The American Spectator

MikeN| 5.20.10 @ 4:14PM

You are underestimating Conway's chances. Bunning was winning comfortably in the 60-40 range when the media just declared him crazy and he squeaked through on Election day.

W. James Antle III| 5.20.10 @ 4:36PM

Maybe, but I think 2010 is a very different political climate than even 2004. But Paul will definitely find his views cariactured by the media.

ggoblue| 5.20.10 @ 7:32PM

yes it is very different...the liberals are trying to demonize 60 percent of the electorate...they will crash and burn for it.

the tea party is a breeding ground for the conservative candidates of the future.

Thor| 5.21.10 @ 9:40PM

Those like Paul and his father who are fighting for a smaller government and our constitution are winning the battle. And the liberal media is scared to death. By the time November rolls around I honestly think the people will back Paul. Our country is beginning to wake up to the erosion of our civil liberties and good young conservatives are doing a great job educating the American public. I find it very encouraging.

Max| 5.20.10 @ 4:21PM

I read Sen. Kyl's comments as critical of Rand Paul, essentially saying that he's speaking like a college student with no sense of the import of his words.

William R| 5.20.10 @ 4:51PM

Rachel Maddow was one of the few TV talking heads to give Ron Paul a fair shake. The people at FAUX news were horrible. Rand announced that he's running on her show and I suspect he never thought she would start talking about the Civil rights act. MSNBC is a joke and now Rand Paul knows it.

tonypal| 5.20.10 @ 9:14PM

Wow, "FAUX news." How clever.

Smitty| 5.20.10 @ 10:15PM

That'll teach Rand Paul to trust MESSNBC! He's a fool if he thinks he has friends there.

guyfawkes| 5.21.10 @ 3:16PM

no worry, few who think pay any attention to Maddow.... and altho' Title II addressed a revolting situation it truly was a clear over extension of federal power. Idealism vs reality is always an interesting argument.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 5:06PM

We are in a Media War .

The tide is turning against The Liberal Mainstream Media ,which attempts to marginalize and damage the credibility of those ,who stand in the way of their agenda.

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.

Remember In November.

around the track| 5.20.10 @ 5:24PM

This is just another example of how a Republican has to apologize for off the cuff, innocuous comments in contrast to Democrats who are given a pass for truly offensive statements and beliefs. I say Paul should just give them the bird!

Michael | 5.20.10 @ 5:28PM

Just because the MSM doesn't like Paul, does not mean Kentucky is going to elect a lib(who vocally supports Obamacare) in a year when lib's in Red States are dead meat.

bondirotta| 5.20.10 @ 5:40PM

Here is what Rand wrote in 2002:

"A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination," wrote Paul, "even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin. It is unenlightened and ill-informed to promote discrimination against individuals based on the color of their skin. It is likewise unwise to forget the distinction between public (taxpayer-financed) and private entities."

He went on record eight years ago defending the right of restaurants to refuse to serve black customers.

This will be brought up again and again and again and again. There will be more soundbites surfacing in coming days and weeks and months.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:37PM

Bring it on.

At least in a State like Kentucky, European-Americans are moving slowly and surely away from the Trotskyite positions on Race.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:37PM

Crawl back under the slimy DNC rock you call home, loser.

William Tucker| 5.20.10 @ 6:00PM

The main provision of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was "public accommodations." I don't think there's any question that a restaurant that opens itself up to serve the public can be allowed to discriminate against anyone who comes in - except for obvious, neutral criterea such as "no shirt, no shoes, no service." If a restaurant wants to incorporate itself as a private club, charge membership and serve only members, I suppose it can although there are still some limitations and they are not going to do much much business.

The really important landmark was the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which ended discrimination at the polls. Once African-Americans started voting they gained political power and all this other stuff became irrelevant. There are now hundreds and hundreds of black elected officials throughout the South and segregation is hardly an issue anymore. The right to vote is enshrined in the Constitution. I assume that Ron Paul and Rand Paul have no problem with that.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 6:33PM

"I don't think there's any question that a restaurant that opens itself up to serve the public can be allowed to discriminate against anyone who comes in - except for obvious, neutral criteria such as "no shirt, no shoes, no service.""

