Rand Paul and the White Separatists

@anniepa (27955)

• United States

29 Sep 10

This isn't about President Obama, but out of curiosity, how are the two connected? Even IF there were evidence that Obama had done something wrong, would that make others' wrongs alright? Annie

artistry

@artistry (4151)

• United States

29 Sep 10

...Hi there annie, Hope you are doing well. I see that Joe Sestek (sp) is gaining on his opponent, if he closes like he did with Senator Specter he should win. I for one do not think that Dr. Rand Paul knows whst his core beliefs are. Anyone who states that he would like to send Mexican babies back to Mexico is a loon as far as I am concerned. I also think that he would say that these people who gave hin money have their right to freedom of speech and perhaps they like what they hear from him which I could very well understand. He is a very complex man with a lot of bizarre thoughts running through his mind. Birds of a feather flock together, just because he has a few African-Americans people working for him is not indicative of anything. There are African-American Republicans, which baffles the heck out of me. So that proves nothing. Hopefully Dr. Paul is on his way to defeat and whereever else he will be going after the election. Take care.

2 people like this

@bobmnu (8157)

• United States

29 Sep 10

Why should it baffle you that African Americans would support a Republican. Could it be that the Republican Party fought against slavery while the Democrat party supported it. Or maybe it is because the Republicans help pass the Civil Rights Act while the Democrats, including the Grand Wizard of the KKK, were filibustering trying to stop the passage. Or could it be that the program that is credited with doing the most to destroy the Black family structure was a Democrat sponsored program. Just why is it so baffling that a Black could support a Republican Candidate?

1 person likes this

gewcew23

@gewcew23 (8007)

• United States

29 Sep 10

Rand do yourself a favor and just return the money. The combined total of the contributions from these three only total $1,300. Surly he can easily replace the $1300 with all the campaign donation that he is receiving from the Tea partiers all around the nation. Former Vanderbilt professor, what was that university doing with a white supremacist as a member of their administration?

1 person likes this

Taskr36

@Taskr36 (13963)

• United States

29 Sep 10

You're right, that's a rather piddly sum when it comes to campaign contributions. He'll probably return it. I'm not sure how long it takes to formally do that. Being that a respected institution like the University of Illinois still employs a known and admitted domestic terrorist, I can't really be surprised by what other characters get jobs at colleges.

1 person likes this

gewcew23

@gewcew23 (8007)

• United States

30 Sep 10

JB I guess I am at not sure what you are asking here. I do lack insight from time to time, I apologize for that. I am quite willing to live in my own little world if that would suffice certain mylotters. I just posted a response to Annie, nothing more than that.

1 person likes this

jb78000

@jb78000 (15139)

•

30 Sep 10

fairly reasonable to assume that neither of you will fill in the details here. however i'd quite like them if you can stop squabbling for two seconds.

1 person likes this

iriscot

@iriscot (1289)

• United States

29 Sep 10

Annie I'm sorry that this is off subject but I thought it might be important... About 10 days or so ago a lady working for a Republican candidate in our state called me. She asked if I was going to vote in the November election and I stated that I hadn't missed voting since I was station overseas in the military. She asked me to vote for her candidate and that if the Democrat got in office my taxes would go up 30%. She implied that if the Republican got in office it wouldn't go up. I asked her where she got the 30% figure and she stammered and finally said that was what she was told to say. What kind of a campaign worker is that? And who in the world would get on the phone to call voters without correct information. I told her she better get her facts straight and not just pick numbers out of the sky.

1 person likes this

republican campaigner

@bobmnu (8157)

• United States

29 Sep 10

President Obama is promising a tax cut for all but the very rich. In reality your taxes will not be cut they just won't increase. He alos failed to mention that all those who receive Health Insurance from their empolyer will be taxes on that amount. In most cases it will move people one or two tax brackets. I agree that people who call you and give you facts they should be able to back them up.

1 person likes this

Taskr36

@Taskr36 (13963)

• United States

29 Sep 10

That's not a surprise. I think the people who do those phone calls are your typical blind supporter of a candidate. They have only slightly more personality than the robocalls with the only benefit being that they can also convert oxygen into carbon dioxide.

1 person likes this

lilwonders

@lilwonders456 (8214)

• United States

29 Sep 10

I am pretty ticked about the "tax cuts". They are not a tax cut. My taxes are not going down. They just are not going up for the things in that bill. He wants to talk about not raising taxes on people making less than 250K...yet as you mentioned people are going to be taxed on Health Insurance payments that come out of their checks. So yes...people less than 250k will see their taxes going up. As a family of 5 I can tell you getting taxed on our health care premiums IS going to make a difference. That is a nice chunk of money a month we are now going to taxed on.

1 person likes this

Wendy

@jerzgirl (9327)

• United States

29 Sep 10

I think it does have the potential to be guilt by association, definitely. But, I also see those separatists as more likely to support a Republican than a Democrat, no matter what. They may be sending donations just because he's GOP and is in opposition to the Dem candidate. It's more how Paul connects with them than how they perceive him. If it's true that he hires Blacks on his campaign staff, then obviously he's not of like mind. Or, it would seem. I think this needs to play out a bit more before any conclusions can be made.

