Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The reason he gave for cancelling Meet the Press was exhaustion. Not good for the third day of his campaign.Was this before or after Maddow? Also, he just turned down going on Meet the Press after accepting a invite on there. The third person to do so in 63 years. Rand's not ready I guess to spin his bullshit yet.
Was this before or after Maddow? Also, he just turned down going on Meet the Press after accepting a invite on there. The third person to do so in 63 years. Rand's not ready I guess to spin his bullshit yet.
Hard to say if this means he won't win, but it's fun to watch. This guy is supposed to be the Tea Partiers' biggest triumph so far and he steps on his dick right out of the starting gate.
Yeah. He might want to tone down his association with the teaparty. I never understood that relationship. Odd couple.
I didn't say he was "baited." I said Rachel took his comments out of context and made him look bad for no reason whatsoever.Oscar Wao is delusional if he thinks ol Rand was baited. HE SAID THIS CRAP BEFORE. and Maddow was actually trying to get him an out, but he kept going further and further down the hole.
No, it's more like Damn Rachel for spinning the answer Rand gave her in an attempt to make him look bad when there was nothing to make him look bad with.
O please. Rand's problem is that he has a radical position. Maddow didn't bait him into giving a crazy answer. He did that all on his own, and Maddow gave him several chances to walk it back. That he pressed further into full-blown crazy isn't her fault.
Oscar Wao is delusional if he thinks ol Rand was baited. HE SAID THIS CRAP BEFORE. and Maddow was actually trying to get him an out, but he kept going further and further down the hole.
To say ol Rand was smeared somehow is laughable. Was he smeared when he said this BP oil disaster was an "accident"?
He is the gift that wont shut up.
O please. Rand's problem is that he has a radical position. Maddow didn't bait him into giving a crazy answer. He did that all on his own, and Maddow gave him several chances to walk it back. That he pressed further into full-blown crazy isn't her fault.
Oscar Wao is delusional if he thinks ol Rand was baited. HE SAID THIS CRAP BEFORE. and Maddow was actually trying to get him an out, but he kept going further and further down the hole.
To say ol Rand was smeared somehow is laughable. Was he smeared when he said this BP oil disaster was an "accident"?
He is the gift that wont shut up.
LOL...kinda like Biden
If this and the oil disaster (which Rand is wrong by the way, it IS a catastrophe) is all they have against the eye guy...they need new material....or maybe not.
Election 2010: Kentucky Senate - Rasmussen Reports
Election Ink - Troubling Poll Results for Rand Paul
He'll be just fine! Sorry race-baiters!
The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
I didn't say he was "baited." I said Rachel took his comments out of context and made him look bad for no reason whatsoever.Oscar Wao is delusional if he thinks ol Rand was baited. HE SAID THIS CRAP BEFORE. and Maddow was actually trying to get him an out, but he kept going further and further down the hole.
If this and the oil disaster (which Rand is wrong by the way, it IS a catastrophe) is all they have against the eye guy...they need new material....or maybe not.
Election 2010: Kentucky Senate - Rasmussen Reports
Election Ink - Troubling Poll Results for Rand Paul
He'll be just fine! Sorry race-baiters!
The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
If this and the oil disaster (which Rand is wrong by the way, it IS a catastrophe) is all they have against the eye guy...they need new material.The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
Its enough Material to destroy this idiots career. If not, he wont shut up, so new material will be provided.
He can back peddle all he wants, but here is the thing.....recordings never, ever go away. God bless America.
Well, here's probably where the interview started to get a bit heated up:I didn't say he was "baited." I said Rachel took his comments out of context and made him look bad for no reason whatsoever.Oscar Wao is delusional if he thinks ol Rand was baited. HE SAID THIS CRAP BEFORE. and Maddow was actually trying to get him an out, but he kept going further and further down the hole.
Fair enough. I am 100% calling you out. What exactly did Maddow take out of context?
I am calling you out because I am tired of your bullshit.
Stay on point please.
But, you know, they desegregated transportation in Boston in 1840, and I think that was an impressive and amazing thing. But also points out the sadness that it took us 120 years to desegregate the South. And a lot of that was institutional racism was absolutely wrong and something that I absolutely oppose.
MADDOW: In terms of legal remedies for persistent discrimination, though, if there was a private business, say, in Louisville, say, somewhere in your home state, that wanted to not serve black patrons and wanted to not serve gay patrons, or somebody else on the basis of their -- on the basis of a characteristic that they decided they didn't like as a private business owner -- would you think they had a legal right to do so, to put up a "blacks not served here" sign?
PAUL: Well, the interesting thing is, you know, you look back to the 1950s and 1960s at the problems we faced. There were incredible problems. You know, the problems had to do with mostly voting, they had to do with schools, they had to do with public housing. And so, this is what the civil rights largely addressed, and all things that I largely agree with.
MADDOW: But what about private businesses? I mean, I hate to -- I don`t want to be badgering you on this, but I do want an answer.
PAUL: I'm not -- I'm not --
MADDOW: Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?
PAUL: Yes. I'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form. I would never belong to any club that excluded anybody for race. We still do have private clubs in America that can discriminate based on race.
But I think what's important about this debate is not written into any specific "gotcha" on this, but asking the question: what about freedom of speech? Should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? Should we limit racists from speaking?
I don't want to be associated with those people, but I also don't want to limit their speech in any way in the sense that we tolerate boorish and uncivilized behavior because that's one of the things freedom requires is that we allow people to be boorish and uncivilized, but that doesn't mean we approve of it. I think the problem with this debate is by getting muddled down into it, the implication is somehow that I would approve of any racism or discrimination, and I don't in any form or fashion.
MADDOW: But isn't being in favor of civil rights but against the Civil Rights Act a little like saying you're against high cholesterol but you're in favor of fried cheese?
