I don't see Rand Paul ever getting the Republican nomination, not because
of anything mentioned in this piece, but because his foreign policy is
diametrically opposed to the policy choices of virtually all Republicans. If all
you knew about Sen. Paul was his foreign and military policy positions, you
would think he must be an ultra liberal Democrat, certainly far to the left of
"Why should Republicans engage in outreach to African-Americans, even though
the level of suspicion is so high and the yield in votes is likely to be so
low?"Really? They need to ask?How about, Because
it's the right thing to do?Because when elected, you represent
all people. Your policies affect everyone. Not just those who voted for you.
Since the takeover of the Republican Tea Party by the "bubba" element of
the South, it will be impossible for any Republican/Tea Party candidate to
garner the votes of almost any minority. Applying a bit of
cosmetilogical legerdemain to a porcine mammal, does not turn said mammal into
anything different than it is.The Republican/Tea Party will have to
remain the party of old, white, largely conservative, religionists.
Seriously....is there ANY republican possible candidate who even stands a chance
for Pres?There aren't any on the horizon...except maybe Huntsman, and
he, word has it, doesn't want to be President.
The progressives just don't know what to do with that part of America that
disagrees with their view that everything should be free and government needs to
take away individual rights for the good of the whole. In other words, the
progressives can't reach their Utopia with those who can actually think for
themselves and just want the government to protect them in their rights
guaranteed under the Constitution (which, by the way, is a hindrance to
progressives). I don't agree with everything that Paul stands for, but I
sure as heck support his desire to protect my Constitutional rights, which is
the real reason progressives dislike him. This author would do better by just
stating what he believes, rather than waxing philosophical about a political
leader that is really good about stating what he believes. If the progressives
would just clear their muddled heads enough to come to terms with what they
really want,then state it, I would be open to listen to them. Until then, give
me what the Constitution guarantees me and leave me alone. I will be a good
neighbor as well, something progressives only know by government delegation.
Whenever I need a good laugh, I'll read post from a regressive who rambles
on and on about how Rand Paul will protect his Constitutional rights and about
how anybody who disagrees with his/her point of view is nothing more than a
free-loading progressive. Hilarious.
" their view that everything should be free and government needs to take
away individual rights for the good of the whole."I hope that
you dont really think that. But, it is a nice, partisan box to put people
in.There are plenty of "progressives" that are quite wealthy
and dont need the free stuff you talk about.In the end, our deficit
is driven by SS, Medicare and Defense. And I can assure you that a good number
of conservatives are partaking of SS and Medicare and scream loudly if we touch
defense.What "conservative" politician is actually working
on these huge chunks of the budget?Do yourself a favor think
logically. You are ranting about the pennies and letting the dollars slip away.
The conservatives just don't know what to do with that part of America that
disagrees with their view that everything should be flowing upward to the 1% and
government needs to take away individual opportunities for the good of the
wealthy minority. In other words, the conservatives can't reach their
Utopia with those who can actually think for themselves and just want the
government to protect them in the rights they think they are guaranteed under
their interpretation of the Constitution (which, by the way, is a hindrance to
conservatives unless twisted to their wishes). If the conservatives would just
clear their muddled heads enough to come to terms with what they really
want,then state it, I would be open to listen to them. Until then, give me what
the Constitution guarantees me as a real, living, breathing human being (not a
corporation)and leave me alone. I will be a good neighbor as well, something
conservatives have completely forgotten.
Two certainties. One is that Rand Paul has no chance of winning the GOP
nomination. The 2nd being the party will nominate an older white male, who
embraces Reagan, talks of smaller goverment, religous freedom, abolishing the
IRS, but in the end losses.
Wow, Gerson, a Republican, eviscerating a Republican. The GOP will see a
bloodbath over the next 2-3 years. They don't know what they stand for,
where they want to go, lack a vision, and have no obvious leader. Probably a
good thing. The last time the were in charge, it didn't turn out so good
and we are still paying the price and will for some time yet.
