I don't think she is a bad person and I don't think she is doomsday for America. Like most media they try to dumb down the conversation rather than debate it. She is no different than anyone at Feaux News to me.
What makes his dad such a hypocrite....I haven't heard much from him lately, has he come out with something new? I'm all for them auditing the Fed. They should abolish the damn thing. And as far as honesty goes in the debate...if the country doesn't want honesty then we deserve what we get. I'm tired of everybody dancing around the truth. It doesn't get rid of the facts to just ignore them. Ask the Greeks how that worked out.
Last I remember he thinks that RPs stance on earmarks is hypocritical. Which I don't think he quite understands the process as it stands. But just for fun. Let take the stance that RP is a hypocrite. Boy I would hate to see who he voted for.. haha
I actually voted for Ron Paul because at least he says the right things even if he doesn't do them. I see no harm in voting for a hypocrite than cannot win. And Ron's stance on earmakrs is entirely hypocritical. He only inserts them into bills he is going to vote against. You can't earmark money to market Texas shrimp and claim you do not support non-constitutionally mandated spending. I understand that the money being spent is already allocated and doesn't add to the deficit, but it does balloon future budgets as they are based on the current one.
I can understand what he means though....I don't expect the people in government to be saints, just that they adhere to the values of the constitution as much as possible. The fact is Paul is one of the few that argue for smaller government and he also pinpoints the FED as one of the major problems for America. You won't here that from many other politicians. If, after the decision has already been made to spend a certain amount of money I don't fault the guy for trying to make sure his district is not left out. Falling on your sword on principal only goes so far.
I have no problem with anything he has said. Like I said before most media dumbs down actual intellectual debate.
So is he really naive enough to believe that race would not be a factor in hiring practices if there were not legislation making it illegal? I ask this question only because there is actual legislation that makes it illegal to deny employment on the basis of race and we still have this issue, albeit much, much more isolated than in 1964.
I can sit here and tell you that i know for a fact that race is still a factor when it comes to hiring people.. I think Rand has a great idea that would work in a perfect world, but this just isn't a perfect world.
