Rand Paul will be on Meet the Press Sunday

[Brian4Liberty]

Ron was a master at flipping a debate on an interviewer.

There is a lot to be said about controlling the direction of an interview. You can't just sit back and be on defense the whole time. (Not that you should ever attack the interviewer at all. Just be able to guide the conversation in a positive manner).

 

[DirtMcGirt]

Oh man he's going to be ambushed. With his latest poll numbers it might be best for him to just stay out of the national media for a while (except fox).

That should have been the strategy form the start. Who are the other guest on the show?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Of course immigration is also a hot topic of the day...

 

[MRoCkEd]

Of course immigration is also a hot topic of the day...

That won't be a problem. He supports the corrected law, as do the majority of Kentuckians.

 

[Matt Collins]

Any chance for Rand to communicate his message is a good thing.

 

[AuH20]

Interesting blurb about David Gregory's wife:

Since June 2000, Gregory has been married to former federal prosecutor and former Fannie Mae executive vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary, Beth Wilkinson.[1] They met while Gregory was covering the Oklahoma City bombing as a reporter and Wilkinson was serving as prosecutor on the case.[21] The couple has a son and twins — one daughter and one son.

 

[Aratus]

IN LIGHT OF THE UPCOMING M-T-P INTERVIEW WE CAN HOPEFULLY HAVE RAND REPLY
IN FULSOME PARAGRAPHs CONCERNING THE ISSUES BEING RAISED IN THIS RACE!!!!

 

[orenbus]

A politico correspondent on Morning Joe - MSNBC just said that Rand Paul won't be doing any Sunday shows, does anyone know if Rand Paul still plans on being on MTP? If so MSNBC just screwed up again putting out false information.

 

[orenbus]

Yea as I figured Politico is being stupid again, they just had David Gregory on and he said Rand Paul will be doing MTP this Sunday.

 

[eok321]

Paul and his strategists need to develop an answer to this question before Sunday. In my opinion, the best way to go is to open up and say it - the lunch counter ban was not the Constitututional purview of the federal government. He should then use as an example Michael Richards. Yeah, it's okay for a businessowner to own a racist business, but in today's America you'd see universal comdemnation that would drive them from the marketplace. Racism cannot be legislated away, it can only be made as unpopular as possible, and that is where we have truly succeeded - by shifting the public opinion so far from racist thinking that racism has become unviable as a business strategy.

But no ducking, no spinning away from the question.

Agreed

Rand holds the constitutional higher ground and he does not need to shy away from any liberal media personalities who are distorting his position. I was hoping for a Ron Paul type answer from him on the Maddow show.

Maddow "Should a racist be allowed to turn away black people if they so wish"

Rand "Sure, I dont agree with their racist position, so i might set up a business beside the existing one. I will choose to allow people of all race and beliefs in and the existing business will have no customers as all people who areagainst racism wiill no longer carry out their business in the racists premises"

 

[MsDoodahs]

Maybe Rand should answer that with the question someone made into a poll here.

"should a racist be able to turn away a black person?"

"Should a black person be able to turn away a racist?"

 

[ssforronpaul]

David Gregory(sp?) host of meet the press was just on cnbc and said he wants to expand on what crazy (weird) limits Paul believes should be put on the government? Will ask multiple questions on that line.


ssforronpaul

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Rand, politically speaking, has to walk a little to "the center" in order to not get painted as not supporting CRA, etc. But he still needs to say "no options off the topic" in dealing with Iran to keep the party unity. I'm just saying what I think he needs to do to win...

 

[JaylieWoW]

Maybe Rand should answer that with the question someone made into a poll here.

"should a racist be able to turn away a black person?"

"Should a black person be able to turn away a racist?"

I saw this advice over on the mises.org forums. Sounded like a solid piece of advice that maybe Rand needs to consider:

I believe the issue is rather simple;



What is worse: someone being a racist, or throwing a racist --who is otherwise peaceful-- in jail? Throwing the racist in jail is most definitely worse.

Racism (as commonly understood) is irrational. Being irrational is not a crime. Hurting other people's person or their property is a crime. If you jail a person who's only vice is racism then you're committing a crime. Committing a crime shouldn't be the business of government.

Conclusion: the proper way of dealing with racism is education as main tactic and social ostracism as fallback tactic. This is how slavery was abolished in the first place (in most non-US countries anyway). It also happens to be the case that racism is economically self-defeating as it creates profit opportunities for competitors by taking away one's access to part of the workforce. The same is true for sexism.



Rand Paul, feel free to use this and educate the masses.