Rand Paul Racist or Flip Flopper?

[punked]

So those of you who haven't be following it. Rand Paul says he would not have vote for the civil rights act. He then was called racist by many many internet blogs and many Senate Republicans wouldn't even comment on his remarks. Now Rand says he supports the act and would vote for it. So either it is the quickest flip flop in history or Rand is lying. Maybe a Kentucky pick up this November for the Dems.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/reversal-paul-backs-govt-enforced-ban-on-discrimination.php?ref=fpi

In other news the NRCC spent 10% of all the money they have to lose the PA 12 big time. Don't forget Shady calling a landslide in November. They can't win congress seat that is trending Republican and spent 10% of all the money they have but Shady has called it. HA

Edited May 20, 2010 by punked

[Jack Weber]

Tea Party bigots???

No way!!!

[naomiglover]

I don't think Rand Paul is a racist. One of the cornerstone of his political ideology is for the government to stay out of people's private lives. He is against racism, yet he believes the government should not have a say in who a private business owner can allow into their business.

[Shady]

I don't think Rand Paul is a racist.

Either do I. But as usual, punked totally lied about Paul's views. Paul said he had an issue with one of the 10 titles that make up the legislation. As a consistent libertarian, I understand what he's talking about. Although I disagree with it. Anyways, it's the usual playbook of the desperate left. They know they're going to get pounded this fall, and they're scared as hell!

[WIP]

I already put my answer on the Tea Party thread here, but I think the crucial point is not whether or not Rand Paul is a racist, but what options his ideology would have if confronted by racism. He gave private business the option of violating the Civil Rights Act in his interview with Rachel Maddow, now he and his advisers are trying to spin their way out of the ditch created by his political ideology of government so small that it is the equivalent of anarchy.

[Jack Weber]

I already put my answer on the Tea Party thread here, but I think the crucial point is not whether or not Rand Paul is a racist, but what options his ideology would have if confronted by racism. He gave private business the option of violating the Civil Rights Act in his interview with Rachel Maddow, now he and his advisers are trying to spin their way out of the ditch created by his political ideology of government so small that it is the equivalent of anarchy.

After reading that,I suspect he's not a bigot...He's just a free market dufus...

[punked]

Either do I. But as usual, punked totally lied about Paul's views. Paul said he had an issue with one of the 10 titles that make up the legislation. As a consistent libertarian, I understand what he's talking about. Although I disagree with it. Anyways, it's the usual playbook of the desperate left. They know they're going to get pounded this fall, and they're scared as hell!

NO he doesn't did you read the link Shady. He flipped flopped and now says he agrees with the Civil rights act. So either he was wrong and has changed his position or he is Lying. You pick which one it is.

BTW Shady the left aren't scared. It is the right who is trying to dial it back cause they know they got nothing. Ann Coulter wrote today

Republican consultants are doing a wonderful job raising expectations sky-high for the November elections, so that now, even if Republicans do smashingly well, it will look like a defeat (and an across-the-board endorsement of Obama's agenda). Thanks, Republicans!

That's what happened in the 1998 congressional elections, nearly foiling Clinton's impeachment. It's what happened to the Conservative Party in Britain a week ago.

And that's what happened this week in the 12th Congressional District of Pennsylvania, formerly represented by Rep. John Murtha.

Note to Republicans: Whenever possible, victory parties should be held after the election, not before it.

Wow even the crazy right things Shady is wrong.

Edited May 20, 2010 by punked

[BubberMiley]

Like all libertarians, his anti-government ideology works well in theory, but when faced with the real world they flip-flop faster than a flapjack.

[Jack Weber]

Like all libertarians, his anti-government ideology works well in theory, but when faced with the real world they flip-flop faster than a flapjack.

Well...That drivel works well on the nutjob base...Not so well in the real world...

