[kj] New Interview with Jaz Wherein He Discourses/Rand Paul.

[sade1]

   My own preference is usually to see what people do to other people either by 
way of their policies or beliefs, or in the guise (disguised? hm..) of their 
policies and beliefs.  

   People, people, people. 
   Policies & beliefs literally do not exist with the people who espouse them, 
so people's/groups' morals are everything; that's what I focus on: what have 
people X done with similar laws & power in the past? how have they previously 
hijacked the power won for their own evil ends? Have they Trojan-horsed their 
way into Power and to what end? Context for me is essential. I can't indulge in 
the luxury of political parlour games because the consequences are way too real 
to not take seriously. What pols & their followers say is one thing, but what 
they do with it is who they really are.
   To me, the differences are like when in 6th grade the teacher has you all do 
a report on your favorite country, so pull out the encyclopedias or Google the 
damn thing, and maybe even fight with classmates as to why your country's 
better. It's a whole different and much more mature/responsible thing as an 
adult to then go to that country, live it a bit, and then judge it. 


As some wiseguy once said, "In theory there is no difference between theory and 
practice; in practice, there is." 


      But still, Big Paul still ins't making it Stateside. That blows....



________________________________
From: "Devacor at aol.com" <Devacor at aol.com>
To: gathering at misera.net
Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 1:28:03 PM
Subject: Re: [kj] New Interview with Jaz Wherein He Discourses/Rand Paul.

I will have to say I was very pressed for time when I did the last post/email. 
 Much of what you are commenting on isn't nec 'him', but his 
taking (libertarian) party line. 

 and as I said (very summarized) we can let our backgrounds and belief systems 
'prejudge', color, and view certain situations in a way that may not always be 
the true case. 


 for instance ive been having this long discourse with this very militant vegan- 
I was making the statement that (grassfed small farmed) organics could actually 
sustain the planet- there are even experts he trusts and values that say this 
and yet he cant put his mind around it to accept it- because he's too locked 
into the vegan viewpoint and it goes too against how he view things. this isnt 
exactly the same situation, but just making the point about our stances. 


I could guarantee you, if you sat with him (Paul) and discussed this out, you 
would find he's not quite this racist pig you may think he is. You may not 
totally agree with his stances, but I think you would get a little better 
understanding. Actually he was down for about 15 mins at this lobbying event I 
was at in senate- I was kind of keeping my eye on him to see how he came off. 
Seemed cool and had the most ethnically diverse staff out of anyone and seemed 
to interact with them more then anyone else did with theirs/most down to earth. 


I overall like and agree with the libertarian concept (if I had to give it a 
thumbs up or thumbs down--not discussing point by point what I like or dont 
like) but I think total party line can be a little clumsy in some areas- 

 biz and the world has changed a bit from 1800 to 1900 to 2000 plus. I'm not 
opposed to going 'old school' but I think they need to think on a 'happy medium' 
in some areas. 


And standing for 'affirmative action' or wanting biz to be able to hire who they 
see fit- neither of them get to any root of racism or injustice. 


and im coming from a background much as yours- my grandfather was in politics 
and worked on some of the earliest green and civil/equal/human rights campaigns 
and modes of thought- along with my chief mentor working on MLK's staff. that's 
where im coming from. 


I mentioned that he (paul)  won the campaign, meaning this instance wasn't some 
red alert issue once he explained it out- its whether you agree with it or not 
(the essence of it, not all the wordings). - like abortion/ pro choice or pro 
life- the stance is the stance, it doesn't sink a candidate out of politics. 

 It wasn't an issue like george allens 'macaca' flap or cruising for dudes in 
the mens bathroom at an airport, which totally derailed people. 


and yes I agree a good thread- and believe me I do understand where you are 
coming from ...

take care

A










 
In a message dated 4/9/2011 4:10:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
saulomar1 at yahoo.com writes:
[BTW, if my earlier reply sounded pointedly personal, I apologize, it's just 
that I use "you" the way those 'other people over there' use "one". More 
appropriate, yep, but it's hard changing old patterns....)

>

>

>> ..your 'analogy' is just based on your own personal opinion and speculation.

> 

>That statement, considering you are not aware of my knowledge-base for replying 

>or the breadth of my awareness of the general issue of civil/equal/human rights, 

>makes that statement above, ironically, in effect strictly YOUR personal opinion 

>AND speculation.  I'll assume then that all our opinions and speculations are 

>worth acknowledging. 

>

>

>Also, Victory, like Might, doesn't equate to Right.  What are you implying by 

>"BUT he won..." So? The number of people who liked him over the other guy was 

>NEVER an issue, neither in my comments nor in yours. So I don't get how his 

>winning has anything to do with proving/validating/justifying/or-whatever re: 

>his position on the topics. Elections by definition are popularity contests 

>ONLY. Nothing to do with how right/wrong a candidate's positions are.

>

>It's truly simple the distillation of Randy's utterance: Govt. shouldn't act out 

>its (meaning, OURS) racism in the public square, actions, programs, 

>institutions, similar-&-etc. but private individuals, initiatives, policies, and 

>concerns (meaning, everyone, and everywhere else not covered in Civil Rights Act 

>-i.e. the public sphere, not just "private businesses") should be allowed to 

>make up their own mind on the matter, to follow whatever their biases beg and 

>paw at the insides of their hosts' chest cavities for. 

>

>

>As he stated that he prefers it, one way they (the "privates") would be free 

>to make up their minds would be for/on behalf of racism. He's against it, sure, 

>he calls racist descrimination " bad business" [an offensive and 

>dismissive trivialization, to be sure] "BUT." Enough said.  How manymore 

>criminal or present-day-historical examples does one need to see that 

>decentralizing the protections against racism and discrimination is both giving 

>permission to, and a ploy to get away with, local bigotries to have free rein.  

>Further, making it a local/state issue takes the a victim's right of redress 

>further away from the federal court system and swerves it through the 

>local/state courts, who are all the more steeped in the local culture and 

>traditions that gave cause for such court actions in the first place! 

>

>

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3O2rBz9gwo

>

>

>And in case you're tempted to think I'm speaking out of my ass, so to speak, 

>well so IS HE! He says so himself! (2:03 of vid) Please don't hold me to a 

>different standard than you do him.

>

>I'm just tired of bigoted pigs dressing up as lil'-innocent-"who, me?! Ah cood 

>nevah..."-types trying to fuck the people the moment their trusting backs are 

>turned. 

>

>

>[This is really a nice thread to pursue because it really begins to expose the 

>truest, most curdling feelings behind different sides of the issue, the feelings 

>that believers will really stand up and die for. Or that "some" ("Earl Grey, 

>please; thank you.") will march in front of Barack, and his wife, and his 

>children, the dog, and the Capitol by the thousands-n'-thousands with machine 

>guns, assault rifles, and clips - and some really stupid signs to boot!] 

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20110412/630b51b2/attachment-0001.html>