Dana,
Great post but I think a solid case can also be made that he is an anti-government extremist-even more so than most Republicans. For example he has called for the abolishment of the Departments of Education and Transportation. Transportation and education are two of the best long term investments for governments and studies have repeatedly shown that they are an EFFECTIVE investement; this explains why many moderate Republicans have supported expansions in education spending. The fact that he objects towards the most effective investments in American society highlights the extreme nature of his anti-government ideology.

if the only evidence you have to smear a man is degrees of seperation by an elected representative who's job is to be a social butterfly and meet with 1000s of people then one can only assume that you're cherry picking. I for one, don't care for these pathetic attempts at race baiting. Ron Paul's position is clear recognition of the INDIVIDUAL and not pandering to group-think racists like yourself that perpetuate the racist collectivist meme.

"No child left behind" doubled the department of Education, did that help the schools? No, our schools are closing because they can't meet the Federal mandate, none of the teachers I know like it. Ron Paul said that money is best be spend at the local level, in schools district, not in Washington DC.

I'll ignore the newsletter and Robert Taft club stuff because it's been debunked elsewhere, but the other two points are fundamental libertarianism.

Rudeness and crudity should not be actionable torts. If I'm your boss and some aspect of my personal behavior offends you, tough. Hit the bricks. I didn't hire you to make life convenient for you. I hired you to make work easier for me.

With regard to the insurance issue, the mere act of offering in the marketplace insurance that fails to cover a particular disease should not be a criminal act. Frankly, if someone wanted to offer hangnail insurance or dandruff insurance, that covered only those ailments and nothing else, I fail to see what would be CRIMINAL about doing so. If I went into McDonald's and asked them to sell me AIDS insurance, they would tell me that selling AIDS insurance wasn't their business. If McDonald's can decline to enter the AIDS insurance business, why can't XYZ Insurance Company? And "But people need insurance!" or some variant of that is not an argument.

Let's see, you pulled the race card, the gender card, so you can't be taken seriously by any rational reader. It's people like you who feed those Nazi trolls with your tongue in cheek insinuations. In an attempt to find out why he gets support from those types I asked some people with obvious white supremest user names on Youtube why their movement backs Paul, because he is the most pro EQUALITY(not makining laws that prop up any race or group). They say the same thing. He will end foriegn aid to Israel. They hate all his other positions, but apparently they hate "the jooos" a lot more...

How arrogant of you to think that some weak blog post COULD EVER BE the "THE DEFINITIVE TAKEDOWN". Of the only Candidate running for office who's support is growing...

You Fail...

what really does the department of education do?
A report of a few days ago said that students in the United States are scoring 39th in the world in math. So where is the money going and why are our children so inept at basics.

Charlie

Bottom line is that every President (and every congressman) takes a sacred oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.

There is no Constitutional authority for the federal departments of Education and Transportation (read Article I, Section 8).

Any candidate that is not supporting the abolition of these unconstitutional (and therefore, illegal) agencies is not serious about his oath of office

I have to agree with the comment from Ken above: You do appear to be cherry picking for so-called racial inequities in Paul's past positions. I believe more to the heart of the issue is how you yourself speak about different people in terms of "women" or "gay people". As soon as you begin to differentiate between what you perceive as different "groups" of people, you become as guilty of discrimination as those you would seek to call racist.

If you want fairness and equality among people, start with your own viewpoint and cease looking at people with an incessant need to categorize them. If fair be fair, then human is human. Period.

I see nothing in this blog that would make me reconsider my support for Dr. Paul. I stand behind him because of his stance on the Economy, non-interventionism and personal freedom's. Not your fuzzy social agenda.

If there are Ron Paul supporters out there that don't particularly like Women or African Americans that is their business as long as they don't violate these groups rights.

There's a pretty solid progressive case to be made against Ron Paul. He is after all a self described hard-core conservative.

The reason you get flak is that you cite his anti-abortion views as evidence of unprincipled hypocrisy. They aren't. They are a reason for abortion rights advocates to vote against him, though.

It also doesn't help your case when you suggest that the Democrats should just dump the white guys already (and hint that the only people who object are anti-semitic skinheads).

It is tiring to keep responding to these false accusations. Dr. Paul is not racist. Dr. Paul fired the staffer who wrote the offensive article. Education is wonderful, but the federal Office of Education is wasteful and intrusive. Ask any teacher or principal how they feel about No Child Left Behind. As a resident of a state overwhelmed with development, I wish that we required developers, not taxpayers, to pay for roads (price of doing business). If we did that, then maybe we could stop treating our existing built and natural environments as disposable resources. If Dr. Paul wrote those things about harassment victims, then I agree that wasn't nice, but please stop cherry-picking. Look at his overall policies; given a chance, Dr. Paul could save America from bankruptcy, and could stop America's descent into belligerent aggression and lawlessness. Peace.

It is important to look at all aspects of a candidate's policy. I looked at your links to Paul's works, and was not scandalized as you were. He does not speak "PC," but it doesn't bother me... and I live in Los Angeles, and have for many years before the riots. It is possible to say things more delicately than what was written, and there may be some factual errors as well, but there are common-sense truths that others are afraid to say. I resent the thought control, and the tyranny of the prudes, more than I resent the lack of government intervention to protect the people whose victim-complex outranks my own.

Wow, some of you guys are really invested in this Ron Paul guy.I wonder what he'll do with all your money once he drops out after New Hampshire.

The whole "intellectual" content of this post can pretty much be summed up by the fact that the Taft Club, which the author brazenly links to the White Nationalist movement, is in fact run by a half-Asian, half-Jewish young man named Marcus Epstein.

Sounds like Dana, not Ron Paul, is the one with a conspiracy problem

Compare the style and content of the newsletter article with Ron Paul's decades of political writing, starting here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

I was concerned when I first heard about this story, since I couldn't ever support a candidate who was a racist. But a simple style comparison should lend credibility to Ron Paul's claim that he didn't write that newsletter article on race. It doesn't match up with everything else he's written. Plus, it's really hard to take seriously any claim that a devotee of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard is secretly a Nazi.

Who ARE all these people? Where did they come from? Do they just sit and Google "Ron Paul" all day? Really, someone clue me in.

Jimbo,

He has already stated very clearly that his at least in this up to Super Tuesday. You should really try to do some research on the situation your commenting on, you wouldn't want to come across as snide and ill informed would you?

Did you unwrap a fish?
This story about Ron Paul's alleged racism was started months ago and debunked a dozen times since.
At minimum, an informed columnist would Google "Ron Paul"+Racism to find the facts of the matter.

This is the most banal ninnying I have ever seen. I will never come back here.

