Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
All the little shit wants is to play "king maker" in the up-coming GOP elections...he knows damned well that close examination of his ideology won't fly in America.....all one has to do is remember his near Spartan response regarding his elimination of Soc Sec and medicade / medicare. Churches are NOT equipped to handle the poor and elderly in this society, and Paul KNOWS this.
But hey, if you like the Somalian gov't, then you'll LOVE Ron Paul as President!
Ron Paul and the racist newsletters (Fact Checker biography) - The Washington Post
FactCheck.org : Ron Paul
you are so misinformed or blinded by hate that it's pathetic. Ron Paul never said he wants to get rid of social security or medicare. In fact he wants to cut money elsewhere to pump money back into the system to sustain it. The Somalia argument is just stupid and over the top. Does Somalia have anything close to the constitution of the United States and a sound belief in the principle of individual responsibility? Educate yourself because you are spreading misinformation like a disease.
Oh spare me your BS! YOU cannot refute or disprove what is in my links. Period. So instead you blow smoke.
Bottom line: Paul cannot have the "small gov't" and "free market" utopia and maintain Social Security and Medicare. Here he repeats the same old neocon/teabagger distortions and lies about Canada to maintain the GOP BS against healthcare reform:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQnMmx6jpcA]Ron Paul Lies Yet Again On Health Care - YouTube[/ame]
And then there's this regarding Social Security that is so akin to the neocon mantra it's almost laughable:
Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul discuss Social Security - CBS News
Bottom line: Paul is full of it. Follow Paul's blueprint for gov't free society, and you would indeed come to a conclusion that is Somalia, because our Constitution would be renedered impotent by the likes of Paul. YOU need to stop living in denial and deal with Paul's duplicitous nature.
you are so misinformed or blinded by hate that it's pathetic. Ron Paul never said he wants to get rid of social security or medicare. In fact he wants to cut money elsewhere to pump money back into the system to sustain it. The Somalia argument is just stupid and over the top. Does Somalia have anything close to the constitution of the United States and a sound belief in the principle of individual responsibility? Educate yourself because you are spreading misinformation like a disease.
Oh spare me your BS! YOU cannot refute or disprove what is in my links. Period. So instead you blow smoke.
Bottom line: Paul cannot have the "small gov't" and "free market" utopia and maintain Social Security and Medicare. Here he repeats the same old neocon/teabagger distortions and lies about Canada to maintain the GOP BS against healthcare reform:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQnMmx6jpcA]Ron Paul Lies Yet Again On Health Care - YouTube[/ame]
And then there's this regarding Social Security that is so akin to the neocon mantra it's almost laughable:
Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul discuss Social Security - CBS News
Bottom line: Paul is full of it. Follow Paul's blueprint for gov't free society, and you would indeed come to a conclusion that is Somalia, because our Constitution would be renedered impotent by the likes of Paul. YOU need to stop living in denial and deal with Paul's duplicitous nature.
All your links said was that they doubted that Paul didn't know about it. They didn't prove he knew about it. It's an opinion piece nothing more. Show me the facts and I will discuss them. As far as health care and that vid I am not sure how Paul lied in there. It cut away to some story about free healthcare in Tennessee. Show me how Somalia is libertarian. Show me proof that Ron Paul knew what was being written under his name.
Deal with it and stop playing dumb with "well, unless Paul says 'I'm a racist', I'm not going to believe it. Grow up, will ya please?
So a newsletter from Paul's political office, WITH HIS NAME ON IT, prints out racist clap trap for YEARS, and yet Paul claims he's oblivious to what his staff is doing. So either Paul approved of the information or he is a complete incompetant when it comes to managing his staff, and ergo is merely a figurehead.
The "facts" are there...YOU are just insipidly stubborn and willfully ignorant when it comes to them. And please go back and look at the video regarding healthcare....if you still don't get it, I'll explain it to you. And Somalia is a gov't that ONLY maintains the military....something that Paul's libertarian vision would reduce our gov't to, as Paul is advocately against any and all federal gov't mandates (i.e., his comments on the Civil Rights Act).
