someone at the huffington post has vision to see the truth
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-sc … 81296.html
Thanks for sharing.
Most of the comments for that article are terrible.
Here's Salon's Joan Walsh's take on Ron Paul. I think she got it right. Ron Paul struck me as not being the brightest bulb on the tree.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/ … newsletter
wow, I just watched that guy avoid answering her very direct questions in regard to private businesses being able to segregate.
people deserve a yes or no answer. I have to agree with you Ralph.
Here's someone else from Huffington Post who's on the right track about Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich"
RON PAUL AND NEWT GINGRICH JUMP THE SHARK
Here we go again. A prominent Republican likens President Obama to Adolf Hitler, and the Republican leadership remains embarrassingly, shockingly silent.
According to former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich, the President's "secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did."
This was not a slip of the tongue. Gingrich has stood by his offensive, morally outrageous comparison on at least two national television programs. And the reaction from House Minority leader John Boehner or his Senate counterpart, Mitch McConnell, or the ever garrulous Dick and Liz Cheney? So far, not even a murmur of disapproval.
Last year, it was Rush Limbaugh who inflamed the Republican base with his irresponsible analogies. Among Limbaugh's gems: "Obama's got a health care logo that's right out of Adolf Hitler's playbook;" "Obama is asking citizens to rat each other out like Hitler did;" the president "is sending out his brownshirts to head up opposition to genuine American citizens who want no part of what Barack Obama stands for and is trying to stuff down our throats;" and "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate."
At the same time, Rand Paul, the new darling of the Republican right, the newly minted Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate from Kentucky, proudly tells us that he would not have voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act because he apparently believes that privately owned restaurants should be allowed to discriminate against African Americans, or, presumably any other minority group. And tellingly, there has been no public outrage from the GOP establishment.
Joe Scarborough, a former conservative Republican Member of Congress, has roundly denounced both Gingrich and Paul on his Morning Joe show on MSNBC, but where are the hapless Michael Steele, and Indiana Representative Mike Pence, and Mitt Romney? Once again, they allow the vitriol to be spewed out in the hope that it will sufficiently poison the body politic in their favor.
Senator Jeff Sessions (R. Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has no problem accusing Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, falsely as it happens, of having "violated the law" when, while Dean at Harvard Law School, she continued the practice of restricting military recruitment in light of the US armed forces' discrimination against openly gay members. But Senator Sessions has not, so far at least, addressed either Newt Gingrich's or Rand Paul's extremist rhetoric. Why not?
Colin Powell explained on CNN that his problem with the GOP was that when Limbaugh "says things that I consider to be completely outrageous, and I respond to it, I would like to see other members of the party do likewise. But they don't." The same appears to be true when it comes to Gingrich or Paul.
Where is House Republican Whip Eric Cantor? Does he agree with Paul that a hotel or restaurant should be allowed to bar me or him because we are Jewish? Does he agree with Gingrich's comparison of President Obama to Hitler and Stalin, two notorious anti-Semites? And if he disagrees with either or both of these Republican luminaries, why hasn't he spoken up?
As we approach both the Kagan confirmation hearings and the mid-term Congressional elections, we must keep the broader political context in mind. Political disagreement is legitimate. Fomenting fear and hatred, or wanting to turn the clock back to the bad old days of Jim Crow and segregated lunch counters is not.
Menachem Rosensaft is Adjunct Professor of Law at Cornell Law School and Distinguished Visiting Lecturer at the Syracuse University College of Law
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/menachem- … ly%20Brief
Some businesses can already deny service to anyone they want to, including nightclubs. And it's legal. Why?
I don't believe it's legal for a nightclub or any business open to the public to deny service based on race. Of course clubs are obligated not to serve minors.
When I was a kid, our swim team competed against a country club where they barred blacks and Jews from being a member. This was the mid-80s in New Jersey. I never understood how that was legal, but maybe there's an exception for clubs that have membership, instead of businesses open to the public.
(We usually accepted the host club's invitation to eat with them after the meet was over. In this club's case, our coach instead said very loudly, "We're going to Friendly's!")
