Not so fast, says Eugene Robinson

[Fozz]

Not so fast, everybody. Rand Paul can't abruptly disavow the extremist views on civil rights that he's been espousing for years and expect us all to just move along. Was he lying then? Is he lying now? Or has the Tea Party movement's newly crowned Mad Hatter changed his mind?

Republican crisis managers wisely didn't allow Paul to stray within range of the Sunday talk shows, but they can't keep him hidden away in some Kentucky cave until November. Sooner or later, the Senate candidate is going to have to answer a direct question: Was he being untruthful on the occasions when he said the federal government has no authority to outlaw racial discrimination in private businesses such as restaurants? Or is he being untruthful now in claiming he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

htt p://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052402991.html

Rand will HAVE to have a way to respond to such questions, because I highly doubt he can just escape from this controversy. The MSM won't let him.

Rand continues to get terrible coverage from the most important media sources, so the bleeding clearly hasn't stopped.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Extremist? But he's right. I mean, eliminating the Fair Housing Act and ADA would, in the longrun, be beneficial to everyone.

[corsair]

Everyone interested in debunking accusations of "Extremism" should read "Extremism, or The Art of Smearing", by Ayn Rand, in her book "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal".

I will push this book on the forum until my keyboard breaks.


http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listi...condition=used

Used from $3.50

[Nathan Hale]

John Coryn answered this best on Meet the Press when he said (and I'm paraphrasing) that Paul never backed away from what he said. Paul still acknowledges the academic constitutional question, but admits clearly, as he has from the start, that he would have voted for the CRA and marched with Martin Luther King Jr.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Rand will HAVE to have a way to respond to such questions, because I highly doubt he can just escape from this controversy. The MSM won't let him.

Rand continues to get terrible coverage from the most important media sources, so the bleeding clearly hasn't stopped.

EVERYTHING is the end in Fozz's world.

"Next poll will show Paul's lead shrinking" he says before it expanded. Or "that (last) debate helped Grayson huge."

Makes the fears of 'Chicken Little' seem well-founded.

[Cowlesy]

I stopped reading at "Eugene Robinson."

[sailingaway]

htt p://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052402991.html

Rand will HAVE to have a way to respond to such questions, because I highly doubt he can just escape from this controversy. The MSM won't let him.

Rand continues to get terrible coverage from the most important media sources, so the bleeding clearly hasn't stopped.

He already has it, he just has to stick to it. He used it with that channel 11 interview. He said, 'you have to distinguish between discussions of principles that apply to any law I actually would be voting on and discussion of a theoretical utopian government structure which may not be a realistic transition from where we are today. I can have the theoretical discussion with you, but it isn't going to be a factor in my votes. The votes I am going to have are going to be on....." And he specifically mentioned social security and medicare, saying they were examples of something he might not have wanted created but now people have been paying into them for generations, it isn't a matter of 'getting rid of them' it is a matter of looking at the demographics realistically, and fixing them, before they go bankrupt.

It wasn't exactly those words, however, it was pretty good.

Heck, Bachman got out off saying if she agreed with him simply by saying 'I'm not going to discuss Rand Paul's positions, I have to concentrate on my own race.' It is just a matter of saying, 'not a topic of discussion' and sticking to it.

[Brett85]

I stopped reading at "Eugene Robinson."

Exactly. Rand doesn't need to answer to that race baiter. Let MSNBC keep bashing him. It will only help him.

[MsDoodahs]

I stopped reading at "Eugene Robinson."

Smart. Very smart.

[Mica Sims]

Jack Conway is playing with fire trying to get people to pay attention to him without asking any tough questions. My guess is he will continue to avoid the tough questions about his support for Obama and Obama's policies because that ship has already sailed. Kentucky didn't vote for Obama in 2008 when he said he was a moderate. We darn sure aren't going to vote for him in 2010 when he is trying to gain even more support for his leftist views.

Jack won't have to take much heat for ObamaCare, deficits, cap and trade, card check, etc. because no one takes them seriously in Kentucky. Jack appears to be a dead duck in this race. The sure sign that his status isn't changing is that no one cares to ask him what he believes.

http://micadaily.blogspot.com/2010/0...other-day.html

[TruthisTreason]

The sure sign that his status isn't changing is that no one cares to ask him what he believes.

http://micadaily.blogspot.com/2010/0...other-day.html

The White House is meeting with GOP leaders today in an attempt to barter a deal on Cap and Trade and Immigration Reform, I wonder if Jack would like to chime-in on that?

[ARealConservative]

Debbi Downer with another doom and gloom post.

shocker!

[mrchubbs]

Eugene Robinson is having a live chat to take questions on this horrid article at 1pm eastern (about 20 minutes from now):

http://live.washingtonpost.com/opini...-05-18-10.html

Here was my submitted question:

-------------------------------------
Eugene,

Have you stopped beating your wife?

It's time to start talking about real issues that matter in 2010, not completely settled law that was passed 45 years ago.

Paul has unequivocally stated that he would not introduce legislation to repeal the Civil Rights Act. He has also stated that he "abhors racial discrimination and would have worked to end segregation."

Libertarianism is the antithesis to racism.

So my real question to you is:

Why isn't that enough for you?

------------------------------------------

Maybe some others here would like to submit some questions too?


Enjoy!

[Carole]

I agree with Walter E. Williams, Rand should stick by his principles, but he needs a very short and clear answer to these questions.

[RM918]

Of course he'll say 'Not so fast', he's terribly upset that this smear hasn't stuck and wants to see Rand implode! Fortunately, Robinson can't do anything about that.

[lordindra3]

Yeah, who cares what the WaPo says. They are historically a VERY liberal newspaper. Who cares?! Of course liberals are going after him! KY is what is important.

Rand will eventually have to answer this question again in debates, but then Rand has to just turn to the complete destruction of our country by the policies of Jack Conway and Co. and he will just call out ConMan and quote what many considered the saying that got Reagan elected "just ask yourself, if you believe that you are better off then you were, then dont vote for me. But if you believe we are far worse off, then you should give me your vote..."... Rand should say something along those lines.