When Rand Paul suggested the 1964 Civil Rights Act went too far, he was widely criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike. Here, Professor Williams explains why they are wrong and Rand is right, while making a far more important point about liberty itself.
Archive for the ‘Republicans’ Category
Posted in abuse of power/corruption, government regulation, ideology, libertarian, nanny state, politics, Republicans, US Constitution, video, tagged Civil Rights Act, discrimination, freedom, racism, Rand Paul on May 31, 2010| 2 Comments »
Posted in fear-mongers, government regulation, ideology, libertarian, mainstream media, nanny state, politics, Republicans, US Constitution, tagged Civil Rights Act, Rachel Maddow, racism, Rand Paul on May 22, 2010| 3 Comments »
Wesley Messamore asks:
Rachel, should black restaurant owners be forced to serve white nationalists? Hmm? Say David Duke walked into a black restaurant and wanted to be served. Does the black restaurant owner have a right to say, “Mmm… no thanks, we’d rather not serve you”? Or does David Duke have a right to be served by the black restaurant owner? Yes or no, please.
It’s interesting — to be consistent, Maddow would practically have to say that Duke has a right to the black restaurant owner’s labor, which is dangerously close to advocating something akin to slavery. Yes or no, Maddow?
Let’s use another example: if Fred Phelps (that’s the God Hates Fags guy) walked into a gay bar and demanded to be served a drink, would Maddow support the right of the restaurant owner or bartender to refuse to serve him? Yes or no, please.
The Civil Rights Act institutionalized racism in Amerika. If you support it, you are the one that is racist.
Posted in government regulation, hysteria, mainstream media, nanny state, politics, Republicans, US Constitution, tagged Civil Rights Act, Rachel Maddow, racism, Rand Paul on May 20, 2010| 17 Comments »
Rachel Maddow attacked neocon-Rand on her propaganda show tonight. Maddow was throwing a hissy-fit over Rand’s correct position that the government has no authority to force private businesses not to discriminate based on race (or anything for that matter).
Indeed private businesses, organizations and individuals should be able to create rules for or refuse service to whomever they choose. That includes allowing or refusing service to those that are white, black, brown, gay, straight, handicapped, obese, retarded, cross dressing, transsexual or whatever type of irrelevant characteristic you can conjure up. Not only that but they should be able to allow or refuse smoking, guns, dogs, drugs or anything else on their private property. At the same time, all competing businesses should have the right to do the exact opposite to attract those that don’t approve. If the offending business can’t attract enough customers, then they go out of business. That is how freedom works. Maddow can’t seem to fathom anything other than the use of violence (government) to force her subjective views on everyone else. What an evil excuse for a human being.
Although Maddow thinks she is taking the high road, she fails to address that many minority groups are NOT covered by the Civil Rights Act. I guess only those that the state, and Maddow, deems worthy are those that may receive “equal rights”.
Update: Jim at heygetthis has more (although he doesn’t realize it).
The MSM parrots are making a big deal of Rand Paul’s victory over his ideologically identical opponent Trey Grayson. They are both neocons. Either way we lose.
These two neocons were simply vying to replace another neocon, career crook Jim Bunning, who is retiring.
This is a non-event and another net loss for freedom.
Update: This site supports Ron Paul. However Rand Paul is clearly a neocon. Go here to find out why.
Posted in 2008 elections, cover-up, politics, polls, Republican Party, Republicans, tagged 2010 election, Connecticut, Diebold, Peter Schiff, Senate, Straw Poll, vote fraud on March 3, 2010| 10 Comments »
The following poll reminded me of Ron Paul’s campaign for the 2008 presidential election:
Ron Paul won virtually every internet poll. Not only that, but he won virtually every straw poll physically attended by Repugs as well. When I say “won”, I mean WON – by a large margin. But sure enough, the “official” poll results showed him bringing in only a small percentage of the vote. And sure enough, the final vote reflected those “official” poll numbers.
This has me wondering if MSM internet polls aren’t really put out there to test the waters, so to speak, to determine how much vote rigging needs to be done to make the “official” vote count match the “official” poll numbers on election night. What do you think?