Yes, and it would also be OK for “GAY” and/or “BLACK” business owned to discriminate... But, IMO, if you are a business owner and turn away a potential money making opportunity... you’re stupid and deserve to go out of business. This group “think” is going to be our downfall… we are all individuals and should be judged on that basis.
Unacceptable view? What exactly is an unacceptable view in a society that is supposed to be free with a first amendment that protects speech and property rights? Any ideology can become fascism. Including liberalism.
Because it's stupid to think that racists suddenly stop being racists when a law is passed. And its stupid to think it wont be the end of civil rights and equality on planet Earth if dumb racists are allowed to refuse a sandwich to a black person or a woman. It's also stupid to assume that in a society that created the CRA, such a racist business would be marginal at best and would likely be openly boycotted by all minorities including women and people of color. Freedom works.
@pplus0440 Thats too bad she really is a genuinely nice person and she is shocked at the way the Republican party is headed, for example, this one, Rand Paul thinks that if a woman was beaten and forcibly raped, she should be forced to birth the fetus or face legal consequences worse than the rapist.
@sirscrotum that's bc the baby is a person and shouldn't be killed. Would you like to have been killed bc you may have been inconveniant to the parents? Genuinly nice people don't invite someone to appear in front of a nationwide audience in order to twist your words and sell you as a racist in order to harm your career and reputation. That is not something a nice person does sir.
@pplus0440 Hell my mom had 3 abortions. My brother has contributed to 4 abortions. OUr standard of living would have been significantly decreased had those pregnancies been carried. Freedom over our own bodies is a fundamental freedom, your anti-freedom and Im pro-freedom
@sirscrotum Oh yeah your right. I guess my parents should kill me because I'm a financial burden to them and without me they could be living in a yacht traveling the world. You have the freedom to do what you want with your body. Not a childs. You and your family are a sad and confused group of people.I feel terribly sorry that you and your mom and brother were ever given the responsibility to make choices.
@sirscrotum Sir Scrotum. I'm not going to take advice from you. If the world having to much people is aproblem do us a favor and go kill your family and yourself. Obviously you won't bc you aren't insane. But then again your family has murdered 7 people already....
@pplus0440 Why dont you put your money where your mouth is and adopt 20 children born from unwanted pregnancies. I aborted 8 million potential babies when I jerked off this morning.
@pplus0440 Its cuz you dont have any authority to make a call on carrying every single fucking pregnancy to full term in America. Quite simply, your a fascist, same as the nazi's, or as I call modern Republicans, the Third Right.
Your mother had the freedom to keep her legs shut when she wasn't in a financial position to care for a child. Your brother also had the freedom to consider the consequences of his flagrant and irresponsible promiscuity as well. Murdering a baby because you couldn't afford the consequences of a sexual relationship is not a justification for murder. Its a REASON for more responsible choices when it comes to your sexual relationships. Freedom comes with responsibility.
I don't get it, what's so awesome about this? It's just Rachel Maddow behaving contemptibly.
Einstein can help shed some light on this.
"Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding." -Einstein
Government force (violence) hasn't cured racism, but it has compromised the ability of business owners to make bad choices. More and more the government is telling us what we can and cannot do, say or think. Where do YOU draw the line?
The only person behaving contemptibly is Paul, and the societally regressive, reactionary voters who give validation to his outmoded ideas. Meanwhile he sits smugly, believing he has ignited a genuine revolution. It's a revolution of revisitation and non-integrity. Not one of progress, insight, or even utility. If you resent Maddow for showcasing that reality, then you're likely one of the latent common denominators in the body politic, that actually buys into his shopworn, separatist spins.
@leverage1976 Yea, I could say much worse things about Maddow. Facts. But who cares? She's just another pawn for the globalists.
Outmoded ideas? Funny, I can find no expiration date on my constitution. I guess liberty and independence would be a "revisitation." I don't even know what all that other crap means that you said.
@VotePaineJefferson Sure u cud say worse things. But they would likely be as tunnel-visioned & thin as what uv said thus far.Einstein n all that, lol. f U shud know that MSNBC has treated R. Paul w/more kid gloves than Fox, CNBC, right-wing talk radio, the lot. Yes, its a double edged sword, as they are bringing in a center-left spin 2give him a platform. Devil's deals u make, when u need exposure. Const. is an evolving document. CRA was part of that evolution. Beyond that, idk wat 2 tell you.
The only "reality" you or Maddow managed to showcase in an entire TV segment and 6 lines of baseless, fact-less, ad-hominem rhetoric, is that Paul is a racist; a claim for which you and Maddow also provide absolutely no evidence of whatsoever.
The only issue discussed by Maddow or you is one-tenth of one bill that was passed 4 decades ago. Talk about lacking progress, insight or utility.. Your comments here and Maddow's so-called "interview" of Doctor Paul, defined.
@VotePaineJefferson Communist/Socialists/Collectivist tallied up an estimated death count of 250-300 million (NOT including war fatalities) in the 20th century alone. When will the eugenics, malthusianism, socialist authoritarian crowd be satisfied with their war against human nature, traditional family values, morality, natural rights, individual and economic liberty? Many prominent leftists not afraid to air out their hatred of humanity have spelled out the agenda quite clearly. Take a guess!
I don't get it. Shouldn't a private business owner be alowed to be racist and run their business in a racist way? It seems like a bad business model but that would be freedom, and that's something this country was supposedly founded on.
@djerwulfe 85% Swedish, eh? A total population less than the size of one US City -New York City? I doubt Atheist Daddy understands the relevance of that and how it distorts his argument. Liberals have as much trouble processing numbers as they do facts, history, human nature, and reality in general.
@djerwulfe Good points! Those tyrants around the world that allow "voting" always receive 98%+ of the popular vote. I guess one can reason that virtually no individual rights and being ruled by an iron fist makes a population extremely happy and content, more so than most of the world and by a long shot! Music to the ears to those arguing for replacing our constitutionally based republic with a socialist 'democracy'.
@djerwulfe Sweden is but one example of a socialist democracy that works. Typical of the Libertarian argument, you provide little substance and a whole lot of ridicule. Feel free to substitute Germany, Canada, Denmark or Finland into my statement if it makes you feel any better. Where is your example of minimalist governments fostering a robust economy? Oh right, you haven't provided one.
@AtheistDaddy Typical of the Church of Marx/Big Govt cultists, loony leftism is ideology divorced from reality as I stated earlier. I checked the crime stats. Canada and Germany are on par with the US. Finland,Sweden,Denmark all have crime statics actually worse than the U.S.! Which even I found remarkable considering the repressed and oppressive nature of those leftist "Utopia's", or socialist democracies around the world.
@SexJunkle Here, again, you merely throw out personal insults and provide no substance. Your arguments are a throwback to the child in a classroom throwing a tantrum when he/she does not get his/her way. I asked about a minarchistic, free market (no gov't regulation, in case you didn't know what I meant) society that is working. You have not and cannot, I'm sure, provide one. Congratulations!
Using your logic, the "happiest" places on earth are under oppressive rule.Find a population more "happy" than the North Koreans are under Kim Jong il. Video footage shows a public celebrating with dancing in the streets and signing praises for their leader (eclipsing 2008 Obama Fever) following his landslide re-election. Saddam enjoyed similar public sentiment, as did progressive lefty Adolph Hitler who caused his adoring public to faint in the presence of their socialist deity.Free HC in '32!
@djerwulfe You believe that Swedish citizens are coerced by the State to report on their happiness? Please. How about health conditions in these nations or Education standards and availability? Equating social democracies to the tyranny of NKorea shows your ignorance of how the world works or illuminates your dishonesty to propagate your ideology.
@AtheistDaddy You don't think the "Nice People" of Govt lie - sorry, that evokes negative emotion...let's say stretch the truth, or commit a white life - about how much their citizens "Love" their leadership? Here's a hint Skippy, most countries don't allow the press to report on a 13% approval rating of their leaders.
@TheEnterprise87 Guess you better take the laws for robbery, murder, prostitution, tobacco/alcohol for minors, extortion, conspiracy, drug possession, terrorist threats, battery and assault off the books too then. Last I checked, all those violations stem from a temporary or systemic lapse of morality. This is where your libertarian arguments fall apart. Similar to your views on taxation. The cost of civilization is taxes. And the cost of civility is govt oversight. Find a more credible hero.
LOL! How adorable. You think government precedes civilization, and that civilization stems from government. How perfectly you sum up the insanity of the left.
It seems like Rand Paul is skating around the question that Racheal Maddow is asking, she is simply trying to get him to answer whether or not he believes that a business has the right to discriminate. The civil rights act protects most of us from discrimination it needs to add sexual orientation to the bill so all people can be protected. Without ENDA and the Fair Housing doctrine you would still see whites only businesses and some would discriminate on gender.
" Without ENDA and the Fair Housing doctrine you would still see whites only businesses and some would discriminate on gender."
I know business owners who do that now even with your perfect regulations. I challenge you to think long and hard about the genesis of your statement; the implication that black people and women are only allowed to eat in restaurants because of ENDA.
"so all people can be protected." Do you seriously believe that the CRA protects people from discrimination?
An embarrassment to KY. I see what he's saying but disagree. It's like me being pro-choice but against abortion. If some asshole chooses not to serve to some group, they lose their business along with anyone else that doesn't like their discriminatory policies. I am just clarifying because it seemed Rachel Maddow didn't get it or something. I still disagree with him.
