Skip to comments.Tea Party Pick Causes Uproar on Civil Rights
Posted on 05/24/2010 4:34:15 PM PDT by grand wazoo
WASHINGTON Rand Paul, the Tea Party candidate who challenged the Republican establishment to win the partys Senate nomination in Kentucky two days ago, criticized a landmark civil rights law on Thursday, landing himself in a potentially damaging dispute over civil rights and race.
In doing so, he provided Democrats an opportunity to portray him as extreme and renewed concern among Republicans that his views made him vulnerable in a general election.
Mr. Paul, in a series of television and radio interviews, suggested that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was too broad and should not apply to private businesses, such as luncheonettes. As his statements drew a swarm of attacks from his opponents, Mr. Paul issued a statement declaring that he would not support repealing the landmark 1964 statute and blaming political opponents for trying to distort his views by saying he favored repeal.
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, he said. Later, in an interview on CNN, he said that if he had been in the Senate in 1964, he would have supported the act.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Uhhhh, note to NYT... there is no Tea Party candidate, primarily because they are not a political party.
“the Tea Party candidate”
therein lies the problem.
I guess they’ll be “reporting” this incident right-up to November.
uh oh, I guess nobody on the upper west side will be voting for Rand Paul.
They will, but I blame Rand Paul. Why did he walk into their trap?
He is only walking into a “trap” if you disagree with him.
It was an awkward first step on the national stage after winning the nomination.
The Pauls will be used against any conservative in the future byt the RATS. The lies will be spread by the RATS and developed into the truth by the MSM.
While Im glad the RNC/GOP got slammed by the Paul win I think its time aPaul fade away. He and his followers have done enough damage.
It was an awkward first step on the national stage after winning the primary.
Anything these two buffoons write in the New York Times is “HOGWASH”!!! Rand Paul will win the senate seat in Kentucky by a landslide. Why? Because POTUS Obama is conducting a failed Presidency. The handwriting is clearly on the wall. God protect America, for Barack Hussein Obama will not!!! Think differently, then show me a mass of Democrats running for office that want his presence in their campaigns or his useless endorsement. Obama is toast, he just does not know yet!!! Obama has become radioactive to the core!!!
He may run for president in 2016.
That makes no sense at all. You can agree with him and still believe he should have given a better answer. He could have given a more nuanced answer and not caused any controversy at all.
They are still trying to gerrymander their way into Kentucky, but West Virginia won’t let them.
I am amazed at the national effort by the media to defeat conservative candidates. It’ too brazen to not be noticed so does anyone still buy into it?
I am getting tired of candidates who say they were set up or whatever. What do they expect when they are interviewed by national correspondents? If you cannot give a common sense answer then you have no business being interviewed.
It sounds whiney to say the media is out to get Republicans. Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, and Steve King have absolutely no problem being interviewed by anyone in the media and they are never part of the gotcha moment. They know how to answer questions and do a great job of representing all of us.
Absolutely - It is amazing and quite frankly pathetic how many ‘conservatives’ are easily manipulated by the Marxist/ MSM when it comes social issues in general and race issues specifically. Get tied up in knots and run away scared. It is the main reason the GOP is feckless and that as a country we have been moving steadily left for almost 50 years.
No amount of nuance will satisfy the leftists. The civil rights bill of 1964 is sacred text to them.
If thats his position, he could have just said that from the beginning and left it at that.
“No amount of nuance will satisfy the leftists. The civil rights bill of 1964 is sacred text to them.”
Not true. He just needed to say what he’s said since the controversy erupted:
“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, he said. Later, in an interview on CNN, he said that if he had been in the Senate in 1964, he would have supported the act.”
Would that have been so hard?
God save us...........
"Damaging" only to those voters who get a case of the fainting fantods any time the MSM or a liberal accuse them of "racism". Few of whom are likely to vote for Paul anyway.
