Civil Rights Act

On July 3, 2004, Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a bill hailing the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In this speech to Congress, Ron Paul courageously spoke out on the often controversial issues of race relations and affirmative action. He explained why the Civil Right Act had failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society.

Ron Paul: Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.

  • David25

    This argument has been wonderful in bring a topic out that no one really wants to talk but is needs to be discussed. But the fact is that Paul only objects to the Federal mandate that was enforced and argues that the federal government in no way could figure out what motivated each case of racism, so they put in another one size fits all fix. This needs to be taken care of by the state and local governments to avoid someone coming in from 100’s of miles away thinking they know whats best for the locals but really just impresses their boss in hopes for a promotion.

    For the arguments that will come saying there is NO WAY this would work because the southern states are full of whiteys who hate everyone besides them, whites have been the minority in Texas for a few years now under Latinos. Plenty of Latinos get hired here with absolutely no involvement by the federal government (or any government) because they work harder than alot of white people, trust me I live here.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @David25 I live in Texas too. Latinos face discrimination here.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @mmmdee I didn’t say they weren’t discriminated against, everyone gets it some time or another. Its a part of life for people to hate on you. That doesn’t mean they don’t get hired for positions they are qualified for anymore.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • SamFox

        @mmmdee , so why do Latinos, who know bias & prejudice when they see or experience it, keep electing Ron Paul?

        You think Ron is prejudiced? Since you live in Texas, why not call Nelson Linder, Austin chapter president of the NAACP, & see what he says.

        http://tinyurl.com/bnup9cq

        How about what these people say:

        http://tinyurl.com/29f3w6

        http://tinyurl.com/3znrsqx

        http://tinyurl.com/3gk69mhRon

        News Letter attack, racist accusations = lib smear campaign

        http://tinyurl.com/7o3dvcu

        I hope you are open minded & honest enough to at least check these out. IMO you are being conned by fringe media. Many ‘news’ outlets are owned or greatly influenced by Spooky Dude.

        SamFox

        »crosslinked«

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • ianqmacallister

        Nonsense. Every other job I see advertised says something like “bilingual preferred.”

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • orsigno

        @mmmdee I’m from Texas too. Everybody of every shade faces some kind of discrimination.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @orsigno compared to white people, miorities face more discrimination in texas.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • ianqmacallister

        Not sure about that. Every time I look through the help wanted ads I see “bilingual preferred.” For some jobs it’s even now mandatory.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister pics or it didn’t happen.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee@ianqmacallister

          iangmc, it’s kinda funny to see mmmdee asking for citations to prove a point.

          mmm never puts up ANY back up for statements mmm makes, so maybe mmm is showing another ‘progressive’ double standard, eh mmm???

          I have left m many challenges asking for m to prove what m says, but all I get in return is Rules For Radicals jive song & dance around the issue I challenge on.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox @mmmdee @ianqmacallister I had finals last week. i already told everyone that. i’m in the process of replying to everyone today. after showing you my cited work, i’ll expect your citation as well. thanks. And please be mature, except you’re a 6th grader, then carry on with your “progressive double standards” hogwash.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee , cite some of my double standards would you please. Thanks.

          Hey, I got up to 6th grade already? Wow!! Thanks for the graduation! I thought you had me in 3rd grade, but who cares….

          Kinda funny you asking some one to be mature. After reading some of the cussing you do & the snarky names…

          You a comedian? Your posts are often gut busters! :-)

          SamFox!

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox you really are an idiot aren’t you?

          when i said “progressive double standards” did you not know i was just quoting what you previously said when you said? or don’t you remember saying “iangmc, it’s kinda funny to see mmmdee asking for citations to prove a point.

          mmm never puts up ANY back up for statements mmm makes, so maybe mmm is showing another ‘progressive’ double standard, eh mmm???” ? idiot.

          or don’t you see the quotes around my “progressive double standards” when i said it as a mockery towards your delusion?

          so why should i cite something you invented out of your delusion?

          how about you cite the progressive double standards you can’t shut up about. troll.

          I’m not going to be mature to a drone who calls people socialist/lib and other absurdities and accuses me of shit i don’t even know. If you were a more respectable person, i could have a proper and respectable conversation with you, but after reading all your nonsense and garbage shit on this site in response to my previous posts, that is not an option.

          I’d rather be a comedian than a delusional idiot that believes telling people to go to cuba makes you seem somewhat enlightened.

          fuck off dumbass.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          mmmdee. All you did in your ‘reply’ is call me what you are. That’s an old ‘progressive’ tactic of ‘ label the other guy with what I am’, just like you did by calling me what ya did. By using that tactic you hope to show the other person to be what they are not, but you are. “Racist” is one of the most terms deceptively bandied about by lib progs.

          When you said “I am not going to be mature…” you describe almost everything you have posted. Your next to last paragraph is just a dodge, a song & dance to excuse your lack of ability to factually respond that proves my assertion. As does your last sentence.

          My delusion? So show us. If that were true & you had any thing to substantiate that I am delusional I am sure you would have posted it right away. All you continue to do is post no substance jive, as in your above post that only obfuscates the issue as you attack me instead of what I say in defense of Ron.

          The issue most at hand is that you don’t like Ron Paul. You call him names & put him down, but you NEVER, as I challenged you to do, put up his own words, then show us what’s wrong with what he said or believes.

          I even left you links to his foreign policy which you can’t impugn so you sing & dance your way out of any substantive reply. That’s because you cannot take Ron’s foreign policy down with out going out side to fringe media &/or what spin master talking heads have spun to redefine what he said.

          Here AGAIN are 2 links to Ron’s FP. Show us where it’s wrong, bad or dangerous to the USA. You CAN”T, so you’ll post your signature song & dance as to why it’s not worthy of refutation. You will continue to say “Ron Paul is isolationist” or what ever you believe is wrong with his FP.

          http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul413.html

          http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/

          Prove your point, not with you immature screeds &/or media ‘analysis'; use Ron’s own words. You are deathly afraid to put up Ron Paul’s own words because you know you cannot prove by them he is nuts or what ever it was you said Ron is or was. You’ll again make up your own juvenile excuses why I am not worthy of reply & junk of that ilk.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Reality Check

      @David25 This is what the real world looked like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Robinson. And that was for someone who had it fairly well off. “I see you are an officer willing to put your life on the line during wartime, now go sit down in the back of the bus!”

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Patriot Dave

      @David25 That’s fine now, but this was fought for by the People and brought about by the Civil Rights Movement in 1964. There is nothing in this Act that disadvantages big businesses, and we’d be naive to think that big corporations with entrenched White CEO’s don’t still discriminate in discreet fashion. That said, Ron Paul, President 2012!

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @Patriot Dave True, if they are real pieces of crap anyone would, that is why we as a people have to wake up, watch and research these people and companies. A lot of CEO’s would screw anyone just to make a buck, a great example is Mitt Romney and his time at Bain Capital. Just as side note not all CEO’s are white most notable recently Herman Cain who is just as bad as Romney with his time serving a head of one of the Fed banks.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Patriot Dave

          @David25 Right, not all CEOs are White, and CEOs of other ethnicities aren’t always innocent either.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • ianqmacallister

    The truth hurts, doesn’t it hmmh. If what I saw is so false and wicked, then it should be easy to disprove. Instead of pointing out the flaws in my facts or logic, you simply throw a temper tantrum and resort to name calling. Resorting to name calling is a dishonorable way of admitting that you simply have no counter-argument.

    The fact is that Congress simply cannot pass any law which undoes that which Mother Nature has ordained. People can still be equal before the bar of justice, but the fact remains that due to the average black-white cognitive differential, the *average* European-American has a higher IQ than 85% of all African-Americans.

