The Liberal Media smells blood in the water and the Conservative Politicians are running to hide.
Now, this may come as a surprise to many, but the problem is, is that Constitutionally speaking, both Ron and Rand are correct. They are Constitutional Fundamentalists, looking at the letter of the law. Liberals generally look at the spirit of the law and the age, I reckon. The Constitution sees a difference between citizen participation and those who are prevented from participating. Further, the Constitution, formed in the wake of an attempted rebellion dealing with private property, deals a lot with the protection of private property. As a matter of fact, a segment of the population was, well, private property. I mean, the Constitution of the Republic (not a Democracy), legalized and protected slavery and the dehumanizing of a person. It enshrined private property.
I don’t think Rand or Ron is racist (well, maybe one of them is) and they are correct about the unconstitutionality of at least certain segments of the Civil Rights Acts. But, what to do about it? Segregation would not end without Federal Intervention. Amending the Constitution to give minorities civil rights would have failed, and upon failure, what would have happened?
Maybe both sides should step back and look at what Rand is saying. Granted, I wouldn’t vote for him as I find his views on several things beyond my toleration, but the fact is, is that there is a difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law, and it has been recognized since nearly the very beginning.
Anyway, just my thoughts.