(June 3, 2011 at 2:16 am)Minimalist Wrote: This guy nails Paul....and his dear old fucked up daddy...pretty well.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010...bertarian/

Quote:First off, I don’t think Rand Paul is a racist, not consciously at least. He simply represents a mindset that is completely ignorant and disinterested in all issues concerning race and racism. He’s disinterested in how that affects people in this country who happen to not look like him. He is primarily concerned with preserving the liberties of those who happen to look like him. That’s essentially the nature of true libertarians. That’s why his father has been relegated to the margins in politics. That’s why we don’t have national libertarian candidates. While their views may be based on principles, they are not based on reality.

The problem with the portion I put in bold is that freedom is freedom. It doesn't matter what race, religion or creed you are. White people are not the only ones to own businesses anymore. Black people own businesses too. If they wanted to say "This is my property and you are white, so fuck off." that is their right. And do you honestly think that a business that only allowed one race could actually survive today?

(June 3, 2011 at 2:31 am)Dean-o Wrote: First off, let me say it is not just liberals on this forum. I was once called a racist because I disagreed with Obama's interventionist foreign policy. It was a discussion of Iraq and Afghanistan at the time, but now we can include Libya.

It's true that the race card is being used too much because Obama is black, but there is lot of racism, be it conscious or unconscious, leveled towards him. When was the last time you ever heard of people claiming a president wasn't born in this country, and if that is such a big deal, why were people so ready to change the law to let Arnold Schwarzenegger run?

Dean-o Wrote:The problem with the portion I put in bold is that freedom is freedom. It doesn't matter what race, religion or creed you are. White people are not the only ones to own businesses anymore. Black people own businesses too. If they wanted to say "This is my property and you are white, so fuck off." that is their right. And do you honestly think that a business that only allowed one race could actually survive today?

As long as that race was whites then yes, it would, and to say otherwise shows how naive you are about the racial views of a large portion of the U.S.

(June 3, 2011 at 1:46 am)Dean-o Wrote: Maybe I could have put it more eloquently than I did with that drunken rant. More sober, let me explain the point I was trying to get across.

Great. Now we're getting somewhere.

(June 3, 2011 at 1:46 am)Dean-o Wrote: First off, let me say it is not just liberals on this forum. I was once called a racist because I disagreed with Obama's interventionist foreign policy. It was a discussion of Iraq and Afghanistan at the time, but now we can include Libya.

And those cartoons you showed on the first post depicted Condeleeza Rice as a sock puppet (or parrot) of the then-President Bush and you yourself claimed that we're all racists (we being liberals) because we put out cartoons like that.
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

How very... republican of you.

(June 3, 2011 at 1:46 am)Dean-o Wrote: It seems that now that we have a black president the race card is the best card to pull. Even though Ron Paul denounced the racist that donated to his2008 campaign, he is still called a racist. His son, Rand, has also been attacked this way. During an interview with Rachel Maddow he said he would not repeal the Civil rights act. In fact, he stated that he agreed with 9 out of 10 parts of the act and that would have been enough for him to vote for it. But MSNBC edited that interview to make it look like Rand would not have voted for it and wants to repeal it.

Yes. He disagreed with the part of the law that would have actually made it work to help end discrimination in America, which is to say, having private enterprise in the US to not discriminate against people based on race (among other things).

Of course, Ron isn't racist. He just says negative things about people totally based on their skin color.

Ron Paul Wrote:"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." - Ron Paul, 1992

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." - Ron Paul, 1992

"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." - Ron Paul, 1992

"What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn't that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?" - Ron Paul, 1992

But that's okay, because Rand is just against the Civil Rights act because it affects private business, who should totally be able to discriminate against people based on nothing more than their skin color.

(June 3, 2011 at 1:46 am)Dean-o Wrote: This is common place among liberals. If you make your opponent look like a racist, everything he says is taken with a grain of salt.

Again - pot, meet kettle.

(June 3, 2011 at 2:27 am)Dean-o Wrote:

(June 3, 2011 at 2:00 am)Shell B Wrote: You should really drink Jack Daniels. The taste is so much better. Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack your thread. You know me and political party talk. Blech.

Jim Beam is cheaper that is why I drink that mostly. Every now and then I will buy some Jack Daniels or Crown Royal.

