# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/121 "2010-05-21T00:59:56Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > No they are not. And they are regulated differently public places. I’ve attended a few private clubs over the years. Never joined. If they discriminate I have no issues with it, as I went with friends and no friends were denied entrance. > > btw, early on I did make a clear distinction between public places and private places But you just objected to **John Mace’s** hypothetical about being denied service at a privately owned lunch counter versus being invited into someone’s home. He was drawing a parallel between the two as being both “privately owned” (hence, not subject to public domain) and you voiced an issue with it. So which is it? Its not okay to have a private “lunch counter” due to former race issues associated with that term, but its okay to have a discriminatory private “club”? What’s the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/122 "2010-05-21T01:01:18Z")
> [@toadspittle](#): > > You are open-minded to an almost holy, saintly degree, then. To be more accurate, how would you feel if EVERY restaurant in the town in which you lived didn’t allow you to eat there, or, at best, made you sit in a separate section of the restaurant, away from the “real human beings,” where the tables were dirty, the floor unswept, and the service bad? Well, you say, then surely someone will open an integrated restaurant that will offer better service, and all of my kind will flock to it, resulting in financial gain for said establishment, and a loss to the discriminators! Except then the owner of the integrated restaurant will wake up one night to find a large cross burning on his front lawn… Right. And why does this happen? Because in the areas where thiswent on, the police, the sheriff, the district attorney, and the state politicians would look the other way. Hell, it’s just a bunch of boys blowing off steam, don’t you know. No harm done! Or if it was an actual lynching, a perfunctory investigation might take place with a yawning Deputy asking a bunch of questions, getting null answers, and declaring the case unsolvable. In the meantime, a black man caught lifting a chocolate bar would have the whole weight of the law thrown at him. That was a problem of _government_, not the free market. It was government law being selectively applied to act as a tool of racism. The same thing happens with union violence. Unions gain in power because when they smash in the windows of a car trying to drive into a picketed property, the cops look the other way because it’s a ‘labor dispute’. So the intimidation continues. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/123 "2010-05-21T01:11:39Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Yeah, but it was under contract to the city, was it not? It’s very common for public transit to be subcontracted out to private companies who own and maintain the buses, but as long as the businesses were being run on behalf of the city, the city had every opportunity to demand an end to discrimination on the buses. At the very least, it could threaten to find another provider or create a public bus ownership program of its own. > > But if I’m wrong on the details of that, and it truly was a privately owned and operated bus line that had nothing to do with the government, received no subsidies or public contracts, then I’ll retract that example. No need to retract even if it was totally private (which it may not have been). Just tossing in a historical tidbit. ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/124 "2010-05-21T01:14:33Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Right. And why does this happen? Because in the areas where thiswent on, the police, the sheriff, the district attorney, and the state politicians would look the other way. Hell, it’s just a bunch of boys blowing off steam, don’t you know. No harm done! Or if it was an actual lynching, a perfunctory investigation might take place with a yawning Deputy asking a bunch of questions, getting null answers, and declaring the case unsolvable. > > In the meantime, a black man caught lifting a chocolate bar would have the whole weight of the law thrown at him. > > That was a problem of _government_, not the free market. It was government law being selectively applied to act as a tool of racism. > > The same thing happens with union violence. Unions gain in power because when they smash in the windows of a car trying to drive into a picketed property, the cops look the other way because it’s a ‘labor dispute’. So the intimidation continues. I don’t disagree with you on this point, Sam. Both govt. and private enterprise can cause problems. ---
**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 21, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/125 "2010-05-21T01:16:36Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > ‘Some laws’ are abused in the same way I guess that ‘some businesses’ were discriminatory. You downplay the role of government in discrimination, and emphasize the role of business, and I’m doing the opposite. I did not emphasize the role of business. I do emphasize the role of individuals and society in institutionalized racism. Government action has been the road of last resort when discrimination was fought. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I don’t think you realize the extent to which blacks and other minorities are _still_ oppressed by laws that liberals support. For example, the Davis-Bacon act was enacted under pressure from large, mainly white firms who were upset that black people were undercutting their wages. > > Today, the Davis-Bacon act basically ensures that union workers are hired for public works projects, which freezes out the poor people from employment in areas where public works would do the most good for local employment. The Davis-Bacon act is heartily defended by Democrats, because Big Labor benefits greatly from it, and Democrats are in the pocket of Big Labor. Your blaming liberals for racism in America? And you want to be taken seriously? Labor disputes that locked others out were less about race than about job security. Unions are ant-immigrant until the new immigrants become the new union members. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Bringing it back around to this thread, Ron Paul has in the past spearheaded efforts to get the Davis-Bacon act repealed. If his son had been thinking a little more clearly, he might have brought this up as a counter-example of how government colludes with the powerful to shut the poor and disadvantaged out of the economy. Not only does this benefit their wealthy donors, but it makes the poor people dependent on the government. > > The Democrats then lobby for social aid to those same people, and gain their support. In the end, it winds up being a wealth transfer from taxpayers to union workers, with reparations paid to the minorities hurt by it. But there’s one constant in all that - the government becomes the power broker, and formerly free people become dependents on government policy. You confuse cause and correlations. You draw conclusions with false assumptions of motive. you may want to read up on things: > [@](#): > > The Davis-Bacon Wage Determinations contained on this web site are wage determinations issued by the U.S. Department of Labor under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts. The Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor determines prevailing wage rates to be paid on federally funded or assisted construction projects. [http://www.gpo.gov/davisbacon/](http://www.gpo.gov/davisbacon/) …and then explain to me how wage determinations on Federal Jobs locks out poor people. I’ve worked many a NON union job in my travels and was always thankful that my base wage was indexed tow hat unions were paying. In states where union pay was low, I got paid crap. In strong union states where the same type of job paid much better. I realized early on that my pay was determined by how well unions were paid. ---
**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 21, 2010, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/126 "2010-05-21T01:19:37Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > But you just objected to **John Mace’s** hypothetical about being denied service at a privately owned lunch counter versus being invited into someone’s home. He was drawing a parallel between the two as being both “privately owned” (hence, not subject to public domain) and you voiced an issue with it. > > So which is it? Its not okay to have a private “lunch counter” due to former race issues associated with that term, but its okay to have a discriminatory private “club”? > > What’s the difference? _sigh_ The difference is one is a public place. Everything not owned by the government is privately owned. A lunch counter is a public place. I have no idea why you are mentioning the ‘public domain’ unless it is that you are confused over legal terms and what they mean. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/127 "2010-05-21T01:30:32Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > In that video posted by the OP, he never once says he’s in favor of discrimination of any kind. In fact, he says he rejects it. I never claimed that Rand Paul was in favor of discrimination. He defends the right of private business to discriminate on the basis of race, which he personally finds odious. Confusing, ain’t it? ---
**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 21, 2010, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/128 "2010-05-21T01:33:57Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I never claimed that Rand Paul was in favor of discrimination. He defends the right of private business to discriminate on the basis of race, which he personally finds odious. > Confusing, ain’t it? But now his campaign says he supports the laws that would prevent businesses their right to discriminate, a right he says he supports, and he now says he would not vote to over turn these very laws if given a chance to. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/129 "2010-05-21T01:40:25Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > But now his campaign says he supports the laws that would prevent businesses their right to discriminate, a right he says he supports, and he now says he would not vote to over turn these very laws if given a chance to. Now that’s change you can believe in! ---
**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 21, 2010, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/130 "2010-05-21T01:44:17Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Now that’s change you can believe in! roflmfao thanks ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/131 "2010-05-21T01:53:25Z")
> [@toadspittle](#): > > You are open-minded to an almost holy, saintly degree, then. To be more accurate, how would you feel if EVERY restaurant in the town in which you lived didn’t allow you to eat there, or, at best, made you sit in a separate section of the restaurant, away from the “real human beings,” where the tables were dirty, the floor unswept, and the service bad? Well, you say, then surely someone will open an integrated restaurant that will offer better service, and all of my kind will flock to it, resulting in financial gain for said establishment, and a loss to the discriminators! Except then the owner of the integrated restaurant will wake up one night to find a large cross burning on his front lawn… No, I don’t say any such thing. I do say that the government should not be complicit in the burning of that cross, which indeed it was in the Jim Crow South. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/132 "2010-05-21T01:57:37Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > _sigh_ > > The difference is one is a public place. Everything not owned by the government is privately owned. A lunch counter is a public place. I have no idea why you are mentioning the ‘public domain’ unless it is that you are confused over legal terms and what they mean. I’m confused. If everything not owned by the government is “privately owned”, how is a lunch counter a “public place”? ---
**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 21, 2010, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/133 "2010-05-21T02:10:13Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m confused. If everything not owned by the government is “privately owned”, how is a lunch counter a “public place”? Definitions. A business can be traded publicly as opposed to being held privately, but it is a privately owned business…in the context of government ownership vs private ownership. When using the term ‘private’ one must first stipulate what definition of ‘private’ is being used. There are other terms that may be used that may state a point more clearly, but those terms may be difficult to use as masks for what people are talking about.. The arts of spin and framing of arguments rely on this type of obfuscation. Again, a lunch counter is a public place, a place business open to the general public. It may be owned by an individual or a group. It is privately owned as long as it is not owned and operated by the government. Now, a home is not a public place or a place of business open to the public. ---
**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 21, 2010, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/134 "2010-05-21T02:12:52Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No, I don’t say any such thing. I do say that the government should not be complicit in the burning of that cross, which indeed it was in the Jim Crow South. Name the where and when of an event, and name the government that was complicitly involved in burning a cross. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/135 "2010-05-21T02:18:09Z")
> [@](#): > > Right. And why does this happen? Because in the areas where thiswent on, the police, the sheriff, the district attorney, and the state politicians would look the other way. Hell, it’s just a bunch of boys blowing off steam, don’t you know. No harm done! Or if it was an actual lynching, a perfunctory investigation might take place with a yawning Deputy asking a bunch of questions, getting null answers, and declaring the case unsolvable. That’s not a problem of government; that’s a problem of _lack_ of government. What happened in the South was that when racists attacked blacks in various ways, the government didn’t step in to solve the problem (by, say, arresting the lynchers and cross-burners). When the problem is lack of government, you can’t say that the solution is less government. ---
**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 21, 2010, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/136 "2010-05-21T02:23:17Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That’s not a problem of government; that’s a problem of _lack_ of government. What happened in the South was that when racists attacked blacks in various ways, the government didn’t step in to solve the problem (by, say, arresting the lynchers and cross-burners). When the problem is lack of government, you can’t say that the solution is less government. bravo. and > [@Dante Fevah](#): > > > [@John Mace](#): > > > > No, I don’t say any such thing. I do say that the government should not be complicit in the burning of that cross, which indeed it was in the Jim Crow South. > > Name the where and when of an event, and name the government that was complicitly involved in burning a cross. mace needs to clarify a few things ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/137 "2010-05-21T03:12:49Z")
> [@Dante\_Fevah](#): > > Definitions. A business can be traded publicly as opposed to being held privately, but it is a privately owned business…in the context of government ownership vs private ownership. > > When using the term ‘private’ one must first stipulate what definition of ‘private’ is being used. There are other terms that may be used that may state a point more clearly, but those terms may be difficult to use as masks for what people are talking about.. The arts of spin and framing of arguments rely on this type of obfuscation. > > Again, a lunch counter is a public place, a place business open to the general public. It may be owned by an individual or a group. It is privately owned as long as it is not owned and operated by the government. > > Now, a home is not a public place or a place of business open to the public. This has fuck-all to do with why one place is deemed “private” and one place is deemed “public” under your argument. You argue that they are the same, yet not the same. Which is it? ---
**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 21, 2010, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/138 "2010-05-21T04:16:24Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > This has fuck-all to do with why one place is deemed “private” and one place is deemed “public” under your argument. You argue that they are the same, yet not the same. > > Which is it? You don’t get IT? It’s your argument. You say a home is the same as a place of business. Yet you can’t defend that arguments without reinventing definitions or running away from them. It’s pretty simple. A lunch counter is a public place. Doesn’t matter who owns it. It’s the purpose for being – to serve the public. A home is a man’s castle. Very private. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2010, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/139 "2010-05-21T04:21:22Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That’s not a problem of government; that’s a problem of _lack_ of government. What happened in the South was that when racists attacked blacks in various ways, the government didn’t step in to solve the problem (by, say, arresting the lynchers and cross-burners). When the problem is lack of government, you can’t say that the solution is less government. So if government agents use their powers to support racism, it’s a problem of lack of government? If the people vote in a Governor, and that governor uses his power to intimidate blacks while nodding at the good old boys who burn crosses into yards, the problem has nothing to do with government? This is sounding dangerously like a “No True Scotsman” fallacy. Government is by definition good. Therefore, if government does bad things, the problem is that there wasn’t enough true government. A recent example: The people entrusted the government to regulate oil rigs. The government regulators wind up being cronies of the oil companies, and give them a pass on having to meet regulatory requirements. Disaster ensues. But hey, government’s not the problem, right? Business only is to blame. If anything, this just shows that we need even more government. Is that about right? ---
**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 21, 2010, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/140 "2010-05-21T04:22:36Z")
Rand Paul is NOT a conservative. he is a libertarian. an interesting sidebar on this issue: > [@](#): > > An interesting historical footnote: William F. Buckley, Jr., in an essay written in the 1960s, directly confronted the libertarian/Objectivist philosophy of Ayn Rand, the namesake of Rand Paul. “The conservative’s distrust of the state, so richly earned by it, raises inevitably the question, how far can one go?”, Buckley wrote. He went on to warn against those “whose passionate distrust for the state has developed into a theology of sorts, or at least into a demonology; to which they adhere as devotedly as any religious fanatic ever attempted to adhere to the will of the Lord.” [http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/20/rand-pauls-civil-rights-stand-out-of-sync-with-republicans/](http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/20/rand-pauls-civil-rights-stand-out-of-sync-with-republicans/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=8)