this guy is dumb... you can be racist, but not in your privately owned business? i personally know of stores that say "asian only" customers... this guy is the clown
@samwilson3d A "home" is not a "business." If you want to open a business, you follow the laws regarding discrimination, just like you follow laws on taxes, work place safety, health codes, and emergency exits. Why is this so difficult to understand?
I love how liberals take away economic freedoms and other certain rights that they want to pick and choose....on the other side u have people watching u in the bedroom. The dogma fogs up the common sense.
you are missing the point you dumb fuck.... you are the clown. its taking our freedoms away, our private property should be ours to do whatever we want with.. and if you discriminate.. nobody will come to eat at your business, then you go out of business.
hes not saying he thinks we should keep all blacks out..
when they tell you we don't accept mustachy people, first of all, you chose to have a mustache and second you can go home and shave your mustache and come back.. a black person didn't chose to be black ( not that is a bad thing) and yeah they can't go home take of their skin then com back to you... just that you don't go through the agony of looking to a different person... :)
When the government has the authority to tell you what kinds of people you have to accepet into your business, what's to stop them from telling you the types of people that you can't accept?
@Ichiboy900 You already have that option. If you don't want government authority, then don't seek a government license or liability protection through incorporation. Operate as a club. Be like the KKK. Nobody tells them they have to accept non-whites.
Most people AGREE with Fox. I'm always amazed at lefties who think the majority supports them. Liberalism is NOT the popular opinion. Conservatives outnumber liberals by 2 to 1. It might surprise you to learn that 60% of people support racial profiling and 80% of people oppose political correctness. How long before the rest of us tell YOU "enough is enough!"
@aphyd23 What do you mean..."most people agree with Fox?" On Fox News' Best nights they only get around 4 + million viewers--which is less than 2 percent of the population.
Maybe so. But that's a helluva lot more viewers than the others get isn't it? But I was going off polls and surveys not viewers. Like I said, conservatives outnumber liberals by 2 to 1.
@aphyd23 Both are far more honest in programming than Fox News. We know professional wrestling is fake going in, and the characters on Sponge Bob are supposed to be cartoonish.
A January 2010 poll by Public Policy Polling (PPP) indicates Fox News is the only news source more Americans trust than not. You've just got your panties up your crack because they don't suck the same dick you do.
@aphyd23 Fox News is the most distrusted name in news, according to a new poll from Public Policy Polling.
"The poll was released on Wednesday. Thirty-four percent of respondents said Fox News was their least trusted source for news. At the same time, however, the network came out on top as the most trusted news source. Another 34% of respondents reported that they trust Fox News the most. The network also saw its trust levels increase by three points since 2011. "
Not really. If one asks which which news source people distrust most people will divide their vote among the several leftists news sources. But Fox is the only major news source that doesn't tilt far left. So ALL the leftists will say they trust Fox least. So the question of which is MORE trusted means more than which is LEAST trusted. If the question were more open ended such as "which of the following don't you trust?" you'd find that Fox is one of the least distrusted.
WOW this guy is stupid we have to take freedom with the good AND the bad parts
i think stossel is right this guy keeps going back to the old times when it was the norm to segragate people but nowadays that would kill your buisness
@davedumas0 Yep, I agree 100%. Same goes for freedom of speech. I despise the KKK, but will defend their right to speak their mind. What's next? Government will dictate who comes to my house party? It's disgusting.
@davedumas0 Why do you think that? People still racially segregate where they live, where their kids go to school, what church they go to, etc. Second, it's not just about "segregation." If Stossel had his way, all those class action lawsuits, where Blacks were illegally charged higher interest rates for car loans or mortgages would be perfectly fine. Are you down with that?
@amboyace its called the business cycle it would be virtual suiside for a business to do that in this day and age cuz a new buisness would pop up that would treat everyone equal and put the other guy out of business besides ALL BIG business's are all about profit the more they can make off anyone (white or black etc) they WILL thats all that a corporation is all about making the maximum amount of money it does not matter if they are black/white if thay can get away with it THEY WILL
@davedumas0 Then explain why Nissan Motors admitted discriminating against Black people and are still in business today? Explain why Black home buyers with excellent credit were pushed into buying sub-prime mortgages, and those Banks, including Wells Fargo, are still in business? These issues happened RECENTLY, sir.
@amboyace if they admitted that publicly then we as americans can boycot nissan thats the great thing about this country if you dont like how they run their business DONT BUY STUFF FROM THEM buy GM or chevy they dont over charge people cuz of their color you have to take freedom all across the spectrum you have to take the GOOD and the BAD for true freedom to work
@davedumas0 Dude, that defeats your own argument. Obviously, not enough people boycotted Nissan, or Wells Fargo after they were caught discriminating based on race. We know this because both companies are doing FABULOUSLY right now. Don't tell me it's "bad for business", when two blatant examples are right in front of you. Just admit what this is. You want "freedom" all right. Freedom to bring back Jim Crow!
@htruman They wouldn't sabotage it. They would've openly supported the conservative position, which was AGAINST, just like the National Review under William F. Buckley, Goldwater and Reagan.
A student association is not a public accommodation, neither is a softball team. John Stossel should do some research before he opens his mouth. Two things he should look into: 1) legal definition of public accommodation; 2) legal definition of freedom of association. Hint: #2 has nothing to do with choosing friends.
But it is completely appropriate since there are many religious people, Islamic ones especially, who found that act to be completely UN-Islamic and mourn like the rest. Freedom of religion and from religion is the true goal of this nation and much of the racism stems from religious beliefs who have, like a cancer, crept into religion including Christianity, Judaism, and Islamic, each if full of racist members, but also many who are not. These religions simply need to change and condemn racism.
American founders wanted a place to practice their own religion (but prejudice against those they found were not legitimate religions, though in truth they were) so we have a bill of rights that states 'freedom of religion' and yet religious people in the nation who feel that it doesn't extend to even long standing religions like Islam and think it inappropriate to have the same freedom to put a mosque close to ground zero
Yes I know the constitution does not mention race that is why they needed to amend it. That was done on purpose to protect mostly souther racist slave owners at the time it was written as a compromise for ratifying. They enshrined racism basically. Because there are plenty of people who lived back then that knew 'all men' easily included people of color, native americans, and even woman and children' so that the language was kept vague on purpose whereas later amendments are more specific
@LimeZYX: Stossel is wrong. Note that while he spoke of market forces he did not, and could not, name a single business upholding white only rules that went out of business. Can you? Can you name a school that closed for not admitting blacks or a doctor's office? Under Jim Crow laws white businesses thrived and, if not for federal laws, would never have been forced to change by their customers who wanted racial separation which, of course, stifled growth and competition from Black businesses.