1 person likes this

Taskr36

@Taskr36 (13963)

• United States

29 Sep 10

You are aware that democrats were the party of segregation right? Democrats like Obama's good buddy and current secretary of education, Arne Duncan even wanted to segregate lgbt students into their own school. Republicans were on the right side of the civil rights movement and ending segregation.

1 person likes this

Wendy

@jerzgirl (9327)

• United States

29 Sep 10

It's funny, but I don't recall making any derogatory comments about anyone other than the separatists and even they have the right to support the candidate of their choice. You're the one making an issue where none was promoted. And, it doesn't matter who began segregation - it does matter who continued it (I believe if you look up Southern Strategy, you'll see how things changed). The fact that it exists at all is appalling. So, take your arguments and find someone who's actually trying to fight.

1 person likes this

@bobmnu (8157)

• United States

29 Sep 10

jerzgirl using your logic then President Obama is a terrorist and a communist because they are more likely to support what he is doing. Let get real, there are many reasons people and groups donate to candidates. If you look at who the big banks and wall street firms donated to it was the Democrats and no one has voiced strong opposition to that and we are not talking a few hundred dollars but thousands of dollars and look what it bought them, Billions in tax payer bailouts. So far Dr Paul has not changed any position to please the separatist.

2 people like this

lilwonders

@lilwonders456 (8214)

• United States

29 Sep 10

Politicans always get endorsements from poeple and groups they would rather not have endorsements from. It happens on both sides. Just because a hate group likes a politican does mean that politican likes or endorses that group or individual. Nor does it mean that the politican represents what that group stands for. "Just because they endorse me...does not mean I endorse them" Ronald Reagan when asked about being endorsed by a white sparatist hate group during his presidential run. The Black Pathners endorsed Obama. Now does that mean Obama is a representive of that hate group? No. Is Obama responsible for their hateful actions and words? No. We can't stop these groups from supporting a candidate...as much as our politicans would like that to happen. LOL. They have just as much right to be a part of the political process as every other citizen of this country. Just because they are stupid and hateful does not they don't have the same rights as teh rest of us. Our constitution actually gives them the right to be stupid and hateful. HOnestly....these groups know by endorsing or giving money to a campaign that is heavily televised they get publicity. They get poeple talking about them. I had no idea who Virginia Abernethy was before now. Now everyone will know who she is and be talking about her for weeks. Not a bad return on a $500 investement. National publicity like she is going to get usually costs a lot more than that.

2 people like this

@anniepa (27955)

• United States

2 Oct 10

You're right, something like this being publicized does help these sorry people and groups get attention and gain credibility with like-minded individuals. I guess that's one of those "unintended consequences" of exposing these contributions. I actually agree with about 99.9% of what you wrote. I'm sure the vast majority of politicians and candidates from both parties have donors and/or supporters that are "questionable" but for most of them there's absolutely no valid reason for "guilt by association". In Rand Paul's case, while I don't think he's a racist, he's said he "abhors racism and racial discrimination" and I take him at his word, BUT he's also said he sides with business owners, like he does on virtually every issue. He believes if a restaurant owner, for example, wants to either exclude African-Americans or any other minority or have a separate section for them, that owner should be able to do that. Hopefully there wouldn't be many who would choose to do that but even one percent or a fraction of a percent would be too many; that would be "taking the country back" in a way I sure don't want to go. Annie

@bobmnu (8157)

• United States

29 Sep 10

I find it interesting that the press can find out every little detail of certain candidates. Within a week of her nomination we knew many little details about Gov Palin yet as Tom Brokaw said on election night "we have elected a president that we know almost nothing about". Now you give us information about who is contributing to Dr Paul campaging, we know what Christine O'Donnell talked about on a high school date. The press seems obsessed with anyone connected with the TEA Party Movement and can tell you every little thing that they have ever done. Yet with all this as Tom Brokaw once said of the President we know almost nothing about their opponent. The press seems to do a very good job of providing us with an over whelming amount of information on certain candidates, yet fail to report even basic biographic information on other major candidates. It makes one wonder if the Press has an agenda they are pushing and will only report the news they want us to know about?

1 person likes this

@anniepa (27955)

• United States

29 Sep 10

I love the constant reference to an out of context remark made on election night by Tom Brokaw! You're right, more was learned about Sarah Palin in a short time, but that was because almost nobody had ever even heard of her outside Alaska so in order to do their job "the press" had to work fast. Anyway, this isn't about Sarah Palinor President Obama. Do you have an opinion on the actual topic? All I've gotten is that you seem to think we shouldn't even know about his donors. Annie

1 person likes this

jb78000

@jb78000 (15139)

•

29 Sep 10

no it isn't surprisingly that the very extreme right would support the moderate right rather than the moderate left and it doesn't mean that the moderate right is guilty through association. that said i am not sure he should have accepted the donations, out of principle. nor returned them either, i think they should have gone to charity, preferably one that the white separatists would not like. to answer your question, no it wouldn't really affect my vote unless other connections came to light. if i was planning to vote for somebody and they accepted donations from such sources it might make me view them with less respect but then i don't have much respect for politicians anyway. i'd be more concerned about the issues.

1 person likes this