Rand Paul Reaches Out to Black Voters at Howard University

Apr 10, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: KVOR-AM Colorado Springs

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul conceded he had a "daunting task" Wednesday when he set out to woo black students at Howard University, and proceeded to tell them that the Republican Party was the party of the civil rights movement.

Comments
81 - 91 of 91 Comments Last updated May 4, 2013
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#93 Apr 29, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazi is basically short for "National Socialist" in German.
I'm not a socialist; nor do I believe in fascism as such - like the fascism you expressed in this thread toward Masud.
If I am not correct, let me know but, aren't you a socialist, Savant?
So you're pro-fascism *and* pro-National socialism.
Looks like you fit the label of "Nazi" here, kid; not I.
The right loves to pretend that Nazism was “socialist” and on the left but everyone knows better. Nazis were a type of FASCIST and that is on the right, folks. No way around it.

When the USSR was falling, reporters were referring to the hardliners, the Stalinists, as the “conservatives”, LOL!!! The “liberals” were those who wanted democracy. And THAT is accurate.“Liberal” has meant power to the people, curtailing the power of the oppressive ancien régime, and so on.

I used to call the Soviets “red fascists” and I think that is accurate.

I think the political spectrum is NOT a linear dichotomy of left-right, but more like a circle or perhaps a cone. There are several dichotomies at work, including that between state-anarchy. Both left and right can lead to anti-statism. On the right it's called libertarianism.

I as an anarchist moved very far to the left and ran into Ron Paul coming around the other side. As an anarchist I want protection for the people from corporate power. Ron Paul worries more about the state, but he acknowledges that our current system is that of a “corporate state”.

As for Rand Paul, I think he's a Tea-Party nut.

A demosocialist, which Savant seems to be, is hardly a Nazi. Get real. He's not a red fascist either. What I hear him supporting in here is similar to Scandinavian demosocialism. Who in their right mind would call the Swedish system "fascist" or "Nazi"? Nobody.

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#94 Apr 29, 2013
Now that we have the scientific technology to analyze the genome, we find out that Hitler's view of “Aryans” was very mistaken. The Aryan Y-haplotype is R. It spread into Europe largely out of the Kurgan culture. And who has the most R in Europe? Slavs! Ukrainians, Russians, Poles. And the Germans? They have R but also a lot of I (Cro-Magnon) and some N (Uralic), plus some Neolithic Mideastern J.(uh-oh! Just like the Jews!).

So the Nazis were full of crap in every way.

Another irony: in the southern Rhineland, during Roman times Jews settled, when the area was inhabited not by Germans but Gauls. This means that in part of Germany, the Jews were there before the Germans! LOL!!!

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#95 Apr 29, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is true that Ron Paul SAID he didn't publish those racist articles written under his name (in HIS publication) over a number of years. But that's no guarantee that he didn't actually write them. And some poople who worked with his publication claim that he DID write or approve what was written. That this kind of drivel could be published FOR YEARS without Ron Paul noticing it seems a bit fantastic. It would suggest that he's mentally incompetent not to have noticed stuff published under his name in his own journal! Or perhaps he's suffering from Alzheimer. Or maybe Ron Paul is just lying.
But I doubt that those who are trying to defend Ron Paul despite those racist articles under his name, would be equally accomodating if let's say articles published from the perspective of the Nation of Islam appeared under the name of Barack Obama in an Obama newsletter or journal.
If you believe Ron Paul's story regarding those articles, then I will sell you the Chesapeake Bay at a discount.
In my opinion Ron Paul did not write that stuff, but knew about it and let it slide, knowing that much of his ultra-right constituency were white racists, and not wishing to challenge them, not wanting to create division over that issue. As I am a very pro-civil rights and anti-racist person, I fault Paul for that decision, and find it to be irresponsible.

It is a fact of life in the USA that the right-libertarian category includes a lot of white racists.

Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#96 Apr 29, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
The federal government should only step in when an individual State clearly infringes upon an individual citizens' right as protected by the U.S. Constitution. Slavery was infringement upon an individuals right to freedom, so the federal government stepping in was correct on that issue, if a State made slavery "legal" there.
As for one person not doing business with another based upon their genetic background? Well, that's their right to be racist. Don't do business with them and they'll lose a lot of money anyway.
If memory is correct: Ron Paul said that he did not write those letters all those years ago, nor did he approve of them before they went out.
Why would anyone be dumb enough to write such things and then blatantly deny it later on? They'd not bother, unless they're an idiot. Ron Paul is clearly not an idiot and he doesn't seem like an ignorant bigot to me. So, all I can go on is his word for now and his character, which speaks volumes if you've heard him speak on many issues and/or read his material on many issues.
As for Jews and Nazis: I support peoples' right to believe whatever they want, it doesn't mean I agree with all of their belifs. There's a difference. Once they put those beliefs into action, and those actions clearly infringe upon another persons' liberty, body or property, THAT'S when I draw the line. That's how government should be.
They can be a "Nazi" (National Socialist) all they want... just keep their hands to their own self and we're fine. Beliefs are different from physical action.
Didn't know you couldn't tell the difference...
Nazism is not like religion which you can keep to yourself. Implicit in the ideology is that one will work to implement it. Likewise socialism.