Deal with it and stop playing dumb with "well, unless Paul says 'I'm a racist', I'm not going to believe it. Grow up, will ya please?
Deal with it and stop playing dumb with "well, unless Paul says 'I'm a racist', I'm not going to believe it. Grow up, will ya please?
Mr. dickhead, Sir:
I am a member of a minority group , I have known Dr Paul since 1971 and have never heard him use incendiary language towards minorities.
He has given literally thousands of speeches over the past 35 years, and he has never spoken such things. Show me one single you tube video or any taped or videotaped conversation where he has used such language.
So STFU or go fuck yourself, pendejo.
.
.
So a newsletter from Paul's political office, WITH HIS NAME ON IT, prints out racist clap trap for YEARS, and yet Paul claims he's oblivious to what his staff is doing. So either Paul approved of the information or he is a complete incompetant when it comes to managing his staff, and ergo is merely a figurehead.
The "facts" are there...YOU are just insipidly stubborn and willfully ignorant when it comes to them. And please go back and look at the video regarding healthcare....if you still don't get it, I'll explain it to you. And Somalia is a gov't that ONLY maintains the military....something that Paul's libertarian vision would reduce our gov't to, as Paul is advocately against any and all federal gov't mandates (i.e., his comments on the Civil Rights Act).
Deal with it and stop playing dumb with "well, unless Paul says 'I'm a racist', I'm not going to believe it. Grow up, will ya please?
First off, you're completely 'round the bend' on those newsletters. Number 1, Ron Paul didn't write them, they were ghostwritten by Lew Rockwell. Number 2, there were a couple of questionable paragraphs in a couple of newsletters, to claim that "racist claptrap went out for YEARS" is a bald-faced LIE, so your 'FACTS' are hyperbolic BULLSHIT!
the only "bullshit" here is that tired mantra Paul parrots like you keep squawking...that Paul COLLECTED THE MONEY generated from a newsletter WITH HIS NAME ON IT, AND WITH EDITORIALS IN HIS NAME that carried racist diatribes FOR YEARS but was oblivious to the content. "Questionable paragraphs" just didn't happen once or twice.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ker-biography/2011/12/21/gIQAKNiwBP_blog.html
Secondly, a video of a free health clinic in rural Tennessee is hardly an indictment of ANYTHING, let alone a health care system that lures people to it from all over the PLANET.
Secondly, the video is a direct example of Paul's duplicitous nature when it comes to healthcare.....seems Paul flip-flops from neocon mantra to libertarian vagueness when it suits him...but the EVIDENCE to his true beliefs is documented, whether you accept it or not.
Third, Ron Paul's comments on the Civil Rights Act are wrong exactly HOW? Please provide some quotes and sources to buttress your hysteria.
Never let it be said that I didn't try to educate the willfully ignorant.
Ron Paul's Skeleton Closet -- political scandals, quotes and characterFourth, SOMALIA?? What a freaking JOKE you are!
So a newsletter from Paul's political office, WITH HIS NAME ON IT, prints out racist clap trap for YEARS, and yet Paul claims he's oblivious to what his staff is doing. So either Paul approved of the information or he is a complete incompetant when it comes to managing his staff, and ergo is merely a figurehead.
The "facts" are there...YOU are just insipidly stubborn and willfully ignorant when it comes to them. And please go back and look at the video regarding healthcare....if you still don't get it, I'll explain it to you. And Somalia is a gov't that ONLY maintains the military....something that Paul's libertarian vision would reduce our gov't to, as Paul is advocately against any and all federal gov't mandates (i.e., his comments on the Civil Rights Act).
Deal with it and stop playing dumb with "well, unless Paul says 'I'm a racist', I'm not going to believe it. Grow up, will ya please?
