Showing posts with label Libertarianism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libertarianism. Show all posts

Saturday, May 22, 2010

Tea Party Activists Defend Rand Paul Amid Civil Rights Controversy

The controversy around Rand Paul may make you wonder how it affects the Tea Party Movement that supported him in his Republican primary victory. Will it affect his chances for a victory in November against his Democrat opponent, Jack Conway?
"I just feel like it's another day in the political arena where the left is frantic because all indicators are they are going to lose big and they know the one big hot-button thing they got is race," said Gina Loudon, founder of the St. Louis Tea Party.

Loudon said the controversy is an attempt by Democrats to distract voters away from other issues, such as border security and growing deficits. She said that race has never been a problem for the Tea Party, which she says takes pride in having a "place in the platform for all races, parties and genders."

She also expressed skepticism of the mainstream media's coverage of the controversy.

"I have so little trust with the mainstream media," she said. "I think this is more about a leftist agenda to erode the support that conservative groups have in November."
By Stephen Clark ~ FOXNews.com

Updated May 21, 2010

Tea Partiers had barely started their victory lap for propelling Rand Paul to triumph Tuesday in Kentucky's GOP Senate primary, when a controversy over the new nominee's criticism of the Civil Rights Act threatened to rain on the parade.

Paul was criticized Wednesday for saying in a series of interviews that he would have opposed forcing private businesses to integrate under the landmark 1964 law that banned racial discrimination. Paul clarified his remarks Thursday, saying he agrees with the goals of the law but questions the federal government imposing its will on businesses – a view consistent with his long-held libertarian beliefs but leaving him open to criticisms that he would allow racial discrimination.

The Tea Party movement faces a dilemma. The conservative grassroots phenomenon that has shaken up the political landscape in the past year has faced accusations from the left of racism. Now it must decide how to deal with the fallout over Paul's comments, which have given Democrats more ammunition for November's midterm elections.

And as Paul tried to explain his take on the civil rights law Friday, he has added fuel to the fire with criticism of President Obama for being too tough on oil company BP PLC in his handling of the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Tea Party activists told FoxNews.com that they plan to keep supporting Paul in his race against Democrat Jack Conway, but they made clear that their platform opposes discrimination and condemned Democrats for seizing on Paul's comments.

"The people in the Tea Party movement oppose racism," said Debbie Dooley, a Tea Party Patriots organizer and FreedomWorks volunteer outside of Atlanta, "We don't believe private businesses should be allowed to discriminate."

Dooley said she doesn't believe Paul is a racist and that she's satisfied with his clarification. "Do I believe he lost support? No," she said. "I don't believe he lost the Tea Party."

But Lenny McAllister, a black syndicated political commentator who has spoken at a number of Tea Party events in Georgia, said he believes Paul went too far with his belief in free market principles.

"Unfortunately, in his interpretation of what America is supposed to be, he's forgotten there's also a constitutional freedom that needs to be guaranteed," he told FoxNews.com, adding that Paul doesn't represent everyone in the Tea Party.

"The movement is one that has leaders like this but also understands that the Constitution is the law of the land and makes sure it's honored and ensures that civil rights are guaranteed," he said.

McAllister said he was not a "big supporter nor a basher" of Paul before the controversy and that he will continue to support the Tea Party.

"I think the main point is that we as conservatives and even Tea Party folks understand the balance," he said. "They're not anti-government. They want proper restraint of government and in this instance that means ensuring civil rights is protected for all Americans."

The Civil Rights Act was landmark legislation that outlawed racial segregation in schools, workplaces and other public places. It also banned unequal application of voter registration requirements.

Paul is an eye doctor who had never run for elective office before the Senate primary. He says he shares many of the libertarian views of his father, Republican Rep. Ron Paul, who represents a Texas district and was a presidential candidate in 2008.

In his primary victory on Tuesday, Paul had strong support from Tea Party activists, who believe that government spending and influence should be curbed. Paul also had the backing of some key conservatives, including former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

But Paul's comments to The Louisville (Kentucky) Courier-Journal last month challenging the Civil Rights Act went viral after he was asked about them in separate interviews with National Public Radio and MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show."

"It's Rand Paul's view," said William Owens, a black Tea Party activist in Nevada. "It's a libertarian view. It doesn't have any reflection on the Tea Party at all."

"His position is not racially inspired. It's libertarian inspired," he said. "He is welcome to that view."

Owens added that he believes Democrats who are criticizing Paul are doing so because they fear the ground they are losing.

READ FULL STORY at FoxNews.com

Bookmark and Share


Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Today's bad guys truly are fascists ~ By Joseph Farah

Joseph Farah explains the political spectrum further. Progressives don't like being labeled as Fascists, however, the label actually fits them well.

What's the center of the political spectrum?


Limited self-government under the rule of law and accountable to the will of the people – just the unique formula invented by America's founders.


Therefore, I can proudly and accurately say, "I'm a centrist – just like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison."
By Joseph Farah

Posted: February 26, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



Self-described "progressives" seldom respond well to being labeled fascists.

They usually consider themselves to be the very antithesis.

But, as I wrote in my column last weekend, "The real political spectrum 101," they really are not so different.

In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to find any substantive difference.


Even moderate Democrats today, people like Pat Caddell, are calling today's American "progressives" – people like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid – "statists." Can any reasonable observer deny they are just that? Don't they believe the state has the answer to all problems? Don't their actions suggest they think government can pretty much always do a better job than the private sector? Are they the folks pushing the "public-private partnerships"? Heck, didn't they facilitate the public takeover of General Motors?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but those are the very definitions of "fascism."

The political ideology of fascism has nothing to do with killing Jews or even imperialistic ambitions. It has to do with government controlling corporations, doling out favors to some and punishing others and harnessing the power of success by corporations for the benefit of the state.

Again, it's a tiny step short of communism, which calls for state ownership of the means of production. Fascists like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler recognized the inefficiency and foolishness of that utopian notion.

Mussolini put it this way: "Fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is a merger of state and corporate power."

Here's another key quote: "State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the state are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management."

Sound familiar yet?


READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Bookmark and Share