for both Palin and McCain have skyrocketed.” – Samara # 62

I think you are still confused about what a fact is! And maybe your not clear on what skyrocketed or drastically means.

NOTHING “drastic” has happened in the polls, yet! And McCain’s unfavorability has not “skyrocketed”.

(McCain is ahead by a lot in KY and Montana.)

www usaelectionpolls com

—

“Instead of hearing solutions to the problems facing our nation, all I here is “Obama is an ARAB”, “KILL HIM”.”

The only one you are suppose to hear solutions from is the candidate and the elected officials. What candidate or elected official in the Republican Party has said Obama is an Arab, kill me???? (again, talk about bogus)

I don’t judge the entire Democratic Party based on the ignorant comments made by the nobody people claiming to be Democrats. Why would anyone with common sense and a brain judge the entire Republican Party based on the comments of some nobody at a public, open to anyone, event???????

By the way darling, obviously you missed this, but McCain was very quick to tell the people at his rally that Obama was NOT an Arab!!!

www youtube com/watch?v=w4Xi8JnfAHI

75. Tanya wrote:

Clif, that youtube click is just for you! (I know you stay on youtube. lol)

76. Brother Spotless wrote:

yea for real; what happened to the tone here? I thought I wrote in a combative manner…

77. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

See DC! Only you and a few others can call me ‘Sammy’. That feels like family.

78. Tanya wrote:

DC,

“Tanya, you came in on full blast directly at Marc because of his “unimpressed” statement before even reading the comments.”

I didn’t come at Marc full blast! You’ve got to be kidding me! I just asked him two simple questions in #7. And I made a playful remark in #26. A joke!

I did not mean any insult by them at all. I just wanted to know why he was unimpressed, like others who asked.

I only put on the boxing gloves ***AFTER*** I get hit!

I NEVER hit anyone FIRST. And a fair analysis of the threads PROVES that!

I think you guys have your close knit, like-minded (liberal) connection, and you don’t take offense to the playful comments from amongst you.

But someone new, AND Conservative (me), makes a playful statement, and you guys take offense and act out of pocket.

I feel like the white person who’s cool with and hangs with black people, and b/c they call each other nigga, the white person thinks it’s OK, and then gets beat up for saying the same thing, even though they meant no harm! LOL

HELLO, I’m black too!!! LOL I know Samara asked me once if I was black! YES, YES,YES (In case you missed it!!!)

I’ve said this a thousand times!!! Don’t take my comments personally! I’m serious about my beliefs, but any playful “push” is just in fun!

79. Logic wrote:

That’s cold Doc! I see you.

80. Blaxx wrote:

Hell I know I miss my Sammy Beatrice. I guess I’ll have to get used to Mrs. Rivers *sniff*

81. Tanya wrote:

I was just catching up on some of the other posts I’ve missed and…

CASE IN POINT:

“Ok Marc. I’m officially tired of your shit.”
Comment by Blaxx — September 23, 2008 @ 12:19 pm

If I said that to the Doc, you guys would have given me a cyber lynching!

“if it sounds like I’m being rude or insulting a person, I usually am” – Blaxx

Blaxx, so I guess you meant to be rude and insulting there?!?!?! I thought you were just joking like I do, but my bad!!!

“I’ve noticed the tone of some of your comments recently have been less heated.” – DC

DC, my tone has been the same and my comments have all been made with the same intentions. I think you are just getting use to me and interacting with me in the ‘Shop more, so you don’t take offense as quickly! Honestly nothing has changed on my end. You just seem to be getting to “know” me better on here now! So you view my comments a little differently now.

“Only you and a few others can call me ‘Sammy’. That feels like family” – Samara

You don’t have to let me into your “family”, but just understand I’m not trying to be your enemy!!!

As Blaxx so eloquently put it:

“It’s a birth-right to say whatever the fuck I please. If you don’t like it, please click the red X at the top right corner of your screen.”
Comment by Blaxx — October 10, 2008 @ 12:48 pm

That is ALL!!!! Thank you and good night!

82. DCI74 wrote:

So Sammy where did you and Ray go for your honeymoon?

83. Blaxx wrote:

“Ok Marc. I’m officially tired of your shit.”
Comment by Blaxx — September 23, 2008 @ 12:19 pm

I’m going to acknowledge your existence one last time. Anything can sound however you twist it when you take it out of its context. Considering Marc and I were throwing jabs at one another about the Mets and Phillies, I was officially tired of his shit. There is a difference between joking around and personally attacking everyone on their stance on EVERYTHING.

84. Tanya wrote:

Blah, blah, blah, same shit!

85. Tanya wrote:

“Anything can sound however you twist it when you take it out of its context.”

That is exactly my point! You guys are taking my comments out of context!

There is no personal harm or attacks intended on anyone. I was, am, joking when I make those type of statements too!

PERIOD. The end!

If anyone took offense, I apologize!

86. econwhat wrote:

Dr. Hill, I have read commentary on quite a number of sites today about the Colin Powell endorsement for Sen. Barack Obama as our next POTUS, so I am interested in what opinions you might offer that have not already been stated. I will be looking out tomorrow though cause you have on occasion presented an opinion not considered by others. BTW, your friends, Profs. Yolanda Pierce and Melissa Harris-Lacewell have been talking about this topic for a couple days now over at THE KITCHEN TABLE. Shout out to these wonderful ladies’ marvelous blog!!! I couldn’t resist!