@mert828 Well, I am pro-choice in principle but personally against abortion. How exactly do you see that as a logical conflict? Maddow was attempting to lure Rand Paul into a baited trap. Paul made it clear to those capable of thinking above mindless emotionalism, that he was FOR ending Government enforced segregation, but against the delusional & dangerous precedent of "ending" all forms of "discrimination" in society. Which is just another losing battle against reality from the loony left.
She got it just fine. She loves big government and hates Rand Paul, so she painted him as a racist in the hopes it would cost him the election. That is not a big secret here is it?
Paulstroie.....Never spend a Day in the Military......But runs his big Fat Trap about our Soldiers.....he spits on our Flag,and spits on Ameriaca......Go fuck your Cousin Mao.....Sissi boy
PaulSTROIE You wiil Never take my right to free speech ,piece of Shit...Lay down in the Streets and let the garbage truck pick you up....Dont give a fuck what you believe,your the true sissi Bitch......Coward
Paulstroie Your the Fucking Problem in America..I served my Time Motherfucker...Serve your time behind Bars...Suck your own Dick ,Punk Ass.....Your Opinion means NOTHING,Cause your Public Enemy NO1..piece of garbage...your the true fachist
Dude, you ever walk into a room with a bunch of people that didn't want you there? Wouldn't it have been good to be made aware of this before you entered?
Establishments like this still exist... it's just... the signs don't because of PC laws.
Rand Paul supports discrimination in the same way that people who are for Freedom of Speech support people telling their parents that their genitals smell bad. He thinks discrimination is okay in the same sense that people who believe in a fair trial are okay with serial rapists going free. He think discrimination is okay in the same sense that people who believe in freedom of religion are okay with Satan worship.
People who don't understand him typically have no principles.
*sigh* Rand, quit circumlocuting. By all means decry the people calling you a racist over it, but -answer the damned question- first. You sound like a slickster trying to avoid taking any stand at all, doing that...
Anti racist laws. I applied for the Pennsylvania State Police in 1982. I was told by a Latino Trooper that because I was white, no matter how I tested and scored I would not be hired because I was white. Not because I was not qualified, but because I was white.
Fellowship my ass.....Greedy,destructive,bloodsucking parasites,I served in Iraq,for your stanking Freedom,I served in Afghanisdan for you to have in Opinion,ignorend ass piece of garbage,YOU GONE TO DEPRIVE ME OF MINE?????Go worship Mao...Motherfucker
@mizzfoxy9 hei commie bitch...this is america...BTW I don't believe you did serve in Iraq bitch...America is America no matter what the bitchez who lie about serving in Iraq....dumb lying bitch....pay your dam health care...
@RationalBullets So build a time machine like Doc Brown and go back to the 1950s. You dont belong in the 00s. If they reversed CRA, w\blacks being only 12.6% of the population, you know damn well here wud be a helluva lot more whites only establishments, than the other way around. Country clubs had mens only grills until the 1990s. Youre either willfully ignorant, or youre pining for a return to the days of segregation. Either way, your protestations are transparent and ring pretty hollow.
@PatsyBailey: Because the point of the question was to force him to say: "I believe in segregation." An ambush interview planned on the day of his election victory and a loaded question that brings up an issue that has been settled for decades. Too obvious for debate.
I would have answered more directly but as a rookie politician, I can understand why he didn't flat out say what she wanted him to say. A person owns their own property owns their property, racist or not.
46bolt PS.I dont wan t and Need your stanking Money!!!I want whats MINE...before assholes like you.waste it.you dont even know the defenition of Marxist,MF..
64bolts Kiss my ass,thief...no Money belongs to you MF...I spend years in the Military for this Country,you selfish greedy ass piece of shit.....I leave whwn your ragedy ass leaves....
Ron Pauls anti war stance it the single most important thing on the table. For this reason I think it is imperative that he gets in. Do people actually think that somehow the world is going to go back to the dark ages and everyone is going to somehow become more racist if he gets in?
Remember, people in the south will have the same feelings anyways, and would you really want to eat at a buissness that doesnt even want you there?
What people do not choose to remember is that the true goal of the civil rights act was to gain control on a burgeoning black middle class. It was too near to blacks making their own way out of the slave culture. In 1865 the blacks marched out of the cotton fields of Georgia slavery. In 1965 the black race marched into the socialist cotton fields of welfare slavery. It is so sad because the intellect and imagination we need to save the world has been smothered by that civil rights act.
SHIT,IM SICK OF REPUBLICANS TRYING TO STEAL OUR MONEY,OUR SOCIAL SECURITY...IT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE,WE,VE PAID INTO THE SYSTEM FOR YEARS///ITS OURS,DONT FUCK WITH IT! ALSO,THEY DONT WANT EVERYBODY TO HAVE HEALTHCARE...THEY HAVENT COME UP WITH ANY SOLUTIONS.!!!HEALTHCARE IS A RIGHT,NOT A LUXURY
@mizzfoxy9 go to england or europe the constitution says it is not a right. you want to talk about stealing money? The libs stole 6.4 billion when the stimulus bill was passed to congressional districts that don't even exist. thats all they do is steal money. look at the new deal 1937 by FDR socialize care, you are a maxist and the money that i make is mine not yours..
@mizzfoxy9 go to england or europe the constitution says it is not a right. you want to talk about stealing money? The libs stole 6.4 billion when the stimulus bill was passed to congressional districts that don't even exist. thats all they do is steal money. look at the new deal 1937 by FDR socialize care, you are a maxist and the money that i make is mine not yours..
@mizzfoxy9 Health Care Iz A Right?? U Retard. if u sick!.pay da docter! out of your pocket Bitch. they work hard stop pumpin the government up .and i grew up in da projects so i dont wanna hear dat old shit
@marks661man Damn. If you wrote that up as a position paper for an opposing candidate to Paul..he may have likely resigned from the race in shame. Those are exellent points though. And the irony is tragically sublime..
@marks661man ~ That was beautiful. I may just have to print and frame that one in my office for posterity. Too bad it will get all jacked up by UTube comment formatting. Anyways, it stands on its own merits.. Good to see this thread thriving. Btw- I fixed 'palpable' for you, when I excerpted the comment. Sorry, had to do it, lol. Safe to say, Paul is not the light in the proverbial tunnel, that he appears to be. And your 'alternate universe' Democratic candidate analogy, was perfect and spot on.
Imagine a throwback Democratic candidate, who advocated returning to the near-socialist economic and wartime mobilization, that FRD effectively used, in bringing us out of the 1930s economic crisis. Or reinstating the corporate tax rates, that Eisenhower championed during the prosperity of the 1950s. Or overturning corporate personhood, in more recent times. The first 2 measures at least, were a hell of a lot more effective in the shorter term of history, than any of the nebulous, >>>
>>> anti-historical 1700s claptrap these Tea Party types robotically spout here and elsewhere. And yet, if such a candidate emerged, Republican media outlets would be shrieking treasonous libel and demanding his ouster by firing squad. Palpaple irony. Paul is not a visionary. He is simply a repackaging of already-discredited conservative ideas, and a few untenable but attractive-sounding budgetary sound bites. He advocates moving America forward, by legislating backwards 40+ years. >>>
>>> After all, if youre gonna be miserable in economic crisis, at least you can take solace in knowing that you can refuse service to a black, mexican or gay. Make apologies and sprinkle all the fairy dust you want on Paul. He will still be a pandering, visionless hack that teases the lowest common denominator. The Tea Party, much like the Reichstag revolutionaries, exist only with the weight of temporary crisis allowing them to be heard with a legitimacy that is phantom and unearned.
The only policy of Paul's you attack is the ignorant and inherently racist one that you create for him: "at least you can take solace in knowing that you can refuse service to a black, mexican or gay."
Good speech about using war and welfare to inflate a depressed economy, though. /sarcasm
Question for the people who think Rand is racist or a supporter of racism? Do you want black people, gay people, etc. to be served by those who hold bigoted views? I wouldn't want my hard earned money to go to someone who doesn't love thy neighbor. Instead, in the free market a failed business model should do just that, FAIL. Choosing not to serve a segment of the population for superficial reasons is stupid. If I were black and refused service, I would start my own restaurant.
@JTG730 Better question would be- With ALL the issues facing America today, WHY would Paul be so fixated on exhuming established and accepted legislation from over 40 years ago? Why is it SO important to Paul, to UNDO what has been DONE? When you approach THAT question with intellectual honesty, not talking points, it becomes pretty clear. Either Paul is the worlds most irrelevant contrarian. Or he genuinely feels that America was better off when blacks and whites ate in separate establishments.
@brianodeci08 The thing is he wasnt fixated on that. He said many times that this isnt a campaign issue, it is said and done. I blame his non-political experience for getting himself in murky waters. Obviously he could have handled it better, but I respect the fact that he doesnt try to score political points and tries to make it an intellectual coversation, holding true to his libertarian views. The slipperly slope argument, while not provable, is always something to consider
@JTG730 If Paul doesnt have the 'political experience', to avoid such an obviously 3rd-rail-type issue, then certainly he doesnt possess the nuance to helm cooperative national legislative authority. As stated before, with all the problems facing us today, and with the near irrelevance this long ago decided issue represents in macro-pool of pressing national issues, Paul's insistence exhuming this dead horse, speaks volumes about where he and the Tea Party would like to steer U.S social policy.
