• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rand Paul and racism

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,255
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You have no doubt lately heard from many talking heads, who are calling Rand Paul a racist. And not long ago, Paul backed down from his original position on the Civil Rights Bill. But guess what? I agree with Paul's original position. Does that make DanaRhea a racist, as well as Rand Paul? Let me explain why it does not.

First of all, let's be clear on something. When it comes to public owned facilities and land, Paul is in favor of the Civil Rights bill. This means no separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, no back of the bus, etc, etc, etc. This is good.

Where Paul differs is on private property, where, even if someone is a complete douche bag, the property belongs to him, and he can use it as he sees fit. So, what makes this racist? It doesn't. He might be a racist, but the idea of your property being your property is not.

Personally, I feel that racists are the worst ignorant, knuckle dragging morons to ever infest the United States. But, as inbred, drooling, mouth breathing, and utterly stupid as they are, they are still Americans, and just as entitled to property rights as anybody else. And, Constitutionally speaking, our rights are based on property. If they don't want to allow someone at their lunch counter because they are either black, gay, female, or Jesus Christ himself, that is their right.

Now I have detailed what I believe to be the rights of the knuckle dragging morons. What, then, are the rights of everybody else, particularly blacks, gays, females, or even Jesus Christ (who is probably shaking his head and laughing his ass off at the racist imbeciles)? They have the right to protest. And don't downplay the power of protest. It was protest, more than government, which ended Jim Crow in the South. More than a few lunch counters and privately owned bus companies went belly-up due to them.

So let the racists have their lunch counters, and let the protesters continue to send them to the poor house. Works better than government intervention ever did. We need government to come in when KKK members blow up churches and lynch people for wanting to vote. That IS a Federal issue. Who does what with their own property, no matter how insane, is none of the Federal government's business.

Therefore, in regard to whether Rand Paul is or is not a racist, I will say this - He is not. But is Rand Paul a whore, who does not stick with his beliefs, in the face of stiff opposition? He certainly is. He was right before he changed his mind, but now he attempts to talk around the Q. Me thinks he wants the Senate too damn bad, and that is breaking his political compass.

Discussion?
 
Last edited:

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,116
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
It just goes to show that the race card is overplayed. This should shock nobody. I'm a racist because I'm against Affirmative Action, think Al Sharpton is a festering sh*tstain, and believe John Riggins is one of the best running backs ever.

Oh yeah - and I have this weird belief that firefighters should be hired on merit and not by skin color. What a bastard am I.
 

Nymphetamine

Active member
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
463
Reaction score
76
Location
Screwston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Agreed.

I'd be willing to bet that at least half of the people that disagree with your stance have no problem with minority scholarships. In essence, the two are one and the same.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
81,577
Reaction score
36,618
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I actually hadn't heard the racist label so much as short-sighted and naive.
 

Geo Patric

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
3,671
Reaction score
1,057
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
DanaRhea,

you would seem to have a rather dim idea of what constitutes 'public' and 'private'.

a lunch counter is not private in the way that your home is. a lunch counter is a private concern doing PUBLIC business. it is a privately owned business, but not a private SPACE.

am i just playing with words here? well... YOU can test it out for yourself... you don't need me or anyone to explain the subtle differences.

go down the street there to Sam's Sammitches... drop yer jeans and whip it out... wag yer willie for the entertainment of the customers.

see...if it were REALLY a private place, you could do that. If Sam wants to be truly private, he can do that... but he could not then benefit from doing business with the public. his sammitches is gonna cost a bit more to make up the difference. but, if ya don't like spooks and greasers and queers... maybe it is worth it to ya. There ARE such private concerns.... the Klan has em.

now, of significance is... Rand Paul KNOWS that, even if you do not. Rand Paul cannot excuse it as a matter of simple ignorance.

which begs the question of what Paul is trying to accomplish in spewing this garbage. Do you really think that HE really thinks that he is capable of overturning a century's worth of civil rights legislation and SCOTUS decisions? OR.. is he just doing whatever he can to gain the futile 'moral support' of all the "I am not really a racist" racists?

geo.
 
Last edited:

The Uncola

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
718
Reaction score
255
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
You have no doubt lately heard from many talking heads, who are calling Rand Paul a racist. And not long ago, Paul backed down from his original position on the Civil Rights Bill. But guess what? I agree with Paul's original position. Does that make DanaRhea a racist, as well as Rand Paul? Let me explain why it does not.

First of all, let's be clear on something. When it comes to public owned facilities and land, Paul is in favor of the Civil Rights bill. This means no separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, no back of the bus, etc, etc, etc. This is good.

