Rand Paul Wins Primary

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
This country is finished…[/quote]

Quite the contrary, this country is back on track.

For a long time, the Left has used things like racism, classism, and xenophobia to shout down Conservatives. It is really a brilliant strategy, I mean, how could anyone not want to help the poor and unfortunate minority groups? They have made common sense appear like radicalism. No more. What started with a foot in the door, is now a wide open flood gate. The laws of simple math never falter, when you are out of money, you are out of money. Rather than give the poor entitlements, how about giving them opportunities to earn those entitlements? Rather than hand out money, why not help people get jobs so they make their own money? Not only does this help people and the country as a whole, it helps those people with self respect. Letting these people earn their way gives them something solid to stand on.

The Left has done a great job of labeling responsibility with audacity. How dare you try to make your own way ! How dare you pay your taxes, manage your money wisely, live a healthy lifestyle so you don’t need a million pills when you hit 60 ! How dare you lay in the bed you make !

22

Ahh right, grass roots, freedom, woo hoo.

Then he holds his victory party at a golf club that costs at least 4 g’s a year to join, and wouldn’t have had the Federal government step in to end segregation, even though it was clear that locally it wouldn’t have happened.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jKxxiqk1Wy4Qa3kOTdKGIzKedY8QD9FQLT1O1

Nothin like a dude that wants to change… but only the calendar, and back to the '50s.

I like this guy already- it’s like when Flash Gordon was my favorite yankee cause he’d blow it immediately against the sox.

23

In this, I think “guns” mean “blacks.”

"Asked whether he opposes part of the Civil Rights Act, Paul said if “you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant even though the owner of the restaurant says, ‘Well no, we don’t want to have guns in here.’ The bar says, `We don’t want to have guns in here because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each other.’ Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant?”

24

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
In this, I think “guns” mean “blacks.”

"Asked whether he opposes part of the Civil Rights Act, Paul said if “you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant even though the owner of the restaurant says, ‘Well no, we don’t want to have guns in here.’ The bar says, `We don’t want to have guns in here because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each other.’ Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant?”[/quote]

I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse.

25

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.

26

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

You really are the dumbest person on this forum.

27

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

You really are the dumbest person on this forum.[/quote]

Considering the source, that’s a compliment. Thanks.

28

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot.

I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

So you want the government to determine who business owners cater to?

29

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

So you want the government to determine who business owners cater to?[/quote]

Yes, because it results in a freer and more just society for us all. You honestly cannot be defending segregationism, even if it’s under the guise of personal freedom.

30

[quote]0mar wrote:

Yes, because it results in a freer and more just society for us all. You honestly cannot be defending segregationism, even if it’s under the guise of personal freedom.[/quote]

But wasn’t there a lot of segregation because of laws?

31

Rand Paul 59%
Jack Conway 34%
Some other candidate 4%
Undecided 3%

32

[quote]0mar wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

So you want the government to determine who business owners cater to?[/quote]

Yes, because it results in a freer and more just society for us all. You honestly cannot be defending segregationism, even if it’s under the guise of personal freedom.[/quote]

No one is defending segregation. Why are you making that jump?

And how can government regulations result in a “freer and just society”? That’s an oxymoron.

Some of you claim to advocate a free market until “fairness” comes into play.

33

[quote]Dustin wrote:

So you want the government to determine who business owners cater to?[/quote]

Based on the color of your skin? Absolutely.

I cannot believe you guys are defending segregation, even if under the guise of economic freedom.

34

Get this shit out of my thread.

35

[quote]Dustin wrote:

No one is defending segregation. Why are you making that jump?
[/quote]

How are you not defending segregation by saying a business owner should be allowed to exclude serving black people?

36

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

No one is defending segregation. Why are you making that jump?
[/quote]

How are you not defending segregation by saying a business owner should be allowed to exclude serving black people?[/quote]

As a business owner, I can discriminate against whomever I want.

As an example, I own a sport supplement store. I’m not in a position financially to hire anyone just yet, but when I do, you can guarantee that I will discriminate against people who don’t live up to the image of my store.