@brianodeci08 Having political experience isn't necessarily a good thing. By that I meant, the ability to answer without answering, speak in rigidly rehearsed talking points, and use moral righteousness/emotional outrage to score political points. It is great that Rand believes third rail issues are not off topic because some people are uncomfortable with those going against the grain and speaking what they believe to be true. And even though this issue was foisted on him, he still won BIG.
@brianodeci08 Rand has shown with repeatedly with first his $500 billion deficit cutting bill, dwarfing that of any other and not touching entitlements! that he not only is capable of legislating, but that he may be of only a handful of reasonable Congressman. Then when he elegantly laid out the insolvency of the entitlement programs and how by his minor tweaks we could perserve it, he was called radical. And lastly, he did not campaign on the reversal of 1/10th of the CRA of 63!!!!!
@JTG730 Sounds like ur very taken w\Paul's bugget postulations. The reality is~ Very few of his ideas r workable w\ the lobyying infrastructure as it currently exists. They make 4great campaign posturing\newsmaking, but ultimately little else. Anderson fractured the vote in1980 w\some radical ideas. It led us to8 years of dismantling the manufacturing sector/middle classs under Reagan. LaRouche was also similarly bold in his fiscal beliefs. Both men are now footnotes. Paul will be no different.
@brianodeci08 the only person fixated on this issue was Rachel. Paul has said that he would not support repealing the civil rights act, and the fact that the media made such a big deal out of this shows how desperate they are to discredit the tea party.
@themaxptob Actually, Paul has been very vocal in repeatedly decrying the 64 CRA. And has been vocal in extolling the virtues of repealing it, while at the same time semantically dancing around trying to avoid the 'racist' tag. That just doesnt wash with rational, thinking people. And by extension, if those policy tenets are important to Paul as a Tea Party candidate, then the Tea Party deserves every last bit of scrutiny they get. Sorry, your Fox News spin doesnt play here.
@brianodeci08 He's been repeatedly vocal because the media keeps questioning him on it! And if you actually listen to him, he decries 1/10th of CRA 64 and would never think to repeal it in whole. Rand Paul is not a racist, and I would love to hear Maddow answer his question about allowing guns in restaurants that he poses in part 2. And trust me, I hate the spin Fox News spews out just as much as the liberal spin out of MSNBC.
@brianodeci08 The point you're misconstruing is, he’d like to undo the legislation but not for the purpose of allowing us to re-segregate (and you know that). His point is that private business shouldn't be regulated by the government, period. That’s libertarianism; it's about freedom, even if business does something that is moral repugnant. His stance is that America was in a better place before all these burdens where put on business, it has nothing to do with who ate where.
@Elderus01 No misconstruing here. Ironic libertarians always cite 'slippery slopes' of govt, when clearly, redressing the CRA as Paul proposes, would be the 1st domino to fall, in the unspoken end game of re-segregation. You know that to be true. Proven time and again~ the argument that racist businesses can be controlled thru economic natural selection, is laughable. What about utilities, car dealers and grocery stores? So minorities need to build their own eh? Please rethink ur position.
@brianodeci08 In your worldview it seems that promoting racism has a controlling stake in certain politicians’ decision making, including Dr. Paul's here. That's just not accurate in this case, his 'end game" isn't to re-segregate and I don’t believe you’re naïve enough to think it is, so what agenda do you have that you’re not sharing?
@Elderus01 You can't obfuscate or ad hominem away Pauls documented, repeated and current reiterations of racial policy overtones in his campaign platform. He's the one making it an issue, not me. If you see allowing systemic racism/sexism/genderism as a fundamental and defensible part of property rights and the Constitution, then you can't be helped. But the only ones bending over backwards to hide any agenda here are Paul, and his needling supporters like yourself. It's laughably transparent.
@brianodeci08 I think you would probably consider me in the "can't be helped" category when it comes to property rights. I also think the question you need to ask yourself is, “Is Paul's end game re-segregation?" When you approach that question with intellectually honesty you’ll see his position comes from libertarian principle, it has nothing to do with him being or not being a bigot.
"and to tell you the truth I haven't really read all through it because it was passed 40 years ago and hadn't been a real pressing issue in the campaign.."
The real question is why is it so important to Siegel and Maddow. Your question is intellectually dishonest.
He answered the question. You're just too ignorant to see it.
It has nothing to do with him being prejudice. It has to deal with the truth of rights, liberty, and freedom.
Not freedoms regulated by society.
So just as you feel that all people are equal and deserve rights, this shouldn't just apply to the context of your perspective. If someone else OWNS something doesn't want to serve someone else, it should be their freedom of choice to do so.
@VideoExpostulations: I swear to God, every day I bet another fool is born with serious reading comprehension problems.
No, he is not fine with that. He is a libertarian and libertarians believe in individual rights. These rights do not include petitioning the heavy hand of government to enact aggression on your part and force others to serve you. The difference between institutionalized racism and private property is that at least you're not supporting it would your money.
---- IF A BUSINESS BEGAN TO NOT SERVE BLACK PEOPLE ETC.. THE FREE MARKET WOULD ALLOW FOR THE BUSINESS TO LOSE PROFIT WITH LESS CUSTOMERS (BLACK CUSTOMERS) AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY MAYBEEEE DOING SOMETHING FOR THEMSELVES??? LIE BOYCOTTING THE RACIST BUSINESS
Smh Rachel Maddow has no respect for me. I am black and I agree they should have the right to say no ur black how bad is that? You take away some1s beliefs? In my opinion thats alot worse lol.
@Tprimeable: Libertarians also believe in individual rights, as in, the right not to be coerced by any entity, corporate or government. This means that company should have no right to pollute or poison your property or body. Self regulation is only in regard to anything outside of fraud or violence.
You're misinterpreting Ron Paul's view on State Rights. He believes things can be handled at State level but this doesn't mean that States have the right to trample individual rights.
I disagree with Paul on this. In his world, there could exist an area where all the hospitals in a large radius refuse to to provide life saving treatment to someone because of their skin color, who would die on the long ride to a hospital outside of that radius.
@JamesVc: No it couldn't since most people aren't racist. If a Hospital was openly racist, it never would take off from the ground and would never even survive. This is like saying that since Guns are allowed, there would be a place where people who like guns are going to kill tons and tons of people!
@Deadwind002 That's true, thankfully in today's not-very-racist America the hospital would be boycotted and probably pelted with rotten fruit all day. But as I said, I dislike that the fact that it COULD exist. As SouthOCmixdown notes, some areas of the South you just can't trust.
@MrKoopa26 Thankfully probably not in modern day America, but it still COULD exist. He needs to face that sometimes government does have to step in to regulate what people do. Otherwise restaurants could serve super eff'd up food, coke could put coke in their coke again, etc.
@JamesVck it could possibly exist in small taverns in small towns or something, but it won't in businesses like pizza hut, jc pennies, pretty much any business that's aim is to be successful. Come on, no business is gonna do anything to get themselves shutdown.
@JamesVck: In a truly free society, no business, government or individual is allowed to poison your body or property with either pollution or toxins.
The government NEVER needs to regulate personal behavior unless it infringes upon the rights of others. These rights do not include the infringement of another person's rights.
For example, if Coke and Cocaine in it, it should be listed on the can and then be up to the person who drinks it.
The Constitution. Libertarian philosophy states that protecting the individual from fraud, coercion or aggression is a legitimate role of government. This means that all products should list all ingredients. The Constitution is sufficient. Any other meddling invites disaster as we have seen with BP's limited liability. I don't see you railing against that.
To stick a fork in your argument, it is the Fed that allows CEO of Monsanto to be food safety Czar of the US, appointed by Obama.
I'd love to see businesses behave themselves on an 'honor system'-basis, with miminal Federal Govt intervention. Which I'm sure R. Paul supports. But after living in the South and having aged 50+ Southerners out and out TELL me that~ If they had a choice, and there was no consequence to refusing service to non-white/gay customers, they most certainly would. Call it anecdotal and irrelevant if you want. But sometimes you DO need the Fed, to help move civil evolution forward by activist statutes.
@SouthOCmixdown You make a great point. But youre giving Paul way too much credit to say he shares the same rational ideals that most conscientious Americans support. Paul is fronting for a breed of conservative that disguises his social agenda, by way of purporting them to be simple economic improvements, rather than a civil rights rollback. And he doesnt even have the guts simply admit, that he is resentful the government has made business comply with anti-racist laws. That's the issue.
@leverage1976 Resent the government mad business comply with anti-racist laws? Are you a racial bigot yourself? What about "discrimination" against gender, physical disabilities, fat, short, obnoxious, shy, depressed, bipolar, pregnant, alternative lifestyles, homosexuals, atheists, Muslims, midgets...and on...and on...and on. Who isn't a victim? I think what Paul resents is the debilitating psychology of victimhood that Govt has sold the public under the false pretense of "caring".
It really doesn't take 6 lines to say "Paul is a racist". It's all you keep repeating over and over, especially when you are called on your bullshit. If you are going to use 6 lines to call Paul a racist, try including some evidence in there somewhere..anywhere..
@SouthOCmixdown: It was Jim Crow laws that forced private business owners to segregate and had nothing to do with free market principles or property rights.
And ... it was civil disobedience and peaceful protest that put an end to that, not government.
@SouthOCmixdown So would you not prefer to know who the racsit or anti-homosexual people were? I know I would and I lived in the South a long time. I don't want to support business or people who are racist or against gay equality. Do you prefer just not knowing?
