Ron Paul: You understand that as proprietor, I have the right to refuse service to anyone - er - or not, of course, as the case may be... Little Woman: Try to special - fried misspokes.
“The true measure of a man is not his intelligence or how high he rises in this freak establishment. No, the true measure of a man is this: how quickly can he respond to the needs of others and how much of himself he can give.”
Young Randal Ron’s son is abandoning his principles to get elected like every other so-called conservative Republican. Learning to lie or respond with none answers. On the other hand Bill Clinton and the Democrats stabbed the working class in the back with NAFTA. But the working class wanted to be Reagan Democrats and are happy to vote against their interest. Real Libertarians are disgusted with both parties.
Jade in terms of platform, the Republican Party is very close to the principles of the Libertarians, so it is natural for Libertarians to try to work within the party to restore its guiding vision. The Democratic Party might align socially in some ways with the Libertarians, but fiscally and governmentally, there is just too large a gap.
He’s uncomfortable with sacrificing the Constitutional right to free association for any reason. The savage! But granting Constitutional right to noncitizen terrorists is obviously OK and you’re a racist if you object.
Private businesses that discriminate on race cost themselves money and strengthen non-discriminating competitors. Government force is liable to be counterproductive if not outright abused. But go ahead, feel instead of think. Keep chanting “Yes We Can!” with the other sheeple.
Hmm… I think it depends on what part of government, and of course “platform” is completely different from execution. Neither party has reduced the size of our government in many, many, many years.
“Private businesses that discriminate on race cost themselves money and strengthen non-discriminating competitors”
Race is just the ‘easy’ one. One could just have easily have replaced ‘race’ with “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Unfortunately it’s more acceptable for businesses to outright discriminate on those things (our government does this, which is why we really need ENDA to pass) and not suffer economically, which is why Rachel Maddow used “race” as in the argument, I think.
Some Fortune 500 companies, for example, such as the one I work for, have anti-discrimination policies that extend further than the government, but then you have to look at the situation in Virginia a little further back where the Virginia attorney general sent out a letter to public schools telling them they didn’t have the authority to protect those minorities once Bob McDonnell stripped them of their protections.
Yes, THAT store changed quickly but none of the others did and yes, it took the government quite a while to push global change through. The facts are that without the government forcing change, there would have been none. Not in business, that is for sure. Libertarians or not, no business that had a meaningful presence was going to put folks of color into positions of power without the insistence of government. Separate but equal education would still be the same farce it was before the civil rights act and follow-on legislation.
Without the civil rights act we would have continued Jim Crow to the detriment of us all.
You free marketers need to be honest with yourselves for a change. People of color and tolerance are here to stay as much as you “geniuses” hate them.
Harley said Rand would have marched with Martin Luther- didn’t realize either of them was THAT old! Boy! Out protesting the Pope and nailing flyers up in Germany!
What Rand Paul said was absolutely correct. I know that left-wing totalitarian scum think it’s OK to try to force other people to live and behave the way THEY think people should, after all that’s just one more way the left and the right are the same. That’s what makes you enemies of liberty, and thus of the entire human species.
And I gotta say, it’s rather bizarre listening to the racist, pro-segregation, pro-racial discrimination left accusing people of being racist merely for supporting the concepts of property rights and individual liberty.
Of course, that’s what you guys are REALLY after: the destruction of liberty, the destruction of property rights, and the enslavement of the human race under a totalitarian global government.
^So you’re in agreement that if someone darker than the KKK hoody you’re wearing can be refused service? Or that its okay to serve your patrons food on dirty dishes to save on soap and water?
Isn’t there some clause about how small [15 or less employees] and religious organizations are allowed to discriminate freely? I know that’s in the ENDA bill. And people can have their little KKK restaurants as long as they’re not open to the public. If you’re open to the public then serve the public, otherwise make it an invite-only and have a litmus tests for skin tone or beliefs, y’know, in case some of them Catholics want to patronize your facility or something.
^I do not understand you señor. If you support someone who has the right to be racist, you would not want to be one? That is like saying you support NASCAR but you think driving around in circles is stupid.
I support gay marriage, that doesn’t mean I want to marry a dude.
This may be a hard concept for any left or right winger to grasp, but I actually support the right of other people to do things that I don’t want to do or that I disapprove of. That is because I have no interest in using threats of violence to force everyone else to be just like me.
