[AppyPappy]

He appears to be too smart.

[beebuster2000]

Rand Paul

NRFPT

[humblegunner]

Why excerpt from your blog?
It isn’t on the list of sources that must be excerpted:

abqjournal.com
adn.com
afp.com
aim.org
atimes.com
associatedcontent.com
awsj.com
baltimoresun.com
barrons.com
barronsmag.com
bayarea.com
bendbulletin.com
boston.com (www.boston.com The Boston Globe)
boxofficemojo.com
bsudailynews.com
businessweek.com
californian.com
canadafreepress.com
Capetimes.co.za
careerjournal.com
cavalierdaily.com
chicagotribune.com
chron.com
cnn.com
collegejournal.com
crainsnewyork.com
csmonitor.com
ctnow.com
daily-chronicle.com
dailypress.com
dallasnews.com
dj.com
dowjonesnews.com
djnewswires.com
dowjones.com
feer.com (Far Eastern Economic Review)
fresnobee.com
foxnews.com
gallup.com
The Guardian (UK)
gazette.net
GCN.com
goerie.com
greenwichtime.com
gwpi.net
heraldnet.com
holahoy.com
ibdeditorials.com
idahostatesman.com
iht.com
investors.com
jacksonville.com (Florida-Times Union)
janes.com
jewishobserver-la.com
jewishworldreview.com
kansascity.com
laopinion.com
latimes.com
livemint.com
marketwatch.com
mcall.com
mercextra.com
mercurynews.com
modbee.com
msn.com
msnbc.com
nasdaq.com
nationalweekly.com
nctimes.com
newhavenregister.com
news.com.au
newsday.com
newsweek.com
nhregister.com
nj.com
nola.com
nynewsday.com
nypost.com
nypostonline.com
nysun.com
nytimes.com
ocregister.com
opinionjournal.com
oregonmag.com
orlandosentinel.com
pcworld.com
pnj.com
post-dispatch.com
post-gazette.com
postwritersgroup.com
readexpress.com
realclearpolitics.com
realestatejournal.com
rockymountainnews.com
sacbee.com
sacunion.com
seattletimes.nwsource.com
sfgate.com
sitepoint.com
sjmercury.com
spectator.org
spokesman-recorder.com
sportsillustrated.com
sportsillustrated.cnn.com
si.com
stamfordadvocate.com
startribune.com
startupjournal.com
statesmanjournal.com
sun-sentinel.com
sunspot.net
theatlantic.com
thewbalchannel.com
time.com
timesdispatch.com
toledoblade.com
tribune.com
tribune-review.com
trivalleyherald.com
todaysthv.com
victorhanson.com
washingtondispatch.com
washingtonpost.com
washingtontechnology.com
washingtontimes.com
washtimes.com
washpostco.com
wnd.com
worldnetdaily.com
worldpress.org
wral.com
wsj.com
wsjbooks.com
wsjclassroomedition.com

Or are you simply trolling for blog hits?

[reaganairport]

The really worrisome aspect of the incident:

While I would personally love to bash Ms. Maddow for taking things out of context or asking unfair hypothetical questions, her interview was generally fair and Dr. Paul seemed hapless and unable to clearly state his positions on civil rights and discrimination in the brief exchange.

(emphasis added)

He needs to get his act together, PDQ.

[RichInOC]

[Fantasywriter]

Okay, how’s this. Just as soon as the MSM stops glossing over Jupiter-sized gaffes on the part of Democrats, we’ll start caring about moon-of-Pluto-sized gaffes on the part of our candidates. Deal?

[whatisthetruth]

If you can't take the heat, then stay out of the kitchen. This will not go away until and unless Rand Paul articulates his position in a more forthcoming way. Hiding behind the skirts of the cowardly GOP bosses is not going to cut it. Wonder if they're the ones behind the sudden Rand Paul cancellation, I wouldn't doubt it.

[Longbow1969]

We are not even remotely close to being a libertarian nation. I’d have been far more comfortable with Rand as a libertarian leaning conservative were it not for the fact that his father is Ron Paul who is a certified nutcase.

It is just far too likely that Rand believes pretty much the same sorts of things his Dad does whether he admits it or not. There are going to be all manner of skeletons pouring out of this closet, and were liable to find out Rand associated with Truthers, anti-war moonbats, etc, etc.

Republicans should run conservative Republican candidates, not libertarians and certainly no one from the Paul family.

And yes, of course I’d vote for Rand over the Democrat. My point is this just wasn’t one of the better candidates we could have put forward. An unconventional candidate is fine, but a Paul?

[LA Conservative]

I think most conservatives and libertarians should study the enemy more closely, as they always set traps to confirm their stereotypes. The one that Rand Paul got into trouble with was the Civil Rights amendment which began to grow the huge government entitlement complex. Of course the institutional segregationist policies were wrong and yes, the Republicans were instrumental in passing it, but this is also where Barry Goldwater was philosophically correct, but politically on the wrong side. Doctrinaire approaches will inevitably blow up, as it did with Paul.

[Cu Roi]

I went to your blog to read the full thing. You quote Sen. Cornyn as saying “Novice candidates occasionally stumble on questions."

A fuller version of the quote is “...I'm sure my experience, that you see novice candidates occasionally stumble on questions. I think he's clarified his position. But I think he's done the right thing...I think he needs to be talking to the voters back in Kentucky, the people who actually will be able to cast a ballot on whether he's elected as the next United States senator or not."

So you take the "stumbling" part of the quote, but neglect to include the part where Cornyn says that Dr. Paul has clarified his position and should be talking to the actual voters. So considerable context that would be more favorable to Paul is lost in your synopsis. Why?

Also, because Cornyn's use of the word "novice" is used mid-sentence, it should be in lower-case if you are going to use quotation marks, not capitalized as you have it. But that part doesn't affect the context; it's just sloppy journalism. After second thought, maybe a media career, perhaps at NBC or the NYT, might be a good fit for you after all.