I disagree with this article that Ron Paul is an extremist anti pro-choice... if you've done your research you'd realize he's pro-state rights and despite his personal beliefs, he'd rather have states free to choose their stances on such issues

You mentioned a few issues taken out of context. My mother is on public housing but if my sisters and I were not taxed at 30% we could afford to pay her rent. I hate the current state of affairs. Ron paul is like a ray of sunshine peaking through the rafters of a crumbling old house. Do you not understand the government is going broke and no one will be taken care of? Even the Canadian dollar is higher then the USAs. God this is so sad. Quit nitpicking and vote for Ron Paul. No one is perfect.

I had a chance to ask Paul, when he was the Libertarian candidate, about the tragedy of the commons and environmental issues. He just said, Hmmm. I don't have an answer.

Nice.

It is also worth mentioning that Ron Paul is the sponsor of the We the People Act, which would bar the federal courts from adjudicating any civil rights cases, among other things. So, he is no friend of civil rights.

Dana is stretching it..

And still, another article loaded with debunked BS.

Sorry Dana, Ron Paul has far more expertise on our currency and banking system. Your use of words like wacko to describe something you know nothing about only shows your ignorance and real intent.

By the way, who is your choice for Candidate? lets do some checking... No comment?

I thought so..

Want to know what scares me?

Fascism.

Dana is stretching it..

And still, another article loaded with debunked BS.

Sorry Dana, Ron Paul has far more expertise on our currency and banking system. Your use of words like wacko to describe something you know nothing about only shows your ignorance and real intent.

By the way, who is your choice for Candidate? lets do some checking... No comment?

I thought so..

Rob
Impressed you are able to read the Constitution.You get serious, and educated.

Ron Paul uses statistics to base his opinions. His opinions are reflected from facts.

They may not be politically correct, some may find them offensive.

But I for one am tired of all the fake pandering and political correctness. I want opinions based on facts not on what someone would find offensive.

I support Ron Paul, and even if I do not agree with him on every issue. He is the most principled politician around, he has core family values, a pro-American message, and ideas that would benefit the middle class by ending inflation. When gas cost 3.50 a gallon, it hurts me alot more than it hurts wallstreet.

Im supporting Ron Paul, all of these typical pandering politicians can go get their money from special interests. Ron Paul's money- just from the American people, who should be the only "special interest."

So much of what you say has already been proven wrong it would seem as though you hadn't taken any time to research your opinions. Paul doesn't want to deny people help or charity or their rights, in fact he is a proponent of all of these. You think that because Paul would have the government butt out of protecting people's rights, that he also would not want anything to replace it. Paul would have charity and concerned society help people, instead of the government doing so with the use of force. Those that care vehemently for AIDs patients and other unfortunates would be able to contribute freely an in their own way to the causes that they most favored, rather than having their dollars stripped from them to support the military or the IRS. This seems like a better plan than putting inefficient bureaucrats in the way of the charitable and their causes.

Ron Paul is very much pro gay rights in that he is pro everyone's rights. Type "Ron Paul gay rights" into YouTube to find out his true opinions. I have a gay friend who used to support Hillary, but now supports Ron Paul after doing a little research. The great thing about Ron Paul is that he answers questions directly and honestly rather than trying to avoid them.

I'm not even reading this, the race card.

1) Ron Paul DID NOT WRITE THAT. That was said to be in his newsletter, and he took moral responsiblity for it when it was brought to his attention when they used it during his Congressional election, but HE DID NOT WRITE IT. He doesn't believe in collectivism - Women, Black, Gay, "Rights", but "individual" rights.

2) The Taft club does not have ties with racism. Did you see the video? Did you see him talk about anything even relating to race? No, it was about Robert Taft and the Old Right philosophy of non-intervention.. Don't be ignorant.

Dana, there's something you need to read. I think you'll be floored....

NPR - "Ron Paul supporters, we'd love to hear who you are."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/bryantpark/2007/12/who_are_ron_pauls_supporters.html

Thanks Dana for writing this. Racsism is a big issue for me when voting so this really grabbed my attention. After reading it I took some time to finally "Googe Ron Paul" and what I discovered was a man of truth and integrity. I dont think I've ever been so excited about politics in my life! Finally a candidate that is not just the lesser of two evils. Go Ron Paul!!!

Paul's position is difficult to understand IF you believe that there is a connection between what he wants government to do, and what he believes individuals should do.

What he believes is that government can not fix moral problems and that he should not foist his moral responsibilities on others using the government. To imagine how silly this really is, remember that Larry Craig favored anti-gay laws, and Bill Clinton was a big supporter of sexual Harassment laws, and Jesse (heimie town)Jackson favored anti hate speech laws.

Can you maybe imagine a world where, when there is a problem like aids, we ask ourselves how WE can help, rather than petitioning the government to do the work that is our own moral responsibility. Of course, now if there is a problem, we all say, so what, we pay our taxes with the justification that this alone covers our moral responsibility to other people.

Ron Paul has come along at just the right time. Lyndon Larouche's long reign as the resident cult leader of presidential politics has come to an end and left a void that desperately needs filling. And with all that money that Paul's collected and not spent, he's well set to run every four years for the next several decades! I can just feel the LOVE all around me!

As a black woman I would never vote for a racist! And that is why I WILL VOTE FOR RON PAUL!!! Ron Paul sees us all as individuals and that is the key to ending racism in government. Ask any minority how they feel, its better to be treated as an individual instead of a member of this, that or the other. God bless you Ron Paul, you are my hero!!

I'm sorry, but your rebuttal of Ron Paul's positions are unconvincing. Does a person have a right to a job? Obviously not. Who would you force to provide it? Does a person with HIV have a right to force their neighbors to pay for the treatment of their disease? Rights do not extend to services provided by others. In order to supply the services, the government would have to forcefully tax us all to do so.

Ron Paul haters are so funny. Its worth having to search into the depths of google just to find wacky articles like this one. The laughs come from knowing these authors do not have a clue how to think logically, they just take their masters orders and write a smear with whatever thats days "smear point" is. Wake up America, you are losing your country.

It never ceases to amaze me how Ron Paul's critics continue to drudge up a piece from a newsletter way back in 1992 that were not even written by him, and which he disavowed at the time and many times in subsequent years.

This sort of the behavior on the part of media moguls and bloggers who wish to be taken seriously is exactly why so many people are flocking to the Ron Paul camp - they are sick and tired of name-calling, race bating, and mudslinging taking the place of honest discussion about ideas and public policy. Shame on you for sinking lower than whale dung at the bottom of ocean.

So, you say, let's not let Paul's opposition to the Iraq War be "papered over" by his record on civil rights? I say you are downplaying the severity of the killing in Iraq so you can smear a man who disagrees with your domestic agenda.

Why waste time writing about a fringe candidate who will not win one primary this year.
Ron Paul isn't even a true libertarian.

I would suggest you read the constitution. Then read about the only candidate who cares about it. Then, think about what you are trying to insinuate regarding a constitutionalist who believes in equal liberty for all, self responsibility, and peace in the world.
Then, go talk to a teacher and ask them about "No Child Left Behind". Now, compare how students in our country compare to the rest of the world with regard to the education system. Then, take a look at our "system of transportation" in this country. What federal transportation system do you see? Perhaps a bunch of individuals driving cars, and an ancient railway system...

