.
Last edited:
Rand Paul wins Senate Primary, soon to be a pro-legalization senator!
- Thread starter Bill O'Reilly
- Start date
- Status
Not with private business, that's wrong for a society to tolerate. I know you need help, hoosier. But the biggest help you'll get is to stop defending Paul's statements about discrimination in private business.
Hell, I tried to give Paul a bone for the benefit of this thread. But somebody said I had to yes/no or fail in their eyes. You can't defend statements like that unless you're willing to consider it happening in a country with millions of private business owners. Whether your intentions are non-discriminatory or not.
You guys aren't advocating state control over discrimination. You're arguing the rights to make the decision at the owner level. While argued that no private business would be dumb enough economically, you say it'll happen enough to exercise public scrutiny. I prefer that status quot and the fact SCOTUS nor Congress has revisited the measure tells me I'm with large support.
Last edited:
All you have to do is listen when Paul tells his local newspaper he would personally demonstrate against the Woolworth's counter denying Martin Luther King Jr. a sandwich. But then he vocally deals with his feelings you can't tell that owner what to do regarding his private business. The same owner that's not likely to employ, not likely to provide equal pay and benefits nor promote minorities within the workplace.
Sorry, I don't happen to think a guy that has that kind of personal conflict is gonna exercise much energy toward discrimination demonstrations. Besides, we've already got that situation solved, excepting those that flout existing law. They face criminal penalties.
Sorry, I don't happen to think a guy that has that kind of personal conflict is gonna exercise much energy toward discrimination demonstrations. Besides, we've already got that situation solved, excepting those that flout existing law. They face criminal penalties.
So, private business has no business discriminating at all, correct? Do you think any place should have the right to discriminate?
We will get through this if you just give simple answers...errr...well, shorter answers.
Maria_Vanessa
Member
The majority of people refuse to see that all sides, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, or whatever narrow political spectrum you choose to label yourself with, have been slowly destroying this country since it was formed. Opinions are now regarded as facts. No one wants to talk, only yell and blame "the other side". Words like, "taking our country back", are just slogans. Whatever it takes to say or do to get elected.
I remember Newt Gingrinch's "Contract with America". I also remember how he wanted Clinton impeached at the same time when Newt was keeping his own affair with a secret. And don't get me started on 'Messy' Jesse Jackson and Al 'Permed-Up' Sharpton. As a proud American, who happens to be Black, it really pisses me off that anyone could mistake these clowns as "Black Leaders". They pocket all the cash they make on their bullshit while hard-working black Americans are working 2 or 3 jobs to try to stay above the damn poverty line. No we all aren't on government assistance, just in case you were curious. Poor does not equal welfare.
Some guy sitting in a chair doing talk radio and getting paid millions of dollars a year in endorsements, advertising revenue and contracts doesn't care about whether I have a job or not. But as long as he or she can influence how people vote, that is all that matters, right? Talking heads and pundits on so-called "news" broadcast that get paid millions of dollars in book deals and book tours don't care whether or not I can pay my rent on time. Just as long as he or she gets enough face time in hopes to get invited on Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer, Meet the Press or whatever is hip to be watching these days. Thank God I don't own a TV anymore.
I don't agree with everything George Washington has done, but he was right on the money to be wary of all polical parties. After his two terms, it's all been downhill from there.
Sorry if this sounds like venting. I supported John McCain when he first attempted to run for President. With his past Presidential election, to me, he sold out on all of his ideals, just for a good shot. And I saw, I watched as he slowly twisted into the politician I could not recognize and began to march to the typical politican drum. If he had just not succumbed to American politics. Maybe I would have voted for him. I knew Obama was going to win, just like I knew Bush would win two-terms. I stuck to my state elections that night.
I'm a registered independant. When I need to investigate a politician, I don't take anyone's word or report as bond. I simply go back into public records and find out for myself the voting record of a politician.
Maybe I'm just a political curmudgeon, but everytime I hear or see a politician that is "different" from the rest, it makes me ill.
I remember Newt Gingrinch's "Contract with America". I also remember how he wanted Clinton impeached at the same time when Newt was keeping his own affair with a secret. And don't get me started on 'Messy' Jesse Jackson and Al 'Permed-Up' Sharpton. As a proud American, who happens to be Black, it really pisses me off that anyone could mistake these clowns as "Black Leaders". They pocket all the cash they make on their bullshit while hard-working black Americans are working 2 or 3 jobs to try to stay above the damn poverty line. No we all aren't on government assistance, just in case you were curious. Poor does not equal welfare.
Some guy sitting in a chair doing talk radio and getting paid millions of dollars a year in endorsements, advertising revenue and contracts doesn't care about whether I have a job or not. But as long as he or she can influence how people vote, that is all that matters, right? Talking heads and pundits on so-called "news" broadcast that get paid millions of dollars in book deals and book tours don't care whether or not I can pay my rent on time. Just as long as he or she gets enough face time in hopes to get invited on Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer, Meet the Press or whatever is hip to be watching these days. Thank God I don't own a TV anymore.
I don't agree with everything George Washington has done, but he was right on the money to be wary of all polical parties. After his two terms, it's all been downhill from there.
Sorry if this sounds like venting. I supported John McCain when he first attempted to run for President. With his past Presidential election, to me, he sold out on all of his ideals, just for a good shot. And I saw, I watched as he slowly twisted into the politician I could not recognize and began to march to the typical politican drum. If he had just not succumbed to American politics. Maybe I would have voted for him. I knew Obama was going to win, just like I knew Bush would win two-terms. I stuck to my state elections that night.
I'm a registered independant. When I need to investigate a politician, I don't take anyone's word or report as bond. I simply go back into public records and find out for myself the voting record of a politician.
Maybe I'm just a political curmudgeon, but everytime I hear or see a politician that is "different" from the rest, it makes me ill.
Surely you realize there is a difference between legislating against a business and it's practices and speaking against it?
I truly think you're missing something.
Say it aint so....
Not one that serves the public.
The right? The right to hate? Your house and private membership gets the opportunity but I wouldn't call it a right. I consider it intolerance.
That's because you can only get through a simple...err...well, short attention span. We'll get through whatever we get through.
hoosier, if you're tying to find a flaw, don't expose yours in the process. We've seen what your channelings lead to, name calling. Everybody doesn't like in your yes/no, black/white context. Make hamburger outta whatever you want but expect it to look the same.
Yes I do. Legislating against discrimination is more effective than an individual's imagination that millions of business owners with the right to discriminate won't do it. If you don't want to discriminate, fight a cause that changes something in your life. Don't expect the house to fold so you can do whatever you want.
I'm missing your narrow point of view.
I think what DB really dont get guys is what inaliable rights represent. No offense intended DB but there is a inaliable right to descriminate.
Inaliable right is a right you are born with and cannot be taken away. Can you explain how you can take away the right to descriminate? You can make laws banning it .. has that stopped it and if not then it was a inaliable right .. we have had this discussion before. I hope you understand I am not suggesting that people should descriminate but it is a right and a inaliable right.. You still think that goverment gives us our rights wich is a misperception IMO.
I think thats the major disconnect for you guys. Like I said before its often unconfortable to be a libertarian because you will often find yourself defending peoples rights to do things you would never do.
Inaliable right is a right you are born with and cannot be taken away. Can you explain how you can take away the right to descriminate? You can make laws banning it .. has that stopped it and if not then it was a inaliable right .. we have had this discussion before. I hope you understand I am not suggesting that people should descriminate but it is a right and a inaliable right.. You still think that goverment gives us our rights wich is a misperception IMO.
I think thats the major disconnect for you guys. Like I said before its often unconfortable to be a libertarian because you will often find yourself defending peoples rights to do things you would never do.
:friends:
Nice post I'll check that out. I try to play nice.
And you're right, statements made all politicians should be held to the highest scrutiny.
I consider it a moral issue. Public-serving private-business owners are still capitalists, they're still part of commerce and still regulated by the commerce clause.
The first thing I would mention is I'm not a Libertarian. Assuming I have Libertarian fundamentals is not unlike the campaign manager assuming the message was well received enough to expand the stump appeal. He got fired.
