In response to:

White Liberals Tell Black Lies about Civil Rights

James3300 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:28 AM
So, Ann, it is good to use federal troops, the US Army, to invade a state or American city to force it's agenda on non-compliant populations? Why should not the current president be allowed to do the same?
Marie150 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:42 AM
All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.
agitator Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 10:14 AM
Where does the Bible say that?
Agent Crawfish Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:32 AM
Congrats. You get the prize for the dumbest questoin of all time. Is is good to use the mechanisms of law to enforce the law? How dumb are you?

Oh wait ... your a Paultard ... that's pretty dumb.
Marie150 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:44 AM
Do not connect his thinkin with Ron Paul's. Ron Paul may be wrong on some issues but he does not deserve to be credited with the ideas of idiotic followers.
James3300 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 10:46 AM
Why don't you and 'marie' just answer the question and stop your lame attempts to be smarties? If it was right for one president to use federal force, the US Army, to invade a state or city to force its federal agenda on the non-compliant, why could not another, to include Obama, do the same?
Agent Crawfish Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 10:53 AM
I did answer your question nimrod ... the law is not "law" in anything other than name if it cannot be enforced. The federal government can legally and morally use force to stop any state government/institution from denying the constitutionally granted rights of an American citizen. Ergo ... if Alabama, or Michigan for that matter, refuses to let black children into a public school the federal goverment has the power and authority to ensure the rights of that black child exist in fact in Alabama.

Why is this difficult for you?
Agent Crawfish Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 10:53 AM
I did answer your question nimrod ... the law is not "law" in anything other than name if it cannot be enforced. The federal government can legally and morally use force to stop any state government/institution from denying the constitutionally granted rights of an American citizen. Ergo ... if Alabama, or Michigan for that matter, refuses to let black children into a public school the federal goverment has the power and authority to ensure the rights of that black child exist in fact in Alabama.

Why is this difficult for you?

Protecting the rights and liberty of citizens is the legitimate role of government ... regardless of who is President.
James3300 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 11:12 AM
If your view of "law" is right and your view of the use of the US Army is right, then do not complain when military force is used by the likes of Obama to bring the same force to bear on non-complaints states and cities, which seems to be on the agenda.
DSMike Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:30 AM
An agenda of racism is not an American agenda...so in that case it was right.

Liberals ignored my book Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama throughout the fall. Now that I'm safely home from my book tour, they feel free to jabber on about their make-believe history of the civil rights movement with abandon.

In the hackiest of all hacky articles, Sam Tanenhaus, the man responsible for ruining The New York Times Book Review, has written a cover story in The New Republic, titled: "Original Sin: Why the GOP is and will continue to be the party of white people."

MSNBC has been howling this cliche for a decade --...

Monday, May 20 | 06:06 PM ET
Monday, May 20 | 06:06 PM ET
Monday, May 20 | 06:06 PM ET
Monday, May 20 | 06:06 PM ET