Some of the best money ever invested eh? I would hate to see your bank account or credit for that matter.

Goldstein, eh? That means you want the USA to continue to sponsor Israel, well, we are out of money - we are broke, and we need to work on America now, so please, go away Israel Lovers.

I am going to make this short but sweet: Every morning Ms. Dana Goldstein asks herself, "How can I fool the masses today?". But there is a further-reaching implication: I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with her. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I even the score. Please note that many of the conclusions I'm about to draw are based on cogent and virtually incontrovertible evidence provided by a set of people who have suffered immensely on account of her. Just between you and me, her grunts all look like her, think like her, act like her, and shower out-of-touch braggarts with undeserved encomia, just like Ms. Goldstein does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha!

Ms. Goldstein always demands instant gratification. That's all that is of concern to her; nothing else matters -- except maybe to glorify incompetent, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. I tell you this because Ms. Goldstein's ebullitions are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to manufacture and compile daunting lists of imaginary transgressions committed against Ms. Goldstein and they promote the mistaken idea that a book of her writings would be a good addition to the Bible. I do not wish to endorse immoralism but rather to illustrate that Ms. Goldstein wants to produce an army of mindless insects who will obey her every command. To produce such an army, she plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy. Whichever approach she takes, if this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this letter's role is much greater than just to reveal some shocking facts about Ms. Goldstein's practices.

It's definitely a tragedy that Ms. Goldstein's goal in life is apparently to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about her initiatives. Here, I use the word "tragedy" as the philosopher Whitehead used it. Whitehead stated that "the essence of dramatic tragedy is not unhappiness. It resides in the solemnity of the remorseless working of things," which I interpret as saying that one of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that no one has a higher opinion of Ms. Goldstein than I, and I think Ms. Goldstein's an acrimonious, coprophagous self-promoter. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, but Ms. Goldstein appears to have found a new tool to use to help her impact public policy for years to come. That tool is credentialism, and if you watch her wield it, you'll unmistakably see why she thinks that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so.

Ms. Goldstein's propaganda machine once said that Ms. Goldstein would never lead a diabolic jihad against those who oppose her. So much for credibility! Which brings me to my point. If I recall correctly, certain facts are clear. For instance, there is a format she should follow for her next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts.

It's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Ms. Goldstein distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain her current opinions. Even if mad sideshow barkers join her band with the best of intentions, they will still plague our minds in a matter of days. Not all, I hasten to add, do join with the best of intentions. If it were true, as she claims, that she has achieved sainthood, then I wouldn't be saying that Ms. Goldstein's language consists largely of euphemism, question-begging, and sheer, cloudy vagueness. In fact, I have said that to Ms. Goldstein on many occasions and I will keep on saying it until she stops trying to promote the lie of resistentialism. She is on some sort of thesaurus-fueled rampage. Every sentence Ms. Goldstein writes is filled with needlessly long words like "galvanocontractility" and "homotransplantation". Either she is deliberately trying to confuse us or else she's secretly scheming to needle and wheedle puerile buggers into her retinue.

I by no means claim to know everything about grotty Machiavellians. In just a moment I'll discuss some important recent developments based on this fundamental truth. First, however, I want to add a bit to what I wrote previously. Ms. Goldstein says that she's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life.

Yes, Ms. Goldstein may have some superficial charm, but she has two imperatives. The first is to renege on an incredibly large number of promises. The second imperative is to take the focus off the real issues.

Ms. Goldstein's remonstrations are like an enormous moral relativism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must clean up the country and get it back on course again because Ms. Goldstein's litanies are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause.

To put this in context, Ms. Goldstein wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving her lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that I'm not a grotesque person. I'd like nothing more than to extend my hand in friendship to Ms. Goldstein's votaries and convey my hope that in the days to come we can work together to do what needs to be done. Unfortunately, knowing them, they'd rather cashier anyone who tries to let Ms. Goldstein know, in no uncertain terms, that the fabric of her invectives is infused with headstrong philistinism because that's what Ms. Goldstein wants.

Drugged-out, disruptive dunderheads in general, and Ms. Goldstein in particular, intend to create an atmosphere of mistrust in which speculations and rumors gain the appearance of viability and compete openly with more carefully considered theories. Why? That's easy. It's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of disagreeable, pesky talebearers like Ms. Goldstein can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. Who could have guessed that she would confiscate other people's rightful earnings? To put it another way, will her shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy her her long-sought victory for daft, cold-blooded totalitarianism with its showy irreverence and glorification of all that is amateurish? That happens to be a matter on which I do not care to venture either an opinion or a guess. I do, however, feel that I should state that Ms. Goldstein's goal is to shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. This is abject tribalism! Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, our current parlous situation is the result of a toxic combination of Ms. Dana Goldstein's recklessness and her cohorts' cupidity.

The idea that a person has a right to a job is problematic because ultimately it means that one person must by threat of force provide for another by allowing them to be their employee. Such a policy is immoral. If someone owns a business it should be up to them how they run it and how they choose to exercise their freedom of speech. As long as they do not threaten their employees (unless their threats amount to decisions about their own property, like the threat that they will no longer employ the person in THEIR business) then the sexual harassment should be allowed. An employer who gives an employee the choice of either having sex with them or being fired, for example, is within his or her rights. People do not have to support this employer's business and furthermore they may protest the business and make it known that this is how he operates his business. Therefore it is in the best interest of employers to put in place sexual harassment policies in their companies.

Insurance companies also should be allowed to do as they wish. As they are involved with matters of life and death they are even more prone to opinions of angry protesters.

I think the racism issues have been addressed numerous times.

I'm used to reading fairly balanced, in-depth, thoughtful comments on this blog. But apparently when you criticize Ron Paul, you provoke an avalanche of angry, simple-minded ranting. Sorry you have to put up with this, Dana.

Reductio ad Hitlerum

Never works with informed voters.

The more the desperate controlled media attempts to "bring down" Ron Paul, the more dedicated you will make the peasants with pitchforks.

Great job - keep it up, you masters will understand far too late that the Pandora's box of the internet has made your power over the minds of the people is about to have it's "DEFINITIVE TAKEDOWN" and we don't have to hope - we can see it!

Speaking to your assessment of Paul's compassion, Bastiat had you pegged long ago:

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."

Sorry to burst your race baiting bubble but we minorities are on to the game. It has been used to smear good candidates far too many times and frankly I am offended at the people who continue to use this tactic and think we are ignorant enough to fall for it yet again.