@NuBN2471 The Government FORCED segregation of businesses. As a white you had the choose of going to the white only business or no where. That's why discriminatory business thrived because you had NO CHOICE. Today a racist business would not survive. I rather have a resturant be up front and say they don't want white customers, then them being forced to serve me and end up spitting in my food. Government has ZERO effect on racism, it only hides what the real problem is.
@whothaplaya Yeah, the people elected those government officials who decided that. "We the people", right? Stop deflecting the truth about anti-minority racism in America.
the racism argument isn't bull, because the policy regarding the prohibition of discrimination in businesses stemmed from racism in the first place....?
Actually, racist businesses can't be OK as the constitution specifically forbids that based on discrimination of race BUT they can discriminate based on appearance so if the person is ugly they can say 'you are very ugly you cannot eat here', or 'the other people eating here would become sickened watching you eat and you seem to smell bad too' and bar them from eating there.
@aphyd23 It does in the 14th and 15th amendment. The central tenet of the US Declaration of Independence, by the way, was that all men are created equal. It's the best and most central principle of American patriotism.
@aphyd23 Yes. The 14th does. It's what ended segregation. You should grow up. If you want to be an anti-American bigot at least have the balls to come out and be one, instead of hiding behind this property bs.
The discussion was about property rights not segregation. And I don't consider name-calling "grown up". You showed what you were when you resorted to ad hominem attacks.
@Snookywoo89 How can I be racist when I'm black,was raised by a white woman who married my black brother who divorced him for a cuban man, who also raised me? I've seen discrimination and I aslo no enough history to know...(REAL HISTORY NOT THE BULLSHIT THEY FEED YOU IN SCHOOL.) this country was built on racsism. Ummm..it's kinda common sense.
If you had replied to me instead of yourself I would have responded a long time ago. Moron.
Obama is half black, was raised by a white woman who married an indonesian who also raised him. But he's still a racist who hangs out with the nation of islam and black panthers. Like I said, you're probably a racist. I've never met a black who wasn't. And I've known a LOT of blacks.
You're a farrakhan supporter ranting about slavery. You're not about right or wrong. You're just about propping up your own prejudices. I could smell your stink a mile away. That's why it doesn't work on me. :)
@aphyd23 LOL your a funny man I didn't even mention Farrakhan it was you. I had no reason to mention him but you did so TY for proving a point my friend.
@aphyd23 hm, good thing nobody did that then, huh? Conversely, you can't really base an argument regarding race on the constitution as it originally was because their views on race were radically different than ours today, i.e. slavery. Obviously they didn't give two shits about black people so to defend legislation which is controversial for it's possible racism while using racist slave owners measure for morality is probably THE dumbest way to make your argument. Embarrassingly awful.
Stossel's right on the mark and Ben is out to lunch. If business owners are stupid enough to have such discriminatory policies then they're only shooting themselves in the foot and their non-idiot competitors will boost their profits by taking money from the "unwanted customers". Once the stupid business owners realize the hit their profits are taking they'll eventually stop being idiots and catch up with the rest of society.
you need to put young turks in the title of your videos so i won't click on them. you claim to be the largest online news because people click your links on accident. you guys suck
Discrimination sucks. No matter what kind, regional, religional, racial, sexual......They all suck and people who encourage it are the sickest. We cannot provide a law against it. We live in a democracy. People gotta bring that change in themselves
@TheLiamwinters Well bro not completely. If u live in places like Chicago, Michigan, LA, u would probably know. But discrimination in America is atleast 70 less than compared to that in Europe
I can see two sides to this issue. It's a question of the balance between the right of the consumer and the right of one to control their own property.
@BrooklynJEW7 Say your a racist against blacks and you own a restaurant. If the government didn't infringe on their rights they would have a sign out front saying no blacks and that's fine. Now the government says they have to serve anyone. Who's to say if a black family goes to eat their the workers do something to their food because they are black? I rather a business be up front with me that they are racist so I can avoid them then worry about if they are doing something to my food.
@whothaplaya You are right. I rather people let me know then deceive me. But that wasnt what i was getting at. You are free to think what you want to think about other cultures and races. But that isnt a right is it? I know its free speech/thought but i dont think hate and bigotry is a right that everyone should have.
@BrooklynJEW7 Some people are going to be racist regardless of what the laws say. So I rather them be open about it and avoid them. People have THE right to be racist. But it doesn't make racist right.
John Stossel is right. It's HIS business, so the business owner can make whatever business choice HE wants. Because its HIS private property....
and Im sure it had more to do with black people being loud in restaurants and not tipping and trying to get stuff free (dont kid yourselves, Ive been in the restaurant business for over 10 years) other then the old lame argument of "skin color".
Lesson today is... If blacks behaved appropriately in public places then these things wouldn't have happen
Your own statements assign negative characteristics to certain patrons based on skin color, so you favor Stossel and Rand Paul's position just because you're a racist and you're ignorant, not because you actually understand the principles behind it. That's fine but you're not helping the cause by spouting the nonsense that you did.
Read what I said. You assigned negative characteristics to certain patrons based on skin color. That's racism by definition. People like you aren't helping Rand Paul or John Stossel.
In Stossel's America I would have to explain to my daughter in 2011 that she could not enter or be serverd at a business because of her skin color. I would not want to live in that America. I thought we already fought this battle and settled this matter. Why would you drag up something so terrible from America's history? John Stossel and his ilk are scumbags!!!!
You wouldn't have to explain that to your daughter because it would never happen. Businesses that tried to make that a policy in 2011 would be committing economic suicide.
if a business says you aren't welcome cause you are black, people will choose not to support that business, and it will go out of business- as it should.
Neanderthals had a larger brain then homo-sapiens which clearly indicates that they were intellectually sophisticated in fact the first musical instrument was documented in neanderthal site found in a cave in southwestern Germany so don't bash them! I hate it when people do that!
this guy should guy should go look at the employment rates of blacks inn the 10 years before the civil rights act and the few years after it being passed. To say that it was in the interest of those of color would be a joke and a smack in the face of the statistics of the time.
@sophiemarie49 It's not about skin color or any other discrimination. It's about individual property rights, rights We The People are guaranteed under the Constitution. Let US decide individually if we agreed or not, and our opinions will be reflected in his success.
@goodboycoopy , no it is not about individual property rights when you open a business to the public. Because in our country the 'public' is inclusive.
If a business owner starts a private club, with limitations on membership, he can be as racist as he wants with choosing who joins.
Do you understand the difference and what are laws say regarding private membership and open to the public businesses?
@yarnpower I understand the law perfectly. I just happen to believe these laws are illegal and outside the realm of the powers guaranteed to the people. Well, no point in repeating myself. I'm an objectivist--a free market is like science; it's self-correcting. By the way, "the public" is not mutually inclusive. Try to get a beer when you're 19 years old. More nanny-stateness.
