Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (122719)	5/21/2010 2:10:13 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 132070

yes, a government that spends trillions to bail out billionaire bankers for breaking the law (taking credit parabolic to GDP via their fed puppet) is doing so well. the 40 million on food stamps thank you! ps - rand is wrong on the civil rights act. he's right that big government is bad, though - not even you can name one where the people weren't eventually punished severely by it.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (122719)	5/22/2010 12:06:44 PM
From: Freedom Fighter	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>>I want Paul to run as a true teabagger and stick by his segregationist stance. (BTW, that doesn't necessarily mean he is racist. He could just be incredibly naive.) And the fact that he believes that handicapped people should fend for themselves and learn how to carry their wheelchairs up steep staircases to get into bathrooms. << More lies and spins from our neighborhood scumbag. If he's backing off at all (and I don't see it), it's because he finally realized how intrinsically evil the elite members of the left are when they started using his position to paint him as a pro segregation racist in order to advance their political agenda etc.... It's quite unfortunate that most of the rank and file left lacks the intelligence to actually comprehend the significance of his position so they could try to weigh the pluses and minuses and decide for themselves. Paul believes in private property rights and the innate intelligence and moral compass of the citizenry to eventually get it right because of education and the power of economics to persuade them. That would eventually make the laws irrelevant. He is against "holier than thou" liberals or conservatives selectively ramming their own personal values down the throats of those that don't agree with them (even when he agrees with those doing the ramming as in the case of civil right). He is willing to accept the fact that it may take a little longer to get it right his way, but believes the greater freedom is a million times better than allowing activist liberals and conservatives to take away freedoms, dictate to private property owners, cause conflict, and get it wrong constantly. IMO, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell this country would revert back to some of the old segregationist ways if the civil rights laws were revoked. If anything, we'd rid the country of some reverse discrimination that evolved as a result. Yes, there would be pockets of racist scumbags running around the country doing fucked up things, but those guys exist anyway despite the laws.