I've researched Ron Paul extensively and not only am I on board with this highly intelligent man on his foreign policies, true free market agenda, monetary policies, and reducng the size of the wasteful behemoth Government who exist only to serve themselves and the lobbyists, I am thrilled to see he is for indivual rights as opposed to pandering to group rights that only serve go make scapegoats out of them and cause discontent by those not receievng "special" benefits that never really come anyway. Minorities only want equal rights as human beings, not for being African American, or Asian, or Hispanic, or Indian, or purple people. We are all human beings and that is what Congressman Paul sees. We want a right to prosper just like everone else. We don't want a hand out by a Government. We want ewual rights. The Government suppresses us by their so-called hand outs.

You on the other hand are a vile person who can not be trusted to speak for me and tell me who is a rascist. I resent your lies and using me to further your agenda. Race baiting has been a tool of many people in the past who are the last people to really have my (an African American woman) bests interests at heart. Been there, experienced that, and have learned to see it clearly. I find Ron Paul delightful...you I find vile.

So if I don't support Ron Paul I'm a Commie? What? What?
If any of you libertarians who have posted here in favor of this man and his agenda are getting checks from the government, you are not worth listening to. Or if your businesses get government contracts. Or if you are getting any education at public expense. Or if you are living off people who are getting checks from the government. If you are getting one penny from the government or using any government services you are not worth listening to.
My favorite story is about a bunch of libertarians who wanted the state to dig a well for them so they could live free in some godforsaken spot.
The governor told them to go fly a kite!
Yes, most of you believe in entitlemsnts, but only for yourselves. You're selfish, that's all.

I had a hard time reading the rest of your article after you said the Department of Education was effective.

True, I'm a libertarian and I live in part on Social Security and the money I invested when I was working. I paid into social security for over 45 years. I continue to be forced to pay more than I can afford toward a school tax, the local tax, the county tax, and the federal tax (not to mention such things as gas tax, etc., etc.) Damn, I earned everything I have and would have even a better retirement than I have if I did not have to continue supporting such parasitic governmental outfits as the "Department of Education" (what a pitiful joke) or, yes, the endless and mindless and bloody wars that we, the people, are dragged into by a top-heavy and oppressive government. Damn right I'm sore. Flush out Washington, vote for Ron Paul

Harry Wrote "Why waste time writing about a fringe candidate who will not win one primary this year. Ron Paul isn't even a true libertarian."

What could be further from the truth.

Im a Canadian who is looking from afar seeing my southern neighbors in trouble. When about 9 months ago I heard about Ron Paul.

PERSONS all around the world believe this man may be the man that could change the united states and maybe even the world for the better.

Someone once said that A society will turn to democracy within two generations of all the citizens having access to television.

With this in mind I can see a need for a new type of government, one that more respects, ultimately, the wishes of the PERSON.

With corporations running the polices of government, who can hope for a better solution then the internet. And who would be a better representative in government than a sound-minded person like Ron Paul.

I know lots of people in the united states that are voting for Ron in the primarys, and have got their way into the republican party specifically for that purpose. I also know plenty of Canadians hoping for A "President" Ron Paul.

Stan- yes that does sound hypocritical of the libertarians that are doing that, but then there is also the argument I have heard of getting one's money back that was extorted from them by the IRS.

The newsletter smear is old news, the Houston Chronicle researched extensively when Ron Paul was running for Congress in 1996 and could not prove he actually wrote those words.

If you read the hundreds of articles he has written at www.ronpaullibrary.com you will see his writing style is nothing like that in the newsletter.

As for the Taft club, it is a minor Republican organization, very mainstream, and actually headed by Marcus EPSTEIN. Guess he didn't get the memo that they were Neo-nazis.

I could go on about his hero Ludwig von Mises being Jewish, or his close friend Murray Rothbard, or Cynthia Mckinney who is not only black but very liberal socially and has praised and worked closely with Paul, but you will believe what you want to believe, and continue to spew your propaganda.

You would be right at home on such sites as FreeRepublic and LittleGreenFootballs, they like to use guilt by association and other smear tactics as well.

By the way your hero Barack Obama's spiritual adviser Jeremiah Wright is a hateful bigot on par with Louis Farrakhan and Pat Robertson. This is not someone who gave an unsolicited donation, it is a close friend and adviser.

Now I know you will not respond to this or any other comment but I felt the need to expose your hypocrisy and shoddy journalism. Have a nice day.

I'm really getting tired of all the same drivel being brought up time and time again. Dana, if you want any argument you make to carry any weight whatsoever try the only one you can make; state vs federal control over nearly all issues.

You obviously want federal control, and federal categorization of every people type you can think of. I and nearly all Paul supporters want states to actually differ based on what their respective populations want (granted they themselves abide by the common most basic of laws).

You make your case, and we'll make ours. This is the ONLY valid argument against Paul.

Just to comment on the first comment about the DOE. You are half right, wrong on exactly what I wrote above. Education is one of the best long-term investments, but you tell me just how many of your 'studies' are talking about a double layer of bureaucracy (state and federal). Simply getting rid of the DOE does not get rid of the states control over the matter, nor does talking about abolishing the DOE mean the country would cut off their investment in education. This is the same for every other issue I've seen brought up here.

Think people.

Interesting post Dana and good work for taking on your detractors.

Moreover, to some of the Paul supporters, you might do a little more good if you didn't make it sound like you're the only people who have a clue about what's going on. The "Paul bot" phenomenon has been interesting to watch.

This article can be cited as proof that Ron Paul is *not* a racist, along "if this is the best they've got" lines.

Tim Jones:

You put it well. WE are so used to thinking that we are dependant upon the Federal GOvernemnt to do things for us. We do not. We are the government. While we need a federal government for certain things, it does not need to live our lives for us.

That is what Paul believes. It sounds nuts because it is something that we are ready to think.

In the 20's and 30's of the last century we did not have the ability to commicate that we do now. Parts of the country needed Federal Intervention, but today are able to have localization of many things without the abuses and neglect that existed prior to the New Deal.

It is worth a try. If you are against Media consolidation why not be against Governemnt Consolidation.

I am not sure about voting for Paul for President, he is my Representative and I vote for him because the Democratic party (all twelve of them) in my area is run by half wits.

I am definately considering Paul as President.

A nutcase he is not, and he is a gentleman to boot.

Tim Jones:

You put it well. WE are so used to thinking that we are dependant upon the Federal GOvernemnt to do things for us. We do not. We are the government. While we need a federal government for certain things, it does not need to live our lives for us.

That is what Paul believes. It sounds nuts because it is something that we are ready to think.

In the 20's and 30's of the last century we did not have the ability to commicate that we do now. Parts of the country needed Federal Intervention, but today are able to have localization of many things without the abuses and neglect that existed prior to the New Deal.

It is worth a try. If you are against Media consolidation why not be against Governemnt Consolidation.

I am not sure about voting for Paul for President, he is my Representative and I vote for him because the Democratic party (all twelve of them) in my area is run by half wits.

I am definately considering Paul as President.

A nutcase he is not, and he is a gentleman to boot.

