Posted on 05/23/2010 10:45:29 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
This whole fiasco boils down to three parts:
1.) Tea Party-backed Rand Paul needs to win the Senate seat, not engage in philospohical debates - at least not now. Do that later after the seat is won (which it will be). Why will it be won, regardless of the hit job on Rand Paul?
Because most people saw the establishment media pouncing on him simultaneously like a well organized machine - from both the left and the right - and they know that they were out to get him.
2.) Rand Paul himself has said that he is personally against racism, but he knows (as do most Americans) that laws cannot end racism. People are too mean? Pass laws that say that people must be nice to each other!? Not gonna work.
3.) Liberals like the Civil Rights Act not so much because it helps to end institutional racism, but because it is a law that empowers the federal government. It gives power to The State. Liberals reason thta The State can make us and force all to be one big happy family - even if we don't want to be.
As George Will said, the Civil Rights Act legislates morality, but in this case, liberals like this kind of morality being legislated.
But, as we all know, liberals don't like the states (or the feds for that matter) legislating on issues like marriage (saying no to same-sex marriage) or saying no to abortion being legal.
It is not Hank. I agree with Rand Paul on many things. Going on MS-NBC the night after winning the GOP primary or for that matter anytime and expecting to be treated decently is one area I do not agree with him nor McCain nor Graham nor any other Rino attempting to curry MSMediot favor.
Bullhockey. I say that Dr Paul went straight on Maddow, took the flack he knew was coming, from a no name network with less viewership than the Weather Channel, and used it to knock one out of the park the next morning with Stehpanopolous. Have you seen the viewership on the Stephenopolous interview? It is practically viral. A smart politician USES the media. There is a difference between that and sucking up to them.
You can imagine whatever you want about how well Rand Rino Paul planned this out. You are dreaming of course. But everyone has a right to their own dreams no matter how far fetched.
Yes, and bigoted lying loons can still make crap up about “RINO” and spew idiocy as long as they can fire up all five functioning neurons and log on.
Ain’t it just great to be living in the USA?
Laws can’t end racism, but they can guarantee that it can’t be practiced against an individual.
You sound angry that you ended up supporting a Rino. So it goes.
It’s ok when its their morality being legislated.
” I do not agree with him nor McCain nor Graham nor any other Rino attempting to curry MSMediot favor.”
.
Why do you continue to repeat this pile of straw?
Paul obviously didn’t attempt to ‘curry’ media favor; he set out to debate them.
Rand Paul is on the opposite end of the political spectrum from McCain and Graham; are you condemning him for this?
.
You confuse anger with contempt, and "RINO" with anyone who is not an RNC bootlicker. However like you said, I would not dream of dissuading you from your opinions, groundless and baseless as they may be.
I am criticizing a particular behavior pattern Rand Paul shares with McCain and Graham.
No, you are imagining something that doesn’t exist.
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.