[Michael Hardner]

Came across this by the by - Conservative blogger Bruce Bartlett is a well connected mainstream conservative. Here's his take, which follows a brief and very informative primer on the major milestones of civil rights legislation, and the constitutional implications.

I don't believe Rand is a racist; I think he is a fool who is suffering from the foolish consistency syndrome that affects all libertarians. They believe that freedom consists of one thing and one thing only--freedom from governmental constraint. Therefore, it is illogical to them that any increase in government power could ever expand freedom. Yet it is clear that African Americans were far from free in 1964 and that the Civil Rights Act greatly expanded their freedom while diminishing that of racists. To defend the rights of racists to discriminate is reprehensible and especially so when it is done by a major party nominee for the U.S. Senate. I believe that Rand should admit that he was wrong as quickly as possible.

Bruce Bartlett's Blog

[GostHacked]

I think Rand Paul was trying to say this :

If everyone was equal under the law from the start, then there would have been no reason to even have a civil rights movement legislation to vote on. We'd all be treated equally already.

[Michael Hardner]

I think Rand Paul was trying to say this :

If everyone was equal under the law from the start, then there would have been no reason to even have a civil rights movement legislation to vote on. We'd all be treated equally already.

From the OP:

So, by our reckoning, here's Paul's progression on the issue over the past 24 hours:

*

Paul on Maddow, circa 9 p.m. Wednesday: I don't agree with the Civil Rights Act, but I don't believe in racism.

*

Paul statement, noon Thursday: I wouldn't support repealing the law.

*

Paul campaign statement, 2 p.m. Thursday: I support the law and the government's power to enforce it.

*

Paul on CNN, 5 p.m. Thursday: "I would have voted yes" for the law. "There was a need for federal intervention."

As a Senate candidate if we're sitting here trying to glean what he was trying to say then he's a huge failure at communicating. What he was trying to say is that he's a bare knuckle libertarian. Business rules, period. Then later he tried to say something else.

When the legislation was being passed in the 1950s and 1960s business opposition was a significant force in trying to shut it down.

[punked]

Oh Noes Shady the Flip Flopper Rand is scared he wont even do an interview he was schedule to do on meet the press. It is only the 3rd cancellation on the show in 65 years!!! Should give you an idea of how much the Republicans are running scared again.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/paul-backs-out-of-meet-the-press-appearance.php?ref=fpa

Edited May 21, 2010 by punked

[Shady]

Oh Noes Shady the Flip Flopper Rand is scared he wont even do an interview he was schedule to do on meet the press. It is only the 3rd cancellation on the show in 65 years!!! Should give you an idea of how much the Republicans are running scared again.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/paul-backs-out-of-meet-the-press-appearance.php?ref=fpa

Well, I'm glad you've moved on from your earlier lies about him. But Republicans aren't scared. He's up 20 points in his senate race!

However, it looks like the Dems have a bit of a problem with their candidate from Connecticut. The make believe Vietnam veteran! What a scum bag.

[punked]

Well, I'm glad you've moved on from your earlier lies about him. But Republicans aren't scared. He's up 20 points in his senate race!

However, it looks like the Dems have a bit of a problem with their candidate from Connecticut. The make believe Vietnam veteran! What a scum bag.

You want to start a topic about another Senate Candidate you can Shady but it looks like that candidate from Connecticut didn't lie and corrected himself in the speech he gave but it was a nice hit piece.

As for Rands lead, means nothing in a poll taken even before the primary Shady. Sorry that was before the field was even set out. You keep citing your out of date polls though as your guy hides under a rock for being a Flip Flopper or a racist.

[BubberMiley]

You keep citing your out of date polls though as your guy hides under a rock for being a Flip Flopper or a racist.

I think he's made it pretty clear his views are not at all racist, but are based on an extremist, fantasyland idea that government shouldn't set the terms of society at all and should just leave people alone to go about their business. It's a perfect example of how libertarians haven't completely thought-through their philosophy.

