via AlterNet:
....(snip)....
Paul’s argument as Weigel, who leans libertarian himself, describes it is this:
Paul believes, as many conservatives believe, that the government should ban bias in all of its institutions but cannot intervene in the policies of private businesses. Those businesses, as Paul argues, take a risk by maintaining, in this example, racist policies. Patrons can decide whether or not to give them their money, or whether or not to make a fuss about their policies. That, not government regulation and intervention, is how bias should be eliminated in the private sector. And in this belief Paul is joined by some conservatives who resent that liberals seek government intervention for every unequal outcome.
Rand Paul’s biggest mistake, Weigel asserts, is that he told the truth about what he believes. “So is Rand Paul a racist?” Weigel asks. “No, and it’s irritating to watch his out-of-context quotes — this and a comment about how golf was no longer for elitists because Tiger Woods plays golf — splashed on the Web to make that point.”
I do not, I admit, know whether or not Rand Paul is a racist, or simply misguidedly naive. But I do know that this conservative, libertarian idea — that private ownership trumps civil rights — is nothing more than bigotry dressed up in the garb of “principle.” And the alliance between Rand Paul’s father, Ron, and the John Birch Society (which opposed the passage of the Civil Rights Act) leaves me deeply suspicious. ........(more)
The complete piece is at:
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/05/21/in-defiance-of-his-citys-history-washington-post-blogger-defends-rand-paul-on-race/
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