Harrison, why don’t you dial down the hostility and spleen a bit, eh? I, at least, have a problem with racism by blacks, and sexism by women. And while there certainly is racism by all parties in the US, there is a difference about being the oppressor versus the oppressed. And as a white American, I don’t really feel like I can declare racism is ended – the test of that is with those discriminated against because of race. Are there people who take advantage of that? Sure. But I also personally know people of color treated shockingly, in a way I would never, ever expect, basically because of their color. (E.g., An African-American Harvard Ph.D of my acquaintance thrown into the back of a police car in Chicago – in cuffs – because his white wife was trying to circumvent the no-parking rule to pick him up at the curb at the airport. Yes, you read that right - she violated the law, and *he* got hauled down to the station.)
Bottom line here, which a lot of people are ignoring, is that the free market does NOT work to eliminate racism if the subset is outnumbered and has the law against them, as was true in the South (and still is where they can get away with it), and indeed in much of the North. Lots of businesses in the South did just fine excluding African-Americans, or allowing them to buy products but not allowing them to get services. And they were excluded from voting to change it. This is exactly what the government should be about – protecting the equal rights of all Americans, including from the “tyranny of the majority.” That’s not being a sheep, that’s upholding our principles. If you can’t deal with that, it says more about you than about liberal principles or liberals.
First off, motivemagus, you offer nothing to support your claim that your friend was treated like that because of his color. Police abuse persons of all colors all over the country.
Second of all, you don’t seem to be able to differentiate between discrimination by government- which is un-Constitutional and perfectly appropriate to address by law- and discrimination by private individuals and businesses, which should be left to the individuals to decide.
You are correct that racism is not “dead” in our society, but you can’t use government to force people to stop being racists. When you attempt to do so, you are trampling on the rights of other people to control their own property and their own lives. The proper remedy is not government force, but social change. MLK did FAR more to help our country move beyond racism with marches and boycotts and acts of civil disobedience than any act of government ever could, and as you yourself point out, federal law can’t do much to change the behavior of racist business owners if their communities are also racist. All the law can REALLY do is force them to hide their racism, which only makes it harder to know just how prevalent racism is in our society, how much progress we’ve made.
It is perfectly acceptable for people to ostracize, boycott, and castigate people who discriminate against others, it is NOT acceptable to use threats of violence- which is what ALL government is- to force changes in their behavior.
Harrison,
Are you saying chaos is an acceptable alternative to the laws that govern us in 2010? Somalia is an example of no effective government. Violence is the norm in Somalia. In the US we have ongoing government and the rule of law. It is far from perfect but this is what we are working with. An ongoing attempt by “We the People” to form a more perfect union, provide for the common defense and protect the general interest” of our citizens.
“This is exactly what the government should be about – protecting the equal rights of all Americans, including from the “tyranny of the majority.””
Wouldn’t it be nice if the government actually did that?
^ Government only controls a couple of square miles of Somalia and therefore can’t interfere with anyone’s “property rights and freedom of association”… your utopia, Harrison_Bergeron?
Somalia? Really? Because our only two choices are violating individual rights or total anarchy?
Refusing to do business with someone is NOT a violation of their rights, it is the exercise of your right to freedom of association, and your property rights.
If, however, the government uses force to compel people to do business against their will, that IS a violation of their rights.
But, as I already know, you folks don’t care about the rights of anyone you don’t like. Like Pat Robertson, you wish to use force to compel people to behave in what you consider to be a moral manner.
^^ The government uses “force” to make sure if I get shot walking down the street there’re consequences. I guess that’s a violation of their rights?
“If, however, the government uses force to compel people to do business against their will”
Wrong. No one is forced to do business with the public.
“Because our only two choices are violating individual rights or total anarchy?”
Because according to you, believing that people should follow a set of public guidelines when dealing with the public is cheerleading a violent police state. If you don’t like absolutes you shouldn’t deal in them.
Harrison, I don’t claim that government can eliminate racism – though I have to say that busing did a surprising amount to reduce open racism in my generation in Charlotte, North Carolina – and I know, I was there. (And people who read the decision might be surprised by a few of the facts, including that the average length of bus ride to school went down under the busing plan.)
