Blogs » Politcs Plus » A dilemma for Rand Paul

Subscribe


Rand Paul seems to be a wonderful family man running for the senate in the state of Kentucky. Yesterday, I heard his opponent bring up Rand Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights and Americans with Disabilities Acts. As a studious observer of politics; I was surprised that Chris Matthews was not familiar with the views of Rand Paul. Chris is usually on top of issues like this. I am equally surprised that his republican opponent did not exploit this issue. That might account why his opponent lost by so much. This is also why Mitch McConnell does not want Rand Paul to represent the GOP.

Last night on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show, Rand Paul attempted to justify his position. He kept answering Rachel's hypothetical with a hypothetical of his own. Mr. Paul said he would have marched with Martin Luther king but he would have voted against the Civil Rights act, although he finds racism reprehensible...Rand Paul agreed with most of what was in the Civil Rights Act but he drew the line at the government forcing restaurants serving patrons they might object to. I really don't believe Rand Paul is a racist but his free market fundamentalist views won't allow him to take a more objective stance. One of the biggest issues of civil rights was the access to the lunch counter; it would not make any sense to march with Dr. King and still oppose equal access to lunch counters. Rand Paul seems to think that private enterprise would have desegregated on their own. Rand Paul tried to make it about the overreach of the commerce clause but you would think in the year 2010; everyone would consider that; established law.

Rand Paul has a plausible answer for him objecting businesses having to construct expensive ramps and elevators to accommodate handicapped workers or customers but the legislation allows for exceptions besides modifications to the bill would be better than just repealing the Americans with Disabilities act. This is not been an issue.

Rand Paul is lucky the election is not until November but overnight polls have Kentucky being a tossup state; instead the solid conservative state it normally is. This morning on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Harold Ford said he can see a situation where a CEO of a restaurant chain would be hesitant in placing a yard sign in support of Rand Paul or a PAC donation being objected to by its members. Rand Paul has nationalized this election unless he somehow puts a lid on it before the media makes it another George Allen "macaca" moment."

I think the GOP is afraid that Rand Paul will embolden the Tea Party and their efforts to repeal the 17th amendment and go back to the days when senators were elected by the legislature of a state. That’s pretty funny, activists want to take away the right to vote for their senator.

*Update***update**** This morning, Rand Paul told Laura Ingraham this morning that it wasn't a good political decision to go on the Rachel Maddow show because he thought he was treated unfairly... Blame the media! All Rachel did was play back his interview on NPR and his answers to the Louisville Courier, to which he had no objection. The greetings were quite friendly but the 15 minute interview went stale and a little hostile when she would not accept his nuance as an answer.

But an hour ago in an interview with the USAToday, Rand Paul gave his best answer yet; by saying that"I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

"Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws.

"As I have said in previous statements, sections of the Civil Rights Act were debated on Constitutional grounds when the legislation was passed. Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years."