Topic: Rand Paul condones racism? | |
---|---|
Rand Paul does not side with racism. He sides with freedom. I disagree. That is your right but you are wrong. You have a right to be wrong. Its a free country. Thanks to people like Rand Paul. Just because you cannot see the wrongness of it, doesn't make it right. |
|
|
|
The faux freedom stance is rampant in the political arena. They do not fight for everyone's freedoms. How do we know that? Because to be truly free there would be no government at all. So anyone who stand on freedoms is not to be trusted at all. That's the height of backward twisted paranoid thinking. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 05/21/10 09:42 AM
|
|
I can usually tell who is full of bull and who is sincere.
Yes, the word 'freedom' is used to incite war and rally the troops and the illusion of 'freedom' has to be maintained. But then there is real freedom, and real patriots. You have to learn to see the difference. |
|
|
|
The faux freedom stance is rampant in the political arena. They do not fight for everyone's freedoms. How do we know that? Because to be truly free there would be no government at all. So anyone who stand on freedoms is not to be trusted at all. That's the height of backward twisted paranoid thinking. Couldn't think of a proper answer? It is the truth. Any politician whose stance is freedoms is a lyin to ya. Government is the opposite of freedom. |
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 05/21/10 09:26 AM
|
|
I believe the man's making a big mistake in siding with discrimination as a personal business choice. To me that is like saying that racism is okay as long as you get away with it. Not. Rand Paul appears to be a closet racist who has let a foot out of the closet. If he goes for higher office I will be there to put effort to stop him. I have to disagree here, as much issue as I also have with blatant, hateful, ignorant racists. When I hear the word 'private' I equate the situation with my (or anyone elses) home. A place THEY maintain and own with no outside resource. In that situation, I understand the danger in mandating to anyone who they can and cant have their private home(or business). I will give an example of how private affairs are different than public ones (and should be) in the eyes of the law. Try running around nude in public or on public property or government property,,,,BIG TROUBLE but if you run around nude in your own home(as long as its not within view of the public) ,,,its no big deal I am a big proponent of Private things being kept private(I am constantly posting on the rights of celebrities and politicians to be left alone concerning their personal relationships). As to racists, what goes around comes around eventually, but what a racist does in private doesnt directly concern me. |
|
|
|
I believe the man's making a big mistake in siding with discrimination as a personal business choice. To me that is like saying that racism is okay as long as you get away with it. Not. Rand Paul appears to be a closet racist who has let a foot out of the closet. If he goes for higher office I will be there to put effort to stop him. I have to disagree here, as much issue as I also have with racists. When I hear the word 'private' I equate the situation with my (or anyone elses) home. A place THEY maintain and own with no outside resource. In that situation, I understand the danger in mandating to anyone who they can and cant have their private home(or business). I will give an example of how private affairs are different than public ones (and should be) in the eyes of the law. Try running around nude in public or on public property or government property,,,,BIG TROUBLE but if you run around nude in your own home(as long as its not within view of the public) ,,,its no big deal I am a big proponent of Private things being kept private(I am constantly posting on the rights of celebrities and politicians to be left alone concerning their personal relationships). As to racists, what goes around comes around eventually, but what a racist does in private doesnt directly concern me. I agree. You did not read the post properly though. I did not say private in my post. |
|
|
|
I agree. I was just kidding. Politicians don't go around suing people. They wouldn't have the time or resources. Its a good thing they can't too, because people might be intimidated about speaking out against corrupt politicians like George Bush who was a moron and a war criminal. They don't HAVE to sue 'em - they can just 'suggest' to the IRS that they 'look into' their tax records for, oh, the last ten years or so ... why leave a paper trail when a nod and a wink will accomplish the same thing ... ? |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility.