What government can do is prevent people from demonstrating racist behavior in public and send a message that this is not acceptable behavior. Forcing people to hide their racism - that is exactly the point. If racism is not permitted in public, people will not absorb racist behavior as “normal” and therefore tacitly accepted.
You still haven’t addressed my main point, which is how do you reduce racism when that is what the majority believes? Come up with a way that both works and is not government – and avoids getting people like MLK shot.
I have to say, it’s this kind of thinking that makes me believe pure libertarianism is naïve. You can certainly gather freely in groups of pure white or pure black (if such a thing existed, which it doesn’t) - but when you interface with the public, that puts you in a different place. Referring to all government action as violence is simply overstating the case in an inflammatory manner to support your point. Make the case that you can reduce racism without government action. And remember the title of Martin Luther King’s book: Why We Can’t Wait. The 1964 Civil Rights act was arguably a century overdue.
So, motivemagus, you want to use government to destroy peoples’ First Amendment rights if you don’t like them. Well isn’t that just great. People have a right to be racist, and to be racist in public. You want to know why I exhibit such hostility and spleen? Because, as I said before, you guys are the enemies of liberty, much like the Segregationists of old, or like the anti-gay folks of today.
The only way to reduce racism in our society is to out against it, refuse to engage in it, refuse to support it, etc. That takes a long time, of course, but it is the only way it can ever truly work. That is how we’ve made so much progress in this country, although most leftists don’t seem to want to acknowledge this progress. Non-cooperation is the most powerful tool there is when it comes to effecting social change.
And yes, government is force. ALL government. EVERYTHING the government does, it does because it has the overwhelming advantage of violent force.
Note, also, that Rand Paul was NOT arguing against the CRA as a whole, but only against certain parts of it.
We don’t even have honest discussions about race anymore. People just look through a modern prism and make assumptions about the past….The Civil Rights Act did some good, no one would argue, but the entire Civil Rights Movement gave rise to racial agitators and craven politicians to the point of swinging many racial issues in the opposite direction. Such as, Jesse Jackson “hustling” corporations and Bill Cosby angering many in the black community for suggesting kids learn proper English and pull up their pants.
Like HarBer said, true change comes from social attainment and educational refinement, not governmental threats.
I never pictured Heckle & Jeckle as being stereotypical “blackface” characters at all, but it’s been years since I’ve seen them. The crows in “Dumbo”, though, are definitely “dialect” characters.
The “King Louie” scene in “Jungle Book” makes me uncomfortable. He’s orange rather than black (and Louis Prima is Italian), but his whole “I Wanna Be Like You” schtick seems patterned after a Harlem big shot who desperately wants to be accepted in Park Avenue society. But the SONG is so great that I turn off my higher brain functions and let my senses swim…
Bakshi’s “Fritz the Cat” has a similar scene of Fritz the Middle Class (“white”) cat getting mixed up with the crows in Harlem, but that’s a deliberate (if mixed) use of the stereotypes. (I say “Bakshi’s” rather than “Crumb’s”, because I don’t know whether that plotline was taken from the source material or was original to the movie. Crumb himself, however, never shied away from broad-stroke stereotypes for fear of giving offense.)
I wasn’t aware of any characters like that in Lulu, but I’m not doubting you. Maybe by the time I was exposed to her they’d already cleaned it up. A lot of the old Disney and Warner Bros. cartoons had stuff they don’t show now, but that doesn’t change the fact that the ones from the same eras which DIDN’T have them remain wonderful.
Periodically one of the Rep Theaters in town puts on a program of old un-PC cartoons (like “Coal Black Riding Hood”), for historical purposes. They’re still great stuff, although I agree that disclaimers (and/or discussion) are appropriate. It’s not censorship, and from the historical standpoint it’s better than burning all the prints…
the Republicans have bin taken over by the tory wing- big government is bad( cept for war/police), no difference (on the effect on the FORM of government) from the ecos small is beautiful gangs on the left, both attack our government.
They run cover for the Royal oil interests-period.
