darkeyedresolve saidNot sure how he is a racist when he said, several times, that he would never go to an establishment that discriminated against people before of their race. He just believes the federal government should be used a last resort and not the solution to every problem.
He should have flipped things around and used the example of What If the Federal Government had been pushing a law that would have allowed for segregation while some states were trying to push integration policies. He would have been just as opposed to that law, because he sees it as an over reach of federal government power. He is just following his views on keeping the Fed as weak as possible, it has nothing to do with race.
Defending States Rights was the cover for segregation during the civil rights struggle of the 1950s and '60s. Sounds reasonable on paper, but in practice it was double-speak meant to prevent integration. Now it rears its ugly head again, and unless you know your US history, you'll be fooled by these misleading tactics.
The same tactics, BTW, that are used against gay rights & marriage, too. US Federalism allocates certain governmental responsibilities to the individual States. It does NOT give the States the right to deny civil rights to US citizens, regardless of their State of residence. Civil rights are a US Constitutional guarantee, and indeed are considered to be natural & inherent human rights, which government does not grant, but rather protects.
As for "private" businesses, the Congress & Courts have long ruled that such concepts as public accommodation make them liable to civil rights laws. Only truly private organizations, such as the Boy Scouts and some private membership clubs fall outside these laws (and even the Scouts are still being debated and litigated). Rand Paul proves either that he is ignorant of US history & law, or he is indeed a closet racist, or both.