Also, I ain’t mad at the Rays, they deserve a taste of the bubbly on their tongues too. So to be clear, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other about the Phillies or Tampa Bay Rays fans experiencing THAT FALL PARADE!!!

87. Blaxx wrote:

econwhat, you got a link on THE KITCHEN TABLE? Google is just giving me recipes and tablecloth patterns

88. econwhat wrote:

yeah blaxx, it’s princetonprofs.blogspot dot com

89. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

this is one of the funniest threads i think i’ve read, well, in my whole entire gotdamn life!!

what a Monday…you gotta love this shit.

night night everyone

90. DCI74 wrote:

Lol @ Blaxx, that’s the wrong kitchen table bruh. The Professors’ have a good bog over there.

91. Tanya wrote:

LOL

92. Blaxx wrote:

That’s what happens when you don’t bookmark stuff when Marc posts it the first time. Sweet dreams WYLTK, we start football tomorrow. By Sunday, you’ll be able to channel surf through all the games and know exactly whats going on.

93. Tanya wrote:

WYLTK,

I find this thread especially funny in comparison to the comments I just read on the October 10, 2008 Photo of the Day post.

You and Blaxx state your opinions on homosexually (with rudeness and cursing) and its defended as OPINIONS! I do the same WITHOUT cursing and rudeness, and I’m “forcing [my] opinions down [your] throats”.

“people are free to be homophobic if they want to…people are entitled to have their opinions…what if it turns out that homosexuality is in fact a deadly sin? what if it turns out that they are going to in fact, burn in hell? what if james??? people have spritual, religuous, and personal beliefs. DEAL WITH IT.”

Comment by wouldn’t you like to know? — October 10, 2008 @ 3:00 pm

I completely agree with you there. But why is it disrespectful when ***I*** espouse these same views!

No one accused you or Blaxx of shoving your opinions down their throat, did they?!?!?!

I think it’s racism – Conservative racism! You guys are just prejudice towards Republicans! LMAO!

94. Clifton Harrison wrote:

smh

95. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

DC, we went to Cancun.

96. DCI74 wrote:

Aww very nice Sammy, hope it was a great trip.

97. econwhat wrote:

CONGRATS Mr. & Mrs. Rivers on the nuptial union!

98. Logic wrote:

Congrats Mrs Rivers! I was wondering why I hadn’t heard from you. Black love, its a beautiful thing, its a beuatiful thing.

99. Blaxx wrote:

I’m still waiting for me to show me that love doesn’t always suck, no matter what color it is.

100. Piscean Princess wrote:

Mrs. Rivers, you will always be Sammy B to me!
Congratulations to you & Ray! I can’t wait to see your pictures.
And heaven knows, I have expressed many times how much I miss the respectful tone that we used to have up in here. Complete 100% cosign on comments 68 & 71. This is so tiring.

101. Blaxx wrote:

I miss omo (R.I.P.), he would have dealt with this shit handily

102. Piscean Princess wrote:

You ain’t neva lied, Blaxx.

103. DCI74 wrote:

Sammy you and Ray give me a little more hope that I won’t become a lonely bitter old man with a few dogs but damn it’s rough out here being single. So I remain optmistic either that or I’ve just given into my own insanity lol.

104. Blaxx wrote:

I admire you for not just settling and staying single while you wait for the right woman DC. I went through my fair share (and probably your share too) of relationships that were all wrong for me just because I didn’t like being single. Each one taught me something new tho so it wasn’t a total loss.

105. natural nubian wrote:

Sammy, the new Mrs. Rivers, congratulations! Not gonna lie tho I thought yall already tied the knot, but just goes to show that you two have just radiated sincere love for each other for that long. Many many years of blessings on you both and your generations of children to come.

106. james wrote:

blaxx, your dislike of homosexuality is no less irrational or arrogant than tanya’s ridiculous ranting and raving. true love is the ability to love everybody equally. you can’t. not yet. that’s why you think love sucks. you need forgiveness and humility rather than an obvious and constant anger fueled by irrational thoughts. your life will change when you change your mantra, and when you start rooting for the phillies; it’s not too late, we’ll hold up the bandwagon just for you. ya gotta believe!

107. natural nubian wrote:

DC, take it from someone who’s perfected singleness, whether u believe in Him or not, you’re only still single b/c God is still working on you and your future mate. Once yall are where each other need to be in order to received each other with your hearts, then that is when yall will meet. It won’t be rosey and “happily ever after,” but it will be the beginning your life +1.

108. DCI74 wrote:

Oh no doubt Blaxx. I don’t feel I’ve ever had a “bad” relationship because even if it didn’t end the way I would’ve liked there was still a lesson learned and I see nothing bad about that. I hear you nn but after a while the grind of being single becomes really tiring and damn near boring. If He is still getting me ready then I can’t front my impatience is really beginning to wear on me.

109. james wrote:

dci74, you too need to become a phillies fan, and quick from the sound of it. i met my wife shortly after the phillies lost the series in 93, just after i had given up entirely on baseball and love. you cannot look for love, but you have to make sure you are in the right position for it to find you.

