Why Rand Paul is the second best thing to happen to the Democrats

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe_Cool
  • Start date Start date
What part of that has to do with forcing businesses to sell to people?


Very nice. But No provision of the article says "private businesses are not allowed to discriminate among their customers".

You fail.
 
What am I denying? There have to be two candidates for the base to be split, you fucktard.
 
You left out the part that says "the right to force companies to do business with them".
 
What do you think "the laws" means?

Here you go

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00002000---a000-.html
 
What part of the constitution gives congress the power to regulate who companies choose to do business with?


You should sue yourself. You're the dumbass who didn't heed the "CAUTION:CONTENTS ARE HOT" warning on the cup.
 
You are a fucking idiot. The constitution mandates that every person must be treated equally by the law. It does NOT give congress the power to make laws that regulate private enterprise.
 
The 14th amendment, retard.

I'm still going to sue that fucking 18 year-old Starbucks barista for everything she owns. Fuck yeah, Rand Paul Revolution.
 
Even *if* Rand were a racist, it doesn't tarnish the values that true republicans believe in. The values and policies of a true republican are not something that a single person's beliefs could even touch. Droves of people aren't going to suddenly switch over to the exact opposite camp just because one guy in the party might be a racist. Which he isn't.
 
equal protection. NOT equal treatment. and has nothing to do with the private sector either
 
here's a thought. What if a significant portion of the electorate doesn't care about racism? or it's far enough down the totem pole compared to other issues?

seems like the criticism of paul could backfire- my guess is that most of the electorate sees right through it, and a significant portion thereof doesn't even care.
 
The Constitution gives Congress the power to pass any laws needed for enforcement. Sorry, private business.
 
Paul really, really wasn't taken out of context (except for that dumb transcript/"yeah" thing). He completely said what he meant. Then shit hit the fan and his campaign issued a statement.
 
Could you quote the part of the 14th that gives the government that power? I don't think you've actually read it, because it doesn't say anything like that.
 
Clearly, OffTopic.com poster and moderator 'Joe_Cool' knows more about Constitutional law than the US Supreme Court. Clearly.
 
You mad dumb.

Of course their name is a clever play on that event, but make no mistake, those faggots are itching to have a candidate of their own. They will eat the GOP alive.
 
Back
Top