Hate Anti-Leftists Syndrome by the MSM

John R. Houk
© May 27, 2010

Republican candidate Rand Paul had originally gained some notoriety by being the son of Libertarian-Republican Ron Paul and the winner of a Kentucky Senate primary race against who many in the media has described as the “establishment” Republican. I am guessing “establishment” means among other things the candidate favored to win.

Rand Paul’s victory has awakened the Leftist MSM Hate Anti-Leftists Syndrome (HALS). In 2008 Republican Vice President Candidate Sarah Palin became the target of HALS. Palin was misquoted and her words twisted and her family placed under a microscope to find any minuscule tidbit of information that could be transmuted into political dirt.



Rand Paul was manipulated into using words of honesty about the Civil Rights Movement to be twisted into the Leftist accusation of racist bigot. (I found this on YouTube. The early part is what became troublesome for Paul. The latter part is primarily a Vlog analysis.)

Paul’s politics is more Libertarian than Conservative. Thus Paul’s emphasis on individual rights of choice of what happens on one’s own property is more valuable than the potential for discrimination based on race, creed and gender. Paul emphasized the non-proprietary elements of the Civil Rights Movement were essential to battling race discrimination that was primarily aimed at Blacks (or African-Americans, whichever is the politically correct of the age). For Libertarians the inalienable right is the thought that free association overrides social imperatives of the Civil Rights law.

Here is the best explanation I have found of the Libertarian concept of Freedom:

“…The essence of the libertarian philosophy is that each person owns him- or herself and whatever belongings he or she honestly acquires. Thus individuals are due freedom of association and, logically, non-association. It also follows that the owner of property should be free to set the rules of use, the only constraint being that the owner may not use aggressive force against others." (Sheldon Richman)

I have to admit I just now viewed Leftist Rachel Maddow’s Leftist setup that will lead to HALS on Rand Paul. It is her interview that is causing Conservatives to rally behind Paul. Slanted Left Crooks and Liars posted the entire 19 minute interview on their website. The Crooks and Liars video is follow by quite the congratulatory post by Nicole Belle praising Maddow and dissing Rand Paul. Belle accuses Paul of not answering Maddow’s questions as if Paul was going to give her yes and no answers such as would occur on the stand in the Court of Law. Fortunately he was able to answer Maddow’s questions to prevent the yes and no questions that could have been twisted more than his actual answers have been.



Now that I have done my bit to point out the Leftist MSM is on a witch hunt to discredit the reputation of GOP candidates running for Office in 2010, let me say that I do think Rand Paul’s stand is as utopian as a Leftist’s stand to establish a collective utopia of ending wealth and entrepreneurship for the so-called greater of good of humanity.

There is no way that racial discrimination would have been dissolved to the point it has up to this point in time if private businesses operating public services could prevent services on the basis of race, religion or national origin. Paul assumes that humanity is inherently good and will the morally correct thing in the preserving of First Amendment rights that presume private ownership has the absolute freedom of choice on who to provide service to or not.

Paul is correct that proprietary ownership provides the freedom of choice BUT if the choice involves offering general public service then the entire public should be allowed the opportunity to check out that service within the limits of the law. (Armed persons and drug black market individuals are an example of being discriminatory against according to the law.) However if the service is of the nature of a private club that accepts members based on say wealth, low income community associations, ethnicity, gender, politics and so on; then I have to agree with Paul.

Paul’s Civil Rights stand is a purist Libertarian interpretation which would not work in America or anywhere. From Hot Air I found this quote from Rand Paul that clarifies his current politics:

A political firestorm has followed Paul since last week, when he expressed misgivings about portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He suggested to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow that the federal government shouldn’t have the authority to force restaurant owners to serve minorities if they don’t want to.

“I think they’ve used it as an issue to try to make me into something that I’m not,” Paul, an ophthalmologist, told a friendly hometown audience at a Bowling Green civic club. “I was raised in a family that said that you judge people the same way Martin Luther King said, you judge people by their character not by the color of their skin.”

Since last week Paul has been reassessing his campaign staff. He said he expects there will be staff changes, though he declined to give details. He won the GOP nomination last week with a campaign staff made up largely of political novices and volunteers. …

Campaign manager David Adams, who had been a Republican blogger in Nicholasville before joining up, will remain but perhaps in a different role, Paul said.

Paul, who ran as a political outsider, also said he has made amends with the Republican establishment. He said he has had cordial discussions with National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky’s senior senator.

It is evident Rand Paul’s campaign is going to be revamped in order to prepare for Leftist political IED’s by the Mainstream Media (MSM).

Well that’s my two-cents. Check out the wit of Ann Coulter as she points the hypocrisy of the Democrats about the Civil Rights Act and accusing Republicans with racism to suck-up the votes of African-Americans (and for that matter Hispanics).

JRH 5/27/10