I'm glad Rand Paul said it...

[NYcarbineer]

I'm glad Rand Paul said what he said about desegregation because the state had no right to tell other people how to use their own private property. I know it is shitty to use it to showcase your racist views but don't you guys realize that freedom of speech is protected by the right to use your own property as you wish to express your racist views such as only serving 'whites only'. I know it is a sucky thing to do but why do we have the right to deny someone the use of their own property and subsequently the right of free speech. Where do we draw the line between good speech and bad speech in this society.

I'm guessing then that you are not happy that he has completely and unequivocally reversed his position:

Rand Paul on CNN earlier this evening:

He said he would have voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act if he were in the Senate at the time, calling the racial climate at the time "a stain on the South and our history."

"There was an overriding problem in the South that was so big that it did require federal intervention in the Sixties," he said. "The Southern states weren't correcting it, and there was a need for federal intervention."

He managed to go from Barry Goldwater to Lyndon Johnson in one hilarious leap!!!!

 

[my2¢]

Thinking back to where we stood as a nation going into and coming out of the 60's in regards to race realtions, I think Rand Paul being born in '63 can only speak on the matter in terms of idealism. I don't agree with what he said and he himself may have 2nd thoughts but in any regards like Reagan once said, I can forgive him his youth and inexperience.

 

[EriktheRed]

There are those who think John and I are wrong to want to move the discussion of Rand Paul away from the topic of whether or not Rand Paul is a racist. Let me remind you: a few years ago, there was an extended back-and-forth between Bobo and Paul Krugman about the extent to which Reagan used racism to help himself politically. Republicans tried to deflect it into an argument about whether or not Reagan was racist himself and then trotted out old friends to say how much Reagan loved black people, had black best friends, didn’t see race at all, and so on.

But, you see, it doesn’t matter whether or not Reagan harbored racist feelings in his own heart, he gave his first post-convention speech in Philadelphia, Mississippi and talked about “states’ rights”. He talked about “strapping young bucks” buying T-bone steaks with food stamps. Reagan’s “actual feelings” about race matter about as much as Lindsey Graham’s “actual feelings” about health care reform.

Once things become personal, Republicans can wriggle off the hook. It’s just too easy to trot out black friends or at least stories about black friends and say “see, Rand Paul is not a racist, next question.” The last 40 years of American politics haven’t been destroyed by a bunch of dumb, racist crackers, they’ve been destroyed by cynical conservatives who were all too willing to manipulate dumb, racist crackers for political gain.

Rand Paul is a nut. But the focus has to be on his nutty political positions and the extent to which other Republicans also believe them (the denials have not been strong so far, aside from McConnell, who already hated Paul), not on his “actual feelings”. Republicans have made a lot of hay out of white fear over the past few decades. And now, to use their own words, it’s time to shove it down their throat.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/05/20/it-was-never-personal/#comments

 

[EriktheRed]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ti-gkJiXc&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - How To Tell People They Sound Racist[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sorry, but nothing is for sure until the Kentuckians vote on Tuesday, November 2, 2010, and the polls close that night.

Whatever the other 49 states think of him is of no value. If enough votes go to Rand, he takes Jim Bunning's seat.

Just like Pelosi, for example.

And he's not racist, sorry to inform you of your misinformed mind, Jim.

He needs to explain how his views differ from his fathers, if they do. And once he explains what his father's views are...he is sunk.

If a former member of the KKK can be elected as President pro tempore of the United states Senate Paul should have no trouble getting elected in Kentucky.

 

[2Parties]

I love how the elitist twats think they are so caring.

They show their love down the barrel of a gun.

Instead of reversing racism through knowledge, charity, and peace we should just point guns at people who don't agree with us. That's going to work.

I'm sure some of you are going to say "look at the progress" but it's the same people who think FDR or World War 2 improved the economy, The Patriot Act saved us, and Obama is creating jobs. They don't believe that anything can happen IN SPITE of government action and instead choose to believe that everything happens BECAUSE of government action.

Government is their God and their creed is that good things don't happen absent of it.

Oh sod off.

If the state's were doing an adequate job of reversing racism through knowledge, charity, and peace there would have been no civil rights act of '64.

Governments never do anything through knowledge, charity and peace.

In reality, if there had been no civil rights act of '64 there would still be segregated lunch counters and you damn well know it.

There still is and you damn well know it.

 

[2Parties]

I'm guessing then that you are not happy that he has completely and unequivocally reversed his position:

Rand Paul on CNN earlier this evening:

He said he would have voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act if he were in the Senate at the time, calling the racial climate at the time "a stain on the South and our history."

"There was an overriding problem in the South that was so big that it did require federal intervention in the Sixties," he said. "The Southern states weren't correcting it, and there was a need for federal intervention."