Wow, you really screwed that one up. What you said to me is that you want more of my money to solve the world's problems. I'm working 60 hours per week. My wife needs an operation that I can't afford. My kids are about to go hungry. You want to take more of my money to police the world. You are really a wonderful person (NOT), to care so much about people half way across the world. Go to hell, I'm voting for Ron Paul!!!

You mention so-called racist, anti-semitic support of Ron Paul. It's a well-known fact that these groups have been heavily-infiltrated by federal agents. Indeed, there's good reason to believe that the supposed support of Ron Paul by these groups could be part of a disinformation campaign designed to discredit Ron Paul's candidacy.

The FBI infiltration of these extremist groups has been well-documented. During the height of the FBI's Cointelpro (Counterintelligence Program) in the 1970s, the FBI discussed putting an informer into the highest position of the KKK.
In fact, during the heyday of its Cointelpro operation, the FBI had some 2,000 informants and agents in the KKK.

It's clear that this infiltration of such groups continues to this day, although no one outside of highest levels of government knows the extent. For example, in 2006, an FBI agent-provacateur and informant organized an anti-semitic rally in the city of Orlando. The Orlando Sentinel, the city's major daily newspaper has covered this story.

Clearly, the FBI has every reason to discredit Ron Paul, perhaps as an official policy. Certainly, rogue elements in the FBI could have reason attack him, because their department's funding would certainly be cut by Ron Paul and many of their cushy, non-productive jobs eliminated.

It wouldn't surprise me that this contribution by a neo-Nazi sympathizer, and the so-called support from neo-Nazis might be prompted by government agents. It seems strange that out of the tens of thousands of donations that Ron Paul received, that some reporter was able to sift through them all
so quickly and come up with a donation from some obscure neo-Nazi that few people have ever heard of, espcially someone with a name as common as Don Black. However, a government informant would know that information and be able to feed it to the reporter. A good reporter would do some digging to see who these supposed neo-Nazi supporters of Ron Paul are, and make sure they're legitimate, before jumping to conclusions about this contribution.

You're also wrong to compare Paul's views with Obama. Obama is not a non-interventionist and anti-imperialist like Paul. He's made many statements supporting foreign military intervention.

And by the way, if anyone wants to see a great music video satire on the MSM, the president, and the war on terror, go to YouTube and see the excerpt from the new, international award-winning feature film, "Song of the Dead," a zombie musical that's also an anti-war satire. The filmmaker, Chip Gubera, is giving a share of his profits to the Ron Paul campaign. Go to:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qQmkkoxSKYw

This article is a smear job. Plenty of examples listed above, but I thought I would pick one thing you threw into your ridiculous laundry list that maybe hasn't been mentioned.

Anti-gay? How is Ron Paul anti-gay? He believes individuals should pick their lifestyle as they choose fit. If you're gay, that's fine. If you want to have a gay life partner, that's fine too. The state shouldn't be involved one way or the other.

The only respect in which he might be considered "anti-gay" is that he doesn't believe any social group, such as homosexuals, should be given special rights and privileges by the government. As the government should not interfere in our personal decisions, they also should not subsidize our personal lifestyles.

But since you said it in your article, please show me some evidence that Ron Paul is "anti-gay".

How do you guys get here so fast? Are you all part of a borg-hive brain?

PaulBots attack!

I am an Afriacn American gay Democrat who will be voting for Ron Paul. Why? Because he is the only candidate questioning what the role of governement should be and advocating less govenrment in our lives. All the others are simply advocating more involvment and more ways to opress us through greater taxaation and control.
He may not have a chance, but at least he has an idea. The rest are running on bankrupt issues.
This isn;t so much about being a liveral or a cnservative, but about asking if the whole system hasn't been broekn.
I went to a rally for Obama where, depsite the fact that I like the guy, I felt very uncomfortable around his supporters. Then I went to a Paul rally and felt like I was an Amercian among other Americans. That was a really good feeling.

Some facts about Ron Paul:

•Ron Paul is a congressman from Texas in his 10th term.
•He is a veteran of the Airforce.
•He is a Doctor who has delivered more than 4,000 babies
•He’s been married to the same woman for more than 50 years.
•He has never voted for a tax increase or an unbalanced budget.
•He has never taken a political junket
•He voted against a congressional pay raise (10 times)
•He is against the regulation of the internet. (The printing press got us out of the Dark Ages, the internet is doing the same!)
•He returns a portion of his allotted staff allowance to the government each year
•He voted against cushy retirement benefits for politicians
•He will end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens.
•He opposes all bills that threaten our 2nd amendment right to bear arms.
•He has a bill to stop the looting of Social Security. As you know, the supposed "trust fund" is looted each year to pay down the annual deficit spending (currently over a half Trillion dollars!) so there really is no trust fund.
•He opposes the New World Order and stealth "free trade" treaties such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and the proposed N American Union.
•He is not a member of the CFR, Bildeburgers or any other Globalist club bent on world government.
•He promises to keep America sovereign and free.

Have you noticed that the dollar has lost more than 50% of its purchasing power in just the last 5 years? The Canadian Dollar is now worth more than ours! Ron Paul has a bill to abolish the Federal Reserve System and return our monetary system to one backed by a real, universal standard of value (our U.S. currency is just paper – it is not backed by anything tangible such as gold or silver – known as fiat currency – the demise of Rome.) This was one of the main reasons for the American Revolution. Why would Congress give away their authority to print and coin money interest free to a group of private wealthy bankers? The Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express. This would stop the theft of the American people and end the socialistic wealth transference that has been taking place for close to a century. Printing money out of nothing and then charging interest on this loaned money should be a crime. This also would then force the government to balance the budget because they could not borrow money created out of nothing and thus tax the people through inflation.

In 1984 Ronald Regan created the Grace Commission which found that 100% of the Income tax goes to pay interest on the national debt, not a dime goes to pave the roads or pay the police. It goes to pay interest. Thus, you get rid of the Fed, you get rid of the IRS.

A government big enough to give you everything you want is also strong enough to take everything you have! He will down size the federal government and return many government functions to the states, carefully following the 10th Amendment to the Constitution which forbids the federal government from doing what is not expressly allowed constitutionally. This will enhance the power of the states and reduce the power of the federal government. He wants to abolish the federal Department of Education, Energy, etc. and get the government out of many areas which the Constitution does not authorize. In short, he wants to follow our Constitution, strictly adhering to it as our founding fathers intended.

Ron Paul voted against the snowballed Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act which have stripped us of our constitutional liberties. These laws operate on the false assumption that we must surrender our freedoms in order to secure our safety. I believe the old maxim that those who are willing to surrender their freedom to have security shall have neither in the end. He has a bill called the Freedom Agenda Act which restores Habeas Corpus and negates the Patriot Act and Military Commissions act! No other candidate has done something like this!

He has also created the Health Freedom Protection Act which ensures Americans have access to uncensored information about supplements and natural remedies. He opposes forced vaccinations and mental health screenings of American citizens. You can spend days doing research on his health care plan. We would agree a Doctor would probably be more familiar with how to fix the medical industry than a lawyer?