One aspect of fascism is heavy collusion of state with capital .That is what we have NOW in the USA, as Ron Paul calls it,“corporatism”.

If you ignore that, your pretense of being non-fascist dissolves upon examination.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#97 May 1, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
<quoted text>
The right loves to pretend that Nazism was “socialist” and on the left but everyone knows better. Nazis were a type of FASCIST and that is on the right, folks. No way around it.
When the USSR was falling, reporters were referring to the hardliners, the Stalinists, as the “conservatives”, LOL!!! The “liberals” were those who wanted democracy. And THAT is accurate.“Liberal” has meant power to the people, curtailing the power of the oppressive ancien régime, and so on.
I used to call the Soviets “red fascists” and I think that is accurate.
I think the political spectrum is NOT a linear dichotomy of left-right, but more like a circle or perhaps a cone. There are several dichotomies at work, including that between state-anarchy. Both left and right can lead to anti-statism. On the right it's called libertarianism.
I as an anarchist moved very far to the left and ran into Ron Paul coming around the other side. As an anarchist I want protection for the people from corporate power. Ron Paul worries more about the state, but he acknowledges that our current system is that of a “corporate state”.
As for Rand Paul, I think he's a Tea-Party nut.
A demosocialist, which Savant seems to be, is hardly a Nazi. Get real. He's not a red fascist either. What I hear him supporting in here is similar to Scandinavian demosocialism. Who in their right mind would call the Swedish system "fascist" or "Nazi"? Nobody.
PTWB once stated that the difference between Nazism and Scaninavian social democracy was negligible since both were forms of "big government." Such simplemindedness would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. Interestingly enough, I once caught PTWB quoting with APPROVAL from a Nazi site. I've never seen him quote with approval from any social democrat writers
Truthism

United States

#98 May 1, 2013
Well, whatever then. Agree to disagree on that subject because the word Nazi is clear for me, no matter how you want to twist supposed historical definitions or not.

So what part of my posts reminds you of the 'fascists' in Germany during WWII?

How am I a "Nazi" (in your own interpretation of the word)?

I'm not the one who wants to infringe upon someone elses right to freedom of speech, simply because it's something I don't personally find to be moral. That would be you, fascist Savant... so hold that mirror up in front of your face: You're much more of a "Nazi" then I ever will be. You might not have held their exact same views concerning the genetic superiority but, you certain do have an insecure, fascist type of mindset; wanting government to infringe upon peoples' rights and liberties because they "offended" you verbally or textually.
Truthism

United States

#99 May 1, 2013
than*

“The "entitled" =communist.”

Level 9

Since: May 10

MY MONEY, come take it.

#100 May 1, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
The federal government should only step in when an individual State clearly infringes upon an individual citizens' right as protected by the U.S. Constitution. Slavery was infringement upon an individuals right to freedom, so the federal government stepping in was correct on that issue, if a State made slavery "legal" there.
As for one person not doing business with another based upon their genetic background? Well, that's their right to be racist. Don't do business with them and they'll lose a lot of money anyway.
If memory is correct: Ron Paul said that he did not write those letters all those years ago, nor did he approve of them before they went out.
Why would anyone be dumb enough to write such things and then blatantly deny it later on? They'd not bother, unless they're an idiot. Ron Paul is clearly not an idiot and he doesn't seem like an ignorant bigot to me. So, all I can go on is his word for now and his character, which speaks volumes if you've heard him speak on many issues and/or read his material on many issues.
As for Jews and Nazis: I support peoples' right to believe whatever they want, it doesn't mean I agree with all of their belifs. There's a difference. Once they put those beliefs into action, and those actions clearly infringe upon another persons' liberty, body or property, THAT'S when I draw the line. That's how government should be.
They can be a "Nazi" (National Socialist) all they want... just keep their hands to their own self and we're fine. Beliefs are different from physical action.
Didn't know you couldn't tell the difference...
Good post and I agree with your stance concerning individualism and the federal government. Ron Paul is alittle out-there for me but Rand Paul,a libertarian, I find that I agree with most of the time....I believe we are at another time similar to 1861. Many states have refused to inlist into Obamacare. Some states are passing laws against following any laws concerning gun control.....I already live in a state where excons can have firearms in their homes, place of business, and vehicles. So much for background checks. It's also in the news everyday concerning our not being involved in Obamacare. We are very close to another "shot heard around the world". I dont really see the problem with different states having different laws. If you dont like ours, move.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#101 May 2, 2013
Truthism wrote:
Well, whatever then. Agree to disagree on that subject because the word Nazi is clear for me, no matter how you want to twist supposed historical definitions or not.
So what part of my posts reminds you of the 'fascists' in Germany during WWII?
How am I a "Nazi" (in your own interpretation of the word)?
I'm not the one who wants to infringe upon someone elses right to freedom of speech, simply because it's something I don't personally find to be moral. That would be you, fascist Savant... so hold that mirror up in front of your face: You're much more of a "Nazi" then I ever will be. You might not have held their exact same views concerning the genetic superiority but, you certain do have an insecure, fascist type of mindset; wanting government to infringe upon peoples' rights and liberties because they "offended" you verbally or textually.
Well, it seems the word may be clear but the meaning is not. Which makes you as naive as many Germans who supported the Nazis.
And since both I and Barros have attempted to explain in the simplest terms the difference between democratic socialism and "fascism," your persistence in using the word "fascist" for a democratic socialist clearly allows us now to identify you as an IDIOT. Case closed. Do some HOMEWORK.
Truthism