This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. I agree, like when the top 10percent have 70percent of the wealth,,,,,thats a pretty powerful position of power,,, |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. The scary part is that you can vote ... |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. The scary part is that you can vote ... Even more scarier is that you can |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. I agree, like when the top 10percent have 70percent of the wealth,,,,,thats a pretty powerful position of power,,, Self determination allows for your children to become one of those people. Make their own money and choices. Collectivism expects them to languish in poverty like the rest.. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 05/21/10 09:52 AM
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. Dragoness you don't make any sense at all. On the one hand you say that any government at all is not freedom. Then you turn around and start spouting about who should be punished for whatever. "Discrimination" is not a crime. You don't even know what discrimination is. Rand Paul is not condoning discrimination. If you think that then you are just wrong plain and simple. Anytime anyone hires anyone they "discriminate" between one person over another. They make a choice. Making a choice requires discrimination. I would 'discriminate' against an X-convict and I would choose a college graduate. If anyone were to tell me that I had to hire an X-convict or a percentage of them, I would tell them to go jump in a lake. The point is, if we exercise our freedom, we will hire the best person for the job and probably a person we think we could get along with. Maybe you have a personal problem. Maybe you have been discriminated against for some reason. But the bottom line is that freedom will win out over any man-made laws that attempt to control people. I am for freedom and for people like Rand Paul. I am not a racist and neither is he. Get over it. |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. Dragoness you don't make any sense at all. On the one hand you say that any government at all is not freedom. Then you turn around and start spouting about who should be punished for whatever. "Discrimination" is not a crime. You don't even know what discrimination is. Rand Paul is not condoning discrimination. If you think that then you are just wrong plain and simple. Anytime anyone hires anyone they "discriminate" between one person over another. They make a choice. Making a choice requires discrimination. I would 'discriminate' against an X-convict and I would choose a college graduate. If anyone were to tell me that I had to hire an X-convict or a percentage of them, I would tell them to go jump in a lake. The point is, if we exercise our freedom, we will hire the best person for the job and probably a person we think we could get along with. Maybe you have a personal problem. Maybe you have been discriminated against for some reason. But the bottom line is that freedom will win out over any man-made laws that attempt to control people. I am for freedom and for people like Rand Paul. I am not a racist and neither is he. Get over it. You are wrong and not making your point well at all. Reread the article. First off government is the antithesis of freedom no matter how you put it. Did I say government is unnecessary? no. Second of all discrimination is a crime and it is a very legitimate crime. None of the faux freedoms fought about can be possible for all humans unless all humans start with the same playing field. Rand Paul has stated that he is a racist who believes in discrimination from businesses. So you cannot deny his own words. |
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. Individual rights only go so far also. You cannot have the individual right to commit crimes at least not without punishment even on your personal time. Discrimination is a crime and should be punished. Rand Paul is condoning discrimination. It is a crime. It is wrong. Making him wrong. Dragoness you don't make any sense at all. On the one hand you say that any government at all is not freedom. Then you turn around and start spouting about who should be punished for whatever. "Discrimination" is not a crime. You don't even know what discrimination is. Rand Paul is not condoning discrimination. If you think that then you are just wrong plain and simple. Anytime anyone hires anyone they "discriminate" between one person over another. They make a choice. Making a choice requires discrimination. I would 'discriminate' against an X-convict and I would choose a college graduate. If anyone were to tell me that I had to hire an X-convict or a percentage of them, I would tell them to go jump in a lake. The point is, if we exercise our freedom, we will hire the best person for the job and probably a person we think we could get along with. Maybe you have a personal problem. Maybe you have been discriminated against for some reason. But the bottom line is that freedom will win out over any man-made laws that attempt to control people. I am for freedom and for people like Rand Paul. I am not a racist and neither is he. Get over it. You are wrong and not making your point well at all. Reread the article. First off government is the antithesis of freedom no matter how you put it. Did I say government is unnecessary? no. Second of all discrimination is a crime and it is a very legitimate crime. None of the faux freedoms fought about can be possible for all humans unless all humans start with the same playing field. Rand Paul has stated that he is a racist who believes in discrimination from businesses. So you cannot deny his own words. OMG!!!! Show me in that interview where Paul said, "I am a racist." |
|
|
|
You make accusations without any proof to back up your statements here. I am not actually sure, you heard the interview and maybe need to readdress the statements themselves to define a better understanding for yourself. I can not see any objectivity here on your part of actually reading the statements. It sounds like some kind of second hand, twisted form of the truth.
|
|
|
|
Rand Paul stands for the individuals right to self determination and that is what the left wingers don't like. Being ruled by a small group of elite is not liberty, does not provide any freedom, and does not end in peaceful tranquility. This quote says it all... "The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson Collectivism is a cancer. 5% ruling 95%.. I agree, like when the top 10percent have 70percent of the wealth,,,,,thats a pretty powerful position of power,,, Self determination allows for your children to become one of those people. Make their own money and choices. Collectivism expects them to languish in poverty like the rest.. yes, self determination,,,the un refuted way to become one of the elite,,,,,,,, not really in ADDITION to self determination,,things like resources, networks, and education, also contribute to where the wealth goes I am not talking about being successful,, or making alot of money at a career, I am talking about having WEALTH to think that those who hold it dont distribute and share it amongst a very small few , is kind of naive with VERY RARE exceptions,, a child being born into poverty today,, is NOT going to be at the top ten percent in wealth tomorrow |
|
|
|
Edited by
Kings_Knight
on
Fri 05/21/10 10:31 AM
|
|
" ... I am not talking about being successful,, or making alot of money at a career, I am talking about having WEALTH to think that those who hold it dont distribute and share it amongst a very small few , is kind of naive ... " If they've taken the intiative to EARN the money, WHY should ANYONE else have a say in what they do (or don't do) with it? It's THEIR MONEY. To have others dictate what I do with MY money is Communism. Who tells you how to spend YOUR money or what to spend it ON? More to the point, how often do you (or have you?) listen ... ? My guess is 'never'. |
|
|
|
You make accusations without any proof to back up your statements here. I am not actually sure, you heard the interview and maybe need to readdress the statements themselves to define a better understanding for yourself. I can not see any objectivity here on your part of actually reading the statements. It sounds like some kind of second hand, twisted form of the truth. Gosh, golly, gee-wizz! You don't mean to say she would actually lie about what Mr Paul said, do you? Me thinks someone spends too much time parroting from obummer.corn |
|
|