But there absolutely is a question. Nothing in the Constitution authorizes the Feds to regulate local businesses in such a manner whether they are a public accomidation or not. If you believe it does then please cite the Article and section. And since this is a conservative website, I trust you won’t offer up the liberals’ favorite part of the Constitution to contort beyond recognition, the interstate commerse clause. This is clearly a state and local issue. Federal encroachment was a blatantly unconstitutional power grab.

Nate| 5.20.10 @ 7:16PM

It does not need explicitly to be stated in the Constitution, you dumb ass.

Public accommodations are just that: PUBLIC. Because they are public, the government has an interest in protecting the rights of all citizens in that sphere.

The fact that you don't understand this shows you have some basic misunderstandings about the relationship between the private and the public in our society.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 8:42PM

For the Feds to do it they ABSOLUTELY DO have to be explicitly granted the authority. It is call enumerated powers doctrine. It is what CONSERVATIVES believe.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 8:53PM

I didn't realize until reading further down that Nate doesn't consider himself a conservative.

tonypal| 5.20.10 @ 9:27PM

Nate, before you go off half-cocked, calling people names, you ought to educate yourself a bit. Since you have not yet acquired the good sense to study the issue, I will refer back to my 1st year Con Law course from law school to help you along.

The mere fact that something is "public" does not mean it automatically falls under the provisions of the civil rights act. If your interpretation was correct, then there would be no such thing as private enterprise, since all private enterprise is presumably open to the public.

The Civil Rights Act is implicated if and when the private enterprise, operating in the public sphere, is found to be engaging in interstate commerce. Now, everyone here except presumably you understands that the Supreme Court has essentially bastardized the meaning of the commerce clause, but there are times when it is applicable.

I would suggest you read Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964), or perhaps have someone explain it to you. Either way, you will gain some understanding of the issue. Then you can discuss the matter intelligently. Until then, if you persist in name calling, you will only expose yourself and your lack of knowledge.

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 10:21PM

I think "Nate" aka Liberal Screeder has some basic misunderstandings about the Constitution; it's just an impediment to Marxists like him and Obammy.

Yeah, Red, I would say "Nate" doesn't consider himself a Conservative! The troll's a Kool-Aid swilling Progressive/Marxist moron .

2Anglico| 5.21.10 @ 9:05AM

There is a big difference between Public and Open to the Public. I guarantee 99.9% of all restaurants are PRIVATELY owned. Public refers to GOVERNMENT ownership, you know, like the Public schools.

Matt| 5.21.10 @ 5:08AM

Red is pretty clearly a troll here from the libtard community to embarrass the Tea Party movement. Ignore him.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:35PM

If the Tea Party Movement can't even stand up for the Constitution and Freedom of Association for the owners of Private Property, of what use is it?

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:36PM

Buzz off, bigot.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 6:23PM

Jim, I understand what you are saying, but the Civil Rights Act was blatantly unconstitutional regardless of what someone thinks about an absolute libertarian right to voluntary association. While I get not leading with it, if pressed what is a constitutionalist supposed to say about the CRA?

While you could argue that a constitutionalist shouldn't lead an effort to initiate a repeal of the CRA, I'm not sure how he could swear off supporting such an effort without being hypocritical.

Michael | 5.20.10 @ 6:24PM

"You are underestimating Conway's chances. Bunning was winning comfortably in the 60-40 range when the media just declared him crazy and he squeaked through on Election day."
That was six years ago. Times have changed...MSM influence is waning.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 6:25PM

Jack Conway :
" There is a clear choice in the Kentucky Democratic primary for U.S. Senate – I support health care reform and Daniel Mongiardo does not….

I support the Employee Free Choice Act…

I believe that undocumented workers who want to emerge from the shadows of the underground economy and participate in American life as legal residents should be able to eventually become citizens…

With official unemployment over 10% in Kentucky and nationwide right now we need a level playing field for workers based on prevailing wage requirements and standard workplace safety rules. "

David Freddoso ,Washington Examiner :

" Along with “card-check,” that last one about “prevailing wage” is political speak for: “Hi, I’m a union tool who will happily accept 20 percent unemployment if it helps the AFL-CIO.”

Conway seems a bit too proud that he supports a law that 60 percent of Kentuckians want to repeal. And while I’d give his immigration views a more sympathetic hearing, I really don’t think Kentuckians are going to support a pro-immigration-amnesty candidate, considering that 65 percent of them support Arizona’s new immigration law. This is why, despite Conway’s demonstrated fundraising prowess — which was mostly a creation of Washington Democrats anyway — the campaign against him will require no creativity at all, just a few months of hard work and a lot of money. "

C Bowen| 5.20.10 @ 6:27PM

Mr. Tucker,

As much as you are correct, a serious conservative recognizes the right of free association--a Men's Club, say at a certain golf course like Augusta National, has a traditional right to exclude whomever it chooses. A restaurant is no different.

