Immediately after the Kentucky US Senate primary, Rand Paul made what a lot of people consider a gaffe that got all kinds of media exposure:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
The entire country went bonkers over the fact that Rand Paul would dare do the unthinkable and dick around with a coveted national document that freed millions of people from the tyranny of an oppressive ruling class. From the Rachel Maddow post, a comment:
Since Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist and I imagine he has his own clinic. Does practice what he preaches? Has he subtly denied minority patients?
Since Paul expressed his opinion that the federal government is over-reaching, through the Civil Rights Act and many others, that means of course he’s racist.
In this case, the speaker thinks the entire document is flawed.
Here’s my gripe. Liberals want their cake and want to eat it too. Some documents are flawed and need to be changed. Other documents of their choice are untouchable.
That’s just being hypocritical. If you’re going to open the doors and dick around with the very document that founded this country, then all documents from that point on are fair game. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 addressed a very specific issue that is not an issue in 2010. Anyone with the very least bit of curiosity about history knows that. Those that don’t shout the loudest.
Rand Paul is correct. He has been attacked totally unjustifiably. The federal government has been over-reaching more and more for the last fifty years and needs to be reined in. One of those tools that enables the federal government to do that is the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Now, having said that, I’m waiting for the inevitable racist accusations. However, until someone points to an actual case of unequal voter registration requirement based on race or a school system practicing racial segregation, I rest my case.
The reason Rand Paul is right at this time is because the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did its job. It assured that the US Constitution and Bill of Rights applied to every US citizen equally through the eyes of the federal government. That’s all it could do. Subsequent laws enacted through the CRA went farther and compelled and coerced individuals and businesses to do things to pander to a specific race. That’s when it became over-reaching. That’s not what the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ever intended.
Rand Paul is right on every account.
And, once again, those who bother to read the Civil Rights Act of 1964 know it. Those that won’t, will shout the loudest. And of course, hurl insults in lieu of being forced to admit it.
Rand Paul is preaching limited government. That is definitely the liberals’ worst nightmare.
Comments
Comments:
Leave a Reply
mw on 07.07.2010
Agree completely about media treatment of the Maddow exchange.
I’d love to see a clear libertarian voice in the Senate (yes I know he is a Republican). We have a socialist voice in the Senate (Bernie Sanders) – that does not mean we will go socialist. Why not a libertarian voice? It does not mean we will go libertarian, it is just am important voice to be part of the national debate – at least as important as Sanders.
That said – this episode shows the risk of a candidate like Paul – he is likely to say things that makes it easy for the media to pounce and distort.
This poll is getting a lot of play in the left-o-sphere showing that he is losing ground. So I thought I’d go to the man who has a better feel for all things KY than anyone I know (except for that notable basketball blind spot).
So what say you Moon? Will Kentuckians see through the media spin and send Rand to the Senate? Or is he too much for Kentucky?
Moonage on 07.07.2010
I’m sure the left-o-sphere is making a lot of play out of the PPP poll, they paid for it. PPP polls primarily for Democrat candidates. Realclearpolitics points out their primary interest by listing them as PPP (D). Wanna guess what the (D) is for? Rasmussen and SurveyUSA don’t have that (D). They also have Paul ahead by 6 to 7. Not too shabby in a 2.5 to 1 Democrat majority state. My take on what’s happening now is if you call people, they’ll say they’re voting for this or that. That’s easy. That’s also fairly meaningless ( ask Al Green ). The problem Conway will have come November is I don’t think he’s going to get people out to vote whereas Paul’s peeps are fired up. I really think Paul will win this one by a lot. To put it in simpler perspective, I’ve not met a single person visibly supporting Conway yet. As far as Paul being too much, we gave the world Jim Bunning. Three times.