Me no libertarian. Me no speaky the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of society, especially on a moral issue.
You could do anything you want with that outlook, on the grounds all laws have been broken without legal recourse. That's a Libertarian principle, not to be confused with the mainstream.
Misconception? Sorry bro, if you're gonna say it you need to get it correct. I refer to past statements regarding individual rights.
As far as where government comes from, it's the same one yours came from. The same government that recognized the moral dilemma as well as the economic interests of society over one's right to hate people. You've got your own misconceptions. I don't see the Constitution as the same static document and I don't have the same fundamental beliefs you do on the subject.
I don't have the time or the space to tell you why you're wrong and I don't want you to tell me I'm not cool after you try to insult me nicely. I know enough of what you're talking about to know I want no part of it and why. And I'll vote till I croak to keep things the way they are.
When it comes to morals, our founding fathers weren't the guiding torch of tolerance. We've progressed as a society since then and arguing the words won't change that fact.
You're advocating one's right to discriminate but look no farther than your personal intent.
The way I see it, and I'll try to be nice. You can't see the forest for the tree.
All of your arguments are flawed, Disco. You have to first understand what discrimination is. You have a very narrow view of the term. It is your misunderstanding of exactly what discrimination means. And perhaps if you actually educate yourself, you could better see the point of view that you think is so racially motivated.
It is YOU that has the race card stuck up your ass, and you are trying to use it to demonize someone that you are afraid of. If he is not the person that will win an election, rational people (and poker players) would let that hand ride and try not to draw attention to it. But, see you folks are either 1) irrational or 2) scared of Paul and those who share his ideology, and know he is one that will be kicking some liberal ass in the fall if you don't gang up and put this racist bastard in his place...so that nothing he has to say, no matter how on point it may be, will be listened to because you managed to convince other simpleton fence sitters that he is in fact a racist bastard that is not to be listened to.
Yeah, you really need to do some study...and try looking up the word discrimination.
Then come back with your ignorant rational. SO we can laugh at some more of your misguided arguments. Man, you have to at least have a grasp of the terms being used before anyone can take you seriously. But then, I know that is a bit much to ask of you.
It is YOU that has the race card stuck up your ass, and you are trying to use it to demonize someone that you are afraid of. If he is not the person that will win an election, rational people (and poker players) would let that hand ride and try not to draw attention to it. But, see you folks are either 1) irrational or 2) scared of Paul and those who share his ideology, and know he is one that will be kicking some liberal ass in the fall if you don't gang up and put this racist bastard in his place...so that nothing he has to say, no matter how on point it may be, will be listened to because you managed to convince other simpleton fence sitters that he is in fact a racist bastard that is not to be listened to.
Yeah, you really need to do some study...and try looking up the word discrimination.
Then come back with your ignorant rational. SO we can laugh at some more of your misguided arguments. Man, you have to at least have a grasp of the terms being used before anyone can take you seriously. But then, I know that is a bit much to ask of you.
Many inaliable rights are regulated and outlawed by the goverment. Murder, drugs, to name a couple. That does not make them 'not rights'.
How did I make a assumption regarding your political leaning I was simply trying to explain what a libertarian was not suggest that you was one... wich is quite obvious from your posts.
This is where the real discussion begins third paragraph. You think that you can suspend peoples rights or take them away depending on your moral opinion of them. Society is a collection of individuals. If you protect individual rights you protect society rights they are not mutually exclusive.
Hopefully one day libertarian principles will be the main stream. The projected interpretation of them is lawlessness but in reality a constitutional conservative libertarian like myself would be fine with your city and state regulating 'society'.
When you say we dont have the right to do something you are wrong imo. That is merely my opinion and understanding of inaliable rights. We lend rights to the goverment at any point we may take those rights back. If the goverment likes it will penalize us. This is what I do with cannabis. Its illegal none the less I run the risk of going to jail. They could not take away my right to smoke only I could let them do that.
Exactly, wich was my point and was hopefully helpful to the people that was trying to have a discussion with you. They have to understand that you literally interpret the constitution and goverment roles much differently than they do(and myself). Atleast thats my impression that they have a similair opinion to myself about rights.