Push him on energy, Republican FORMS of government, and his views( like ALL libertarians), and he dove tails the queen, economist mag, foxnoose….they are all TORY, and RUN to protect the QUEEN( and HER ownership of BP).
already, sarin palin has opened up the attacks” pres. is “un-american” to speak against the crowns oil(BP).
follow the $$$- sarin after giving AK oil fields to BP to “manage” ( they promptly spilled), then quit to take her payoff over at his lordships shop- Sir Murdoxks-foxnoose.
follow the money, left and right…..shows WHO and what supports these tory’s.
same garbage everytime, “gov is too big, yadda, yadda” the U.S. republic “NEEDS” to be broken up, states rights,
and the eco break up the nation into smaller parts.
Just flagged douremimi -twice! They don’t learn, do they?
AVOID http://www.betterwholesaler.com and
http://www.okayfashions.com
Take the ‘Boulder Pledge’ – don’t do ANY business with spammers, EVER!
cfimeiatpap almost 14 years ago
“The true measure of a man is not his intelligence or how high he rises in this freak establishment. No, the true measure of a man is this: how quickly can he respond to the needs of others and how much of himself he can give.”
Read Phillip K Dick………………..
MaryWorth Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Rand Paul would never run a lunch counter let alone EAT at one being the country club elitist he is!
NewgateLudd almost 14 years ago
Young Randal Ron’s son is abandoning his principles to get elected like every other so-called conservative Republican. Learning to lie or respond with none answers. On the other hand Bill Clinton and the Democrats stabbed the working class in the back with NAFTA. But the working class wanted to be Reagan Democrats and are happy to vote against their interest. Real Libertarians are disgusted with both parties.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
“Real Libertarians are disgusted with both parties. ”
That’s what I thought, too, which is why I was surprised to see an “R” beside his name.WarBush almost 14 years ago
Rand Paul needs guns! Lots and lots of guns just in case one of his patrons gets “violent.”
Jascat almost 14 years ago
Rachel Maddow twisted him into a pretzel, and scared him s..tless..GO RACHEL!!
Simon_Jester almost 14 years ago
Libertarian – A Republican who wants to get stoned and have gay sex.
HabaneroBuck almost 14 years ago
Jade in terms of platform, the Republican Party is very close to the principles of the Libertarians, so it is natural for Libertarians to try to work within the party to restore its guiding vision. The Democratic Party might align socially in some ways with the Libertarians, but fiscally and governmentally, there is just too large a gap.
annamargaret1866 almost 14 years ago
cfimeiatpap, and thank you too, for that quote.
Technojunkie almost 14 years ago
He’s uncomfortable with sacrificing the Constitutional right to free association for any reason. The savage! But granting Constitutional right to noncitizen terrorists is obviously OK and you’re a racist if you object.
Private businesses that discriminate on race cost themselves money and strengthen non-discriminating competitors. Government force is liable to be counterproductive if not outright abused. But go ahead, feel instead of think. Keep chanting “Yes We Can!” with the other sheeple.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Hmm… I think it depends on what part of government, and of course “platform” is completely different from execution. Neither party has reduced the size of our government in many, many, many years.
“Private businesses that discriminate on race cost themselves money and strengthen non-discriminating competitors”
Race is just the ‘easy’ one. One could just have easily have replaced ‘race’ with “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Unfortunately it’s more acceptable for businesses to outright discriminate on those things (our government does this, which is why we really need ENDA to pass) and not suffer economically, which is why Rachel Maddow used “race” as in the argument, I think. Some Fortune 500 companies, for example, such as the one I work for, have anti-discrimination policies that extend further than the government, but then you have to look at the situation in Virginia a little further back where the Virginia attorney general sent out a letter to public schools telling them they didn’t have the authority to protect those minorities once Bob McDonnell stripped them of their protections.T Gabriel Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Some times i wonder about that “genius” tag.
Yes, THAT store changed quickly but none of the others did and yes, it took the government quite a while to push global change through. The facts are that without the government forcing change, there would have been none. Not in business, that is for sure. Libertarians or not, no business that had a meaningful presence was going to put folks of color into positions of power without the insistence of government. Separate but equal education would still be the same farce it was before the civil rights act and follow-on legislation.
Without the civil rights act we would have continued Jim Crow to the detriment of us all.
You free marketers need to be honest with yourselves for a change. People of color and tolerance are here to stay as much as you “geniuses” hate them.
Dtroutma almost 14 years ago
Harley said Rand would have marched with Martin Luther- didn’t realize either of them was THAT old! Boy! Out protesting the Pope and nailing flyers up in Germany!