First off, you're completely 'round the bend' on those newsletters. Number 1, Ron Paul didn't write them, they were ghostwritten by Lew Rockwell. Number 2, there were a couple of questionable paragraphs in a couple of newsletters, to claim that "racist claptrap went out for YEARS" is a bald-faced LIE, so your 'FACTS' are hyperbolic BULLSHIT!
the only "bullshit" here is that tired mantra Paul parrots like you keep squawking...that Paul COLLECTED THE MONEY generated from a newsletter WITH HIS NAME ON IT, AND WITH EDITORIALS IN HIS NAME that carried racist diatribes FOR YEARS but was oblivious to the content. "Questionable paragraphs" just didn't happen once or twice.
Ron Paul and the racist newsletters (Fact Checker biography) - The Washington Post
Secondly, a video of a free health clinic in rural Tennessee is hardly an indictment of ANYTHING, let alone a health care system that lures people to it from all over the PLANET.
Secondly, the video is a direct example of Paul's duplicitous nature when it comes to healthcare.....seems Paul flip-flops from neocon mantra to libertarian vagueness when it suits him...but the EVIDENCE to his true beliefs is documented, whether you accept it or not.
Third, Ron Paul's comments on the Civil Rights Act are wrong exactly HOW? Please provide some quotes and sources to buttress your hysteria.
Never let it be said that I didn't try to educate the willfully ignorant.
Ron Paul's Skeleton Closet -- political scandals, quotes and characterFourth, SOMALIA?? What a freaking JOKE you are!
Once more for the cheap seats....Somalia is currently a gov't whose main purpose was to maintain the military, with little to no federal regulation on business or the society. Hence the current debacle there. Paul's libertarian policies, which are AGAINST any or all federal interference in the private sector/society...would open the door on to exactly the same type of result.
But keep laughing, chuckles, because little clowns with delusions of a Spartan nation like Paul will NOT sit well with the rest of America.
Ron Paul was a co-sponsor of the Fair Sentencing Act....which addresses the disparity between sentences for crack vs cocaine (which are BIG). Cocaine is used more prominently by white people, and crack is used more prominently by black people (that's just the way it is).
Actions speak louder than words ya know.
edit: He also wants to end the war on drugs, which has put more black people to prison than whites (proportionally speaking). That's not a racist thing to say-it's just the truth-to deny that blacks are more likely to get arrested for abusing drugs than whites is just silly.
First off, you're completely 'round the bend' on those newsletters. Number 1, Ron Paul didn't write them, they were ghostwritten by Lew Rockwell. Number 2, there were a couple of questionable paragraphs in a couple of newsletters, to claim that "racist claptrap went out for YEARS" is a bald-faced LIE, so your 'FACTS' are hyperbolic BULLSHIT!
the only "bullshit" here is that tired mantra Paul parrots like you keep squawking...that Paul COLLECTED THE MONEY generated from a newsletter WITH HIS NAME ON IT, AND WITH EDITORIALS IN HIS NAME that carried racist diatribes FOR YEARS but was oblivious to the content. "Questionable paragraphs" just didn't happen once or twice.
Ron Paul and the racist newsletters (Fact Checker biography) - The Washington Post
Secondly, a video of a free health clinic in rural Tennessee is hardly an indictment of ANYTHING, let alone a health care system that lures people to it from all over the PLANET.
Secondly, the video is a direct example of Paul's duplicitous nature when it comes to healthcare.....seems Paul flip-flops from neocon mantra to libertarian vagueness when it suits him...but the EVIDENCE to his true beliefs is documented, whether you accept it or not.
Third, Ron Paul's comments on the Civil Rights Act are wrong exactly HOW? Please provide some quotes and sources to buttress your hysteria.
Never let it be said that I didn't try to educate the willfully ignorant.
Ron Paul's Skeleton Closet -- political scandals, quotes and characterFourth, SOMALIA?? What a freaking JOKE you are!