@brad238899 I'm not concerned either way if someone is anti-gay or racist. If that's how they feel then I cant change them. They may even have some valid, foundational reasons for their beliefs. But if they want to do business in a public square, they need to shift those beliefs into neutral and treat everyone the same. If they cant be trusted to do that effectively, they either need to get out of business, or be 'reminded' by the govt that that's not the way we operate in America.
@SouthOCmixdown If it's public then why do they pay mortgages and rent for their businesses? I agree that in public contracts and public business that there is no room for racism but who am I to force someone how to run their business that they own in it's entirety? And unlike you I'd rather know. I support equal rights for homosexuals and equality for all races and I'd like to patronize stores that are owned by people with similar views.
@brad23889 Some would have you believe that private business is an autonomous entity unto itself. The fact is~ No business is truly independently 'private'. If they pay loans/mortgages/rent, they are utilizing institutions that are federally-backed by FDIC-insured securities. Business locations, are protected by federal/state/local zoning and buidling codes. Their insurance is bonded by the adherence to those. In that sense, business exists by the hand of govt, just as much as they decry it.
@SouthOCmixdown The same exact thing can be said for private homes and people. They pay tax, mortgages, rent and use FDIC insurance and there are also federal/state/local zoning and building codes. So essentially what you're saying is that the government should be able to make racism illegal in itself because every single person has involvement with the government. Until you believe everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness then I don't think we will see eye to eye.
@brad238899 Homeowners get tax breaks for that. Despite the fact they get far more benefit by being a homeowner, than the govt does taxing them. Only now, do you see disgruntled speculators who miscalculated their 1997, 320k home purchase on an interest-only mortgage, bemoaning their property taxes on a severely-depreciated home. So in that respect, many homeowners treated their home as a business investment. And when it failed, they unfairly expect govt to stop charging them taxes on it.
@SouthOCmixdown How did this go from a conversation about individual liberty to the housing crisis. Anyways, I'll let you have the last word. I think our conversation that has stretched over a few days has come to a bit of an end. It's been nice having a civil conversation with you. Something that is quite rare on youtube these days.
@brad238899 I agree. Been very civil and pleasant talking to you as well. And you are right. A rarity to be sure, nowadays. Ultimately and as always, our conversations may not necessarily directly affect policy changes we'd like to see. But they can at least get the discussion and recognition of a possible problem on the table. Which to me, is vitally important. Good day to you and all here.
@brad238899: Thanks brad. Even in practical circumstances, forcing racist people to serve the people they discriminate against is ridiculous. They'll spit in your food and you're still supporting racism by forcing them to serve you, thereby accomplishing nothing.
This is backwards thinking just like the Drug War and Gun Control. If we don't make it illegal, everyone's going to do drugs, shoot people and everyone's going to be racist! Ridiculous.
@Deadwind002 God you really don't understand what conditions were like in the south during the civil rights movement, do you? Before the civil rights act was enacted pretty much everyone WAS racist. The drug war and gun control are completely different issues because those things affect yourself, whereas racism affects people other than yourself. They are apples to oranges issues.
@Tprimeable You honestly think that as soon as the Civil Rights Act as passed everyone in the south ceased to be racist? The government can't force someone to be unbigoted.
@jwb2116 Did I ever say that? What the civil rights act DID do was allow black people to do what they wanted without institutional racism. They could not be refused service from restaurants, etc. It opened the doors.
@Tprimeable "Before the civil rights act was enacted pretty much everyone WAS racist." This is what you said. The CRA didn't end racism. Maybe they couldn't be refused service, but the bigoted owners of said restaurants could provide lousy service to them, make them feel uncomfortable and unwanted or even fearful for their safety.
Society has to evolve to a point where all races/backgrounds are accepted, it can't be mandated by the government.
@jwb2116 Yes, but until that day (who knows when), people need laws and rules. Guess we should get rid of cops too, and trust people to not be criminals starting today.
@Tprimeable: It was MLK who achieved this, not government. It was Jim Crow laws, government, that forced people to be racist. You don't have a moral right to what belongs to someone else.
As I said previously, even in practical terms, the Civil Rights Act shields the bigot from the folly of their actions. Racist people can now discriminate and not be punished for their actions.
@SouthOCmixdown Paul is trying to appeal to the old school segregationist apologists, who are still living voters to bolster his base. And to those who say that business should be allowed to decide who they want to serve and let the free market reign, u are full of crap. Look at what the Koch brothers have done in funding the Tea Party and fooling millions of working class ppl. Rich racists will fund and support legal defense for racist business if the laws change. Wake up and stop being naive.
@SouthOCmixdown: It was local and state government that forced property owners to segregate and discriminate against blacks. Libertarianism is based on free enterprise, property rights and mutual contracts, not the corporatism that we have today. You do not need the Federal Government to enact aggression on property owners unless they themselves commit aggression. To enact aggression is more immoral than choosing who enters your property. As MLK demonstrated, racism fails w/ boycotts, not gov.
Liberals are financial illiterates and can't think beyond the idea that any store owner is an evil capitalist in the first place. An evil capitalist who if given the chance would [insert any brainwashed liberal myth] and would enjoy it.
@SurlyCalifornia
Wrong. Elected. (oops , looks like you make being wrong a hobby)
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@nfwvideo2011
The sum of your argument is "you are racist" ..
I challenge you to ponder how and why that is proof that your position is wrong and that your argument is empty.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@nfwvideo2011
it's bad for liberty. Could care less about its impact on business.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@nfwvideo2011
A protestant church has the right to refuse admittance to a catholic. Funny how it hasn't ended Catholicism or protestants...
This is a fine example of how convoluted your position is... you can't even keep your own perception of reality straight..
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@nfwvideo2011
public business? LOL! A construct of the progressive mind.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
(cont.) Not even that's it's "OK" to do... just that they have a right to do what they want with their private property.
drshlotzkin 5 months ago
Yes, and it would also be OK for “GAY” and/or “BLACK” business owned to discriminate... But, IMO, if you are a business owner and turn away a potential money making opportunity... you’re stupid and deserve to go out of business. This group “think” is going to be our downfall… we are all individuals and should be judged on that basis.
drshlotzkin 5 months ago
Unacceptable view? What exactly is an unacceptable view in a society that is supposed to be free with a first amendment that protects speech and property rights? Any ideology can become fascism. Including liberalism.
mrnegronis 5 months ago
This man doesn't answer questions directly. This is why she has to continuously ask the same question.
iAnnouska 5 months ago
Im black and i agree with him, your property = your choice.
asdfGeist 5 months ago
@asdfGeist being black doesn't preclude you from being stupid...congratulations...!!!
thetruthis9 5 months ago
@thetruthis9
Because it's stupid to think that racists suddenly stop being racists when a law is passed. And its stupid to think it wont be the end of civil rights and equality on planet Earth if dumb racists are allowed to refuse a sandwich to a black person or a woman. It's also stupid to assume that in a society that created the CRA, such a racist business would be marginal at best and would likely be openly boycotted by all minorities including women and people of color. Freedom works.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
Rachel Maddow is an idiot.
pretorious700 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RICK PERRY'S GARDASIL Kills & Maims Young Girls - Announces Presidential Bid
^Vid on youtube search it.
Perry is a mass murderer! Killed Young Little girls.
BEWARE Of Perry!
SkyRifter 6 months ago
I hate rachel maddow
pplus0440 6 months ago
@pplus0440 that's totally healthy
Roxz80 6 months ago
@pplus0440 Thats too bad she really is a genuinely nice person and she is shocked at the way the Republican party is headed, for example, this one, Rand Paul thinks that if a woman was beaten and forcibly raped, she should be forced to birth the fetus or face legal consequences worse than the rapist.
sirscrotum 5 months ago
@sirscrotum that's bc the baby is a person and shouldn't be killed. Would you like to have been killed bc you may have been inconveniant to the parents? Genuinly nice people don't invite someone to appear in front of a nationwide audience in order to twist your words and sell you as a racist in order to harm your career and reputation. That is not something a nice person does sir.
pplus0440 5 months ago
@pplus0440 Hell my mom had 3 abortions. My brother has contributed to 4 abortions. OUr standard of living would have been significantly decreased had those pregnancies been carried. Freedom over our own bodies is a fundamental freedom, your anti-freedom and Im pro-freedom
sirscrotum 5 months ago
@sirscrotum Oh yeah your right. I guess my parents should kill me because I'm a financial burden to them and without me they could be living in a yacht traveling the world. You have the freedom to do what you want with your body. Not a childs. You and your family are a sad and confused group of people.I feel terribly sorry that you and your mom and brother were ever given the responsibility to make choices.
pplus0440 5 months ago
@pplus0440 earth has 7 billion people, adding more babies into the world, isnt going to solve the problem Its a choice, not a child..
sirscrotum 5 months ago
@sirscrotum Sir Scrotum. I'm not going to take advice from you. If the world having to much people is aproblem do us a favor and go kill your family and yourself. Obviously you won't bc you aren't insane. But then again your family has murdered 7 people already....
pplus0440 5 months ago
@pplus0440 Why dont you put your money where your mouth is and adopt 20 children born from unwanted pregnancies. I aborted 8 million potential babies when I jerked off this morning.
sirscrotum 5 months ago
@sirscrotum doesn't surprise me that sir scrotum is telling me he jerked off this morning and that he is smarter than me.
pplus0440 5 months ago
@pplus0440 Its cuz you dont have any authority to make a call on carrying every single fucking pregnancy to full term in America. Quite simply, your a fascist, same as the nazi's, or as I call modern Republicans, the Third Right.
sirscrotum 5 months ago
@sirscrotum
Your mother had the freedom to keep her legs shut when she wasn't in a financial position to care for a child. Your brother also had the freedom to consider the consequences of his flagrant and irresponsible promiscuity as well. Murdering a baby because you couldn't afford the consequences of a sexual relationship is not a justification for murder. Its a REASON for more responsible choices when it comes to your sexual relationships. Freedom comes with responsibility.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
I wish he would just answer the question. I agree with him, i'll do it for him.
