- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NAACP Invites Rand Paul To Speak
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:10 pm to RollTide4Ever
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:10 pm to RollTide4Ever
Should decline the invitation and call them a racist organization.
0
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:54 pm to La Place Mike
quote:
I think you are giving Duke and the KKK more influence than they actually had. I know because I was there.
You are just making assumptions as to why they wouldn't vote for a Republican. I would like to know why they voted for Obama. Especially your brother and if Obama has lived up to his expectations.
Do you really have that hard a time imagining that Jindal's parents may have experienced bigotry in this country? In either 1970 or 1971, I went to an LSU football game with my Dad, and there were people handing out KKK literature outside the stadium when we were leaving.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 4:07 pm to trackfan
quote:
By the way, do you know who was the second Black quarterback to win a Super Bowl?
Russell Wilson (although Rob Parker would disagree).
Another good example--in the leadup to Super Bowl XLVIII, BSPN didn't mention that Tomlin is black.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 4:09 pm to trackfan
quote:
I seriously doubt that you aren't without tribal instincts of your own.
I wouldn't be surprised if he is. He's lived off the grid in the past and is very individualistic.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 4:13 pm to trackfan
quote:It could have happened. What does this have to do with Asians and Jews voting for Obama?
Do you really have that hard a time imagining that Jindal's parents may have experienced bigotry in this country? In either 1970 or 1971
quote:That doesn't mean the KKK had any influence.
I went to an LSU football game with my Dad, and there were people handing out KKK literature outside the stadium when we were leaving.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 4:24 pm to La Place Mike
quote:
It could have happened. What does this have to do with Asians and Jews voting for Obama?
Go back and check out what Jindal said after Romney lost to Obama. On a certain level, some of the things that resonate with Blacks, also resonate with other minorities. This isn't some made-up theory, it's real.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 4:57 pm to trackfan
quote:
I couldn't disagree more. Liking someone because they have something in common with you isn't the same as hating someone because they are
Liking the guy because he's a bit darker than Romney is silly enough, but voting for him and defending him for that reason is f'king ridiculous.
Obama has a "whiter background" than most of us who post on this board.
This post was edited on 2/23/14 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:11 pm to Sentrius
quote:
How can democrats smear a guy like Rand at this point?
They really have nothing on him.
His remarks of a few years back on the voting rights act were ignorant and stupid.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:14 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
His remarks of a few years back on the voting rights act were ignorant and stupid.
What was ignorant and stupid about them? Or are you just repeating what you've heard?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:20 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
What was ignorant and stupid about them? Or are you just repeating what you've heard?
In a vacuum, they would be defensible from a purely libertarian standpoint. Unfortunately, a vacuum did not exist in the 1960's. The state was actively participating in and helping private citizens abridge the franchise. Anyone taking Paul's position would have to be almost entirely ignorant of the situation at the time.
I believe his remarks might have been about CRA and not about VRA specifically, but presumably his logic is the same.
Here's some light reading on the topic.
LINK
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:22 pm to Big Scrub TX
You've avoided the subject
What was it he said that was so "ignorant?"
What was it he said that was so "ignorant?"
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:23 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Big Scrub TX
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:33 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
What was it he said that was so "ignorant?"
His remarks were ignorant of reality. But don't worry - in classic political form, he managed to un-say it after he said it. (i.e. he was for it before he was against it...like they all are)
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:36 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
His remarks were ignorant of reality. But don't worry - in classic political form, he managed to un-say it after he said it. (i.e. he was for it before he was against it...like they all are
He gave a perfectly good explanation on the Maddow show.
What was ignorant about it? I don't think you understand what "ignorant" means, but you're displaying some here.
Do you even know what he said?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:40 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
He gave a perfectly good explanation on the Maddow show.
What was ignorant about it? I don't think you understand what "ignorant" means, but you're displaying some here.
Do you even know what he said?
Yes, I know what he said. Both to start with and then his lying clarification. He gave a pure-libertarian, ridiculous viewpoint about "freedom of speech" being hampered by such things as CRA.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:42 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Yes, I know what he said. Both to start with and then his lying clarification. He gave a pure-libertarian, ridiculous viewpoint
Gotcha. You disagree with it so now it's "ignorant."
Typical.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Gotcha. You disagree with it so now it's "ignorant."
For anyone to have the opinion represented by his original remarks (which were mere repetitions of his remarks over the years), one would have to have been ignorant of the facts on the ground in the 1960's.
Now, his "retraction" or "clarification" remarks are not ignorant - they actually display a decent understand of the climate then.
Unfortunately, he said the first ones first.
quote:
Typical.
You really need to get over yourself. I'm unaware of anything of value you have added in this discussion.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 5:49 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
You really need to get over yourself. I'm unaware of anything of value you have added in this discussion.
Likewise
It was about the CRA, and this was his statement.
quote:
It’s not all about race relations, it’s about controlling property, ultimately.
He's right.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:06 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
It was about the CRA, and this was his statement.
quote:
It’s not all about race relations, it’s about controlling property, ultimately.
While he's right, he must avoid to lecture on the basis of political philosophy. Candidates nowadays are in a realm of media 24/7, whose snippets are never given in full context. He pulled a "Papa Paul" moment, and must steer clear of such intertanglings in the future.
I believe he has learned from his "mistake", and will be more careful in taking a philosophical stance on the march to the nomination.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 6:11 pm to CherryGarciaMan
quote:
I believe he has learned from his "mistake", and will be more careful in taking a philosophical stance on the march to the nomination.
Right. Political philosophies are often ignored under the "end justifies the means" modern mentality. Few people understand the concept of private property rights anymore, everything is for the good of society, or their view of it.
Page 7 of 10
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News