Rand Paul linked to campaign donations of White Supremacist groups

[Madvillain]

How about just not voting for racists period

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

How about just not voting for racists period

Libertarians will say people can't get be racist.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

How about just not voting for racists period

Hes not tellign anyone what to do, people are free to do what they want

But if u dont agree that splitting the vote arbitrarily is the only way forward u are retarded :yadontsay:

 

[Geek Nasty]

Libertarians used to be all the kookie conservatives the Republicans didn't want to be in the same room with. John Birchers, white supremacists, skinheads, anti-semites, etc. Look up some of the stuff printed in Ron Paul's named journal (he doesn't claim it anymore now that he doesn't run it).

This is where the modern Republican party F'd up. I think it was William F. Buckley who told everyone "hey we're not getting anywhere if we have these clowns in-house." So, they purged them all until Obama wrecked McCain then they were so desperate for votes and enthusiasm they let them all back in. That's where IMO all this "new" racism is coming from. Every board is flooded with these haters from Yahoo to Youtube. CNN even shut down their comments section they had so many racists flooding the comments section.

 

[Robbie3000]

yeah we should, we should stop delusion that because somebody isnt blatantly racist they have our interests, black people need to have stakes and people in both parties

the democratic party is not your friend, we have no friends

Vote for Council of Conservative Citizen funded candidates brehs.

The Council of Conservative Citizens opposes “all efforts to mix the races,” and believes “that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character.” It would severely restrict immigration, abolish affirmative action and dismantle the “imperial judiciary” that produced, among other rulings, the 1954 Supreme Court decision that integrated American education.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Vote for Council of Conservative Citizen funded candidates brehs.

The Council of Conservative Citizens opposes “all efforts to mix the races,” and believes “that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character.” It would severely restrict immigration, abolish affirmative action and dismantle the “imperial judiciary” that produced, among other rulings, the 1954 Supreme Court decision that integrated American education.

Dems are racist too, if we give them our votes they will work with us, everyone is a little racist

 

[Madvillain]

It would severely restrict immigration, abolish affirmative action

This is what he wants though

 

[theworldismine13]

Vote for Council of Conservative Citizen funded candidates brehs.

The Council of Conservative Citizens opposes “all efforts to mix the races,” and believes “that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character.” It would severely restrict immigration, abolish affirmative action and dismantle the “imperial judiciary” that produced, among other rulings, the 1954 Supreme Court decision that integrated American education.

oh i see, so you think we should vote for the "good white folk"

 

[DEAD7]

CATO got 2 written warnings out for @DEAD7 over poor performance.... if he doesnt get his conversion rate out of th red this quarter hes done

 

[Robbie3000]

This is what he wants though

oh i see, so you think we should vote for the "good white folk"

You should be bright enough to vote for candidates that are not funded by an openly white supremacists group.

It's not rocket science.

 

[theworldismine13]

You should be bright enough to vote for candidates that are not funded by an openly white supremacists group.

It's not rocket science.

but you think its ok to vote for candidates that created the prison industrial complex tho

 

[tru_m.a.c]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-inexcusably-a-symbol-of-human-bon#.slXZDMpna

Don't fall for the okie doke. We tell y'all all the time, being openly racist is bad for business.

The next day, Rachel Maddow duly noted Paul’s change of heart. “Rand Paul went to Shelbyville yesterday, and he sang the praises of the civil rights movement and the civil rights activists and specifically the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” she said, going on to repeat Paul’s statement, even displaying it on screen. “Rand Paul coming out in full support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” she said afterward, “which is nice, and I don’t mean to be raining on the parade, but I have to point out that this marks something of a shift in Rand Paul’s position on this legislation.” She then replayed a clip of her famous May 19, 2010 interview with Paul, in which he repeatedly refused to say he would have supported the bill. Specifically, she played a segment in which Paul said, “There’s 10 different titles, you know, to the Civil Rights Act, and nine out of 10 deal with public institutions, and I’m absolutely in favor of. One deals with private institutions, and had I been around, I would have tried to modify that.” He went on to indicate that he might or might not have finally agreed to support the bill, with just one title that he objected to.

I can’t help but join with Maddow in applauding Paul’s change of heart — but I do still harbor some deeper doubts, not least because Paul has dissembled, disinformed and confused so frequently and so much on the subject over the years — he’s even gotten the number of titles in the Civil Rights Act wrong; there are 11 of them, not 10. More significantly, as Ian Millhiser noted back on April 10, 2013, there are numerous examples of Paul going on the record — both in print and on videotape — expressing his opposition to the Civil Rights Act:

Here’s video of him saying it to a Kentucky paper’s editorial board. Here’s a lengthy interview where he tries to defend his opposition to the Civil Rights Act to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. Here’s video from just last year of him defending his father’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act (according to Rand Paul, “it’s not all about race relations, it’s about controlling property, ultimately.”)

Yet on that date, Millhiser noted, Paul insisted otherwise to an audience at the historically black Howard University. “I’ve never been against the Civil Rights Act. Ever,” he said, “I have been concerned about the ramifications of the Civil Rights Act beyond race… but I’ve never come out in opposition.”

It’s good that Paul’s views have apparently evolved over time, but it’s disturbingly less good that he still can’t admit the change in his thinking, because there’s still a great deal of confusion, contradiction and outright falsehood that he’s perpetuating. In the passage I quoted above, for example, he substantially misrepresented the balance of the Civil Rights Act, and dramatically downplayed the extent of his “principled” opposition. A true change of heart would mean coming to terms with those inconvenient truths, admitting his past mistakes, and coming to terms with them, rather than stubbornly refusing to square with the facts.

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/12/ran...on_civil_rights_are_as_phony_as_the_old_ones/

 

[tru_m.a.c]

You should be bright enough to vote for candidates that are not funded by an openly white supremacists group.

It's not rocket science.

but you think its ok to vote for candidates that created the prison industrial complex tho

how does this statement refute @Robbie3000 's original point. No, it's not ok to vote for people that created the PIC. The fukk do you think we rant and rave about on this board?

 

[hashmander]

if republicans got half the black vote with the way they have been behaving the past 7 years (let's just start there and not even go back to the southern strategy), why would they ever change? if a child is doing bad in school you don't give them cookies and then say, see if you do good in school there will be more cookies for you.

 

[Robbie3000]

but you think its ok to vote for candidates that created the prison industrial complex tho

:

We've been through this before. Law and Order was a Republican platform long before Clinton singed the legislation into law. It was an issue that was used to attack Democratic candidates as soft on crime by demonizing black people since atleast the 70s. (Willie Horton ads)

Unintended consequences of legislation meant to curb crime at a time of high crime rates does not mean Clinton and Dems were racially motivated.

But thats neither here nor there, what we do know for certain is that Republican politicians and several Republican Presidential Candidates, accepted thousands of dollars in campaign funds from from an openly racist group even after the RNC denounced the group.

And even after this shooting, Republican presidential candidates were refraining from calling this a racially motivated shooting out of fear of offending their racist voters. .

Even now, some hesitate calling for the removal of the Confederate Battle Flag from the Capitol grounds in order to pander to the "South Shall Rise Again" crowd.

Good luck casting your lot with that crowd.