Unbelievable: Ron Paul Slams Civil Rights Act

[Old Rocks]

and fyi; you're team took away Freedom of Speech and the Right to bear arms. So don't try the moral high ground, it's a slippery slope.

?

You continue to make no sense.

How was ‘Freedom of Speech’ taken away? Cite the statute. How was the ‘Right to bear arms’ taken away? Again, cite the statue.

Hate speech is a crime. that's called taking away my freedoms.
The right to bear arms has been reduced to just fire arms, and the left fights daily to restrict those to the point of uselessness.

these are well known facts. If you don't actually know this, look it up yourself.

Ah fuck. Let's just give everyone a 2 kiloton nuclear hand grenade. That way, when one of you looney's lose it, we won't have to worry about policing that neighborhood again!

 

[Article 15]

Wow.

Aren't murder laws legislating morality?

No, thats legislating crime.

Why is it a crime?

 

[PredFan]

Thanks for showing just how much the left will lie and lie to get what they demand and to Hell with the law and Constitution.

?

This makes no sense.

During the Civil Rights Era and beyond, it was progressives alone who fought against conservatives and their effort to restrict civil rights, particularly with regard to African-Americans. Liberals fought for the rule of law, and to ensure the fundamental tenets of the Constitution remain in place: equal access to the law, equal protection of the law, and the right to due process.

Which became; You must hire a minority, even if he's less qualified. You must promote minorities, even if they can't do the job.

on and on

That's tyranny, whether you like it or not.

Remember when you used to be against the Patriot Act?
Or that extra check Bush sent out yearly?
Or when you were against the death penalty?
How about when you were against the war and spreading it?


None of you are against those things now.

That's gonna leave a mark!

 

[rightwinger]

By Laura Bassett

WASHINGTON -- Despite recent accusations of racism and homophobia, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) stuck to his libertarian principles on Sunday, criticizing the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it "undermine[d] the concept of liberty" and "destroyed the principle of private property and private choices."

"If you try to improve relationships by forcing and telling people what they can't do, and you ignore and undermine the principles of liberty, then the government can come into our bedrooms," Paul told Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union." "And that's exactly what has happened. Look at what's happened with the PATRIOT Act. They can come into our houses, our bedrooms our businesses ... And it was started back then."

The Civil Rights Act repealed the notorious Jim Crow laws; forced schools, bathrooms and buses to desegregate; and banned employment discrimination. Although Paul was not around to weigh in on the landmark legislation at the time, he had the chance to cast a symbolic vote against it in 2004, when the House of Representatives took up a resolution "recognizing and honoring the 40th anniversary of congressional passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." Paul was the only member who voted "no."

More: Ron Paul: Civil Rights Act Of 1964 'Destroyed' Privacy

Clearly this concept is way too complicated for you to understand, but Ron Paul is correct. If you had a lick of sense, you'd title this thread, "Ron Paul stands up for liberty for all". But no, you're unable to comprehend hence the title you chose.

Ron Paul does not stand up for peoples who's liberty is being denied because of skin color

 

[PredFan]

He's a racist huh?

Nobody in this thread has called Ron Paul a racist (admittedly, the words "nuts" and "neanderthal" have been bandied about). People have merely noted that he criticized the Civil Rights act. It's perfectly possible for non-racists to facilitate racism. As Michael Gerson put it (Ron Paul’s quest to undo the party of Lincoln - The Washington Post)

"Whatever his personal views, Paul categorically opposes the legal construct that ended state-sanctioned racism."

Are you able to understand that opposing the legislation and it's broad scope, and the wording of the bill, is not the same as opposing civil rights? Honest question.

 

[Stephanie]

I'm trying to get my panties all in a bunch over this, but it came from the OP and Hufferpost, so I just can't seem to do it.

 

[PredFan]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

 

[PredFan]

Eyes on the Prize - Episode 03 - Aint Scared of Your Jails 1960-1961 - YouTube

Irrelevant, just like your previous flashback contribution.

 

[Article 15]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Why is murder illegal?

 

[rightwinger]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Right by any standards

The government legislates morality all the time.....it is called being a civilization

 

[PredFan]

More: Ron Paul: Civil Rights Act Of 1964 'Destroyed' Privacy

Clearly this concept is way too complicated for you to understand, but Ron Paul is correct. If you had a lick of sense, you'd title this thread, "Ron Paul stands up for liberty for all". But no, you're unable to comprehend hence the title you chose.

Ron Paul does not stand up for peoples who's liberty is being denied because of skin color

Garbage.

 

[PredFan]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Why is murder illegal?

