Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: Rand Paul defends criticism of Civil Rights act. But isn't racist. Really.

  1. #16
    Elite Member Brookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the "D"
    Posts
    24,751

    Default

    I'll bet those fishsticks go well with Tea.
    Life is short. Break the Rules. Forgive Quickly. Kiss Slowly. Love Truly.
    Laugh Uncontrollably. And never regret ANYTHING that makes you smile.

    - Mark Twain

  2. #17
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default

    Heh....he's backtracking like mad now. NIce try, fuckwad. No one's buying it.

    The morning after he declined to endorse the totality of the Civil Rights Act in his much-discussed appearance on the Rachel Maddow Show, Dr. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) copped to feeling regret -- not over his comments, but rather his decision to be interviewed by Maddow in the first place.

    "It was a poor political decision and probably won't be happening anytime in the near future," the Tea Party endorsed Senate candidate said on the Laura Ingraham show on Thursday morning. "Because, yeah, they can play things and want to say, 'Oh you believed in beating up people that were trying to sit in restaurants in the 1960s.' And that is such a ridiculous notion and something that no rational person is in favor of. [But] she went on and on about that."

    Blaming the messenger is a tactic often used by politicians when the message itself is to blame. And Paul's appearance on the Maddow show on Wednesday night was anything but bland. For 15 minutes, he and the host went back and forth in debating where there should be limits to government efforts to desegregate private institutions (Paul was skeptical that the government should play any role at all). But the notion that the MSNBC host was somehow unloading liberal hostilities on him doesn't jibe with the fact that Paul got the same type of treatment during an NPR interview earlier that morning -- or, for that matter, that a conservative voice on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough, seemed aghast at his answers. "He needs to come up with an answer today, or Kentucky will be Arizona: a battleground for ugly, racial politics," Scarborough said. "He has 24 hours."

    (Paul, in fact, chose Maddow's show to initially launch his Senate candidacy a year prior to last night's appearance.)

    Paul did seem to draw back (or tighten) his discussion of the Civil Rights Act during his interview with Ingraham.

    "These are settled issues in the Civil Rights Act," he said. "I have no intention of bringing up anything related to the Civil Rights Act... I think [segregation] is sort of a stain and blight on our history -- so, no, I have never really favored any change in the Civil Rights Act or any of that. But they have seemed to unleash the loony left on me."

    Story continues below

    UPDATE I: Rand Paul's campaign has now issued a lengthy statement about his views on the Civil Rights Act. The key quote: "I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    "I believe we should work to end all racism in American society and staunchly defend the inherent rights of every person. I have clearly stated in prior interviews that I abhor racial discrimination and would have worked to end segregation. Even though this matter was settled when I was 2, and no serious people are seeking to revisit it except to score cheap political points, I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964."

    "Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws."

    "As I have said in previous statements, sections of the Civil Rights Act were debated on Constitutional grounds when the legislation was passed. Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years."

    "My opponent's statement on MSNBC Wednesday that I favor repeal of the Civil Rights Act was irresponsible and knowingly false. I hope he will correct the record and retract his claims."

    "The issue of civil rights is one with a tortured history in this country. We have made great strides, but there is still work to be done to ensure the great promise of Liberty is granted to all Americans."

    "This much is clear: The federal government has far overreached in its power grabs. Just look at the recent national healthcare schemes, which my opponent supports. The federal government, for the first time ever, is mandating that individuals purchase a product. The federal government is out of control, and those who love liberty and value individual and state's rights must stand up to it."

    "These attacks prove one thing for certain: the liberal establishment is desperate to keep leaders like me out of office, and we are sure to hear more wild, dishonest smears during this campaign."

    UPDATE II: TPM highlights another potentially problematic view of Paul's that came up during the same NPR interview during which Paul discussed the Civil Rights Act.

    Rand Paul's interview with NPR's All Things Considered last night was the first sign the the freshly-minted Kentucky Republican Senate nominee might have some explaining to do today. The blogosphere is already alight with Paul's interview with Rachel Maddow, but his interview on NPR shows that his libertarian views go deeper than just his take on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Speaking with NPR's Robert Siegel, Paul made the case for less federal involvement in workplace and environmental regulation, including his opposition to some components of the Americans With Disabilities Act. [...]