Once more for the cheap seats....Somalia is currently a gov't whose main purpose was to maintain the military, with little to no federal regulation on business or the society. Hence the current debacle there. Paul's libertarian policies, which are AGAINST any or all federal interference in the private sector/society...would open the door on to exactly the same type of result.
But keep laughing, chuckles, because little clowns with delusions of a Spartan nation like Paul will NOT sit well with the rest of America.
Fail ....Paul is not against government, he is a constitutionalist. That means he thinks we should follow the constitution as it was intended. Scaling back the government by ending the wars and cutting wasteful spending is a far cry from the elimination of any federal involvement.
Naa-uhh son....you're not going to skate by with this myopic viewpoint on Paul's many diatribes about the role of the Federal Gov't via the Constitution. Any jackass can say "end war and cut wasteful spending", that's a standard politician talking point few (in context) would disagree with....it's the "how do we do that" and all the little in-between issues is where the wheels come off Paul's bandwagon. Here, P.J. O'Rourke lays it out:
Ron Paul Says Founders Ignorant of Constitution - Paul J. O'Rourke - Open Salon
Paul may stick to his guns, but his aim is off:
Ron Paul’s constitutionalist record (Fact Checker biography) - The Washington Post
I think you are wrong on the last count as well, most people I talk to are in agreement that the government is too big and that it wastes too much money. Most people want to end war and bring our troops home.
Nice try, but you can't distort what I previously wrote. The issue at hand was about Paul's duplicitous stands regarding his newsletter, Civil Rights and healthcare. I gave concrete evidence where Paul has been DEAD WRONG. But instead of just acknowledging the FACTS, you try to dodge and blow smoke. Sorry, but the chronology of the post will always be your undoing in that respect, no matter how many times you deny it.
What you have in Somalia is disorder not a libertarian society. In a libertarian society people respect the rights of others because they know their own rights are protected by that same respect. The world as a whole isn't ready for a completely libertarian society yet. This doesn't mean we can't work towards that goal and maximize our freedoms by limiting the federal government to its original mandate.The sole purpose of our government was to ensure that we remain free, anything more than that and it is outside of its jurisdiction.
Ron Paul was a co-sponsor of the Fair Sentencing Act....which addresses the disparity between sentences for crack vs cocaine (which are BIG). Cocaine is used more prominently by white people, and crack is used more prominently by black people (that's just the way it is).
Actions speak louder than words ya know.
edit: He also wants to end the war on drugs, which has put more black people to prison than whites (proportionally speaking). That's not a racist thing to say-it's just the truth-to deny that blacks are more likely to get arrested for abusing drugs than whites is just silly.
Regardless of the truth behind the newsletters, they are Ron's dumbest mistake either way.
Hopefully his son will run in 2016 without any of that baggage.
Ron Paul was a co-sponsor of the Fair Sentencing Act....which addresses the disparity between sentences for crack vs cocaine (which are BIG). Cocaine is used more prominently by white people, and crack is used more prominently by black people (that's just the way it is).
Actions speak louder than words ya know.
edit: He also wants to end the war on drugs, which has put more black people to prison than whites (proportionally speaking). That's not a racist thing to say-it's just the truth-to deny that blacks are more likely to get arrested for abusing drugs than whites is just silly.
And on the flip side Paul has stated he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act....one of the major legal moves in the direction to help prevent unjust incarceration of black folk in this country.
And ending the "war on drugs" is a noble thing to say....but if you strip the federal gov't of any means to investigate the injustice of incarceration as a result of that "war", the bluster of Paul is but a piss in the wind.
I've already provided documentation of the racism of some of Paul's public statements. You can deny it, but you can't make it go away.
Ron Paul was a co-sponsor of the Fair Sentencing Act....which addresses the disparity between sentences for crack vs cocaine (which are BIG). Cocaine is used more prominently by white people, and crack is used more prominently by black people (that's just the way it is).