110. Ann wrote:

I just spent the better part of 45 minutes reading all these comments….damn..

question…some of you guys aluded to the “good ole days” when the blog first started…how did the blog start? were you guys all from the same area? how did Blaxx find you guys, since he all up in canada…just curious…

111. Blaxx wrote:

james, I understand you don’t agree with my views on homosexuality and that’s fine. We can agree to disagree. But I LOVE how you threw the Phillies reference in there. I’m still saying Rays in 5 tho, you can’t sway me. May the bandwagon run me over if I am wrong. Keep in mind I’m not currently single, by the sounds of these parallels you draw between being a Phillies fan and love, if they do win (big IF) I might fuck around and get married then go spend my honeymoon at the victory parade.

Good question Ann, the regulars that are still here are from all over mostly. There were a lot of Dr. Hill’s students on here in the beginning, there still are too but they aren’t as vocal. I learned about the blog one day I was home sick from work and I was watching CNN as I was laid up in bed. They were discussing the Duke Lacrosse rape case and they brought in Marc Lamont Hill via satellite for his thoughts. I was impressed with what he had to say and the fact he didn’t look much older than me (he still doesn’t) so I went to the website they had up on the screen (Marclamonthill.com), read all the articles and stumbled upon the blog. The rest, as they say, is history.

112. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

don’t worry DC, if all else fails, you can always marry me

i just have a few rules you MUST abide by. And they are as follows:

Rule #1 all handy stuff you must take care of, leaky faucets, putting up curtain rods, hang pictures, etc…

Rule #2 you MUST take out the trash. don’t ever ask me to do that…ever.

Rule #3 you must cook a decent meal, at least 4 times a month.

Rule #4 you must experiment (use your imagination)

Rule #5 you must love me 24/7 365/6, even when i wake up looking like the snufflelufugus (you don’t want to see my hair in the mornings) but if you loved me you would!

Rule #6 You must love kids! i don’t have any, but that doesn’t mean i won’t change my mind…

Rule #7 last, but definitely not least. you can not be cheap! I love shoes…end of discussion

Now if you can follow these 7 simple rules, then my friend, we can go to vegas tomarrow.

btw- GOOD MORNING….blaxx i’m warming up my MSN, you got the clipboard ready??? and my dreams were very sweet, thanx!

113. DCI74 wrote:

LOl @ james, so becoming a Phillies fan is teh kiey?? I need to let that thought marinate a bit.

Ann I found Marc’s blog 2 years ago less than a month after he started it. I found an article he wrote on snitching that appeared on a few other sites and that brought me here. This was long before Doc was doing any cable news shows or anything like that. Honestly with a think a couple of exceptions we were all strangers but pretty much grew to respectfully engage with each other over time. The mood was distinctly different than it is now, less argumentative and it felt like a place where people who read more than the back of cereal boxes could come together to talk about hip hop, current affairs, politics, and social issues among other things all while maintaining a base level of decorum.

114. Ann wrote:

DCI74

One Saturday it was rainy and I was bored out of my mind I actually sat down at the computer and for the better part of 3 hours poured through old blog posts the year prior to when I started coming around. I can notice a change. In the beginning Marc wrote a lot of blogs himself. Now he posts a lot from other mediums but I attribute that to his increasingly busy shedule. It’s some pretty good stuff in the archives.

115. Blaxx wrote:

That’s why we gotta start getting more contributions from the regulars. There will be more EverythingBlaxx film reviews. I’d like to start the next one this weekend, still kicking around ideas on which film I will review. I’m open to suggestions so just hit me up.

116. DCI74 wrote:

Exactly Ann, when I said the mood and vibe has changed I’m definitely not making it up, many of the regulars that have been here long enough also agree. I agree Blaxx, more contributions from others would be dope. You paying attenion Marc??

117. Blaxx wrote:

Well Marc can’t put guns to our heads and make us contribute DC. Well, I mean he could but good luck catching me nigga! LOL. I meant to ask you, you still got your radio show going?

118. DCI74 wrote:

Very true. I have some ideas for submissions I’ll be sending Marc’s way. No Blaxx, we became a victim of idiot Clearchannel executives so our station was axed last October because they felt this market needed yet another alt-rock radio station, so when they flipped the format we all got fired, no heads up or advance notice which is typical in the commercial radio business. I also closed my podcast but I have some new things in the works and will be back in the mix very soon.

119. Blaxx wrote:

Sorry to hear that I only got to peep the show a couple times before its demise. Me and my boy are kicking around the idea of a podcast because everybody that knows us and has heard us talk, debate or argue feels that we need a TV or radio show. We are looking for a DJ who doesn’t mind working for free for free promotion. I’ll keep y’all posted on how that turns out.

120. Piscean Princess wrote:

Ann,

I found Marc’s blog shortly after Katrina. I am pretty sure I found him after he was a guest poster on blackprof dot com. Initially I didn’t know anyone on here, but came to know one (formerly) frequent poster personally…I also nudged one of my online friends over here. And, let’s face it, it does kinda seem like we all know each other on some level, even if we’ve never met!

It’s too bad that the comments from the older posts have been compromised. We used to have a helluva lot of fun up in here. The ‘Shop is equally as informative for me now as it was then…..I’m just exhausted with the combativeness that has permeated the comments….hence my new semi-lurker status. I can’t waste my energy on aimless arguing and middle school dogging.

