Since we are speaking about Libertarian Rand Paul and racism today, I thought this letter I received from Media Matters was interesting. I believe the right wingers better wise up or they will be a party of the past in the not so distant future.
Media Matters:
Yesterday, John Stossel took to the air on Fox News to defend the right to discriminate based on race. Yes, you just read that correctly. On Megyn Kelly's Fox News show, Fox News employee John Stossel said:
"Private businesses ought to get to discriminate. And I won't ever go to a place that's racist and I will tell everybody else not to and I'll speak against them. But it should be their right to be racist."
Stossel is only the latest in a long line of Fox News personalities to divide America along racial lines, and it needs to stop. We need to send a message loud and clear -- first to Fox, and if it's unwilling to listen, to the sponsors who support it:
Enough is enough: Stop promoting racism on your network.
But Stossel didn't just argue for the right to discriminate. He went a step further, suggesting the "public accommodations" section of the Civil Rights Act should be repealed, thus allowing businesses to practice racial discrimination. This is the section of the law that prohibits a lunch counter from refusing to serve African-Americans -- a practice which was commonplace when the law was passed.
The government, Stossel says, should be protecting the rights of businesses that want to discriminate -- not the rights of minorities facing pervasive discrimination.
Enough is enough: Stop promoting racism on your network.
This isn't the first time a Fox personality has treaded the line on race. Fox News operates under the direction of President Roger Ailes, a longtime political operative with a history of race-baiting and racially inflammatory campaign tactics. Glenn Beck, one of Fox's top-rated hosts, has repeatedly called both Barack Obama and Sonia Sotomayor "racists" who dislike white people and white culture, and hosts Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly have also stoked racial insensitivity with on air-comments.
It's not just the hosts: In just the past week, Fox has also provided a platform for the extremist anti-immigrant group Americans for Immigration Control, which has been linked to white nationalist groups and drawn fire from the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center for their anti-Latino rhetoric.
Enough is enough: Stop promoting racism on your network.
Now Stossel is adding to Fox's record of questionable rhetoric on race. At some point, this stops being a question about individual hosts or guests -- and starts to be a question about the whole network.
It's time for Fox News to be held accountable for the racially charged statements and racial insensitivity that it continually allows on the air.
Yes, the email is about Fox news and it's racial insensitivity, but what about those who are loyal fans of Fox? Why not speak out about these hosts and guests who stoke the coals of racism?
This is 2010, we have a half black president and some US citizens have "come out of the closet', they are having a real problem hiding their true colors...
3 hours ago
23 comments:
"Why not speak out about these hosts and guests who stoke the coals of racism?"
Of course they won't do that because the viewers are just that racists. This kind of crap just reinforces their position and allowed them to come out of their closet.
Since Obama was elected we have as a country returned to those times of yesteryear and it's not good out in da hinterland.
With the assistance of Fox and all the limbos it has once again become fashionable to be a racist.
It will get worse before it gets better and the better may not happen and if it does it will take a very long time.
LTFO!
LTFO?? You got me onefly. Laugh The Fuck Off? Love The Fucking Obama?
LTFO...?
Let's Turn Fox Off?
Look the fuck out.
I like it Infidel but Onefly you made me laugh out loud! As sick as I am right now it felt kinda good to laugh...
stossel would be singing a different tune if lunch counters had been off-limits to middle-aged men with a constant craving for attention and who have porn 'staches that went out of style when magnum p.i. went off the air.
Let's just have the government go in and shut them down. That is the logical conclusion from what you argue.
Jerry Critter made a great point yesterday when he said"
"Where you stop is important, but you can't stop if you never start."
It's true, but government doesn't know when to stop. It's human nature.
Property rights are fundamental to our liberties. I know this is hard to understand, but that is the crux of it. If government controls your property, it controls you.
What if they tell you you cannot drink, smoke or watch tv in front of your children? At what point to you take a stand to guard your liberties?
Or do you just trust government to do the right thing?
What if a "rightwing" government told anti-gun business owners that the must allow armed citizens into their restaurants? Would that be OK?
People have a natural right to control (and even do stupid stuff with) their property so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others, and others have no right to enter or use the property of others without permission, even if they have an "Open" sign hanging out front.
I used to buy flowers from a guy who sells them on a street corner until a coworker told me the flower salesman called him the N-word.
I wouldn't buy a flower from him if his were the last ones on earth and my marriage depended on it. I also tell everyone I can about this a-hole every chance I get in the hope he goes out of business and starves.
