by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

This week Ron Paul announced his candidacy for the presidency of the United States and placed himself in the spotlight of controversy, unabashedly stating on the Chris Matthews show that he would have voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act were he in congress at the time.

Rep. Paul’s reasoning against the Civil Rights Act is consistent with his position on property rights and that the act violated the property rights of independent businesses. This is consistent with constitutional principles and libertarian values advocated by Paul.

Those who remember Senator Bary Goldwater will remember he voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act on the same property rights basis expressed by Rep. Paul on the Mathews show. Senator Barry Goldwater was the Republican Presidential nominee in 1964.

Chris Mathews, in typical progressive fashion, implied that Paul was a racist because of his position on the Civil Rights Act. Of course this only points up Mathews ignorance of, or lack of understanding, with respect to the body of law respecting property rights.

I believe that property rights should be protected. Your right to be on TV is protected by property rights because somebody owns that station. I can’t walk into your station. So right of freedom of speech is protected by property. The right of your church is protected by property. So people should honor and protect it. This gimmick, Chris, it’s off the wall when you say I’m for property rights and states rights therefore I’m a racist. That’s just outlandish.

Paul added that any talk of the segregated South that the Civil Rights Act aimed to reform is too old to be relevant anyway, saying the specter of Whites Only signs is “ancient history.”

Besides, Paul says that the Jim Crow laws would have ended without the Civil Rights Act anyway, a view held by many libertarians who believe the free markets solve social problems.{Read More}

The left’s attempt to frame Paul as a racist based on his stance with respect to the 1964 Civil Rights Act amounts to progressive demagoguery and nothing more.


More at The Other McCain.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, after deriding Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann as two “bubble headed idiots” has recently shown himself to be — in the least — an uniformed and perhaps delusion progressive.

It seems Mr. Matthews believes the Panama Canal is in actually in Egypt. Note the one-minute twenty-second mark in the following video. Mr. Matthews, in his very own words, makes the proclamation. I guess bubble-headed-ness is something Chris know a lot about.

The Statement:



More at theblogprof.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

By RightKlik

by the Left Coast Rebel

Anyone that reads my thoughts on a regular basis knows that I am a big fan of Representative Paul Ryan. If you are not familiar with Ryan, please go here for “A Roadmap for America’s Future.”

Earlier this week Wesley Messamore at the Humble Libertarian noted an awesome exchange between Paul Ryan and statist-MSNBC’er Chris Matthews, writing:

THIS is how to talk to statist progressives like Chris Matthews. Congressman Paul Ryan stands up to Matthews and explains how new taxes hurt economic growth (and even government tax revenues, à la Art Laffer); why ending Bush’s tax cuts would hurt small businesses and their workers- not “the wealthy;” and says exactly what he would cut out of the budget to fix America’s unsustainable deficit- if only the obstructionist Democrats would allow it.

After watching the video below, read the summary that follows so you can learn how to better advocate for lower taxes, less spending, and fiscal responsibility.

Wesley has been interning at YAL this summer and told me recently that he has learned an incredible amount about effective activism for the pro-liberty cause. On that note, Wesley Messamore highlights several points about Paul Ryan’s approach that are quite effective and concludes that:

Another key take-away is Ryan’s demeanor. Notice how he smiles, speaks calmly and clearly, and uses simple facts. He’s very polite and obviously very intelligent. This is how you defend liberty to its skeptics. Without being aggressive or ugly, he uses simple and true facts to spectacular effect. Without being impolite, the strength of his case made Chris Matthews look like an idiot. And ultimately- when the facts are on the table, statism always looks idiotic.

Wesley’s writeup is a MUST READ for activists and hints at a new approach for essentially ‘arguing with idiots’ that rein in the so-called progressive movement/power structure today. I can speak for myself in that I tend to become worked up and agitated when confronting progressive-statists and their ludicrous agenda talking points. Wes’ advice is solid – keep your cool, stick to the facts and ultimately from that vantage point, statism will always look idiotic, even to the politically uninitiated.

Updated: Well shiver me timbers – even old Andrew ‘Sullie’ Sullivan is a fan of Paul Ryan, “The Republican who Gives me Hope” :

If the GOP wins the House, as I assume they will, Ryan really will become a critical figure, it seems to me. He’ll be the Chairman of the Budget Committee – and one of six members of the president’s Debt Commission. If he can resist the enormous partisan pressure against bipartisan compromise and intellectual honesty, he will be the unlikely hinge in one of the most critical moments in American economic and fiscal history.

I agree, especially in bold.

Cross posted to Proof Positive, LCR, Rational Nation.

by the Left Coast Rebel

Unlike Barack Obama, at least he is honest. And no, I am not talking about socialist Bernie Sanders, I am referring to MSNBC host Chris Matthews admitting that he is a fan of Saul Alinsky:

“Well, to reach back to one of our heroes from the past, from the ’60s, Saul Alinsky once said that even though both sides have flaws in their arguments and you can always find something nuanced about your own side you don’t like and it’s never perfect, you have to act in the end like there’s simple black and white clarity between your side and the other side or you don’t get anything done.

“I always try to remind myself of Saul Alinsky when I get confused.”

h/t Moonbattery