Rachel Maddow ambushes Rand Paul on Civil Rights Act of 1964 (segregation), page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times

reply posted on 19-5-2010 @ 11:16 PM by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by Misoir

I agree...I don't think he's racist either. That's why I titled the thread as an ambush...because that's exactly what it looked like.

You could tell he wasn't prepared for the questioning...especially the hit piece that was put together right before he walked out. He's a novice at the politics thing...and it showed in this interview...he didn't handle himself well.

This is going to be used against him...it's what happened to his old man.

It's going to hurt him just as it did his dad.

I like many of his stances....Auditing the Fed, Campaign Finance Reform, Anti-war, etc.

Cripes, this is why i HATE politics.

[edit on 19-5-2010 by David9176]

I dunno. I watched it and she did ask yes or no questions. If he is a man of his beliefs, then there should be no issue. He should know what his beliefs are and be able to answer a yes or no question with a simple answer? I am not saying it was not an ambush but it seems to me that when you cannot answer yes or no about what YOU THINK, then the problem is all yours. Maybe I am wrong?

reply posted on 19-5-2010 @ 11:17 PM by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by hotbakedtater

He has to have handlers and a team, please do not expect me to swallow he was not prepared for this, he just won the nod the gloves are OFF.

I'm not expecting you to believe anything. I was expressing my OPINION to Misoir...not you. Sorry if you were offended.

Me too! And I am no where near offended, this is just a debate all of us have opinions here, I love reading yours a lot. We just really disagree about Rand Paul.

And we can all respond to the posts, that is what is so fun about message boards. Everyone can participate no matter how they feel.

It almost seems like some people are coddling rand due to his being the genetic offspring of the great Ron Paul. I tend to like a lot of what Ron and Rand say, just not enough to make me vote for them or think they are special or untypical.

reply posted on 19-5-2010 @ 11:29 PM by David9176

reply to post by hotbakedtater

It almost seems like some people are coddling rand due to his being the genetic offspring of the great Ron Paul.

I think that's a reasonable statement...and the reason for that is that Ron Paul is OLD. His days are numbered and people are hoping that his son can carry on the message he gives. He's just no where near as polished as his father.

I have to admit that I am looking for who will be the next great leader to get this country out of the rut....I think everyone here is.

I still have a job, luckily, but I haven't had a raise in 2 years because of the economy, and I lost my former job because of outsourcing (NAFTA) to Mexico. We actually trained our replacements who didn't even speak English. Try training someone to take your job....it's not fun. Wasn't a happy time for me to say the least...although I don't place blame on those we were training...the real blame was the greedy ass stockholders of our company who realized they could get a jump in stock prices by outsourcing.

Small businesses have historically gotten this country out of recessions...yet they can't compete because our tariffs are too low. It's killing us and it's the reason our manufacturing is nearly gone.

We have to raise tariffs...I've stated it 1000 times and will probably do it 1000 more!

The things I would like to happen just aren't happening

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 06:06 AM by mishigas

reply to post by hotbakedtater

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Who cares if he is a racist, I am more concerned with his anti female stance, and his being a Christian and using these issues to Pander for cheap and easy votes in his home state.

So you are concerned with him 'being a Christian'? And the fact that that may help him gain votes?

It sounds like you don't think Christians have the right to be fairly represented. Why is that?

And I don't see him as being 'anti-female' at all. Where in the world did you come up with that notion??

You are totally skewing his views on private rights. He clearly stated that, while he is against discrimination of any kind, he still supports free speech. That means allowing speech which is objectionable. All voices must be given the same opportunity to be heard, even if their views are objectionable.

It's a difficult position, and one that is easy to misrepresent, but then, it's not for everyone...only those who do not live by soundbites.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 06:12 AM by mishigas

reply to post by David9176

David

I actually think that Rand handled himself quite well. His message is clear, to clear thinkers. That excludes about 90% of voters. Unfortunately, that 90% is easily manipulated by the MSM.

Rand needs to get a 'friendly' medium in which he can get his message out without the constant sniping by the MSM in their attempt to score 'gotchas' against him. Does such a medium exist? Maybe talk radio, for starters.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 09:53 AM by lonestranger

I think he did pretty well considering the subject and the way she tried to use lawyer tactics to make him look bad.

I think (IMO) there IS a right for business owners to refuse service if they feel they need to. An example, take smokers, they come in all races and religions. Should the state/government step in and tell a business owner he can't have smoking in his club anymore?

What if your a black club owner and every Saturday night you have a "dance contest night"... A group of white college kids come in and wanna get in the contest. You know has a owner this isn't going to be good. Maybe its better to ask them to leave than take that chance of maybe your property getting damaged, someone getting hurt, the police showing up (that's always good business).

What about a "gay" club... say a group of sailors on leave show up. Could be good business... a group of marines maybe not so good.