It's theoretical, of course, but to the latter point the franchise in a republic should be severely restricted to, lets say, property owners.

If you can point me to the place in the Constitution that grants a right to vote--please do.

The idea that any group, defined by race (e.g. all white men can vote, rather than all propertied men), or gender, should get the right to vote, is ludicrous.

Nate| 5.20.10 @ 7:13PM

The Constitution doesn't outlaw -- say -- someone tying you up and dumping you over the side of a boat in the middle of a river. But it the government certainly would prosecute anyone for doing it, because there are other LAWS besides the Constitution.

It's incredible that this sort of thing needs explaining, but as Tea Baggers continue to demonstrate, basic civics is not something many Americans are all that familiar with.

C Bowen| 5.20.10 @ 7:45PM

Nate;

Your nomination to the Supreme Court is forthcoming.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 8:48PM

Laws against murder are at the state level, and have nothing to do with the Constitution.

Talk about needing basic civics.

(There are federal laws against murder such as killing federal employees in the performance of their duty, but the increasing federalization of law enforcement is something true conservatives bemoan.)

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 10:25PM

"Nate" the Liberal Screeder is a fine piece of foul-mouthed human excrement. You do Marxists proud, jackass.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 10:41PM

Spoken like a typical liberal pseudo-intellectual elitist bore there Sport .

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 6:35PM

The right to Women's Gyms .The Girl Scouts , Senior Citizen Residences ,etc. Miss Black America ,etc.

C Bowen| 5.20.10 @ 8:04PM

It does seem pretty obvious if one employs a discarded faculty called logic.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 6:46PM

The same liberal media agendists and liberal political agendists that have attempted to slander ,denigrate and marginalize ,Rush Limbaugh ,Sarah Palin and The Tea Party Rebels are trying to do the same to Rand Paul .

We ,Tea Party Rebels don't allow liberal agendist racebaters to " Define " Us nor do we allow them to define Sarah Palin ,Rush Limbaugh or Rand Paul .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

Remember These Racebaiters In November .

Nate| 5.20.10 @ 7:21PM

Who are the race baiters again?

Glenn Beck is a racist slob, as is Limbaugh. Palin engages in constant dog-whistle bigotry.

I don't get that vibe from Rand Paul; I think he thinks he's in a philosophy debating club and not an election, but then again I can't read anyone's mind.

The bigotry among Tea Baggers is obvious to everyone. No one is fooled, and you don't even have to wink and nudge anymore. It's all out in the open.

So yeah, I do hope normal, middle class folks remember the Baggers and the right wing radio disc jockeys in November and I hope they choose sanity and the 21st century over the nightmares of the racist past.

Bydand76| 5.20.10 @ 8:02PM

Nate is angry because Purpleguy didn't come over to play warcraft tonight.

Nothing like a bloviating idiot to make one smile now is there.

Honestly!

Pro Libertate!

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 10:27PM

Nate=Liberal Screeder=Purpleguy=losers.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 10:43PM

More Of your Toughie Girlieman Bravado .

Perch Sweetie !

JmsA| 5.21.10 @ 9:36AM

Nate,

Thank you. I knew that if I kept on scrolling down far enough, sooner or later I would find a racial screed from you. You libs are just so predictable. And by the way, regarding your comment about the government protecting the citizens, does that include the citizens of Arizona against the illegal alien criminals from down south? "The bigotry among Tea Baggers is obvious to everyone," as it also yours.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:33PM

The "Racist" Past was AWESOME compared to now, for everyone but people who care more about Anal Sex than any other issue.

Even Blacks were better off because when Black Men are kept under control, Black on Black crime is FAR lower.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:35PM

Nice try, Marxist troll; your destructive Plantation Politics have destroyed the Black family. More black babies are aborted by percentage of population than any other ethnic group, and young black women have the highest numbers of illegitimate births in the country.

The Democrat controlled inner cities are the Democrat plantations of today; white Liberals are racists.

Nate| 5.20.10 @ 7:10PM

Mr Antle seems right here.

