# Rand Paul's interview on Rachel Maddow - A real Libertarian meets the real world **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 20, 2010, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157 "2010-05-20T18:07:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Dante\_Fevah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Dante\_Fevah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dante_Fevah)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/21 "2010-05-20T19:36:22Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I mostly agree but I don’t like the “gotcha” journalism on Maddow’s part. IMO Maddow is trying to paint Paul as a racist because he supports free businesses, no matter how odious it is. Paul may (or may not) be naive but his position doesn’t make him racist. I doubt Maddow was trying to paint Paul as a racist. She was trying to get him to answer a simple question. The question had to do with public comments he had made. It is his answer that could paint him as a racist. MADDOW: Do you think that a private business has the right to say we don’t serve black people? I would have said to Paul, Answer the question directly and then answer why you think the way you do. It would’ve been an honest conversation. Might even have been an example of a profile in courage. Paul exhibited the whimp style of leadership. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/22 "2010-05-20T19:38:17Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Yes, it is. If you can’t even quote the full sentence without including something that goes against the image you are trying to propagate (“…the way they wish is odious and appalling.”), you’re being deceptive. > > For example: > > “The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation…” > -Martin Luther King, Jr. “odius and appaling” are useless modifiers if the baseline intent is to support a businesses legal and moral right right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/23 "2010-05-20T19:40:21Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I mostly agree but I don’t like the “gotcha” journalism on Maddow’s part. IMO Maddow is trying to paint Paul as a racist because he supports free businesses, no matter how odious it is. Paul may (or may not) be naive but his position doesn’t make him racist. It doesn’t make him a racist, it makes him a douchebag. Probably also marks him as having a poor grasp of what socety was like in those times. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/24 "2010-05-20T19:41:01Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > The question had to do with public comments he had made. It is his answer that could paint him as a racist. The fact that you seem to be saying that if he does indeed confirm that he doesn’t think businesses shouldn’t be able to discriminate against protected groups, then he’s a racist, is exactly the sort of sentiment she was going to feed into by getting a soundbite. You are (as far as I can tell) demonstrating the reason he was so defensive. Phrasing the question as specifically whether or not business should be able to deny black people is deliberately inflamatory in that regard. A more neutral way to ask it would be to ask if he feels that the government has the right to dictate who or how he chooses to serve customers. ---
**Author:** ![Dante\_Fevah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Dante\_Fevah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dante_Fevah)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/25 "2010-05-20T19:43:29Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > While he definitely didn’t handle the question elegantly, they are essentially trying to nail him with a soundbite where he says “yes, I think businesses should be allowed to discriminate against blacks” out of context. So he played it defensively. Which still sucks, since he could’ve articulated the position better. > > It’s easy to trap people like this because a ton of liberals don’t understand that there’s a gap between “I think an act is wrong” and “I think the government should outlaw the act that act”. They think that “I think the business owner should have a right to run his business as he sees fit” is secret code words for “OH GOD I WISH I COULD EXCLUDE BLACK PEOPLE” when it isn’t. > > I think businesses should be able to discriminate against serving anyone as they see fit, for any reason, while I would also personally boycott loudly any business that used that freedom to do something wrong. Your assumptions of what most\* liberals\* understand, would be hilarious if it weren’t being used to cover over the libertarian nonsense that separates principles from real world consequences. The rest of your answer reflects ignorance of the distinctions between _open to the public_ businesses, and _private business_ dealings. You also are taking progressive attitudes and stamping them on liberals. Bad. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/26 "2010-05-20T19:46:48Z")
Not sure why Maddow has such an interest in the subject now that society can no longer legally discriminate about who can serve in what jobs, who can marry whom, etc. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/27 "2010-05-20T19:47:11Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > The fact that you seem to be saying that if he does indeed confirm that he doesn’t think businesses shouldn’t be able to discriminate against protected groups, then he’s a racist, is exactly the sort of sentiment she was going to feed into by getting a soundbite. You are (as far as I can tell) demonstrating the reason he was so defensive. I think the point the previously referenced blogger Klein made was the most on point in this discussion, specifically that Rand Paul is not necessarily, or even obviously, a de facto racist, but he is an obvious ideological extremist and that’s not a recipe for success in statewide \*\*general \*\*elections for political office. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/28 "2010-05-20T19:48:27Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > Your assumptions of what most\* liberals\* understand, would be hilarious if it weren’t being used to cover over the libertarian nonsense that separates principles from real world consequences. I’m saying that there’s a certain attitude more common amongst liberals that if something is right, then it’s fine to be made law by the government. There’s no consideration of whether or not it’s something with unintended consequences or whether it should be left up to the individual. So quite simply, “racism is bad” becomes “let’s make all sorts of laws that stamp out racism”. There’s not a position of “I find it morally wrong, but this isn’t an issue for the government to solve with law”. So, when you don’t even have this concept in mind, the only conclusion you can make is “opposes laws forcing non-discrimination” = “desire to discriminate”. > [@](#): > > The rest of your answer reflects ignorance of the distinctions between _open to the public_ businesses, and _private business_ dealings. No, it doesn’t - I’m just saying that I think businesses open to the public should be able to discriminate. Which they can - except for protected groups. A business owner can ban all kids under a certain age, or people who dress a certain way, or even just kick people out because he doesn’t like the way they look at him. It’s only the specific prohibitions on discriminating against protected classes that are given some reverence. > [@](#): > > You also are taking progressive attitudes and stamping them on liberals. Bad. Could you explain to me the differences on this issue? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/29 "2010-05-20T19:49:51Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > The fact that you seem to be saying that if he does indeed confirm that he doesn’t think businesses shouldn’t be able to discriminate against protected groups, then he’s a racist, is exactly the sort of sentiment she was going to feed into by getting a soundbite. I don’t think he’s a racist. I think he’s a naive idealist who doesn’t grasp the nasty real-world endgame of his utopian political theories. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/30 "2010-05-20T19:53:50Z")
I don’t really have a problem with your criticms there, it seems valid enough. However, I do think I would feel better living in a society where, upon given the chance, people would do what’s right rather than being held back in their racist desires due to the active intervention of the government. I’d like to think that in this day and age, businesses that had a blatantly racist policy would be boycotted and ran into the ground by people of their own free will, rather than by force of law. Maybe that makes me a naive idealist too. ---
**Author:** ![Dante\_Fevah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Dante\_Fevah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dante_Fevah)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/31 "2010-05-20T19:55:44Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > The fact that you seem to be saying that if he does indeed confirm that he doesn’t think businesses shouldn’t be able to discriminate against protected groups, then he’s a racist, is exactly the sort of sentiment she was going to feed into by getting a soundbite. You are (as far as I can tell) demonstrating the reason he was so defensive. > > Phrasing the question as specifically whether or not business should be able to deny black people is deliberately inflamatory in that regard. A more neutral way to ask it would be to ask if he feels that the government has the right to dictate who or how he chooses to serve customers. You jump between asking Paul what a business should be able to do and what Paul himself would do. So this is about the personalities of Rand Paul and Rachel Maddow, or will we be discussing the principles involved? Framing an argument or question is important, but it can be used as a way of deflecting. Being disingenuous in speech, is a cowardly way of avoiding responsibility for words and actions. An _open to the public business_ that demands the right to deny service to black people is initiating an an inflammatory event. Open to the public businesses are regulated. Are you against regulating ‘open to the public’ businesses? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/32 "2010-05-20T19:58:04Z")
He could easily have answered that question if he was smart: > [@](#): > > Rachel, that was an appalling time in our history and I am glad that black people are no longer banned from shopping or working in certain businesses. But despite the Civil Rights Act there is still lingering discrimination against blacks and other groups. The Libertarian position is that we could have obtained the same goals through other means such as boycotts and public humiliation of those who discriminated. The fact that the Civil Rights Act could pass showed that society was already on the brink of recognizing the evil of discrimination. It may be that had racial discrimination ended by those means, some of the resentment people felt from being forced by the Federal government to accept blacks would be less, and society would be better off. Not that I agree, but it is certainly a question any Libertarian should be equipped to address. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/33 "2010-05-20T19:59:48Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > You jump between asking Paul what a business should be able to do and what Paul himself would do. The answer he gives, he clearly indicates that he has no desire to discriminate against blacks with his own business. > [@](#): > > So this is about the personalities of Rand Paul and Rachel Maddow, or will we be discussing the principles involved? Framing an argument or question is important, but it can be used as a way of deflecting. Being disingenuous in speech, is a cowardly way of avoiding responsibility for words and actions. Asking “do you think businesses should be able to ban black people” is obviously more loaded and more inflammatory than “do you think businesses should be restricted from discriminating against protected classes?” or even more generally “do you think business owners should have the right to choose who to serve?” > [@](#): > > An _open to the public business_ that demands the right to deny service to black people is initiating an an inflammatory event. Open to the public businesses are regulated. Are you against regulating ‘open to the public’ businesses? I’m against the specific exception that business owners can’t discriminate against protected classes in choosing who they serve. I think business owners should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/34 "2010-05-20T20:00:15Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > You jump between asking Paul what a business should be able to do and what Paul himself would do. > So this is about the personalities of Rand Paul and Rachel Maddow, or will we be discussing the principles involved? Framing an argument or question is important, but it can be used as a way of deflecting. Being disingenuous in speech, is a cowardly way of avoiding responsibility for words and actions. > > An _open to the public business_ that demands the right to deny service to black people is initiating an an inflammatory event. Open to the public businesses are regulated. Are you against regulating ‘open to the public’ businesses? The term you are looking for is “public accommodation” and it was a principle that was adopted fairly late in our laws. ---
**Author:** ![statsman1982](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e79b87/32.png) [@statsman1982](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/statsman1982)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/35 "2010-05-20T20:02:07Z")
I agree that the position he holds is not very radical, but poses a large risk for misinterpretation. A savvier politician probably wouldn’t have brought up the issue for the media to misinterpret in the first place, but you can’t unring the bell in this case. The best thing Paul can do is acknowledge that he believes that the authority of a person to run their business as they see fit, including but not limited to, denying service to whomever they please, is absolute. I assume the Tea Partiers backed him because they thought he’d bring something new to Washington. So far, he’s been practicing the doublespeak with the best of them. Here’s a soundbite that might work for Mr. Paul: “Yes, a business should be legally allowed to discriminate based on race, and right thinking people should boycott such a business.” Ok, it’s not really snappy, but I think that sums it up well enough for a nightly news segment. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/36 "2010-05-20T20:04:45Z")
While that’s true, by the time it hits the air, it becomes “Yes, a business should be legally allowed to discriminate based on race…” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/37 "2010-05-20T20:07:55Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > However, I do think I would feel better living in a society where, upon given the chance, people would do what’s right rather than being held back in their racist desires due to the active intervention of the government. I’d like to think that in this day and age, businesses that had a blatantly racist policy would be boycotted and ran into the ground by people of their own free will, rather than by force of law. If the agents of a freely-elected government prevent a business from operating in such a fashion, how is than not “the people acting of their own free will”? A legal expression of the will of the people is far more effective than any boycott. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/38 "2010-05-20T20:12:29Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > It’s easy to trap people like this because a ton of liberals don’t understand that there’s a gap between “I think an act is wrong” and “I think the government should outlaw the act that act”. “Liberals”? Surely you don’t seriously suggest that the statement is any less true of conservatives… ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/39 "2010-05-20T20:12:37Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > If the agents of a freely-elected government prevent a business from operating in such a fashion, how is than not “the people acting of their own free will”? A legal expression of the will of the people is far more effective than any boycott. Then why not try to enact into law every aspect of behavior you deem correct? How about we just outlaw people being racist at all? That’ll solve the problem. If we allow the freedom to discriminate with your business, and yet those who use that freedom for harm suffer for it (through boycotts, ostracism, whatever) we’ve won both in terms of having property owners retain sovereignty, individuals making the right choices, and society being served as a greater goal. If this happens at gunpoint rather than through individual choices, it still accomplishes some good, but less, and has greater costs. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/40 "2010-05-20T20:14:11Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > “Liberals”? Surely you don’t seriously suggest that the statement is any less true of conservatives… I don’t generally subscribe to a one-axis political orientation world. You cannot infer from my words that if I believe liberals have some trait, then I must believe that authoritarian conservatives don’t. Rand Paul is, I assume, basically libertarian, and I can very much suggest the statement is less true of libertarians since that’s one of the main issues of their philosophy. Probably the main one. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=3)