    Don’t accept my word for this. You can go read the scientific studies which have looked into the question. Go read Arthur Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton, Richard Lynn. Read the study that was just published August 2011 in the Journal of Molecular Psychiatry.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • mmmdee

    @JoshuaChavers@Ianjmacdonald@classicliberalism@ClintFitzgerald Is this a joke?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • classroom teacher

    That does it for me. I no longer am interested in Ron Paul. Our country must have laws or there would be no freedom for anyone especially libertarians.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • David25

      @classroom teacher There would be laws, just laws enforced by the state government instead of the federal. As long as they don’t keep others’ freedoms from them the people locally in the state would be free to rule themselves.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • SamFox

      @classroom teacher , you get in the corner & wear a dunce cap for an hour!

      “That does it for” you? Pray tell why? No citations?

      Don’t you do your own thinking & research? Or are you another easy to manipulate Homer Simpson who has been taken in by fringe media propaganda spewing talking heads.

      I am not attacking. Just trying to say YOU BEEN HAD!

      Can you show us where Ron has said he wants no laws? Where he advocates anarchy? What you posted reflects comments that came from biased news. Not what you would have said if you had looked up what Ron himself actually believes & advocates as opposed to malicious & deceptive purposely misinterpreted Ron Paul statements spun by fringe media.

      What Ron was expressing is what he says often when it comes to govt shoving it’s big foot in a door, don’t let them!

      Let fed govt getting involved in the civil rights thing & where do they go next? What will they call for controlling next? What Ron was saying don’t let the govt camel get it’s nose under your tent.

      Where were the Feds when it came to equal treatment under the law, an area they do have Constitutional backing for.

      SamFox

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Motov

        @SamFox@classroom teacher

        If anyone has questions about Ron Paul being a racist

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Motov , GREAT VIDEO!! Thank you. I saw it on the side of another site & changed tabs & could not find it again.

          Ron is not now nor has he ever been a racist.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Jacob9578

          @Motov@SamFox@classroom teacher

          My GOD! A BLACK PERSON! IN A VIDEO BY RON PAUL! I now realize how racially accepting he is.

          Anyone can put a minority in a video. It doesn’t mean they aren’t racist

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Patriot Dave

          @Motov@SamFox@classroom teacher

          Exactly. I personally do not believe that Ron Paul is a racist. I do believe that he is strongly ideologically driven, however, to a fault. But, for all his faults, which aren’t many, he has way too many good things about his ideology and political philosophy to not support him and advocate and campaign for him.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Patriot Dave

          @Jacob9578@Motov@SamFox Yes, anyone can put a minority in a video, but not everyone can get a TESTIMONIAL about being helped in a time before Ron Paul EVER thought about running for president. Nerd.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox@Motov because we can tell who is racist just by looking at them.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @Jacob9578@Motov@SamFox@classroom teacher show me at least 500 black supporters of ron paul and we can have a conversation on the black community’s support of ron paul.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Jacob9578 , that video was not done by Ron Paul. He was surpized by it in fact.

          Man., you have yer mind made up, dontcha. I’ll confuse you with some facts anyway. :-)

          These videos were also not made By Ron Paul. These people did them on their own FOR Ron.

          Defending RP from Racist label: Texas NACCP chapter Prez-

          http://tinyurl.com/bnup9cq

          http://tinyurl.com/29f3w6

          http://tinyurl.com/3gk69mhRon

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rv0Z5SNrF4

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQkNABSM3fk

          NAACP agrees with Ron, also opposes war on some drugs

          http://www.naacp.org/press/entry/naacp-passes-historic-resolution-calling-for-end-to-war-on-drugs

          News Letter attack = lib smear campaign

          http://tinyurl.com/7o3dvcu

          Ron interview by W Blitzer on racism,

          These are not really intended for you jake or mmm. I know you are close minded & more than likely working for some Soros funded internet hit squad that fears Ron Paul ending the intentional collapse of the USA.

          Rather these are intended for honest & open minded people.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Jacob9578

        @SamFox@classroom teacher

        Currently the most contraversial issue handled by state gov’ts is gay marraige, which is being handled in a biggoted and unfair manner.

        “Where were the Feds when it came to equal treatment under the law, an area they do have Constitutional backing for.”

        What the hell are you talking about?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Jacob9578, why don’t you find out? What, we gotta hand feed you every thing? How about reading the document. “Equal treatment under the law” is in there. And it is mandatory.

          Sheesh.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • orsigno

      @classroom teacher “He who can not protect themself without the law, is either a fool or a coward.” He who can not live without that law is both.”

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • DaveJannsen

    Forced integration is unconstitutional? I quite think that the forced integration of our schools after the end of segregation is a good thing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • ianqmacallister

      Do you like how they’ve had to dumb down the curriculum?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • mmmdee

        @ianqmacallister It depends on which state you live in. In Vermont, the public school Education is awesome. The state government controls what teachers can teach, not the federal government.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          Vermont demographics

          European-Americans: 95%

          African-Americans: 1%

          http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/50000.html

          How could the education there possibly be awesome with such a stunning dearth of diversity? Don’t those people understand that “diversity is our strength”?

          Must be the fresh Vermont air.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister or it must be that Vermont is liberal not libertarian or conservative.

          I think The more liberal or less conservative/Libertarian the government of a city, regardless of diversity, the better the city (or even country in most cases) is in health (better environment laws, better health care polices), education, and living standards, because less conservative/Libertarian governments tend to invest more time into the livelihood of it’s people.It’s their liberal government, and mindset.

          For example Barbados has a great education system (99.7 Literacy rate) and it’s 90% black. And other majority black countries like Zimbabwe, South Africa, Kenya etc have good Literacy rates. South Korea also has a great education system, and it’s (99.0 Literacy rate), and it’s mostly non white. So this is clearly not a white/Black thing.

          And Although Norway, Canada, Germany and the U.S have more white people in them, Norway, Canada, and Germany (or less conservative that the U.S), have better education and health care.

          So there’s that.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister And it might also be that a lot of people who live in Vermont don’t think like you. thank goodness.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee, problem is, all those things are not mandated in the Constitution for the fed govt to do. If you like big govt & lotsa nanny stateism & the control over the citizens it comes with, you could always move to Cuba.

          The problems we are having are because govt has illegally usurped power that is not given them in our founding documents.

          Big govt is not the solution. Big govt is the problem!! Many of the places that have all the great stuff you say they do, also have a lot more restrictions on freedom & liberty.

          Where does govt get the $ it ‘invests’? From the private sector.

          Problem with libs & the socialism they love to impose is that sooner or later they run out of other people’s $$.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee , No, that’s not that. THIS IS!

          http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=HcBaSP31Be8&vg=medium

          The above is your 0-care, hope ya like it.

          Can’t say I do.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          “And other majority black countries like Zimbabwe, South Africa, Kenya etc have good Literacy rates.”

          Now there are some countries worth emulating. 😉

          (Do you really take their literacy statistics seriously?)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Patriot Dave

          @SamFox@mmmdee Also, the more contracts for social programs the people enter into with their government, the more the government OWNS them, and laws that restrict the liberties of the people oppress them in other areas of life. I’m not an absolutist, and say that there is never a place or a time when socialism will not work, but it doesn’t work in the United States. Socialism would morph into communist dictatorship in the U.S. before you can say Soviet Union. The police state and the deterioration of our Constitutional liberties are tell-tail signs that a socialist state just won’t work in a country who’s tradition of Freedom and the MERIT system is still a flame that burns within many Americans. I can do for myself without the “Federal Government telling me which hand to use to wipe my ass.” Like Thomas Jefferson, I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences that come with Liberty, than to those that come with too small a degree of it.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox the constitution gives the national govt supremacy over the state governments. Under Justice Marshall, and following supreme court cases like mcculloch vs maryland etc, the national government’s supremacy over states was solidified. The original constitution was not a set in stone rule, it was meant to evolve as time passes. For example the original constitution allowed for slavery and today, it does not. Learn something about history.

          And since we are suggesting places for people to move to now, i suggest you move under a rock and live there forever.

          You like throwing out vague nonsense without explaining your reason behind this vague nonsense. “big govt is the problem” why? how? in what ways? etc etc. Is it a definite always thing? why is that? and so on. So if you are going to throw out vague nonsense, at least have an explanation ready for it or you are just wating everybody’s time.

