How do you feel about letting blacks eat at The Olive Garden - According to Rand Paul the owner should decide. Soooo if you went to a nice restaurant with your black co-worker and the owner thought blacks were "Jungle Bunnies" - he could seat you and tell your black friend to take a hike back to MauMau land. He said: Paul argued that Maddow's questions weren't practical, but were instead abstract. She asked Paul to tell that to protesters who were beaten in their struggle for equal rights: Maddow:... Howabout desegregating lunch counters? Paul: Well what it gets into then is if you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant even though the owner of the restaurant says 'well no, we don't want to have guns in here' the bar says 'we don't want to have guns in here because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each-other.' Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant? These are important philosophical debates but not a very practical discussion... Maddow: Well, it was pretty practical to the people who had the life nearly beaten out of them trying to desegregate Walgreen's lunch counters despite these esoteric debates about what it means about ownership. This is not a hypothetical Dr. Paul. Ahhh - so privately owned restaurants should be able to keep out blacks. It's kinda like letting someone bring a gun into a bar. EXCUSE ME?? It makes me feel like I'm living back in Jackson, MS (I lived there) in 1961. I bet hes' even got black friends! What a pile of crap!! Vote Tea Party!! NOT!!
I think he's just stupid, personally =P Fuck, I wish he wasn't related to Ron Paul =/ I'm never having children if I want to become President =D
For those who are not familiar with Rand Paul - he is the son of Ron Paul. He won the Republican primary in Kentucky as the Tea Party candidate.
Paul is an idiot. Nobody is going to gain anything by arguing against a law that was passed in 1964 and is still considered a landmark advancement in American civilization, with no realistic possibility of ever being repealed. If he was smart, he would have kept his views on that subject to himself. Instead, this will probably become the issue that ends his political career.
Exactly. Nothing he said is necessarily wrong. It does blur the lines between private and state that have existed in America since it's creation. Does it go too far? Maybe in some rare cases, in fact, most likely in some rare cases. But this is not a politician's issue. Not yet, probably not ever. This is a courts' issue. And every politician should know the difference.
I know Snake feels like this is a legal issue, but I disagree - Though the issue might be decided by the courts - the issue is reallly human compassion, respect and dignity. I can not even imagine being barred from using a restroom because of something I have NO control over. Or being denied being served at a restaurant or drinking from the water fountain around back, if any. I saw this in Jackson, Ms in the 60's - I was part of it. No more! Perhaps in Nazi Germany - but not in America. I am white, I have the political power, I am the majority - therefore - I am better than you - You will take what I am willing to allow you to have. We can not be like the rich man who allows crumbs to fall from the table for the poor beggar - It may be freedom for the rich man - but it is enslavement for the beggar. What Rand Paul says IS necessarily wrong.
What about human compassion, respect and dignity for those who only want to be around a certain group? So you disagree that it blurs the lines between private and state? Cause you sure haven't said a word about that. I've been discriminated against BECAUSE of the current laws and attitudes on race. At my highschool, almost no scholarships were for white kids. I come from a poor home, but not a poor minority home - so I don't deserve help. There were government scholarships and grants that I would have been eligible for IF I was a minority, but because I was white I was just above the income limit. My first day of Community College, my Java professor looks around the room, sees all males (and mostly white ones) and tells us "If you were planning on transferring to CMU (my dream school), forget it. In all my years here, only two students have been accepted. Both were female, one was a African American, as well. CMU has trouble meeting it's [affirmative action] quota of female students because females aren't as interested in technological jobs - so it only looks for female students here." I can't help that I was born in the majority. I can't help that I was born poor. I can't help that statistically my race makes me more able to succeed in life because of economics that I didn't really receive a piece of. I HAVE been discriminated on because of Affirmative Action. What he said is not an issue of "racism" vs "compassion"; this is real life and it's all different colors.
I don't know Duck's particular situation and there are things about afirmative action that irk me also. However, to even discuss going back to a time when a black man or woman couldn't go into a dining establishment, or movie, or bathroom should be abhorant to every American who's sight has not been blinded by racist attitudes - either taught to them or perceived by them. Organizations like the tea party play on those attitudes. As Dylan said "You're better than them, you been born with white skin," they explain. And the Negro's name Is used it is plain For the politician's gain As he rises to fame. "Only a pawn in the game" Which is exactly right Don't look to Wall Street or Corporations or Banks to blame for the problems of struggling white folks - it's the poor black man's fault. And Rand Pauls idea to just let business do what they want - as we have seen - leads to malicious, cruel, hate filled treatment of those who are in the minority - particularly dark skinned minorities.
I am not discussing that. I am discussing considering the possibility that the Civil Rights Act could have been better. Whom do you mean when you say "organizations"? The Tea Party is an organization of people - but who are the people you are referring to that are doing the playing? Is Rand Paul one of them? How am I better than a black man? I've known black people with much wealthier households than my own. Why should I be treated like I am better than a black man, just because I am white? I told you how Affirmative Action has affected me for a reason. Minorities are given more opportunity now. That's not creating balance. The Civil Rights law was made to protect blacks' freedom - and I recognize that. Blacks are still statistically more likely to be disadvantaged because of the racism of America's forefathers -- I'm not denying that. But that has nothing to do with if the Civil Rights Act of 1964 oversteps the boundaries between public and private. There is a possibility that there could be a better way to protect the freedom of minorities in America -- that appeases those who feel that it does blur the lines between private and public. What? =S Who is saying it's the black man's fault? Why do you keep raising this to an issue of black versus white - without giving me any reasons why this is an issue of black versus white? He never said to let the businesses do what they want though. He only said that he thinks it blurs the line between public and state.
Rand Paul knows who his voters are (his "base"). In that case, he's crazy like a fox. He may disgust many of us, but he (sadly) appeals to a lot of people. What was his margin of victory in the primary? 25 points? It was a landslide. Strange days indeed.
The line between public and state is blurred all the time. It must be blurred on occasion when "public" is doing damage to society. Does regulating Wall Street against schemes that defraud the public at large blur the line? Of course, according to your theory Wall Street should do what Wall Street wants to do. It is their right as a private business. Such schemes harm society so they must be regulated. Manufacturing meth? Private enterprise Dumping toxins on the side of the road? Private enterprise Blocking people from entering a business for having different colored skin? That is private enterprise too and needs to be regulated I really appreciate you sharing your views - it makes for a lively discussion. I love it.
Thank you. You are completely right about this. But now that I am enlightened (and think that I need to work on some feelings of cultural inequity =P), I still feel that he could be just stupid. I mean, I clearly fell for the illusion, why couldn't he?
Giving preferential treatment to one, because of an inferior position in the culture, does not discriminate against the others. For example, requiring wheel chair ramps for those who cannot walk does not discriminate against those who can; or, giving food assistance to the needy does not discriminate against the wealthy. As a white male, you have an institutionalized advantage and there is no way you can dispute this fact. .
It really isn't a matter of personal business rights or state rights, it is a matter of whether people of color are indeed people and human. If so then they are to be afforded all the same rights and privileges granted by the Constitution. Any private business owner does have the right to provide service to whomever they want, but if a business actively discriminates against a portion of the population, they are only hurting themselves monetarily in the long run. I also am annoyed by what is basically reverse discrimination, but that is not the issue here. It's simply are blacks humans and citizens, if so shut the fuck up and serve them lunch! Thats my opinion on it, and yes Rand Paul is a dipshit for many reasons.
I've been denied the use of a restroom because it was for "customers only". What he says may offend your sensibilities, but nothing he is saying is "wrong". If Maddow were not pushing for emotional ratings, then the whole discussion wouldn't have had the air of controversy.
