Added: 1 year ago
From: Federaljacktube
Views: 1,036
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (34)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Rand Paul dodged the question Rachel was trying to get him to answer THE ENTIRE INTERVIEW:"Do you support the rights of business owners to discriminate?"

    And tho he dodged it with semantics,Rands answer was YES! HA! Just like his dad. Sorry,Rand is a libertarian slimeball fascist.Folks,we NEED a REAL govt,"of the people,to protect US from predatory business owners,and to protect human rights.We dont need someone like Ron Paul as president who would dismantle what little protections we have left

  • (Continued) The '10th' is unnecessary(and HAS bee misused as an 'umbrella law' to infringe on rights) and is self 'regulated' by people simply NOT choosing to support that private business/property with their money/time, and anyone who truly does not condone racism will join with you(Boycotting them would be a much more Constitutional option..)

  • I think the biggest thing Rachel is missing here is the fact that with the 'lunch counter' situation , the government was in a position where it did not punish someone for violent acts committed because of that. The '9 out of the 10', would prevent the actual harm done, because those people would go to jail and NOT have someone on the government side of things that supports there actions. There would be CONSEQUENCES for their violence.

  • Paul is saying government has a lack of power to mandate such things. The issue isn't whether he is racist or not, but that he views government's scope as precluding itself from 'going there' to begin with. From that limitation then, the slippery slopes Maddow brings up can be avoided. Less is more.

  • Ask yourself why dose RACHEL support segregation in Israel?

  • I am a libertarian and I agree with Rand's position, but there has got to be a better way with dealing with this direct question "Would you support the abolition of laws illegalizing right of private businesses to discriminate against people they don't wand to serve.

    I have a better answer, at least a talking point that could deflect this question. It is a matter of implied warranty of a public servicing business.

  • Rachael was correct in her targeted question. Rand dodged the the direct question.

    Perhaps that was the right thing to do politically, but the dodge and misdirection was too obvious.

    I am a libertarian and I agree with Rand's position, but there has got to be a better way with dealing with this direct question "Would you support the

  • Rachel is full of fail among other things.

  • this guys sick that y he s the darling of the crazy tea baggers

  • Rachel you got it wrong to attack him on this point.You don't know it but your very transparent. You look very dishonest and deceptive.Let it go.He believes that civil rights should come about WITHOUT A LAW.However, he doesn't remember that in those days the South looked like South Africa and Americans felt so ashamed (Lyndon Johnson .Texas)that a law was needed to bring the south in line with the rest of the world.THE TEA PARTY WILL NOT REPEAL THE ACT.

  • there is moral discrimnation, and immoral ones.

    but you can't support one and disallow others based on your personal views.

    if you defend freedom for someone, you also have to defend freedom for others.

    yes, including the moronic, stupid bigoted ones.

  • right, so the government should force heterosexual strip clubs to hire men as dancers. otherwise its discrimination.

    all minority college funds should be available to everyone, otherwise its discrimination.

    private businesses, such as Jewish owned restaurants should allow people wearing hateful clothing like KKK or Nazi outfits in.

    all religious organizations should let in homosexuals.

    all homosexual clubs should allow homophobic people in.

    people are so fucking stupid.

  • Even the Republicans are backing off from this guy. The only people who favor his views are the ones with the white pointy hats that spew hate, vulgar language or regurgitate the nonsense answers from Paul's clip. Calling a Rhodes Scholar (look up what that is!) a moron simply shows your ignorance. Fox news started the "hype" with Paul's comments, not MSNBC.

  • There still is segregation now. The negro college fund is only available to blacks. There are many black owned businesses that will hire only black people. There are many many other things also. The only problem is civil rights are one sided they only apply against white people. Rachel Madcow is a moron anyway and she shouldn't even be allowed on the tube shes the racist pig here for trying to start non issue antagonistic attack.

  • How diverse is the MSNBC lineup? Things look mighty white to me...

  • I really dislike Madcow, Just one more reason I don't have cable TV.

  • Ugh, Maddow makes my skin crawl sometimes. Typical control freak, selfish liberal though. They want the whole world their way and the end always justifies the means to these people. All Paul is saying here is that he doesn't believe in telling other people what to do, it's as simple as that, if they want to be racists, let them be. Should the government make laws that segregate and condone racism? No. And that's what he said. Maddow had about twenty different straw men going here.

  • He maintains his composure much better than I would. It is a very valid point he makes. First the government tells you WHO a private business must serve, then WHAT to serve, then WHEN to serve it, then HOW you serve it. Is it MY business or the GOVERNMENTS business?

  • It is obvious that her hadlers have put in the priority for a one issue fight.

  • Maddow makes me sick

    what a race baiting bitch

  • I wish Rand Paul could be more honest with his views. Just say "Yes, people, in the private sector, should have the right to discriminate."

  • @Anarkokommunist yea no shit. I wouldn't allow racist into my house...I discriminate on my property.

  • @whippoorwillss

    Same here, and I also do not hang around boring people, my parents, people who smell bad, e t c. Discrimination is choosing.

  • Comment removed

  • She's probably more racist than he is ;) Liberals tend to be just as racist as the next person, they just like to "look" good. It's alllllll about looks with them.

  • He makes a very valid point, quite frankly, and he correctly diagnosed the intellectual versus political debate, and how the political debate automatically makes any substantive debate impossible, because many people do not have the ability to make the kinds of political-intellectual distinctions that this conversation demands. Rachel Maddow set him up as a racist here and I think it was patently unfair and disengenuous.

  • Isn't he FOR abolishing the Department of Education and the Federal Reserve? No government at all! Why would we reform institutions that fuck over the American consumer? The AUDACITY of the Dems to stand up for the people and not mega rich trillion dollar companies.

  • this shows how stupid maddow is. jim crow was a law put in place by government institution

  • How many times can he start with "well the interesting thing is..."?

  • stupid bitch. he didnt wanna answer her crap question so why does she ask it 15 times. I'd like to bitchslap her.real good :)

  • I wish I had a list of all of the people Rachele has called racist...

  • Wow! Wow! Rand Paul did REALLY well. He was honest and direct, without falling into any of her traps. I think any open-minded person who watched this interview couldn't dismiss RP as some crazy racist loon. Wow. This is only the second or thind time I've ever seen him on TV and I am truly impressed.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more