121. Brother Spotless wrote:

Let’s be real: the blog was poppin’ when Brothers Spotless, Lightness, and Smartness graced the stage

On a serious note, there once was a time when I did learn from the posts on this blog. And while it may be easy to pile on those who base their actions solely on the Bible (I know it’s easy for me), a quick glance in the proverbial mirror may do all of us some good. That is, if we do wish the Barbershop to return to the level of conversation it once possessed.

And Prof. Hill: Man up and post more of your own thoughts!! Please???

122. natural nubian wrote:

wow, ok. wasn’t gonna chime in but why not. i was brought to the blog while in undergrad. i work in finance now, but even back then i’d get very bored at sitting all day at a computer without reading articles and news items that provoked my own thoughts. i enjoy the comments regardless but i’ve found the blog has lost its original authenticity & gritt. i visit a blog to read up on different POVs and i gotta cosign w/brother spotless. doc, i miss your original pieces (the homeless crackhead story still makes me cry to tears). it was your blog that encouraged me to explore my own inner authoress thru cheesy (but insightful) facebook notes.

i understand you’re much MUCH more busy now but i do miss your own voice on the page. As for the originators, i’d have to say other than the obvious Omo, Big Vic needs to emerge from his hibernation asap! Dr. Ting and her points (even tho she a seminole i won’t hold it against her) as well as the other ladies (one even started her own blog a few months ago) are missed.

123. DCI74 wrote:

Yes Spotless the Brothers trio along with omo always brought much-needed balance and openness to the Shop.

I feel you Princess, I’m going to embrace a semi-lurker status too because I just don’t feel compelled to get in the mix within every thread especially the volatile ones. Recently my preference is to read the posting and the comments and reflect on it myself, take a glance into the proverbial mirror like Brother Spotless said versus getting involved in back-and-forth comments.

124. Blaxx wrote:

I’ve already made a personal vow to step back and try not to engage people in blogger warfare. I’ve thrown down my keyboard, not in surrender but in hopes of peace and goodwill. We can’t bring the old days back but we can at least be better than this.

125. Blaxx wrote:

However, it must be said that if Marc keeps talkin bout my Mets then it’s on.

126. DCI74 wrote:

Lol cosign Blaxx. This makes me think of a lady I see on the bus sometimes. She’s fairly old and clearly has issues i.e. talking to herself, grabbing people’s stuff and trying to engage everyone else in her madness. I realized a while back that when people ignore her she’s a quiet as a sleeping baby. So I’m just going to treat the blog bullies just like her and ignore them, afterall if no one pays attention they’re basically talking to themselves.

On another note, here’s a prediction sure to go wrong: Mets & Yankees in the World Series next year, an official Subway Series.

127. Blaxx wrote:

Bold prediction right there. I’m sure Marc is bookmarking this thread right now for next October to rub it in your face if you’re wrong. That’s a big IF tho. GO METS! You Gotta Believe.

128. DCI74 wrote:

Lol I got nothing to lose, my pride can take it.

129. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

DC, well, if all else fails you, you can always marry me…

i’ve posted my 7 deadly rules i require for a man to wed me, but it didn’t post…and lord knows i’m not going to ask the Doc to find it or me…i don’t know if he ate yet, and i don’t want my head chewed off

also, for you guys reading pleasure, i will definitely work on some of the language that i use when i post…i definitely like for people to feel comfortable with me…sometimes i like to push the envelope…but it’s all out of love…and i hope that, that is conveyed through my comments…

I love the barbershop and it’s patrons! so i’ll work on ME for YOU all…

plus hell, i’m too fine to be sounding like a *Darn* sailor…

see, i’m improving already!

130. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

find it for me*

131. Tanya wrote:

“whether u believe in Him or not, you’re only still single b/c God is still working on you and your future mate. Once yall are where each other need to be in order to received each other with your hearts, then that is when yall will meet.” – natural nubian #105

Indeed!

132. DCI74 wrote:

Lol well thanks wyltk, we may have to discuss that over a football game.

Seven deadly rules? Hmm do share…

133. Tanya wrote:

I think it’s really great that you guys have your close knit community here; and everyone misses the “good old days” in some respects, in many aspects of life. So I understand your feelings.

I am very curious to know how many “Conservatives with Conviction” were in the ‘Shop in the beginning???

It is very easy to have a good old time and get along peacefully with people who believe the same things you do.

I’m not trying to start a war in here. I just have strong beliefs and feel compelled to SHARE them. I’m seriously NOT trying to beat you in the head with them. If you disagree fine, but we don’t have to be enemies!

It is never my intention to hurt or offend anyone, but I have to be honest about my beliefs, even if it upsets others. I am often offended by a lot of the beliefs shared here, but I don’t take it personally. (Even when I KNOW, some of you mean it personally.)

I’m a very playful person, and in person, people laugh at my jokes!!! (they really do!)

But obviously, you guys just don’t get my jokes. (I think it has a lot to do with the fact that I’m an “intruder” to the happy liberal family you have here.) So, even though I mean NO harm by them, I’ll stop making them.