Where Paul differs is on private property, where, even if someone is a complete douche bag, the property belongs to him, and he can use it as he sees fit. So, what makes this racist? It doesn't. He might be a racist, but the idea of your property being your property is not.

Personally, I feel that racists are the worst ignorant, knuckle dragging morons to ever infest the United States. But, as inbred, drooling, mouth breathing, and utterly stupid as they are, they are still Americans, and just as entitled to property rights as anybody else. And, Constitutionally speaking, our rights are based on property. If they don't want to allow someone at their lunch counter because they are either black, gay, female, or Jesus Christ himself, that is their right.

Now I have detailed what I believe to be the rights of the knuckle dragging morons. What, then, are the rights of everybody else, particularly blacks, gays, females, or even Jesus Christ (who is probably shaking his head and laughing his ass off at the racist imbeciles)? They have the right to protest. And don't downplay the power of protest. It was protest, more than government, which ended Jim Crow in the South. More than a few lunch counters and privately owned bus companies went belly-up due to them.

So let the racists have their lunch counters, and let the protesters continue to send them to the poor house. Works better than government intervention ever did. We need government to come in when KKK members blow up churches and lynch people for wanting to vote. That IS a Federal issue. Who does what with their own property, no matter how insane, is none of the Federal government's business.

Therefore, in regard to whether Rand Paul is or is not a racist, I will say this - He is not. But is Rand Paul a whore, who does not stick with his beliefs, in the face of stiff opposition? He certainly is. He was right before he changed his mind, but now he attempts to talk around the Q. Me thinks he wants the Senate too damn bad, and that is breaking his political compass.

Discussion?

Exactly which "talking heads" called Paul a "racist"?

Got a link?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,350
Reaction score
52,480
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
You have no doubt lately heard from many talking heads, who are calling Rand Paul a racist. And not long ago, Paul backed down from his original position on the Civil Rights Bill. But guess what? I agree with Paul's original position. Does that make DanaRhea a racist, as well as Rand Paul? Let me explain why it does not.

First of all, let's be clear on something. When it comes to public owned facilities and land, Paul is in favor of the Civil Rights bill. This means no separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, no back of the bus, etc, etc, etc. This is good.

Where Paul differs is on private property, where, even if someone is a complete douche bag, the property belongs to him, and he can use it as he sees fit. So, what makes this racist? It doesn't. He might be a racist, but the idea of your property being your property is not.

Personally, I feel that racists are the worst ignorant, knuckle dragging morons to ever infest the United States. But, as inbred, drooling, mouth breathing, and utterly stupid as they are, they are still Americans, and just as entitled to property rights as anybody else. And, Constitutionally speaking, our rights are based on property. If they don't want to allow someone at their lunch counter because they are either black, gay, female, or Jesus Christ himself, that is their right.

Now I have detailed what I believe to be the rights of the knuckle dragging morons. What, then, are the rights of everybody else, particularly blacks, gays, females, or even Jesus Christ (who is probably shaking his head and laughing his ass off at the racist imbeciles)? They have the right to protest. And don't downplay the power of protest. It was protest, more than government, which ended Jim Crow in the South. More than a few lunch counters and privately owned bus companies went belly-up due to them.

So let the racists have their lunch counters, and let the protesters continue to send them to the poor house. Works better than government intervention ever did. We need government to come in when KKK members blow up churches and lynch people for wanting to vote. That IS a Federal issue. Who does what with their own property, no matter how insane, is none of the Federal government's business.

Therefore, in regard to whether Rand Paul is or is not a racist, I will say this - He is not. But is Rand Paul a whore, who does not stick with his beliefs, in the face of stiff opposition? He certainly is. He was right before he changed his mind, but now he attempts to talk around the Q. Me thinks he wants the Senate too damn bad, and that is breaking his political compass.

Discussion?

Dan, I have not seen one talking head call him a racist, not even on MSNBC. They called him essentially nutty and out of touch, which I agree with. They called him badly unprepared to answer a simple question, and he certainly was that. They did not that I saw call him a racist.

Edit: forgot one: they have called him whiny for his reaction the the Maddow interview top, and good god he has been.
But go ahead and build that strawman.
 
Last edited:

FilmFestGuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
2,120
Reaction score
1,244
Location
Nashville, TN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Dan, I have not seen one talking head call him a racist, not even on MSNBC. They called him essentially nutty and out of touch, which I agree with. They called him badly unprepared to answer a simple question, and he certainly was that. They did not that I saw call him a racist.

But go ahead and build that strawman.

Thanks for that, because I've not seen him accused of being racist once. It may have happened, but I haven't witnessed it in any of the media that I take in.

But, the biggest point is hit upon by Geo Patric: when your private business is a public accommodation, you have opted to create a contract with the general public.