He believes in a non-meddling foreign policy, the same policy that was advocated by George Washington in his Farewell Address. He will use diplomacy first and use military power only as a very last resort. He voted against the pre-emptive war in Iraq from the very beginning, declaring it to be contrary to the Christian theory of just warfare as well as immoral and unconstitutional because Congress never declared war. He is the only candidate who pledges to bring the troops home from Iraq IMMEDIATELY, and not just from Iraq. He will bring our troops home from all over the world and let other nations take care of defending themselves and fighting their own battles. Stationing troops in over 130 countries costs us almost a trillion a year! We've been in Korea for 50 years! They don't even want us there. Imagine our troops and that money being used here to secure our borders.

Ron Paul has walked the walk, not just talked the talk. There are many changes that need to be made, and no doubt he will not be able to make them all overnight. Yet, I think you can see why those who have gotten very wealthy by trampling on the Constitution hate Ron Paul. He is a threat to the way they have become accustomed to doing things. The political establishment and biased media that spends millions of dollars on a campaign trying to convince you they are fair and balanced, are very upset about Doctor Paul.

Read his book, Freedom Under Siege and A Foreign Policy of Freedom.

I love when people say that he is going to oppress you by getting the FEDERAL government out of your lives. As a libertarian I wish your doomsday scenarios were true, but I don't live in a locality where my local, state and federal governments are all ruled by Libertarian majorities. It would be nice if you people would understand jurisdiction and the diversity it is supposed to create. Just because I think it is a good idea doesn't mean I have to screw it up for 312 million people by making them submit to my will. And I am not ignorant enough to think that Mississippi and California can live under the same uniform laws and not be completely polarized. Let California put up the hammer and the sickle and have Lenin statues in Sacramento for all I care. Let the blue and talk radio red states engage in social engineering to their hearts content. That is rather perverse if you ask me. Keep it up and don't forget that war is peace, ignorance is strength, and oh as you are making the case, Freedom is slavery.

Yes vote for the people who also say that a majority is apparently a minority because they cannot override vetoes for bills they don't have to even bring up.

I also like how you say Obama's "original opposition. " Now he is opposed to troops being there possibly around 2013 and that is just the lip service he is paying people. You know that intelligent blond woman on Morning Joe, her dad was the one that started to fund the jihadists against the Soviets. Guess who picked him up as an adviser? Yup Obama. Do you think he picked him as an adviser just to say no to him repeatedly? Come on. Obama isn't a philosopher-ruler but you can tell what kind of ruler he will be by the philosophers he surrounds himself with, see Bush and the Neocons for reference.

"Wacky ideas" on monetary policy? How is Ron Paul's opposition to flushing $2 billion per day of barrowed money down the toilet that is Iraq, while we are already $9 trillion in debt, wacky?

Are not Ron Paul's views sane whlie the status quo will certainly destroy our country from within. No other issues such as abortion, race, healthcare, nor anything else matter, is our empire and its currency continue to callapse.

I'll ignore the newsletter and Robert Taft club stuff because it's been debunked elsewhere,

I keep seeing people post statements like this, yet they never, ever, post a link to these alleged debunkings. I wonder why that is?

I'm gay and still voting for one of the Greatest Presidents to be Ron Paul :) He does whats right for his country. Your BS is just that.

"Wacky ideas" on monetary policy?

The gold standard.

It's amazing that you wrote all that vapid bullshit and managed not to use the words "Harry Reid." Maybe if you want Greenwald to respond, you should respond to the points he actually raised.

Hey, did you guys hear the one about Ron Paul sitting down for some Thai food with neo-nazis?

FYI, RP's speech to the Taft Club is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8cPoCcqL3U

And it would be pretty unusual for a racist to talk about potentially pegging Walter Williams as a running mate, wouldn't it?

Dana Dana Dana... how can one person be so wrong? Racist? Anti-gay? Those two descriptions are so off-base that I am puzzled to even know where to begin. Ron Paul believes that we are all individuals created with the same rights. Shame on you for outright lying. In a Ron Paul world, gays would be able to marry and blacks would be set free from the chains of welfareism to prosper. Once again...shame on you.

Damn, this was weak! I though you'd be able to return the volley, at least, once.

You immediately went off into logical fallacy land. Straw men, guilt by association, ad hominem, you covered them all. I don't think you touched on the original topic once except to tell Glenn you were not a one issue voter (even though your last post says otherwise).

Dust yourself off, maybe you'll do better if there's ever a rematch.

And let me just write a bit further on the failed ideology that is both espoused by the right and the left currently in this country of a Federal Democracy, tyranny of the majority, versus the limited Republic we were supposed to keep as Franklin instructed. Forcing homogeneous laws on a nation of heterogeneous states and localities is like trying to force that square peg into the circular hole, it will never work. The only thing it is good for is constant agitation and polarization of the masses, and that always creates a faux struggle for power hungry politicians to "champion" and political rags to sell magazines about the latest predictable outrage.

Dana wrote, "And Paul was no less compassionate when it came to ..."

Who pays for Dana Goldstein's idea of what is "compassionate". Would Dana have our government steal the fruits of my labor from my family to pay for Dana's ideals?

Dana, please fund your own ideals (like Bill G. or Warren B. or Oprah W.) and keep your thievery away from my family.

Wow. So many Paulbots, so little time.

This one's my favorite:

Goldstein, eh? That means you want the USA to continue to sponsor Israel, well, we are out of money - we are broke, and we need to work on America now, so please, go away Israel Lovers.

Posted by: Mick Russom | December 20, 2007 7:21 PM

Gee, wherever did Dana get the idea that Paul has a bunch of anti-Semites supporting him?

Amazing. Ron Paul's supporters are collectively the single best argument against his candidacy. Everyone knows that America is filled with nuts and ignoramuses. But it's quite a spectacle when they gather together to support a particular candidate.

Dana I bet there are plenty of empty seats on the next flight to Tel Aviv. Please forget to write us when you get there! Toodles!

Seriously, if we could put Paul bots on something like global warming, we'd have it solved by now.

Jesus...I admire the passion of his followers, but there's not a lot of room for disagreement with them.

Also...let's be honest folks...Paul is not winning the White House, so this is just a matter of getting it all off your collective chests.

To any of you who are interested in how the media is employed as a propaganda tool to influence American public opinion, I highly recommend you see the video titled "Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land" available on Google Video. After seeing the video please consider whether it might be possible that Ron Paul's position on entangling alliances might have so frightened those featured in the video that they are now making a concerted effort to slander this American statesman and patriot. I'm of the opinion that the latest Ron Paul attacks are part of a coordinated propaganda attack by the Hasbara Project.

See the video here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6604775898578139565

The smear attemps are fruitless, Dana. He's "Teflon Ron." Nothing sticks.

Jeff Fecke - Do you love israel more than america? i am not anti-semite nor anti-arab. I don't think the US should support Israel or Saudi Arabia...
what does that make me?