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
What Rand Paul said was absolutely correct. I know that left-wing totalitarian scum think it’s OK to try to force other people to live and behave the way THEY think people should, after all that’s just one more way the left and the right are the same. That’s what makes you enemies of liberty, and thus of the entire human species.
And I gotta say, it’s rather bizarre listening to the racist, pro-segregation, pro-racial discrimination left accusing people of being racist merely for supporting the concepts of property rights and individual liberty.
Of course, that’s what you guys are REALLY after: the destruction of liberty, the destruction of property rights, and the enslavement of the human race under a totalitarian global government.
WarBush almost 14 years ago
^So you’re in agreement that if someone darker than the KKK hoody you’re wearing can be refused service? Or that its okay to serve your patrons food on dirty dishes to save on soap and water?
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Isn’t there some clause about how small [15 or less employees] and religious organizations are allowed to discriminate freely? I know that’s in the ENDA bill. And people can have their little KKK restaurants as long as they’re not open to the public. If you’re open to the public then serve the public, otherwise make it an invite-only and have a litmus tests for skin tone or beliefs, y’know, in case some of them Catholics want to patronize your facility or something.
TruthfulTheocracy almost 14 years ago
^I do not understand you señor. If you support someone who has the right to be racist, you would not want to be one? That is like saying you support NASCAR but you think driving around in circles is stupid.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Being told to tolerate people of different backgrounds while in a public space… how awful… .
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
@Mexicano:
I support gay marriage, that doesn’t mean I want to marry a dude.
This may be a hard concept for any left or right winger to grasp, but I actually support the right of other people to do things that I don’t want to do or that I disapprove of. That is because I have no interest in using threats of violence to force everyone else to be just like me.
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
@Jade:
Yes, trampling property rights and freedom of association IS awful.
You and Pat Robertson, peas in a pod…
Motivemagus almost 14 years ago
Harrison, why don’t you dial down the hostility and spleen a bit, eh? I, at least, have a problem with racism by blacks, and sexism by women. And while there certainly is racism by all parties in the US, there is a difference about being the oppressor versus the oppressed. And as a white American, I don’t really feel like I can declare racism is ended – the test of that is with those discriminated against because of race. Are there people who take advantage of that? Sure. But I also personally know people of color treated shockingly, in a way I would never, ever expect, basically because of their color. (E.g., An African-American Harvard Ph.D of my acquaintance thrown into the back of a police car in Chicago – in cuffs – because his white wife was trying to circumvent the no-parking rule to pick him up at the curb at the airport. Yes, you read that right - she violated the law, and *he* got hauled down to the station.) Bottom line here, which a lot of people are ignoring, is that the free market does NOT work to eliminate racism if the subset is outnumbered and has the law against them, as was true in the South (and still is where they can get away with it), and indeed in much of the North. Lots of businesses in the South did just fine excluding African-Americans, or allowing them to buy products but not allowing them to get services. And they were excluded from voting to change it. This is exactly what the government should be about – protecting the equal rights of all Americans, including from the “tyranny of the majority.” That’s not being a sheep, that’s upholding our principles. If you can’t deal with that, it says more about you than about liberal principles or liberals.
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
First off, motivemagus, you offer nothing to support your claim that your friend was treated like that because of his color. Police abuse persons of all colors all over the country.
Second of all, you don’t seem to be able to differentiate between discrimination by government- which is un-Constitutional and perfectly appropriate to address by law- and discrimination by private individuals and businesses, which should be left to the individuals to decide.
You are correct that racism is not “dead” in our society, but you can’t use government to force people to stop being racists. When you attempt to do so, you are trampling on the rights of other people to control their own property and their own lives. The proper remedy is not government force, but social change. MLK did FAR more to help our country move beyond racism with marches and boycotts and acts of civil disobedience than any act of government ever could, and as you yourself point out, federal law can’t do much to change the behavior of racist business owners if their communities are also racist. All the law can REALLY do is force them to hide their racism, which only makes it harder to know just how prevalent racism is in our society, how much progress we’ve made.
It is perfectly acceptable for people to ostracize, boycott, and castigate people who discriminate against others, it is NOT acceptable to use threats of violence- which is what ALL government is- to force changes in their behavior.
SuperGriz almost 14 years ago
Simon_Jester said, about 9 hours ago
Libertarian – A Republican who wants to get stoned and have gay sex.
