Thank you Rand Paul

reply to post by TaxpayersUnleashed


If he's such a winner... Why did he cancel his interview on "meet the press" putting him in the same boat as Louis farakhan and a Saudi Prince?


Also... The issue isn't that he came right out and said he was a racist... The issue is that he is oblivious to civil rights issues, because his quote was " I abhor discrimination... It is absolutely the worst business decision to discriminate based on color of skin"


So it's now about civil rights at all for him.... It's about what's good for business...

Which means he is oblivious to civil rights out sided of the context of business.

I was worried about the younger Paul for a while. He certainly isn't his father. Many of his statements before the election seems too much along party lines.

Now that he has been elected we find out he has no media savvy whatsoever. And instead of looking for press opportunities that might paint him in a positive light, while avoiding negative ones he seems to be suffering from a case of foot in mouth disease. Certainly not a good thing for a politician.

I can't see him lasting long in that game unless he picks up his act or gets a Teleprompter and a press team.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


I don't think that Paul believes that the Civil Rights Act is wrong. What he was doing was use a philosphical argument to make a case and in the public sphere, that is foolish.

The public does not have the ability to intellectually process the nuance of political philosophy and Paul should have been smart to know that. He looks like an amature and frankly not ready for prime time.

On the BP thing, he never said that BP should not be held responsible for the clean-up. He said that he found the administration comments about their putting a "jack boot on the throat" of BP offensive. He was referring to the facist practice of the government forcing business to perform its whim and in that practice essentially nationalizing that business.

If you are familiar with history, Robert Bork made similar comments, attempting to show how smart he was by using philosphical arguments about the constitutionality of certain things, including slavery. He proved that being a brilliant lawyer is not certainly qualification to be on the supreme court, but judgement and temperment are equal to intellect.

I don't think Paul's comments have anything to do with the republican party, I also don't think that he has racist views. He was making subtle, philosophical arguments and he should have been smart enough that they would rip the bark off of him in the media and should also have been smart enough to understand that probably 80% of the folks listening would not understand what he was trying to do.

[edit on 24-5-2010 by dolphinfan]

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

The public does not have the ability to intellectually process the nuance of political philosophy and Paul should have been smart to know that. He looks like an amature and frankly not ready for prime time.

Paul had been getting mostly positive press from all sides for the whole race. Given he has never in his life had to deal with an attack like that he did an okay job. And he learned from it. His next press op with ABC went 350% smoother even though the same attack was brought up.

His comments on businesses and race show exactly why his politics are flawed. Freedom? Protection under the Constitution? "Don't tread on Me"?

Oh, a business that won't serve those who aren't Anglican or Caucasian will ultimately fail due to the fact it will not do well....

Please. Have you been to Alabama?

Disgustingly enough there are still parts of this country where a business that did that would do VERY well.....

Not the answer Rand. WRONG!