The fact, which has been posted numerous times on this topic that the Tea Party has no leader, does not matter to the Government Run Press, i.e. MSM. Their attempts to tar Conservatives, Libertarians, and Tea Party supporters as racists is a deliberate political ploy that seeks to destroy all opposition to Socialism. The sad reality is that we can no longer discuss the proper role of government in America, especially with anything that has to do with race. In a free society, people have a right to be stupid. If a business owner decides that he does not want the business from a specific group of people, regardless of whether or not it has anything to do with race or religion, he should have the right to make bad business decisions without government intervention. The idea that the government has the authority to tell someone who they can and cannot serve is the worst sort of totalitarianism. This is what happens when equality rather than freedom is the basis for government. Equality can only be obtained by governmental force. Of course, the government gets to decide what qualifies a equality. As we have seen, Congress excludes itself from the laws that it imposes on everyone else, and that includes racial quotas and regulations. In a society that is grounded on individual freedom, which includes freedom from an intrusive government, people would respect the freedom of others to make their own decisions, even if those decisions hurt the individual that makes them.
Well said. And worth repeating:
” This is what happens when equality rather than freedom is the basis for government. Equality can only be obtained by governmental force.”
Yes, he could have just said “Barry Goldwater was wrong to have voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And Ronald Reagan was wrong to have boldly supported Goldwater for President that year.”
Then Rand Paul would have clearly identified himself as being a modern politically correct individual who has assimilated 1960s liberalism and now calls it “conservative”.
God bless Lyndon Johnson, founding father of 21st century conservatism.
Rand Paul is right.
Law was needed to prevent blacks from being forced to the back of public government-run buses, from being forced to drink from public government-supplied drinking fountains, and from being forced to segregate and not attend public schools.
Private lunch counters were a different thing. The Government had no authority to tell private businesses to integrate, private homeowners to sell homes to blacks, etc.
Now, I think the practice of discluding blacks was despicable, but then I am not going to revise history or judge those from a different time when values and mores were different from our modern values and mores.
That said, the market would have fixed the lunch counters.
Once upon a time no blacks were allowed in sports, then Jackie Robinson kicked ass and the rest is history. Heck, it is only very recently that NFL teams finally overcame racism to allow black quarterbacks and head coaches.
The market is self-leveling. Restaurants and stores that allowed in blacks and Hispanics would get their business and make more profit, pressuring other vendors to do the same or go bankrupt.
Paul Rand is right. This isn’t that hard. The 1964 Civil Rights bill should have ended all forms of public discrimination, but not addressed private discrimination. The man is right.
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, he said. Later, in an interview on CNN, he said that if he had been in the Senate in 1964, he would have supported the act.
So you think they are now satisfied with his explanation? They attacked his position on Meet the Press.
...when the NYT moves down here to Kain-tuc to vote for the senate seat in November, I might be a might concerned. Fer now, I’ma gut laughin’ that they’re scared SH!TLESS!!!
...Jest’a keep on talkin’ ya city slickers...
yeah, ‘Tea Party’ is not an organization. that Rand Paul is running under. Very misleading reporting.
“He is only walking into a trap if you disagree with him.”
No. Agree or disagree with what he said, liberals in the media wanted to bring him down and used a question designed to make him sound extreme. They succeeded and his answers were the ammunition.
--> Tea Party Pick Predictably Attacked by DNC Media
Not. Any. More!
Bush was tagged as a racist by the NAACP merely for having a racial attack in his STATE.
Please stop digging the hole deeper. He’s saying he’d vote for civil rights bill, lets move on.
“I am amazed at the national effort by the media to defeat conservative candidates.”
Why are you still amazed, after years and years of media bias that just gets worse and worse. Only 2 months back the outright lies of “tea partiers” using the n-word, a lie reported as fact and not retracted.
8 years of blame bush, and now obama hasnt had a press conference in 6 MONTHS and no peep from the press on it.
” It too brazen to not be noticed so does anyone still buy into it?”
If they do, they are just drinking the koolaid along with the media.
People are missing the point if they are yammering about agreeing or not with what he said.
This was a political media setup from the get-go, a trap, and only a stupid politician would whine about it or fall into it. Rand Paul made a ‘newbie’ mistake and his walk-balk is an attempt to get out of the hole. Good for him for digging out. Next step is to move on.
He may say something you may agree with, but the liberals wanted some excuse to distort his words to make him out to be a racist loon. Even if he is not.
He did come around to the right answer, and NOW, anytime the issue is raised, he needs to say the EXACT SAME THING every single time it is raised so that NO NEW NEWS is made on the issue, and he pivots and says “Can we get back to the real issues of this race, such as ....” and talk about his real agenda.
Will the liberal media be ‘satisfied’ with the above strategy? Heck no, because they will have no more news to use this to beat him up.
