Posted on 05/26/2010 6:37:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Skip ahead to 4:30 of the clip. Between the racial politics involved, his duty as chairman to defend a Republican nominee, and bipartisan consensus that the Civil Rights Act was not only necessary but long overdue, he’s got a fine line to walk here. And it shows: When Tapper pressed him about this on ABC, he conceded that Paul’s position on discrimination by private businesses made him “uncomfortable” but refused to denounce it on grounds that, er, “I can’t condemn a person’s view.” (You can watch here.) In fairness, there’s really no smooth “spin” to be had in this case, which explains why Karl Rove reportedly encouraged Paul to back out of his “Meet the Press” appearance. Steele tried gamely in Tapper’s segment to steer the conversation onto safer ground, but couldn’t quite get there; Palin, when asked about Paul on “Fox News Sunday,” resorted predictably to complaining about media bias. The problem is that, even if you take the J.E. Dyer approach and emphasize that Paul’s not a racist, just a guy who worries about federal overreach, you run into this point from Sam Tanenhaus:
However attractive it may be just now to depict all political conflict as a neatly bifurcated either/or, with the heroic individual pitted against the faceless federal Leviathan, the truth is that legislative battles over civil rights laws were waged within government, and between competing incarnations of it, federal vs. state. Passage of the Civil Rights Act, as Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina observed last week, hinged on the Interstate Commerce Clause, which “was properly used by the courts and the Congress.”
The fact that the feds have since overreached doesn’t mean the feds should have no reach at all, and to argue that way at a moment when the GOP’s attacking ObamaCare as an abuse of the Commerce Clause is as dangerous as it is unnecessary. If the conservative take is that Congress took a mile in passing the individual mandate only because we gave them an inch by, um, letting them desegregate lunch counters, you’ve just raised the moral stakes on O-Care considerably for a whole lot of undecideds and not in a way that favors our side. The smart, and I think legally correct, way to defend the CRA while opposing the mandate is to follow Randy Barnett and Ace by arguing that the Thirteenth Amendment, not the Commerce Clause, gives Congress power to reach private actors in matters of racial discrimination. With race, as with religion, the normal constitutional rules don’t apply, and it’s the Constitution itself that says so. Read Ace, especially, for an elaboration on that point. It’s okay for the feds to operate a business (ask any GM shareholder) but it’s not okay for them to operate a church. The Establishment Clause makes a special exception because of the historical risk of religious persecution. It’s not okay for the feds to tell people whom they should associate with but it’s okay to tell business owners that they can’t racially discriminate. The Thirteenth Amendment makes a special exception because of the historical reality of America’s racial caste system. What’s ironic about Paul’s position is that in his own way he’s made the leftist mistake of reading the Constitution that he wished existed instead of the one that does. It’s a libertarian document, but it’s not perfectly libertarian. And a good thing, too.
I am ready for Ari Fleischer as chairman of the RNC. If only he would take the job. Over the past year and a half, he has had the most aggressive and powerful message about what we believe. He gets right back in the face of the MSM heads. If he weren't so good, they'd ask him back. THAT'S the kind of guy we need.
Have to agree on Blackwell. As Secretary of State of Ohio he protected the integrity of the election.
It is my understanding that Soros has funded far left radicals to run for SOS in as many states as possible.
Yeah the secretary of state project is bad news because its been so successful. Its been so successful because people don’t pay attention. They’ve installed 11 of the 13 radical secretaries of state where they’ve tried.
http://www.secstateproject.org/
For an idea of just how dangerous they are, check out Jocelyn Benson on wikipedia. She’s been groomed to steal elections.
What the Dem Party chair says after the Rand Paul discussion is outrageous and much more dangerous if poeople believe it: that the Republicans caused the economic meltdown and the Dems are helping us climb out of it.
First of all, I do not believe we are climbing out of it. Secondly, the Republicans did not cause it: it was Democrats who insisted on the subprime mortgage mess continuing that caused it. The Republicans tried to stop it, as all here know.
This is the most damaging lie, because people are suffering and want to blame someone, and which someone would be better than the already demonized George Bush?
Somehow we have to undistort that distorted history.
We need to spend seriously on getting attorneys as challengers in the blue states where fraud is commonplace.
We need attorneys present when the votes are counted.
If we don’t spend the money there we are doomed to suffer thru two more years of total corruption.
Get Alan on the red phone...
So Steele thinks Paul’s philosophy is misplaced “in these times.” That is, the times during which republicans are supposed to BEND OVER for democrats, cross the aisle, never offer real objections, get along and never, ever make the NY Times mad!! Well those “times” haven’t worked out very well, Mikey!! Unless, of course, you’re a professional at hiding under your desk in order to keep your senate seat. Mitchie the Kid comes to mind.
With Michael Steele running the GOP....its just more proof that too many Republicans are just “Democrats with jobs”
...for those interested. :D
JH(is)O....what a chump. :^/
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.