          “problem with libs and…” *yawn* stop spitting out what you read on bumper stickers and use your brain. Your poorly thought out and mindless repetition only reveals how little you know about socialism. Word of advise, stop watching to much fox news and actually think for yourself.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister good question. because european and american companies exploit the lack of labor laws in other countries and make people work for 75 cents and hour or lower while stacking up on profit, and then there are sweat shops. But most importantly is their lack of respect for the housing and living conditions of the people they exploit, their oil companies spill oil in villages, towns, etc, they use up all the resources that the natives would be using to make life more bearable. Watch yes men fix the world and educate yourself on these things. Also nice to note, these companies are 99.9% run by white people.

          and germany and norway both have one of the best gdp in europe and they are very liberal. I’m afraid now you will go and look up their demographics and say “aha! no blacks!”

          You can’t win it ignorance. It’s either the blacks are doing it or the liberals. how sad.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

          • ianqmacallister

            Social democracy works as well as it does in Northern Europe because the societies are filled with Northern Europeans.

            Rhodesia was the bread basket of Africa when Europeans ran it. Now it is an economic basket case.

            South Africa under white rule a much more civilized country than it is now. In fact, it was so prosperous that blacks from the rest of the Africa flocked to South Africa for a better life, notwithstanding apartheid. The blacks took it over, and it’s gone down hill. The country experiences rolling blackout. Violent crime is through the roof. It’s the rape and murder capital of the world. Read Ilana Mercer’s latest book on the subject, Into The Cannibals’ Pot.

            Same old story all over Africa when the Europeans left. The Africans just could not even maintain the civilization and infrastructure that was left behind by the whites, and things just started going downhill.

            By the way, I hadn’t posed a question; I had simply observed the world around me.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister you sound stupid. please stop.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Jacob9578

        @ianqmacallister

        If ur saying that black kids being in schools dumb down the curriculums, you are a racist

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          If you introduce a child who is in the 80 or so IQ range to reading at the usual age of six, he’s much more likely to fail than children with IQs of 100 or higher, and much more likely to be given up on by the time he’s at an age at which he could read with the same level of facility as the average six-year-old — that is to say, when he’s nine or ten. The average black entering first grade is about a year behind in level of development. A year is a crucial difference when it comes to readiness for reading and arithmetic.

          There is a huge academic literature on the gaps in cognitive test results, practically all of it converging on the fact that African American mean scores on cognitive tests fall below the white means by a tad more than one white standard deviation.

          You can’t face the fact that there are real differences between the various racial groups.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

        • mmmdee

          @Jacob9578@ianqmacallister if you say that, yes you are.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • ianqmacallister

            I am a realist. Since you cannot handle the truth, you want to shoot the messenger. Why get mad at me? I didn’t design Africans to have a lower average IQ than anyone else.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    • SamFox

      @DaveJannsen yes intergration is a good thing. But letting the fed govt camel’s nose under the tent is always a bad idea. They never know when to stop.That is why Dr. Paul says what he does about the CRA.

      We can’t trust govt to exercise any self control. Especially when the only control they want to exercise is over We The People.

      SamFox

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • David25

    For those who think Ron Paul a bigot who hates everyone not just like him, please google “the question was answered six years ago”. This is a blog from an openly gay candidate in Virginia who Ron Paul put his support behind.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @David25 okay? and? do majority of lgbt citizens support ron paul? do they? are they libertarian or republican? are majority of minorities libertarian/republican/ron paul supporters? are they? ask yourself these questions.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @mmmdee Seem to be coming over more and more everyday. 6 years ago no one was talking about anything Paul was, now its mainstream.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @David25 because six years ago ron paul wasn’t a threat. He was a crazy old HARMLESS man. Now, it’s a different thing. He actually has a shot at running against Obama. So now, he’s a crazy old POTENTIALLY HARMFUL man, and any sane person can’t have that.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @David25 ps: I’ve always been politically active. Just never cared for Ron Paul, and still don’t actually, it’s just the absurdity of his followers on this page is amusing. Even regular republicans i engage in conversation with aren’t this openly delusional. What i’m reading here is the kind of thing I watch on Fox news, so…i’m pretty entertained.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • David25

          @mmmdee There is no difference between Republicans and Democrats or between the different news networks. Both parties want to spend alot of your money and either tax the poor or impose impossible fees and fines from regulations on small businesses. Both parties want endless war to save us from the “terrorist” who are pissed off because we’ve been bombing their families for years and just want us to quit occupying their country.

          And all the mainstream news networks are paid for by the banks which is obvious from barrage of commercials from BoA, Chase, and others. The banks hate Ron Paul because its his mission to take down the Fed who bails them out whenever they get in trouble for making bad investments (16 trillion at first glance from the audit). Which, if we didn’t have such corrupt regulating bureaucrats in D.C., the rich heads of these companies would be in jail by for fraud. Maybe get some of the money they got for stealing all their customers back since most of it didn’t exist to begin with thanks to our fractional-reserve banking system.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • David25

          @mmmdee Look up “the compassion of Dr. Ron Paul” to see how crazy and dangerous he is. Don’t just put someone down because some talking head told you so, especially when they are getting paid to do it.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          mmmdee. , It’s easy to call names, engage in negative generalities & make inane statements that you don’t back up. Your repetition of fringe media blather exposes you as one who is being led around by the nose by biased ‘news’ media talking heads.

          You are a good Homer Simpson it appears. Very easy to manipulate, as your posts show. They reflect no original thought. You do, however, mirror many fringe media talking points whose purpose is to deceive, misinform & manipulate. You got suckered badly & it shows!

          Why is it you who major in Ron Paul bashing do the Rules For Radicals personal attack thing rather than doing, say, “Here is Ron Paul’s foreign policy from his own words. See where it’s wrong”? & then point out the deficiencies. It’s not that you oppose Ron. That is your right & I support it.

          It’s that in your opposition to Ron you lie. That is NOT right. You should be ashamed.

          Why don’t you show us the smoking gun beyond reasonable doubt proof that absolutely proves Ron wrote any thing racist. That HE IS a racist. That he has ever been over heard saying such. How many videos have you found where people are saying “I heard Ron & here is what he said” or videos of Ron in his own words saying any thing racist.

          You can’t.

          The ONLY thing this ‘Ron is a racist’ lying, disingenuous media propaganda campaign has going for it is a weak attempt at guilt by association. Only shallow souls fall such easy to refute agendas.

          Oppose Ron all you want. You are free to have your own opinion. Just make sure it is based on verifiable facts lest you find media gotcha & you were conned & you continue to look foolish when you make unsubstantiated juvenile remarks. Above all, GET HONEST!

          Thanks.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Jacob9578

          @David25@mmmdee

          Actually, the last time there was no federal reserve bailing out banks, we had the Great Depression. That was bad.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • orsigno

          @mmmdee Harmful to whom? The paradigm that we need to force whites to hire non-whites in 2012?

          Let me attempt to shift yours. If you aren’t the most qualified, you shouldn’t be the one hired. Universities are no longer required to become qualified as people realize people aren’t really learning anything useful there other than how to socialize and how to owe a ton of money to people you’ve never met. As a matter of fact, you can get qualified to do pretty much whatever you want without ever stepping foot in a University. The internet is a beutiful thing.

          Want to work in the computer security industry? Go get your CISSP and/or Security+ certifications and demonstrate some technical ability (That you learned from tinkering on your personal computer) and I can get you a job tomorrow. You might not start at $100k/yr, nobody does.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • David25

          @Jacob9578@mmmdee The Fed act was passed in 1913 in a nearly empty congress near Christmas, well before the depression and it immediately began retracting the money supply and causing people to live with less. Speculators on Wallstreet made reckless investments that they knew they would get bailed out from with taxpayer money because of their cozy relationship with the Fed. When the stock market crashed people ran on the banks and thanks to our flawed fractional-reserve banking system everyone was stiffed and left with nothing. This caused the Great Depression.