I like Rand Paul and I like his father; they seem like decent fellows, and you have to admire a principled libertarian.

Principled libertarianism is -- as they used to say about marxism -- might look nice on paper, but in practice it doesn't always work.

Using the commerce clause to desegregate the south was not ideal; it clearly stretched the Constitution; but, it needed to be done.

Now, America is not an apartheid country anymore. Relations between the "races" are better than ever, and one reason is the civil rights laws of the 60s and early 70s.

I hope Paul demonstrates some wisdom and good judgment on this issue. Although I would vote for the Democrat, Paul deserves an election about actual issues facing people in Kentucky and this country. But first he's got to demonstrate he has a deeper grasp of American history and culture than he's showed so far on this civil rights issue.

S.L. Toddard| 5.21.10 @ 1:29PM

A lot of abuse has been addressed to Nate here, some of it deserved, but everyone should stop for a moment and read his position distilled:

"Using the commerce clause to desegregate the south was not ideal; it clearly stretched the Constitution; but, it needed to be done."

True conservatives fear allowing the government to "stretch the Constitution", whether they are de-segregating lunch counters or eavesdropping on American citizens "to protect" them. Liberals believe the good that government can do extra-constitutionality outweighs the dangers of abandoning the rule of law. Conservatives believe government should protect what is, liberals believe government should manifest what should be.

That is the dividing line.

S.L. Toddard| 5.21.10 @ 1:30PM

that should read: "the good that government can do extra-constitutionally"

Real American| 5.20.10 @ 7:20PM

Leftists always claim to be the purveyors of nuance but here again we see that they'd rather reflexively scream "RACIST!" every chance they get instead of trying to understand that something can be both unconstitutional and produce good results or be constitutional and produce bad ones.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:31PM

The Civil Rights Act didn't produce good results.

Even Blacks are CLEARLY worse off, because it disempowered Whites to such an extent that it stopped Blacks from imitating White cultural norms.

Tens of Millions of Blacks have grown up without fathers because of this.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:41PM

Correction: Tens of millions of Blacks have grown up without fathers because of racist White liberals like you. You deliberated supplanted Black fathers with welfare; you are responsible for the destruction of the Black family in our country.

Tim| 5.20.10 @ 7:28PM

How's this ?

Rand Paul :
“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.”

“My opponent's statement on MSNBC Wednesday that I favor repeal of the Civil Rights Act was irresponsible and knowingly false. I hope he will correct the record and retract his claims.”

“The issue of civil rights is one with a tortured history in this country. We have made great strides, but there is still work to be done to ensure the great promise of Liberty is granted to all Americans.”

"Yes, because I think the preponderance of the evidence was that we had some abhorrent things going on in our society—segregation, the Jim Crow laws...I think the south had failed and that the federal government did have a role in ending discrimination in all of these practices."

Next !

WendyG| 5.20.10 @ 7:34PM

>>W. James Antle III| 5.20.10 @ 4:36PM
But Paul will definitely find his views cariactured by the media.

And now the WH has chimed in. As a non-fan of Ron Paul, I was concerened when I heard Rand Paul's remarks today. And the contect of what he said aside, it was a boneheaded political gaffe. But there is no qucker way to get me to rally around Rand Paul than to have the liberal media and the WH machine attack him. And BTW-my black Conservative friends think this is much ado nothing. So I will defer to them and give Paul Rand the benefit of the doubt.

William R| 5.20.10 @ 8:34PM

Just saw these.

Barry Goldwater explains his vote against the 64 Civil Rights Act on Firing Line

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacJtYPHKiE

Milton Friedman defends Rand Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhgy0ymD-NI#t=3m08s

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 8:55PM

Actually Rand is backtracking too much. The CRA was blatantly unconstitutional. Period. End of discussion. No consistent constitutionalist can believe otherwise.

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 10:31PM

Paul's a newbie and he'd better watch what comes out of his mouth. I hope he's a quick learner because the Left would like nothing more than to take him down. This was an unforced error.
Madcow's loving it!

JmsA| 5.21.10 @ 10:58AM

Paul's unforced error on Madcow's show, which thankfully has relative few viewers, will blow over unless continues to make gaffes.

S.L. Toddard| 5.21.10 @ 1:33PM

Here is a position a constitutionalist could take that would be both constitutionally correct as well as politically correct (I am not condoning the position): "The CRA was unconstitutional - the federal government is not empowered by the constitution to desegregate private businesses. I would support, however, state laws or a constitutional amendment granting government that power".

