Paul Krugman:
Corporate America, however, really, truly hates the current administration. Wall Street, for example, is in "a state of bitter, seething, hysterical fury" toward the president, writes John Heilemann of New York magazine. What’s going on?
One answer is taxes — not so much on corporations themselves as on the people who run them. The Obama administration plans to raise tax rates on upper brackets back to Clinton-era levels. Furthermore, health reform will in part be paid for with surtaxes on high-income individuals. All this will amount to a significant financial hit to C.E.O.’s, investment bankers and other masters of the universe.
Ross Douthat:
But Paul just couldn’t help himself. He had to play Hamlet, to hem and haw about the distinction between public and private discrimination, to insist on his sympathy for the civil rights movement while conspicuously avoiding saying that he would have voted for the bill that outlawed segregation.
By the weekend (and under duress), he finally said it. But the tap-dancing route he took to get there was offensive, tone deaf and politically crazy.
It was also sadly typical of the political persuasion that Rand Paul represents.
Buh-bye, Rand. We hardly knew ye.
Matt DeLong:
Just about everybody on the Sunday shows was talking about the firestorm that erupted last week over Kentucky GOP Senate candidate Rand Paul's comments on the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The controversy arose from an interview Paul gave to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, in which he defended previous statements taking issue with a provision in the legislation prohibiting discrimination by private businesses. GOP leaders found themselves walking a fine line Sunday in supporting their candidate while distancing themselves from Paul's actual words...
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin suggested on "Fox News Sunday" that MSNBC host Rachel Maddow's interview with Paul that spurred the controversy was "prejudiced" by Maddow's own agenda. Palin also compared the interview and subsequent media attention to the unfair treatment she has said she received during the 2008 presidential campaign.
Rand's treatment is very similar to Palin's, but it's not unfair. It is a product of their both being not ready for prime time, starting with the fact that they come to these events unprepared.
Ron Brownstein:
In the GOP, this upheaval carries a strong ideological tinge, with insurgents such as Paul and Florida's Marco Rubio insisting that Republicans adopt a more militantly anti-government agenda. The Democratic challenges don't send as clear a signal. Although Sestak and Halter generally stand to their rivals' left (and drew support from liberal groups), each emphasized anti-Washington populism, not ideological purification...
That makes these trends especially ominous for the congressional compromisers who sometimes stray from their party's consensus (a frequent charge against Specter, Lincoln, and Bennett). But, above all, these changes create a political world where no one is in charge -- an environment that is increasingly volatile and partisan but also more open to new ideas and unexpected ascents. After his own stunning 2008 primary victory over an opponent rooted far more deeply in the party establishment, no one should understand that complex calculus better than the ultimate candidate that nobody sent: Barack Obama.
Reuters:
The head of the Republican Party criticized Senate candidate Rand Paul on Sunday for questioning the landmark Civil Rights Act and said the Kentucky libertarian's views were out of step with the party and country.
So it goes.
EJ Dionne on Mark Souder:
I always thought he was the real deal, both serious and thoughtful in his approach to religious and political questions. I disagreed with him on many things but not on everything.
So I do hope that Souder finds a way to work out his redemption. But it is precisely because this story hits me personally that I want to shout as forcefully as I can to my conservative Christian friends: Enough!
Enough with dividing the world between moral, family-loving Christians and supposedly permissive, corrupt, family-destroying secularists.
As sympathetic as you'll find to Souder, while still nailing the hypocrisy.