Rand Paul's Wednesday interview with Rachel Maddow indicated a key flaw in rigid libertarianism, namely a lack of pragmatism. Principled views are without question a pre-requisite for anyone seeking a leadership position, but good leadership requires flexibility in the face of ambiguity. It is Paul's tight grasping that the government should not intervene in any manner with the operating of a private business that will do him in. The reason that the government had to mandate desegregation in private businesses is simply due to the inertia that was prevalent up to the time with regard to racism. If we were to live up to the principles inherent in The Declaration of Independence that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.", then the individual patron wins out over the proprietor of the business. If the 1964 Civil Rights Act did not include private businesses and was drafted with a strict libertarian ideology with regard to private establishments, then we would still see segregation in private businesses in The South today. The government needed to step in to protect the rights of individuals to freely patronize ANY legal establishment. I am sorry Dr. Paul, but your libertarian position on the Civil Rights Act flies in the face of the freedom that you espouse. It is not just the government that can be a menacing beast, but the mob cannot be trusted to correct itself. With regard to ethics, there is no invisible hand that will force the mob to respect the rights of the minority.