          2 lies about the Fed- 1. Its not federal, this is a private bank that sold stocks to get started and has no govn’t oversight. 2. There are no reserves, all the gold for our country has been shipped seas into European banks and god knows where else. The Fed has NEVER been audited which is completely insane. Kind of a long movie but very informative,

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox I call people names? look who the fuck is talking? socialist? libs? go to cuba if you don’t like it here? progressive double standards? fuck off dumbass. you are stupid fuck and i’m not apologizing. I don’t even want to have a conversation with you because you disgust me.And you’re the same guy whose been running your mouth about citations right? and where are yours? seriously. I can’t even talk to you, you’re too fucked up to have a conversation with.

          I repeat liberal inane blah? coming from the fox news drone, that’s a fucking lot.

          Just reading your comments gave me a fucking headache.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @orsigno his harmful to sane people but thanks for pointing out that some white people like yourself are uncomfortable with being forced to do the right thing.

          If you aren’t the most qualified for a job you shouldn’t be hired, i agree and i’m sure everyone agrees but that is not what the civil right asks or civil right activists ask. They ask for whites to not be racist or discriminatory towards minorities in the work place. the end. somehow in your head (and in your head only ) this is equal to forcing people who aren’t qualified for a job to take that job over a qualified person, and how that makes any remote sense is beyond me.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @orsigno

          he’s harmful to sane people but thanks for pointing out that some white people like yourself are uncomfortable with being forced to do the right thing.

          If you aren’t the most qualified for a job you shouldn’t be hired, i agree and i’m sure everyone agrees but that is not what the civil right asks or civil right activists ask. They ask for whites to not be racist or discriminatory towards minorities in the work place. the end. somehow in your head (and in your head only ) this is equal to forcing people who aren’t qualified for a job to take that job over a qualified person, and how that makes any remote sense is beyond me.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • SamFox

        @mmmdee , why? These Q’s don’t take us any where. David25 is right. Straw man per chance…

        ron POaul’s liberty message IS quite catching! :-)

        SamFox

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • SamFox

      @David25 Thanks David! Great link!

      SamFox

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • ianqmacallister

    Affirmative action is nothing less than official, government-mandated discrimination against whites. It requires the lowering of standards overall in order to hire “enough” non-Asian whites. Read The Affirmative Action Hoax by Steven Farron.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • David25

    In an unregulated market you boycott any establishment that wants to deny someone services because of their race or anything else. This would make it much easier to point out racist and shun them for what they are instead of forcing people to hide the fact and letting it grow even greater in secret. Public opinion was already turning away from the appalling open racism and putting this tactic in action in 1964. If the government would a have stood up and protected Americans right to free speech instead of letting the local police beat them when they tried to protest much of the violence probably would not have happened.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Redmond J

      @David25 “In an unregulated market you boycott any establishment that wants to deny someone services because of their race or anything else.”Or, if all the political, social and economic power lies in the hands of the racists, you boycott (or firebomb) any establishment that breaks ranks and treats black customers fairly. You know, what actually happened in real life back when the South got to play by Ron Paul’s rules.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • mmmdee

        @Redmond J@David25 Exactly!

        lol just like I was saying to the other guy who was like “People would go down the road to the non racists shop and buy the same product without the government” really? because like time I checked, those people WERE the racists. Like…a horrible majority of white people in the south were racists, point blank.

        About this boycotting thing, Back then Whites/Racists had invented a society were blacks could not move forward on their own, blacks couldn’t just boycott white businesses, because back then, the white businesses were the best, and it was purposefully made that way so that Blacks HAD to depend on whites.

        But even then, take a look at Chick-fil-a today. Chick-fil-a is openly homophobic and funds organizations and political candidates that are also homophobic. LGBT activists have boycotted this organization for months now (almost a year), and that doesn’t mean anything, because well endowed homophobes still eat there, and Chick-fil-a is still up and running without a hitch.

        Back in the 1960s even if blacks boycotted these businesses, it wouldn’t do anything, because well endowed racists (which was pretty much everyone except Latinos, Asian, Native Americans etc) or well endowed non racists who liked the product regardless of it’s harmful policies, because it wasn’t directly harming them and it was cheap (hey i’m not racist, but this is some good shit and for less too!) would continue to buy from that business. (I mean, it even happens today, people still buy stuff from Walmart even though they don’t agree with it’s hurtful/horrendous working Policies. Things are just Cheaper there, so people buy things there).

        My problem with Ron Paul supporters is that they have a disconnect with reality. They keep offering present solutions to problems in the past, as if people today are the same people back then, and as if problems today are the same as problems back in those days. It’s a very unrealistic approach to things.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • David25

          @mmmdee@Redmond J This is why the size of the government must be reduced. When we give power to regulators they becomes corruptible, choosing to help those organizations who they like or can fill their pockets and heavily regulate those they want to be left behind.

          The reason the civil rights act was passed is the public outcry, which means the majority of the Americans were waking up the mistreatment of blacks. This outcry began to pressure government to stop looking the other way and stop giving favorable treatment to racist establishments. So for fear of losing their jobs, they began telling people what to do instead of stopping the local governments from enforcing jim crow laws that held minorities back and making sure the little guy could get things done just as easily as those who were already established and well known. Without the regulations helping racist, established businesses and the regulators guarding them, minorities would have a much easier time making just as good a product or service (if not better) as any other business around as long as they worked hard to do so.

          I do not disagree with what the civil rights act was trying to do or the good results it accomplished, I just believe that if left up to the the people this would have happened anyway through peoples’ common sense. Once the government is allowed by us the begin regulating one aspect of our lives they will use it to regulate others and gain more power. Just like they did when it helped them gain power by passing laws to hold back minorities, thankfully the country was still run by the people mostly and partially stopped them from doing this.

          All of this does require people to do their research before they spend their money blindly and to have a little dignity (which I believe most people do or we would still be a slave country). It may take longer to get things accomplished, but it is the only way to get real change and not force people to be fakes. People have been freed from oppression throughout history only to be held back by those who lust for power. We must pay attention to what people DO not just what they say will do.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • David25

          @mmmdee@Redmond J Actually looking at where our money is going is the number one topic of this election and something everyone (including me) needs to get better at, I for one will not eat at a chick-fil-a again. (Kinda off topic) This points out why the mainstream media is such a sham, because most Americans that I know and talk to have heard nothing of this and should. The news networks lean toward making their bosses money, not forward delivering fair and balanced news that is good for all.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Redmond J

          @mmmdee@David25 Ron Paul is a throwback to the 1920’s when the Civil War was viewed as a tragic mistake, slavery as not really all that bad, America as an island that could divorce itself from the world and not be affected by what happened elsewhere, racism as natural, African Americans as completely undeserving of human or civil rights, and Hoovernomics as not yet fully discredited. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRx-trdMGtY

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          And I suppose you consider the War Between the States a good thing? 600,000 American men killed not counting civilians. Large parts of the South devastated.

          It would have been far cheaper to just buy the slaves and then set them free. Lincoln wanted them sent back to Africa.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee , I see you didn’t answer my challenge to put up Ron Paul’s own words on subjects then refute them &/or show how he is wrong or bad or what ever.

          Whatamatta, you got nuttin you can show us?? Just as I thought. I note you ignore what I asked you to do & continue unsubstantiated propaganda attacks on Ron.

          I knda figured you’d do the ignore thing. Shows what you are, a shill troll working for one of Spooky Dude’s propaganda outlets.

          Thanks for nothing. But then again, that IS your posting style.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Redmond J , you really hitting the propaganda over drive or what? All you have proven is that you have a biased opinion of Ron Paul. I note that you left no citations, no back up, no proof at all for your guilt by wishful association screed.

          I offer you the same challenge I gave mmmdee.I bet I get the same response from you.

          Show us in Ron’s own words where he says the USA should quit the rest of the world. How is is an isolationist as you so tacitly expressed in you tirade of lies.

          Put up Ron’s own words. Not media ‘analysis’, not Bill O’Reilly spin or other vapid talking head opinion. Only Ron’s words. Use videos, books he wrote, speeches…as long is it is what Ron himself expressed.

          I am betting you can’t prove any of your criticisims of Ron Paul this way.

