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 party’s 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.
He'll learn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.