    Here's the interview in a nutshell, from Paul's response to a question about whether or not he thinks the ADA is an example of federal "overreach":

    "I think a lot of things could be handled locally," Paul told Siegel. "For example, I think that we should try to do everything we can to allow for people with disabilities and handicaps...I think if you have a two-story office and you hire someone who's handicapped, it might be reasonable to let him have an office on the first floor rather than the government saying you have to have a $100,000 elevator. And I think when you get to solutions like that, the more local the better, and the more common sense the decisions are, rather than having a federal government make those decisions."http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/20/rand-paul-civil-rights-rachel-maddow_n_583292.html

    I think his supposed naïveté is dangerous. Like many--if not most--"isms", libertarianism may make sense on an academic level, but only when conceived in vacuum of intellectual exercises. In the gritty friction of the real world, the exercise falls apart. To say that only publicly owned entities should be legislated from discriminating ignores centuries of oppression and injustice. Glibly dismissing any real examples such as the Woolworth's lunch counter by claiming his "abhorrence of racism" and saying that people would vote with their dollar to not patronize those business is laughably naive.
    Last edited by buttmunch; May 20th, 2010 at 02:52 PM.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  3. #18
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,250

    Default

    That's almost an IF apology.

    I don't know if Rand in his heart is a racist, but he's utterly clueless about what America stands for and that makes him dangerous.
    Tea baggers want to fight the Man because the Man doesn't look like them.

  4. #19
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default

    Well, his father certainly has made it clear his feelings on people of colour and while I won't blame the son for the sins of the father it sure is starting to stink around this guy.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  5. #20
    Elite Member celeb_2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13,467

    Default

    He forgot to mention he has black 'friends.'

    Probably lets them use his restroom too.

  6. #21
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default

    *smacks head* Of course! The old 'I have black friends' excuse. I can't wait for his next crazy statement.

    Here's an excellent comment from the same source:

    Rand Paul's argument that businesses would have eventually desegregated themselves for economic reasons flies in the face of several sad decades of post-Civil War history in the US.

    Rand's argument also echoes his father Ron's argument that the Civil War was unnecessary because slavery would have eventually gone away on its own for economic reasons.

    In both cases, the Paul men are asking Blacks to suffer patiently while they wait for the majority whites to figure out that hating them, enslaving them, and segregating them is bad economics.

    Um, yeah. Way to stand up for human rights, boys.
    This also leads to questions about whether a white doctor would then be able to refuse treatment to a black patient, etc. This guy is either unbelievably stupid or one mother of a racist.
    Last edited by buttmunch; May 21st, 2010 at 04:13 AM.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  7. #22
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default

    Huh. It appears he's been working with this theme for awhile now.

    Here's another wrinkle in the controversy over U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul's arguments, made Wednesday to NPR and Rachel Maddow, over whether the Civil Rights Act was necessary to prevent discrimination.

    In a May 30, 2002, letter to the Bowling Green Daily News, Paul's hometown newspaper, he criticized the paper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, and explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin." (Hat tip: Page One Kentucky. I have purchased the letter from the newspaper's online archives, but will not post it here out of respect for the copyright.)

    "The Daily News ignores," wrote Paul, "as does the Fair Housing Act, the distinction between private and public property. Should it be prohibited for public, taxpayer-financed institutions such as schools to reject someone based on an individual's beliefs or attributes? Most certainly. Should it be prohibited for private entities such as a church, bed and breakfast or retirement neighborhood that doesn't want noisy children? Absolutely not."

    In language similar to the language he's used talking about the Civil Rights Act, Paul criticized racism while defending the right of businesses to discriminate.

    "A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination," wrote Paul, "even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin. It is unenlightened and ill-informed to promote discrimination against individuals based on the color of their skin. It is likewise unwise to forget the distinction between public (taxpayer-financed) and private entities."

    Jesse Benton, a spokesman for Paul, cautioned that Paul's statements about federal laws in no way mean he's interested in repealing laws that prevent discrimination.

