Posted on 04/11/2013 7:46:57 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Sen. Rand Paul R-Ky. delivered an effective speech at Howard University, even though he rhetorically stumbled at points.
The audience was mostly silent through Paul’s prepared speech, which highlighted traditional Republican policies such as school choice, free markets, and limited government.
Paul’s more libertarian ideas, however, appeared to resonate with the audience, as they applauded for his views on reduced jail penalties for non-violent drug users and a more humble foreign policy.
“Republicans are often miscast as uncaring or condemning of kids who make bad choices,” Paul said. “I, for one, plan to change that.”
Paul admitted that Republicans had failed to highlight the importance of their rich heritage of supporting civil rights, which was part of the reason he decided to give a speech.
Paul created a stir when he asked the students if they were aware that the NAACP was founded by Republicans – a line that the crowd apparently perceived as insulting.
The audience also laughed when Paul forgot the name of Edward Brooke when he tried to cite the black Massachusetts senator who was a graduate of Howard University.
Paul admitted that people told him he was either “brave or crazy” for speaking at a historically black college, especially after the controversial comments he made about the Civil Rights Act during an MSNBC interview with Rachel Maddow in 2010.
“Here I am a guy who once presumed to discuss a section of the Civil Rights Act,” Paul said, admitting that “it didn’t go so well.”
The audience, however, had this event in mind, as a student accused Paul during the Q-and-A session of believing in the federal government’s legal right to discriminate against individuals.
“I’ve never been against the Civil Rights Act,” Paul stated flatly in response. “Ever.”
After the audience was silent in response, the host of the event encouraged Paul to explain his position further, reminding him that “this was on tape.”
Paul responded that he was only concerned about certain portions of the Civil Rights Act that were beyond race.
His attempt to explain earned him a little bit of applause from the audience but it perhaps he should have been more prepared to address the topic.
Paul made an effective argument that Republicans weren’t targeting black voters by requesting a photo I.D. in order to vote – insisting that it was different from the Southern Democrat “literacy tests” of the 1850′s.
“I think that if you liken using a driver’s license to a literacy test, you demean the horror of what happened,” he stated.
During the Q-and-A session one student suggested there were two Republican parties, one of the party of Abraham Lincoln and civil rights – and the other the party of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
After the audience applauded the question, Paul argued that there wasn’t any difference between the two historical eras of Republicans, but that the party had failed to talk about it enough.
Judging by the audience’s response, Paul perhaps should have spent less time talking about Republicans and their role in civil rights movement to students who likely had the facts fresh in their mind from their history classes.
Instead, Paul probably should have done more to diffuse accusations of racism within the modern Republican party and asked the students themselves how the party was perceived.
At the end of the event, a student challenged Paul’s belief that government should just “leave us alone,” and suggested that he wanted a government that could help him go to college.
Paul’s response to the question relied heavily on the federal government’s budget and deficit numbers that perhaps sounded a bit cynical for a young man who saw government as his path to opportunity.
In the end, Paul’s humble demeanor and earnest approach probably saved him from any embarrassing boos or ridicule – such as Mitt Romney’s speech to the NAACP during the presidential campaign.
Paul deserves credit for reaching out, but his effort illustrated that more Republicans need to spend more time speaking and listening to the black community.
The issue is non-violent crime. Someone using weed in their own home is one thing. Someone trafficking in it or other drugs is contributing to the violent drug culture. Most drug- related prisoners are in for trafficking, and this is why crime and drug crime in particular is down from 30 years ago. To lump in drug dealers with occasional users for reduced sentences because they are “non-violent” is a big mistake, and this is where it could lead.
And it does for this young man. It guarantees college loans. What more is needed?
RE: Rand Paul is a socially liberal and fiscally conservative isolationist like his old man.
Well, on gay marriage, he wants government TOTALLY OFF the business of recognizing marriages altogether. How this is done in practice remains to be seen.
"The Democrats promised equalizing outcomes through unlimited federal assistance while Republicans offered something that seemed less tangible-the promise of equalizing opportunity through free markets."
And Howard is a black college, so they were his target.
Howard is a very reputable school academically. But, there has been 2 or 3 generations of government indoctrinated dependents who have gone through those hallowed halls. It will take time and effort to turn this around. I think the impending SHTF government crash / crisis will wake some up...
still trotting out the lies...
- My opponents call me libertarian but I'm pro-life. (Feb 2011)
- Life begins at conception. (Jul 2010)
- Opposes federal abortion funding. (Aug 2010)
- Prohibit federal funding for abortion. (May 2011)
- Opposes same-sex marriage. (Nov 2009)
- Opposes affirmative action. (Aug 2010)
- Supports Amendment to prevent same sex marriage. (Aug 2010)
I could care less what Rand Paul said his views were before the became a US senator. Only two of the positions you listed were after Jan 2011, when he became a member of Congress. His old man voted for sodomy to be allowed in the US Armed Forces. His old man said during the debates that anyone should have the right to “get married”. His old man said there was nothing wrong with Iran getting nuke. Rand Paul worked on Ron Paul’s campaign and supported him for US president. If you don’t agree with someone’s positions, you don’t support them for president, unless you are a hypocrite. And like his code pink father he is an isolationist and has never seen a drug he didn’t want legalize. Like his old man, Rand Paul ran for Congress as a republican because libertarians don’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected to public office. End of story.
Keep avoiding the challenge - Rand's actual positions in statement or deed (NOT his dad's).
Rand Paul said explicitly when stumping for his father that he was NOT his father. Couldn't have been more clear, but you don't care about facts. Are you exactly the same as your father? I sure as heck don't want to be tarred with the same brush as my father, but in similar circumstances, I'd do exactly what Rand did - it's his frikin' dad for crying out loud!
Rand Paul stated his positions and all you can trot out is "his father".... Nothing else. I give up.
Who did you support? Did you agree with everything they said? Are you a hypocrite?
Dang, Rand Paul might have lost the black vote for 2016. HAHAHAHAHAHA.
A flying donkey has a better chance at getting the GOP nomination than Code Pink Rand Paul.
That same flying donkey has a better chance of getting more than 5% of the black vote than Rand Paul or any other potential GOP nominee. Waste of time.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform
LATimes.com | March 19, 2013 | Michael A. Memoli
Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3010596/posts
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.