          Prove me wrong. You can’t.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox dude…chill the fuck out. I’m studying for my finals. I’m going to get back to everyone (not just you) when it’s over next week. I don’t live on this website, jesus.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee, chill yer own self. You have had plenty of time to lie all over the place about Ron Paul, that’s why I called ya out.

          Hope ya do well on yer finals.

          Hope also that you are an honest & open minded person. All I ask is an honest open minded evaluation of Ron. Not the repetition of fringe media analysis & the deceptive spin they put on Ron’s words & stances on issues as the establishment tries to torpedo the only true threat to the $ pig trough most in the fed govt feed from. Including the military industrial complex.

          OK, now we both B chilled, study hard do well & get back.

          Please know I am not trying to put you down, though it does seem like it at times I think. It is that I get frustrated when people attack Ron Paul but never prove their case using what Ron himself has said or written.

          My comments are directed at your words, not you. If I have attacked you personally I apologize. That is not a tactic I use on purpose.

          Good luck on yer tests. Always hated tests. :-)

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister buy slaves from southerners who were unwilling to sell them and ship them back to africa were they will be re-enslaved by southerners under their new confederate country all over again. sounds like a perfect plan.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox what challenge?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox you are dumb.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • ianqmacallister

            mmmdee has to resort to insults because she can not refute the arguments of her opponents.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Reality Check

      @David25 That’s a very nice fantasy world to live in, but do you have time to boycott every single organization that discriminates. You finish with buses, but then what about trains, trolleys, mortgage lending, policing, jury selection. How do you boycott the court system? You say the government should have stood up and protected Americans’ right to free speech, but the fact is the Federal government did. Did you forget that little fact? When Americans were killed and police failed to investigate, Federal agents were sent to investigate. When Americans wanted to attend the public schools they had the full right attend, yep, the Federal government had to step in. Instead of putting out these fires one by one, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 sought to say enough is enough. If Paul has an issue with American’s being guaranteed the rights they were born with, then I have an issue with Paul claiming he stands up for the rights of all Americans.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @Reality Check I could boycott the most of those services actually, especially since there are plenty of people who just want your money and don’t care what color your skin is. Jury selection should have some kind of regulation on it to keep a fair jury. The Civil Rights Act did nothing to stop police from racial profiling, which is still out of control so that failed and Paul is the only one who has the guts to take that on. And if you say letting people get hosed down and beaten is free speech I’m sure the Occupy people would disagree. Schools shouldn’t be public and tax credits should be available for homeschooling so parents are responsible for their kids education not the rest of us. If you want to change public opinion you have to get out change people’s minds by example. No amount of govn’t is going to change someone’s morals, it will just make them resent others more.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • JoshuaChavers

    @Ianjmacdonald@classicliberalism@ClintFitzgerald You can hire all the non-whites you want if they are more qualified. You get fined when you start hiring whites over more qualified blacks and can not even hide the fact you are doing it simply because they are black.

    White people have it soooo hard in America.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • ianqmacallister

    @Ianjmacdonald@jwpa13

    You will note that MacDonald didn’t use the phrase “degrade into a mostly ethnic student body”; jwpa13 did.

    Regarding the “current egalitarian view on race,” it’s anti-scientific bunk inspired by cultural Marxism. Peoples are not interchangeable, Negroes are not merely Caucasians wrapped in dark skin. Read Why Race Matters by Michael Levin (1997). I see that it has been updated and re-released November 2011. See also the works by Arthur Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton, and Richard Lynn. Also read Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept, Biology and Philosophy 25 (2010), 143-162, by Neven Sesardic, professor of philosophy at Lingnan University, Hong Kong.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Ianjmacdonald

    @classicliberalism

    Ever heard of the Congressional Black Caucus? They exist for one purpose: examining legislation in terms of its benefits for blacks. They meet on federal property while on the public dime, and yet they do not admit non-blacks.

    It is a racist organization.

    Ever heard of national Council of La Raza (“The Race”)? They are a federally-funded brown supremacist organization.

    Non-whites are free to associate as non-whites without being excoriated by the media, or investigated and prosecuted by the government. And everyone thinks that this is normal.

    Whites are not allowed the same rights. All I demand is equal rights for whites. We are not demanding anything different than what other races demand.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

  • Ianjmacdonald

    @classicliberalism

    By forbidding deed covenants, federal civil rights laws prevent whites from establishing their own communities.>if other people bother you by simply existing, you have the choice to leave.I have a better idea: restore private property rights and freedom fo association.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Ianjmacdonald

    @classicliberalism@ClintFitzgerald

    All I know is that if I fail to hire enough “non-whites,” federal regulators will fine me. When it come to enforcing privileges for non-whites in BRA (Black Run America), lefties somehow have no problem recognizing race.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • alim

    I appreciate your remarks. England brought about a broadly successful end to racism in pretty fast measure, based on groups of citizens who spoke out against it and – (herein may be the ‘kick-start’ you suggest) – slave owners were paid by the government for losses from the freeing of slaves that had previously been their ‘property’. England did many things to curb slavery – Wikpedia has a good amount of historical information. Though many people spoke out against slavery in America, our government took a different approach to dealing with slaves and with slave owners and of course the Civil War carved a chasm between north and south that we still deal with today.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Hmm

    The Birthplace of Reagan America and Modern Conservative Political Strategy, An Excerpt from an Interview with Eventual RNC Chairman Lee Atwater in 1981

    Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry S. Dent, Sr. and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [the new Southern Strategy of Ronald Reagan] doesn’t have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he’s campaigned on since 1964 and that’s fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster.

    Questioner: But the fact is, isn’t it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

    Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Gregor97

    It seems some people don’t understand. Ron Paul doesn’t want the government’s hand in private business. You don’t have a right to other people’s products, money, service or employment. However in public buildings such as libraries, it’s a different story, because everyone paid for it, it belongs to everyone and thus Ron Paul believes there should be no discrimination in public buildings.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @Gregor97 So if Private Businesses want to buy and sell slaves, dump acid into drinking water, and do just about any horrendous thing they feel they need to do, they should be allowed to do so without restrain? really?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @mmmdee@Gregor97 Humans aren’t a commodity and he adheres to strict property rights which doesn’t allow you to pollute your neighbors air or land.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Redmond J

          @David25@mmmdee@Gregor97 Polluted air and water are famous for obeying real estate boundaries.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @David25@Gregor97 Yeah, but Big Corporations don’t give a flying fuck. Without regulations they will do whatever they want to do period. History has shown this time and time again. Read about when America was laissez-Faire, before the progressive era, and how bad it was. Heck, look at other countries RIGHT NOW, with no regulations on Big Businesses or the environment. It’s shit. Proper shit. He can believe in a strict property blah blah all day long, but reality CORPORATIONS DON’T. and they have proven it again and again! without regulations on them, THEY WILL DO AS THE PLEASE. And what can poor people do about it? Without money, all they get is a shit lawyer. A shit lawyer vs millions of dollars in the Judge’s pocket from the corporation = nothing getting done, and America going back to it’s state before the progressive era. And if you’ve never heard of such a time, you really need to read about it, and learn.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee , says you. If a big corp pollutes ect they will go out of business.

          No sane person would do business with them. The free market would shut them down. Pollution & such aw on the downhill BEFORE govt stepped.

          Here is ‘progressive’ from old school progs.

          Margaret Sanger:

          GB Shaw:

          0bama-

          Hill Clinton-lies about what a liberal & a ‘progressive’ is. 0 lies about where he gets donations.

          Besides, can you please show us where Ron calls for NO He calls for regulations? Didn’t think so. He calls for a great reduction of regs, but never says NO REGS. He is NOT an anarchist.

          Don’t you know ron wants to RESTORE the true law of the land, the US Constitution to it’s rightful place. For that he gets hammered by big govt socialists & control freak supporting fringe media.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Reality Check

          @SamFox re “No sane person would do business with them.” Or the businesses would move to India, Mexico, China, or some other country were environmental abuses can be ignored by the American consumer.

          http://izismile.com/2010/04/19/slaves_at_chinese_factory_that_produces_for_microsoft.html

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox BP pollutes the air. has it gone out of business?

          Ron paul’s website says

          A PRO-ENERGY PRESIDENT

          As President, Ron Paul will lead the fight to:

          * Remove restrictions on drilling, so companies can tap into the vast amount of oil we have here at home.

          * Repeal the federal tax on gasoline. Eliminating the federal gas tax would result in an 18 cents savings per gallon for American consumers.

          * Lift government roadblocks to the use of coal and nuclear power.

          * Eliminate the ineffective EPA. Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create – not to Washington.

          http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/energy/

          and then:

          REAL SOLUTIONS

          As President, Ron Paul will lead the way out of this crisis by:

          * Opposing all unfunded mandates and unnecessary regulations on small businesses and entrepreneurs.

          http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/economy/

          excuse me for interpreting that as no regulations on big companies. *eye roll*

          hey can YOU tell ME where he says “i dont call for no regulation, just a great reduction of regulation?”

          I THOUGHT SO.

          and stop flooding this place with opinionated youtube videos. that counts as nothing.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • scottg1089

        @mmmdee@Gregor97 nobody is opening a goddamn slave shop. jesus christ open your f’n eyes. if people want to say black people can’t come into their business then fine, that’s up to them but when you’re selling the same goods as that person down the block and you sell to all races would anyone shop at the racist’s store (racist’s, obviously)? ignorant to even ask a question like that.. selling slaves… sigh

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @scottg1089@mmmdee@Gregor97 Nobody’s opening a goddamn slave shop? how silly are you. Today, more slavery is going on than ever before. Educate yourself bro. The only reason that police can crack down on businesses that engage in slave trade is because of the thirteenth amendment. Something that Ron Paul disagrees it with because he thinks it would have made more sense for the union to buy all the slaves from the confederacy instead of force them to end slavery. How that makes any fucking sense is beyond me, cause (just like you), he has so much faith in racist, ignorant white people. You believe that every white person is sane enough not to open a slave shop (even though they are thousands of businesses in America and Europe importing and trading slaves to this day ) and He believes every racist, ignorant white person back then would agree to sell their slaves when they knew they weren’t going to have any more slaves to do their work. really?

          In the 1960s when the Civil Rights Bill was introduced, things were horrendously bad for black people. Get your head out of your ass bro. When Black people tried seating in the front of the bus, they were beating and told to go back, when businesses refused to serve black people, they were celebrated. The white people then are not the white people now, idiot. They weren’t moral enough to say “oh, i’ll go down the road and buy stuff from a non racists place” they WERE the racists and LOVED the racists. This was a time when 2 FUCKING MILLION WHITE PEOPLE were openly and unashamedly KKK members. The ONLY way for black people to move forward and start a process towards true equality was if the government helped them as it was meant to do under the 14th amendment. Period. There is no other way. You are ignorant to believe white people back in the 1960s were so good, that they’d happily just give black people full equality without much struggle. You need to go back and read your history,

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • scottg1089

          @mmmdee@Gregor97 i didn’t even read your entire post honestly, but from the other 2 posts, and the first 3 or 4 sentences you typed this time you’re either A) scared of the white man (lol) or B) you’re a racist yourself.

          you are a retard lol. you have to understand by now that white people aren’t against blacks. there’s always going to be a few radicals who are racist (like yourself) just shut the fuck up. and don’t tell people to do research or read anything because you don’t know what the fuck you’re even talking about lol.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • mmmdee

          @scottg1089@Gregor97 ” Dear Scary Black woman, I’m a dumbass who doesn’t read or know anything so i’m just going to call you a white hating racist who needs to shut up, because it makes me feel more secure, I have no better response being that my brain is illogical and cannot respond to reason, and It reinforces my false belief that I’m right and you’re wrong. You see, I know that majority of white people in the 1960s were racist and very much against black people and even today, that there are still a lot of bigoted people in power and a lot of mistreatment of minorities (blacks, Latinos, women, lgbt citizens etc), I mean, I’d have to live in a box not to know that, but i’m just going to close my eyes and whisper blah blah blah to myself in hopes that the scary black woman (being you) will shut the fuck up and let me live my privileged life in my ron paul delusional bubble of nonsense, sincerely yours scottg1089″–Scottg1089 ( December 2011).

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Redmond J

          @scottg1089@mmmdee@Gregor97 Thank you Scott for demonstrating the audience Ron Paul’s newsletters were written to attract.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @scottg1089@Gregor97 Thank You Darcee. Good to know some people still know a lot about history.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @scottg1089 , right on. Besides, the constitution NOW says slavery is illegal. That is the kind of regulation Ron Paul wants to restore, the Constitution.

          mmmdee, you get that yet?

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Redmond J , maybe so. But also remember, Ron did not write the racist crap & had denounced that foolishness many itme.

          The ‘Ron is a racist’ lying smear was answered some years ago.

          Since there is no real dirt to dig up on Dr. Paul, media has to program people into a guilt by association gimmick to try to convince the gullible Homer simpson useful idiots that Ron is bad because he is racist.

          Ron has never been racist. any one who has done any open minded honest research knows that already.

          Note that they attack Ron Rules For Radicals style. They don’t/can’t attack him on his issue stands, his voting record, his speeches or his platform. They don’t want those things exposed to the public or his support would skyrocket faster than it is now.

          This is why those who do honest open minded research support Ron Paul for POTUS 2012!!!

          All they can do against Ron are the RFRs personal attacks that are now where near truthful. It’s a sad commentary on the US citizen that so many are duped by the duds.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee ,lotta words, no proof. Typical.

          Show us where Ron is what you said. Put up the proof in his own words. You can’t.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @mmmdee , actually it was Dems who were most racist. And opposed the civil rights act. They try to hide that & even have the gall to say they are why blacks are free. They like you lie a lot.

          http://www.black-and-right.com/the-democrat-race-lie/

          http://errvideo.com/Links/24/

          http://www.suwanneegop.com/NBRA%20Civil%20Rights%20Newsletter-2.pdf

          Now whatcha got to say? I already did your ‘progressive’ ancestors. You gave no reply to that either. Ignoring evidence you are wrong is proving you don’t have much integrity .

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox show us where ron paul is what you said? are you fucking kidding me? i’m talking about the civil rights act in this thread and why it’s useful, not about who ron paul is. can you fucking read or are you a blind moron? can you tell me what i said about ron paul? cause last time i checked i was talking about the civil rights act and how useful it was when it was put in place. YOU ARE A FUCKING TROLL, DO YOU UNDERSTAND? A FUCKING TROLL.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • SamFox

        @mmmdee , you going to answer my challenge? Betcha can’t.

        SamFox

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox jesus christ. shutup troll.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Joe

        A truly free market prevents abuses like this. If you don’t like businesses that do these things, you don’t have to buy their products. If enough people don’t buy their products, then they are forced from economic necessity to change or go out of business. It is only when government gets involved and passes laws that allow bad behavior to exist that there are problems because the law negates consumer sentiment as a motivator for change because why should a business change when the government has put laws in place allowing them to do what they do?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @Gregor97 I mean, since Private Business are supposed to be “untouchable” or something? right?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Redmond J

        @mmmdee@Gregor97 I don’t suppose it’s even worth pointing out that in Ron Paul’s world the Civil Rights activists were criminals trespassing on private property while the owners of No Dogs, Blacks or Jews establishments were simply citizens defending their property rights.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • SamFox

          @Redmond J , no it is not worth pointing out unless you can back it up.

          You some kind of frog or toad? You sure made a big unsubstantiated leap on that one!!

          More RFR character assassination via a flimsy guilt by made up association ploy.

          What a gross attempt at deception. YUCK!!

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Gregor97

        You obviously haven’t educated yourself very well on Libertarian thought. People and businesses can do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t violate anyone’s rights. So they can’t violate anyone’s property, physically harm anyone, force people to work for them etc. However not hiring or providing services to anyone are not in violation of any right, however forcing them to hire or sell is.

        Try reading this: http://www.dailypaul.com/196432/the-right-to-be-racist

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @Gregor97 not hiring or providing services to anyone based on their gender, sexual orientation or race is not a violation of any right? how so?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Gregor97

          @mmmdee

          Yes it’s not a violation, as you don’t have a right to THEIR money, products, service, or employment.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          Because you have no right to buy goods or services from me. My labor is my own. For you to assert that you are entitled to come onto my property and buy goods or services from me is to assert that I am your slave.

          I am a free man desiring to live in a free society. I shall enter into contracts only with those with whom I wish to do business, and who wish to do business with me.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Gregor97

        @mmmdee@Gregor97

        I know you’re thinking that if businesses are allowed to be prejudiced, they will be prejudiced. Yeah, maybe like 0.00001%. The reason being that public opinion has changed drastically from very racist to very anti-racist. Just look at the things people say now vs. the 30s when racial slurs were commonplace.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • mmmdee

          @Gregor97 You live in a bubble lol.

          In countries were there are no regulations of business, AMERICAN businesses open sweat shops, with horrible working conditions and low pay, basically slave labor. In the 1960s, when the civil rights act was introduced, 99.9% of white businesses aka businesses in power WERE prejudiced. And if the government left them alone, IT WOULD HAVE CONTINUED. bigots just dont wake up one day in morning and decide not to be bigots.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Gregor97

          @mmmdee@Gregor97

          Your first statement is invalid as no country has free markets AND American “sweatshops”. All because there are no regulations on business doesn’t make it a free market; you also need no regulations on the workers and consumers. Otherwise it’s a Fascist system.

          Now moving on to your second statement. I recognize that there where many prejudiced businesses in the 60’s; but that doesn’t mean it would have continued. The majority of people were changing their opinion on race, and the market would have strongly reflected that; there were no reasons to have the government take over the whole scene. Just look at businesses who make one controversial comment; they’re dead not because of government, but because of their consumers.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • mmmdee

          @Gregor97 The majority of people were changing their opinion on race in the 1960s (i’m assuming you are talking of white people here), really? can you back that up with the source you got your information from? I want to check it out, because i’ve been in AP World History, AP U.S History, and AP Government and own multiple history books, and i have never once heard or read tabout majority of white people (who ran everything in the 1960s) changing their opinion on race without government intervention (or prior to government intervention). So Please cite your information, thanks. I would love to know where this is coming from.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  • jwpa13

    Mr. Paul, the constitution as originally written acknowledged people’s rights to OWN other people. It took a war and constitutional amendments to end that and another amendment to give women the rights the founding fathers gave to men ONLY

    To have life, liberty and a CHANCE at the pursuit of happiness one must have decent job.and a decent education and to some degree a decent home. Your position, taken to its logical conclusion, means that liberty gives personal property owners the right to deny liberty to others.

    Your strict interpetation of our constitution would once again give store owners the right to deny any group I do not prefer, jobs If I owns the biggest or only store in a town I can refuse to sell food, clothing, the right to use MY bathrooms to certain groups. and in short order turn back the clock to pre-civil rights times and have segregation today, tomorrow and forever.

    NO SIR, the FEDERAL government has a role to play in ensuring that all sexes and races get a level playing field when it comes to the delivery of basic things NATIONWIDE. Separate is not equal. If a mostly white town in a mostly white state decided to allow “private all white ” schools to exist, the public school in at least some of that state’s towns would over time degrade into a mostly ethnic student body. Without the interaction between young whites and other races (who tend to come from poorer backgrounds) we would begin to slip back into more polarized communities. The public schools would be in competition with private ones for the best teachers and the best of all available resources Without a broad spectrum of candidates to run for election to public school boards, public schools would surely suffer and in the course of time die on the vine. The inner city schools of large metropolitan areas now need state tax aide to remain viable, and that is WITH laws to accomplish this.

    I like your ideas on the “FED” sir, but on the whole your vision of states rights , and a government so small as to not be able to protect its weakest citizens from the tyranny of the majority leads me away from supporting you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Ianjmacdonald

      @jwpa13

      >constitution as originally written acknowledged people’s rights to OWN other people.

      Oh really? Please identify the specific section which acknowledges the right to own other people.

      >Your position, taken to its logical conclusion, means that liberty gives personal property owners the right to deny liberty to others.

      You have no right to use my bathroom. You have no right to join my club. You have no right to be my neighbor, renter, or employee. Why would you want to force other people to associate with you? Are you really that so disagreeable?

      >If a mostly white town in a mostly white state decided to allow “private all white ” schools to exist, the public school in at least some of that state’s towns would over time degrade into a mostly ethnic student body.

      So what? Then they would not have to deal with white oppression.

      >public schools would surely suffer and in the course of time die on the vine.

      As opposed to the suberb job that they are doing now?

      The cold hard truth is that many of us want absolutely nothing to do with many of you. We want you to go away and leave us alone, but you keep blabbering on about how you have some kind of right to force your presence on us.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      • http://aegrwer.com/ true

        1- Ok, in the Constitution, it acknoledges slavery and says Congress cannot move against it for 20 years. 3- Your argument that then minorities would not have to deal w/ racism is racist, ignorant, offensive, and stupid. Segregation is considered by pretty much everyone else in the world besides you to be bad. If you are truley against the ruling of Brown v. Board, then I feel sorry for you.

        4- They do have a right to force you to do certain things. They are the government! It would be nice if the government did not have to regulate things, but when people are ignorant, they need to step in! By being a racist asshole, you force the government to be larger!

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          Who argued that minorities would not ever have to deal with “racism”? If you are a minority in a country, you might just have to deal with the fact people prefer the company of their own kind. If segregation is universally considered so bad, then why do people when left to themselves prefer the company of their own kind? Sunday morning church services and backyard bar-b-ques, for example. Did you know that forced integration in prisons is a complete failure? Did you know everyone in corrections knows that assigning cellmates according to race reduces the level of prison violence? And yet the race deniers are not at all concerned with the results of their policies. In their world, the only thing that counts is that they have such awesomely noble intentions.Why must the government force people to associate with people against their will? Why would *you* want to associate with someone who does not want to associate with you? Are you really so loathsome that you need the government to force other people to associate with you?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • ianqmacallister

          If segregation is so universally considered bad, then why must liberals insist on laws forbidding it? If diversity is so wonderful, then must it be crammed down our throats? Are you so loathsome that you must use laws to force yourself onto the company of those who do not wish to be around you?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • SamFox

          @true show us where “1- Ok, in the Constitution, it acknoledges slavery and says Congress cannot move against it for 20 years.” That’s horse wash. Where in the world did you get that?

          Govt is limited in what they can “force us to do”. That is what the Constitution you so dreadfully fear is for.

          You want more go up a few posts. I left plenty about the US founders & slavery.

          SamFox

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @SamFox hey troll, have you heard of dred scott vs. stanford? you know the case that shows not only how the constitution acknowledges slavery but how slaves were PROPERTY and slave masters were PROTECTED by the constitution and law. if not look it up. this is something i learned in 10th grade so you sound like an idiot.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • SamFox

      @jwpa13 Horse feathers. You are a liar. Prove me wrong with Ron’s own words.

      You Homer Simpson Spooky Dude shills are so easy.

      If you knew anything, you would know that the Founder’s constructed the Constitution in such as way the slavery could be abolished.

      https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.tv/lMi7KC4_DbA

      http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/respub/v6n1/boyd.html

      http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=99

      “I like your ideas on the “FED” sir, but on the whole your vision of states rights , and a government so small as to not be able to protect its weakest citizens from the tyranny of the majority leads me away from supporting you.” ???? Have any citations to prove your point? It is clear you have no clue about what this paragraph says.

      You are so far off base on that one, it’s almost amusing. Not trying to attack or demean. I am just mystified how you could come up with such an inaccurate statement.

      I am also baffled by your saying that Ron’s strict adherenec to the Constituion is a bad thing. “Your strict interpetation of our constitution would once again give store owners the right to deny any group I do not prefer, jobs If I owns the biggest or only store in a town I can refuse to sell food, clothing, the right to use MY bathrooms to certain groups. and in short order turn back the clock to pre-civil rights times and have segregation today, tomorrow and forever.”