That is entirely correct.
deadheadzan almost 14 years ago
Harrison, Are you saying chaos is an acceptable alternative to the laws that govern us in 2010? Somalia is an example of no effective government. Violence is the norm in Somalia. In the US we have ongoing government and the rule of law. It is far from perfect but this is what we are working with. An ongoing attempt by “We the People” to form a more perfect union, provide for the common defense and protect the general interest” of our citizens.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
“This is exactly what the government should be about – protecting the equal rights of all Americans, including from the “tyranny of the majority.””
Wouldn’t it be nice if the government actually did that?^ Government only controls a couple of square miles of Somalia and therefore can’t interfere with anyone’s “property rights and freedom of association”… your utopia, Harrison_Bergeron?
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
Somalia? Really? Because our only two choices are violating individual rights or total anarchy?
Refusing to do business with someone is NOT a violation of their rights, it is the exercise of your right to freedom of association, and your property rights.
If, however, the government uses force to compel people to do business against their will, that IS a violation of their rights.
But, as I already know, you folks don’t care about the rights of anyone you don’t like. Like Pat Robertson, you wish to use force to compel people to behave in what you consider to be a moral manner.
parkersinthehouse almost 14 years ago
there are so many ways to cloud the issue - let’s just call a racist a racist
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^^ The government uses “force” to make sure if I get shot walking down the street there’re consequences. I guess that’s a violation of their rights?
“If, however, the government uses force to compel people to do business against their will”
Wrong. No one is forced to do business with the public.“Because our only two choices are violating individual rights or total anarchy?”
Because according to you, believing that people should follow a set of public guidelines when dealing with the public is cheerleading a violent police state. If you don’t like absolutes you shouldn’t deal in them.Motivemagus almost 14 years ago
Harrison, I don’t claim that government can eliminate racism – though I have to say that busing did a surprising amount to reduce open racism in my generation in Charlotte, North Carolina – and I know, I was there. (And people who read the decision might be surprised by a few of the facts, including that the average length of bus ride to school went down under the busing plan.) What government can do is prevent people from demonstrating racist behavior in public and send a message that this is not acceptable behavior. Forcing people to hide their racism - that is exactly the point. If racism is not permitted in public, people will not absorb racist behavior as “normal” and therefore tacitly accepted. You still haven’t addressed my main point, which is how do you reduce racism when that is what the majority believes? Come up with a way that both works and is not government – and avoids getting people like MLK shot. I have to say, it’s this kind of thinking that makes me believe pure libertarianism is naïve. You can certainly gather freely in groups of pure white or pure black (if such a thing existed, which it doesn’t) - but when you interface with the public, that puts you in a different place. Referring to all government action as violence is simply overstating the case in an inflammatory manner to support your point. Make the case that you can reduce racism without government action. And remember the title of Martin Luther King’s book: Why We Can’t Wait. The 1964 Civil Rights act was arguably a century overdue.
Harrison_Bergeron almost 14 years ago
So, motivemagus, you want to use government to destroy peoples’ First Amendment rights if you don’t like them. Well isn’t that just great. People have a right to be racist, and to be racist in public. You want to know why I exhibit such hostility and spleen? Because, as I said before, you guys are the enemies of liberty, much like the Segregationists of old, or like the anti-gay folks of today.
The only way to reduce racism in our society is to out against it, refuse to engage in it, refuse to support it, etc. That takes a long time, of course, but it is the only way it can ever truly work. That is how we’ve made so much progress in this country, although most leftists don’t seem to want to acknowledge this progress. Non-cooperation is the most powerful tool there is when it comes to effecting social change.
And yes, government is force. ALL government. EVERYTHING the government does, it does because it has the overwhelming advantage of violent force.
Note, also, that Rand Paul was NOT arguing against the CRA as a whole, but only against certain parts of it.
HabaneroBuck almost 14 years ago
We don’t even have honest discussions about race anymore. People just look through a modern prism and make assumptions about the past….The Civil Rights Act did some good, no one would argue, but the entire Civil Rights Movement gave rise to racial agitators and craven politicians to the point of swinging many racial issues in the opposite direction. Such as, Jesse Jackson “hustling” corporations and Bill Cosby angering many in the black community for suggesting kids learn proper English and pull up their pants.
