Ron Paul - on Rachel Maddow - McCain, Bush, Obama

[Metalip]

It's funny watching this two years later and seeing how right is.

[pretorious700]

Rachel had better hope there is some conservative counterweight to the deficit, or even her high profile job could be in jeopardy.

[rsaathoff]

These news casters have taken their stick straight from Jane Curtain and Chevy Chase of Saturday Night Live. Wow has this been dumbed down.

[miker6459]

long live Ron Paul!

[pwoznic]

Enjoy your plummeting ratings, MSNBC!

[JXjohn]

Well, you can smile now. But for how long?

[johndoeqwe]

maddow is a liberal lesbian... HAHAHA rachel, get lost you queer..

[wraith713]

Hail to the king, baby.  Ron Paul 2012.

[xenugears]

I wish I could have voted for him but now we have no other choice than Obama. I dont think Obama is the best for the job but then he is waaay better than McCain so for that Obama will get my vote. Its funny how the people are not entirely heard yet we call ourselves a free country...Why the fuck cant we vote for Ron Paul anymore? why the fuck? thats our free country..

[robpatozz]

RPHB we hear your frustration, there is a major campaign of misinformation bombarding those who seek the truth. We are here to help. Dr. Paul has devoted his entire political life to the cause of LIBERTY. You can see were he stands on these issues that you raise, turn of the MSM and use the link provided at the upper right under (more info). Beware, if you believe that the government MUST provide for you by taking money from other citizens (producers other than yourself) you maybe disappointed.

[tuttletown1]

Listen to how Maddow puts things. She calls Ron Paul "Former Libertarian Candidate" instead of the traditional Republican that he is and has been. She also calls him the "2008 'Right Wing' Sensation". Ron Paul is a not at all like the right wing fringe. He is a libertarian and a constitutionalist. We must listen closer to the terms that are used by the media that lessens our people.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

He is a former libertarian candidate. That's not a label, that's a fact.

And he is a right-winger. He opposes civil rights, abortion, environmental regulation, workplace safety regulation, taxes on the rich, Social Security, and immigration. He's a hardcore right-winger on domestic issues.

[kailynleto]

Feels like 2007 all over again.

He's an individualist who thinks group rights are bad, hence the civil rights opposition. He opposes government regulation of the environment in favor of respecting property rights. He's not opposed to safety regulation at the state level. He is opposed to taxes period...he thinks no one should have to pay federal taxes. And he's a solid Constitutionalist on domestic issues.

FYMatp

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

There's nothing unconstitutional about the MLK holiday. There was only one reason to side with Jesse Helms and vote against the holiday in 1983, and everyone knew what it was. It's the same reason John McCain apologizes for his vote to this day. Paul bragged about it instead, calling MLK a Communist, a plagiarist, and a closet homosexual who "seduced underage boys."

[pigeatinginfidel]

Well, there's the fact that we don't have a tradition of making national holidays to celebrate individuals. The closest we have is a President's day that falls on Washington's birthday.

And there is the troubling fact of MLKs associations as well as his moral shortcomings. The night before he was shot, the FBI were monitoring his hotel room where he was partying with several prostitutes.

There is a lot of other dirt on the guy that has been sealed until 2032 too.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

If Paul hates MLK or considers him immoral, that's fine. But he shouldn't go on TV and call him a personal hero, and he shouldn't schedule any "money bombs" on his birthday, a holiday he considers wrong and immoral. He should be a man instead of a pandering hypocrit---come right out and call MLK a piece of shit, and run on your real platform, Ronnie.

[pigeatinginfidel]

How does he oppose civil rights? care to offer a definition of the word?

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

In 1964, we passed a little bill called the Civil Rights Act, which ended segregation and discrimination in hiring, housing, education, and other sectors. To get it passed, MLK marched on Washington and delivered his "I Have a Dream Speech," recognized as the greatest speech in 20th century American history. To get it passed, supporters overcame a filibuster led by racist, southern Republicans. It may be the most important Act of the 20th Century.

Paul opposes it, and would repeal it.

[pigeatinginfidel]

Um. Those were democrats, not republicans. First, there were hardly any republicans from the south. Of the 94 southern democrats, 87 opposed it. There were 5 southern republicans. Yes, that's all of them. It was a democratic senator who led the filibuster. I suggest you get your facts straight.

[pigeatinginfidel]

And Ron Paul opposes some of the features of that legislation not because he is against blacks, but because he is for rights. Most of those civil "rights" are not rights at all. A right to demand to go onto someone else's property and demand that they house you? That isn't a right any more than it is a right to demand that someone not speak their mind if it happens to offend someone.

It was one thing to bar government from discriminating. That was justified because government cannot do that.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

Ahahahahaha!!! As if the Civil Rights Act imposed anything of the sort! What a stupid thing to say!

[pigeatinginfidel]

But these so-called civil rights went further and created new rights, and these "rights" are at odds with more fundamental rights. No one has a fundamental right to force me to fix them a sandwich. If I don't like someone, no matter what the reason, I have every human right to refuse to serve them a sandwich. The civil rights act completely inverted the nature of rights. THAT is why Ron Paul opposes it, because of the obligations it put on private citizens.