Well, yes, if you want to completely avoid controversy, and the national spotlight that comes with it, that would be a safe answer.
He wins in Kentucky, it’s a Republican seat in a state that went for McCain handily in a year that the Democrats are going to do very badly.
And now, because of this controversy, conservatives / grass roots / tea partiers are more aware of Rand Paul and more on his side than ever before. If he was going to run for President at some time, and win, he would initially have to be the guy that the conservatives / grass roots / tea party supports. He’s not going to be getting the votes of people who prefer Romney or Gingrich at this point. He’d be going after the votes of people who like Palin. In any given year, there would likely be a number of candidates vying to be the true conservative candidate. Rand Paul has taken a step toward the front of that pack.
I don’t know. He may come up with a better answer. I assume that he’s paying close attention to whatever effects his words might have in Kentucky. He could mention that those Jim Crow laws that forced businesses to segregate were all passed by Democrats.
And every time the reporters ask him about it - they’ll know that Rand Paul will tell them that the Democrats caused segregated lunch counters.
He could chuckle about it. “Ha ha, why do you keep asking me about this when you know that I’m just going to tell you that the part of the Civil Rights Act that I loved the most was the part that removed the Jim Crow laws. You know the Jim Crow laws that were, in every single case, signed by Democrat Governors, that forced private businesses to discriminate, to segregate. Yeah, I would’ve loved removing those Democrat segregationist laws. (Other parts, I didn’t like as much, but), Yeah, I would’ve voted for it, especially since it removed or nullified the Democrat Jim Crow laws forcing private businesses to segregate.”
In order to get a really good President, we’re going to have to get someone who is willing to fight the media. If Rand Paul does run for President, he will have to be prepared to discuss, in a convincing way, issues surrounding the Civil Rights Act.
If he chooses to run for President, he will be able to explain, in his own way, on his own terms, the problems with the 64 Civil Rights Act. He will be able to make the most persuasive argument possible in favor of liberty and the Constitution possible and he will inspire many who might’ve otherwise not given the matter much thought or might’ve thought that Rand might be mildly racist in some way.
And, although Bush was tagged as a racist, he did win 2 terms.
The problem I see with Rand Paul 2016 is the 2016 part. In 2016, we’re looking at a good Republican Incumbent.
“Yeah, I wouldve voted for it, especially since it removed or nullified the Democrat Jim Crow laws forcing private businesses to segregate.
When they nullified the State Laws enforcing Segregation, they immediatly passed Federal Laws enforcing Integration. This quickly led to such “Goodies” as Affirmative Action AKA “Legal Anti White Laws”. Our children and Grand Children now don’t have a chance. Thanks, Leftists!
Well, we’re all in agreement here pretty much.
Can’t states pass anti-discrimination laws instead of the feds? It’s a states issue not a federal issue. States can’t pass laws mandating discrimination, but they can pass laws banning discrimination. The S. Ct. can take a look at those laws. But the feds shouldn’t be passing the laws
Anybody that didn't see it coming hasn't been paying attention.
Agreed. After Palin got spanked you would think that people would wake up. Lose the naivete, you're swimming in the shark pool now. The liberal propaganda machine is your enemy, you have a responsibility to be prepared.
That's because the GOP is a sham party, run by the elites, that exists merely to provide the illusion of choice, and to serve as the left's punching bag. The entire history of the GOP is one long retreat.
The Washington Generals of politics.
Children of privilege. God love 'em, they bring a coffee cake to a knife fight.
I’ve seen it in the past but now it seems coordinated and I haven’t noticed that before. It’s like they all, major networks, AP, papers are on the same page with what they cover and how they cover it.
Maybe it’s been that way all along, I just didn’t see it.
I think he thought he was smarter than Sarah Palin. I think he bought into the notion that Sarah just wasn’t smart enough to deal with the media but HE would be able to handle them. He (and she) doesn’t speak sound-byte. He speaks in full sentences and thoughts.
Because there used to be a time when most conservatives saw the civil rights act of 1964 as a major usurpation of power by the federal government at the expense of states and personal liberties.
People who want to be offended by his remarks would never consider voting for him anyway. The Democrats have several racial/ethnic voting blocks in their pockets. Republicans would do well to write them off and not try to buy their votes at the expense of everyone else.