Like HarBer said, true change comes from social attainment and educational refinement, not governmental threats.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
“Note, also, that Rand Paul was NOT arguing against the CRA as a whole, but only against certain parts of it. ”
Why wouldn’t he give Rachel Maddow a simple yes-or-no answer then on her question?“And yes, government is force. ALL government. EVERYTHING the government does, it does because it has the overwhelming advantage of violent force.”
Well then, I guess as a member of a small minority that is often the target of violence, “yay government.” =\MaryWorth Premium Member almost 14 years ago
harleyquinn states “He said he would have been marching with Martin Luther.”
But would he have marched with Dr. Martin Luther King?
deadheadzan almost 14 years ago
Harrison- a question- what other government in the world today do you think would be the ideal Libertarian example?
deadheadzan almost 14 years ago
Reasonsventriloquist, You sure said it all!
fritzoid Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Little Lulu was racially insensitive? Are we thinking of the same Little Lulu?
fritzoid Premium Member almost 14 years ago
Ah. I only know the print versions, with no theme song…
fritzoid Premium Member almost 14 years ago
I never pictured Heckle & Jeckle as being stereotypical “blackface” characters at all, but it’s been years since I’ve seen them. The crows in “Dumbo”, though, are definitely “dialect” characters.
The “King Louie” scene in “Jungle Book” makes me uncomfortable. He’s orange rather than black (and Louis Prima is Italian), but his whole “I Wanna Be Like You” schtick seems patterned after a Harlem big shot who desperately wants to be accepted in Park Avenue society. But the SONG is so great that I turn off my higher brain functions and let my senses swim…
Bakshi’s “Fritz the Cat” has a similar scene of Fritz the Middle Class (“white”) cat getting mixed up with the crows in Harlem, but that’s a deliberate (if mixed) use of the stereotypes. (I say “Bakshi’s” rather than “Crumb’s”, because I don’t know whether that plotline was taken from the source material or was original to the movie. Crumb himself, however, never shied away from broad-stroke stereotypes for fear of giving offense.)
fritzoid Premium Member almost 14 years ago
I wasn’t aware of any characters like that in Lulu, but I’m not doubting you. Maybe by the time I was exposed to her they’d already cleaned it up. A lot of the old Disney and Warner Bros. cartoons had stuff they don’t show now, but that doesn’t change the fact that the ones from the same eras which DIDN’T have them remain wonderful.
Periodically one of the Rep Theaters in town puts on a program of old un-PC cartoons (like “Coal Black Riding Hood”), for historical purposes. They’re still great stuff, although I agree that disclaimers (and/or discussion) are appropriate. It’s not censorship, and from the historical standpoint it’s better than burning all the prints…
jaxaction almost 14 years ago
the Republicans have bin taken over by the tory wing- big government is bad( cept for war/police), no difference (on the effect on the FORM of government) from the ecos small is beautiful gangs on the left, both attack our government. They run cover for the Royal oil interests-period.
Push him on energy, Republican FORMS of government, and his views( like ALL libertarians), and he dove tails the queen, economist mag, foxnoose….they are all TORY, and RUN to protect the QUEEN( and HER ownership of BP).
already, sarin palin has opened up the attacks” pres. is “un-american” to speak against the crowns oil(BP).
follow the $$$- sarin after giving AK oil fields to BP to “manage” ( they promptly spilled), then quit to take her payoff over at his lordships shop- Sir Murdoxks-foxnoose. follow the money, left and right…..shows WHO and what supports these tory’s.
same garbage everytime, “gov is too big, yadda, yadda” the U.S. republic “NEEDS” to be broken up, states rights, and the eco break up the nation into smaller parts.
pbarnrob almost 14 years ago
Just flagged douremimi -twice! They don’t learn, do they? AVOID http://www.betterwholesaler.com and http://www.okayfashions.com Take the ‘Boulder Pledge’ – don’t do ANY business with spammers, EVER!
pbarnrob almost 14 years ago
Just flagged douremimi -twice! They don’t learn, do they?
AVOID http://www.betterwholesaler.com and http://www.okayfashions.com!
AVOID Jordaner.com (the target of the ow.ly redirection from bbcsee).
Take the ‘Boulder Pledge’ – don’t do ANY business with spammers, EVER!