It's just best that Rand Paul say's nothing today

[j.p.]

"Sincerely, save your empty words," Booker replied. "You are the person who said you would have opposed the Civil Rights Act, singlehandedly blocked the Emmett Till Antilynching Act, and had the audacity to say racism no longer exists."

Rand Paul’s opponent hands him a righteous smackdown for MLK Day - Raw Story - Celebrating 17 Years of Independent Journalism

[k.d.]

What was the vote tally on that legislation?

[j.p.]

Who would care.

[k.d.]

the actual voting record for both Houses of Congress shows that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed the Senate on a 73-to-27 vote. The Democratic supermajority in the Senate split their vote 46 (69%) for and 21 (31%) against. The Republicans, on the other hand, split their vote 27 for (82%) and 6 against (18%). Thus, the no vote consisted of 78% Democrats. Further, the infamous 74-day filibuster was led by the Southern Democrats, who overwhelmingly voted against the act.

An examination of the House vote shows a similar pattern. The House voted 290 to 130 in favor. Democrats split their vote 152 (61%) to 96 (39%) while Republicans split theirs 138 (80%) to 34 (20%). The no vote consisted of 74% Democrats. Clearly, the 1964 Civil Rights Act could not have been passed without the leadership of Republicans such as Everett Dirksen and the votes of Republicans. As the online Wall Street Journal so aptly subtitled Mr. Steele's article, "Trent Lott jeopardizes the very productive ideas his party stands for."

[j.p.]

I fail to see any relevance. Master Rand was shitting his diaper in 1964.

[k.d.]

Then why did you bring it up when clearly it was your dirtball party that voted against it.

[j.p.]

No, it was Rand who is against it. No Dems as far as I can tell.

[k.d.]

Look at the vote tally meathead

[j.p.]

Not a single Dem was around in 1964

Plus, not all Republicans are spineless hypocrites.

[k.d.]

Not a single Dem was around in 1964

Really. Well, who voted then?

Plus, not all Republicans are spineless hypocrites.

Has anyone asked Paul for his reasoning? Or are you to spineless?