@goodboycoopy , you can't compare drinking age-limits with discrimination, any more than you can compare driving age-limits. It isn't 'nanny-stateness' to have regulations that make the public safer but just good old common-sense. The theory that the free market is self-correcting is nonsense because only a few people control the majority of the wealth, thus a few heartless rich people can cause a lot of harm without the 'market' correcting them. I'd recommend that you read your history.
@sophiemarie49 Nice try, you attempt to slip by "Stossel and most racists." Stossel has never shown me any inclination toward racism. As a matter of fact, he is one of the most fair-minded TV journalists I've found in years, refreshingly so. He IS a strict Constitutionalist. I applaud his courage. He doesn't pretend or hide. Being totally up-front with your beliefs is incredibly challenging, especially when they're so unpopular.
It is your private business, meaning you have private rights, not public rights. Allowing the government to decide this for you will eventually lead to hmmmm, lets see, the Patriot Act for one. So when the federal government breaks down your door falsely accusing you of being a terrorist, you should be happy with the government you endorse.
Wow, so they want to legalize racism and practice apartheid... but it won't happen because the businesses that are racist will go out of business. That wouldn't pass the smell test even if it were next to a month-old rotting corpse. I know most people that call themselves libertarians are good people and honestly just want to be able to live w/o worrying about big govt looking over their shoulder, but this is beyond the pale. End corporate personhood immediately and stop crap like this today!
@MrRobinMurphy No private business in this country is an island. If you want to do business in America there are tons of zoning laws, codes etc you have to abide by. What our country is saying is we don't condone racial discrimination in this land and if that's what you want to practice then take it to another country. The USA as a matter of law and moral principle won't stand for that anymore.
Businesses OWN their goods/services & as it's their private property, they've right to sell it to whoever they want. Laws don't get rid of racism like you'd like to believe, it just hides racists & harm others. For example, in a free society, you'd know some doctor is racist & you wouldn't go to him but when there are laws against racism then you won't know who is & isn't racist so a racist doctor may mistreat you & you'll've endangered your health since he's acting normally
@lomocan A person's property is not an immovable rock around which the world revolves, never has been and never will be. A person may own their property but they do not have sovereignty over it. Only the state has sovereignty. Nothing in the south would have changed had that change not been compelled - the majority of whites there would have still wanted segregation even if Jim Crow laws were stricken down, but segregration not prohibited so that it was optional.
@thegillotine09 I am thinking of people. The constitution doesn't say you can go out and do whatever you wish your property. It exist within the geographic region of a sovereign state. They can indeed legislate what you can or cannot do on your property when it infringes on the rights and liberties of others, creates a public danger or nusiance. One is free to be a bigot but they are not allowed to use their bigotry to deprive others of their rights or make them 2nd class citizens.
1) Unlike many libertarians, I don't worship the Constitution, so citing its text as philosophical truth doesn't work with me.
2) I haven't said that property rights are absolute, rather that they should be respected in order to promote a just society.
3) I believe that ideologies, including racism, should be fought with arguments, not force. To resort to forcing people to act nonracistly implies that there are no arguments against racism.
@thegillotine09 Fighting it logically in the south would have done nothing - after equal treatment was compelled it was the coming generations who grew up with a desegregated society who became used to it, since they grew up in it it was normal and natural to them - just as on the opposite end the generations before them grew up in a segregated society so it was normal and natural to them and they didn't see the injustice in it.
"Fighting it logically in the south would have done nothing"
It doesn't have to be logic, you can appeal to empathy and a number of other valid arguments. How do you think racism has been fought and mostly defeated over the past 4 decades? Was it because laws forced people to cater to blacks against their will or because great leaders like MLK Jr. spread a message that resonated with the American population?
@thegillotine09 The past 4 decades was after the civil rights era, so you are talking about generations who grew up in a largely desegregated society so to them that was normal and they thought nothing of it. Empathy? Have you seen the mobs of angry whites during the integration of Little Rock High School? Uni of Alabama? Uni of Missippi? All of the lynchings - who were almost always acquitted by all white juries? Appeal to their empathy?
@thegillotine09 Well you may not like the consitution or want it done away with but that doesn't change the fact that it is still the supreme law of the land as of this time or that the state is the sovereign power over it's geographical territory.
@thegillotine09 I prefer to live in a state organized society for the security and order, if you would prefer a stateless society your remedy is to find another place to live that has no sovereign power over it. By choosing to remain living in a society with a state that means you have given implied consent to recognize the authority of that state. I'm not saying that to be flippant, it's just that it's your only real remedy.
Or I could do as the civil rights activists did and try to raise awareness of political corruption and promote individual liberty :P Would you seriously tell equal rights activists "If you don't like the way our society is run, you can leave"?
@thegillotine09 The civil rights activists also fought and lobbyied for legal remedies. The gov./state has a vested interest to assure the rights of all citizens are upheld. And rights are not absolute, you can't claim a right to deprive someone else of their rights. And we do live in a state and a state/gov. does at times have legitimate and legal justifications to use force. To compel compliance with the order of a court, public security, enforcing the rights of all segments of society.
I'm sure that you are aware the 5th amendment allows the gov to take private property for public use so long as the property owner is fairly compensated so 1) property rights are not absolute 2) compelling equal and just treatment of all citizens is a far less over reach than the state taking your property and building a road over it.
A scenario for you: You are a black person going on a road trip. Your car breaks down in a small all white town, there are two auto repair shops in town, both of them refuse service to you. The only auto repair shop that will service you is in another town 50 miles away. What do you do? If one had magical powers they should transport you back to the 1930s deep south as a black person and let you experience it first hand - being treated as a 2nd class citizen, perhaps then you would get it.
A scenario for you: You are a black person going on a road trip. Your car breaks down in the middle of a desert. You wander for days without water and die.
Lesson learned: stay away from deserts. Avoid associating with retards who hate you for no reason, move out of pisshole racist states and into better areas.
Fox News website puts a spin on every headline about the president that he is "different than the rest of us" or that he is passing more and more laws to take rights away from white people. People add comments -- without even reading the article which doesn't even match the inflammatory headline -- calling the president Omammy, Buckwheat, Porch Monkey. etc. Fox and Roger Ailles and the GOP (who Ailes once worked for) have based Republican winning strategy on stirring up "white resentment"
Forgive me if this sounds like a stupid question but why CAN'T private businesses discriminate? They're private- it's like you and your friends throwing a party not wanting to invite that random stranger across the road.
The whole idea that laws will end racism is chimeric.