Maker's Mark is better.

---

(June 3, 2011 at 2:31 am)Dean-o Wrote: And do you honestly think that a business that only allowed one race could actually survive today?

A small to mid-sized business, yes. And with that statement it's quite obvious that you've never lived in the south.

Haven't had a chance to review your links in detail. I'm certainly open-minded that there's an under-reported faction of the Tea Party that advocates for libertarian ideas instead of conservative (or even further to the right). Where you lost me was in the last paragraph: (bold emphasis mine)

(June 2, 2011 at 9:51 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Lastly, if you want to see the "real" Tea Party, I suggest you look at the speakers who go to the smaller events. I haven't looked at his videos for a while (been avoiding YouTube recently), but Lee Doren (http://leedoren.com) always made great videos concerning the Tea Party. He is young, intelligent, and usually sticks to the issues of what the Tea Party is actually trying to do.

Lee Doren?

Seriously?

"How the Fucktard Works" Lee Doren?

Sir Stares-a-lot Lee Doren?

The same guy who's claim to fame was "telling you what all the experts won't" (this is a bad start)? Who's opening sequence was a world spinning backwards, for a YouTube Channel entitled "How the World Works" (irony and an omen)? I've seen some of his videos. Young I'll grant. Intelligent, not so much.

fun side note in regards to Libertarians, because their government (and the citizens of that nation) would be completely helpless to this little gem of a problem:
110$ loan, 20 years of bondage

(June 3, 2011 at 1:46 am)Dean-o Wrote: Maybe I could have put it more eloquently than I did with that drunken rant. More sober, let me explain the point I was trying to get across.

First off, let me say it is not just liberals on this forum. I was once called a racist because I disagreed with Obama's interventionist foreign policy. It was a discussion of Iraq and Afghanistan at the time, but now we can include Libya.

It seems that now that we have a black president the race card is the best card to pull. Even though Ron Paul denounced the racist that donated to his2008 campaign, he is still called a racist. His son, Rand, has also been attacked this way. During an interview with Rachel Maddow he said he would not repeal the Civil rights act. In fact, he stated that he agreed with 9 out of 10 parts of the act and that would have been enough for him to vote for it. But MSNBC edited that interview to make it look like Rand would not have voted for it and wants to repeal it.

This is common place among liberals. If you make your opponent look like a racist, everything he says is taken with a grain of salt.

Wait..you are blaming Ron Pauls racism on the media reporting it?

Dude, you totally did a fox news turn around on us. You are actually claiming that "liberal media" spins it? Did you NOT hear Ron Paul in HIS OWN VOICE on the young turks video saying to jail people for going to "the wrong" public speeches? Thats pretty douchy and anti-freedom, especially coming from someone who claims to be libertarian leaning.

Are there any other Conspiracy Theories you would like to bring to this forum's attention Dean-O..perhaps the "liberal media" is spinning that Ron Paul may take over those "FEMA concentration camps" I keep hearing about.

---

(June 3, 2011 at 2:31 am)Dean-o Wrote:

(June 3, 2011 at 2:16 am)Minimalist Wrote: This guy nails Paul....and his dear old fucked up daddy...pretty well.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010...bertarian/

Quote:First off, I don’t think Rand Paul is a racist, not consciously at least. He simply represents a mindset that is completely ignorant and disinterested in all issues concerning race and racism. He’s disinterested in how that affects people in this country who happen to not look like him. He is primarily concerned with preserving the liberties of those who happen to look like him. That’s essentially the nature of true libertarians. That’s why his father has been relegated to the margins in politics. That’s why we don’t have national libertarian candidates. While their views may be based on principles, they are not based on reality.

The problem with the portion I put in bold is that freedom is freedom. It doesn't matter what race, religion or creed you are. White people are not the only ones to own businesses anymore. Black people own businesses too. If they wanted to say "This is my property and you are white, so fuck off." that is their right. And do you honestly think that a business that only allowed one race could actually survive today?

So..just wondering Dean-o.


Will slavery be legal in this libertarian utopia of yours?

---

(June 3, 2011 at 8:09 am)FaithNoMore Wrote: As long as that race was whites then yes, it would, and to say otherwise shows how naive you are about the racial views of a large portion of the U.S.