PAUL: But I'm not against --
MADDOW: I mean, the Civil Rights Act was the federal government stepping in to protect civil rights because they weren't otherwise being protected. It wasn't a hypothetical. There were businesses that were saying black people cannot be served here and the federal government stepped in and said, no, you actually don't have that choice to make. The federal government is coming in and saying you can't make that choice as a business owner.
Which side of that debate would you put yourself on?
PAUL: In the totality of it, I'm in favor of the federal government being involved in civil rights and that's, you know, mostly what the Civil Rights Act was about. And that was ending institutional racism.
Gee, looks like he's in 2010, not 1960, eh?later, after Rachel asks him,
PAUL: What I think would happen -- what I'm saying is, is that I don't believe in any discrimination. I don't believe in any private property should discriminate either. And I wouldn't attend, wouldn't support, wouldn't go to.
But what you have to answer when you answer this point of view, which is an abstract, obscure conversation from 1964 that you want to bring up. But if you want to answer, you have to say then that you decide the rules for all restaurants and then you decide that you want to allow them to carry weapons into restaurants.
People in Kentucky don't care if their Senator is a racist.
Hell, they would prefer it.
...or maybe not.
Election 2010: Kentucky Senate - Rasmussen Reports
Election Ink - Troubling Poll Results for Rand Paul
He'll be just fine! Sorry race-baiters!
The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
...or maybe not.
Election 2010: Kentucky Senate - Rasmussen Reports
Election Ink - Troubling Poll Results for Rand Paul
He'll be just fine! Sorry race-baiters!
The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
And trouble for the rest of the GOP trying to song and dance their way through supporting him.
As somebody else said, it's pretty bad when Mitch McConnell looks like a genius for supporting the other guy.
Hard to say if this means he won't win, but it's fun to watch. This guy is supposed to be the Tea Partiers' biggest triumph so far and he steps on his dick right out of the starting gate.
Yeah. He might want to tone down his association with the teaparty. I never understood that relationship. Odd couple.
Well, in his first speech after winning he said he thanked the tea baggers specifically for his win.
He represents perfectly.
The stuff about Rand just came to the surface. Believe it or not, his campaign is in real trouble.
And trouble for the rest of the GOP trying to song and dance their way through supporting him.
As somebody else said, it's pretty bad when Mitch McConnell looks like a genius for supporting the other guy.
LOL.
I think the "Tea Party" is in more trouble than the GOP. America has been waiting for the first "Tea Party Candidate" to articulate exactly what the party stands for.
Rand bungled it.
Though in fairness, this is what he believes so I guess you can't say he bungled it. Maybe the things we have been saying (i.e. "The teaparty is too fringe for most of America") will no longer be dismissed as "liberal propaganda".
Naaaaaaahhhhhhhh.
And trouble for the rest of the GOP trying to song and dance their way through supporting him.
As somebody else said, it's pretty bad when Mitch McConnell looks like a genius for supporting the other guy.
LOL.
I think the "Tea Party" is in more trouble than the GOP. America has been waiting for the first "Tea Party Candidate" to articulate exactly what the party stands for.
Rand bungled it.
Though in fairness, this is what he believes so I guess you can't say he bungled it. Maybe the things we have been saying (i.e. "The teaparty is too fringe for most of America") will no longer be dismissed as "liberal propaganda".
Naaaaaaahhhhhhhh.
Well, I like to call this the third Tea Party candidate
1. Doug Hoffmann who cost the GOP a House Seat,
2. Scott Brown, who is turning out to be an Olympia Snowe RINO,
...a somewhat unenviable track record...
he wasntLOL.
I think the "Tea Party" is in more trouble than the GOP. America has been waiting for the first "Tea Party Candidate" to articulate exactly what the party stands for.
Rand bungled it.
Though in fairness, this is what he believes so I guess you can't say he bungled it. Maybe the things we have been saying (i.e. "The teaparty is too fringe for most of America") will no longer be dismissed as "liberal propaganda".
Naaaaaaahhhhhhhh.
Well, I like to call this the third Tea Party candidate
1. Doug Hoffmann who cost the GOP a House Seat,
2. Scott Brown, who is turning out to be an Olympia Snowe RINO,
...a somewhat unenviable track record...
Good point. I didn't realize Brown was a bagger though.
I think the larger problem: nobody really knows what the teaparties stand for.
The reason he gave for cancelling Meet the Press was exhaustion. Not good for the third day of his campaign.Was this before or after Maddow? Also, he just turned down going on Meet the Press after accepting a invite on there. The third person to do so in 63 years. Rand's not ready I guess to spin his bullshit yet.
In public, Senate candidate Rand Paul's Republican colleagues have tried to contextualize his controversial comments about anti-discrimination laws and the Obama administration's handling of the Gulf Coast oil spill, but privately they bemoan the political newcomer's gaffes and wish he'd focus less on the national media spotlight and more on Kentucky and the economy.
The reason he gave for cancelling Meet the Press was exhaustion. Not good for the third day of his campaign.Was this before or after Maddow? Also, he just turned down going on Meet the Press after accepting a invite on there. The third person to do so in 63 years. Rand's not ready I guess to spin his bullshit yet.
Hmmmm.....
In public, Senate candidate Rand Paul's Republican colleagues have tried to contextualize his controversial comments about anti-discrimination laws and the Obama administration's handling of the Gulf Coast oil spill, but privately they bemoan the political newcomer's gaffes and wish he'd focus less on the national media spotlight and more on Kentucky and the economy.
Kentucky GOP urges Rand Paul to avoid national spotlight - Politics AP - MiamiHerald.com
Right, because all Kentuckians are backwards, toothless hillbillies.People in Kentucky don't care if their Senator is a racist.
Hell, they would prefer it.