[pigeatinginfidel]

But as I said, and he agrees, that any ordinance or law that REQUIRES discrimination should be illegal. And THAT was the original issue. Restaurants weren't refusing to serve blacks because they wanted to, but because the city governments forced them to. But it went too far and destroyed property rights in the process.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

Ahahahaha!!! Yeah, you're right---Southern restaurants and hotels really, really, really wanted to hire and serve blacks, but the big, bad local government stopped them!!! When MLK and the Freedom Riders came, they greeted them with open arms!!!

There is no "property right" to discriminate against or segregate black people, and that's the bottom line. There's only one reason to oppose the Civil Rights Act, and everyone knows what it is.

[pigeatinginfidel]

There absolutely is a right. My property, my rules.

This is the problem, you have no idea what rights are. Rights are not obligations you impose on other people. Rights are fences that keep people from imposing their will on you. If someone chooses to not serve you that is their right, because you cannot force others to act on your behalf. You cannot enslave others to your benefit.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

No, it's not their right. State and local governments and businesses that trade in interstate commerce are subject to the U.S. Constitution, which is intended to preserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those entities have no right to fuck other people based on race, gender, or religion. That's why no one seriously suggests the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional. Rather, its opponents consider blacks inferior, and wish to create a NEW right to segregate/lynch/rape them.

[pigeatinginfidel]

Straw man, much?

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

Yes, that's exactly what you're doing. You completely misstate and overstate the actual language of the CRA, and then beat the shit out of that strawman.

[strapt313]

you are a nazi and no one with a free thinking mind gives a fuck about your dumb-ass opinion. go back to sleep you mindless, feeble being.

[strapt313]

yes it is their right. any business has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose and for any reason. it is up to the community to persuade that business to do otherwise. the constitution does not force any person to "do" anything. it is merely a piece of paper stating your god-given rights. the constitution does not "grant" anyone any rights, nor does your government. no institution or person or government can "give" or "take" your rights away. they were already yours to begin with.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

Of course businesses have that right. Well, they had it. In the 1980s. And in South Africa.

If you want to defend apartheit, you go right ahead. We the People would rather have the Declaration of Independence, and liberty and justice for all.

[strapt313]

you know nothing of rights. rights are about ones property. thats it. it is there to prevent you from damaging ones property and them from yours. so, they do have that right according to the constitution. read it sometime. it will make you at least SOUND smarter.

[RonPaulHatesBlacks]

I know more about property rights than you ever have, or ever will. There has never been a property right permitting business trading in interstate commerce to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or gender. There is no such right in the Constitution, and you tellingly do not cite a single sentence of that document. All Americans are equal under the law, and there is no property right for a business to treat blacks as subhumans. You're not a lawyer, and shouldn't pretend to know the law.

[dase4321]

@RonPaulHatesBlacks so your a lawyer?

[strapt313]

you do not know what you are talking about. it doesn't matter how many times he says he supports the civil rights act, you will continue to believe what you believe. that makes you insane.

[rhymeswithpint]

"There may be no 'I' in 'team', but there is in 'maverick'!"

hahaha

[confidnz]

Ron Paul really needs to spearhead getting independent parties more 'mainstream'...

[OmarThePug]

I would rather have one pearl of wisdom from a true statesman then any well produced produced 30 minute informercial.

[saxrider]

Thanks Rachel, for giving Dr. Paul a chance to speak. It was very gracious. My parents love you by the way. They think you are great. They're the Democrats in the family, I'm the libertarian (small L) in the family. I used to believe in the bullshit that the GOP spouted...small government, fiscal conservation, constitutional in spirit....

[madman80310]

Towards the end when it pans back to Maddow, she has the saddest look on her face because she realizes he is right about Obama!

[crogromphulous]

@madman80310 Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich together. Google that. Both are principled gentlemen. TOGETHER THEY CAN WIN!

Register to vote as a Republican, or he CANNOT win the Republican nomination, because YOU will NOT be eligible to vote for him in the PRIMARY! You can still vote however you want in the final election.

[Vitacore]

You are my hero Dr. Ron Paul!

[quartermick]

End The Fed on Nov. 22 at a Fed branch near you. endthefed (dot) us

[StrictlyHerbal]

that was one really long sentence but i loved it!

[danbowski40]

I love to here MY President Speak!!!!!! :)

[chucksheen]

As a man, I have never loved another man so dearly as the modern day Thomas Jefferson.

Live free and bring light into the dark!

[radiofriendly]

Ron Paul! A jewel shining in a pile of S#&%.

Ha, I think he knew he wasn't going to get much time...so he just gave an amazing run-on sentence!

[gsuitter]

Neo conservatism and the GOP are going to crash and burn this election. We must ensure a Ron Paul Republican party emerges from the ashes.

[papagenu07]

is there any reason that the background they use when ron paul speaks has a burning flag? that's fucked up

[robpatozz]

Look closely, It is an Eagle sitting on ??? in front of the flag...

[garnelson]

You better clean your computer screen and then watch it again....or come back after you sober up!

[Rashaed]

its a bald eagle statue in front of the flag.

[Feuerbach66]

Ron Paul gives hope and inspiration to people not only in America. And thanks to Rachel Maddows for her respectful interview.

[gr8dalmuti]

If the GOP had embraced Ron Paul instead of shunning him, you'd be looking at the next president of the United States. It's too bad Reagan isn't alive today with his wits about him. His support for RP would have made all the difference.

[guslingus]

He is Americas best hope. I like how he has a youth following

[quillinhand]

I hope he's got enough energy for 2012.