GOP Hopeful, Rand Paul, compares the right to health care to slavery...

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Rand Paul Right to health care is slavery - Kate Nocera - POLITICO.com

“With regard to the idea whether or not you have a right to health care you have to realize what that implies. I am a physician. You have a right to come to my house and conscript me. It means you believe in slavery. You are going to enslave not only me but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants, the nurses. … You are basically saying you believe in slavery,” said Paul (R-Ky.), who is an ophthalmologist.

Good grief! Is this guy the best the GOP can find?

His example is obviously hyperbole, but he is 100% correct. You have no right to someone else's labor.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

To compare the "right to healthcare" to slavery is beyond the pale. Paul evidently does not understand what slavery was in the south. His statement is both ignorant and insulting to anyone who genuinely believes slavery was a travesty in the history of this country.

His statement has proven he is not worthy of being considered a true contender for the White House.

Nonsense. To point out the fact that a so-called right to health care implies that somebody must be forced to work for you, possibly against their will, is a form of slavery does not belittle American slavery anymore than calling Ted Bundy a murderer belittles the holocaust.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Rand Paul was born about 200 years too late to be the pro-slavery states rightser he surely would have been back then.

I know you graduated from a government school controlled by the education wing of the democrat party....so you don't understand history, the truth or reality......but how is Rand Paul being against the government setting doctors wages being pro fucking slavery.....do you even think before you post....

Oh...I get it....you think you just have to say Ramd Paul is pro slavery....then your lefty nitwit fellow travelers will take up that point up and repeat it like trained seals and then the democrats in the main stream press will push the idea and wherever he goes they will ask him..." Senator Paul...why do you support slavery" and then your smear job will be complete....

You leftists,are vile and disgusting human beings....

It is logical to speculate that Rand Paul would have been a states right champion from Kentucky in the 1800's,

which makes it therefore logical to speculate that he would have supported his state's right to keep slavery legal.

This poster knows nothing about the history of states' rights in battling slavery and so cannot be taken seriously on the issue.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Rand Paul was born about 200 years too late to be the pro-slavery states rightser he surely would have been back then.

I know you graduated from a government school controlled by the education wing of the democrat party....so you don't understand history, the truth or reality......but how is Rand Paul being against the government setting doctors wages being pro fucking slavery.....do you even think before you post....

Oh...I get it....you think you just have to say Ramd Paul is pro slavery....then your lefty nitwit fellow travelers will take up that point up and repeat it like trained seals and then the democrats in the main stream press will push the idea and wherever he goes they will ask him..." Senator Paul...why do you support slavery" and then your smear job will be complete....

You leftists,are vile and disgusting human beings....

It is logical to speculate that Rand Paul would have been a states right champion from Kentucky in the 1800's,

which makes it therefore logical to speculate that he would have supported his state's right to keep slavery legal.

This poster knows nothing about the history of states' rights in battling slavery and so cannot be taken seriously on the issue.

The history of states' rights in trying to preserve slavery is what you should have said.

 

[NYcarbineer]

When a guy like Rand Paul is still clinging to the legitimacy of Jim Crow principles in the 21st century,

it's hardly a leap to transport that mindset back 200 years and see it supporting slavery.

 

[Dana7360]

How is he wrong? A "right" is something you have that cannot be abridged. It is not something you can force others to provide for you. You have the right, for example, to free political speech. That means you can say whatever you want to about a politician. You don't, though, have the right to force your neighbor to pay for commercial time so you can say those things on TV. You can have the "right" to healthcare to the extent that no one can legally prevent you from accessing it, but forcing your neighbor to pay for your health insurance is not a right. Forcing one person to work for another person is.....

If a person doesn't have access to health care they can die. A person has the right to live.

If you disagree then all yours and conservatives screaming about abortion and right to life is just the lie I've believed it is for many decades.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Rand Paul was born about 200 years too late to be the pro-slavery states rightser he surely would have been back then.

I know you graduated from a government school controlled by the education wing of the democrat party....so you don't understand history, the truth or reality......but how is Rand Paul being against the government setting doctors wages being pro fucking slavery.....do you even think before you post....

Oh...I get it....you think you just have to say Ramd Paul is pro slavery....then your lefty nitwit fellow travelers will take up that point up and repeat it like trained seals and then the democrats in the main stream press will push the idea and wherever he goes they will ask him..." Senator Paul...why do you support slavery" and then your smear job will be complete....

You leftists,are vile and disgusting human beings....