Truthyness| 5.20.10 @ 9:28PM

80% of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act. Most of the Republican party supported it, in other words. Is Mr. Antle suggesting these were all "Rockefeller Republicans"?

The fastest way for Rand Paul to take himself down is to endorse the view that the Civil Rights act was unconstitutional and should not have been passed. That's the sort of thing that will find the Tea Party consigned to irrelevance in no time, if it follows down that path.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 10:35PM

"is to endorse the view that the Civil Rights act was unconstitutional"

But it was unconstitutional. If you believe otherwise then please point me to the Article and Section or Amendment that authorizes it. Get back with me when you find it. Thanks.

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 10:56PM

We know it was unconstitutional, Red--so was Roe v Wade. What's important here is that Rand Paul is elected in November, and it wouldn't be the first time one of our own was taken out by unforced errors. There's too much at stake to lose him.

Paul has to be more disciplined when he speaks or the Left will destroy him.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 11:24PM

I get what you're saying Nobama, but I'm not the one running. How do we fight the power of the PC Gestapo if we dance to their tune? It only empowers and emboldens them. Someone has to make a stand. Someone has to stop the cycle. If pressed on the constitutionality of the CRA, what is a Constitutionalist supposed to say?

Nobama| 5.20.10 @ 11:37PM

Red, we don't have the power to stop the Left--yet. The Leftist MSM is a potent adversary.
We need some victories under our belt first.

Rand's brand new at the political game; he's got to keep his eye on the prize! He could have remained true to his principles without causing controversy if he had been more artful in explaining his position; he's got to be smarter. The Constitution is not a suicide pact!

You think it's an accident this kerfuffle resulted from an MSNBC interview?

I don't.

tonypal| 5.20.10 @ 9:30PM

I posted this earlier, but I wanted our resident genius Nate to have another shot at reading it and responding. Let's just see if he can get through his response without the sophomoric name calling.

Nate, before you go off half-cocked, calling people names, you ought to educate yourself a bit. Since you have not yet acquired the good sense to study the issue, I will refer back to my 1st year Con Law course from law school to help you along.

The mere fact that something is "public" does not mean it automatically falls under the provisions of the civil rights act. If your interpretation was correct, then there would be no such thing as private enterprise, since all private enterprise is presumably open to the public.

The Civil Rights Act is implicated if and when the private enterprise, operating in the public sphere, is found to be engaging in interstate commerce. Now, everyone here except presumably you understands that the Supreme Court has essentially bastardized the meaning of the commerce clause, but there are times when it is applicable.

I would suggest you read Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964), or perhaps have someone explain it to you. Either way, you will gain some understanding of the issue. Then you can discuss the matter intelligently. Until then, if you persist in name calling, you will only expose yourself and your lack of knowledge.

Mary| 5.20.10 @ 9:48PM

I am from KY and have had some misgivings about Paul because I am not a big fan of his dad. However, he is not his father and I am researching his positions and paying close attention. I know people who have said they cannot support Conway because of his support of Obamacare. I also know people who will support him but, by and large, they are the most uninformed people I know. They have no idea what is going on in this country and still fall all over Obama. I pointed out to my mother that Conway will use this in campaign ads as well as paint him like his father. She said, "how far do things have to get before we don't give a sh## what Jack Conway says". Paul's website is very detailed about his positions. Conway avoids mentioning a lot of them.

Truthyness| 5.20.10 @ 11:20PM

Red, good luck getting all the acts that aren't explicitly authorized in the Constitution repealed. You stay busy tilting at your windmills, the serious people will try to get the possible done. If Rand goes your route, he's a cooked goose.

SoCon| 5.20.10 @ 11:24PM

Couldn't agree more!

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 11:36PM

So So"Con," are you admitting you don't believe in original intent and enumerated powers? That would be a curious position for a conservative.

SoCon| 5.20.10 @ 11:48PM

I believe in the Constitution like you, Red--but the Constitution won't do us much good if we are in the minority. The last sixteen months have been a nightmare, don't you think?
Sometimes you have to bend a little so you don't break.

Troll Watch| 5.21.10 @ 12:32AM

For Red this is all about preening in front of a mirror. You are wasting your time trying to get him to make distinctions and form political alliances. Rich Lowry has a nice take on this problem at National Review. I hope Rand Paul solves it before he gets a liberal elected Senator in Kentucky.

SoCon| 5.21.10 @ 2:35AM

Red is snotty, smart and wisdom challenged; he needs to grow up.
I hope Rand Paul is a fast learner.

Red Phillips| 5.20.10 @ 11:37PM

"the serious people"

You're right. That whole following the Constitution thingy is so unserious.

Mikeh| 5.21.10 @ 9:51AM

Y'know - your opinion doesn't mean squat. The Supreme Court has decided CRA is constitutional. That you think it isn't means zero. Get a grip loser.

2Anglico| 5.21.10 @ 10:12AM

Yeah, 5 black robed political appointees know better than the Founders. Read Jefferson's misgivings about the courts. 2 million abortions/yr thanks to SCOTUS. Can't wait till they find a foreign precedent to allow me to kill Granny.

Troll Watch| 5.21.10 @ 1:35PM

Here comes crazy Red again. Typical paleoconservative - he probably wants to put me in jail just because I'm sexually attracted to other men.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 4:53PM

You'd love it in jail. Trust me...

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 6:00PM

I'm sure you know a lot about jail love, Nate/Lib Screeder, Reggie, PurpleSEIUthug.

Red Phillips| 5.21.10 @ 4:56PM

No, I want you to repent of your sins and get saved.

Tim*| 5.20.10 @ 11:35PM

Rand Paul And We Tea Party Rebels know , "It's The Economy Stupid " .

The Tea Party Supports Rand Paul .
http://www.randpaul2010.com/

S.L. Toddard| 5.21.10 @ 7:21AM

But he would be better off returning to the rigorous message discipline that will keep him from having to make such statements in the future

Precisely.

Troll Watch| 5.21.10 @ 10:05AM

This would be a good time for Rand to join the Turd in a sneak attack on Sean Hannity. The two of them could begin by waiting for Debbie Schlussel to give them instructions. The Turd is a great tactician. Rand would be crazy not to follow his example.

somnolence| 5.21.10 @ 7:38AM

When was the last time a Republican running for any office in Kentucky received the majority of ANY minority bloc vote?

somnolence| 5.21.10 @ 8:14AM

And I'm talking about "racial minority" blocs. I certainly feel no qualms about bringing this up since the media has thrown it at the public for decades. Yes, it's 2010 and we're still a divided America along racial lines-certainly, a hyphenated America. The real political reality is that Paul has a 25 point lead over Conway. If Conway wants to make Paul's clumsy statement a cornerstone of the race I would imagine any conservative with a backbone would welcome it.

martin j smith| 5.21.10 @ 8:17AM

This would be my advice to Conservative/Republican candidates thinking of being interviiewed in any MSM stting: a) Think again, b) If you really must then get coaching from a media ( conservative type ) expert who can clue you in on the tricks of the trade. Do not make ANY off the cuff remarks except things like:
Excuse me but i have to go to the rest room.
Be at ease with your beliefs as long as you are aware that words matter and can be used against you in a pin drop.

JP| 5.21.10 @ 10:09AM

Martin,
You hit the nail on the head. What were Paul's handlers thinking? These people need to be focused, and limit Paul's MSM appearances to the absolute minimum. Paul has a huge target painted on his back. He and his advisors I hope realize that his target audience is the people of Kentucky, not the East or West Coast. They should ignore them, and focus like a laser on the issues of Kentucky. I hope they learnt thier lesson.

JP| 5.21.10 @ 10:11AM

Today is a perfect day for Rand Paul to hit his economic messages. The Euro is in free fall, and if it doesn't stop, the panic will soon spread here. Paul has an excellent oppurtunity to give his views on a)how to manage this crisis and b)how to prevent a future one.

bondirotta| 5.21.10 @ 12:22PM

You are right. And Rand spent this day defending British Petroleum and screeching how Obama is "un-American" for being so harsh on BP.

Can't hardly wait for next week's polling numbers.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 10:37AM

Tea Party Supported Pat Toomey In Pennsylvania is hammering the economy and unemployment.

Tea Party Rand Paul will get back on message and hammer the economy and unemployment ,as well

Like Da Man Say , " It's The Economy Stupid " !

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

Remember In November.

Oldefarte| 5.21.10 @ 11:33AM

Folks, these are typical leftists' attempts at imposing GUILT upon conservatives. Obama recently allowed Calderon and himself to DOUBLE-TEAM this country's guilt by labeling Arizona's immigration law rasism, gentrification, discrimination, disenfranchisement, etc. It's all about using GUILT as a weapon, so don't fall for liberals' bullexcrement!!!!!!!!

Nate| 5.21.10 @ 3:08PM

The idea that the Civil Rights laws of the 60s and 70s are unconstitutional is simply ridiculous.

The commerce clause, I would admit, is made to do more work than it was probably intended to do, but the benefits that legislation has conferred upon this country are definitely worth it.

Institutional racism effectively rendered blacks in the south second class citizens. Their rights were systematically denied by a network that included local governments AND privately owned businesses. Breaking that network was a powerful blow against the racist system of the south and prepared that region of the country to rejoin the civilized world.

I do not think that any of the justices now on the Supreme Court -- some of whom are far more conservative than most "main stream" conservatives (whatever that means these days -- would even consider repealing the provisions Paul has questioned or criticized, and the question becomes, What is with the Tea Party and the race issue?

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:28PM

"The commerce clause, I would admit, is made to do more work than it was probably intended to do, but the benefits that legislation has conferred upon this country are definitely worth it."

You mean benefits like people (including Liberals) bankrupting themselves to buy houses far away from Blacks?

"What is with the Tea Party and the race issue?"

What is it with Blacks and the race issue, that they support Government MANDATED Discrimination against Whites!

It's called "Affirmative Action", look it up...

Nate| 5.21.10 @ 3:50PM

Reggie --

Racists like you can always be counted upon to make these arguments. They hold a certain attraction for other bigots, but I won't have any truck with them.

You should look up the arguments made by southern white racists against desegregation in the 50s and 60s. You won't find much daylight between what they said then and what you're saying now.

Fortunately, your innings are up and the country has left behind people who think like you do.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:45PM

Nice try, Nate/Liberal Screeder; we know Reginald is really you, dumbtard.

White Liberal racists like you have destroyed the American Black family. You are a piece of Marxist garbage.

Democrats: The party of SLAVERY, SEGREGATION, SODOMY and SEDITION.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 4:48PM

The Democratic Party in its current form is against Slavery and Segregation, unfortunately in the case of Segregation.

They are in favor of those other two things, though.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:51PM

Stupid Screeder.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 4:46PM

"Fortunately, your innings are up and the country has left behind people who think like you do."

We'll just see about that...

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 4:25PM

Apparently , it's a lot less than Obama ,Who allowed his Racial Obsession to lead him to 20 years with Minister Jeremiah Wright ,Sport.

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 3:25PM

One of the basic issues here is that if the Government has the right to mandate discrimination against White Males, Private Property Owners CERTAINLY have the right to discriminate against whoever they please.

Just where does the Government get off saying they're the only ones who can discriminate?

Nate| 5.21.10 @ 3:52PM

Property rights are not absolute. Legitimate state interests have been held to supersede them quite often since the inception of the Republic. Racial discrimination has rightly been held to be something the state has an interest in preventing.

Nothing about any of this should be new to anyone with an adequate grade school education.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 4:28PM

Aaaand , Big Government has abused the living hell out of eminent domain , as well .

Reginald| 5.21.10 @ 4:50PM

"Legitimate state interests have been held to supersede them quite often since the inception of the Republic. Racial discrimination has rightly been held to be something the state has an interest in preventing. "

That is absurd. The very people who pretend to hold that the State has an interest in preventing racial discrimination also support the Government mandating discrimination against all Men and people of European descent.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:46PM

Once again, Nate/liberal Screeder is 'planting' a bigot on this thread. You're the racist, jackass.

Kramer| 5.21.10 @ 3:33PM

I can't believe the number of moronic comments posted on here supporting Paul. Not only are you people obviously uneducated and live in a bubble, but for some reason you seem to be proud of it.

Nate| 5.21.10 @ 3:56PM

All modern democracies produce nationalist, proto-fascist movements during hard economic times. In this country, such impulses usually manifest themselves as a witch's brew of white nationalism, nativist revanchism, know-nothing xenophobia, and reactionary backlash against liberal agendas that seek to increase the amount of political and economic autonomy available to the people. Such movements typically adopt the rhetoric of favoring "small government," but are blind to the ways in which so-called "small government" actually increases the power of the state vis-a-vis the individual by weakening the institutions (familial, educational, cultural, legal etc.) that mediate between him and state power.

