Apparently, if your last name is ‘Paul’ and you are running for higher office, the first thing you do is voice your opposition to ending the Jim Crow laws. That’s what Rand Paul did immediately after winning the Kentucky nomination for Senate, and that’s what Ron Paul has done on the day he announced his candidacy for president. Appearing on Hardball, Ron Paul argued that he isn’t a racist; he’s a supporter of property rights.
“Yeah, but I wouldn’t vote against getting rid of the Jim Crow laws,” Paul said. He explained that he would have opposed the Civil Rights Act “because of the property rights element, not because they got rid of the Jim Crow laws.”
His reasoning is totally awesome. Remember, he’s the one who said he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And his reason is this:
“This gimmick, it’s off the wall when you say I’m for property rights and for states rights, and therefore I’m a racist,” said the Texas congressman. “That’s just outlandish.”
Paul appealed to the free market, and argued that if a business owner were to post signs declaring segregation in his or her business, people wouldn’t patronize it.
“For you to imply that a property rights person is endorsing that stuff, you don’t understand that there would be zero signs up today saying something like that,” he said. “And if they did they would be an idiot and out of business.”
No one asked Ron Paul if he would sign the Civil Rights Act of 2011. Back in 1964, there were ‘Whites Only’ signs all across the South and no one was going out of business over it.
Ron Paul thinks it’s outlandish to call him a racist. Fine. I won’t call him a racist. I’ll just point out that he thinks it’s every American’s right to not serve black people.
