Rand Paul writes TIME op-ed on Ferguson MO/police militarization

[JRP1994]

http://time.com/3111474/rand-paul-ferguson-police/

"Anyone who thinks race does not skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention, Sen. Rand Paul writes for TIME, amid violence in Ferguson, Mo. over the police shooting death of Michael Brown."

[Matty]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://time.com/3111474/rand-paul-ferguson-police/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Fcolumnists+%28TIME%3A+Ideas%29

[Matty]

Damn, you beat my thread by a minute! I'll have mine deleted.

Of course, I agree with the senator.

[JRP1994]

Damn, you beat my thread by a minute! I'll have mine deleted.

Of course, I agree with the senator.

Haha sorry! But yes, I agree with him as well.

[DrScholl]

He's only making trouble for himself with Republican primary voters.

[RTX]

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

Who watches MSNBC except for Lockup anymore?

[Free Bird]

He's only making trouble for himself with Republican primary voters.

Why say you that?

[Brewer]

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

Who watches MSNBC except for Lockup anymore?

Who watches MSNBC for Lockup?

[ElectionsGuy]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

[King]

I liked it and this is great, but it's also derailing his nomination chances. A twitter search for Rand #tcot will show you how much the totally-not-racist-at-alls consider him a pandering running-to-the-left opportunist now.

[DrScholl]

He's only making trouble for himself with Republican primary voters.

Why say you that?

Do you really have to ask?

[Rockefeller GOP]

I really don't see how this will kill his primary chances.  No one - whether you're an enlightened, urban liberal who knows more than anyone else or a folksy, redneck social conservative - wants to live with a police force that has gotten out of control.

P.S. Yes, I am poking fun at liberal Democrats' inflated opinions of themselves.

[Beet]

Good for him.

[King]

I really don't see how this will kill his primary chances.  No one - whether you're an enlightened, urban liberal who knows more than anyone else or a folksy, redneck social conservative - wants to live with a police force that has gotten out of control.

P.S. Yes, I am poking fun at liberal Democrats' inflated opinions of themselves.

Sorry but that's bogus.

Unquestioned support of law enforcement has been a Republican tenet since the 60s.

It's pretty clear a majority of conservatives adore the police state. Many are officers themselves. I know a handful of police offers personally and they're all super right wing. The only problem they have at the moment is that they don't feel like they're in control of it, hence "take my country back."

[ElectionsGuy]

He's only making trouble for himself with Republican primary voters.

Why say you that?

He actually does have a point. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Fox News, and other conservatives have already defended the militarization of the police force, not just the shooting. And many conservatives on twitter, blogs, etc. immediately wanted to talk about black crime, poverty, and the looting/rioting. The position that Paul is taking is not popular among your average conservative, and many already don't like Rand for foreign policy reasons.

I worry that around this time next year republicans will be trying to ignore or debunk him like his dad. He's not his dad, but he certainly has ideas that mainstream conservatives dislike at heart.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

Who watches MSNBC except for Lockup anymore?

Who watches MSNBC for Lockup?

Lockup is the only think on MSNBC worth watching.  I have no use for MSNBC's commentary programming given that they're just poorly produced Democratic propaganda with a big side of corporatism.

[IceSpear]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

You know Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996, right?

[Rockefeller GOP]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

You know Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996, right?

Well something DRASTIC happened in that year!

[Pandaguineapig]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

You know Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996, right?

You're point? Michele Bachmann used to be a liberal democrat, peoples views radically change.

[IceSpear]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

You know Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996, right?

You're point? Michele Bachmann used to be a liberal democrat, peoples views radically change.

...I was clearly saying that to make a point about how Hillary Clinton supporting Goldwater 50 years ago is completely irrelevant. Did you even read the context?

[Pandaguineapig]

Fantastic article

What will poor MSNBC now say about Senator Paul?

I guess they can keep bothering him about his supposed opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Crickets from Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton.

You know Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996, right?

You're point? Michele Bachmann used to be a liberal democrat, peoples views radically change.

...I was clearly saying that to make a point about how Hillary Clinton supporting Goldwater 50 years ago is completely irrelevant. Did you even read the context?

My bad, I think Hillary's support of Goldwater was simply a reflection of her parent's views given that she has always been pretty liberal

[SPC]

I liked it and this is great, but it's also derailing his nomination chances. A twitter search for Rand #tcot will show you how much the totally-not-racist-at-alls consider him a pandering running-to-the-left opportunist now.

Running to the left got McCain through the primaries (as running to the not-as-extreme right did for Romney.)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I liked it and this is great, but it's also derailing his nomination chances. A twitter search for Rand #tcot will show you how much the totally-not-racist-at-alls consider him a pandering running-to-the-left opportunist now.

Running to the left got McCain through the primaries (as running to the not-as-extreme right did for Romney.)

Dole is the only remotely moderate Republican to get the nomination in the last 35 years.

[Maxwell]

I liked it and this is great, but it's also derailing his nomination chances. A twitter search for Rand #tcot will show you how much the totally-not-racist-at-alls consider him a pandering running-to-the-left opportunist now.

Running to the left got McCain through the primaries (as running to the not-as-extreme right did for Romney.)

Dole is the only remotely moderate Republican to get the nomination in the last 35 years.

McCain was to the left of Romney and Huckabee, certainly.