Maddow is a great interviewer, and even though she's a member of the 24-hour newsarazzi, she should be given credit for setting up such a long interview so to really give Paul a chance to explain his views on the subject. I do think after she's made her point, she continues to dig into him to score some political points, but overall, she gives him a chance to speak. In fact, at one point she says, "I'm sorry to interrupt you, go on sir." Can you imagine O'Reilly doing such a thing?
But, I think that she has helped make this issue far bigger than it has any right to be. Rand Paul has said that he fully supports 9 out of 10 points of the Civil Rights Act from over 40 years ago. The point that he expresses mixed feelings about (not, as some would have you think, disagrees with) is the one prescribing that businesses desegregate. Such problematic views are the reason that people like Rand Paul and his father Ron Paul will never be palatable enough for the Presidency, but that's not to say that there's absolutely no value in them. Why else would they cling to such beliefs that are obviously going to hurt them at the polls?
The point that Paul is trying to make is that by having laws that impede on private business in the way the Civil Rights Act does, you are inherently limiting freedom of speech which could potentially weaken the power of the first amendment. Granted, back in the '60s the risk to the first amendment was massively overpowered by the problem of widespread racism, but I think that what Paul is after is getting our country to see past the tangible effects of legislation and look into the future jurisprudential questions that such legislation brings up.
The Health Care Bill is a perfect example: About 20 states (all with Republican leadership I should point out) are bringing cases to court regarding the Constitutionality of the mandate that people buy insurance or face a penalty. I think this is another case where the need for health care reform overpowers the objections based on murkiness to the legal system, but the opponents are not without some reason. Does the government really have the right to insist that we purchase a particular product, in this case insurance?
Now, that debate is also colored by the fact that the cases raised against the health care bill are all done to score political points for the Conservative bases of the states in question, but Rand Paul is doing no such thing. I think that he has a very honest concern for the language of a particular law, and wishes that people could see how it makes for confusion. As he said about 400 times in the Maddow interview, he abhors racism and I think he is very supportive of the way that the Civil Rights Act changed the world for the positive. Rand Paul is not a racist.
I know an awful lot of people who would support banning the KKK from marching through cities, which is frightening because when public opinion is massively against something, there is a danger that politicians could give in to it and pass legislation that, though popular, overreaches on the rights of Americans. The KKK should be allowed to march through our cities, and in fact, I feel a sense of national pride that we allow such things to occur, as abhorrent as I believe their views are.
Mr. Paul's point, as I see it, basically asserts that we should allow racists to be racist. If they want to open a Whites Only diner, they should go ahead, and the overwhelming public dissent would make it go out of business. I think that he's incorrect in that line of thinking - in some instances, the government's intrusion on private lives is necessary for the maintenance of a stable country - but I don't think that his heart is in the wrong place, as liberal pundits would have you think. Rather than attack his character, they should be attacking his logic. His view is incorrect, but not malevolent.
And since I was so impressed with Maddow's interview, I thought I'd reward her by showing some embarrassing footage of her rival.
And even better is this remixed version. A good example of how sampling does nothing but enrich our experience of the original. If anyone's interested in seeing a good documentary about sampling (Featuring one of the HHB's favorites, Girl Talk) check out RiP! A Remix Manifesto, currently available on Hulu (for FREE!!!).
Quick Addendum: Here's Ross Douthat's column in Monday's NY Times. I think he discusses the issue pretty eloquently:
No comments:
Post a Comment