He said nothing racist. That isn't the debate regardless of what the title of this thread says...What people are debating is the part of the civil rights act that he doesn't agree with will allow for racism to take place. I can see where Rand Paul is saying he doesn't want the goverment dipping into private buisness but in the end giving the private buisnesses the right to say "your a black person, i'm not serving you" is not a good idea...it is waaaaay direct of an amendment that it will send out country back in time.
Rand Paul: Racist
- Thread starter Jagger69
- Start date
He said nothing racist. That isn't the debate regardless of what the title of this thread says...What people are debating is the part of the civil rights act that he doesn't agree with will allow for racism to take place. I can see where Rand Paul is saying he doesn't want the goverment dipping into private buisness but in the end giving the private buisnesses the right to say "your a black person, i'm not serving you" is not a good idea...it is waaaaay direct of an amendment that it will send out country back in time.
I really can't judge that and neither can you. As a whole I think we are much more tolerant than most people ( including I think you) give us credit for. Is there still racism, yes.
How racist do you think we are?
but he doesnt say that either...
when the woman says " do you think its ok for businesses to say that they wont serve minority groups?"
rand paul talks about how awful racism was, and how it should be abolished from society today. he even says that any acts of racism should not be going on.
so he says no to her question...
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
yeah Italians were discriminated against too, but they still aint bitchin about it 100 years later.
I think you are making two points tits, one is that without gov laws in place preventing segregation that it would return, in force.
na ga happen...........
and your second poit is, whites treated all and only non whites bad ( which is just not true) , and now its payback time.
see, its thinking like that that is moving the country backward.
And this is the type of intelligent debate we should be having. I personally disagree with your conclusion that the country would go backwards. I feel that the free market would put most businesses that tried to practice segregation out-of-business.
Really? Which lands? The lands in Oklahoma
Reservation land is gov't mandated segregated land essentially and seems to be the kind of racism that Rand Paul would be against. I agree that there are stark differences between people's attitudes about gov't regulation/protection/interference with public and private enterprise.
I would like to ask why did Rand Paul continue to refer to gun rights in his answers to the questions about Civil Rights?
Libertarian, tea-partier and new Kentucky republican senatorial nominee Rand Paul (eye-doctor son of the celebrated Ron Paul) showed his racist colors in flaming red on the Rachel Maddow show last night. It's in 2 parts and takes almost 20 minutes to watch but it's worth it, believe me. If you have any sense of the principle of equality for all, you'll be appalled like I am:
If it were up to Dr. Paul, segregated lunchcounters and restrooms would be back in vogue. Businesses would be allowed to arbitrarily refuse service to anyone they choose for no reason other than perhaps the color of their skin, their ethnic background or their religious beliefs. :eek:
Staunch party stalwarts like Mitch McConnell and Dick Cheney supported his opponent but the right wingnuts overran them. They have subsequently been silent on this issue. I wonder how Michael Steele feels about Dr. Paul's views. :dunno:
This is the new direction of the republican party? I'm sure there will be some here who welcome this trend. Personally, I see the proliferation of this type of political philosophy as not only morally wrong but, in fact, suicidal to the GOP. In some type of knee-jerk reaction to what they perceive as the left-wing extremism of the Obama administration, the republican party, led by banner-wavers like Wasilla Sarah and Rand Paul, is pushing their agenda further and further to the right. Rather than reaching out to centrists and moderates who may also share some trepidations about the direction the country is taking (like me, for instance), they choose to huddle around their hard-core right-wing base. Huge mistake.
How did this acorn (oops....bad word maybe?
I'm a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. There is no one who speaks for me in this political process anymore. The democrats want to spend-spend-spend and give everyone a free ride regardless of their contribution (or lack thereof) to the cause and the republicans want to return this nation to the early 19th century.
Beam me up, Scotty!
Scotty is here! :hatsoff:
Honestly, I wanted to ask you about this post since I made some stupid comments in that thread. I just wondered, why?
My little sister took care of kids with down syndrome and she loved them, but she just wanted a guy who was white; are you saying my sister is a racitst? I think if this is the conclusion you've come to (and you're one of my favorite posters on the board) that you should retract (or rethink) the conclusions you've made. It's just not factual. As guys, yeah, we will pretty much stick anything that moves in front of us (my first gf in HS was half Mexican), but to say someone is racist on the basis of one thing they do, or in this case a policy that is not factual, is inappropriate (her best friend was half black as well, too).
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
exactly.
Really? Which lands? The lands in Oklahoma
I agree that there are stark differences between people's attitudes about gov't regulation/protection/interference with public and private enterprise.
I would like to ask why did Rand Paul continue to refer to gun rights in his answers to the questions about Civil Rights?
I honestly am not sure about the gun rights so I can't speak on that. Another issue all together so lets not muddy the waters. Beside you never answered the question, how racist do you think this country is in 2010?
Now that I think about it, what I think he was trying to say is that since government is telling private businesses how to act they thus become public domain. In a public domain, you have the right to bear arms (with a legal gun permit). This in turn would prevent a private restaurant from banning guns in them if the person had a legal right to have one. Not a great arguement on Paul's part and I'm not sure I am explaining it properly.
Very Racist. The racism has only retreated below the surface in an effort to move with more guile and cunning.
That is a very naive answer given the history of this country and also given the kind of "free market" that has existed at the beginning of the nation and today. It is also insufficient given the admittedly specific circumstance.
Many people criticize academics for living in an "ivory tower" away from the reality of life in America. A lot of Dr. Paul's reliance on the word "philosophy" seems to conform to the same "ivory tower" criticism for which the academic left routinely faces. William F Buckley and Barry Goldwater tried to intellectualize Conservatism. Kudos to the Liberatarians under the Drs. Paul for trying to do the same.:dunno:
exactly. i can see yours and rand pauls viewpoint...i undestand where you guys are coming from. And i don't think the initial perspective is a racist one at all. But i do believe it has the potential to lead to it though
I have asked you questions too which you have selectively answered/ignored or which you simply respond with "the free market will settle this" or some such construction.
I believe we are very racist today in the South and in the West. I think there are subtle examples of racism in the Northeast. The Pacific Northwest might be the most non-racial area in the nation today.
Really? Which lands? The lands in Oklahoma
I agree that there are stark differences between people's attitudes about gov't regulation/protection/interference with public and private enterprise.
I would like to ask why did Rand Paul continue to refer to gun rights in his answers to the questions about Civil Rights?
Could you please provide some links or more detail on this govt segregated land. Not doubting what you are saying I would just like to do some research on this. If what you are saying is true than Paul would be against this because he is not a racist.
Agreed.
I guess I didn't understand your question that I responded with the free market will decide. Please elaborate on what you meant and I will try to answer. You have to remember I've been the only one arguing these points and I am responding to numerous posters.
I agree with you also that it has the potential to lead to racism. My belief is that in a truly free society that unfortunately you can not create laws against private businesses that want to practice segregation.
I appreciate you asking me to provide you with links. I think you can find your own research on The Dept of Interior -- Bureau of Indian Affairs and reservation lands in this country.
Rand Paul stated that Boston basically removed segregation from its society in 1840, but it took our nation (and the South) another 120 years before we passed Civil Rights.
Yes, I think it's fair to conclude there is a lot of racism still in this country.
I disagree with you that there is still a lot of racism still in this country. If there was still a lot of racism then I don't think we would have elected a half Afro-American and half Caucasian man to the presidency. Who the hell would have voted for the guy? Whites and blacks would both have a reason not to like the guy.
Similar threads
