[Peace-discuss] Fw: Whites only?

[C. G. Estabrook]

"...Here’s Maddow, brandishing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as though this is
the only matter worth considering in the forthcoming race between Rand Paul and
the Democrat, an awful neo-liberal prosecutor, Kentucky’s current attorney
general, Jack 'I'm a Tough Son-of-a-Bitch' Conway.

"Between Conway and Paul, which one in the U.S. Senate would more likely be a
wild card – which is the best we can hope for these days – likely to filibuster
against a bankers’ bailout, against reaffirmation of the Patriot Act, against
suppression of the CIA’s full torture history?

"Paul, one would have to bet, and these are the votes that count, where one
uncompromising stand by an outsider can make a difference, unlike the gyrations
and last-ditch sell-outs of Blowhard Bernie Sanders.

"Liberals love grandstanding about what are, in practice, distractions. You
think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is going to come up for review in the U.S.
Senate?"


On 5/23/10 9:53 AM, unionyes wrote:
> Wayne, I don't like the Federal government dictating things that restricts
> people's freedoms either ( seatbelt laws, gun ownership restrictions, drug
> and prostitution laws, so called " Patriot Act " and Military Commisions Act
> ), however. There are some laws and restrictions that federal, state and
> local governments must enact for the public good. If Rand Paul's opposition
> to the 1964 Civil Rights Act was acted upon and repealed, that would mean
> that there would be SOME business owners who would place " White's Only "
> signs on the exterior of their businesses, and that racial and ethnic
> discrimination in hiring would be allowed. To me this would NOT be a positive
> step in creating a better society, because in effect this would restrict the
> rights of minorities to patronize businesses as they choose and sit where
> there are available seats in a bus or reataurant, etc.. Government in and of
> itself is NOT the problem, the problem is when citizens no longer control
> their government and instead private corporate interests do. David J.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- *From:* E.Wayne Johnson <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>
> *To:* John W. <mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com> *Cc:* Peace-discuss
> <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> *Sent:* Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:12
> AM *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Whites only?
>
> Libertarians dont want the federal government telling local private
> businesses what to do. Libertarians reject racism, especially government
> enforced racism. On the one hand we have the elitist-run state masquerading
> as do-gooders fighting the "never-ending battle against racism". On the other
> hand we have lovers of liberty being accused of racism because they dont like
> the iron fist of the authoritarians telling them how they ought to run their
> lives. The fact that libertarians tend to be white and male makes them an
> easy target for (false) allegations of racism and sexism. The white male
> genotype may indeed embody some tendency toward libertarianism but that
> doesnt make them racist. Libertarians dont want the government dictating
> anything to them not already specifically allocated by the constitution and
> its amendments. They dont like unconstitutional wars. Racism is also
> unconstitutional as well as crosswise with the libertarian doctrines embodied
> in the 1776 Declaration. Those who are calling libertarians racist are
> relying upon ignorance to support their notions. ----- Original Message
> -----
>
> *From:* John W. <mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com> *To:* E.Wayne Johnson
> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag> *Cc:* Jenifer Cartwright <mailto:jencart13 at yahoo.com> ;
> Peace-discuss <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> *Sent:* Sunday, May
> 23, 2010 5:11 PM *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Whites only?
>
>
> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 4:00 AM, E.Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
>
> Jennifer, I think this is just plain silly and I am disappointed that people
> get sucked into this wave of hysterical thinking that Stossel of all people,
> and Rand Paul are racist because they are Libertarian. It doesnt make any
> sense at all and it should be an embarrassment to make this sort of
> unwarranted accusation. The strangest thing about race baiting is that there
> are willing participants ready to chase the bait. EWJ
>
> What would be the reason, then, EWJ, why libertarians would want to exempt
> businesses from the various pertinent civil rights acts? Who exactly would
> the businesses be wanting to exclude or discrimate against?

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.