Businesses will be losing out on a lot of profits if they didn't serve non-whites or gave them low quality service; that'll just mean that business who offer good service to non-whites will earn more than those who don't, not to mention, it could also lead to more non-whites starting their new businesses to service the non-whites.
The point is businesses are private & people should've a right to own & sell their property as they choose.
@lomocan Give me three real earth examples of this "free market" solution in regards to racism. Otherwise, you're just floating out hypothetical utopian fantasies just like the rich White men like Stossel and Paul who know that American society has always been stacked in the favor of people like themselves.
@ElShaddai7777 What are you saying? Winning an Emmy absolves somebody of racism? Did you know that over 10,000 Jews fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War? I bet you didn't, because you'd never make that statement otherwise. Get with the program. John Stossel is a rich, white corporatist tool doing the bidding of richer, whiter corporatists.
this guy is dumb... you can be racist, but not in your privately owned business? i personally know of stores that say "asian only" customers... this guy is the clown
RickReinster 2 weeks ago
Thanks Young Turks...
mervviscious 3 weeks ago
The man had a point. If I open a business, that's my property, I should be able to let anyone in that I want (or not let them in).
Suppose the government said I couldn't refuse to let black people in my home because I let white people in. It's no different.
samwilson3d 4 weeks ago
@samwilson3d A "home" is not a "business." If you want to open a business, you follow the laws regarding discrimination, just like you follow laws on taxes, work place safety, health codes, and emergency exits. Why is this so difficult to understand?
amboyace 2 weeks ago
I love how liberals take away economic freedoms and other certain rights that they want to pick and choose....on the other side u have people watching u in the bedroom. The dogma fogs up the common sense.
theUSER101 1 month ago
you are missing the point you dumb fuck.... you are the clown. its taking our freedoms away, our private property should be ours to do whatever we want with.. and if you discriminate.. nobody will come to eat at your business, then you go out of business.
hes not saying he thinks we should keep all blacks out..
ammoniha 1 month ago
i'll discriminate against who ever typed up those Sub-Titles...
acloudedhed 2 months ago
TYT Failed!!!
rzxwm10 2 months ago
Tyt is garbage news.
netcompany3 2 months ago
One thing though, the word "discrimination" just means selection. But "illegal discrimination" has a whole different meaning"
Or, hey, can men join a womens volleyball league?
Can male reporters enter the locker room of female athletes?
younghoss 2 months ago
when they tell you we don't accept mustachy people, first of all, you chose to have a mustache and second you can go home and shave your mustache and come back.. a black person didn't chose to be black ( not that is a bad thing) and yeah they can't go home take of their skin then com back to you... just that you don't go through the agony of looking to a different person... :)
spirituelconnexion 2 months ago
@spirituelconnexion So I guess a black man should be a play a blonde white character, Alice in Wonderland.
unknownunknowns 2 months ago
@unknownunknowns RuPaul or Tyler Perry would make excellent Alices.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
When the government has the authority to tell you what kinds of people you have to accepet into your business, what's to stop them from telling you the types of people that you can't accept?
Ichiboy900 2 months ago
@Ichiboy900 You already have that option. If you don't want government authority, then don't seek a government license or liability protection through incorporation. Operate as a club. Be like the KKK. Nobody tells them they have to accept non-whites.
amboyace 2 months ago
what a fuck are non whites that stupid, these europeans-white people are doing the same thing today, different way same bullshit....
mack3dg 3 months ago
im against discrimination, but i dont know if i need to thumb up this video or thumb down -_-
piru5150blood 3 months ago
WHAT A BUNCH OF FUCKEN MORONS . I DESPISE THIS FUCKEN NETWORK
JLOZANO2 3 months ago
This guy is an idiot... The TYT anchor not John Stossel.
666or999 4 months ago
@666or999 I concur
bermudaguy1 4 months ago
Or, lets have ugly old women working at Hooters or big fat girls working at The Diet Centre!! Fuckin moron!
bermudaguy1 4 months ago
How long will Fox last before the people they are against say "enough is enough!"
Paulaeblack 4 months ago
@Paulaeblack
Most people AGREE with Fox. I'm always amazed at lefties who think the majority supports them. Liberalism is NOT the popular opinion. Conservatives outnumber liberals by 2 to 1. It might surprise you to learn that 60% of people support racial profiling and 80% of people oppose political correctness. How long before the rest of us tell YOU "enough is enough!"
aphyd23 4 months ago
@aphyd23 What do you mean..."most people agree with Fox?" On Fox News' Best nights they only get around 4 + million viewers--which is less than 2 percent of the population.
amboyace 2 months ago
@amboyace
Maybe so. But that's a helluva lot more viewers than the others get isn't it? But I was going off polls and surveys not viewers. Like I said, conservatives outnumber liberals by 2 to 1.
aphyd23 2 months ago
@aphyd23 More people watch Sponge Bob and professional wrestling than Fox News.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
@amboyace
Oh, yeah? Which one do you watch?
aphyd23 2 weeks ago
@aphyd23 Both are far more honest in programming than Fox News. We know professional wrestling is fake going in, and the characters on Sponge Bob are supposed to be cartoonish.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
@amboyace
A January 2010 poll by Public Policy Polling (PPP) indicates Fox News is the only news source more Americans trust than not. You've just got your panties up your crack because they don't suck the same dick you do.
aphyd23 2 weeks ago
@aphyd23 Fox News is the most distrusted name in news, according to a new poll from Public Policy Polling.
"The poll was released on Wednesday. Thirty-four percent of respondents said Fox News was their least trusted source for news. At the same time, however, the network came out on top as the most trusted news source. Another 34% of respondents reported that they trust Fox News the most. The network also saw its trust levels increase by three points since 2011. "
Whoops.
amboyace 1 week ago
@amboyace
Not really. If one asks which which news source people distrust most people will divide their vote among the several leftists news sources. But Fox is the only major news source that doesn't tilt far left. So ALL the leftists will say they trust Fox least. So the question of which is MORE trusted means more than which is LEAST trusted. If the question were more open ended such as "which of the following don't you trust?" you'd find that Fox is one of the least distrusted.
aphyd23 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this channel sucks
bloodbathssss 4 months ago
WOW this guy is stupid we have to take freedom with the good AND the bad parts
i think stossel is right this guy keeps going back to the old times when it was the norm to segragate people but nowadays that would kill your buisness
davedumas0 4 months ago
@davedumas0 Yep, I agree 100%. Same goes for freedom of speech. I despise the KKK, but will defend their right to speak their mind. What's next? Government will dictate who comes to my house party? It's disgusting.
thelordmemnoch 2 months ago
@davedumas0 Why do you think that? People still racially segregate where they live, where their kids go to school, what church they go to, etc. Second, it's not just about "segregation." If Stossel had his way, all those class action lawsuits, where Blacks were illegally charged higher interest rates for car loans or mortgages would be perfectly fine. Are you down with that?
