Ah, but the media is whirling, no? This must mean Paul is making some sort of impact. It’s just not an impact Luke Brinker of mediamatters.org is comfortable with. Though his concerns are equally as legitimate as his questions (as they should be when we speak of a possible president), I find Brinker’s argument only whirling everything in the opposite direction.
Instead of saying what Paul is not, we must first understand what he is. Furthermore, We all like to make conclusions, especially when they are convenient.
I am not poking fun at Mr. Brinker. I understand he is an educated person, and that is respectable without a doubt.
The points he made within his article all touch on Paul’s alleged false identity—the Republican who can relate with the Democrats at some level. I agree with Brinker on a lot of aspects, especially who he blames for the confusion of Paul’s identity in the first place:
“The media’s facts-be-damned references to Paul’s supposed unorthodoxy on social issues is symptomatic of a larger failure of political journalism.”
He placed that sentence at the end of his article, after the damage was already done. What comes before and after the blame of political journalists is where the uncertainty resides.
Oh yeah, that is the whole article he wrote. It is all about uncertainty, except for the headline, which is statement: “’Socially Liberal’ Rand Paul Is A Media Creation”
It seems as if Brinker needs clarity, with no bias, on Paul’s stances. A noble cause, but why does he indirectly ask questions that lead with a statement? Perhaps he is not so uncertain. It’s because he knows what he’s doing. But let’s stop beating around the bush, shall we?
Plainly, we have to get straight to the point. We need to ask Sen. Paul himself. Doing political journalism “well” can be a hard thing to do, but that is no excuse for any of them. Brinker ended his article with this:
“Mentions of his purported social libertarianism almost uniformly come in the context of speculation on the 2016 horse race – how Paul can position himself as an electable candidate, how he could puncture the Democratic coalition. What’s lost is a meaningful discussion of his positions on actual issues.”
Again, ought we not to just ask Paul himself what his stances are? I won’t deny that I have written articles questioning the possible Republican nominee, but reading this proposed another idea—getting straight to the source, and the journalists have. The media getting to Paul is one of the few things making Paul question a campaign. He understands what comes with the territory, though.
All the same and with no blame, he has made his stances clear. Read the articles on this website to clarify. Watch his interviews and television appearances. All the facts are right there. What needs to stop are the relentless claims without evidence.
We should be able to trust a quote, and it should be placed in its proper context. This is something liberals, conservatives, and everything in between should adhere to.
(Photo Courtesy of Russ Allison Loar via Flickr Creative Commons)
Finally someone on Capital
Hill is willing to speak out and
stand firm for our personal
freedoms, our God-given
rights and all man's equality.
Here you can keep up with the
latest insights and events in
Paul World, helping our hero
restore the Constitution...
and take our country back!