I like to engage with people of different ideologies. I found this blog b/c when I saw Marc on TV (and disagreed with his position) I was thoroughly impressed with the logic and reason he used to support his point; It made me think, differently!

I like the ‘Shop b/c the intelligent liberal perspectives I find on here challenge my thought and keep me on my toes. And the ignorant and ridiculous comments strengthen my faith and position. I take the good with the bad, and I learn and grow from it.

I may not agree with you, but I don’t have any grudge or ill will towards any of you.

If you take a moment, I’m sure you will see that all of my comments are made in the same tone and with the same love and concern for my people as yours are. I’m just speaking from the opposite side of the fence!

“And while it may be easy to pile on those who base their actions solely on the Bible (I know it’s easy for me), a quick glance in the proverbial mirror may do all of us some good.” – Brother Spotless #118

134. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

Thanks you guys for all the love. Ray and I are happier than ever. I’ll have to work with Marc to get some pics up.

How did I come to the Shop? Well, Ting and I were in grad school together (GO SEMINOLES!) and she told me her good friend started a blog and she wanted me to show my support. I’ve been hooked ever since. . . .

Here’s a question to the Brothers – What was up with yall? Were you guys like a fraternity or something? I thought your names were cute but also cheesy: Brother Spotless, Brother Darkness, Brother Whatever . . . . .

135. Brother Spotless wrote:

I see Mrs. Rivers from the Hater Coalition has chimed in…

We all went to the same undergrad, and continued dialog through our blog (see the link to my name).

We all actually found Dr. Hill at individually. I heard about him through the other Brothers, and invited him to meet my previous boss, as she wanted to gather ideas on gang prevention (btw: Dr. Hill has no regard for parking laws).

136. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

so you ARE a gang? lol

137. DCI74 wrote:

Lol @ Sammy, The Brothers Cheesy. I thought the names were clever. On another note I think Garrett, derek alexander and hotchocolatboi were one in the same lol.

138. Piscean Princess wrote:

I was always suspicious of those other 2 as well, DC. Particularly hotchocolateboy. He was a hot nightmare.

139. Blaxx wrote:

so you ARE a gang? lol

Comment by Mrs. Rivers — October 21, 2008 @ 5:27 pm

No, they are an anti-gang gang.

I’m not really surprised that Dr. Hill don’t give a fuck about where he parks. He seems like the type of guy who would tell his driver to just park the limo up on the sidewalk while he runs in for a minute.

140. clifton harrison wrote:

“seems like the type of guy who would tell his driver to just park the limo up on the sidewalk while he runs in for a minute”

hahahahahahaha, that’s funny, because for some reason, i can picture him doing that

141. MrsPickron wrote:

I can’t say how long it took me to read all of the comments here. WOW, I had so much to say and make comments on… then as I read on I see someone said it already. I enjoyed reading this thread. I like the family feeling you all have. It’s good to know that it has not always been so heated in here.

You guys should have taken heed to Marc’s position towards Tanya. I noticed he rarely responds to her. I have read a different tone in her comments. I’m officially diagnosing Tanya with bipolar disorder. Sometimes she seems like a really nice christian woman & other times she’s a raging bull out to attack any and every.

Ann, I’ve had the intentions to go back and read the older blogs but I just can’t find the time. I have to think of it my next boring rainy day.

142. DCI74 wrote:

It you get the chance MrsPickron read the archives, lots of good stuff in there. The only bad part is many of the really good comments are gone and have been replaced with spam.

143. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“Sometimes she seems like a really nice christian woman & other times she’s a raging bull out to attack any and every.”

I’m sure it’s a matter of me being ” a really nice Christian woman” when YOU AGREE with my position/comments, and I’m “a raging bull” when YOU DISAGREE with my position/comments.

If YOU bounce back and forth in your assessment of my personality (WITHOUT knowing me) based solely on my comments, then YOU’RE the one with mental health issues!!!

144. Tanya wrote:

Take DC for example:

Sometimes he says things that I think are in genus and very sharp! And sometimes I think he says things that are really silly!

But I understand it’s not a matter of him being some type of mix-up between dumb and smart. I don’t think he’s a different person at times (bipolar).

I just realize that the things he says that I THINK are silly, is only b/c I don’t agree with it, and I realize there are many people that may agree with him.

But whether DC says something I think is really smart or really silly, I still believe he’s a cool dude.

But hey, not everyone is as level headed as I am!!!

145. MrsPickron wrote:

Every assessment here are based on the comments, what else do we have to assess?

To agree or disagree with your comments is not the issue here. Why is it so hard for you to accept others’ views & positions. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean you have to become a “raging bull”.

You put so much energy into insulting or belittling someone when they disagree with you. What do you get out of it? You quote & represent the bible on one hand then you go & judge on the other. One may have an open ear to listen to the knowledge that you share but in the same comment you use profanity & insults… bam, the listener’s ears are closed. I know you’re not an educator but that does not work when you want someone to hear what you are saying.

Oh well, come on with your insults, it doesn’t matter one way or the other to me. I just hope you are not like this outside of the cyber… its one thing to have the entire Shop avoid you and have a sense of “beef” towards you but your real life family & friends should mean more. You should accept & respect others’ view even if they are different from yours.

Peace

146. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“Why is it so hard for you to accept others’ views & positions.”

