Mediaboss Marketing

Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) fancies himself as that brave Republican who will actually broach the subject of race and reach out to black voters. We've written before, though, about how many of his ideas about engaging black voters aren't new or bold, and how his claims about his ability to expand the tent are way overblown.

Something else that is overblown? Paul's idea about his record on what he calls "minority rights."

From a Salon interview (emphasis mine):

SALON: When it comes to race, how do you explain to potential new supporters some past controversies like your comments on the Civil Rights Act and a former aides neo-Confederate past that you know Democrats and others will bring up should you seek the White House?

PAUL: Well, I think that I simply point to my record. I dont think there has been anybody who has been a bigger defender of minority rights in the Congress than myself, and thats not saying others aren't trying as well.But I think you can see a history and a litany of bills that Ive put forward to not only restore voting rights, but to try to prevent people from the tragedy of losing their employability through felony convictions and other things.

People will always do things for partisan purposes, and I think some of that drummed up in the beginning for partisan purposes when I was running for office. But no, I dont think theres anything out there that people are going to say, Oh, look at this, this means that youre a racist, or something, and I think if they do, they probably pigeonhole themselves as being unreasonable by making that kind of comment.

One person who apparently slipped Paul's mind as he was making this comment wasRep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who got his head cracked openon "Bloody Sunday" in 1965.

As for his own record, Paul's stance on the issues that normally come under the rubric of civil and minority rights isn't exactly the kind of record activists in those fields would tout. He has said he doesn't personally believe in same-sex marriage and that the right for gays and lesbians to marry should be left up to the states to decide. He has said that the American With Disabilities Act goes too far. He also voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, which passed the Senate 64-32. (Sen. John McCain, among other Republicans, voted for it.) He has said that he wants to restore the role of the federal government in the Voting Rights Act, buthasn't introduced any legislation on it or signed on as a co-sponsor to a bill that would accomplish that goal, the Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2014.

Paul's exaggeration over his own record illustrates one of his bad habits, which is that he tends to say things with little to back up what he says. This will be a problem if he runs for president. His comments also show that he doesn't yet have a good answer to the real question about his past comments about the Civil Rights Act and the American Disabilities Act.

Paul's party will be in control of Senate and all of Congress come 2015. He'll have a chance to introduce and build support around "minority rights" bills -- including ones that go beyond criminal justice reform. He has a chance to build a record, but whether he will go beyond photo-ops and soundbites is anybody's guess.

See original here:
Rand Paul says hes Congresss biggest defender of minority rights. What?

Much of Sen. Rand Pauls appeal, as a politician generally and as a probable 2016 presidential candidate, stems from this idea that hes a different kind of Republican. Its an image that Pauls people work diligently to cultivate as they play up their boss philosophical and policy differences with the GOP. He has a libertarian streak (that hell gladly abandon as circumstances warrant), and he tends to oppose foreign military intervention (except when he supports it).

One area in which Paul really tries to set himself apart from his party colleagues is minority rights. After decades of subtle and overt hostility towards the interests of minority voters, the Republican Partys relationship with non-white segments of the population is terrible. Rand Paul is making a very public effort to court black voters and send the message that Republicans care about minorities, too. Its an uphill climb for any Republican, and Paul has his own unique obstacles to overcome specifically, the fact that he had a Neo-Confederate secessionist as one of his closest aides, and his past stated opposition to portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act banning discrimination in privately owned businesses. Pauls strategy to date for dealing with those comments has been to deny (falsely) that he ever said them and insist (falsely) that his views on the subject have always been consistent.

In an interview for Salon published this morning, Phillip Bailey asked Rand Paul how hed explain away these two controversies to potential new supporters, and the senator came back with a brazen answer:

Well, I think that I simply point to my record. I dont think there has been anybody who has been a bigger defender of minority rights in the Congress than myself, and thats not saying others arent trying as well. But I think you can see a history and a litany of bills that Ive put forward to not only restore voting rights, but to try to prevent people from the tragedy of losing their employability through felony convictions and other things.

Okay, lets state up front that Sen. Paul has indeed championed minority rights issues as a member of Congress, and has deviated from the party line on those issues. Hes sponsored legislation to restore voting rights to people convicted of non-violent felonies, and he backs sentencing reform for drug-related offenses. Those are important, needed reforms and Paul, unlike most of the rest of his party, is on the right side of them.

