The Republican National Committee recently conducted an?online straw poll?identifying 32 candidates who could get its nomination in the 2016 presidential race. Each of the 32 has quite a questionable history, though, that contrasts with the GOP’s consistent claim of it being the ?moral? option for voters.
Philander, racism, thievery, bribery, and combinations of these and other?sins?are?found across the slate, in fact.?In this series on the 32 potential candidates (updated every other day), Liberal America will offer a quick rundown on the hypocrisy clouding each one’s ?holier than thou? claims.
Rand Paul
U.S. Senator from Kentucky
When Rand Paul says he and his Libertarian platform stand for freedom, it’s his own he’s talking about ? not anyone else?s.
Take his 2012 incident at Nashville International Airport, for example. After setting off the passenger-screening metal detector, Paul refused to undergo a pat-down, claiming it violated his personal freedom. (He walked away to a men’s room, took whatever it was out of his clothing, then bought a ticket with another airline using a different gate.) However, he said he generally supports the spy-like activities of the National Security Agency against everyone else’s freedom; ?I’m not against the NSA, I’m not against spying, I’m not against looking at phone records,? he said this year, referring to his lawsuit that seems to protect the Agency’s actions instead of preventing them.
He’s currently attacking potential Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton via public addresses about her husband, freely talking about the Monica Lewinsky scandal almost 20 years after it occurred. But last year he criticized national press that reported his son’s arrest for underage alcohol consumption and disorderly conduct. Paul should be ?afforded privacy and respect,? he said, stating his son’s offenses were of no reflection on his role as U.S. senator. He also criticized media when the multiple affairs of 2012 candidate Herman Cain came to light.
He wants the freedom to identify himself as the ?board-certified? Dr. Rand Paul, too. But he isn’t; the national clearing house says he’s had no certification since 1995, in fact. To complete his search for freedom, though, he created his own ?National Board of Ophthalmology? in 1999, then ?certified? himself, and even though the American Medical Association refuses to recognize his made-up organization. (He continues the ?board-certified? claim to this day, even though his NOB creation went out of business in 2011.)
And when it comes to laws and issues that specifically protect the rights of others? Forget about it. He doesn’t support the Civil Rights Act’s Title II, which outlaws business discrimination against consumers based on color, nationality, or creed, he said in 2010. He calls for an end to the Voting Rights Act, created especially to protect minority rights in elections, because ?we have an African-American president,? he says. That he’s now conducting a nationwide tour of addresses to black communities (during which is he making the false claim he’s always supported the Civil Rights Act) isn’t making up for Paul’s history, either, Baltimore’s Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said in a recent editorial.
Paul is openly against women’s rights, as well, blocking the Paycheck Fairness Act in 2012, voting against renewal of the Violence Against Women’s Act in 2013, and consistently calling for outlawing abortion, even in incidents of rape or when the mother’s life is threatened. He’s against protecting women from sexual harassment in the workplace, too.
He also freely exercises his own assumed right to abuse the rights of others. In Oct. 2013, Rachel Maddow caught Paul plagiarizing from Wikipedia in an address he gave at Liberty University. He denied it, but that theft only spurred others to dig up other incidents. Less than two weeks later, Buzzfeed found Paul had copied over 1,300 words from a Heritage Foundation publication, as well as several sentences from a Cato Institute newsletter, using them without proper attribution in his recent ?Government Bullies? book. That inspired the Washington Times to review Paul’s contributions to their publication, and the rightwing newspaper cancelled his regular column after it found multiple incidents of plagiarism, too. And earlier this year, an attorney charged Paul with theft of intellectual property, stating the senator took his work in a lawsuit without attribution ? and without pay.
Add in his opposition to improving minimum wage and lowering student loan interest rates, mix them with his legislation to defund food stamps for the poor, and stir in his goal to abolish the Americans with Disabilities Act, and what do you get? The self-serving, constituent-ignoring Sen. Rand Paul, who cares only about his freedom and no one else?s.
But even though he’s currently leading the polls amongst potential Republican presidential candidates, there’s one freedom Paul might be denied. The laws of his state of Kentucky prevent any candidate from appearing on ballots twice, meaning he might have to choose between running for president and running for re-election to his senate seat.
Visit Liberal America for future updates on?the other?GOP 2016 hopefuls.
What’s your take on these?hypocritical Republicans? State your case on?Liberal America’s Facebook?page.
See previous posts on GOP 2016 hopefuls:
Kelly Ayotte??|?Haley Barbour?|??John Bolton?| ?Jeb Bush?|?Hermain Cain? |?Ben Carson?|??Chris Christie??| ?Ted Cruz??|?Mitch Daniels??| ?Newt Gingrich??| ?Nikki Haley?|?Mike Huckabee?|??Bobby Jindal?|?John Kasich?|?Peter King?|?Susana Martinez?| Sarah Palin?|