amboyace 2 weeks ago
@amboyace its called the business cycle it would be virtual suiside for a business to do that in this day and age cuz a new buisness would pop up that would treat everyone equal and put the other guy out of business besides ALL BIG business's are all about profit the more they can make off anyone (white or black etc) they WILL thats all that a corporation is all about making the maximum amount of money it does not matter if they are black/white if thay can get away with it THEY WILL
davedumas0 2 weeks ago
@davedumas0 Then explain why Nissan Motors admitted discriminating against Black people and are still in business today? Explain why Black home buyers with excellent credit were pushed into buying sub-prime mortgages, and those Banks, including Wells Fargo, are still in business? These issues happened RECENTLY, sir.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
@amboyace if they admitted that publicly then we as americans can boycot nissan thats the great thing about this country if you dont like how they run their business DONT BUY STUFF FROM THEM buy GM or chevy they dont over charge people cuz of their color you have to take freedom all across the spectrum you have to take the GOOD and the BAD for true freedom to work
davedumas0 2 weeks ago
@davedumas0 Dude, that defeats your own argument. Obviously, not enough people boycotted Nissan, or Wells Fargo after they were caught discriminating based on race. We know this because both companies are doing FABULOUSLY right now. Don't tell me it's "bad for business", when two blatant examples are right in front of you. Just admit what this is. You want "freedom" all right. Freedom to bring back Jim Crow!
amboyace 1 week ago
God forbid if Fox was around during The Civil Rights Movment, they would of sabotage it.
htruman 4 months ago
@htruman They wouldn't sabotage it. They would've openly supported the conservative position, which was AGAINST, just like the National Review under William F. Buckley, Goldwater and Reagan.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
A student association is not a public accommodation, neither is a softball team. John Stossel should do some research before he opens his mouth. Two things he should look into: 1) legal definition of public accommodation; 2) legal definition of freedom of association. Hint: #2 has nothing to do with choosing friends.
YY4Me133 4 months ago
But it is completely appropriate since there are many religious people, Islamic ones especially, who found that act to be completely UN-Islamic and mourn like the rest. Freedom of religion and from religion is the true goal of this nation and much of the racism stems from religious beliefs who have, like a cancer, crept into religion including Christianity, Judaism, and Islamic, each if full of racist members, but also many who are not. These religions simply need to change and condemn racism.
Foreshadow44 5 months ago
American founders wanted a place to practice their own religion (but prejudice against those they found were not legitimate religions, though in truth they were) so we have a bill of rights that states 'freedom of religion' and yet religious people in the nation who feel that it doesn't extend to even long standing religions like Islam and think it inappropriate to have the same freedom to put a mosque close to ground zero
Foreshadow44 5 months ago
Yes I know the constitution does not mention race that is why they needed to amend it. That was done on purpose to protect mostly souther racist slave owners at the time it was written as a compromise for ratifying. They enshrined racism basically. Because there are plenty of people who lived back then that knew 'all men' easily included people of color, native americans, and even woman and children' so that the language was kept vague on purpose whereas later amendments are more specific
Foreshadow44 5 months ago
@LimeZYX: Stossel is wrong. Note that while he spoke of market forces he did not, and could not, name a single business upholding white only rules that went out of business. Can you? Can you name a school that closed for not admitting blacks or a doctor's office? Under Jim Crow laws white businesses thrived and, if not for federal laws, would never have been forced to change by their customers who wanted racial separation which, of course, stifled growth and competition from Black businesses.
NuBN2471 5 months ago
@NuBN2471 The Government FORCED segregation of businesses. As a white you had the choose of going to the white only business or no where. That's why discriminatory business thrived because you had NO CHOICE. Today a racist business would not survive. I rather have a resturant be up front and say they don't want white customers, then them being forced to serve me and end up spitting in my food. Government has ZERO effect on racism, it only hides what the real problem is.
whothaplaya 5 months ago 2
@whothaplaya Yeah, the people elected those government officials who decided that. "We the people", right? Stop deflecting the truth about anti-minority racism in America.
amboyace 2 weeks ago
if u own a business u have the right to advertise to and provide services to who want to nothing unethical about that the racism agurment is bull
jpunz 5 months ago in playlist jpunz's Favorited Videos
@jpunz
the racism argument isn't bull, because the policy regarding the prohibition of discrimination in businesses stemmed from racism in the first place....?
DivinelyMochaDipped 5 months ago 2
@DivinelyMochaDipped So fucking true
Snookywoo89 4 months ago
If you can't treat people like human beings you shouldn't be running a business.
bradjbourgeois73 6 months ago
I agree with Stossel on a few issues, but this ain't one of 'em.
bradjbourgeois73 6 months ago
Actually, racist businesses can't be OK as the constitution specifically forbids that based on discrimination of race BUT they can discriminate based on appearance so if the person is ugly they can say 'you are very ugly you cannot eat here', or 'the other people eating here would become sickened watching you eat and you seem to smell bad too' and bar them from eating there.
Foreshadow44 6 months ago
@Foreshadow44
The constitution doesn't forbid discrimination based on race. In fact, the constitution doesn't even mention race. Not once.
aphyd23 6 months ago 6
@aphyd23 It does in the 14th and 15th amendment. The central tenet of the US Declaration of Independence, by the way, was that all men are created equal. It's the best and most central principle of American patriotism.
Vandal49 5 months ago
@Vandal49
Oh, yeah? Do the 14th & 15th amendments say anything about telling people what they can and can't do with their own property?
aphyd23 5 months ago
@aphyd23 Yes. The 14th does. It's what ended segregation. You should grow up. If you want to be an anti-American bigot at least have the balls to come out and be one, instead of hiding behind this property bs.
Vandal49 5 months ago
@Vandal49
The discussion was about property rights not segregation. And I don't consider name-calling "grown up". You showed what you were when you resorted to ad hominem attacks.
aphyd23 5 months ago
@aphyd23 because this country was built on racism.
Snookywoo89 5 months ago
@Snookywoo89
I think you're probably racist.
aphyd23 5 months ago
@Snookywoo89 How can I be racist when I'm black,was raised by a white woman who married my black brother who divorced him for a cuban man, who also raised me? I've seen discrimination and I aslo no enough history to know...(REAL HISTORY NOT THE BULLSHIT THEY FEED YOU IN SCHOOL.) this country was built on racsism. Ummm..it's kinda common sense.
Snookywoo89 5 months ago
@Snookywoo89
If you had replied to me instead of yourself I would have responded a long time ago. Moron.
Obama is half black, was raised by a white woman who married an indonesian who also raised him. But he's still a racist who hangs out with the nation of islam and black panthers. Like I said, you're probably a racist. I've never met a black who wasn't. And I've known a LOT of blacks.
aphyd23 4 months ago
@aphyd23 HEY GO FUCK YOURSELF=) HAVE A NICE GO AT BEING AN IDIOT
Snookywoo89 4 months ago
@Snookywoo89
Trash mouth.
aphyd23 4 months ago
@Snookywoo89 Nice one!
bermudaguy1 4 months ago
@aphyd23 They still had slaves....doesn't say much for all being equal does it? And that was in the constitution!
bermudaguy1 4 months ago
@bermudaguy1
I don't really care.
aphyd23 4 months ago
@aphyd23 Excellent!!
bermudaguy1 4 months ago
@aphyd23 Because everybody was white and blacks were slaves.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
That "blacks were slaves" bs doesn't work on me.
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 Of course it would'nt work on a racist such as yourself.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
And yet you were the one playing the race card. You hypocrite.
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 I just call it as I see it my friend.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
So does Farrakhan.
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 And he is a very wise man.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
You're a farrakhan supporter ranting about slavery. You're not about right or wrong. You're just about propping up your own prejudices. I could smell your stink a mile away. That's why it doesn't work on me. :)
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 LOL your a funny man I didn't even mention Farrakhan it was you. I had no reason to mention him but you did so TY for proving a point my friend.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
Yeah, I mentioned him first. And then you told me how wise he was. C'mon, bro. Tell me again how great farrakhan is. :)
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 I'm sure you there is a difference between someone being wise and someone being great. I never said he was great though that was you. ;)
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@Da1shocker
Let's keep it real now. Don't pussy out now. Tell us all what you really think of farrakhan.
aphyd23 1 month ago
@aphyd23 ROFLMBAO good one.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@aphyd23 and before you go grammar police on me yes I should've said you're instead of your.
Da1shocker 1 month ago
@aphyd23 You are wrong. Check out the fifteenth amendment.
samwilson3d 4 weeks ago
@samwilson3d
The 15th amendment is talking about the right to vote. It doesn't say anything about private business owners.
aphyd23 3 weeks ago
@aphyd23 gee. I wonder why. Maybe because they thought SLAVERY was o.k. at the time. What an embarrassingly awful argument.
If you're being sarcastic, high five.
DeLaSoul246 3 weeks ago
@DeLaSoul246
An "embarrassingly awful argument" is when someone shouts "SLAVERY" because they can't think of anything better to say.
aphyd23 3 weeks ago
@aphyd23 hm, good thing nobody did that then, huh? Conversely, you can't really base an argument regarding race on the constitution as it originally was because their views on race were radically different than ours today, i.e. slavery. Obviously they didn't give two shits about black people so to defend legislation which is controversial for it's possible racism while using racist slave owners measure for morality is probably THE dumbest way to make your argument. Embarrassingly awful.
DeLaSoul246 3 weeks ago
@DeLaSoul246
"hm, good thing nobody did that then, huh?"
Actually, that's exactly what you did. And I noticed how you went right back to whining about your racist bullshit.
aphyd23 3 weeks ago
@aphyd23 lol good argument bro. Keep trollin' the good troll.
DeLaSoul246 3 weeks ago
@DeLaSoul246
I didn't troll you. You saw my high rated comment at the top and tried to troll me. Biatch.
aphyd23 3 weeks ago
LMFAOOOOO - take away protections for ethnic or sexual minorities from racist employers? LMFAOOOOO is he fucking insane?
SpearofDestiny0 6 months ago
Stossel's right on the mark and Ben is out to lunch. If business owners are stupid enough to have such discriminatory policies then they're only shooting themselves in the foot and their non-idiot competitors will boost their profits by taking money from the "unwanted customers". Once the stupid business owners realize the hit their profits are taking they'll eventually stop being idiots and catch up with the rest of society.
LimeZYX 7 months ago
what a joke
bigcat4444 7 months ago
Jim Crow laws DID NOT protect the right of business owners to segregate, what they did was PUNISH business owners who tried to integrate.
j1a2r34 7 months ago
a private owner can be racist but a public place cannot! any racist person should go play in traffic though
coronaboi602 7 months ago
Fucking racist asshole they can go fuck there self tumbs up if you agree
caitlin3447 7 months ago
you need to put young turks in the title of your videos so i won't click on them. you claim to be the largest online news because people click your links on accident. you guys suck
endwelfare 7 months ago
Discrimination sucks. No matter what kind, regional, religional, racial, sexual......They all suck and people who encourage it are the sickest. We cannot provide a law against it. We live in a democracy. People gotta bring that change in themselves
AithaKartik 7 months ago 13
@AithaKartik yes we can and in fact we have did and it works
TheLiamwinters 6 months ago
@TheLiamwinters Well bro not completely. If u live in places like Chicago, Michigan, LA, u would probably know. But discrimination in America is atleast 70 less than compared to that in Europe
AithaKartik 6 months ago
@AithaKartik
Yeah well there is so much less racism then there was 50 years ago, because of both laws and a change in our culture.
TheLiamwinters 6 months ago
I respect John Stossel.
kz888888 7 months ago
I can see two sides to this issue. It's a question of the balance between the right of the consumer and the right of one to control their own property.
tedfreeway 7 months ago
Is this dumbass guy actually serious? What an idiot. How the hell is it a right to be racist ?
BrooklynJEW7 7 months ago
@BrooklynJEW7 Say your a racist against blacks and you own a restaurant. If the government didn't infringe on their rights they would have a sign out front saying no blacks and that's fine. Now the government says they have to serve anyone. Who's to say if a black family goes to eat their the workers do something to their food because they are black? I rather a business be up front with me that they are racist so I can avoid them then worry about if they are doing something to my food.
whothaplaya 6 months ago
@whothaplaya You are right. I rather people let me know then deceive me. But that wasnt what i was getting at. You are free to think what you want to think about other cultures and races. But that isnt a right is it? I know its free speech/thought but i dont think hate and bigotry is a right that everyone should have.
BrooklynJEW7 6 months ago
@BrooklynJEW7 Some people are going to be racist regardless of what the laws say. So I rather them be open about it and avoid them. People have THE right to be racist. But it doesn't make racist right.
whothaplaya 6 months ago
@whothaplaya haha well said. I didnt think of it like that exactly but i still agree with you.
BrooklynJEW7 6 months ago
Black people, it has been and it will be a heck of a ride. Saddle up!
jubilee203 7 months ago
she, like the other fox news men and women, are idiots
zm093 7 months ago
John Stossel is right. It's HIS business, so the business owner can make whatever business choice HE wants. Because its HIS private property....
and Im sure it had more to do with black people being loud in restaurants and not tipping and trying to get stuff free (dont kid yourselves, Ive been in the restaurant business for over 10 years) other then the old lame argument of "skin color".