It is logical to speculate that Rand Paul would have been a states right champion from Kentucky in the 1800's,

which makes it therefore logical to speculate that he would have supported his state's right to keep slavery legal.

This poster knows nothing about the history of states' rights in battling slavery and so cannot be taken seriously on the issue.

The history of states' rights in trying to preserve slavery is what you should have said.

Where? Slavery was a federally protected right, so why would it need preserved? Many northern states, Wisconsin for example, decided to exercise their states' rights and nullify and refuse to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. But you had no idea about that did you?

Ableman v. Booth How State Nullification Can Defy Tyrannical Government

 

[g5000]

Yesterday, the government took over health care. Tomorrow, money will take over the government that took over your health care. The next day, liberals will whine about there being so much money being thrown at the politicians who control their health care.

Enjoy!

 

[2aguy]

When a guy like Rand Paul is still clinging to the legitimacy of Jim Crow principles in the 21st century,

it's hardly a leap to transport that mindset back 200 years and see it supporting slavery.

Jim Crow is a policy of the democrat party....not the libertarians....as was actual slavery...the democrats fought a war to keep blacks as their slaves....and then created him crow to keep them from getting their God given rights....and then decided that they couldn't stop them from voting...and used,welfare,to reenslave them....

 

[Camp]

The main point being made is that today is Rand Paul's turn to capture headlines by saying stupid stuff that patronizes the rw nut base.

 

[auditor0007]

He is 100% correct. You have no "right" to healthcare.

You are correct that we do not, but that does not mean that we should not. Of course, this is the reason so many other countries have passed us by and why the US is no longer the greatest country in the world, because we have stopped caring about everyday people. Sure, the US still gives more people the best opportunity to make something of themselves from nothing, but that is actually quite rare in comparison to the average person who just wants to live their life, go to work, raise a family, and know that they won't find themselves out on the street should something bad happen to them.

 

[2aguy]

How is he wrong? A "right" is something you have that cannot be abridged. It is not something you can force others to provide for you. You have the right, for example, to free political speech. That means you can say whatever you want to about a politician. You don't, though, have the right to force your neighbor to pay for commercial time so you can say those things on TV. You can have the "right" to healthcare to the extent that no one can legally prevent you from accessing it, but forcing your neighbor to pay for your health insurance is not a right. Forcing one person to work for another person is.....

If a person doesn't have access to health care they can die. A person has the right to live.

If you disagree then all yours and conservatives screaming about abortion and right to life is just the lie I've believed it is for many decades.

again forcing someone to work against their wishes or for a fee they don't accept is slavery...wether you get healthcare is not part of that equation......but you just want to smear republicans.....so nice try...

 

[NYcarbineer]

When a guy like Rand Paul is still clinging to the legitimacy of Jim Crow principles in the 21st century,

it's hardly a leap to transport that mindset back 200 years and see it supporting slavery.

Jim Crow is a policy of the democrat party....not the libertarians....as was actual slavery...the democrats fought a war to keep blacks as their slaves....and then created him crow to keep them from getting their God given rights....and then decided that they couldn't stop them from voting...and used,welfare,to reenslave them....

Rand Paul would have been a conservative Democrat in the 1800's. The Confederates were almost all Democrats.

 

[2aguy]

He is 100% correct. You have no "right" to healthcare.

You are correct that we do not, but that does not mean that we should not. Of course, this is the reason so many other countries have passed us by and why the US is no longer the greatest country in the world, because we have stopped caring about everyday people. Sure, the US still gives more people the best opportunity to make something of themselves from nothing, but that is actually quite rare in comparison to the average person who just wants to live their life, go to work, raise a family, and know that they won't find themselves out on the street should something bad happen to them.

Wrong...substandard government healthcare that is healthcare in name only is what the democrats are creating....they don't care about healing people, they care about controlling healthcare and the money needed to fund it. Taking care of those without healthcare does not require the federal government to mangage it...we could easily give uninsured or hard to insur vouchers to buy coverage....but then...the democrats and their minions in the federal bueacracy wouldn't have control over them....

 

[2aguy]

When a guy like Rand Paul is still clinging to the legitimacy of Jim Crow principles in the 21st century,

it's hardly a leap to transport that mindset back 200 years and see it supporting slavery.

Jim Crow is a policy of the democrat party....not the libertarians....as was actual slavery...the democrats fought a war to keep blacks as their slaves....and then created him crow to keep them from getting their God given rights....and then decided that they couldn't stop them from voting...and used,welfare,to reenslave them....