Your ranting and name-calling stifles debate and free-thinking. I thought conservatives were supposed to be the dogmatic neanderthals?
This also contributes to the bland, weaselly political class we currently suffer under. They keep it dumbed down to the third-grade level empty phrases (Hope and Change, We are the change we've been waiting for) to avoid controversy.
As to the racism charge you all have flung at everybody, ho hum, *yaaaawnnnn* ...
This also contributes to the bland, weaselly political class we currently suffer under. They keep it dumbed down to the third-grade level
this silverfish(sorry, everytime I see your name I wanna call you silverfish, so it will be)this is what the rightwing is doing to the American people, what they are known for. Keep the masses dumbed down so they will follow us like sheep without question. This is what Limbaugh,Beck and Palin, now Paul Rand do, keep 'em dumb and they won't search another way, they'll just cling to us, their guns and their religion.
We on the left keep referring your leaders as Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin because you have no other leaders. Pity...
COLOR OF CHANGE.ORG says this:
Stossel went on to argue something that history has disproved time and again — that private business will do the right thing, without being compelled by laws, because no one would patronize a business that discriminates. It’s a blind belief in market fundamentalism that just isn’t in sync with reality. In the '60s, white-owned businesses that allowed Blacks as customers lost business. Market forces actually perpetuated discrimination; they didn’t combat it. Simply put: segregation would still be active in parts of this country if government hadn’t stepped in.
And recent history has shown that the public accommodations section of the Civil Rights Act is still needed. In 1994, it was used to hold Denny’s Restaurants accountable, after the chain repeatedly refused to seat Black customers.4 Just last year, it was used to go after a Philadelphia pool that prevented Black children from swimming there.5
It’s time for FOX News to make a choice. Are they going to give Stossel a platform to revive dangerously outdated perspectives? Or will they move with the rest of the nation into the 21st century? Please call on FOX News to fire John Stossel. And once you do, please ask your friends and family to do the same:
Sue and readers:
We have fun prodding one another, but I want to make a serious statement.
Equating a defense of property rights with racism is the same as calling anti-war people un-American. It doesn't follow. Someone can choose to be racist with their property, but all defenders of property rights are not racist.
Liberalism can become traditional conservatism
The libertines of the French Revolution became conservative guardians of their own dogma, burning and beheading all who disagree. Just ask Thomas Paine, who was jailed and almost killed by them.
Your Argument is a classical conservative one
I want you to realize you are making a classic Burkean Conservative argument for the right of government to regulate private behavior for the good of society. Yours is a very un-liberal cry for a Hobbesean Leviathan constituted in the Federal Government.
Here is the problem with that
When liberals are in power and they do what they think is right for society, and you cheer. When they tell business owners what they can and can't do with their own property, you cheer.
But what happens when conservatives take over the Leviathan?
They declare business owners cannot bar armed citizens from entering their establishment. Business owners may not bar religious kooks from standing on the premises and handing out religious tracts. You get angry.
Both sides end up abusing the power of the Leviathan for narrow partisan purposes, as we are prodded and herded like cattle every 4 or 8 years.
Classical Liberalism Rejects the Leviathan
The philosophers of the enlightenment (Classical Liberals), Locke and Rousseau among them, posited than man's rights are inherent and inviolable because they come from God (or nature, if you prefer). No earthly power may abridge them. This was a radical idea, and it is the idea upon which the founding fathers created this nation.
Civil Rights: A Legitimate Use of State Power
I respect the historical precedent of racism in America to which you point. It is a perfect example of theory colliding with reality. When every business owner in the state or a region locks out certain categories of people and violates their basic human rights, something must be done. Note that I have not attacked this argument, and neither did Rand Paul.
Screaming names shuts down debate and stifles free thinking
This is about freeing ourselves from narrow ideology and going beyond what Rachel Maddow or Rush Limbaugh says and daring to think outside the partisan, ideologically, approved boundaries. It's not about partisan political points, it's about ideas.
We all need to think more. A thinking citizenry is a great danger to venal politicians of all stripes.
One more thing before I leave for work...
I am not saying you or your readers are wrong to defend the government's actions supporting civil rights. It had to be done.
I am saying you are wrong to indiscriminately sling the charge of racism.
I urge everyone to get past the talking points. I do the same to my libertarian and conservative confreres at my blog, so I don't just admonish liberals.
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington
Fox is not Racist.
Cats are not independent.
Bears are not woods-poopers.
Popes are not Catholic.
This is why I rarely visit this blog anymore. Silverfiddle, in an admirably honest, educated, straightforward manner, tried to make a very cogent point and it went right over your heads. You all were so busy trying to think of a sarcastic comeback that you didn't even comprehend his words.
No matter how logical, wise or profound the words, they fall on deaf ears here. The reason, of course, is that the usual readers of this blog are not interested in the truth or even in honestly striving to arrive at a mutual understanding of our problems. They are here for purely partisan reasons...their mutual admiration society for extreme progressives. They hate George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and countless others, all of them conservative, or even worse, a liberal who thinks for himself and dares to speak against the party line or Barack Obama... that being the biggest sin of all.
The problem with Paul's and Silver F's argument against a private property owner being forced to accommodate people they don't personally like or feel prejudiced against is this:
We would never have moved forward and righted the wrong of keeping African Americans as second class citizens. We would still have to witness the degradation of a group of Americans--remember when Willy Mays had to wait on the bus while his team mates ate their meals? Sammy Davis Jr. could perform at Las Vegas hotels, but couldn't sleep in them.
A majority of southerners did NOT want to integrate.
Now that it has been accomplished, many southerners have no fear of being in the company of their AA neighbors.
There were two rights in conflict: The private business owner's "right" to treat A.A.'s like second class citizens, and our A.A. citizens to be treated with the same dignity as whites.
When two rights are in conflict, the one that does the least harm must prevail.
That so many Libertarians don't understand this basic tenet of human decency, is astounding, and I still believe is based in racism--I speak only for myself in stating that.
A majority of American businesses were not harmed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in fact, it was beneficial to the south, in that a lot of the past discriminating businesses received new customers--African Americans!
Shaw: I appreciate your point on the history of racism and I agree, but you've added nothing new to the conversation.
Every action brings an opportunity cost, and I guess what bugs me is that liberals generally fail to acknowledge that.
No one has addressed even one of my points...
SiverFiddle - They can't address even one of your points because they are talking the Liberal talking points.
Funny how this can work both ways isn't it. Only difference is we recognize it. Some on the left failto do the same.
We all need to think more. A thinking citizenry is a great danger to venal politicians of all stripes.
Oh I do agree there SF! Like I said before, righties are the worst when it comes to the sheeple argument. Just interview the people at the teaparty rallies, most of them have no idea what they are protesting all they know is we have a black president who is taxing them and taking away their god given rights. Its bullshit and you know it! And it has been proven liberals are smarter than conservatives....just sayin'
thank you Shaw, it is all about equal rights under the law. Nobody in the US of A should have to live like a second class citizen because of skin color or disability. This is where the right and left differ. If left up to the states we would have rampant racism all over this great nation of ours, you betcha!
Linda you and your blog do amuse me! If you haven't been to Linda's blog please go, she quotes Beck and Limpy.
Yes Linda I detest those conservative buffoons you referred to and with good and sane reasoning. You detest President Obama on purely partisan reasoning, plus Limpy tells you to...
Actually you are wrong about progressives, sometimes we get very angry with our president and we even let him know it. We are NOT sheeple, but we believe we have a very intelligent president and its such a refreshing change from the last moron in the WH...
Linda and RN, did you see the comment thread to the post just below this one? It's simply not true that no one here will engage with conservative arguments.
Yes, we ridicule conservatives (as I've no doubt you ridicule liberals when you're mostly among fellow conservatives), but that doesn't mean we can't debate things seriously too.
SF is just making the same basic argument as before. It's dangerous for the government to regulate anything because that will give it license to regulate everything. That's not the way things work in the real world. It is perfectly possible to have a government which bans racial discrimination by private businesses but does not ban watching TV with your kids. Every civilized country in the world has had such a government for decades.
In any case, a government which regulated nothing would be just as unacceptable as a government that regulated everything. We have no choice but to seek the optimum point somewhere in between.
I do agree with Silverfiddle about one thing. Accusations of racism have become massively over-used on the left, and are routinely thrown around when there is no justification for them, and this is harmful to us, not to the conservatives, because it alienates some people we could otherwise reach and interferes with our ability to grasp certain political realities (more on that here). I'm not convinced that the accsation of racism is unjustified in the case of Stossel or Paul, though (right now I'm voting "insufficient data"). Racism is not pervasive on the right, but it does exist.
Sue ~ I couldn't care less about the person of Barack Obama. What I detest is his progressive agenda.
Post a Comment