Actions speak louder than words ya know.
edit: He also wants to end the war on drugs, which has put more black people to prison than whites (proportionally speaking). That's not a racist thing to say-it's just the truth-to deny that blacks are more likely to get arrested for abusing drugs than whites is just silly.
And on the flip side Paul has stated he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act....one of the major legal moves in the direction to help prevent unjust incarceration of black folk in this country.
And ending the "war on drugs" is a noble thing to say....but if you strip the federal gov't of any means to investigate the injustice of incarceration as a result of that "war", the bluster of Paul is but a piss in the wind.
I've already provided documentation of the racism of some of Paul's public statements. You can deny it, but you can't make it go away.
Link?
Specify please, because in posts #71 and #65 I provide links to back up what I say.
And the war of drugs does target black people more than it does white people-as I said that's just reality. Not a good reality-but true.
No shit sherlock....but as I pointed out, Paul's rhetoric about an apparent injustice does little to compensate for his schizoid attitude to the federal gov't....in order to stop a federal policy and get justice for people, you need to correct the apparatus, not just throw it out the window and leave things to private enterprise, whose main goal is profit.
I think what some people perceive as racism is by saying groups aren't entitled to freedoms-but that the individuals are. For example instead of focusing on how to improve poverty in the black community-you could focus on helping the individual poor person (which in turn would naturally help the black community more than the white community-just because of the nature of the outcomes).
First off, let's cut the crap....there is nothing "perceived" about the racist clap trap in Paul's newsletter.....under his name by which he collected on it's profit. Nor is there anything "perceived" about the documented racist blurbs by Paul in various public speeches and comments. THEY ARE A MATTER OF HISTORY AND A MATTER OF FACT.
Secondly, how in the hell do you "focus on helping the individual poor person" without the apparatus of State and federal programs? Libertarian idealism essentially wants to recreate the wheel...in the form of corporate and private organizations. What Paul's parrots fail to understand is that corporations and private enterprises are only responsible to their shareholders...NOT the American public in general. People not getting off their butts and getting involved in their local, state and federal politics leads to problems. We've had a healthy dose of the corporate animal unfettered since Ronnie Reagan took office...which is why we're so screwed today. Paul's convoluted logic just leads to the same rhetoric being spewed by neocons and teabaggers...and that just doesn't work out well, as we've seen in the cumunlation of the Shrub years.
That's what ending the war on drugs does. Is ending it specifically designed to help the black community? Maybe not. However to say that the end result of ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community more than other groups would be dishonest.
Who said ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community? I didn't, and I didn't allude to, suggest or infer anything of the sort. I am so damned tired of this lame ass libertartian/neocon/teabagger tactic of trying to distort and misrepresent what others write when they can't defend the policies/words/actions of their leadership. See my above responses.
He's also the only politician that I've seen lately call out the rate that blacks are executed compared to whites.
And on the flip side Paul has stated he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act....one of the major legal moves in the direction to help prevent unjust incarceration of black folk in this country.
And ending the "war on drugs" is a noble thing to say....but if you strip the federal gov't of any means to investigate the injustice of incarceration as a result of that "war", the bluster of Paul is but a piss in the wind.
I've already provided documentation of the racism of some of Paul's public statements. You can deny it, but you can't make it go away.
Link?
Specify please, because in posts #71 and #65 I provide links to back up what I say.
And the war of drugs does target black people more than it does white people-as I said that's just reality. Not a good reality-but true.
No shit sherlock....but as I pointed out, Paul's rhetoric about an apparent injustice does little to compensate for his schizoid attitude to the federal gov't....in order to stop a federal policy and get justice for people, you need to correct the apparatus, not just throw it out the window and leave things to private enterprise, whose main goal is profit.
I think what some people perceive as racism is by saying groups aren't entitled to freedoms-but that the individuals are. For example instead of focusing on how to improve poverty in the black community-you could focus on helping the individual poor person (which in turn would naturally help the black community more than the white community-just because of the nature of the outcomes).