Rand Paul would have been a conservative Democrat in the 1800's. The Confederates were almost all Democrats.

No...he would have been a Republican who believed in the Constitution...which is what libertarians believe in....the Bill of Rights in Particular....try harder...you are still wrong...

 

[JimH52]

Slavery forced the sale of the children of slaves. Slavery many times lead to sexual assault and rape. Slavery enabled Masters to use lethal punishment when ever they wished.

So basically, Paul does not understand slavery. If he does make the General, which I doubt he does, this statement will be used against him.

 

[Zander]

He is 100% correct. You have no "right" to healthcare.

You are correct that we do not, but that does not mean that we should not. Of course, this is the reason so many other countries have passed us by and why the US is no longer the greatest country in the world, because we have stopped caring about everyday people. Sure, the US still gives more people the best opportunity to make something of themselves from nothing, but that is actually quite rare in comparison to the average person who just wants to live their life, go to work, raise a family, and know that they won't find themselves out on the street should something bad happen to them.

If you want to make healthcare a "right", amend the constitution. Good luck!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Rand Paul was born about 200 years too late to be the pro-slavery states rightser he surely would have been back then.

I know you graduated from a government school controlled by the education wing of the democrat party....so you don't understand history, the truth or reality......but how is Rand Paul being against the government setting doctors wages being pro fucking slavery.....do you even think before you post....

Oh...I get it....you think you just have to say Ramd Paul is pro slavery....then your lefty nitwit fellow travelers will take up that point up and repeat it like trained seals and then the democrats in the main stream press will push the idea and wherever he goes they will ask him..." Senator Paul...why do you support slavery" and then your smear job will be complete....

You leftists,are vile and disgusting human beings....

It is logical to speculate that Rand Paul would have been a states right champion from Kentucky in the 1800's,

which makes it therefore logical to speculate that he would have supported his state's right to keep slavery legal.

This poster knows nothing about the history of states' rights in battling slavery and so cannot be taken seriously on the issue.

The history of states' rights in trying to preserve slavery is what you should have said.

Where? Slavery was a federally protected right, so why would it need preserved? Many northern states, Wisconsin for example, decided to exercise their states' rights and nullify and refuse to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. But you had no idea about that did you?

Ableman v. Booth How State Nullification Can Defy Tyrannical Government

And since he can't reply, he doesn't, and pretends this post never happened.

 

[CowboyTed]

Right, the US signed the UN Declaration of Human rights in late 1940s which included ... So Rand knew when he became a doctor and so did everyone else... So he choose his profession knowing this...

This is like a guy becoming a soldier and saying it is slavery to go to war...

Saying that who is forcing him to treat people?

 

[bendog]

Rand Paul was born about 200 years too late to be the pro-slavery states rightser he surely would have been back then.

I know you graduated from a government school controlled by the education wing of the democrat party....so you don't understand history, the truth or reality......but how is Rand Paul being against the government setting doctors wages being pro fucking slavery.....do you even think before you post....

Oh...I get it....you think you just have to say Ramd Paul is pro slavery....then your lefty nitwit fellow travelers will take up that point up and repeat it like trained seals and then the democrats in the main stream press will push the idea and wherever he goes they will ask him..." Senator Paul...why do you support slavery" and then your smear job will be complete....

You leftists,are vile and disgusting human beings....

It is logical to speculate that Rand Paul would have been a states right champion from Kentucky in the 1800's,

which makes it therefore logical to speculate that he would have supported his state's right to keep slavery legal.

This poster knows nothing about the history of states' rights in battling slavery and so cannot be taken seriously on the issue.

The history of states' rights in trying to preserve slavery is what you should have said.

Where? Slavery was a federally protected right, so why would it need preserved? Many northern states, Wisconsin for example, decided to exercise their states' rights and nullify and refuse to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. But you had no idea about that did you?

Ableman v. Booth How State Nullification Can Defy Tyrannical Government

That's an interesting link. I had known that southern states, like Mississippi, stated one reason supporting seceding was northern states not applying the fugitive slave act, but I either didn't know, or had forgotten, it required a non-judicial hearing to identify a run away slave where the slave didn't even get to speak. I had thought that the northern states just refused to apply state dollars to enforcing a federal law, like some states now refuse to prosecuted pot crimes. But the feds can still use federal courts to enforce federal law, so there's no nullification involved.

Still, nullification is unconstitutional..