I hereby proclaim that from this day forth that "Mike P" shall be renowned the world over as the Fred Ettish of the blogosphere. Toodles!

Why are so many people afraid of Ron Paul? If we can get to the heart of the question, we will be that much closer to addressing the root cause of America's decline and slide into being a police state.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM0Ow6rzzD0

WE THE PEOPLE reject the media and political establishment and the REVOLUTION will continue. We reject all polls and the vote is the only thing that counts. We will take back the republican party from the neocons and religious right. Then our country. Truth cannot be put down.

Give me a break. You're going to splice it up saying us "paultards" are anti jew, anti black (crap was that not P.C. enough) We are on a highway to hell in a fast car and all you want to do is argue in the damn car. Wake up. Morgan Stanley just took $5 million bailout from China today. Our problems are alot bigger than our damn egos. Wake up. This isn't "doomsday" this is damn reality. I'm so sick of all the b.s. If were gonna argue in the "car" then lets get back to the important crap of whether Brittney has underwear on or not and ignore everything that doesn't suit our fancy. This is bigger than our pride. This is reckoning. This again is about doomsday stories this is the truth. Ron Paul at least I can vote for something anti establishment. Wake up and quit arguing in the car. For the most part dems and repubs are both on "cocaine" and guess what they have the same dealer.

Paul is the only GOP candidate calling for the end of the drug war--surely a good thing for blacks, who are constantly racially profiled. He calls for the end of the federal death penalty, noting it is disproportionately applied to blacks (as well as the poor). He calls for an end to the Iraq occupation, when blacks are disproportionately represented in the military.

While he also calls for an end to welfare programs, he admits that a transitional period is needed and does not say the states cannot provide similar programs.

As for anti-Semitism, his economic models are Jewish. His opposition to aid for Israel accompanies a similar end to its Arab neighbors. His complaints about Israel's lobbying is related to its size and power (as a foreign influence) not to its Jewishness.

As for abortion, I agree with him that a fetus is human, but I don't want to try to force women to give birth just the same. His "let the states choose" middle-road option is more palatable to me than the Constitutional amendment route some GOP candidates propose.

Similarly, on gay marriage, he'd keep the federal gov't out of it, and that's OK with me.

Also, bear in mind that any of the proposals on the economy or domestic issues would have to pass the Congress, so he would be more setting a direction than getting his proposals passed in total.

The issue where he would have immediate impact would be in enforcing a non-interventionist (not isolationist) foreign policy.

If you support non-interventionism, along with an end to the war in Iraq, he is the only choice among the GOP. And among the Democrats, only Kucinich has consistently opposed the war and the accompanying loss of civil rights. Obama has voted money for the war and voted for renewing the Patriot Act.

Those, like me, who will vote based on the war and civil rights issues issues should look at Paul and Kucinich: one is a Libertarian Republican, the other a Socialist (or maybe "social justice" Democrat.

I respect Kucinich, but will vote for Paul, because I don't think the goverment is good at running things, and I don't want the government to have too much power. We've have enough concentration of power under Bush.

Ok sorry, I typed way to fast in my angst. Morgan Stanley took 5 billion from China not million and I meant IS NOT about doomsday stories...

Ok sorry, I typed way to fast in my angst. Morgan Stanley took 5 billion from China not million and I meant IS NOT about doomsday stories...

Ok sorry, I typed way to fast in my angst. Morgan Stanley took 5 billion from China not million and I meant IS NOT about doomsday stories...

take your welfare state and shove it. join the revolution and restore the republic. freedom for all! Ron Paul 2008.

Steve m writes:
>>Who ARE all these people? Where did they come from? Do they just sit and Google "Ron Paul" all day? Really, someone clue me in.

Show up to the caucuses. Stand in lines with us at the primary ballot boxes. You'll get a chance to be introduced soon enough.

TEFLON RON, Dana the smears won't stick.
As for getting rid of the Department of Education, it's been around for 50 years! 50 years and they haven't ever gotten it right. I want to just scream, I won't keep quiet. The schools are miserable and that department has produced zip, zero, zilch, nada in any measurable results . Zero advancement for the kids it supposedly helps. It is inept and a waste! As for Dr.Paul being a racist I ment him personally and spoke with him. I am the son of Mexican migrants!
Viva Ron Paul
God Bless America

Who ARE all these people? Where did they come from? Do they just sit and Google "Ron Paul" all day? Really, someone clue me in.
Posted by: steve m. | December 20, 2007 5:34 PM

How do you guys get here so fast? Are you all part of a borg-hive brain?
PaulBots attack!
Posted by: gfw | December 20, 2007 10:59 PM

I can answer these. It's because there are a LOT of us. 58,000 of us donated a record $6.02 million real dollars just last Sunday. That's a lot of fringe. :-)

"Wacky ideas" on monetary policy?

The gold standard.

Posted by: Kevin | December 20, 2007 11:57 PM

That wacky Alan Greenspan had this and this to say about that wacky gold standard.

Oops, got caught by limited HTML parsing. Here are the two links I referenced above:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igTaBT6SAaU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEZnPtbi77g

As a female attorney and independent woman, I am sickened by how the pendulum has swung. Today women wield the sexual harassment sword and put men in terror. Frankly, I have only seen the harassment laws abused by women those who take advantage of them for employment and/or financial gain. These same women are those who used to take advantage of men for gain. The secrets out of the bag: harassment laws are far more lucratve ...

The nonsense of this article aside, I did notice a few comments criticizing so-called "Paulbots" for finding and commenting against this article.

To be frank, the article is available for public view. If you find that a great deal of readers are speaking out against your comments, it may not be the fault of the readers. It may very well be because of the inaccuracies in your article

Response to Jeff Fecke:
Hey Jeff, why do you equate Anti Israeli sentiment with Anti Semitism? Are you a racist? Are you trying to tell us that only Jewish people live in Israel or are you just trying to tell us that the only people that live in Israel and count for anything - are Jews? Racist Bigot! Is the phrase that comes to mind pal!

Fail

I'm gay and I support Ron Paul... he's the only candidate who would seek to remove government from the lives of gay people... and just leave us alone. Even if he thinks gays are God's plague on the earth, he at least wants to get government out of our lives, unlike many on the GOP side and everyone on the Dem side. Voting for Paul, as a gay male, is far more in my interest than any other candidate. Dana's post are tired arguments rehashed for the millionth time over many years.

The liberals and neocons both share a love for "The State"...a love that Ron Paul supporters do not share. There is a vastly significant portion of this society who reject the notion of the welfare/warfare state. They, like myself, are sick and tired of being over-regulated, over-taxed, being treated like criminals and being told what to do by bureaucrats and politicians.

The desperation of liberals and neocons to "keep us in our place" and make us "good little citizens" has resulted in horrific smear attacks like this stupid and baseless "white supremacist" baloney. Already, these allegations are starting to fall apart:

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/tara-thai-ron-paul-and-white-supremacists-fec-report-data/

Keep up the smear attacks: you'll only see the resistance to your state-worship grow.