Hey Republicans - two words: Chris Christie.
As I watched the violence and protests in Missouri unfold over the past week and
I hear and see the ugly - volence laced - ignorant crowd that walks the streets
I have to wonder what effect the Democrat Party has had on the Black Community
over the past 50 years. In Chicago for example there were 12 black on black
murders just over the past weekend and the percent of Black children born with
no father is at 70%. That is shocking to say the least. To make the absurd
suggestion that the ideology of the Democrat party has helped the Black
community is nonsense. It has made it MUCH worse. The Democrat party has no
answer for the Black community and proof is in the numbers of every major city
from violence to high school drop out rate to out of wed lock children and
abortion and so on......New thinking is CRITICAL to help African
Americans as well as Hispanic Americans. The same ole same ole throw a bunch of
money at the problem doesn't work. New leadership is also needed in the
White House! Handouts will never work!! Dr. Ben Carson is a breath of fresh
With the full support of the media, the progressives continue to perpetrate the
myth that the GOP only cares about the rich 1% and is racist at its core. They
also equally support the myth that progressive policies have somehow actually
helped instead of hurt the poor and middle classes in this country.If those things were really true, then poor black people would be making
substantial gains in their position in society under this administration. We
would see big improvements in unemployment rates, incarceration rates,
graduation rates, stable families, etc. among the minority groups.Instead, we see some of the biggest declines in the history of this country.
Just like how Detroit refuses to acknowledge how Democratic rule destroyed that
once great city, liberals refuse to even think that Obama's policies might
be detrimental to poor people.
@ patriot, you make a truly astounding statement that any one political party is
responsible for racism in America, something that predates the United States.
It just never has gone away. Your attack on the Democrats for trying to help
minorities is ill-conceived. No program is perfect, but what the Democrats are
doing is trying to help. The Republicans offer nothing at all and have refused
to lift a finger. I would prefer to err on the side of helping, even though it
might take another 200 years to turn around what this country did to its
minorities over the past 400+ years.
re:EsquireEsquire - look at the numbers because they do not lie
guy!! Over the past 50 years every stat I sited has gotten much worse and the
reason is due completely to the failed liberal policies that the Democrat party
use. Hand outs and welfare and disincentives for work will NEVER be the answer.
Never. The GOP has some great ideas and Paul Ryan and Dr. Ben Carson have
actually articulated them recently. When something isn't working you
don't keep doing it making the absurd judgement that it is better than
nothing. Sometimes you have first STOP doing the bad policies and then reverse
and insert new thinking into the problem. Now let's look at why
the Democrats do what they do. You suggest it is out of concern and care. I
completely disagree with that. It is actually out of a lust for power for
themselves and making people dependent is the key. What black people need is
freedom from government dependence and the power to achieve that. Show me one
policy from your party that acheives that!
My wife is African American, from nearby the trouble in Ferguson, Missouri.The Civil Rights Act, Affirmative Action and many liberal programs
indeed have had a very, very beneficial effect for many African Americans, who
we now see among us, out of the ghetto, welcome parts of our middle class,
integral parts of the wonderful mosaic of America.Unfortunately,
there are too many people who have not benefitted from equal rights and social
programs, and I don't think anyone has ready answers on how they might be
helped, or better yet, motivated to reach up and achieve.We have too
many people - regardless of race - who have concluded they're not going to
win (or even be respectable) in the the race to prosperity, and instead they
seek to survive by bypassing our regular economy. The racism of
yesteryear has become the "class-ism" of 21st century Capitalism, and if
able-bodied, college educated, hard-working, loyal employees are easily
discarded as "uncompetitive" via globalization, it's hard to see
how the even less fortunate will succeed.