Liberal Reader| 5.21.10 @ 4:17PM

The left has worked to undermine the family in almost every way possible. Nate needs to get help. He spends most of his time trying to project his flaws on others. Nate-get into troll rehab quick.

Nate| 5.21.10 @ 4:37PM

Nonsense.

Dad with a job is a fine thing for a family.

Dad with a union job is even better.

Child labor laws? Maternal leave? The five day work week? Over time?

Anyone? Anyone?

LIBERALISM.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 4:59PM

" In 2009, 7.9 million public sector employees belonged to a union,
compared with 7.4 million union workers in the private sector. The
union membership rate for public sector workers (37.4 percent) was
substantially higher than the rate for private industry workers (7.2
percent). Within the public sector, local government workers had the
highest union membership rate, 43.3 percent."

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:49PM

Liberal Reader is a Conservative now? Who knew?

Remember, Screeder--democrats are the party of SLAVERY, SEGREGATION, SODOMY and SEDITION.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 5:16PM

Oooooor , all modern democracies produce internationalist, proto-socialist movements during hard economic times. In this country, such impulses usually manifest themselves as a witch's brew of Black Liberation Theology , Communism , Post Colonial African Socialism, know-everything pseudo-intellectualist elitism, and deconstructionist backlash against conservative agendas that seek to increase the amount of political and economic autonomy available to the people. Such movements typically adopt the rhetoric of favoring BIG GOVERNMENT , but are blind to the ways in which BIG GOVERNMENT actually increases the power of the state vis-a-vis the individual by weakening the institutions (familial, educational, cultural, legal etc.) that mediate between him and state power.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 4:39PM

Yeah right, pseudo-intellect dweeb ,man of the world keisterhat.

And here those rascally rascals at The CBS/New York Times Polling declared We,Tea Party Rebels , better educated and wealthier than the general public.

Sooooorry !

JP| 5.21.10 @ 4:14PM

Perhaps few want to admit it, but Rand Paul played the Teaparties like fiddles. Paul has shown that he really is unelectable. He's making mistakes that I'd thought were things of the past. Not even Dan Quayle would make such unforced errors.

The Teaparty has quite a few independents and even people who voted for Obama. The Teapartiers are united in reducing federal spending, thoughtfull reforms of entitlements, and thoughfull reduction of the federal government's huge regulatory bureaucracy. Liberty is the foundation. But now isn't the time to point out problems with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Nor is it the time to complain about the 16th Amendment.

One really wonders how smat politically Rand Paul really is.

Nobama| 5.21.10 @ 4:50PM

It was ONE error, JP. Get over yourself.

Tim*| 5.21.10 @ 4:50PM

JP says ,
" One really wonders how " smat "politically Rand Paul really is. "

Rand Paul's "Smatter " than you.

mavigozler| 5.21.10 @ 10:58PM

I love it! Antle's previous piece on the election night victory of Paul was talking about Paul being the real catalyst for change, the Tea Party coming in droves to Washington like the Gingrich-led revolution of '94.

Now what we see is the implosion of Paul and all his kooky and racist supporters.

Forget the Rasmussen poll, in which questions are circuitously worded with the greatest bias to lead the the respondent to give the right-wing choice. Let's wait for the real polls (CBS-NYT, Politico, Quinnipiac, etc) to roll into Kentucky and that 25-point lead won't be a tenth of that, especially after that nut Paul talked about bringing back apartheid to America.

Paul has erred on MULTIPLE LEVELS by believing that "private property" is whatever its owner wants to do with it. If he really believes that, he will have to eliminate the planning and zoning commissions (or powers) of city and county (and possibly state) governments, and the codes and statutes that regulate the use of land, such as an homeowner in a neighborhood deciding not to use his lot to collect and store nuclear waste, next to a school or children's park. What a NUT Paul is!

BozObammy| 5.22.10 @ 12:47AM

Yeah sure! The "REAL" polls like CBS-NYT that oversample democrats by a margin of 10 and poll generic adults rather than the more accurate likely voters. What a joke!

Rasmussen is routinely more accurate than the BS spewing polls on the Left.

Conway's a Leftist creep who supports Card Check and union thuggery. Who needs violent Communist Union violence like Greece?
Read it and weep, libtard--Rand Paul will win big in November!