But casting himself as Congress biggest defender of minority rights is an absurd and grossly self-aggrandizing statement that isnt supported by the record hes cultivated over half a term in the U.S. Senate. First of all, as Twitter was quick to point out, John Lewis, an actual hero of the civil rights movement, is still representing Georgias 5th congressional district in the House of Representatives. Until such time as Rand Paul is thrown in jail or hospitalized in the fight against racial inequality, then his claim to being Congress chief defender of minority rights is without merit.

As for Pauls record: yes, hes on the right side of some important issues, but very much on the wrong side of others. Right now theres a nationwide Republican campaign to impose restrictive voter ID laws that are flagrantly discriminatory and will effectively disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of minority voters. Rand Paul supports these laws. But he also knows they make Republicans look bad. So his solution is to chastise Republicans for emphasizing voter ID laws because theyre bad PR and interfere with his own efforts to court minority voters. Heres what he said on Sean Hannitys Fox News program earlier this year:

PAUL: No I agree, theres nothing wrong with it. To see Eric Holder youve got to show your drivers license to get in the building. So I dont really object to having some rules for how we vote. I show my drivers license every time I vote in Kentuckyand I dont feel like it is a great burden. So its funny that it got reported that way.

But I do mean what I said, that Republicans need to be aware that there is a group of voters that Im trying to court and that we should be trying to court who do see it as something directed towards them. So thats why what Ive been trying to emphasize is not voter-ID, but trying to emphasize that I would like to give people back the right to vote if they committed a youthful non-violent crime and have served their time.

So the Rand Paul stance is to plow ahead with voter suppression tactics, but keep it on the down-low because hes got a reputation hes trying to cultivate. And that, in his mind, makes him Congress greatest defender of minority rights.

Here is the original post:
Rand Paul is Congress greatest civil rights hero, says Rand Paul

Progressives#2
Progressivism Number 2.

By: Ryan Mussack

Visit link:
Progressives#2 - Video

All Progressives Congress Inaugurates National Convention Committee
The All Progressives Congress, APC has set up a 24 member committee to organize its national convention scheduled to hold December 10th 2014. The Party #39;s Nat...

By: NTANews

Original post:
All Progressives Congress Inaugurates National Convention Committee - Video

The All Progressives Congress has accused President Goodluck Jonathan of political desperation and sabotaging his own administrations war against Boko Haram to satisfy his ambition.

It says this desire is unbecoming of a self-respecting national leader.

In a statement in Abuja on Thursday by its National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, the party said just because he was so desperate to remove Aminu Tambuwal as the Speaker of House of Representatives, Jonathan ensured that the House could not meet as scheduled on Thursday to consider his request for an extension of the State of Emergency in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states.

It said, For a President, who has severally stated his administrations commitment to the battle against the insurgency in the North-East, is it not a cruel irony that he allowed his personal ego and political desperation to override his sense of propriety, by moving to have Rt. Hon. Tambuwal removed instead of having the House of Representatives sit to consider his request?

Does anyone need any more evidence that the Presidents sole preoccupation is how to win the 2015 elections, rather than the fate of the hundreds of Nigerians, who are daily being killed and maimed at the epicentre of the insurgency? Had he been genuinely committed to the fight against insurgency, would the President not have allowed the House to sit to consider his request? How does he feel now that the entire National Assembly has been shut down because of his capricious action?

The opposition party noted that because of his meddlesomeness in the affairs of another arm of government, and also his blatant disregard for a court order that the status quo be maintained on the issue of the defection of the Speaker to the APC, the President on Thursday suffered a moral and political defeat that would hunt him for a long time to come.

The statement added, The plot was simple: The Presidency decided to use the reconvening of the House as an opportunity to remove the Speaker. While Deputy Speaker Emeka Ihedioha was accorded a presidential ride into the premises of the National Assembly, House Speaker Tambuwal was barred from entering by the hordes of security agents who have been deployed solely for that purpose.

Their plan was to ensure that with Tambuwal locked out, Ihedioha would preside over the reconvened House and the Speaker will then be removed. The consideration of the request to extend the State of Emergency was not important to the Presidency. The fate of the Nigerians who are suffering from the insurgency, which has displaced 1.5 million people, does not bother the Presidency. All it wanted is to remove Tambuwal.

Read the original here:
Tambuwal: APC accuses Jonathan of political desperation