"Over the past 50 years every stat I sited has gotten much worse and the
reason is due completely to the failed liberal policies that the Democrat party
use"Patriot. It should be obvious, but maybe you are missing
it.If it has happened over the last 50 years, maybe, just maybe, it
is not just the Democrats using these "failed liberal policies". You do know that in the last 50 years, the GOP has been in power quite
often. Sorry to break it to you, but they have not historically operated
significantly different from the Democrats.And vice versa.Sad that so many can not see this very apparent fact.
One old Man. If you can defend whether something is Constitutional,I am more
than happy to support your cause. Progressives, however,view the Constitution as
an impediment to their "do-gooder" ideas. The endless tit and tat of
ideas can cease if that question can get answered. It doesn't matter
whether the poor man is poor or the rich man is rich. The progressives are
still under the delusion that they have some program to fix poverty or any other
number of challenges in this country. I don't want a Utopian society. I
want human beings that have to live life without somebody trying to live it for
them, which progressives are doing all they can to do. Since when was this
country founded under the principle that everyone had to have a certain level of
income to be happy, or educational attainment, or Health care? I don't want
government taking care of me! Progressives are under the delusion that people
need their help to be happy. That doesn't stop them, however. Rand Paul
doesn't like compulsion, something that progressives know is a threat to
what they can't live without, power!
Hmmmm . . . So we have Gerson, a former GW Bush acolyte . . . And he's
dissing Rand Paul.We've seen how completely DESTRUCTIVE to this
nation Republicans can be.“The single most important thing we
want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president . . .
”Mitch McConnel's infamous dictum and the consequent
sabotage of all useful legislation favored by the President showed the
Republicans' willingness to harm America if it can help achieve a
questionable political objective.And now Republicans are showing how
destructive to their own party they can be. Apparently silly bickering takes
precedence over party solidarity.Let's just stand back and let
this take its course.Republican continually show their propensity
and inclination to destroy. If they direct their animus toward one another,
that could be a good thing, couldn't it?
In my eyes, the act that is most revealing of the heart of the Republican Party
today is its effort to restrict access to the polls. IMO, this says loud and
clear, "We aren't trying to win hearts and minds. We have in our tent
who we want and now we have to figure out a way to win with what we recognize is
a minority."It both sickens and saddens me to see the party in
this state. I used to respect it.
...Ronald Reagan was only elected after public turned against Jimmy Carter after
he cancelled Olympics, nationwide 55 mile per hour speed limit, debacle in
Iranian desert etc. The things Rand Paul has to say are usually not met with a
lot of applause from any sector, but minority voices are always welcome, are
When I was teaching economics I was generally interpreted (correctly) of being
pretty left-wing. But I always told my students how much I admired and liked
Jack Kemp. More than anything he was SINCERE in wanting to make amends
racially. It wasn't just politics to him. Kemp couldn't be a
10CC said:"The Civil Rights Act, Affirmative Action and many
liberal programs indeed have had a very, very beneficial effect for many African
Americans, who we now see among us, out of the ghetto, welcome parts of our
middle class, integral parts of the wonderful mosaic of America."Sorry, but the 1964 Civil Rights Act had more Republican/Conservative support
than Democrat support. In fact, it was only because the GOP voted in such a
large majority that it even passed. Democrat support was 61%; Republican
support was 80%. Interestingly, former Democrat Senator Robert K Byrd (former
Exalted Cyclops in the KKK) filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as did
Democrat Al Gore Sr.You said:"We have too many
people - regardless of race - who have concluded they're not going to win
(or even be respectable) in the the race to prosperity, and instead they seek to
survive by bypassing our regular economy."Most of these folks
are Democrat voters who've been conditioned to subsist off of the
Government, and have been fed the destructive Liberal narrative of class
warfare. Liberal Democrats have all but destroyed the Black family.
Let's also mention than Jack Kemp was the best defender of the supply-side
gospel (I never bought it). Kemp died relatively young at age 73 in
2009. I wish he could have been part of the current Republican mess, as a
moderating agent. Sad.