First off, let's cut the crap....there is nothing "perceived" about the racist clap trap in Paul's newsletter.....under his name by which he collected on it's profit. Nor is there anything "perceived" about the documented racist blurbs by Paul in various public speeches and comments. THEY ARE A MATTER OF HISTORY AND A MATTER OF FACT.
Secondly, how in the hell do you "focus on helping the individual poor person" without the apparatus of State and federal programs? Libertarian idealism essentially wants to recreate the wheel...in the form of corporate and private organizations. What Paul's parrots fail to understand is that corporations and private enterprises are only responsible to their shareholders...NOT the American public in general. People not getting off their butts and getting involved in their local, state and federal politics leads to problems. We've had a healthy dose of the corporate animal unfettered since Ronnie Reagan took office...which is why we're so screwed today. Paul's convoluted logic just leads to the same rhetoric being spewed by neocons and teabaggers...and that just doesn't work out well, as we've seen in the cumunlation of the Shrub years.
That's what ending the war on drugs does. Is ending it specifically designed to help the black community? Maybe not. However to say that the end result of ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community more than other groups would be dishonest.
Who said ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community? I didn't, and I didn't allude to, suggest or infer anything of the sort. I am so damned tired of this lame ass libertartian/neocon/teabagger tactic of trying to distort and misrepresent what others write when they can't defend the policies/words/actions of their leadership. See my above responses.
He's also the only politician that I've seen lately call out the rate that blacks are executed compared to whites.
Then you need to open your eyes and pay more attention: Sen. Bernie Saunders immediately comes to mind. Rep. Maxine Waters is another....that's just off the top of my head.
Mr. taichi idiot,
You really have gone off your little rocker. I've read all your links and watched all your videos, so I'm going to take them one by one.
Let's start with the newsletters. The offending passages were published in 1992, at a time when Ron Paul was running his OB/GYN practice in Lake Jackson. There were 2 newsletters mentioned in your link, neither of them written by Dr. Paul. You claim that these kinds of things went out for YEARS, but NONE of your links show any PROOF of that, they just make the accusations. Yes, he was responsible, and yes, he has disavowed them and apologized for them. What the fuck else do you want him to do?
Stop lying....the article states that the 1992 EXAMPLES were part of a consistent pattern since the newsletter's inception....you'd know that if you read it carefully and comprehensively. So are you saying that Paul collected the money from the sales, had his name on the thing and had it connected to his semi-political group for years yet had NO CLUE as to it's content? That makes him an incompetant at best, Guy.....a liar at worst.
Now let's move on to Social Security. Ron Paul wants to end it. Slowly. Without taking benefits from those who are dependent on it. The system is broke, it can't be fixed, there are more people taking out of it than people putting into it. It's a Ponzi scheme that has run it's course. Allowing younger workers to keep their money and finance their own retirement gets the government out of the way, and allows those workers a much better rate of return on their money. To pay for the benefits that current recipients get he will take the money from our overseas escapades. We have almost a half-million troops around the world. We bring them home, give the bases to the governments of the countries they are in and quit paying for them. We quit giving foreign aid to 154 countries around the world and spend that money on our citizens.
And spare me this neocon/teabagger/libertarian lunkhead parrot squawk about Soc Sec. It's problems stem from the FACT that you had administrations use it as a financial surplus for the budget....SOMETHING IT WAS NOT DESIGNED TO DO. Stop that crap, and Soc Sec works. Oh, and military spending is a whole other issue....don't try to lump everything together without the details in order to support Paul's BS.
Now lets talk about healthcare. You seem to think that a private group doing private charity work for poor people in Tennessee is a BAD thing. Why is that? NO ONE has a right to healthcare. According to our Founders our rights come from our Creator, not our government. I happen to agree with them. These rights are 'inalienable'. That means they cannot be taken away. They cannot be bought or sold. Healthcare is a COMMODITY. It costs money. It can be bought and sold. What right does the government have to steal my money, or yours, and give it to somebody else? It doesn't. Get over it, we don't live in the Socialist States of America.
