No offense to my sister, but what a bunch of idiots live in Indianapolis and actually sent this clown to Congress:
A top lawmaker in the Congressional Black Caucus says tea partiers on Capitol Hill would like to see African Americans hanging from trees and accuses the movement of wishing for a return to the Jim Crow era.
Rep. Andre Carson, a Democrat from Indiana who serves as the CBC's chief vote counter, said at a CBC event in Miami that some in Congress would “love to see us as second-class citizens” and “some of them in Congress right now of this tea party movement would love to see you and me
Comments
really...makes me embarrassed to live in indy.....
I realize Rand Paul doesn't speak for the entire Tea Party, but he is on record supporting a return to Jim Crow. As you know, he advocates allowing restaurants to ban black customers. He's probably not your party's best spokesman.
Littlejohn, that is preposterous and you know it. Please cite exact quotes of Mr. Paul or at least have the decency to place a disclaimer on your comments like "This is my embellished version of my partisan interpretation of what I want people to believe this guy was really saying".
Tim, click on this link:
It includes an actual video of Rand Paul saying precisely what I said he said, and more.
I embellished nothing; if anything I understated his opposition to civil rights.
Instead of simply calling me a liar, you could have done 2 minutes of Google research and found dozens of references to this. I await your apology.
I didn't need to google it, I've seen the interview. Show me in the transcript where he says "I support a return to Jim Crow" and show me in the transcript where he says "I advocate allowing restaurants to ban black customers".
He never said that, he never advocated those things. You and Huffpo, and other dishonest lefties extrapolate a general idea or comment (like Paul's on private property rights) to absurd ends.
Interviewers will deliberately elicit a general "idea" or philosophical answer and then extrapolate it out to fit their own narrative. It's patently dishonest and may get them a pat on the back from fellow dishonest democrats & socialists but real people see right through it.
Here's an example that's real simple using the sign in the window of restaurants across the country "We reserve the right to refuse to anyone". You can ask damn near anybody (customer or employee) if that sign is a good idea and 99% of them will say of course it is, which (using your methodology and logic if you will) means those 99% want to return to Jim Crow and they want retaurants to refuse service to black customers.
Huffpo's assertion, as well as yours, are absurd which is why Paul went on to win and this story never gained any traction.
If you're waiting for an apology, don't hold your breath, you'll pass out.
Because "we reserve the right to refuse to serve anyone" applies to people with no shirts and barefoot (a board of health issue) and smoking (another public health issue) and wielding a gun and intoxicated and a public nuisance (criminal concerns, no doubt). Society by now recognizes that message doesn't mean also keeping blacks out of restaurants, that's why most people don't extrapolate anything as sinister as you imply.
Society has moved on, so should Rand Paul and his ilk.
AJ
Tim, I knew you're too much of an A-hole to ever apologize, so don't worry about my holding my breath.
Of course you didn't click the link. If you had, you'd have heard Rand Paul assert that restaurant owners should have the right to refuse service to blacks. This is, by definition, Jim Crow. You're splitting hairs in a way that makes Bill Clinton look like a Boy Scout.
I specifically said (go back and read it) that Rand Paul doesn't speak for all Tea Partyers. You're waging a straw man argument. (Leo can explain to you what that means.)
You may also notice that I never said that Rand Paul literally said "I support a return to Jim Crow." No one would say that.
But you're playing games to make it look like you weren't completely wrong. But we both know you are.
An intelligent adult would recognize when it's time to admit "I was wrong." You might even offer a reason why you were wrong, such as "I get all my news from Fox News." There would be no hard feelings and the whole thing would blow over.
But, as I noted, that would be the action of an intelligent adult.
heh..heh..heh.. "An intelligent adult would recognize when it
Tim - We reaLLY NEED TO FIND someone to give "small -place-to-take-a-pee" a job so he doesn't have the spare time to mess up the blog-o-sphere! Doesn't ANYONE need a circus barker or something like that?
Semantics, tim, are the crutch of those in the wrong.
A "straw man" accusation from someone who brings up Rand Paul to distract us from the indefensible comments of a despicable, race-baiting demagogue?
Leo, I apologize for taking the bait and allowing the thread to get hijacked.
As for the remarks of Mr. Carson, your assessment as "indefensible" is spot on.
Leo, since we were talking about racism, I hardly see where I hijacked the thread.
Tim's admission that he didn't click on my link speaks volumes.
I wonder if he deals with disagreement by placing his fingers in his ears and singling "la la la la la."
Furthermore, as you perfectly well know, Rand Paul said just what I said he did. As moderator, it would be decent of you to point that out to Tim. The fact that I paraphrased is no defense.