Also from Huffington Post: by Bruce Wilson
"Enter Rand Paul.
Amidst the hullaballoo over Republican Rand Paul's upset victory in the Kentucky GOP primary for US Senate, one of the few journalists to raise the issue of Paul's somewhat uncomfortable proximity to Christian Reconstructionism has been Alternet's Adele Stan, who observes that Rand Paul's father Ron Paul is personal friends with one of the bigger names in the Christian Reconstructionist movement, Howard Phillips, founder of the US Taxpayers Party -- now re-branded as The Constitution Party. But there's much more direct evidence tying Ran Paul to the Constitution Party, whose national platform declares,
"The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations...
The U.S. Constitution established a Republic rooted in Biblical law"
I've seen Ron Paul at right to life rallies.....
He's right on so many issues, but he wants to take my freedom away...NO THANKS. BEEN THERE, DONE THAT.
If you check out the issue - not the propaganda - the issue is the rights of individuals against the rights of businesses. If a business wants to discriminate - discriminate in giving service or hiring - Rand Son of Ron - says the business rights are higher. The rights of the business owner are curtailed if he can't deny service or a job on ANY basis he wants.
I lived in NC - MOSTLY it's not racist - now. There was a time - Mostly, it was. The Civil Rights Act (backed up with federal troops) broke the back of institutional discrimination. Rand and Ron think that it would have evolved naturally (in a century or two) and discriminating against a minority is better than forcing a standard of equality.
Look at the history - the Civil War ended in 1865. Blacks in the south were still denied jobs, civil and voting rights (to some degree) 100 years after that. Civil Rights laws tested states rights - and the states lost the right to discriminate individually just as the Confederacy lost the Civil War. Only AFTER the intervention of the federal govenment (civil rights and voting rights) in the 60s did things change.
Rand Son of Ron is not a racist - but he supports the rights of a business to be racist and implement racist policy. You have to decide for yourself if you agree.
It hasn't stopped either.
"That story is that as the overall unemployment rate remained steady, the Black unemployment rate leaped from 15.8 percent to 16.5 percent. The rate for Black women rose from 12.1 percent to 12.4 percent. The rate for Black men closed in on 20 percent, rising from 17.8 to 19.0.
Meanwhile, unemployment rates for White America – only half that of the Black rate - either remained steady or went down. For Whites, the rate remained at 8.8 percent, well below the national average. For White men, the rate dropped from 9.0 percent to 8.9 percent. For White women, the rate remained steady at 7.3 percent.
Labor experts say racial disparities in education is a key answer."
White Unemployment Goes Down As Black Unemployment Goes Up
MONDAY, 12 APRIL 2010 05:49
By Hazel Trice Edney, NNPA Editor-in-Chief –
Typical Rand Paul supporters in Kentucky--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wroj0FL … embedded#!
I'm sure you'd find only educated, sober, and wealthy advocates for our current President right?
by icountthetimes6 years ago
Do you think there's still a chance that someone other than Romney or Gingrich will emerge and become the Republican nominee. Both Romney and Gingrich both have good, but not spectacular levels of support, and there is...
by SparklingJewel6 years ago
this guy is giving a perspective that needs to be heard Specifically, on all the metrics that a year ago everyone accepted as useful indicators of political standing, Ron Paul is not just a front-runner but a strong...
by RVDaniels5 years ago
Do you like Congressman Ron Paul and would you vote for him?Do you believe Ron Paul can be a good President?
by James Smith5 years ago
Stirring the pot a little bit with this hopefully.http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/but-i-thou … -business/Since Wall Street is the main beneficiary of the Fed through bailouts and money printing, a sound-money...
by Doodlehead5 years ago
According to Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul has plans to lead the Liberty Caucus Republicanswhen he resigns in December. Lew says Dr. Paul has kept his typical low profileuntil he is out of Congress. ...
by Evan G Rogers6 years ago
Rand Paul recently tried to filibuster the passage of the continuation of completely tyrannical aspects of the Patriot Act. But both the House and the Senate were able to end it and pass the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.