"Yes, it is legally acceptable to not allow any race of your choice on your property"
also
"isn't saying you're for civil rights but against the civil rights act a contradiction" (paraphrased)
no it's not. if it were then saying you were opposed to the PATRIOT act means you're not a patriot.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 hm, you're obviously a white person. why don't you get some alanis morisette cd's and dance poorly while you're at it? douche.
also, you're analogy to the patriot act is retarded.
clockworkscott 6 months ago
More on regulations here
/watch?v=a1JKNSA-CGg
VotePaineJefferson 6 months ago
I don't get it, what's so awesome about this? It's just Rachel Maddow behaving contemptibly.
Einstein can help shed some light on this.
"Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding." -Einstein
Government force (violence) hasn't cured racism, but it has compromised the ability of business owners to make bad choices. More and more the government is telling us what we can and cannot do, say or think. Where do YOU draw the line?
VotePaineJefferson 6 months ago
The only person behaving contemptibly is Paul, and the societally regressive, reactionary voters who give validation to his outmoded ideas. Meanwhile he sits smugly, believing he has ignited a genuine revolution. It's a revolution of revisitation and non-integrity. Not one of progress, insight, or even utility. If you resent Maddow for showcasing that reality, then you're likely one of the latent common denominators in the body politic, that actually buys into his shopworn, separatist spins.
leverage1976 6 months ago 2
@leverage1976 Yea, I could say much worse things about Maddow. Facts. But who cares? She's just another pawn for the globalists.
Outmoded ideas? Funny, I can find no expiration date on my constitution. I guess liberty and independence would be a "revisitation." I don't even know what all that other crap means that you said.
VotePaineJefferson 6 months ago
@VotePaineJefferson Sure u cud say worse things. But they would likely be as tunnel-visioned & thin as what uv said thus far.Einstein n all that, lol. f U shud know that MSNBC has treated R. Paul w/more kid gloves than Fox, CNBC, right-wing talk radio, the lot. Yes, its a double edged sword, as they are bringing in a center-left spin 2give him a platform. Devil's deals u make, when u need exposure. Const. is an evolving document. CRA was part of that evolution. Beyond that, idk wat 2 tell you.
leverage1976 6 months ago
@leverage1976
The only "reality" you or Maddow managed to showcase in an entire TV segment and 6 lines of baseless, fact-less, ad-hominem rhetoric, is that Paul is a racist; a claim for which you and Maddow also provide absolutely no evidence of whatsoever.
The only issue discussed by Maddow or you is one-tenth of one bill that was passed 4 decades ago. Talk about lacking progress, insight or utility.. Your comments here and Maddow's so-called "interview" of Doctor Paul, defined.
A joke.
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@VotePaineJefferson Communist/Socialists/Collectivist tallied up an estimated death count of 250-300 million (NOT including war fatalities) in the 20th century alone. When will the eugenics, malthusianism, socialist authoritarian crowd be satisfied with their war against human nature, traditional family values, morality, natural rights, individual and economic liberty? Many prominent leftists not afraid to air out their hatred of humanity have spelled out the agenda quite clearly. Take a guess!
SexJunkle 6 months ago
I don't get it. Shouldn't a private business owner be alowed to be racist and run their business in a racist way? It seems like a bad business model but that would be freedom, and that's something this country was supposedly founded on.
InKa4484 6 months ago
@djerwulfe 85% Swedish, eh? A total population less than the size of one US City -New York City? I doubt Atheist Daddy understands the relevance of that and how it distorts his argument. Liberals have as much trouble processing numbers as they do facts, history, human nature, and reality in general.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@djerwulfe Good points! Those tyrants around the world that allow "voting" always receive 98%+ of the popular vote. I guess one can reason that virtually no individual rights and being ruled by an iron fist makes a population extremely happy and content, more so than most of the world and by a long shot! Music to the ears to those arguing for replacing our constitutionally based republic with a socialist 'democracy'.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@djerwulfe Sweden is but one example of a socialist democracy that works. Typical of the Libertarian argument, you provide little substance and a whole lot of ridicule. Feel free to substitute Germany, Canada, Denmark or Finland into my statement if it makes you feel any better. Where is your example of minimalist governments fostering a robust economy? Oh right, you haven't provided one.
AtheistDaddy 6 months ago
@AtheistDaddy Typical of the Church of Marx/Big Govt cultists, loony leftism is ideology divorced from reality as I stated earlier. I checked the crime stats. Canada and Germany are on par with the US. Finland,Sweden,Denmark all have crime statics actually worse than the U.S.! Which even I found remarkable considering the repressed and oppressive nature of those leftist "Utopia's", or socialist democracies around the world.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@SexJunkle Here, again, you merely throw out personal insults and provide no substance. Your arguments are a throwback to the child in a classroom throwing a tantrum when he/she does not get his/her way. I asked about a minarchistic, free market (no gov't regulation, in case you didn't know what I meant) society that is working. You have not and cannot, I'm sure, provide one. Congratulations!
AtheistDaddy 6 months ago
Using your logic, the "happiest" places on earth are under oppressive rule.Find a population more "happy" than the North Koreans are under Kim Jong il. Video footage shows a public celebrating with dancing in the streets and signing praises for their leader (eclipsing 2008 Obama Fever) following his landslide re-election. Saddam enjoyed similar public sentiment, as did progressive lefty Adolph Hitler who caused his adoring public to faint in the presence of their socialist deity.Free HC in '32!
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@AtheistDaddy
LOL! The United States. Bahahaha... You know.. the Second largest economy in the world..
Second only to the EU, which is really 27 countries reporting their GDP as one, LOL! This just goes to show what facts do to your position..
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@djerwulfe You believe that Swedish citizens are coerced by the State to report on their happiness? Please. How about health conditions in these nations or Education standards and availability? Equating social democracies to the tyranny of NKorea shows your ignorance of how the world works or illuminates your dishonesty to propagate your ideology.
AtheistDaddy 6 months ago
@AtheistDaddy You don't think the "Nice People" of Govt lie - sorry, that evokes negative emotion...let's say stretch the truth, or commit a white life - about how much their citizens "Love" their leadership? Here's a hint Skippy, most countries don't allow the press to report on a 13% approval rating of their leaders.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
Comment removed
SexJunkle 6 months ago
The government cannot legislate morality.
TheEnterprise87 6 months ago
@TheEnterprise87 Guess you better take the laws for robbery, murder, prostitution, tobacco/alcohol for minors, extortion, conspiracy, drug possession, terrorist threats, battery and assault off the books too then. Last I checked, all those violations stem from a temporary or systemic lapse of morality. This is where your libertarian arguments fall apart. Similar to your views on taxation. The cost of civilization is taxes. And the cost of civility is govt oversight. Find a more credible hero.
SouthOCmixdown 6 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown
LOL! How adorable. You think government precedes civilization, and that civilization stems from government. How perfectly you sum up the insanity of the left.
I just want to pinch your cheeks you're so cute!
YewTube2025 6 months ago
It seems like Rand Paul is skating around the question that Racheal Maddow is asking, she is simply trying to get him to answer whether or not he believes that a business has the right to discriminate. The civil rights act protects most of us from discrimination it needs to add sexual orientation to the bill so all people can be protected. Without ENDA and the Fair Housing doctrine you would still see whites only businesses and some would discriminate on gender.
J4vandf 6 months ago
@J4vandf
" Without ENDA and the Fair Housing doctrine you would still see whites only businesses and some would discriminate on gender."
I know business owners who do that now even with your perfect regulations. I challenge you to think long and hard about the genesis of your statement; the implication that black people and women are only allowed to eat in restaurants because of ENDA.
"so all people can be protected." Do you seriously believe that the CRA protects people from discrimination?
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@SexJunkie It's not. That's my point.
mert828 6 months ago
An embarrassment to KY. I see what he's saying but disagree. It's like me being pro-choice but against abortion. If some asshole chooses not to serve to some group, they lose their business along with anyone else that doesn't like their discriminatory policies. I am just clarifying because it seemed Rachel Maddow didn't get it or something. I still disagree with him.
mert828 6 months ago
@mert828 Well, I am pro-choice in principle but personally against abortion. How exactly do you see that as a logical conflict? Maddow was attempting to lure Rand Paul into a baited trap. Paul made it clear to those capable of thinking above mindless emotionalism, that he was FOR ending Government enforced segregation, but against the delusional & dangerous precedent of "ending" all forms of "discrimination" in society. Which is just another losing battle against reality from the loony left.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@mert828
She got it just fine. She loves big government and hates Rand Paul, so she painted him as a racist in the hopes it would cost him the election. That is not a big secret here is it?
YewTube2025 6 months ago
Paulstroie.....Never spend a Day in the Military......But runs his big Fat Trap about our Soldiers.....he spits on our Flag,and spits on Ameriaca......Go fuck your Cousin Mao.....Sissi boy
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Paulstroie Coward,Racist Mutherfucker....let other people fight the Battle,so this Bitch Paulinestoie can open up her evil Trap.....
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
PaulSTROIE You wiil Never take my right to free speech ,piece of Shit...Lay down in the Streets and let the garbage truck pick you up....Dont give a fuck what you believe,your the true sissi Bitch......Coward
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Paulstroie Your the Fucking Problem in America..I served my Time Motherfucker...Serve your time behind Bars...Suck your own Dick ,Punk Ass.....Your Opinion means NOTHING,Cause your Public Enemy NO1..piece of garbage...your the true fachist
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Dude, you ever walk into a room with a bunch of people that didn't want you there? Wouldn't it have been good to be made aware of this before you entered?
Establishments like this still exist... it's just... the signs don't because of PC laws.
jieuxarmeni 6 months ago
Rand Paul supports discrimination in the same way that people who are for Freedom of Speech support people telling their parents that their genitals smell bad. He thinks discrimination is okay in the same sense that people who believe in a fair trial are okay with serial rapists going free. He think discrimination is okay in the same sense that people who believe in freedom of religion are okay with Satan worship.
People who don't understand him typically have no principles.
darwinkilledgod 6 months ago
@darwinkilledgod
Wow. Your logic cuts through this bullshit like a knife. Here here!
YewTube2025 6 months ago
*sigh* Rand, quit circumlocuting. By all means decry the people calling you a racist over it, but -answer the damned question- first. You sound like a slickster trying to avoid taking any stand at all, doing that...
WindFamiliar 6 months ago
its funny that rachel maddow tries to paint rand paul as a racist when she supports the racist apartheid state of israel
intellectualgiant911 6 months ago
RAND PAUL ROCKS!
MAGMADIVER1 6 months ago
Anti racist laws. I applied for the Pennsylvania State Police in 1982. I was told by a Latino Trooper that because I was white, no matter how I tested and scored I would not be hired because I was white. Not because I was not qualified, but because I was white.
And JadeTomZ what a dumb ass statement to make.
DaylesPoppy 6 months ago
ALL REPUBLICANS ARE RACISTS....in the south.
you can not get elected unless you are.
JadeTomZ 6 months ago
fellowshipclique,learn how to speak english,before you adress somebody....you aint no ghetto .....tell that lie to somebody who cares..IT AINT ME
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Fellowship my ass.....Greedy,destructive,bloodsucking parasites,I served in Iraq,for your stanking Freedom,I served in Afghanisdan for you to have in Opinion,ignorend ass piece of garbage,YOU GONE TO DEPRIVE ME OF MINE?????Go worship Mao...Motherfucker
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Fellowship Clique suck out of my ass in a Flavorstraw Mr Hitler.....
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
@mizzfoxy9 hei commie bitch...this is america...BTW I don't believe you did serve in Iraq bitch...America is America no matter what the bitchez who lie about serving in Iraq....dumb lying bitch....pay your dam health care...
paulstroie 6 months ago
@RationalBullets So build a time machine like Doc Brown and go back to the 1950s. You dont belong in the 00s. If they reversed CRA, w\blacks being only 12.6% of the population, you know damn well here wud be a helluva lot more whites only establishments, than the other way around. Country clubs had mens only grills until the 1990s. Youre either willfully ignorant, or youre pining for a return to the days of segregation. Either way, your protestations are transparent and ring pretty hollow.
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@PatsyBailey: Because the point of the question was to force him to say: "I believe in segregation." An ambush interview planned on the day of his election victory and a loaded question that brings up an issue that has been settled for decades. Too obvious for debate.
I would have answered more directly but as a rookie politician, I can understand why he didn't flat out say what she wanted him to say. A person owns their own property owns their property, racist or not.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
Syria is a great country for your ass to reside,maybe Afghanistant..64bolt hit the road
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
64 motherfucking Bolt
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
46bolt PS.I dont wan t and Need your stanking Money!!!I want whats MINE...before assholes like you.waste it.you dont even know the defenition of Marxist,MF..
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
64bolts Kiss my ass,thief...no Money belongs to you MF...I spend years in the Military for this Country,you selfish greedy ass piece of shit.....I leave whwn your ragedy ass leaves....
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
Ron Pauls anti war stance it the single most important thing on the table. For this reason I think it is imperative that he gets in. Do people actually think that somehow the world is going to go back to the dark ages and everyone is going to somehow become more racist if he gets in?
Remember, people in the south will have the same feelings anyways, and would you really want to eat at a buissness that doesnt even want you there?
aristurtle1 6 months ago
What people do not choose to remember is that the true goal of the civil rights act was to gain control on a burgeoning black middle class. It was too near to blacks making their own way out of the slave culture. In 1865 the blacks marched out of the cotton fields of Georgia slavery. In 1965 the black race marched into the socialist cotton fields of welfare slavery. It is so sad because the intellect and imagination we need to save the world has been smothered by that civil rights act.
jimbronaugh 6 months ago
SHIT,IM SICK OF REPUBLICANS TRYING TO STEAL OUR MONEY,OUR SOCIAL SECURITY...IT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE,WE,VE PAID INTO THE SYSTEM FOR YEARS///ITS OURS,DONT FUCK WITH IT! ALSO,THEY DONT WANT EVERYBODY TO HAVE HEALTHCARE...THEY HAVENT COME UP WITH ANY SOLUTIONS.!!!HEALTHCARE IS A RIGHT,NOT A LUXURY
mizzfoxy9 6 months ago
@mizzfoxy9 go to england or europe the constitution says it is not a right. you want to talk about stealing money? The libs stole 6.4 billion when the stimulus bill was passed to congressional districts that don't even exist. thats all they do is steal money. look at the new deal 1937 by FDR socialize care, you are a maxist and the money that i make is mine not yours..
64bolts 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mizzfoxy9 go to england or europe the constitution says it is not a right. you want to talk about stealing money? The libs stole 6.4 billion when the stimulus bill was passed to congressional districts that don't even exist. thats all they do is steal money. look at the new deal 1937 by FDR socialize care, you are a maxist and the money that i make is mine not yours..
64bolts 6 months ago
@mizzfoxy9 Health Care Iz A Right?? U Retard. if u sick!.pay da docter! out of your pocket Bitch. they work hard stop pumpin the government up .and i grew up in da projects so i dont wanna hear dat old shit
FellowshipClique 6 months ago
@marks661man Damn. If you wrote that up as a position paper for an opposing candidate to Paul..he may have likely resigned from the race in shame. Those are exellent points though. And the irony is tragically sublime..
brianodeci08 6 months ago
maddow sucks.
smiggles1776 6 months ago
@smiggles1776 Mr. Maddcow
BringBack1776 6 months ago
@marks661man ~ That was beautiful. I may just have to print and frame that one in my office for posterity. Too bad it will get all jacked up by UTube comment formatting. Anyways, it stands on its own merits.. Good to see this thread thriving. Btw- I fixed 'palpable' for you, when I excerpted the comment. Sorry, had to do it, lol. Safe to say, Paul is not the light in the proverbial tunnel, that he appears to be. And your 'alternate universe' Democratic candidate analogy, was perfect and spot on.
leverage1976 6 months ago
Imagine a throwback Democratic candidate, who advocated returning to the near-socialist economic and wartime mobilization, that FRD effectively used, in bringing us out of the 1930s economic crisis. Or reinstating the corporate tax rates, that Eisenhower championed during the prosperity of the 1950s. Or overturning corporate personhood, in more recent times. The first 2 measures at least, were a hell of a lot more effective in the shorter term of history, than any of the nebulous, >>>
marks661man 6 months ago
>>> anti-historical 1700s claptrap these Tea Party types robotically spout here and elsewhere. And yet, if such a candidate emerged, Republican media outlets would be shrieking treasonous libel and demanding his ouster by firing squad. Palpaple irony. Paul is not a visionary. He is simply a repackaging of already-discredited conservative ideas, and a few untenable but attractive-sounding budgetary sound bites. He advocates moving America forward, by legislating backwards 40+ years. >>>
marks661man 6 months ago
>>> After all, if youre gonna be miserable in economic crisis, at least you can take solace in knowing that you can refuse service to a black, mexican or gay. Make apologies and sprinkle all the fairy dust you want on Paul. He will still be a pandering, visionless hack that teases the lowest common denominator. The Tea Party, much like the Reichstag revolutionaries, exist only with the weight of temporary crisis allowing them to be heard with a legitimacy that is phantom and unearned.
marks661man 6 months ago
@marks661man
The only policy of Paul's you attack is the ignorant and inherently racist one that you create for him: "at least you can take solace in knowing that you can refuse service to a black, mexican or gay."
Good speech about using war and welfare to inflate a depressed economy, though. /sarcasm
YewTube2025 4 months ago
Question for the people who think Rand is racist or a supporter of racism? Do you want black people, gay people, etc. to be served by those who hold bigoted views? I wouldn't want my hard earned money to go to someone who doesn't love thy neighbor. Instead, in the free market a failed business model should do just that, FAIL. Choosing not to serve a segment of the population for superficial reasons is stupid. If I were black and refused service, I would start my own restaurant.
JTG730 6 months ago
@JTG730 Better question would be- With ALL the issues facing America today, WHY would Paul be so fixated on exhuming established and accepted legislation from over 40 years ago? Why is it SO important to Paul, to UNDO what has been DONE? When you approach THAT question with intellectual honesty, not talking points, it becomes pretty clear. Either Paul is the worlds most irrelevant contrarian. Or he genuinely feels that America was better off when blacks and whites ate in separate establishments.
brianodeci08 6 months ago 17
@brianodeci08 The thing is he wasnt fixated on that. He said many times that this isnt a campaign issue, it is said and done. I blame his non-political experience for getting himself in murky waters. Obviously he could have handled it better, but I respect the fact that he doesnt try to score political points and tries to make it an intellectual coversation, holding true to his libertarian views. The slipperly slope argument, while not provable, is always something to consider
JTG730 6 months ago
@JTG730 If Paul doesnt have the 'political experience', to avoid such an obviously 3rd-rail-type issue, then certainly he doesnt possess the nuance to helm cooperative national legislative authority. As stated before, with all the problems facing us today, and with the near irrelevance this long ago decided issue represents in macro-pool of pressing national issues, Paul's insistence exhuming this dead horse, speaks volumes about where he and the Tea Party would like to steer U.S social policy.
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 Having political experience isn't necessarily a good thing. By that I meant, the ability to answer without answering, speak in rigidly rehearsed talking points, and use moral righteousness/emotional outrage to score political points. It is great that Rand believes third rail issues are not off topic because some people are uncomfortable with those going against the grain and speaking what they believe to be true. And even though this issue was foisted on him, he still won BIG.
JTG730 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 Rand has shown with repeatedly with first his $500 billion deficit cutting bill, dwarfing that of any other and not touching entitlements! that he not only is capable of legislating, but that he may be of only a handful of reasonable Congressman. Then when he elegantly laid out the insolvency of the entitlement programs and how by his minor tweaks we could perserve it, he was called radical. And lastly, he did not campaign on the reversal of 1/10th of the CRA of 63!!!!!
JTG730 6 months ago
@JTG730 Sounds like ur very taken w\Paul's bugget postulations. The reality is~ Very few of his ideas r workable w\ the lobyying infrastructure as it currently exists. They make 4great campaign posturing\newsmaking, but ultimately little else. Anderson fractured the vote in1980 w\some radical ideas. It led us to8 years of dismantling the manufacturing sector/middle classs under Reagan. LaRouche was also similarly bold in his fiscal beliefs. Both men are now footnotes. Paul will be no different.
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 the only person fixated on this issue was Rachel. Paul has said that he would not support repealing the civil rights act, and the fact that the media made such a big deal out of this shows how desperate they are to discredit the tea party.
themaxptob 6 months ago
@themaxptob Actually, Paul has been very vocal in repeatedly decrying the 64 CRA. And has been vocal in extolling the virtues of repealing it, while at the same time semantically dancing around trying to avoid the 'racist' tag. That just doesnt wash with rational, thinking people. And by extension, if those policy tenets are important to Paul as a Tea Party candidate, then the Tea Party deserves every last bit of scrutiny they get. Sorry, your Fox News spin doesnt play here.
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 He's been repeatedly vocal because the media keeps questioning him on it! And if you actually listen to him, he decries 1/10th of CRA 64 and would never think to repeal it in whole. Rand Paul is not a racist, and I would love to hear Maddow answer his question about allowing guns in restaurants that he poses in part 2. And trust me, I hate the spin Fox News spews out just as much as the liberal spin out of MSNBC.
themaxptob 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 The point you're misconstruing is, he’d like to undo the legislation but not for the purpose of allowing us to re-segregate (and you know that). His point is that private business shouldn't be regulated by the government, period. That’s libertarianism; it's about freedom, even if business does something that is moral repugnant. His stance is that America was in a better place before all these burdens where put on business, it has nothing to do with who ate where.
Elderus01 6 months ago
Comment removed
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@Elderus01 No misconstruing here. Ironic libertarians always cite 'slippery slopes' of govt, when clearly, redressing the CRA as Paul proposes, would be the 1st domino to fall, in the unspoken end game of re-segregation. You know that to be true. Proven time and again~ the argument that racist businesses can be controlled thru economic natural selection, is laughable. What about utilities, car dealers and grocery stores? So minorities need to build their own eh? Please rethink ur position.
brianodeci08 6 months ago
@brianodeci08 In your worldview it seems that promoting racism has a controlling stake in certain politicians’ decision making, including Dr. Paul's here. That's just not accurate in this case, his 'end game" isn't to re-segregate and I don’t believe you’re naïve enough to think it is, so what agenda do you have that you’re not sharing?
Elderus01 5 months ago
@Elderus01 You can't obfuscate or ad hominem away Pauls documented, repeated and current reiterations of racial policy overtones in his campaign platform. He's the one making it an issue, not me. If you see allowing systemic racism/sexism/genderism as a fundamental and defensible part of property rights and the Constitution, then you can't be helped. But the only ones bending over backwards to hide any agenda here are Paul, and his needling supporters like yourself. It's laughably transparent.
brianodeci08 5 months ago 2
@brianodeci08 I think you would probably consider me in the "can't be helped" category when it comes to property rights. I also think the question you need to ask yourself is, “Is Paul's end game re-segregation?" When you approach that question with intellectually honesty you’ll see his position comes from libertarian principle, it has nothing to do with him being or not being a bigot.
Elderus01 5 months ago
@brianodeci08
Please cite any evidence whatsoever that Paul is " fixated on exhuming established and accepted legislation from over 40 years ago"
" is the worlds most irrelevant contrarian."
"genuinely feels that America was better off when blacks and whites ate in separate establishments."
Certainly you weren't making baseless, incendiary comments designed to misdirect people from important issues or to imply that Rand Paul is a racist?
YewTube2025 6 months ago
@brianodeci08
"and to tell you the truth I haven't really read all through it because it was passed 40 years ago and hadn't been a real pressing issue in the campaign.."
The real question is why is it so important to Siegel and Maddow. Your question is intellectually dishonest.
YewTube2025 6 months ago
He answered the question. You're just too ignorant to see it.
It has nothing to do with him being prejudice. It has to deal with the truth of rights, liberty, and freedom.
Not freedoms regulated by society.
So just as you feel that all people are equal and deserve rights, this shouldn't just apply to the context of your perspective. If someone else OWNS something doesn't want to serve someone else, it should be their freedom of choice to do so.
That's true freedom.
TheGreggAlexander 6 months ago
He won't actually answer the question.
squamish4244 6 months ago
He doesn't believe in Government Racism but hey, private racism is fine with him!
VideoExpostulations 6 months ago
@VideoExpostulations: I swear to God, every day I bet another fool is born with serious reading comprehension problems.
No, he is not fine with that. He is a libertarian and libertarians believe in individual rights. These rights do not include petitioning the heavy hand of government to enact aggression on your part and force others to serve you. The difference between institutionalized racism and private property is that at least you're not supporting it would your money.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
Comment removed
brianodeci08 6 months ago
Videos with 'Rachel Maddow' in the title don't get very many views. Maybe only dogs can hear them...
HoldTheProfanityFool 6 months ago
OK HE IS RIGHT HERE IS THE ANSWER
---- IF A BUSINESS BEGAN TO NOT SERVE BLACK PEOPLE ETC.. THE FREE MARKET WOULD ALLOW FOR THE BUSINESS TO LOSE PROFIT WITH LESS CUSTOMERS (BLACK CUSTOMERS) AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY MAYBEEEE DOING SOMETHING FOR THEMSELVES??? LIE BOYCOTTING THE RACIST BUSINESS
--- DONE ----
MORE SUPPORT FOR RAND PAUL
AND FOR FUCKS SAKE:
RON PAUL 2012 !!!!
xkamikaze78 7 months ago
Smh Rachel Maddow has no respect for me. I am black and I agree they should have the right to say no ur black how bad is that? You take away some1s beliefs? In my opinion thats alot worse lol.
ROXAS10000000000 7 months ago
FYI: Rand is no Ron
accardi4life 7 months ago
The down side of supporting Liberty, is they you have to defend it on both sides of the fence, and even things you might not agree with.
Gazerich 7 months ago
@Tprimeable: Libertarians also believe in individual rights, as in, the right not to be coerced by any entity, corporate or government. This means that company should have no right to pollute or poison your property or body. Self regulation is only in regard to anything outside of fraud or violence.
You're misinterpreting Ron Paul's view on State Rights. He believes things can be handled at State level but this doesn't mean that States have the right to trample individual rights.
Deadwind002 7 months ago
Would just like everyone to know that the some Jim Crow Laws FORCED private business to either be white only or have a seperate section for blacks.
just a thought
Salvysahagun 7 months ago
I disagree with Paul on this. In his world, there could exist an area where all the hospitals in a large radius refuse to to provide life saving treatment to someone because of their skin color, who would die on the long ride to a hospital outside of that radius.
JamesVck 7 months ago
@JamesVc: No it couldn't since most people aren't racist. If a Hospital was openly racist, it never would take off from the ground and would never even survive. This is like saying that since Guns are allowed, there would be a place where people who like guns are going to kill tons and tons of people!
Deadwind002 7 months ago
@Deadwind002 That's true, thankfully in today's not-very-racist America the hospital would be boycotted and probably pelted with rotten fruit all day. But as I said, I dislike that the fact that it COULD exist. As SouthOCmixdown notes, some areas of the South you just can't trust.
JamesVck 7 months ago
@JamesVck Really? You think that would happen?
MrKoopa26 7 months ago
@MrKoopa26 Thankfully probably not in modern day America, but it still COULD exist. He needs to face that sometimes government does have to step in to regulate what people do. Otherwise restaurants could serve super eff'd up food, coke could put coke in their coke again, etc.
