Speaking of Rand Paul, in case anyone is thinking, “I don’t know much about him, an
Speaking of Rand Paul, in case anyone is thinking, “I don’t know much about him, and he DOES seem to have SOME good ideas, maybe I should give him a chance?” Let’s shut this down now to save everybody time. LET’S PUT IT THIS WAY: ARE YOU OFFENDED BY INDIANA’S “NO GAYS ALLOWED” LEGAL HATE BILL? RAND PAUL DOESN’T ONLY SUPPORT THAT LAW, HE - IN 2010, NOT 1910 - ARGUED FOR LEGAL “NO BLACKS ALLOWED” BUSINESS - I’M NOT EXAGGERATING HERE. Rand Paul Would Be The Worst President On Civil Rights Since The 1800s“Decisions concerning private property and associations should in a free society be unhindered,” Paul wrote in a 2002 letter to his local newspaper. He added that these decisions should remain unhindered even though “some associations will discriminate.”“A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination,” Paul claimed, “even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin.”This notion that “freedom” requires permitting business owners to engage in odious behavior animates many of Paul’s statements on discrimination. Though “[i]t is unenlightened and ill-informed to promote discrimination against individuals based on the color of their skin,” Paul wrote in his 2002 letter, “It is likewise unwise to forget the distinction between public (taxpayer-financed) and private entities. A society that forgets this distinction will ultimately lose the freedoms that have evolved and historically been attached to private ownership.”Eight years later, during his successful bid for the U.S. Senate, Paul laid out this philosophy more succinctly. After a member of the Louisville Courier-Journal’s editorial board asked Paul if “it would be okay for Dr. [Martin Luther] King not to be served at the counter at Woolworths,” the soon-to-be-senator replied that permitting racists to discriminate is “the hard part about believing in freedom.”And then there was his interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, where he admitted that he has a problem with much of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As originally enacted, the Civil Rights Act is divided into 11 titles, most of which prevent discrimination by government actors. Shortly after winning the GOP nomination for the Senate seat he now holds, Paul told Maddow that he has no problem with these bans on state-sanctioned action because “the government should not be involved with institutional racism or discrimination.”Paul did express doubts, however, about the provisions of the Civil Rights Act that “harbor in on private businesses and their policies.” When pushed on whether businesses should be able to turn patrons away because they are black, Paul suggested that doing so would violate the free speech rights of racists — “I don’t want to be associated with those people, but I also don’t want to limit their speech in any way in the sense that we tolerate boorish and uncivilized behavior because that’s one of the things freedom requires is that we allow people to be boorish and uncivilized.”And let’s not talk - actually LET’S talk - about top Rand Paul aide “The Southern Avenger” IN CONCLUSION: RAND PAUL 2016? -- source link