He managed to go from Barry Goldwater to Lyndon Johnson in one hilarious leap!!!!

He's becoming a bigger joke by the second. Him and his dad sold their souls for this? Good luck...

 

[2Parties]

Looks like the left has found a new target.

You're a dumb ass.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sorry, but nothing is for sure until the Kentuckians vote on Tuesday, November 2, 2010, and the polls close that night.

Whatever the other 49 states think of him is of no value. If enough votes go to Rand, he takes Jim Bunning's seat.

Just like Pelosi, for example.

And he's not racist, sorry to inform you of your misinformed mind, Jim.

He needs to explain how his views differ from his fathers, if they do. And once he explains what his father's views are...he is sunk.

If a former member of the KKK can be elected as President pro tempore of the United states Senate Paul should have no trouble getting elected in Kentucky.

Yep, Rand Paul is now a former segregationist. As of about 5 hours ago.

 

[paperview]

He needs to explain how his views differ from his fathers, if they do. And once he explains what his father's views are...he is sunk.

If a former member of the KKK can be elected as President pro tempore of the United states Senate Paul should have no trouble getting elected in Kentucky.

Yep, Rand Paul is now a former segregationist. As of about 5 hours ago.

Hot damn,. That's funny.

 

[paperview]

50 years ago. 5 hours ago.

Same dif.

 

[paperview]

Quote:
In reality, if there had been no civil rights act of '64 there would still be segregated lunch counters and you damn well know it.

There still is and you damn well know it.

Do you understand the difference between self-segregation and institutionalized segregation?

From your post, it appears you don't.

 

[rdean]

Hey, Kentucky Republicans are going to have a "GOP Unity Rally" on the 22nd. I would love to be there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why is this even a big deal? I don't get it.

He's approaching this topic from an aspect of the Federal government's scope of power and effectiveness in regulating hiring practices, and thinks it can be much better regulated at the local level with private citizens. Whether or not I agree with him is irrelevant, my point is that it doesn't seem racist, it seems like libertarian-ish 'small government' dogma.

I mean, he keeps saying he supports the CRA, and that racism is abhorrent and shouldn't be funded with public dollars, etc. It seemed he was pretty unequivocal in all that.

But I guess if you're looking for something, you'll find it. This seems like a leap to paint him a racist or promoting racist sentiments.

He's an anti federal government extremist. He, like not a few around here, think they understand the Constitution, but in their zeal to apply an extremist limitation of power on the federal government, they astoundingly overlook one of the primary functions of the Constitution (and the government it forms) which is to protect civil rights.

To them, the federal government, and it's power to function as a federal government, is nothing more than a bombing target and the occasional civil right that gets blown up in the process,

well, that's just unfortunate, unavoidable collateral damage.

There's a reason that James Madison believed that the central federal 'big' government was a better formula for protecting the rights of the citizens than to transfer that power to the states:

""The smaller the society the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party and the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression." Extend the size of the republic, Madison argued, and the country would be less vulnerable to separate factions within it."

Dead on. Note how precisely that applies to Southern segregation and the need for the federal government to end it.

Constitution of the United States - A History

 

[NYcarbineer]

I love how the elitist twats think they are so caring.

They show their love down the barrel of a gun.

Instead of reversing racism through knowledge, charity, and peace we should just point guns at people who don't agree with us. That's going to work.

I'm sure some of you are going to say "look at the progress" but it's the same people who think FDR or World War 2 improved the economy, The Patriot Act saved us, and Obama is creating jobs. They don't believe that anything can happen IN SPITE of government action and instead choose to believe that everything happens BECAUSE of government action.

Government is their God and their creed is that good things don't happen absent of it.

Oh sod off.

If the state's were doing an adequate job of reversing racism through knowledge, charity, and peace there would have been no civil rights act of '64.

Governments never do anything through knowledge, charity and peace.

In reality, if there had been no civil rights act of '64 there would still be segregated lunch counters and you damn well know it.

There still is and you damn well know it.

Yeah, that's called freedom of association and is a right.

The fact that one black guy doesn't want to eat at your restaurant doesn't earn you a justification for turning away the one who does.

 

[Sheldon]

Why is this even a big deal? I don't get it.

He's approaching this topic from an aspect of the Federal government's scope of power and effectiveness in regulating hiring practices, and thinks it can be much better regulated at the local level with private citizens. Whether or not I agree with him is irrelevant, my point is that it doesn't seem racist, it seems like libertarian-ish 'small government' dogma.

I mean, he keeps saying he supports the CRA, and that racism is abhorrent and shouldn't be funded with public dollars, etc. It seemed he was pretty unequivocal in all that.

But I guess if you're looking for something, you'll find it. This seems like a leap to paint him a racist or promoting racist sentiments.

