Sarah Palin Endorses Clint Didier For Senate

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

By November, this incident will be ancient history. If the Dems were smart, they would have held off on this story until mid-October or so.

From here on out, Paul's going to beat the drum of bailouts, spending, and health care; and that's what the voters care about. Not some silly academic/philisophic discussion on legislation passed ages ago.

I don't think there's anything trivial --then or now-- about the Civil Rights Act. You may feel that way, but I don't. And if it's so trivial, why does it keep coming up and why did Paul just cancel the biggest interview of his political career?

Surely Paul could have sat down with David Gregory on "Meet", allay all concerns during the first 15 minutes of the program and campaign, on the very issues you just mentioned, for the second 15 minutes on probably the most respected Sunday talk show. And I'll bet a shiny nickel that this story will still be hot come November. In fact, I think it's only going to grow whenever the Tea Party or Rand Paul's name is mentioned. Every time Paul speaks it becomes more and more apparent that his views are not within the mainstream.

Besides, his latest blunder is calling the president un-American for calling out BP and being too tough on them over the recent oil spill. Really Rand Paul, you're defending a British oil company for polluting American waters and affecting tens of thousands of American lives in the Gulf region? Just whose side is this dude on anyway?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I don't think there's anything trivial --then or now-- about the Civil Rights Act. You may feel that way, but I don't. And if it's so trivial, why does it keep coming up and why did Paul just cancel the biggest interview of his political career?

Surely Paul could have sat down with David Gregory on "Meet", allay all concerns during the first 15 minutes of the program and campaign, on the very issues you just mentioned, for the second 15 minutes on probably the most respected Sunday talk show. And I'll bet a shiny nickel that this story will still be hot come November. In fact, I think it's only going to grow whenever the Tea Party or Rand Paul's name is mentioned. Every time Paul speaks it becomes more and more apparent that his views are not within the mainstream.

Besides, his latest blunder is calling the president un-American for calling out BP and being too tough on them over the recent oil spill. Really Rand Paul, you're defending a British oil company for polluting American waters and affecting tens of thousands of American lives in the Gulf region? Just whose side is this dude on anyway?

LOL @ un-american. This story isn't going so long as he is dodging the media. He is not a smart guy at all.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I don't think there's anything trivial --then or now-- about the Civil Rights Act. You may feel that way, but I don't. And if it's so trivial, why does it keep coming up and why did Paul just cancel the biggest interview of his political career?

Surely Paul could have sat down with David Gregory on "Meet", allay all concerns during the first 15 minutes of the program and campaign, on the very issues you just mentioned, for the second 15 minutes on probably the most respected Sunday talk show. And I'll bet a shiny nickel that this story will still be hot come November. In fact, I think it's only going to grow whenever the Tea Party or Rand Paul's name is mentioned. Every time Paul speaks it becomes more and more apparent that his views are not within the mainstream.

Besides, his latest blunder is calling the president un-American for calling out BP and being too tough on them over the recent oil spill. Really Rand Paul, you're defending a British oil company for polluting American waters and affecting tens of thousands of American lives in the Gulf region? Just whose side is this dude on anyway?

I didn't say the issue was trivial. Property rights is extremely important. Again, that was his contention with the Civil Rights Act. But the issue and the law is settled, and in the end, I'm saying the voters will be on to more current, pressing issues. They're more concerned with the policies of fiscal insanity.

Now, this thing about being "mainstream" -- did it ever occur to you that people might be starting to see that "mainstream" political views is what got government to its current pathetic state? The republicans and democrats have been in complete control of everything for well over a hundred years, they've squandered and spent our money into oblivion and now have to borrow or print the money out of thin air and it's put us into bankruptcy.

Yes, Rand Paul is standing up for private business. That surprises you? This president wants a centrally-planned economy, works in direct opposition to the free enterprise system, and doesn't miss a chance to criticize, demonize, and make the case for outright control of the sectors of the economy that he and his minions don't particularly like. We've seen that already with the car industry, the health care industry, and the banking and finance industries.

If you believe that come November, the voters will forget all of that and instead focus on comments made to an obscure newspaper about legislation passed 46 years ago -- then hopefully the DNC will hire you as their national campaign director.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I didn't say the issue was trivial. Property rights is extremely important. Again, that was his contention with the Civil Rights Act. But the issue and the law is settled, and in the end, I'm saying the voters will be on to more current, pressing issues. They're more concerned with the policies of fiscal insanity.

Now, this thing about being "mainstream" -- did it ever occur to you that people might be starting to see that "mainstream" political views is what got government to its current pathetic state? The republicans and democrats have been in complete control of everything for well over a hundred years, they've squandered and spent our money into oblivion and now have to borrow or print the money out of thin air and it's put us into bankruptcy.

Yes, Rand Paul is standing up for private business. That surprises you? This president wants a centrally-planned economy, works in direct opposition to the free enterprise system, and doesn't miss a chance to criticize, demonize, and make the case for outright control of the sectors of the economy that he and his minions don't particularly like. We've seen that already with the car industry, the health care industry, and the banking and finance industries.

If you believe that come November, the voters will forget all of that and instead focus on comments made to an obscure newspaper about legislation passed 46 years ago -- then hopefully the DNC will hire you as their national campaign director.

As with most political discussions here, I don't think there's much that separate our views. i believe we agree on more than we tend to lead on. After reading your post and instead of going point for point, let's just say I agree with about 90% of what you said. The other 10%, I have to stay true to my DNC talking points I mean, God forbid you talk negatively about Obama.

Yes, the law is settled. But the issue and conversation is ongoing and evolving and Rand Paul, not Rachel Maddow or some other liberal, placed himself dead in the center of this discussion. He did it first with NPR and a small newspaper.

Just to bring this full circle just a tad bit, Rand Paul announced his candidacy on Rachel's show way back when. So he obviously felt comfortable going on the show. He agreed to do another interview following the election results, this wasn't an interview out of thin air.