Whether purposeful or not the Republicans spread an enormous lie. That is equal
opportunity and social welfare policies are meant to guarantee the success of
the underprivileged. Equal Opportunity means just that. The
individual still has to seize the opportunity and do the work to take advantage
of it. 10CC points out very well that millions of African Americans and others
have done just that. The fact that large numbers of others haven't
doesn't discredit the policy or those who have. Social Welfare
again is not designed to end poverty. It's designed as a humanitarian
effort to keep poor people alive. That's all. Social Welfare
programs have been instrumental in helping both those who have taken advantage
of opportunities and those who haven't. The first to succeed and the later
to exist. The problem is not a program that allows someone to exist
but in why some don't want to succeed (support themselves and their
families using talents and work). I'm not sure this is a
problem solved by government but rather by community. Just a point that this is
the very community work the President was doing at one time.
Outreach to the black community would be very easy for a conservative. All
he/she would need to do is point out that the black community is little or no
better off than it was 40 years ago when the Democrats started the Great
Society. Since then the Democrats have had the White House for about 25 years.
(the Republicans 28). Also the Democrats have controlled Congress the majority
of that time. At times, the Democrats had the House, Senate, and White House.
(Under Carter, Clinton, and Obama). So the big question becomes, If Democrats
are so good for minorities, then why haven't their lives improved very much
when the Democrats have been in power? All that support given to Democrats by
the black community, and they have little to show for it. Answer of course is
that the blacks are taken for granted by Democrats. The Democrats do little for
them, and still get their vote. Republicans need to point this out and say give
us a chance to change things. Try something new with support for new people or
your lives will continue to be like Fergerson Mo. or worse Chicago Ill.
Whether you believe in extermination of races and people (marxism), or are a
Rand Paul fan (Libertarian), or follow the Tea Party (Constitution and Liberty),
they do have a following for whatever reason. There is nothing that will change
America, whether Capitalism, Socialism, or Communism, except a return to moral
principles and virtuous living. It is futile to think that our current leaders
or future leaders, be they Communist, Marxist, Socialist, or Libertarians, that
will change anything for the better unless it is based on values that reflect
integrity, honesty, and virtue. Bottom line, government programs, be they
Republican, Democratic, or otherwise, will only make things worse! In the
meantime, one can support a return to those principles with a smile on your face
and lightness in your heart. The chatter back and forth about this policy and
that policy are just that. There is nothing that can be done. The writing is
on the wall. The realistic optimist I am! As far as economic systems, however,
Capitalism is at the top of the list as the best possible system to help
mankind. The others mean death of millions either by attrition (Socialism) or
concentration camps (Communism).
It is entertaining to hear conservatives revel in the fact that Republicans were
against slavery during the Civil War and voted for the Civil Rights Act. Yay
for you! Now vote for the current civil rights issues like same sex marriage.
Don't want to? Then odds are if you had lived during the 1860's and
1960's you probably would have felt the same antipathy to
"progressive" causes and would have been a Democrat! But it's
great that now it has become socially unacceptable to hold those old regressive
positions. Get on the right side of history and continue the progressive
tradition you so proudly proclaim!
Wonder said:"It is entertaining to hear conservatives revel in
the fact that Republicans were against slavery during the Civil War and voted
for the Civil Rights Act. Yay for you!"Do you have any idea how
insulting what you just wrote is to Black Americans?The Democrat
Party History of racism:* Jim Crow segregation laws were enacted by
Democrats* The 1924 Democrat National Convention was host to one of
the largest Klan gatherings in American history* The 1964 Civil
Rights Act: Democrat support 61%; Republican support 80%. Interestingly, former
Democrat Senator Robert K Byrd (former Exalted Cyclops in the KKK) filibustered
the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as did Democrat Al Gore Sr.* Democrat
President Franklin Roosevelt gave us the disgraceful Japanese Internment
Camps* Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings and his history of racial
slurs towards blacks * Margaret Sanger, Liberal Icon and
founder of Planned Parenthood, in her 1939 "Negro Project" had as her
goal, the desire to greatly reduce the Black population, or as she referred to
them, "human weeds." Ever wonder why so many Planned Parenthood Centers
are in the inner-city? 13 million black babies aborted since 1973.And the only answer the Left has is: "Yeah, well the Republicans
don't support Same Sex Marriages!"
