Mediaboss Marketing

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