You'll note that churches and private member-only clubs are exempt from any of the laws that prevent discrimination in public accommodations.

So - if you want to discriminate, then you simply make your business a member-only club instead of a public accommodation. If you open your business to the public, you've entered into an implied contract with me. You can set rules within your business that I must follow (thus no "whipping it out" as Geo Patric states); but those rules cannot discriminate based upon race, gender, age, veterans status, etc.

You have the freedom to have a racist business if you'd like: just make it members only.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,350
Reaction score
52,480
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Thanks for that, because I've not seen him accused of being racist once. It may have happened, but I haven't witnessed it in any of the media that I take in.

But, the biggest point is hit upon by Geo Patric: when your private business is a public accommodation, you have opted to create a contract with the general public.

You'll note that churches and private member-only clubs are exempt from any of the laws that prevent discrimination in public accommodations.

So - if you want to discriminate, then you simply make your business a member-only club instead of a public accommodation. If you open your business to the public, you've entered into an implied contract with me. You can set rules within your business that I must follow (thus no "whipping it out" as Geo Patric states); but those rules cannot discriminate based upon race, gender, age, veterans status, etc.

You have the freedom to have a racist business if you'd like: just make it members only.

That is the nutty and out of touch part. I should not be allowed to tell black people they cannot eat at my restaurant, I should not be allowed to not hire blacks and gays. These are not complicated or draconian rules.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,519
Reaction score
32,395
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Dan, I have not seen one talking head call him a racist, not even on MSNBC. They called him essentially nutty and out of touch, which I agree with. They called him badly unprepared to answer a simple question, and he certainly was that. They did not that I saw call him a racist.

Edit: forgot one: they have called him whiny for his reaction the the Maddow interview top, and good god he has been.
But go ahead and build that strawman.

Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - What's behind Rand Paul's confusion? - CNN.com Blogs

Apparently Anderson Cooper has heard the racism talk too...
 

Geo Patric

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
3,671
Reaction score
1,057
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Dan, I have not seen one talking head call him a racist, not even on MSNBC.

well.... perhaps not the mainstream, but it is certainly out there.
Paul tried to walk the fine line between the inherently racist effect of libertarian policies and being a racist. And he didn’t do a very good job of it.
Hullabaloo

the libertarian philosophy of Rand Paul and the Supreme Court of the 1880s and 1890s gave us almost 100 years of segregation, white supremacy, lynchings, chain gangs, the KKK, and discrimination of African Americans for no other reason except their skin color.
Rand Paul is No Barry Goldwater on Civil Rights | Capital Gains and Games

That he supports racist policies is something that we the opposition should highlight without caveats about ideological rigor that is frankly lacking. Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he’s a principled man is counterproductive and missing the point.
http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/this_aint_no_foolin_around/

and if the actual accusation is missing, the suggestion is certainly there. and it is valid.

racism is a problem not in how joe bigot THINKS, it is a problem in how we BEHAVE, regardless of what we think or feel. Policies enacted out of an adherence to ideological premises that result in racial exclusion are racists - period. That the guy who supports them doesn't hate black folk doesn't change that.

geo.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,519
Reaction score
32,395
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That is the nutty and out of touch part. I should not be allowed to tell black people they cannot eat at my restaurant, I should not be allowed to not hire blacks and gays. These are not complicated or draconian rules.

Thats simply not true. theatres and malls routinely post their own version of rules...for example...it is constitutional to own and carry a firearm...yet in virtually every theatre you see they post signs declaring their right to refuse to serve you should you be in possession of a firearm, legal or not.

Just because you own a business you arent stripped of your rights.

And in the greater context...it really bears asking...HAS the federal government done anything to IMPROVE race relations by passing these acts? I think it does the opposite of what they intend it to do.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,477
Reaction score
29,174
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal

I assume you are referring to this paragraph.

Washington (CNN) - The caricatures have been flying from left and right since Tea Party Senate candidate Rand Paul started talking about the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That Rand Paul is a racist. That his nomination proves the Republican Party is, too. That MSNBC host Rachel Maddow is a man-eating sorceress. That the liberal media ... you get the idea.

I think its pretty weak as it is essentially what Redress is saying, people are making the accusation that certain people are saying things, but in no case (that I have been able to find) can we find someone who has actually said this. Perhaps some blog in the butthole of the blogosphere, but nothing legitimate or with any real following or influence.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Rand Paul is like his nutty daddy in that he speaks in code. Those supporting the code applaud it silently. Those on the receiving end of the code struggle against it right out in the open.

Unfortunately, there are a good many people either unable or unwilling to recognize the code, and so they support it, too.