JamesVck 7 months ago
@JamesVck it could possibly exist in small taverns in small towns or something, but it won't in businesses like pizza hut, jc pennies, pretty much any business that's aim is to be successful. Come on, no business is gonna do anything to get themselves shutdown.
MrKoopa26 7 months ago
@JamesVck: In a truly free society, no business, government or individual is allowed to poison your body or property with either pollution or toxins.
The government NEVER needs to regulate personal behavior unless it infringes upon the rights of others. These rights do not include the infringement of another person's rights.
For example, if Coke and Cocaine in it, it should be listed on the can and then be up to the person who drinks it.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
@Deadwind002 And what security measures are put in place to ensure these companies are honest about what they put in their products?
Tprimeable 6 months ago
The Constitution. Libertarian philosophy states that protecting the individual from fraud, coercion or aggression is a legitimate role of government. This means that all products should list all ingredients. The Constitution is sufficient. Any other meddling invites disaster as we have seen with BP's limited liability. I don't see you railing against that.
To stick a fork in your argument, it is the Fed that allows CEO of Monsanto to be food safety Czar of the US, appointed by Obama.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
@Deadwind002 Who will force them to put the ingredients on the can? And who will force them to do it accurately?
JamesVck 6 months ago
I'd love to see businesses behave themselves on an 'honor system'-basis, with miminal Federal Govt intervention. Which I'm sure R. Paul supports. But after living in the South and having aged 50+ Southerners out and out TELL me that~ If they had a choice, and there was no consequence to refusing service to non-white/gay customers, they most certainly would. Call it anecdotal and irrelevant if you want. But sometimes you DO need the Fed, to help move civil evolution forward by activist statutes.
SouthOCmixdown 7 months ago 29
@SouthOCmixdown You make a great point. But youre giving Paul way too much credit to say he shares the same rational ideals that most conscientious Americans support. Paul is fronting for a breed of conservative that disguises his social agenda, by way of purporting them to be simple economic improvements, rather than a civil rights rollback. And he doesnt even have the guts simply admit, that he is resentful the government has made business comply with anti-racist laws. That's the issue.
leverage1976 7 months ago 34
@leverage1976 and thats exactly whats he saying moron you are not smart enough to understand what hes saying
tonyteb 7 months ago
@leverage1976 Resent the government mad business comply with anti-racist laws? Are you a racial bigot yourself? What about "discrimination" against gender, physical disabilities, fat, short, obnoxious, shy, depressed, bipolar, pregnant, alternative lifestyles, homosexuals, atheists, Muslims, midgets...and on...and on...and on. Who isn't a victim? I think what Paul resents is the debilitating psychology of victimhood that Govt has sold the public under the false pretense of "caring".
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@leverage1976
It really doesn't take 6 lines to say "Paul is a racist". It's all you keep repeating over and over, especially when you are called on your bullshit. If you are going to use 6 lines to call Paul a racist, try including some evidence in there somewhere..anywhere..
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown: It was Jim Crow laws that forced private business owners to segregate and had nothing to do with free market principles or property rights.
And ... it was civil disobedience and peaceful protest that put an end to that, not government.
Deadwind002 7 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown So would you not prefer to know who the racsit or anti-homosexual people were? I know I would and I lived in the South a long time. I don't want to support business or people who are racist or against gay equality. Do you prefer just not knowing?
brad238899 7 months ago
@brad238899 I'm not concerned either way if someone is anti-gay or racist. If that's how they feel then I cant change them. They may even have some valid, foundational reasons for their beliefs. But if they want to do business in a public square, they need to shift those beliefs into neutral and treat everyone the same. If they cant be trusted to do that effectively, they either need to get out of business, or be 'reminded' by the govt that that's not the way we operate in America.
SouthOCmixdown 7 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown If it's public then why do they pay mortgages and rent for their businesses? I agree that in public contracts and public business that there is no room for racism but who am I to force someone how to run their business that they own in it's entirety? And unlike you I'd rather know. I support equal rights for homosexuals and equality for all races and I'd like to patronize stores that are owned by people with similar views.
brad238899 7 months ago
@brad23889 Some would have you believe that private business is an autonomous entity unto itself. The fact is~ No business is truly independently 'private'. If they pay loans/mortgages/rent, they are utilizing institutions that are federally-backed by FDIC-insured securities. Business locations, are protected by federal/state/local zoning and buidling codes. Their insurance is bonded by the adherence to those. In that sense, business exists by the hand of govt, just as much as they decry it.
SouthOCmixdown 6 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown The same exact thing can be said for private homes and people. They pay tax, mortgages, rent and use FDIC insurance and there are also federal/state/local zoning and building codes. So essentially what you're saying is that the government should be able to make racism illegal in itself because every single person has involvement with the government. Until you believe everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness then I don't think we will see eye to eye.
brad238899 6 months ago
@brad238899 Homeowners get tax breaks for that. Despite the fact they get far more benefit by being a homeowner, than the govt does taxing them. Only now, do you see disgruntled speculators who miscalculated their 1997, 320k home purchase on an interest-only mortgage, bemoaning their property taxes on a severely-depreciated home. So in that respect, many homeowners treated their home as a business investment. And when it failed, they unfairly expect govt to stop charging them taxes on it.
SouthOCmixdown 6 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown How did this go from a conversation about individual liberty to the housing crisis. Anyways, I'll let you have the last word. I think our conversation that has stretched over a few days has come to a bit of an end. It's been nice having a civil conversation with you. Something that is quite rare on youtube these days.
brad238899 6 months ago
@brad238899 I agree. Been very civil and pleasant talking to you as well. And you are right. A rarity to be sure, nowadays. Ultimately and as always, our conversations may not necessarily directly affect policy changes we'd like to see. But they can at least get the discussion and recognition of a possible problem on the table. Which to me, is vitally important. Good day to you and all here.
SouthOCmixdown 6 months ago
@brad238899: Thanks brad. Even in practical circumstances, forcing racist people to serve the people they discriminate against is ridiculous. They'll spit in your food and you're still supporting racism by forcing them to serve you, thereby accomplishing nothing.
This is backwards thinking just like the Drug War and Gun Control. If we don't make it illegal, everyone's going to do drugs, shoot people and everyone's going to be racist! Ridiculous.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
@Deadwind002 God you really don't understand what conditions were like in the south during the civil rights movement, do you? Before the civil rights act was enacted pretty much everyone WAS racist. The drug war and gun control are completely different issues because those things affect yourself, whereas racism affects people other than yourself. They are apples to oranges issues.
Tprimeable 6 months ago
@Tprimeable You honestly think that as soon as the Civil Rights Act as passed everyone in the south ceased to be racist? The government can't force someone to be unbigoted.
jwb2116 6 months ago
@jwb2116 Did I ever say that? What the civil rights act DID do was allow black people to do what they wanted without institutional racism. They could not be refused service from restaurants, etc. It opened the doors.
Tprimeable 6 months ago
@Tprimeable "Before the civil rights act was enacted pretty much everyone WAS racist." This is what you said. The CRA didn't end racism. Maybe they couldn't be refused service, but the bigoted owners of said restaurants could provide lousy service to them, make them feel uncomfortable and unwanted or even fearful for their safety.
Society has to evolve to a point where all races/backgrounds are accepted, it can't be mandated by the government.
jwb2116 6 months ago
@jwb2116 Yes, but until that day (who knows when), people need laws and rules. Guess we should get rid of cops too, and trust people to not be criminals starting today.
squamish4244 6 months ago
@squamish4244 Straw man.
jwb2116 6 months ago
@Tprimeable: It was MLK who achieved this, not government. It was Jim Crow laws, government, that forced people to be racist. You don't have a moral right to what belongs to someone else.
As I said previously, even in practical terms, the Civil Rights Act shields the bigot from the folly of their actions. Racist people can now discriminate and not be punished for their actions.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
@Tprimeable: It was government that forced individuals to segregate and market choices that ended it.
I don't think it's difficult to understand.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
@Deadwind002
..
Why is this not glaringly obvious to anyone?
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown Paul is trying to appeal to the old school segregationist apologists, who are still living voters to bolster his base. And to those who say that business should be allowed to decide who they want to serve and let the free market reign, u are full of crap. Look at what the Koch brothers have done in funding the Tea Party and fooling millions of working class ppl. Rich racists will fund and support legal defense for racist business if the laws change. Wake up and stop being naive.
marks661man 6 months ago
@marks661man
"Paul is a racist and even though I can provide absolutely no proof, you are naive and asleep if you don't believe me."
ZZZzzzzZZzzzz
YewTube2025 4 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown: It was local and state government that forced property owners to segregate and discriminate against blacks. Libertarianism is based on free enterprise, property rights and mutual contracts, not the corporatism that we have today. You do not need the Federal Government to enact aggression on property owners unless they themselves commit aggression. To enact aggression is more immoral than choosing who enters your property. As MLK demonstrated, racism fails w/ boycotts, not gov.
Deadwind002 6 months ago
dumb fuck.
TheDukeljk 6 months ago
@SouthOCmixdown It's basic econimics... They refuse to serve you... They lose your business... they go out of business.
SupurNinja 6 months ago
Comment removed
SexJunkle 6 months ago
Liberals are financial illiterates and can't think beyond the idea that any store owner is an evil capitalist in the first place. An evil capitalist who if given the chance would [insert any brainwashed liberal myth] and would enjoy it.
SexJunkle 6 months ago
@SexJunkle Conservatives cannot think beyond biased prejudices against liberals; as you clearly prove in you comment