United States

#102 May 4, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
<quoted text>
The right loves to pretend that Nazism was “socialist” and on the left but everyone knows better. Nazis were a type of FASCIST and that is on the right, folks. No way around it.
When the USSR was falling, reporters were referring to the hardliners, the Stalinists, as the “conservatives”, LOL!!! The “liberals” were those who wanted democracy. And THAT is accurate.“Liberal” has meant power to the people, curtailing the power of the oppressive ancien régime, and so on.
I used to call the Soviets “red fascists” and I think that is accurate.
I think the political spectrum is NOT a linear dichotomy of left-right, but more like a circle or perhaps a cone. There are several dichotomies at work, including that between state-anarchy. Both left and right can lead to anti-statism. On the right it's called libertarianism.
I as an anarchist moved very far to the left and ran into Ron Paul coming around the other side. As an anarchist I want protection for the people from corporate power. Ron Paul worries more about the state, but he acknowledges that our current system is that of a “corporate state”.
As for Rand Paul, I think he's a Tea-Party nut.
A demosocialist, which Savant seems to be, is hardly a Nazi. Get real. He's not a red fascist either. What I hear him supporting in here is similar to Scandinavian demosocialism. Who in their right mind would call the Swedish system "fascist" or "Nazi"? Nobody.
Mr. Savant clearly expressed support of the tyrannical government arrest of an individual, merely because that person (Masud) said something Savant did not like.

I can picture the fascist Nazis doing the same thing.

So mr. Savant is giving off a fascistic type of mindset. He wants 'the state' to control mere speech of someone who offended him with text (lol!). He doesn't believe in freedom of speech, apparently; therefore, he wants all that power to the government.

That, on top of his admittance of being a socialist, I'd say he qualifies as being labeled a "Nazi" here.

I'm still waiting for him to explain, in detail, how I could accurately be labeled a "Nazi" - since he's the one who called me the Nazi first, out of no where. Seems he's too scared to face up to his tremendous mistake.

"Demosocialism"?

Well, the U.S. is not a "Democracy" to begin with; it's a Constitutional Republic! So mr. Savant might want to move to a 'Democracy' first, for his 'demo-socialist' utopia.

I'm for freedom of every single individual to do what they want with the money they earned, all on their own. When government gets involved (and yes, also with secret pay-offs from billion dollar corporations), things screw up badly down the road, as we can now see today.
Truthism

United States

#103 May 4, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
One cannot be BOTH fascist and socialist at the same time.
There are a few forms of socialism and one of them is "STATE SOCIALISM."

State Socialism: "A political system in which the state (government) has control of industries and services."

Fascism: "A totalitarian philosophy of government that glorifies the state and nation and assigns to the state control over every aspect of national life."

-

One can easily be a FASCIST and a SOCIALIST at the same time.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
There's A War On The Black Male 3 min chris722 565
Why do blacks claim to be the true Israelites? ... (May '11) 4 min JOHNS ON TOP OF IT 4,758
Damaged Goods White Women: PICS 9 min The Foot of Oppre... 2
I don't want to marry a BLACK MAN 10 min reality-chec 3,299
progressive white people: where are you? (Jul '08) 13 min Savant 1,950
Been having some crazy kinky dreams 14 min The Foot of Oppre... 47
What's happened to my lovely little girl? 16 min Estelle 8
How has Africa from the begining of time influe... (May '13) 1 hr African AE 1,884
Lol.. WW Has 8 Mix Kids wants MORE!! 5 hr Diva 361
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

African-American People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••