Check the Preamble and 9th Amendment of the Constitution, genius. Under the law of the USA, healthcare is a right by it's citizens. And since Libertarians don't believe in theocracy, how do you suddenly invoke THE CREATOR in order to support your half assed attack against healthcare reform?
We are seeing what private enterprise without oversight or regulation can do to the general public regarding healthcare....the example in the video I linked shows the absurdity of trying to wholly depend on charity to pick up the slack....and that's WITH current system and not with Obama's healthcare reform in full effect. Paul's dismantling of the federal gov't would make that scene nationwide and much, much worse.
Now lets talk about conspiracy theories, the UN, the NAU, and the private bankers running the Fed. Guess what dumbfuck, it's all true and all verifiable with government documentation right here on the Internet. Get your head out of your ass for a few minutes and LOOK IT UP!! you're so busy pissing and moaning about losing your 'free stuff' you don't even bother to use the brain God gave you. You're a fucking LEECH! A scum-sucking, bottom-feeding parasite on the ass of humanity. You should be ashamed of yourself, if you had any shame. I'm sure your grandmother would be embarrassed by you.
Now GO FUCK YOURSELF, it'll be the first time you have sex with someone you love.
Please quote the Preamble and 9th Amendment where it says that, I can't seem to find it here. And I didn't invoke the Creator, our Founders did.Link?
Specify please, because in posts #71 and #65 I provide links to back up what I say.
And the war of drugs does target black people more than it does white people-as I said that's just reality. Not a good reality-but true.
No shit sherlock....but as I pointed out, Paul's rhetoric about an apparent injustice does little to compensate for his schizoid attitude to the federal gov't....in order to stop a federal policy and get justice for people, you need to correct the apparatus, not just throw it out the window and leave things to private enterprise, whose main goal is profit.
I think what some people perceive as racism is by saying groups aren't entitled to freedoms-but that the individuals are. For example instead of focusing on how to improve poverty in the black community-you could focus on helping the individual poor person (which in turn would naturally help the black community more than the white community-just because of the nature of the outcomes).
First off, let's cut the crap....there is nothing "perceived" about the racist clap trap in Paul's newsletter.....under his name by which he collected on it's profit. Nor is there anything "perceived" about the documented racist blurbs by Paul in various public speeches and comments. THEY ARE A MATTER OF HISTORY AND A MATTER OF FACT.
Secondly, how in the hell do you "focus on helping the individual poor person" without the apparatus of State and federal programs? Libertarian idealism essentially wants to recreate the wheel...in the form of corporate and private organizations. What Paul's parrots fail to understand is that corporations and private enterprises are only responsible to their shareholders...NOT the American public in general. People not getting off their butts and getting involved in their local, state and federal politics leads to problems. We've had a healthy dose of the corporate animal unfettered since Ronnie Reagan took office...which is why we're so screwed today. Paul's convoluted logic just leads to the same rhetoric being spewed by neocons and teabaggers...and that just doesn't work out well, as we've seen in the cumunlation of the Shrub years.
That's what ending the war on drugs does. Is ending it specifically designed to help the black community? Maybe not. However to say that the end result of ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community more than other groups would be dishonest.
Who said ending the war on drugs wouldn't help the black community? I didn't, and I didn't allude to, suggest or infer anything of the sort. I am so damned tired of this lame ass libertartian/neocon/teabagger tactic of trying to distort and misrepresent what others write when they can't defend the policies/words/actions of their leadership. See my above responses.
He's also the only politician that I've seen lately call out the rate that blacks are executed compared to whites.
Then you need to open your eyes and pay more attention: Sen. Bernie Saunders immediately comes to mind. Rep. Maxine Waters is another....that's just off the top of my head.
Still waiting for your link on Ron Paul saying he would have voted against the civil rights bill.
And you have a link for the Sanders/Waters (I actually believe you-I just couldn't find anything with a quick Google search).