That tends to be the template with all of the Libertarians on this forum I have met so far. I do not think they have a hidden agenda. I honestly believe they are THAT ignorant of modern race relations.

---

(June 3, 2011 at 10:34 am)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: But that's okay, because Rand is just against the Civil Rights act because it affects private business, who should totally be able to discriminate against people based on nothing more than their skin color.

..because, to libertarians, the freedom of the white majority to have a choice wether to descriminate against non-whites or not OUTWEIGHS the freedoms of the non-white minority to choose NOT to be descriminated against.

Discrimination DESTROYS freedom.

In the name of "freedom", the libertarians would pull race relations in this country back to post civil war era sentiments by removing the colar placed on it in the 60's.

Can you imagine an ATHEIST trying to get a job in this "Libertarian paradise" they think of? Is everyone prepared on this board to act like Christians, and not even THINK of touching anything atheist online for fear of being caught and blacklisted? Black lists are illegal, but under Libertarian rule they would not be..meaning a single company you worked for (who's christian owner discovered you are an atheist..or even just accused you of it) can put your name on a list, and EVERY SINGLE COMPANY who deals with that list will refuse to hire you based on that list alone. Employers could fire for any reason, and actually force religious ceremonies to be performed by their employers for fear of termination. Women would have only secretary jobs (and only the best felators will be the highest paid).... blacks would be janitors, and only if they even like them in the building at all.

This is what Dean-o and Adrian are supporting... its not just race descrimination..its a return to sexism as well. Its not that they are sexist, or racist..its just that they want to pull the reigns off that have stopped this from hapening in the 21st century with the naive idea that "nobody is racist anymore..so we dont need these laws"

Hey..if nobody is racist anymore.... then the laws will not need to be enforced..isnt that nice! Keep them on the books just in case.

Then again, I am not naive about race relations.



...and we will not be able to sue because it is all legal in their minds.

(June 3, 2011 at 2:59 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Lee Doren?

Seriously?

"How the Fucktard Works" Lee Doren?

Sir Stares-a-lot Lee Doren?

The same guy who's claim to fame was "telling you what all the experts won't" (this is a bad start)? Who's opening sequence was a world spinning backwards, for a YouTube Channel entitled "How the World Works" (irony and an omen)? I've seen some of his videos. Young I'll grant. Intelligent, not so much.

It is humourous to note that Thunderf00t, the originator of the phrase "Sir Stares-a-lot", once stated that the reason he refrained from appearing in many of his initial videos was to prevent people from using ad-hominem attacks based on his appearance. Hypocrite much? Of course, Thuderf00t also has a long history of critiquing other people's videos, and then refusing to respond when people (like Coughlan666, LatumWay, DLandonCole, etc) call him out on things he is wrong on. I'm a fan of his "Why people laugh at creationists series", and I credit him with introducing me to Lee Doren's channel (although once I started watching Lee's response videos, I realized who was more knowledgeable when it came to US law and economics.

Lee already explained the world spinning backwards; at the time he thought it looked cool, and he didn't have the technical know-how to reverse it, nor did he think it was really that important (and to be honest, it really isn't; his latest videos open with the inside of the planet containing moving cogs...).

If Lee Doren isn't your cup of tea though, I suggest watching Jacob Spinney, who is a popular libertarian and atheist on YouTube (although I'm not sure if he associates with the Tea Party).

Anyway, I'd like you to read the polled data very much, and see what you make of it. You did challenge me after all, and I think I came through quite well.

reverendjeremiah Wrote:Will slavery be legal in this libertarian utopia of yours?

Absolutely.

Slavery has always been legal, is legal, and forever shall be legal. Where there are laws, there is slavery. Where there are not laws, there also is slavery.

The question is not whether there will be slavery somewhere (there will be)... it is what forms the slavery there takes on.

(June 4, 2011 at 4:35 am)Aerzia Saerules Arktuos Wrote:

reverendjeremiah Wrote:Will slavery be legal in this libertarian utopia of yours?

Absolutely.

Slavery has always been legal, is legal, and forever shall be legal. Where there are laws, there is slavery. Where there are not laws, there also is slavery.

The question is not whether there will be slavery somewhere (there will be)... it is what forms the slavery there takes on.

I have a different take on this . we have out sourced our slavery to china.