I could be wrong but I believe Rand is saying that the federal government shouldn't be interfering with business owners rights to run there businesses the way they see fit. You don't have to be racist to refuse service.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by lonestranger]

[edit on 20-5-2010 by lonestranger]

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 10:41 AM by OldDragger

reply to post by mishigas

You sound like Sarah palin! Ugh!
Stop rationalizing about Paul. He's a polititian, not a Saint.
ATS has showered the Paul name with so much mindless worship it's ridiculous! If he can't hold his own, he can't hold his own! Simple.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 10:48 AM by ModernAcademia

The War Continues
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Basically this is a full scare war against anti-war candidates, it's that simple
I made a thread about Dick Cheney himself being worried of Rand
They are trying to reduce him to a small time party like the libertarians
Watch the above link

I'm sorry but being impartial doesn't mean you are PRO whatever someone on TV says you are.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 08:25 PM by mishigas

reply to post by OldDragger

You sound like Sarah palin! Ugh!

Thanks for the compliment!

Stop rationalizing about Paul. He's a polititian, not a Saint.

Your comments make zero sense.

Been hitting the cooking sherry a little bit early, eh?

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 09:28 PM by GorehoundLarry

Well, well, well.....
All I'm going to say is:

Rand Paul kinda made the point that private businesses have a right to allow or disallow anyone they want in their facility.

Is he right? You goddamn right he is!! The liberal media is going crazy over this, claiming he's a racist and a bigot. Well, what about them? Civil rights should only relate to the African American community?

What about bathhouses that prohibit women?
What about the boy scouts prohibiting homosexuals?
What about the military prohibiting homosexuals?

I could go on but I won't.

Discrimination never ended. Equality that blacks preach is nothing but a myth while Affirmative Action is around.

Before I go off too topic and rant forever, I'll just end with: Rand Paul, you have my support any day.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 09:44 PM by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Well, well, well.....
All I'm going to say is:

Rand Paul kinda made the point that private businesses have a right to allow or disallow anyone they want in their facility.

Is he right? You goddamn right he is!! The liberal media is going crazy over this, claiming he's a racist and a bigot. Well, what about them? Civil rights should only relate to the African American community?

What about bathhouses that prohibit women?
What about the boy scouts prohibiting homosexuals?
What about the military prohibiting homosexuals?

I could go on but I won't.

Discrimination never ended. Equality that blacks preach is nothing but a myth while Affirmative Action is around.

Before I go off too topic and rant forever, I'll just end with: Rand Paul, you have my support any day.

I actually agree with him too. But I am very firmly opposed to wishy washy backpedaling avoidant pandering politicians, all of the above Rand Paul is. He needs to get behind his ideas and stay firm and strong in his opinion. This interview was bad for him, because he blew it, and he should have knew it.

No excuse for a politician in such a spotlight race (because of his father he KNEW he would have the entire nation on him IF he got the nod).

KY politics are historically dirty if Rand was a true KYian he would have known this. You have to be very firm in your beliefs to make it to the top of politics. I like my waffles from IHOP.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 10:01 PM by GorehoundLarry

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Agreed.

It was a good chance for a Republican to go on a liberal news outlet and make a name for himself. Actually try to prove not all Republicans are insane. Well, like you said, he blew it. I don't think this is going to blow over anytime soon and I doubt the liberals are going to let this go for a while.

reply posted on 20-5-2010 @ 10:15 PM by pavil

reply to post by TheOneElectric

I think he was trying to show that the Principle of Govt. mandating what a person or business can or can not do is a slippery slope. It's just his Libertarianism shining through.

Madow perverted that into "so your a racist" piece. He was just trying to say that when Govt. dictates what an individual can do, we all lose freedom.

I don't see him a racist at all, even though MSNBC sure is trying it's best to spin it that way. Wonder who called them on the phone...????

reply posted on 21-5-2010 @ 12:52 AM by sp00n1

whoa whoa whoa....

I think he did pretty good, all things considered. Of course hindsight is 20/20 and we would all have done things differently if we got to sit back and judge... but we didnt.

the entire establishment is out for this guy because he represents real change. a return of power to the people.

dont buy into all of the media bull#!

# rachel maddcow, and all the other neo-lib fascist nazis.

"do you support segregation?"

"of course not. i would organize boycotts and protests! but i would not ask the government to impose its values on 'free citizens' "

learn from your mistakes, keep it simple, dont buy into media hype

reply posted on 21-5-2010 @ 10:03 AM by mbkennel

Originally posted by Bobbox1980
Rand Paul came off as a weak pussy.

Rand needed to reframe the debate.

Rachel Maddow was trying to frame the debate to make Rand Paul look like a racist who supported racists in their discrimination of black people or the disabled.

Or somebody who doesn't support the 1964 Civil Rights act, and doesn't yet present a satisfactory alternative.

Rand Paul needed to reframe the debate in terms of individualism versus collectivism. The rights of the individual versus the collective good.

Except that in the real world, racism will be practiced and the consequences felt by actual individuals. Property owners are not the only Noble Individuals on the planet.

I will stand for individualism any day. I think racism is abhorrent, ignorant, and just plain stupid. At the same time do you think the shareholders of Walmart, a store in virtually every major city in the country, is going to vote to support discrimination against people because of their race or disability?

Hell no they won't, it is bad for business.

Will people and management at XXX-mart do it? You betcha.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^