Lesson today is... If blacks behaved appropriately in public places then these things wouldn't have happen
fargonbastedge 7 months ago
@fargonbastedge
Your own statements assign negative characteristics to certain patrons based on skin color, so you favor Stossel and Rand Paul's position just because you're a racist and you're ignorant, not because you actually understand the principles behind it. That's fine but you're not helping the cause by spouting the nonsense that you did.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Personnel property and the ownership rights that come with it. Trumps your gay little emotional rant about race...
... Nothing to do with bigotry
fargonbastedge 7 months ago
@fargonbastedge
Read what I said. You assigned negative characteristics to certain patrons based on skin color. That's racism by definition. People like you aren't helping Rand Paul or John Stossel.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Using your logic. Its OK for someone to walk into your house and eat your food and you cant tell them to leave?
Race is not important here, its just personnel choice. Now go troll somewhere else
fargonbastedge 7 months ago
@fargonbastedge
You just confirmed that you didn't actually read what I said to you. Which makes sense given some of the thoughtless positions you hold.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 read it several times.
fargonbastedge 7 months ago
In Stossel's America I would have to explain to my daughter in 2011 that she could not enter or be serverd at a business because of her skin color. I would not want to live in that America. I thought we already fought this battle and settled this matter. Why would you drag up something so terrible from America's history? John Stossel and his ilk are scumbags!!!!
BOXCHEVYBOY350 8 months ago
@BOXCHEVYBOY350
You wouldn't have to explain that to your daughter because it would never happen. Businesses that tried to make that a policy in 2011 would be committing economic suicide.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
I finally agree with TYT
freedomrace1 8 months ago
if a business says you aren't welcome cause you are black, people will choose not to support that business, and it will go out of business- as it should.
blondeballa32 8 months ago
What's next, a law against being clumsy, or stupid, or messy?
GarrettPetersen 8 months ago
John Stossel
BA Pyschology Princeton University
8 Emmy Awards in Journalism
30 Years of Journalism Experience
Ben Mankiewicz
Liberal Hippie Douche from Public Access
the Young Turks have no business picking a fight with John Stossel
If John Stossel was on their show. The WHOLE GANG WOULD LOOK RETARDED!!!
Salvysahagun 8 months ago
@Salvysahagun To be fair, I have to ask: Do you know the measure or milestones of experience of the Young Turks?
BornFlunky 8 months ago
@BornFlunky
Well lets see,
Cenk had on Peter Schiff and ended up looking like a fool.
Largest online news shoe? psssh
They are a political opinion show nothing more.
How many field journalist, or investigative reporters on on staff?
They use other channels data and should be sued.
The only thing that sets them apart from other youtubers is one thing
Production value
case closed
Salvysahagun 8 months ago
What right does the government have to impose on PRIVATE businesses?
jujigun 8 months ago
Neanderthals had a larger brain then homo-sapiens which clearly indicates that they were intellectually sophisticated in fact the first musical instrument was documented in neanderthal site found in a cave in southwestern Germany so don't bash them! I hate it when people do that!
n64wilbert 8 months ago
@n64wilbert , I agree with you. Most people with Europe and Asian ancestry have 3 to 5% Neanderthal genes!
yarnpower 8 months ago
Comment removed
n64wilbert 8 months ago
this guy should guy should go look at the employment rates of blacks inn the 10 years before the civil rights act and the few years after it being passed. To say that it was in the interest of those of color would be a joke and a smack in the face of the statistics of the time.
polevaultrockstr 8 months ago
@sophiemarie49 It's not about skin color or any other discrimination. It's about individual property rights, rights We The People are guaranteed under the Constitution. Let US decide individually if we agreed or not, and our opinions will be reflected in his success.
goodboycoopy 8 months ago
@goodboycoopy , no it is not about individual property rights when you open a business to the public. Because in our country the 'public' is inclusive.
If a business owner starts a private club, with limitations on membership, he can be as racist as he wants with choosing who joins.
Do you understand the difference and what are laws say regarding private membership and open to the public businesses?
yarnpower 8 months ago
@yarnpower I understand the law perfectly. I just happen to believe these laws are illegal and outside the realm of the powers guaranteed to the people. Well, no point in repeating myself. I'm an objectivist--a free market is like science; it's self-correcting. By the way, "the public" is not mutually inclusive. Try to get a beer when you're 19 years old. More nanny-stateness.
goodboycoopy 8 months ago
@goodboycoopy , you can't compare drinking age-limits with discrimination, any more than you can compare driving age-limits. It isn't 'nanny-stateness' to have regulations that make the public safer but just good old common-sense. The theory that the free market is self-correcting is nonsense because only a few people control the majority of the wealth, thus a few heartless rich people can cause a lot of harm without the 'market' correcting them. I'd recommend that you read your history.
yarnpower 7 months ago
@sophiemarie49 Nice try, you attempt to slip by "Stossel and most racists." Stossel has never shown me any inclination toward racism. As a matter of fact, he is one of the most fair-minded TV journalists I've found in years, refreshingly so. He IS a strict Constitutionalist. I applaud his courage. He doesn't pretend or hide. Being totally up-front with your beliefs is incredibly challenging, especially when they're so unpopular.
goodboycoopy 8 months ago
It is your private business, meaning you have private rights, not public rights. Allowing the government to decide this for you will eventually lead to hmmmm, lets see, the Patriot Act for one. So when the federal government breaks down your door falsely accusing you of being a terrorist, you should be happy with the government you endorse.
sladeltd1 8 months ago
Wow, so they want to legalize racism and practice apartheid... but it won't happen because the businesses that are racist will go out of business. That wouldn't pass the smell test even if it were next to a month-old rotting corpse. I know most people that call themselves libertarians are good people and honestly just want to be able to live w/o worrying about big govt looking over their shoulder, but this is beyond the pale. End corporate personhood immediately and stop crap like this today!
Relbl 8 months ago
Sorry, Stossel is right, had you listened, you would have understood.
fredNielssen 8 months ago
this guy is fucking retarded
IncoherentCommenter 8 months ago
Comment removed
MrRobinMurphy 8 months ago
@MrRobinMurphy No private business in this country is an island. If you want to do business in America there are tons of zoning laws, codes etc you have to abide by. What our country is saying is we don't condone racial discrimination in this land and if that's what you want to practice then take it to another country. The USA as a matter of law and moral principle won't stand for that anymore.