I hope Rand Paul runs and wins the GOP nomination.Because -- a
vote for Rand Paul, is just a vote for Hillary Clinton.
Funny, Svenn, most Black Americans don't seem to be too insulted by the
current Democratic Party. Only ones who think they should be are the far right
Republicans who think they would have been champions of the Civil Rights Act if
they had been of voting age during the 60's. You seem to be the one who
insults them by thinking they are unaware of the history of the Democratic and
Republican Parties. Believe me, anyone with even a grain of knowledge of recent
history is aware that Southern Democrats were anti-Civil Rights laws. It's
no big revelation to me or to any Black person. Yet you righties think
you've discovered the big reveal that no one knew.
And, I might add, the Republican candidate for President in 1964 was against the
Civil Rights Act. So how does that fit your narrative?
Although Rand Paul is much better then his father, I would agree that the GOP
has little to offer in candidates at this point. Unless Dr Carson, Ted Cruz, Jim
Demint, Herman Cain or maybe even Sarah Palin commit to the race, nothing of
interest. Nobody has committed yet! How embarrassing that the only thing the
dems have to offer is Clinton. That certainly appeals to the mindless throngs
who let the news media make their decisions for themselves, or the awb branch of
the dem party (which is huge), but offers nothing to the rest of the country,
who is getting more and more full of sympathy politics everyday.
SvennThanks for pointing out better than I could all the skeletons
that the Democrat Party has in their closet. I can only add that Bill Clinton
made racial allegations after Obama had won the South Carolina primary. Funny
how liberals can get away with stuff like that while Republicans are destroyed.
Does anyone really believe the Republican Party could have as one of its
standard bearers an ex KKK member? Or have a Supreme Court nomination like Hugo
Black get through. He was KKK too, and appointed by Roosevelt.
SCfan said:"Funny how liberals can get away with stuff like that
while Republicans are destroyed."Exactly! But let's
remember, they couldn't do it without a compliant media. BTW, I
had forgot about Bill Clinton's racist remarks about Barack Obama. Hmmm,
now let's see, what did Clinton say? Oh yes, now I remember:“A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.”
-Bill ClintonBeing a Liberal means never having to say you're
Airnaut/LDS Liberal/Openminded Mormon/ Samuel the Liberalite/LDS Treehugger"I hope Rand Paul runs and wins the GOP nomination.Because -- a vote for Rand Paul, is just a vote for Hillary
Clinton."That would only be applicable if Rand Paul was running
3rd party.Do you really want a person who voted to attack Iraq and
favors drone strikes on innocent civilians?If Bush was a Liberal
(which he was because he tripled the size of government) I bet you would like
him too because there is no real difference between the two of them at all other
than party affiliation. They are all the same tyrant when they get out of
campaign mode and into the whitehouse anyway regardless of party their policies
are totally the same.
Anti Bush-ObamaChihuahua, 00Airnaut/LDS Liberal/Openminded Mormon/
Samuel the Liberalite/LDS Treehugger======= FYI -- I've been Libertarian since 1971, but have voted for other parties
through the years, I voted for Jon M. Huntsman Jr. (R) last
election.2008 Bob Barr (L)2004 Michael Badnarik (L)2000 Harry
Browne (L)Ross Perot in 1992 & 1996and Rand's father RON
Paul as the Libertarian candidate in 1988 Like Mitt Romney NOT being
a younger George W. Romney, Rand Paul is NOT a little Ron Paul either.