For instance, the guy or gal that comes in looking for work that is 50 pounds over weight and has never lifted a dumbbell in their life, there is no way I would consider hiring them. I’m actively discriminating against them. According to you guys, the government should prevent me from doing so.

edited

37

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]0mar wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I agree with him 100%… on all sides. If Louis Farrakhan wants to establish a privately owned restaurant open only to blacks more power to em. If some idiot doesn’t want black people in his business he should have the right to be an idiot. I wouldn’t go there and I hope nobody else would either, effectively bankrupting the place, but he or anybody else has the right to hire and or cater to, or not, whoever they want. The alternatives are much worse. [/quote]

Hahaha. Man you’re unbelievable.

So do we go back to segregated bathrooms and water fountains as well? Only taxis for white people?

Hell, let’s just bring back slavery so at least the blacks know where they stand.

This is not an admirable idea you have. Every once in a while it’s nice to be reminded that the people on this forum are, indeed, the extreme right wingnuts, and I’m not actually crazy.[/quote]

So you want the government to determine who business owners cater to?[/quote]

Yes, because it results in a freer and more just society for us all. You honestly cannot be defending segregationism, even if it’s under the guise of personal freedom.[/quote]

No one is defending segregation. Why are you making that jump?

And how can government regulations result in a “freer and just society”? That’s an oxymoron.

Some of you claim to advocate a free market until “fairness” comes into play.[/quote]

Government regulations are the only things that keep business from completely owning your ass. If business had it’s way, the vast majority of people would be working for subsistence level earnings, there would no quality control and businesses could make any claims they wanted to do about a product.

Look to the late 1800s up until the '30s/'40s. If you weren’t in the tiny minority of wage earners, your life was pretty shitty. Heroin-laced cough medicine. Dirt brown water. Air choked with smoke. 15 people crammed into an apartment and barely able to scrounge money up for rent. Working 80 hour work weeks for subsistence level pay. This is life without government regulation.

38

http://www.randpaul2010.com/2010/05/rand-paul-sets-the-record-straight/

In response to liberal media attacks, Dr. Rand Paul today released the following statement:

â??I believe we should work to end all racism in American society and staunchly defend the inherent rights of every person. I have clearly stated in prior interviews that I abhor racial discrimination and would have worked to end segregation.

Even though this matter was settled when I was 2, and no serious people are seeking to revisit it except to score cheap political points, I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

â??Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws.

â??As I have said in previous statements, sections of the Civil Rights Act were debated on Constitutional grounds when the legislation was passed. Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years

â??My opponentâ??s statement on MSNBC Wednesday that I favor repeal of the Civil Rights Act was irresponsible and knowingly false. I hope he will correct the record and retract his claims.â??

â??The issue of civil rights is one with a tortured history in this country. We have made great strides, but there is still work to be done to ensure the great promise of Liberty is granted to all Americans.

â??This much is clear: The federal government has far overreached in its power grabs. Just look at the recent national healthcare schemes, which my opponent supports. The federal government, for the first time ever, is mandating that individuals purchase a product. The federal government is out of control, and those who love liberty and value individual and stateâ??s rights must stand up to it.

â??These attacks prove one thing for certain: the liberal establishment is desperate to keep leaders like me out of office, and we are sure to hear more wild, dishonest smears during this campaign.â??

39

[quote]Dustin wrote:
As a business owner, I can discriminate against whomever I want.

As an example, I own a sport supplement store. I’m not in a position financially to hire anyone just yet, but when I do, you can guarantee that I will discriminate against people who don’t live up to the image of my store.

For instance, the guy or gal that comes in looking for work that is 50 pounds over weight and has never lifted a dumbbell in their life, there is no way I would consider hiring them. I’m actively discriminating against them. According to you guys, the government should prevent me from doing so.

edited[/quote]

So if you don’t want to hire blacks because they’re black, and you don’t want to serve blacks because they’re black, that should be OK? That’s what you’re telling me?

40

And even more ironic is the fact that you’ve got Robert fuckin Johnson as your avatar. You are mightily confused my friend.