Rand Paul Falsely Says He Never Opposed The Civil Rights Act

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) opposes the Civil Rights Act of 1964's bans on whites-only lunch counters and discrimination by private employers. We know this because there are multiple videos of him opposing the Civil Rights Act of 1964's bans on whites-only lunch counters and discrimination by private employers. Here’s video of him saying it to a Kentucky paper’s editorial board. Here’s a lengthy interview where he tries to defend his opposition to the Civil Rights Act to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. Here’s video from just last year of him defending his father’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act (according to Rand Paul, “it’s not all about race relations, it’s about controlling property, ultimately.”) Still don’t believe that Paul opposes the Civil Rights Act? You can watch this embedded video of Paul saying that “the hard part about believing in freedom” is that you have to oppose the Civil Rights Act:

Nor is this a particularly new position for Sen. Paul. In a 2002 letter to his hometown newspaper, Paul wrote that “[a] free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination – even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin.”

So it is a bit baffling that Paul told an audience at the historically black Howard University today that he actually believes something else:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), a proponent of civil liberties, told a professor on Wednesday that he never opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

“I’ve never been against the Civil Rights Act. Ever,” he said during a question and answer session at the historically black Howard University in Washington.

“This was on tape,” countered the questioner.

“I have been concerned about the ramifications of the Civil Rights Act beyond race…but I’ve never come out in opposition,” Paul clarified.

Again, Paul has never said that he is “concerned about the ramifications of the Civil Rights Act beyond race.” He’s said — repeatedly, over a period of many years, and sometimes on video — that he opposes applying federal civil rights law to private businesses, such as the private business where this picture was taken:

View the original article here

GOP Congresswoman: I Opposed Domestic Violence Bill Because It Protected Too Many Groups

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) on Monday openly admitted that she opposed the latest reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) because it included protections for LGBT, Native American, and undocumented victims of domestic violence.

In an appearance on MSNBC, Blackburn pointed out that the latest iteration of the law protects “different groups” and thus dilutes funding for straight, non-Native American women with the proper documentation:

When you start to make this about other things it becomes an “against violence act” and not a targeted focus act… I didn’t like the way it was expanded to include other different groups. What you need is something that is focused specifically to help the shelters and to help out law enforcement, who is trying to work with the crimes that have been committed against women and helping them to stand up.

Watch it:

Domestic violence is domestic violence, period. And there is no way to justify Blackburn’s suggestion that some victims of this violence are more deserving than others. The reauthorized VAWA allows programs targeting LGBT victims of domestic violence to compete on equal footing for grant money with other groups serving underserved populations, and it ensures that LGBT victims will not be turned away from shelters and other services because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. These victims of violence deserve the same protections as anyone else caught in domestic abuse.

Additionally, the reauthorized VAWA includes provisions to prevent serial rapists and similar abusers from preying on Native American women. If Blackburn considers Native American women a “different group,” then it’s one she should be most concerned about: Three out of every five Native American women has been assaulted by an intimate partner.

View the original article here