Im sure you will and that is scary. Im not looking to get into it with you I was simply trying to help out...
I like this last part where you in a around about way imply me to be a racist... well I suppose I can be honest and admit I have made a racial remark in my life.. am I proud of it ? no .. do I believe my race is superior .. no .. am i a racist? I believe we are all racist to some degree some of us just admit it. I dont try and try very hard not to be but its hard sometimes ... and ive employed all races with equal wages and everything else...
What you fail to mention is im advocating ones right to be regulated by states and cities. Not by the federal goverment. I also cannot see how you can say that racial descrimination in a resteraunt or bar is related to the commerce clause.
The meaning of regulate in those days was 'to make regular'. It was ment to make trade between states regular. In other words the current status quo with the insurance companies having monopolies in states is a example of them not using it properly. The idea was to keep states from tarrifing each other.
Article 4 section 4 ... this one will piss ya off .. =)
James Madison in the Federalist papers no 10:
Hoosier also has a point... discriminate against people everyday... maybe not based on color ... regardless its discrimination.
For instance 'shirt/shoes' policy at most stores. Thats descriminating in multiple ways yet our goverment stands idle ... oh noes ..
For instance 'shirt/shoes' policy at most stores. Thats descriminating in multiple ways yet our goverment stands idle ... oh noes ..
You know come to think of it ... its descriminating against poor people and since african americans are purportionately poorer... lol
Bill O'Reilly
Member
Wow I am really happy with how much debate this thread has sparked.
I haven't read through any of it but its good to see people talking.
Just wanted to add in that:
It's my opinion we should advocate a public policy that does not divide people into groups in any way.
If people want to be racist dumbfucks I may disagree but fight for your right to do so.
I can only live my own life.
I haven't read through any of it but its good to see people talking.
Just wanted to add in that:
It's my opinion we should advocate a public policy that does not divide people into groups in any way.
If people want to be racist dumbfucks I may disagree but fight for your right to do so.
I can only live my own life.
Let's talk to Mr. Yes/No, the same guy that jokes about making short, simple answers. Keep in mind who I'm keeping it brief for. I don't don't care about your personal motivations. Multiply your "right" with untold millions of business owners and you'll have grounds for discussion, with me anyway.
Somebody tell the sidewalk screamer to pipe down. First off, I'm about as afraid of a fringe belief as I am of you personally. I think it's rare stupidity when a peep calls one that's pro equal rights a racist. You're are indeed certified.
I think bigoted comments deserve all the attention they warrant. Even when the bigoted comments declare they won't result in bigoted actions. If find the excuse more ridiculous than the idea of repeal itself.
That's two bs options, I'll choose racially tolerant and choose to believe it trumps your right to discriminate.
Somebody remind this guy he's losing his shit. Paul's points are temporarily sidelined until he shuts up the bigoted comments. You're doing him and others no favor with bs like that.
Mitch didn't tell him to stick a cork in it because Mitch is afraid of the media. Mitch is smart, Mitch knows the media is a moral reflection of the country. Mitch knows media uproar translates to public uproar. Something you confuse with the enclave.
from the guy that doesn't know the definition of the word racist yet flings it at pro equal-rights folks. You fight the battle and lose the war simultaneously. If you were on the battlefield, I hate to think how many times you bit the big one. Misguided in your head.
Lol, keep calling me racist and see who laughs at you. I can see both sides doing that. You get cockier with help but it doesn't help your substance.
Yeah? You took all that to say I don't know what you can't teach? I don't agree with your opinion of repealing discrimination. We don't have revisionist dictionaries like Beck's daily, chalkboard, revisionist-history lesson.
Your right to interpret whatever moral issue you want from a piece of paper (your boy's illustrious description) goes only as far as the rest of the country. And you're sitting here joking about laughing at a single voice. I'd wish you luck with the masses but you'd have to get the clinical definition of the word masses first.
equal rights = everyone has equal rights. Rights are given to you by your mom and dad when your born and not the goverment... Once you realize that you will realize that goverment intervention should not be necessary for we are all equal unless of course your racist and think some races are superior?
- Status
