Rand Paul spox: Fed gov't should bar businesses from discriminating

[Hamer]

Jesee Benton is now the spokes person for Rand? It seems this statement is a complete 180 of what rand said last night and today on Laura Ingram's show. WTF is going on here?

A spokesman for Rand Paul just clarified to me that the candidate does, in fact, believe that the Federal government should have the power to ban private businesses from discriminating based on race.

Paul had earlier claimed he didn't support that role for the Federal government, sparking a raging controversy. A statement he issued today in hopes of quieting the firestorm affirmed his support for the Civil Rights Act, but only said he backed it for stopping "discrimination in the public sphere."

Asked for further clarification, Jesse Benton, a spokesman for the Paul campaign, confirmed that Paul does in fact think the Federal government should have the power to ban private businesses from commiting racial discrimination. He told me:

"Civil Rights legislation that has been affirmed by our courts gives the Federal government the right to ensure that private businesses don't discriminate based on race. Dr. Paul supports those powers."

That's a reversal from what Paul said last night on Rachel Maddow's show. Maddow asked Paul to clarify his previous expressions of doubt about parts of the Civil Rights Act, querying: "Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?"

more : http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/rand_paul_spox_fed_govt_should.html

 

[Bergie Bergeron]

Flip-flop?

 

[damiengwa]

Jesee Benton is now the spokes person for Rand? It seems this statement is a complete 180 of what rand said last night and today on Laura Ingram's show.

A spokesman for Rand Paul just clarified to me that the candidate does, in fact, believe that the Federal government should have the power to ban private businesses from discriminating based on race.

Paul had earlier claimed he didn't support that role for the Federal government, sparking a raging controversy. A statement he issued today in hopes of quieting the firestorm affirmed his support for the Civil Rights Act, but only said he backed it for stopping "discrimination in the public sphere."

Asked for further clarification, Jesse Benton, a spokesman for the Paul campaign, confirmed that Paul does in fact think the Federal government should have the power to ban private businesses from commiting racial discrimination. He told me:

"Civil Rights legislation that has been affirmed by our courts gives the Federal government the right to ensure that private businesses don't discriminate based on race. Dr. Paul supports those powers."

That's a reversal from what Paul said last night on Rachel Maddow's show. Maddow asked Paul to clarify his previous expressions of doubt about parts of the Civil Rights Act, querying: "Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don't serve black people?"

more : http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/rand_paul_spox_fed_govt_should.html

Benton is an idiot. now rand is a flip flopper. hasn't this kid been paying attention...

This is how they nail you. f*ck

 

[t0rnado]

Worst move this campaign has made. Rand Paul was completely correct in saying that the Civil Rights Act violated property rights. Going back on it will just give Konway more attack ad fuel.

 

[sailingaway]

Benton was a real problem in Ron's campaign, IMHO. I read somewhere he set up Bruno even AFTER a similar situation he had set up for Barr was so disastrous.

Why is he involved with Rand?

 

[damiengwa]

Worst move this campaign has made. Rand Paul was completely correct in saying that the Civil Rights Act violated property rights. Going back on it will just give Konway more attack ad fuel.

now all you appologist libertarians have gotten your way. Benton just flip-flopped Rand. Brilliant. I know this kid is family, but how in the world on a day with a huge firestorm about what the candidate said, is Betton speaking on behalf of Rand. Especially saying something counter to Rand.

you really think a 25 pnt lead will die b/c of one principled position against a small piece of the '64 act?

But flip-flopping? Thats worse.

All you 'ooh please like me better' libertarians have just gotten your way. Lets see the result.

 

[Fozz]

I hope Benton is wrong....Rand needs to correct him ASAP if so...

 

[hvac ak47]

Fail!

 

[paulitics]

FUCK!!! It's the flip flop that kills you, not your position as long as it is based on principle. Voters want to know their candidate won't buckle under pressure. Now nobody will trust what he has to say.

 

[gls]

The flip-flop will hurt him more than taking the principled stance, especially in conservative Kentucky where most people probably agree at least somewhat with that stance.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

Welcome back Mr. Benton, thanks for all your help dude.

 

[TheFlashlight.org]

That's no flip-flop. Why don't you read it carefully. He supports those powers. What powers? The Court and the Federal Government. Nuff said. Try to read between the lines. This is the one issue where a principled stance will kill you. So he softens it with some sophistry and the issue begins to die.

 

[Dreamofunity]

I hope Benton is wrong....Rand needs to correct him ASAP if so...

"Benton is wrong, I wouldn't have voted it" starts this whole thing over again, except this time actually saying it.


Ugh.

 

[paulitics]

Someone needs to get in contact with the campaign. This flip flop can't gain traction, or it is over for Rand.

 

[Fozz]

"Benton is wrong, I wouldn't have voted it" starts this whole thing over again, except this time actually saying it.


Ugh.

Rand Paul never said he wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights Act

 

[Ninja Homer]

Here's Rand's press release: http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/05/20/paul-i-support-the-civil-rights-act/

“I believe we should work to end all racism in American society and staunchly defend the inherent rights of every person. I have clearly stated in prior interviews that I abhor racial discrimination and would have worked to end segregation. Even though this matter was settled when I was 2, and no serious people are seeking to revisit it except to score cheap political points, I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

“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.”

“This much is clear: The federal government has far overreached in its power grabs. Just look at the recent national healthcare schemes, which my opponent supports. The federal government, for the first time ever, is mandating that individuals purchase a product. The federal government is out of control, and those who love liberty and value individual and state's rights must stand up to it.”

“These attacks prove one thing for certain: the liberal establishment is desperate to keep leaders like me out of office, and we are sure to hear more wild, dishonest smears during this campaign."

 

[DaisyFL]

Benton joining the campaign explains why everything has gone pear shaped. FIRE HIM! Burn his desk, then salt the earth under it.

 

[Fozz]

I think the Washington Post is twisting this to make it look like a flip-flop, but the truth is, Rand never opposed the CRA. Not in the Courier Journal interview, not in the Maddow interview.

 

[TheFlashlight.org]

Rand's not running for Supreme Court. He still believes what he believes, but he's not going to Monday morning quarterback the courts when that will kill his chances for Senate. He didn't flip flop on a damn thing. He just supports the rights of the courts to decide the constitutionality of legislation. He never said he agrees with the courts decision. And why should he?

 

[Ninja Homer]

I think the Washington Post is twisting this to make it look like a flip-flop, but the truth is, Rand never opposed the CRA. Not in the Courier Journal interview, not in the Maddow interview.

I think Benton is easily twisted and continually fails as a spokesperson.