Why is it so hard for you and others to accept MINE???

“Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean you have to become a “raging bull”.”

I don’t become a “raging bull” when someone disagrees with me. I have, however, responded with “mean” remarks ***AFTER*** someone has pushed my buttons and/or said something “mean” FIRST!

I’m NOT the first in the Shop to use profanity, but I know for sure I have used profanity the LEAST!!! So that can’t FAIRLY be the issue!

When I had that exchange with Clif and Cezar about the use of the word nigger, you obviously didn’t think I was a “raging bull” then. You “sided” with me so definitely that Cezar actually thought you were ME!!! lol

But since you have gays in your family (as you’ve mentioned on another post) you may feel some personal resentment toward my position wishing to prevent them from getting married. So NOW my comments are “raging bull” like. (oh the irony, lol)

For the record, YES I am STRONGLY against homosexuality, strongly. But I’m against STRONGLY against smoking too! But I don’t discriminate against smokers or treat smokers as though they are less than human. I respect and love smokers for the individual children of GOD that they are. And that is exactly how I feel about homosexuals. I still love them and respect them for the children of GOD that they are!

But liberal can’t understand that. They think that b/c you object to and reject the lifestyle you can’t be humane to the human.

It’s like O’Reilly said tonight, liberals (Joy Behar from The View in particular) simply dislike people just b/c they have different political views then them. That’s the case here.

You guys don’t dislike ME (you don’t know ME). You dislike my VIEWS (my VIEWS are all you know).

“Oh well, come on with your insults, it doesn’t matter one way or the other to me.”

Insults??? You’re the one that called me bipolar! Now your panties are in a bunch b/c I SUGGESTED you may be the one with mental health issues?!?!?!?!

Come on!!! You don’t see the bias here????

Thanks for your concern for my personal life; to let you in a bit: I’ve always been and still am, the most popular in all my circles (that’s part of the reason for my booming business), and I have a great big family that I am very close too!

So, I’M GOOD!!!!

But Peace be onto you!

147. Tanya wrote:

Just wanted to draw attention to one more thing:

You and others keep telling me to “respect” views different from mine…

However, I have NEVER questioned anyone’s Christianity for supporting homosexuality.

Many on here have questioned my Christianity for NOT supporting gays. That’s disrespect. (But you don’t see me crying about it!)

All I do is state WHY I’m against whatever. And apparently, some people, simply, just can’t handle that!

148. MrsPickron wrote:

Tanya, “When I had that exchange with Clif and Cezar about the use of the word nigger, you obviously didn’t think I was a “raging bull” then. You “sided” with me so definitely that Cezar actually thought you were ME!!”

Yes, I shared my views about about the N word. You & I just happened to agree, however; you did become a “raging bull” on that topic. We were making the same points but on a different tone. I actually mentioned in that thread that you could have been reaching Clift but as soon as you started insulting him you lost him (I don’t have the word for word quote). Just trying to remember back, I think you acknowledged your wrongful comments & addressed them in that thread.

OTT… Where is Cezer anyway??? Cezer, where are you?

“But since you have gays in your family (as you’ve mentioned on another post) you may feel some personal resentment toward my position wishing to prevent them from getting married. So NOW my comments are “raging bull” like. (oh the irony, lol)”

For the record in case you don’t remember the two men in my family, my uncles who were homosexuals passed away. Therefore, I don’t have any “gays” in my family that I know of. I feel that it is the citizen’s choice to get married same sex or not. GOD will deal with them accordingly. We have all sinned. That’s why Jesus died for us remember. Leave it up to GOD to judge on Judgement Day. We agreed in another thread about homosexuals that the sex therapist (can’t get her name right now) posted about anal sex… remember?. Even though I had love ones who lived that life I do believe its wrong but its not for me to judge and I loved them as I love my straight family members. Again, you made crazy insults to the sex therapist & Deacon. I felt that you were totally wrong & out of order, however; that was not my argument as the time. I did tell you that calling Deac a “faggot” was wrong. You & I had the same views but again in a different tone… you became a raging bull and started calling names & belittling the commenters who disageed with

149. MrsPickron wrote:

(this must be a really long comment, my phone wouldn’t let me type anymore)

cont…
you.

Insults??? You’re the one that called me bipolar! Now your panties are in a bunch b/c I SUGGESTED you may be the one with mental health issues?!?!?!?!

Do you really think I care that you said I have mental issues? Its nothing you guys can say on here that can hurt me. “panties are in a bunch” Frankly Sweetie, I don’t have any panties on (since you mentioned my personal attire)
I have fun in the Shop & I learn a lot. I’m not here for drama. I just felt the need to address my feeling towards your comments as I observed a back & forth characteristic through your comments. The bipolar comment was only used to describe that your comments not to unsult you… I actually thought you would laugh at it. I thought it was rather funny!

Glad to know you are well in your life outside of here. I didn’t think you weren’t. I just assumed you would have some friendship issues. Again, all I can assess are your comments & relationships here. You’re correct we don’t really know the person outside of here. I never said I didn’t like you & I do respect your views. I just don’t like how you jump on people & throw insults.

Peace

150. MrsPickron wrote:

I have 1 more thing to address but its easier on a pc… stay tuned!!!

151. MrsPickron wrote:

Tanya,

“I’ve been back and forth a bit after the Palin designation, and then I got over it and came back to Obama-mania;”

You’re not just “back and forth” about who you are voting for.

“Congrats on the nuptials! All the best for a long and prosperous union!”

This is the “really nice Christian woman”.

“I agree with you about priorities, and GOD’s word is my priority.”

This is the “really nice Christian woman”.

“Samara can do the event planning!”

Are you praising her work? This is the “really nice Christian woman”.

“How ignorant is that????”

Are you calling her ignorant? This is the “raging bull” getting started.

“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the difference!”

Are you calling her stupid? This is the “raging bull”.

Maybe you being banned from this blog was insight and cosmic intention!! This is the “raging bull”.

“Maybe the Christian in you can offer a substantial argument based on GOD’s Word and not man’s emotion.”

Are you questioning her faith and Christianity? This is the “raging bull”.

“YOU’RE the one with mental health issues!!!” This is the “raging bull”.

These are your “raging bull” episodes from this thread; there are so many others that are worst on other threads. That was fun!!!

Peace!!!

152. BigVic4 wrote:

I could never be a conservative…

I don’t like men.

153. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“I actually mentioned in that thread that you could have been reaching Clift but as soon as you started insulting him you lost him (I don’t have the word for word quote).”

Clif threw the FIRST insult there. (I hate to point fingers, but I have to draw attention to the facts, especially since I’m being wrongful accused.) Clif was the FIRST to curse and be rude. Clif called me a hoe! lol

I just referred to him as a nigger, which according to HIM, was OK for blacks to do to each other. I DID mean it in a negative tone, but it was all PUN. Nonetheless, I did APOLOGIZE for that.

“For the record in case you don’t remember the two men in my family, my uncles who were homosexuals passed away”

I didn’t recall you saying that. My condolences. My point is simply, you have a personal connection to it, so you may be more sensitive to someone’s opposition. AND THAT’S FINE. You just have to understand that it’s FINE for me to feel the way I feel I about it too! And it doesn’t make me a mean or heartless person to object to the lifestyle!

“Leave it up to GOD to judge on Judgement Day.”

Then why do we JUDGE murders, thieves, etc. and put them in jail??? Why do we seek to punish people (JUDGE them) who lie (Martha Stewart and others have gone to jail for perjury)???

WHY DON’T WE JUST LEAVE THAT UP TO GOD?????????

Listen, honestly, in my heart, I DO NOT JUDGE people. Because GOD said not to, and I know the penalty for judging others! So I don’t do it!!!

But we are NOT suppose to support sin. SO, I don’t support homosexuality! My opposition is NOT a judgment!

“Again, you made crazy insults to the sex therapist & Deacon.”

I did NOT make any insults towards the sex therapist! She IS a bisexual; so why would mentioning that be an insult???

I did come at Deacon a little hard! I admit, and I apologized then and there for it!

But that was ONLY AFTER like 100 comments, total frustration, and AFTER he came at me crazy FIRST!!! I’m sure you remember the crazy and mean things he said about me, JUST simply for opposing him! It wasn’t until my 95th comment that I came at him!

154. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“The bipolar comment was only used to describe that your comments not to unsult you… I actually thought you would laugh at it. I thought it was rather funny!”

MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anything I say, i.e.: “How ignorant is THAT?” (“that” being the operative word, THAT not YOU), is in reference to the person’s COMMENT, not an attack on them and/or their character!

And most of the things you guys, apparently, take offense to, I usually only mean it as a JOKE! You guys say things in jest back and forth at each other, but when I do it, the Barbershop Lynch Mob comes a running!!! WHY??? (b/c I’m the outsider to the happy liberal family, IMHO)

“I just assumed you would have some friendship issues”

All of my friends are liberals (all of my close friends). I fight with them about politics all day!!! I’m like Elizabeth on The View, I’m totally out numbered and always under attack!!! And our discussions/debates get VERY heated. But we are all mature enough to still walk away in love. No one take anything PERSONALLY.

They all have threatened to physically harm me if I don’t vote for Barack! (and I’m a little scared that they might, for real!) But they say that during EVERY election, and they all know I vote Republican, and they still come to my events, they still support my efforts, and support me personally, and they still answer the phone and are there for me when I need them. We have heated, “raging bull” exchanges, but they obviously still love me like I love them.

YOU CAN DISAGREE AND NOT HATE PEOPLE!!!

“I just don’t like how you jump on people & throw insults.”

I don’t like how people jump down my throat! Why are others getting a pass, when they provoke or say out of pocket things to me FIRST, and I just respond????

155. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

BigVic is BACK! Hey buddy!

156. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

In response to your #148:

I’m glad you noticed my “nice” comments; and that is the TONE I began with here!

Then…..

I was attacked, despite my good intentions and friendly comments, just b/c I said I don’t want gays to marry, and that, among other things, was hindering my vote for Obama. (be a black and tell a black you’re not voting for Obama and that’s enough to get stabbed!)

The first of my “negative” comments you mentioned was:

“How ignorant is that????”

Well that was comment # 57!!!

In fact all of my “negative” comments that you mentioned were made in #57!!!!