Because they passed a law against it.

 

[Article 15]

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Why is murder illegal?

Because they passed a law against it.

Why did they pass a law against it?

Do you agree with the law?

Answer both questions, please.

 

[Paulie]

Why do we care what one democrat voter thinks about Ron Paul, during the republican nomination process?

We don't even need your ass in the general, because we already know that tens of millions of idiots are going to vote for Obama regardless.

 

[rightwinger]

Clearly this concept is way too complicated for you to understand, but Ron Paul is correct. If you had a lick of sense, you'd title this thread, "Ron Paul stands up for liberty for all". But no, you're unable to comprehend hence the title you chose.

Ron Paul does not stand up for peoples who's liberty is being denied because of skin color

Garbage.

Ron Paul has a corrupt view of Liberty

There is no time in American history where liberty has been denied to the extent of the way we treated our black citizens. We had state sponsored, open terrorism against our black population

Ron Paul does not see that as a violation of liberty?

 

[PredFan]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Right by any standards

The government legislates morality all the time.....it is called being a civilization

I know where you are going but it's silly. It isn't like the Civil Rights Act couldn't have been written differently. While telling us it was doing a good thing, it was also seizing an opportunity to reach further into the lives of citizens. The problem with the Liberals and Conservatives both is that you want the government to use it's power to control people. You simply disagree on what should be controlled. Ron Paul and Libertarians don't suffer from that kind of blindness and hypocrisy. Ron Paul stands for liberty for ALL, not just special interest groups.

 

[dblack]

He's a racist huh?

Nobody in this thread has called Ron Paul a racist (admittedly, the words "nuts" and "neanderthal" have been bandied about). People have merely noted that he criticized the Civil Rights act. It's perfectly possible for non-racists to facilitate racism. As Michael Gerson put it (Ron Paul’s quest to undo the party of Lincoln - The Washington Post)

"Whatever his personal views, Paul categorically opposes the legal construct that ended state-sanctioned racism."

This qoute, like many responses to Paul's views, is misleading demagoguery, if not an outright lie. It insinuates that Paul supports state-sanctioned racism - the opposite of his position on the Civil Rights Act. In fact, the banning of Jim Crow laws is the part of the act he agrees with and why he wouldn't consider repealing it.

What Paul is doing here, what the status quo pundits find so repugnant, is speaking up for property rights.

Paul explained that while he supports the fact that the legislation repealed the notorious Jim Crow laws, which forced racial segregation, he believes it is the government, not the people, that causes racial tensions by passing overreaching laws that institutionalize slavery and segregation. Today's race problems, he said, result from the war on drugs, the flawed U.S. court system and the military."The real problem we face today is the discrimination in our court system, the war on drugs. Just think of how biased that is against the minorities," he said. "They go into prison much way out of proportion to their numbers. They get the death penalty out of proportion with their numbers. And if you look at what minorities suffer in ordinary wars, whether there's a draft or no draft, they suffer much out of proposition. So those are the kind of discrimination that have to be dealt with, but you don't ever want to undermine the principle of private property and private choices in order to solve some of these problems."

He's questioning the assumption that its necessary, or even a good idea, to put government in charge of deciding who we must do business with or for what reasons we can decline. We can solve our problems, even intractable issues like racism, without enacting "thoughtcrime".

 

[Paulie]

Ron Paul needs to learn that there are times when you put aside your libertarianism and do something because it is the right thing to do

Right by who's standards?

Some people, many people, think that abortion is wrong. You cannot have the government legislating morality.

Right by any standards

The government legislates morality all the time.....it is called being a civilization

Forcing people by law to not act racist doesn't remove the racism.

The only thing that changed in this country since the civil rights movement was that now people just keep their racism to themselves.

We grew as a society on racial tolerance IN SPITE of the civil rights act, not because of it.

Today, if the act was repealed, and a business owner banned black patrons, that business would be lucky if it managed to stay afloat for a full week. Not only would people in the local area boycott it, but the media would pick up the story and the contempt for the business would quickly grow nationally and the business would die. And the owner would probably never be able to redeem himself.

 

[rightwinger]

The Civil Rights period was the biggest defense of Liberty and Freedom in our lifetimes. Ron Paul should be ashamed of himself

 

[Katzndogz]

It was the republicans alone, fighting the anti civil rights democrats. Democrats may want to rewrite history today. It was democrats holding the hoses and standing in the school house doors.

I don't expect anything from Ron Paul - TODAY - to try to damage control what he did in the past. All the candidates did that. Newt Gingrich can always become a faithful husband, Ron Paul can't stop being a lunatic.