• Makes sense to me.
    I'm closed minded on some issues, too, especially in my personal life. For example, some say that one should never consume alcohol. I say a beer or glass of wine or two is fine for me and those who can drink responsibly. I am open-minded to the fact that one drink makes some people go nuts and they cannot handle it.
    This is a pretty relative subject. One person's closed-mindedness could be another person's perseverance.

    Anyway, I didn't think you were understood properly or that there was a misunderstanding somewhere.  Glad you cleared it up.

    April 25, 2008 at 4:55 p.m.

  • No, I'm not endorsing being close- minded, I am saying, recognize the part of you, that is.
    You used drugs as a very good example. There are many respectable people out there, including Ron Paul that think we should legalize marijuana. Marijuana for medicinal purposes should be looked at. I am not for legalizing drugs as a whole, because it is a way to condone it’s use.

    I repeat compromise when you can, without giving up your principals. I mentioned a way to safely removing CO2 from the atmosphere by pumping it underground, without invoking the political hot buttons, and at the same time some company will make money off it. Introducing father greed to mother nature.

    Yesterday, I said I was not open-minded as a method of full disclosure. Of course it was taken literally, to mean, I was close minded on all issues especially those coming from the conservative side. As you well know, I don't see eye to eye with social conservatives, but I'm comfortable with fiscal conservatives. The poster that was calling me out for  being closed-minded; completely disregarded his bias.

    Long-winded, but I hope it explains what I mean, by using open-minded methods ,to get results.

    April 25, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.

  • I still don't get it, Mike. Are you saying that it's good to be close-minded? Help me out here.
    What if what one is closed-minded about is harmful, like doing drugs or cheating on income tax?
    I agree that a bit of stubborness is good, and sometimes a LOT of it is needed.  But if it's good stubborness, usually it's called perseverance, or endurance. Anyway... I'll be openminded to your response.

    April 25, 2008 at 4:08 p.m.

  • Good question maryann….. I believe you are more steadfast now, than you were 20 years ago. I was really talking about Christian beliefs as a whole, and I erred and used the word religion. Same with politics and issues...But you are right now that I think about it ,many Republicans are switching parties in order to vote for Obama.

    I'm still trying to make the point that we all have a stubbornness about us, and we might not be as open- minded, as we might think. I chose religion and politics because it used to be taboo to argue these subjects in public because of the repercussions.

    Instead of dealing with the different personalities, I think we should come together as a country through our representatives and scrap what’s not working, and improve what we we have. I mentioned compromise without giving up principles.

    April 25, 2008 at 3:54 p.m.

  • Mike, if people are firmly entrenched in their religion and politics, and are "closedminded," then how can one acccount for all the conversions out there? You know, people joing the Baptist faith, people becoming Catholic at Easter, or me switching from voting Democratic 20 years ago to batting different ways now?
    I consider this a philosophical point, and not a challenge.

    April 25, 2008 at 3:38 p.m.

  • Praise every one at MSNBC, but cry foul to Fox?
    I suggested a political show and listed the panel to emphasize that both sides of the political spectrum are represented. For instance, I despise the isolationist,zeophobic views of Pat Buchanan when it comes to illegal immigration,but when it comes to political campaigns. he knows his stuff. I didn't care much for Joe Scarborough, when he was one of  the instrumental figures in impeaching Bill Clinton, but he gives a fair political analysis.
    I admitted that I am close minded, when it comes to putting much stock into what Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity have to say. Perhaps I should've said that I can understand why those on the right do the same when it comes to Al Franken, Rachel Maddow or Dusty Rhodes. But my message was lost on this, because my post was not about entertainers, because the compromise I was trying to convey, has come from Congress and business. That was my message.

    My blog was never meant to be tit for tat starting with me but I realize I'm part of the problem.
    I hope it clears the muddy waters a bit Sandwichh.

    April 25, 2008 at 1:22 p.m.

  • I did see that good movie thinpinkpig...And I get the mesage.

    April 25, 2008 at 1:04 p.m.

  • "but to drop the “my way or the highway” method of doing business."

    What??????      You just praised everyone on MSNBC and cry foul against those on Fox. I am a Buchanan guy.
     Shall I say without a wierd comeback, ...u 1st?

    April 25, 2008 at 12:10 p.m.