[maple_leafs182]

I think he's made it pretty clear his views are not at all racist, but are based on an extremist, fantasyland idea that government shouldn't set the terms of society at all and should just leave people alone to go about their business. It's a perfect example of how libertarians haven't completely thought-through their philosophy.

Governments tend to corrupt, this is why it is important to have libertarians. The American government is corrupt.

[Argus]

You want to start a topic about another Senate Candidate you can Shady but it looks like that candidate from Connecticut didn't lie and corrected himself in the speech he gave but it was a nice hit piece.

Calling your lies "misstatements" don't make them any less lies no matter how indignant and self-righteous you get about it.

"When I was serving in Vietnam" is not a misstatement it's a lie.

[Argus]

I think he's made it pretty clear his views are not at all racist, but are based on an extremist, fantasyland idea that government shouldn't set the terms of society at all and should just leave people alone to go about their business. It's a perfect example of how libertarians haven't completely thought-through their philosophy.

I agree. It's an idea which has some appeal to me as I too believe that, at least in a semi-perfect world, people shouldn't get told by the government who they must do business with. One restaurant won't serve you? Fine. Most othes will, and that one will lose business. That's how the market works.

The ideology runs afoul of reality in a number of ways, however. One only need look at what unrestrained capitalism in the financial sector accomplished without government "interference" to see that there is a place for government oversight. You would think this would be enough of an example to give pause to people who want the government to keep its hands and nose away from business and let it do whatever it wants but apparently not.

Of course, his ideology would also have refused any and all aid to those businesses, which also holds a certain appeal. All those sleazy and incompetent brokers and banks would have gone under, as they should have (along with GM and Chrysler), and there likely would have been a depression, as opposed to a recession.

[punked]

Calling your lies "misstatements" don't make them any less lies no matter how indignant and self-righteous you get about it.

"When I was serving in Vietnam" is not a misstatement it's a lie.

Yep misleading not a lie.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005190039

[Shady]

Yep misleading not a lie.

No, it's a lie. He didn't serve in Vietnam. In fact, he sought and received 5 deferments.

[zyatheismyx]

Yep misleading not a lie.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005190039

the world of ILLUSION...

[Argus]

Yep misleading not a lie.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005190039

It's nice you found a "progressive" web site where they agree with your opinion. My opinion is he lied. Saying you served in Vietnam is a lie, and a really nasty one for a guy who sought and received 5 deferments so he wouldn't have to serve in Vietnam.

It's like a Canadian soldier who "serves" at NDHQ in Ottawa talking about how he served in Afghanistan. Sorry, don't buy the "misspoke" thing.

[punked]

It's nice you found a "progressive" web site where they agree with your opinion. My opinion is he lied. Saying you served in Vietnam is a lie, and a really nasty one for a guy who sought and received 5 deferments so he wouldn't have to serve in Vietnam.

It's like a Canadian soldier who "serves" at NDHQ in Ottawa talking about how he served in Afghanistan. Sorry, don't buy the "misspoke" thing.

Again if you want to make a topic about this please do. This topic is about Rand Paul the guy who is now so scared of the Media he is one of only 3 people in 65 to cancel an interview on meet the press.

The problem with you "this guy lied story" is he has said and told the media many times before he did not serve in Vietnam. He was talking about the treatment of Vets in the country and how dismal it is. He was talking about the Vets of that war and mis spoke once. Act like you never have done that PLEASE PLEASE DO. Again he has stated many times HE DID NOT SERVE in Vietnam on the record before this. I promise there a million people on tape saying something stupid and when taken out of context looks bad but you would really be missing the point living your life by sound bits.

http://blogs.courant.com/colin_mcenroe_to_wit/2010/05/the-flaws-in-the-nyt-blumentha.html

Edited May 23, 2010 by punked

[Shady]

Apparently Joe Sestak has admitted that the White House offered him a high-ranking job, to keep him from running against Arlen Specter in the Democrat primary.