This paragraph was written by our friend Rational Nation on his blog today. I asked him if he believed discriminating against blacks, treating them like second class citizens (I actually said dogs) was threatening their pursuit of happiness. I believe it does. Refusing to seat a black man at a lunch counter in the 60's could have led to his life being threatened, if he had fought back. Making the black man feel less worthy then the white man in my opinion does threaten his pursuit of happiness. Maybe I have more empathy for the struggles and pain our black citizens had to endure.
Hopefully these people who seek leadership roles in our government, who have NO empathy for struggling minorities, get rejected by the American people.
RN: "Before I start first let me reiterate I am a solid believer in the principals Rand Paul was addressing after his primary win last Tuesday in Kentucky.
The principal of private property, whether it be individual or business, and the inherent right to do with it as one pleases in so long as it does not threaten the life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness of another is a valid ethical and moral principal. Period. Government has no ethical basis on which to interfere."
Sorry RN, we don't need to go backwards in this country. We want "progress", not "oppression".
24 comments:
Sue - The progress you advocate if taken to it's natural ending results in the same progress the Bolsheviks gave Mother Russia.
That is the absence of individual property rights. If you are okay with that then your okay with it. I am not. Neither am I okay with racism or bigotry.
The government is well within it's bounds to pass laws relative to the public sector and in so doing eliminate institutional racism.
Rand Paul did a poor job countering Maddow reasonable questions. She is obviously biased but her questions were not out of line. He just did a poor job of countering Maddow's questioning.
we just see it so differently RN. I believe every part of the Civil Rights Act was just and fair.
Well said Sue!
What don't these people understand about equal.
It's not of their choosing.
Equal means everywhere - 24/7 not at designated places but every place.
There's enough bigots out there these days that have come out of the closet since a brother was elected prez they think there is a chance they can turn the clock back and relive the struggle of the civil war they never got over losing.
What a bunch of bullshit - Maddow's biased. No she's just fucking right is all. Dumb nutter Paul didn't have a goddamn answer because you can't answer the truth with a lie when the one asking the question is much smarter than you and will not let you go with telling a lie like most of the whores on da tv.
He fucking stupid and a racist even though he says he's a good guy.
And we're like the russki's you say. There's nothing rational about anything you wrote.
Anybody who advocates people can be turned away because of their color or whatever may be the theme of the day is nothing but a fucking bigot and a racist.
It's impossible to have both.
Cry for me and say you're getting picked on and that we on the left are so angry or some other quack shit like that.
I have a business that is open to the public. My country's laws say that I have to serve everyone equally. That's the way it was not for a very long time and then it was finally changed because we are all supposed to be equal.
I like that equal thing and it's the right thing when our constitution states we all all equal.
You don't like that why in the fuck don't you leave where it's not like that - a place you'll feel more at home surrounded by those who are more to your liking.
You people are a bunch of sick fucks as far as I'm concerned and with out question hate what our country stands for.
Go the fuck away asshole and that includes that simple bitch Lisa as well.
I deleted an anonymous comment that said this post is stupid. Well anon, why do you think that? Is it because liberals have hearts and righties do not? Is it because you only think about what's constitutionally correct, no matter who gets kicked in the face? You are like cold tin soldiers, no feelings for your fellow man and his suffering. That is the difference between liberals and conservatives. So I will not apologize for my big heart and my caring liberal views. If you get ill reading sappy shit such as mine then go elsewhere.
well said Onefly!!
We are all equal under the law. The black man can go to war and die for the righties who won't go, but serve him a burger and fries?? OH NO, Not if they don't feel like it!!
It's true about Paul, he did not know how to get outta the mess he got himself into with Rachel, so he now he thinks he will campaign but not talk to the liberals because they know him too well. What a fraud.
I responded to Rational Nation on his website post concerning this Sue. Public businesses enjoy the benefits of taxpayer provided public infrastructure. The government is well within it's rights to make sure everyone has equal access.
It's a shame we still have to have laws concerning this. I like RN and a few of the others in our community that follow his "Independent Conservative" label. I appreciate their loyalty and defense of Rand Paul. Perhaps in time Rand will figure out a better way to answer questions besides obsfucation or simply putting his foot in his mouth.
Till then, you and our friend Carl of Uncouth Ruminations will be busy RN.
"Hopefully these people who seek leadership roles in our government, who have NO empathy for struggling minorities, get rejected by the American people".
Isn't "empathy" a dirty word in the far right's vocabulary?
If I'm not mistaken, it was part of the problem certain Republicans had with a current member of the Supreme Court.
BTW...our pal had to get that Bolshevik stuff in there, heh?
Good night, comrades!
Why should owning property give you more rights than those that do not?
I read a comment on Huff Post that sums the argument up..
The righties are afraid of what is coming.. They know they will soon be a minority and are fighting it tooth and nail, while we on the left embrace what made this country great... Diversity and immigration from other countries. If we hadn't had immigration, this country would never have been.... It is because of this, we are great.
But the comment I read was this, "Better learn to embrace the law that is civil rights, because in a few years the "whities" will be the minority that is going to be in danger. They can be discriminated against if the law is overturned or changed the way Paul describes he would have done."
Makes sense to me... not that I am comparing what was done to anyone in the middle of the fight for civil rights to what we may face... I am just saying we should be thankful we have those protections in place already.
"The progress you advocate if taken to it's natural ending results in the same progress the Bolsheviks gave Mother Russia." --RN USA
First of all, RN, this is America, not Russia--when the Bolsheviks took over, there was no Constitution or representative government established in that country. Your comment is not applicable.
But I'll let Ross Douthat, a writer with impeccable conservative credentials explain:
"But Paul just couldn’t help himself. He had to play Hamlet, to hem and haw about the distinction between public and private discrimination, to insist on his sympathy for the civil rights movement while conspicuously avoiding saying that he would have voted for the bill that outlawed segregation.
By the weekend (and under duress), he finally said it. But the tap-dancing route he took to get there was offensive, tone deaf and politically crazy."
[skip]
"The problem is that paleoconservatives are self-marginalizing, and self-destructive.
Like many groups that find themselves in intellectually uncharted territory, they have trouble distinguishing between ideas that deserve a wider hearing and ideas that are crankish or worse. (Hence Ron Paul’s obsession with the gold standard and his son’s weakness for conspiracy theories.)
Like many outside-the-box thinkers, they’re good at applying their principles more consistently than your average partisan, but lousy at knowing when to stop. (Hence the tendency to see civil rights legislation as just another unjustified expansion of federal power.)
And like many self-conscious iconoclasts, they tend to drift in ever-more extreme directions, reveling in political incorrectness even as they leave common sense and common decency behind."
thanks for the great comments. Amelia and I are still fighting the dreaded colds, but I'm trying to stay afloat with the blogging.
Shaw I love the last sentence, "even as they leave common sense and common decency behind"
Annette I was thinking last night after my last posted comment, what would those like Paul and RN do if the roles were reversed and the whites became the oppressed, how would they handle that?!
And RN makes the same slippery-slope argument that has already been debunked. We cannot have the government regulate anything because that will give it license to regulate everything. If the government desegregates lunch counters, we will end up with a totalitarian state.
Nonsense. Every advanced country in the world has banned most forms of racial discrimination for decades without turning into a totalitarian state.
You could just as well say that we can't let the government limit abortion or pornography because if you carry that to its ultimate conclusion the government will end up controlling everything people do, but I never hear right-wingers making that argument.
I do wonder if the conservatives here ever read the serious responses to what they say. So far I see little sign of it.
thanks Infidel, the rights argument is nonsense and I would hope the majority of this country feels as we do.
I really do appreciate all the comments. Mine are usually fraught with emotion and you all balance that with your common sense arguments!
Infidel753 said...
And RN makes the same slippery-slope argument that has already been debunked. We cannot have the government regulate anything because that will give it license to regulate everything. If the government desegregates lunch counters, we will end up with a totalitarian state.
First of all I have never said government should not be able to regulate anything. That of course would lead to anarchy and as we know is unworkable because of human nature, whatever human nature means.
Secondly most people realize that government must have restraints placed on it. That is what the founders accomplished in the writing of the constitution.
The question that is being asked today is simply when is enough (government) enough. The mere fact I, and most other independent conservatives and or Libertarians, believe government has grown beyond it's proper position does not make us unreasonable, bigoted,racist, homophobic or any other of the plethora of descriptive adjectives the left choose to apply.
Having said this I will acknowledge the right is guilty of the same thing from time to time. I include myself in this statement as well. And here comes the But... when people fight for their beliefs it does occasionally get emotional. And often I see this on progressive blogs.
And the world turns.
yes RN, you could describe me as an emotional progressive...
Lisa is such a fuckwit. May her stomach splash all over her face.
Leslie, LOL, believe me I tried to delete but blogger wouldn't let me! I'll keep trying..
lisa gets a sick stomach from reading this post, she must be racist...
If that were her "only" problem I could handle it.
Hey I was just reporting the news that was left out.....intentionally.
RN: So you do acknowledge that government can regulate some things without triggering a slippery slope that leads to Bolshevik-type totalitarianism.
The question then becomes, what things can the government legitimately regulate?
There are a lot of areas where it's debatable whether the government should have any role in regulating the uses to which private property is put, but it seems to me like a no-brainer that banning racial discrimination in public accommodations (even if privately owned) is not one of those grey areas. With the history of racism in decades past and the potential of widespread discrimination to divide Americans, it's obvious to me that relaxing our prohibitions on such discrimination would be terribly dangerous and destructive -- not to mention, of course, morally wrong.
This is a field where some minor regulatory limitation on how a merchant can run his business is justified to prevent much greater harm.
Just popping in to say how much I love your governor!
Rock on Gov. Christie!
pedaling must be craving some traffic flow to her lame blog! EFF U!
Post a Comment