NewYorkCityUSA7 8 months ago
@NewYorkCityUSA7
Businesses OWN their goods/services & as it's their private property, they've right to sell it to whoever they want. Laws don't get rid of racism like you'd like to believe, it just hides racists & harm others. For example, in a free society, you'd know some doctor is racist & you wouldn't go to him but when there are laws against racism then you won't know who is & isn't racist so a racist doctor may mistreat you & you'll've endangered your health since he's acting normally
lomocan 8 months ago
@lomocan A person's property is not an immovable rock around which the world revolves, never has been and never will be. A person may own their property but they do not have sovereignty over it. Only the state has sovereignty. Nothing in the south would have changed had that change not been compelled - the majority of whites there would have still wanted segregation even if Jim Crow laws were stricken down, but segregration not prohibited so that it was optional.
xexixk 8 months ago
@xexixk
I hope one day you wake up and stop thinking of the world in terms of states and start thinking in terms of people.
thegillotine09 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 I am thinking of people. The constitution doesn't say you can go out and do whatever you wish your property. It exist within the geographic region of a sovereign state. They can indeed legislate what you can or cannot do on your property when it infringes on the rights and liberties of others, creates a public danger or nusiance. One is free to be a bigot but they are not allowed to use their bigotry to deprive others of their rights or make them 2nd class citizens.
xexixk 8 months ago
@xexixk You're still thinking in statist terms.
1) Unlike many libertarians, I don't worship the Constitution, so citing its text as philosophical truth doesn't work with me.
2) I haven't said that property rights are absolute, rather that they should be respected in order to promote a just society.
3) I believe that ideologies, including racism, should be fought with arguments, not force. To resort to forcing people to act nonracistly implies that there are no arguments against racism.
thegillotine09 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 Fighting it logically in the south would have done nothing - after equal treatment was compelled it was the coming generations who grew up with a desegregated society who became used to it, since they grew up in it it was normal and natural to them - just as on the opposite end the generations before them grew up in a segregated society so it was normal and natural to them and they didn't see the injustice in it.
xexixk 8 months ago
@xexixk
"Fighting it logically in the south would have done nothing"
It doesn't have to be logic, you can appeal to empathy and a number of other valid arguments. How do you think racism has been fought and mostly defeated over the past 4 decades? Was it because laws forced people to cater to blacks against their will or because great leaders like MLK Jr. spread a message that resonated with the American population?
thegillotine09 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 The past 4 decades was after the civil rights era, so you are talking about generations who grew up in a largely desegregated society so to them that was normal and they thought nothing of it. Empathy? Have you seen the mobs of angry whites during the integration of Little Rock High School? Uni of Alabama? Uni of Missippi? All of the lynchings - who were almost always acquitted by all white juries? Appeal to their empathy?
xexixk 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 Well you may not like the consitution or want it done away with but that doesn't change the fact that it is still the supreme law of the land as of this time or that the state is the sovereign power over it's geographical territory.
xexixk 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 I prefer to live in a state organized society for the security and order, if you would prefer a stateless society your remedy is to find another place to live that has no sovereign power over it. By choosing to remain living in a society with a state that means you have given implied consent to recognize the authority of that state. I'm not saying that to be flippant, it's just that it's your only real remedy.
xexixk 8 months ago
@xexixk
Or I could do as the civil rights activists did and try to raise awareness of political corruption and promote individual liberty :P Would you seriously tell equal rights activists "If you don't like the way our society is run, you can leave"?
thegillotine09 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 I was addressing your seeming desire for a stateless society.
xexixk 8 months ago
@thegillotine09 The civil rights activists also fought and lobbyied for legal remedies. The gov./state has a vested interest to assure the rights of all citizens are upheld. And rights are not absolute, you can't claim a right to deprive someone else of their rights. And we do live in a state and a state/gov. does at times have legitimate and legal justifications to use force. To compel compliance with the order of a court, public security, enforcing the rights of all segments of society.
xexixk 8 months ago
I'm sure that you are aware the 5th amendment allows the gov to take private property for public use so long as the property owner is fairly compensated so 1) property rights are not absolute 2) compelling equal and just treatment of all citizens is a far less over reach than the state taking your property and building a road over it.
xexixk 8 months ago
A scenario for you: You are a black person going on a road trip. Your car breaks down in a small all white town, there are two auto repair shops in town, both of them refuse service to you. The only auto repair shop that will service you is in another town 50 miles away. What do you do? If one had magical powers they should transport you back to the 1930s deep south as a black person and let you experience it first hand - being treated as a 2nd class citizen, perhaps then you would get it.
xexixk 8 months ago
@xexixk
A scenario for you: You are a black person going on a road trip. Your car breaks down in the middle of a desert. You wander for days without water and die.
Lesson learned: stay away from deserts. Avoid associating with retards who hate you for no reason, move out of pisshole racist states and into better areas.
thegillotine09 8 months ago
@NewYorkCityUSA7 Yeah that's what I was looking for. Now that's an arguement!
MrRobinMurphy 8 months ago
Fox News website puts a spin on every headline about the president that he is "different than the rest of us" or that he is passing more and more laws to take rights away from white people. People add comments -- without even reading the article which doesn't even match the inflammatory headline -- calling the president Omammy, Buckwheat, Porch Monkey. etc. Fox and Roger Ailles and the GOP (who Ailes once worked for) have based Republican winning strategy on stirring up "white resentment"
Frankcoins 8 months ago
white people=most racist race alive. White people are keeping racism alive because they thrive off of hating others who are different. .
psychoeyez 8 months ago
Forgive me if this sounds like a stupid question but why CAN'T private businesses discriminate? They're private- it's like you and your friends throwing a party not wanting to invite that random stranger across the road.
JermzzzyFTW 9 months ago
John Stossel has 20 years of journalist expeirence... who the fuck is this guy?
Salvysahagun 9 months ago
When I look at this guy, I think: Credible.
cmrees2 9 months ago
The whole idea that laws will end racism is chimeric.
Businesses will be losing out on a lot of profits if they didn't serve non-whites or gave them low quality service; that'll just mean that business who offer good service to non-whites will earn more than those who don't, not to mention, it could also lead to more non-whites starting their new businesses to service the non-whites.
The point is businesses are private & people should've a right to own & sell their property as they choose.
lomocan 9 months ago
@lomocan Give me three real earth examples of this "free market" solution in regards to racism. Otherwise, you're just floating out hypothetical utopian fantasies just like the rich White men like Stossel and Paul who know that American society has always been stacked in the favor of people like themselves.
amboyace 9 months ago
@ElShaddai7777 What are you saying? Winning an Emmy absolves somebody of racism? Did you know that over 10,000 Jews fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War? I bet you didn't, because you'd never make that statement otherwise. Get with the program. John Stossel is a rich, white corporatist tool doing the bidding of richer, whiter corporatists.
amboyace 9 months ago