He's an anti federal government extremist. He, like not a few around here, think they understand the Constitution, but in their zeal to apply an extremist limitation of power on the federal government, they astoundingly overlook one of the primary functions of the Constitution (and the government it forms) which is to protect civil rights.

To them, the federal government, and it's power to function as a federal government, is nothing more than a bombing target and the occasional civil right that gets blown up in the process,

well, that's just unfortunate, unavoidable collateral damage.

There's a reason that James Madison believed that the central federal 'big' government was a better formula for protecting the rights of the citizens than to transfer that power to the states:

""The smaller the society the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party and the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression." Extend the size of the republic, Madison argued, and the country would be less vulnerable to separate factions within it."

Dead on. Note how precisely that applies to Southern segregation and the need for the federal government to end it.

Constitution of the United States - A History

Yes. I know all that.

My quote seems irrelevant to your post.

 

[2Parties]

Quote:
In reality, if there had been no civil rights act of '64 there would still be segregated lunch counters and you damn well know it.

There still is and you damn well know it.

Do you understand the difference between self-segregation and institutionalized segregation?

From your post, it appears you don't.

The difference is you want to use violence to stop self-segregation. Hint: that has hindered progress, not helped it. People who would segregate before still do. People who wouldn't then still wouldn't.

People like to pretend things are going to be solved by acts of congress. Until everyone grows up and realizes mommy government isn't going to make the bad guys go away this problem will never cease.

Why would anyone discriminated against now want to go to a private business that treated them like crap before? Why would a racist shop owner now want someone they deplore on their property? Well, just pass a law and all is solved.

Wrong. It just pissed off the racist business owners, and those who were discriminated against are shoving the governments gun in the businesses face forcing them to be there. It's just a bad situation all around, and is not helpful in educating people...

 

[AnyonebutBush]

I'm glad Rand Paul said what he said about desegregation because the state had no right to tell other people how to use their own private property. I know it is shitty to use it to showcase your racist views but don't you guys realize that freedom of speech is protected by the right to use your own property as you wish to express your racist views such as only serving 'whites only'. I know it is a sucky thing to do but why do we have the right to deny someone the use of their own property and subsequently the right of free speech. Where do we draw the line between good speech and bad speech in this society.

Just as anyone could deny anyone entry to their home or land for any reason, someone should be able to deny someone entry to their business for any reason. Private property is private property. Racism is a horrible thing, but people have the right to be racist. As for the Civil Rights Act in the here and now, that's not what's keeping us from devolving into a racist mass that segregates society. Attitudes have changed, if somebody tried to make their store "white only" then they'd inevitably be forced out of business by people refusing to shop there out of disgust.

Kennedy!!....What he said is just stupid! Thats it, just stupid! Your arguing to defend it is just as stupid! Your personal residence is PRIVATE property. When you open a business that is to do business with the public (not a private members only), then you give up some of your private property rights. You and your racist republicans can refuse entry to any colored person you would like at you personal residence, but once you open a business and want to sell to the public well......that includes, foreigners, blacks, browns, purples, blues, and if those little green guys come from Mars then guess what??!! You gotta give them the same treatment!! I hope one of his children needs medication and when he goes to the corner store in a panic to get it, they remember him and refuse him service!

 

[paperview]

There still is and you damn well know it.

Do you understand the difference between self-segregation and institutionalized segregation?

From your post, it appears you don't.

The difference is you want to use violence to stop self-segregation. Hint: that has hindered progress, not helped it. People who would segregate before still do. People who wouldn't then still wouldn't.

People like to pretend things are going to be solved by acts of congress. Until everyone grows up and realizes mommy government isn't going to make the bad guys go away this problem will never cease.

Why would anyone discriminated against now want to go to a private business that treated them like crap before? Why would a racist shop owner now want someone they deplore on their property? Well, just pass a law and all is solved.

Wrong. It just pissed off the racist business owners, and those who were discriminated against are shoving the governments gun in the businesses face forcing them to be there. It's just a bad situation all around, and is not helpful in educating people...

Yeah.

Best we not piss off those racist business owners.

 

[EriktheRed]

This is exactly what you get for playing the political game. Your dad has already admitted on video that he was endorsing neocons (over "Ron Paul Republicans") for political gain, you take weaker stances than him, and then your wishy washy talking about this issue with the media. You then backtrack. What do you expect? If you and your dad have any souls left I just wonder if they will be worth enough to the guys pulling the strings to win the Senate seat.

I'm both sad and apathetic to all this Paul crap...

Looks like the left has found a new target.

Bush, Cheney, Palin, and now Paul.

You can have him. I hope you'all choke on him.

"Found"??? It's not like we had to go looking.


Hell, these "targets" have all presented themselves on a silver platter with apples in their mouths and a sign saying "here I am, roast me!"