However, in PREVIOUS comments, here are the “negative/mean” things that were said FIRST to instigate my RESPONSES:

#53
“your responses are annoying and most of time so bogus” – Samara

“‘pencil broken arguments’” – Samara (I think she meant broken pencil arguments, lol, but the point/insult she was making is still the same!)

“The Christian in me wont allow me to stoop to your level of conversation.” – Samara (that’s clearly insulting)

#37
“Clearly it is your priority to not see homosexuals have the basic human right of happiness and freedom of expression in this country” – Samara (this is insulting, she’s trying to imply that I don’t care for them as people, {which I do})

“If you state to be the devout Christian you are, can you undoubtedly side with a political party who’s rallies look more like lynch mobs and hatefests than peaceful demonstrations of polital change?” – Samara (questioning my Christianity, insulting my party)

#15
“But I guess if you’d rather continue to borrow money from China to only ship it overseas to pay for a pointless war, instead of helping out your fellow American brothers and sisters then I see your point. . . .” – Samara

How is this any different from the sarcasm I use, that you guys think is soooo insulting??? How is her sarcastic remark different from my “you might support a man marrying a dog” remark???

And as you know, my “maybe you have mental health issues” comment was IN RESPONSE to your “you’re bipolar” comment.

So let’s be fair here, ok!

Thank you for highlighting that my “mean” comments were only AFTER provocation from others FIRST!

PS- In many States provocation is a crime! lol

157. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

BTW – I just clicked your link. Congrats on the pregnancy!!! You look so happy and at peace! Good Stuff!!!

158. clifton harrison wrote:

Tanya, please don’t lie about me. You said that i was the first one to “curse and be rude”. Lets clarify this statement.

Here is the link for you (Mrs. Pickron, and others to see):

www marclamonthill com/mlhblog/?p=5589#comments

Now true indeed, i did curse first, but the cursing wasn’t directed to you personally until you started insulting and disrespecting me as a person.

Comment #41, i called your comment “some crazy shit”. Not you, but your point of view on that particular topic. And even though we had prior topics which lead up to this, i probably shouldn’t have phrased it in that way.

But here’s the thing, you understood it as me calling your comment crazy (and not a personal attack) and you even asked for clarification (comment #42).

After i responded to your comment (not attacking you personally), in comment #43, you started personally attacking me and my intelligence (comment #44).

In my response in comment #47, i was upset, but even in my anger, my foul language was directed at you, but it was always tied back to the argument (not that it excuses them). But your response in comment #48 took the level of disrespect to new heights.

Tanya: “Get use to that street corner and those colors little Nigger! (and I mean that in a fully derogatory way, b/c if you can use it with such ease then obviously you are it!)”

I don’t want to get into with you anymore, because that exchange made it clear to me that you aren’t able to exchange ideas without it becoming very disrespectful and/or claiming your opinion is right because you have God on your side.

I just wanted to clear it up because from reading this thread, you use my name and me insulting you as if i’m just a rude person from jump, and that’s not true.

Clif

159. T M Abbott wrote:

Dr. Hill, I’d like to know where I can find your commentary on the Obama endorsement of Gen. Powell.

160. T M Abbott wrote:

That is, BY General Powell.

161. MrsPickron wrote:

Tanya I read the comments then & I remember clearly. I know what was said on both ends with you & Clif. On that thread I felt like we were playing the role of the educator & Clif & Cezar were our pupils so to speak because we were trying to enlighten them about the ignorance of using the N word. We were actually “winning” the arguement but when you stooped down to the pupil’s level, everything that you said previously was erased. Yes, you did apologize but will Clif ever receive & respect anything else you say now? Once you go “there” a person will have a mute ear there after. I’m not sure if I explained that well enough to be understood.

I have noticed that you will acknowledge your wrong & apologize… that’s great!

I do accept your views on homosexuality & yes we do have some different views. I do see “that” sin is the same as a murderer & liar. I don’t see the crime in homosexuality as I see it in a murderer. All sin is NOT a crime. If I lie & say I don’t eat chicken; its a sin but not a crime. If a man love another man & lay with him as he should a woman; its a sin not a crime. If a man kill his brother; its a sin & a crime. No, I don’t feel that a homosexual is as guilty as a murderer when it comes to the law. I don’t wish for laws to go against homosexuality. Same sex marriages, whatever; it doesn’t matter to me.

I understand that you say people insult you first… but do two wrongs make a right? Did you ever think that people insult you to provoke you?

I can see that relationship with you & your friends. I was going to state earlier that I can actually see us being friends & bumping heads all the time. When the respect & understanding is there its brushed off the shoulders a lot easier.

In closing, I do respect you & like the “really nice Christian woman ” I see from your comments. I read this blog a while before I ever made a comment. I felt like I’ve gotten to know the bloggers. You’ve made so many intelligent comments when I saw the “raging bull” for the first time I was disappointed.

162. MrsPickron wrote:

Tanya,
Thanks so much for the acknowledgement. That was very thoughtful.

We are truly Blessed!!!!

163. Josh wrote:

Like I said earlier……another black man looking for a job! He waited till less than two weeks before the election to back another black guy who needs a job! If you think this worth ANYTHING but a one day news blip your all dumber than you REALLY sound! Colin is lookin for a job! That’s it! Noting more! Nothing less! End of story!