Rand Paul’s Education in Media Bias Earned the Hard Way
Initially, Maddow pretended to value Paul’s presence and thanked him for announcing his candidacy on her show the year before. Yet then she preceded to spew a series of questions that can be easily summed up in five words: “Why are you a racist?”
The plastique hullaballoo originally arose from a discussion Paul had with the Louisville Courier-Journal’s editorial board. There the candidate revealed a libertarian worldview that many of us share but that no lamestream media member has any interest in processing or appreciating.
Maddow hijacked him and admitted: “I know this must feel like frying pan and into the fire.” Paul repeated that he did not believe in segregation, racism, “discrimination in any form,” or anything else that Maddow was trying to frame him with.
Specifically, Paul’s position was that while he believed in civil rights and abhorred segregation, he was uneasy with the end result.
Largely thanks to civil rights legislation (that absolutely had to be passed) the federal government can now stick its rhinocarian horns into the affairs of private businesses whenever the fancy strikes a bored or porn addicted bureaucrat.
Obviously, federal intervention was necessary and effective in regards to the south. It is unfortunate though that leftists continue to use that unusual example to forever de-legitimize the concept of federalism.
Local rule, as a rule, is best. This is something that is lost in the present day as the Democrats seek to shift all power and authority to their Washington, D.C., federocracy.
Ultimately, centralization spells death for individual liberty. That is the essence of what Rand Paul believes and sought to explain.
Much is made by pseudo-liberals of their nuanced minds, but Maddow morphed a sophisticated constitutional objection into lowbrow farce.
Paul’s failure to convince her was entirely predictable as you cannot “shake hands with a clenched fist.” Self-righteous ideologues high on emotion are not good candidates for an education.
Of course there was nothing inflammatory about what Paul said or even thought. He’s no Senator Bilbo, but the same cannot be said of those Democrats who want to doom large subsections of America to a life spent on the dole.
Some of Maddow’s leftist conspecifics were aware that Paul was no strawman so they downgraded his utterances to the misdemeanor charge of “extremist” or racial echoer, while Newsweek hoped the affair would serve as proof that all members of the tea parties were racist.
>MSNBC is a political operation first and a news source never second. Rand Paul went to Maddow expecting an interview.
If they’re a political operation why was he so naive to think that he should expect an interview?
No individual thinker could possibly take the tripe that MSNBC and the MSM trot out on a daily basis, particularly when it comes from Rachel Maddow. the good people of KY are perfectly capable of picking a leader that stands for their beliefs.
what I am mad as hell about is that Snitch McConnell turned on Paul in an instant because he wasn’t ‘his guy’.
McConnell has served his purpose and his style of leadership that folds to the MSM is not what this country needs.
Ron Paul is a conservative “hero” ??
How do you figure?
Great article. I agree completely.
I’m not a huge fan of either of the Pauls. Ron got a pass from the media because of his opposition to the invasion of Iraq and the U.S. presence in the mid-east. Without that credential he would have been pigeonholed as a “populist crank.” Rand just learned a valuable lesson. When you run for office with an (R) after your name you are always in the enemy’s camp when dealing with the MSM.
Rachel kept asking Rand the same question over again for twenty minutes. He gave her his consistent answer for twenty minutes. Because he did not give her the answer she wanted she says he ran from her. Obviously, to her way of thinking consistency is running. That’s a lefty for you.
“Just how conservative, how radical, how extremist are you?”
From now on, all conservative interview subjects confronted with idiotic questions like this should answer the interviewer with the following:
“So, when did you stop beating your spouse?”
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
[For a light hearted take on our present peril]
The rub for many of us lies not in extending civil rights, but the method in which it was done. Slavery, for example, a far worse evil than jim crow, was eradicated by constitutional amendment after 4 years of war. No one wants a war, but one does want such respect for the Constitution. Jim Crow should have been ended by a constitutional amendment. Instead, Congress was given the power to endlessly expand its reach, and it has done so.
Paul should propose a civil rights amendment.
Rand made a big mistake in not being prepared for the MSM as the enemy.
I think he should have gone on the Meet The Press and been prepared to
a) describe in simple terms the over reach of gov’t that he opposed,
b) remind the voters that Jim Crow laws were enacted by the Dem Party,
c) define racism as treating people differently based on their skin color — and invoke MLK to define the Dream of non-racism — treating his children and all children based on their character, not skin color,
d) ask whoever is interviewing him whether THEY are a racist? whether they want to have policies that treat people differently based on skin color?
Optional (e) say that Affirmative Action treats different races differently, and should be more honestly called Affirmative Racism — and be against Affirmative Racism.
So where’s he been — why didn’t Rand know the nature of the beast?
Nobody should go into politics if he or she has this kind of naivete. It is unforgivable. If elected, he’ll be like a babe in the woods in Washington. And they wonder why it’s called the Stupid Party.
I would rather have a politician who is honest, consistent, and places good of the country over good of the party, but does bad interviews than one who interviews well, but is a lying, vacillating, party hack. We already elected Obama.
If Rand Paul can’t handle a left wing interviewer like Rachel Maddow, he deserves to lose. Even if he wins in November, he will forever be branded as a racist, and by implication, all Republicans. David Duke was eagerly booked on all the talk shows because they could put his name up on the screen with an (R) next to his name.
Wow, to be honest I don’t truly know what to say. I have only read the very first chapter so far and it has been really fascinating and has definitely caught my attention. I will absolutely be reading extra, I promise. I feel it has been Incredibly good so far. I love it! Maintain up the wonderful perform!