Young mister Paul wishes to return us to a time when minorities had little access to basic services in some areas, since they did not OWN these services. What a shame that here it is the 21st century and people actually think it's a good idea to regress society back to more primitive days.
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,244
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
But, the biggest point is hit upon by Geo Patric: when your private business is a public accommodation, you have opted to create a contract with the general public.

Most businesses are a public accommodation. If you don't like the way that they do business, go somewhere else. The property owner should get to decide what he wants to do with the place.

Rand Paul is not a racist. I fully support his views on this issue.
 

Geo Patric

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
3,671
Reaction score
1,057
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
theatres and malls routinely post their own version of rules...for example...it is constitutional to own and carry a firearm...yet in virtually every theatre you see they post signs declaring their right to refuse to serve you should you be in possession of a firearm, legal or not.

this is the strawman. The popular "we reserve the right to refuse service" is almost entirely unenforceable... it is empty.

can you identify a single instance of a business that operates in a jurisdiction where the carrying of guns is legal and they have been denied public accommodation they would have received otherwise?

lemme save you a lil trouble... the marine? refused at the gas station? is an urban legend... never happened. See Scopes.com.

I think it does the opposite of what they intend it to do.

you are entitled to the opinion, of course, but i think you misuse the term "think".

geo.
 
Last edited:

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,244
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Rand Paul is like his nutty daddy in that he speaks in code. Those supporting the code applaud it silently. Those on the receiving end of the code struggle against it right out in the open.

Unfortunately, there are a good many people either unable or unwilling to recognize the code, and so they support it, too.

Young mister Paul wishes to return us to a time when minorities had little access to basic services in some areas, since they did not OWN these services. What a shame that here it is the 21st century and people actually think it's a good idea to regress society back to more primitive days.

The fallacy of looking back and blaming one thing while ignoring economic growth. The reason that blacks have better access to services today is not because segregation is illegal: it is because by and large they are richer. No blacks are stuck being sharecroppers anymore. With a growth in wealth comes better service.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,350
Reaction score
52,480
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
well.... perhaps not the mainstream, but it is certainly out there.


and if the actual accusation is missing, the suggestion is certainly there. and it is valid.

racism is a problem not in how joe bigot THINKS, it is a problem in how we BEHAVE, regardless of what we think or feel. Policies enacted out of an adherence to ideological premises that result in racial exclusion are racists - period. That the guy who supports them doesn't hate black folk doesn't change that.

geo.

It's a big world out there Some one will say just about anything. It does not make it an issue. I am sure there are a couple people who have called him a racist, but the "not in the mainstream" is key.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,350
Reaction score
52,480
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
you are entitled to the opinion, of course, but i think you misuse the term "think".

geo.

Moderator's Warning:
Do not do this again
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The fallacy of looking back and blaming one thing while ignoring economic growth. The reason that blacks have better access to services today is not because segregation is illegal: it is because by and large they are richer. No blacks are stuck being sharecroppers anymore. With a growth in wealth comes better service.

You're not so good on cause and effect, are you?
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
49,477
Reaction score
29,174
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
And in the greater context...it really bears asking...HAS the federal government done anything to IMPROVE race relations by passing these acts? I think it does the opposite of what they intend it to do.

Yes. By setting the tone. There is very much that can be said for these laws creating the social assumption that people of different race can expect to be treated the same. This assumption gets ingrained into children as they grow up and it becomes normal behavior and thought to them.
 

Geo Patric

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
3,671
Reaction score
1,057
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
It's a big world out there Some one will say just about anything. It does not make it an issue. I am sure there are a couple people who have called him a racist, but the "not in the mainstream" is key.

by and large, i would say that is true... on most matters. I would have said it about the term 'socialist' too... until recently.

more importantly, Paul has backed off his earlier statements, claiming now that he WOULD have supported the '64 civil rights legislation. whew! so... he is not a racist? but then... he is not really a 'principled libertarian" either? is he ... just one more opportunist?

well... i thought so all along.

geo.
 

FilmFestGuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
2,120
Reaction score
1,244
Location
Nashville, TN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,552
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Thanks for that, because I've not seen him accused of being racist once. It may have happened, but I haven't witnessed it in any of the media that I take in.

What I heard by a media member (sorry, but I don't remember which one) was the comment that he "opposes civil rights". That statement will automatically get one branded as a racist, regardless of context or fact.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
108,350
Reaction score
52,480
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
What I heard by a media member (sorry, but I don't remember which one) was the comment that he "opposes civil rights". That statement will automatically get one branded as a racist, regardless of context or fact.

I think the actual quote was "opposed the Civil Rights act", which is a significantly different meaning.
 
Top Bottom