    "The federal government has the power under the Civil Rights Act to make sure citizens don't discriminate on race," said Benton. "He's not going to repeal it. The only people who are talking about changes to civil rights legislation are people on the left are people who want to use this as a political attack tool. Not any serious people talking about policy."http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/rand_paul_in_2002_i_may_not_li.html
    And now I'm thinking about his spokesman being forced to resign after posting 'Happy N***ger Day' on his myspace page on Martin Luther King Day. But since Rand says he isnt' a racist I'm going to have to believe it. Please, Kentucky, don't vote this asshole into the Senate.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  8. #23
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,100

    Default

    The far left is attacking Dr. Paul because they are desperate. Their candidate is trailing him in the polls for the Kentucky Senate seat.

    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.

  9. #24
    Elite Member WhoAmI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    4,371

    Default

    Looks like he's going the Sarah Palin route. Avoid the press once you make a fool of yourself. Coward.

    Rand Paul cancels Meet the Press appearance

    After two days of bruising media coverage about his views on elements of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the campaign of Kentucky U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul tells me it has canceled the candidate's upcoming appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" -- something the show's host and producer are currently sounding the alarm about on Twitter.

    "Rand did Good Morning America today, set the record straight, and now we are done talking about it," said campaign spokesman Jesse Benton. "No more national interviews on the topic."
    Right Now - Rand Paul cancels Meet the Press appearance

  10. #25
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purple rain View Post
    The far left is attacking Dr. Paul because they are desperate. Their candidate is trailing him in the polls for the Kentucky Senate seat.

    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.
    The fucking "far left", who think the Civil Rights Act was a good thing unlike this asshole? Are you fucking retarded? That "Far left" must comprise about 95% of the country except for the moron teabagger nativist crowd you belong to.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  11. #26
    Elite Member Sundance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purple rain View Post
    The far left is attacking Dr. Paul because they are desperate. Their candidate is trailing him in the polls for the Kentucky Senate seat.

    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.
    They're "attacking" Rand Paul because he's a fucking idiot.
    “The thing that attracts people to “The Sopranos” is the family element. It shows that America still has a longing for that traditional upbringing.” Christine O'Donnell

  12. #27
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purple rain View Post
    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.
    Does that even matter? Paul's showing that he doesn't get the importance of the civil rights acts of the 60s. That's reason enough that he doesn't belong in the senate.
    Tea baggers want to fight the Man because the Man doesn't look like them.

  13. #28
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purple rain View Post
    The far left is attacking Dr. Paul because they are desperate. Their candidate is trailing him in the polls for the Kentucky Senate seat.

    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.
    Kentucky is an extremely red state. It is pretty much a foregone conclusion that the GOP's candidate, whoever it is, will win.
    I don't think that is what is setting off the panic. He's a threat to both traditional Repubs and Dems, I would guess. Perhaps the media etc is making the mistake of paying too much attention to him ?

    In a GOP that is without a clear leader, everyone is waiting to see who is going to emerge as a leader and what direction the party is going to take. Rand Paul is the flavor of the month, kind of like Scott Brown was a few months ago.

    The problem with Libertarianism is that some of its tenets and ideas seem like common sense but when taken to their extreme quickly become retarded. I would love to live in a world where people do the right thing and we need minimal laws and governance, but I do not see this happening.

    Why not question him for some of the ridiculous things he spouts?

  14. #29
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purple rain View Post
    The far left is attacking Dr. Paul because they are desperate. Their candidate is trailing him in the polls for the Kentucky Senate seat.

    As if Rand Paul would have the power or push to eliminate the Civil Rights Act or the Department of Education if he were elected to the Senate. What non-issues.
    Priceless!
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 20th, 2010, 09:46 AM
  2. Obesity becoming U.S. civil rights issue for some
    By celeb_2006 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: April 30th, 2009, 12:51 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 18th, 2008, 04:20 AM
  4. Replies: 23
    Last Post: November 1st, 2008, 10:48 AM
  5. Don't buy an iPhone if you care about your civil rights
    By pacific breeze in forum Computers and Technology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 14th, 2007, 02:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •