Sen. Rand Paul visited Fourth Street Live yesterday with a giant cardboard check made out to the big bad federal government for $600,000, money his Senate office saved by cutting back on staff for constituent services. After belatedly answering questions from the press about running for president and supporting Sen. Mitch McConnell’s re-election over his possible Tea Party challenger (the Tea Party is so 2010) — as well as planted supporters shouting over the press about how great he is — Paul was asked why he was one of 22 GOP male senators to vote against the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act last week.

According to Paul, his opposition to the bill was rooted in VAWA requiring “borrowing money from China,” adding that he thinks such domestic violence efforts should be handled and funded completely at the state level and by private charities, not the federal government. Paul dodged LEO’s question on whether he thought the bill was unconstitutional, but as we noted last week, he has no problem telling his buds in the wacky “Men’s Rights Activists” movement that it violates the Constitution.

But how can Paul say the federal government shouldn’t get involved with criminal laws at the state level when he also supports amending the Constitution to criminalize abortion at the federal level, and is the co-sponsor of legislation like the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, which can put doctors in jail for a year if they perform an abortion for a minor who crosses state lines to have the procedure without the presence and consent of her parents? (This bill also has no exemption for rape and incest, meaning if a father rapes and impregnates his daughter, she can’t have an abortion unless he goes with her and OKs it. It’s a family values, thing…)

We decided to ask Sen. Paul why he’s OK with the federal government getting involved to save fetuses but doesn’t think such protection should be given to grown women facing violence. His answer — or lack thereof — was kind of amazing:

LEO: You support the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Why is action like that good on the federal level, but not the Violence…

Paul: (interrupts) I’m not familiar with the details on that, anybody else?

LEO: But you’re a sponsor of the legislation?

Paul turned his head and refused to look at me, as he waited a few seconds for someone else to ask a question.

So one would have to assume that Paul is just blatantly lying here, since he has banged his drum the past four years demanding that congressmen “read the bills” before voting for them, right?

After a few more questions, I followed up:

LEO: How are you not familiar with a bill you’re sponsoring?

Paul: I think you’ve already had yours. Anybody else?

LEO: Did you read it?

Paul: Alright, thanks guys.

And with that, Paul ended the presser and darted off. This happens to be the second time in a row he’s refused to answer a question from LEO about his abortion policy stance and abruptly ended a presser because of it.

It’s funny, because Rand Paul loves to speak in front of influential conservative groups in D.C. and Iowa — groups his father could never win over but he plans on successfully wooing — about how much he’s going to fight for draconian abortion policy on the federal level, yet when asked very simple questions about abortion back home by the media, he turns mute and storms off.

I wonder if those anti-choice groups are impressed by Paul’s refusal to testify to about the “genocide” of “babies” when given the opportunity, or if they’ll be troubled by his peculiar situational amnesia?

Either way, it seems pretty clear Rand is both a liar and a coward.