Why Does Media Think Ron Paul So Relevant to Son Rands Campaign?

If you watched cable news at all this morning, you saw that all eyes were trained on Sen. Rand Pauls (R-KY) entrance into the 2016 presidential race. But what you might not have expected to hear was all the hoopla about Pauls father, the libertarian firebrand Ron Paul.

The elder Paul, a former congressman and GOP presidential candidate himself, pioneered the same appeal to young conservatives and libertarian-minded voters for which his son is currently known. While the two differ on policy in many areas, the general message remains the same: Less government, fewer foreign entanglements, criminal justice reform, and an end to NSA surveillance.

Ron will obviously not be irrelevant to Rand the elder libertarians hardcore fan base will be an important asset for the campaign. But unlike his father, the senator is more openly attempting to court traditional conservatives, as indicated by his recent rhetoric about radical Islam, same-sex marriage, and other wedge issues. To be blunt: Rand is not Ron.

And yet the media fixates on their connection, as if Rand isnt his own person. According to a TVEyes search of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. today, Ron was mentioned 29 times during discussions and reports about his sons candidacy.

Just today, CNNs David Gergen said the younger Paul has daddy issues. MSNBCs Jos Daz-Balart declared the shadow of Ron Paul is looming large over his son. NBCs Kelly ODonnell said Rand was trying to create distance between him and his father by staging Ron off to the side, ensuring there is no hand-raising moment between father and son at the speaking podium. And CNNs Dana Bash suggested Rand has to be more mainstream than Ron in order to win.

Why is Ron so relevant when reporting or commenting on Rands presidential bid? Is it because of the seemingly outlandish things the elder Paul has said of late? Or is it because of his positions on the relevant issues?

Either way, his name comes up in a way that suggests Rand needs to answer for his father.

Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has yet to announce her presidential run, but how often will the media harp on the influence her husband, former President Bill Clinton, might have on her?Will they mention Bills potential influence close to 29 times during a six-hour period on the morning of her announcement?

Lets explore that possibility. Has anyone thus far argued that Hillary has husband issues? Or that Bill is looming large over Hillary? Would Hillary be at the whims of her husband if she were president? Such rhetoric could be considered sexist and yet, its perfectly rational to treat Rand as if hes not his own person, inseparable from his fathers more radical beliefs and words.

See the original post:
Why Does Media Think Ron Paul So Relevant to Son Rands Campaign?