      I agree with Ron. If you let the fed govt over step it’s Constitutional restraints an inch, how long will it be before they are every where in control of every thing. That IS the situation we are facing today. More & more liberty & civil rights of ALL citizens are now threatened because people thought “Oh, that’s a good thing for the fed govt to do.” People all to often fail to realize they opened a Pandora’s box by allowing some of their freedoms to be eroded, no matter how “good the intentions’ may be & how much more the govt would eventually gobble up.

      If you don’t want to be thought a complete air head, please prove your case. You can’t because your contentions are no where found in anything Ron has said or written.

      If I’m wrong, please show us how, in Ron’s own words. Not media ‘analysis’ or opinion.

      Bethca can’t get ‘er done!

      SamFox

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • ClintFitzgerald

    Frank Roman is right. He said, ” Freedom of association. The FedGov has no business whatsoever in determining who we associate or do business with,” and that is moral.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • classicliberalism

      @ClintFitzgerald

      Thank you, sir! It’s hard discussing racial issues because people get so nasty and personal. It’s usually the liberals who do that, too. They scream racism or make personal attacks about you (like saying ‘get out of your mom’s basement’) or say “there are more nonwhites than whites” (yet they claim to be against majority rule), etc.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • http://aegrwer.com/ true

        One of the reasons you may find it hard to talk to people about this stuff is because you are racist! Racism was a huge problem, and still is. If you knew anything about America, you would know that minority rights are an important part of our philosophy. Affirmative action may be flawed, but it is still outweighed by the benifits of it.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          I have no trouble talking to people about race. I see that you exhibit the typical knee-jerk response of anti-white bigots in that you simply denounce as :racist” anyone with whom you disagree.

          “Anti-racist” is code for “anti-white.”

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Redmond J

          @ianqmacallister ”

          I have no trouble talking to people about race. I see that you exhibit the typical knee-jerk response of anti-white bigots in that you simply denounce as :racist” anyone with whom you disagree.

          “Anti-racist” is code for “anti-white.””If Ron Paul isn’t the guy who wrote the Ron Paul newsletters, Ron Paul’s supporters are eager to remind us that they’re the guys who read them.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister hhahahaha….please tell me you’re not serious..

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          All I demand is that every individual be treated equally before the law, and that property rights and freedom of association be restored.

          I do not seek anti-black laws, I do not seek the restoration of Negro slavery.

          And one other thing, speaking, globally, whites are the true minority.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @ClintFitzgerald lolololol. Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests, not the freedom of whites to actively discriminate against minorities. You are really clueless about the constitution.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      • David25

        @mmmdee@ClintFitzgerald It does not however allow federal government to force people to do something, that would be infringing on people’s freedoms to do what they want.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • ianqmacallister

        Freedom of association means that I get to decide who I want to associate with, and that you get to decide who you want to associate with. You have no right to get an invitation the parties that I hold, or the nightclub that I operate. Likewise you are under no obligation to admit me to your church, or allow me to join whatever clubs you might run.

        It’s called freedom.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        • mmmdee

          @ianqmacallister Hey, i copied and pasted word for word the definition of freedom of association as defined by constitutions around the word (not just the U.S btw), and the definition the U.S courts accept when ruling on cases. In case your brain did not comprehend it the first time, let me repeat it for you–Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. Does this mention invitations to parties in anyway? really? and let’s get real here, when have any minorities went to court about not being invited to parties? seriously? you are a fucking moron. So let me say this as slowly as possible, just for you, NO. ONE. IS. FORCING. YOU. TO. INVITE. ANYONE. TO. YOUR. PARTY. NO. ONE. SAID. THEY. HAD ANY. RIGHT. TO. GET INVITATIONS. TO. PARTIES. YOU. HOLD. OR. ANYONE. HOLDS. YOU. ARE. BEING. DELUSIONAL. I. REPEAT. YOU. ARE. BEING. DELUSIONAL. seek help before it’s too late.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          “Freedom of association” means my freedom to associate with whom I want.

          “when have any minorities went [sic] to court”

          mmmdee prefers to throw a tantrum and call names instead of having a discussion.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • ianqmacallister

          OK, mmmdee, let’s accept your definition just for the sake of argument.

          “Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.”

          You clearly do not believe that whites should also enjoy freedom of association. How would you react to a group of white people coming together *as whites* to collectively express, promote, pursue and defend their common interests *as white people*? We all know the answer. You people would scream to high heaven! You and the rest of the “teach tolerance” crowd would denounce us all as evil Nazi white supremacists! Liberals have such amazing double standards around the issue of race. Blacks can come together at a meeting of the NAACP without fear of being denounced as “black supremacists.” Latinos can associate through National Council of La Raza (literally “The Race”) without being denounced as a “hate group.” Whites are the only group denied that same right.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  • harddrive1919

    @FrankRoman

    Awwww…Don’t be so sensitive FRANK. There you go again getting your panties in a wad because I don’t share your teenage wet dream. Quit playing the race card and get off the video games kid. Ask your messiah ron paul that if he hates the govt so much, why has he been in it for most of his life. Why doesn’t he decline his govt healthcare? I’ll tell you why, since you need an adult to think for you…..because no private insurance would cover his old ASS….get off the gas and come with a better response moron….I will wear the title of racist coming from a reactionary idiot like yourself….good day FRANK ROMAN…lol

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Informme

      @harddrive1919@FrankRoman

      That’s silly. Government is supposed to be a place for debate and change. To suggest that Paul leave government because he objects to what happens there is to say that he should run away from what he believes in. He’s not a career politician; he had a successful medical practice in Texas. He’s in Washington because he felt compelled. And can you please provide the relevant links to where Paul discusses his GOVERNMENT healthcare? I wouldn’t be very surprised if it emerged that he had only private healthcare. In fact, if you were to follow him more closely, you’d learn that he does not participate in any government program which would benefit him personally at the expense of the taxpayers, e.g. the congressional pension plan. Equally, he has vowed that as president, he would only accept the average American income (about $39,000 per year) instead of the current salary of $400,000.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • scottg1089

        @Informme@harddrive1919@FrankRoman well said sir, it’s a good thing harddrive is a big boy and can think for himself.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • FrankRoman

    Freedom of association. The FedGov has no business whatsoever in determining who we associate or do business with.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • TroyWilliams!

      Some people see a desired ends and are morally ambivalent about how those ends are reached. The social engineers who ripped our society apart with an experiment that the majority of Americans didn’t want finally have their near dystopian society fractured at every conceivable social fault line.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • classicliberalism

        @TroyWilliams!

        I remember seeing a video with Humprey (I think?) and Thurmond. Thurmond said the civil rights bill would force businesses to do business with people they didn’t want to, that it would lead to discrimination against whites (which it has) and that it’s best for people to accept people on their own and without laws telling them to. Instead of passing laws making it illegal for people to discriminate against you, why not create your own business? Why is it wrong to discriminate on race (something you don’t chose), but not wrong for a bar to only hire young, pretty females? I mean, they didn’t choose to be young or pretty.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • IanMacAlister

          Should women have the freedom to establish their own health clubs so that they can work out free from the leering male gaze?

          Should black bar owners have the freedom to not serve drinks to known Klansmen?

          Why would someone even want to patron a tavern, restaurant or hotel where they were not welcome?

          Should I be forced to hire someone not because I think he’s best for the job, but to satisfy some quota set down by some federal diversicrat?

          How can the Black Congressional Caucus meet in publicly-owned buildings on the public dime while excluding non-blacks without facing legal action from the Department of Justice?

          Why does the National Council of La Raza (“The Race”), a racial advocacy group, get federal tax dollars year after year? Should tax dollars really be spend funding a racist agenda?

          If I run “gay marriage freedom of association” through google I get back 1,700,000 hits. Is it hypocritical for leftists to invoke the principle of “freedom of association” when advocating for gay marriage while denying freedom of association in just about any other context?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • mmmdee

      @FrankRoman is that really how freedom of association is defined or are you pulling bs out of your ass? think about it.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0