You know, until fairly recently, I always thought ignorance was the exclusive domain of neocons. I now realize there an awful lot of narrow-minded liberals as well.

However, it's nice to see that they have accepted the fact that RP is a serious contender against the other Republicans in the primaries, and against the Democrat candidate in Nov. I, and several of my friends have recently registered Republican, in order to vote in the primary for RP.

No amount of grasping at straws to smear him will stop the exodus of Democrats from their party. And painting him as a racist will not help Obama.

Get ready for "shock and awe"!

Nice try Zionist boy. This is the most rediculous hit piece I have ever seen. I'm not surprised at all that it was writen by a Jew. Such obvious Jewish propaganda, trying to link him to Nazis and skinheads and rednecks and Big corporations. LOL Why do the Jews hate Ron Paul?? Simply because he does'nt think we should be sending money and troops to defend Israel. You really need to come up with a new and less Jerry Spinger way to attack Dr. Paul. The cat is out of the bag on People like you. You are acommunist and your ancesters have been race baiting just like you are doing for many years. You are sooooo Anti-Defamation League it's not funny. The ADL are spys and subverters for Israel and everyone knows it. You areall about social engineering. This article is full of outright lies and is simply silly. You hate white gentiles just like your parents told you to and are a good liar just like Mom and Dad too. MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

I just made a $100 donation to RP based on this post. Thanx Dana! Paul '08

This is what you are really about buddy.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php

The reason Ron Paul wrote what he did about AIDS was this. In the late 80's AIDS patients were trying to get insurance companies to cover AIDS related care even though it was not included in the policies they bought. It was an attempt to get the insurance companies toforce them to cover something they had never agreed to cover. So it wasn't that the insurance companies (or Ron Paul for that matter) didn't have sympathy for the patients, it was that the contract was trying to be overruled instead of re-written and re-rated.

As for his position on gays, many gays feel that since he wrote legislation called the Marriage Protection Act that he was in fact arguing against gay marriage. That is too simplistic an argument. In fact, the legislation stated that in any state where marriage of any kind is defined by state law, the federal courts may not overturn that law to make blanket national changes. This works both ways. If Kansas wants to ban gay marriage the federal court cannot interfere, but if Massachusetts wants to legalize gay marriage the federal court may not interfere, and likewise the legislation would prevent the Congress from making a blanket national decision as well, lest new legislation be written.

Opponents AND proponents of gay marriage all should have signed on, but of course, the legislation was far too intelligent for anyone but Ron Paul to understand. As usual, he's the only bright one in the bunch fighting for people in their own states to decide their own laws regarding their own lifestyles.

Ron Paul's own words tell anyone who cares to learn that he is not a racist or anti-Semitic. He called Martin Luther King and Ghandi his heroes (neither are white). He tried to get each member of Congress to contribute $100 of their own money to give Rosa Parks a medal of honor (they all declined, instead they used taxpayer dollars and none of their own). He has been heard quoting Walter Williams, a black economist from Philly. His economic heroes are Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, all Jewish.

He doesn't want to give fotreign aid to Israel OR to any other country including all the countries Israel is enemies with.

The Robert Taft Club is an old school, non-interventionist organization, not a white supremacist group. In other words, this piece was a smear. It does perpetuate other stereotypes, however, stereotypes I would think the author would not want to perpetuate. It's sad. I thought We the People were getting smarter about race and religion issues. I guess I was mistaken.

Ron Paul believes a fetus is a human with rights. He never said eh doesn't respect women's rights but he believes that infringing upon the life of the fetus is a greater offense than a woman who got pregnant deciding she doesn't want to be pregnant to commit murder. Now, not everyone agrees abortion is murder, but then what you should do is try to convince him otherwise, not label him anti-women's rights because that's just ridiculous. Have you ever considered why he thinks that way (or why you think your way), or just that he's an old white Christian male so he must be sexist, racist, and anti-Semitic?

I thank the American Prospect for following the lead of Little Green Footballs and Freerepublic for exposing Ron Paul for what he is.

My only problem with the American Prospect is the link where one can make a "a tax-deductible donation" How will the children become educated if we are deducting taxes from the Dept. of Ed?

If a person who has used intravenous drugs and has contracted AIDS we must take care of them. And if one penny of tax dollar is not available because of the American Prospect's offer to allow people to CHEAT on their taxes then I say we check their connections to skin head groups as well.

THis is paranoid nonsense. Dana Goldstein claims the Taft Club is run by a bigoted, self-hating Jew, Marcus Epstein. The only grounds for this conclusion is that Mr. Epstein has ties to Patrick Buchanon (who Dana apparently believes is the grand wizard of the KKK). THen Dana calls ROn Paul a corporatist as evidence he cites his book "Freedom Under Seige". THe only thing this book says about corporations is that they conspire with politicians to corrupt the system. Hardly a corporatist position. Shame on Mr. Goldstein

All this white power bullshit is ISRAELI SUBVERSION OF OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM!! Israel is the greatest enemy this country has ever faced. Here is the proof! http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php

Epic Troll blog is Epic

POST THIS STORY EVERYWHERE YOU CAN. LETS EXPOSE THESE PIECES OF FILTH.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php

Dear Dana
To use a line from an old Saturday Night Live skit. I will para phrase.
"Dana, you ignorant slut!
I am against abortion whole heartedly but would have made an exception when your mother was pregnant with you, and would have been happy to perform the abortion myself"
Your complete ignorance of what Ron Paul stands for seem to be beyond your means. Are you just repeating what someone else thinks?
Now you'll chalk this up to another Wacky Ron Paul supporter but if you want to see wacky look at yourself.
Kinky Friedman, a great Jew from Texas once wrote a song that you should heed, considering your lack of competence in writing creditable essays, I think you should just "Get your biscuits in the oven and your buns in the bed.
Happy Holidays.

GO KINKY!!!

Just another distortion folks!!!
Nothing to see here, Now go and spread the good news...

"Freedom, Prosperity and Peace"
So fundamental for all nations. And for the sake of humanity!!!

"This is abject tribalism! Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, our current parlous situation is the result of a toxic combination of Ms. Dana Goldstein's recklessness and her cohorts' cupidity."

Well, she already confessed (good for the soul) that she learned it in school. Mumsie and Daddum's insularity has made them sick, and there is no cure.

I think the Democrats should tax them into oblivion.

In his 1988 book Freedom Under Seige (you can read the whole thing online), Paul railed against sexual harassment victims. He wrote, "Why don't they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem? Seeking protection under civil rights legislation is hardily acceptable." What if a victim needs to keep working because he or she feeds their children and pays their rent paycheck to paycheck? What if quitting just isn't a viable option? For Paul, the rights of the employer not to be sued simply trump the rights of the individual. Corporations are people, too!

And Paul was no less compassionate when it came to HIV/AIDS patients. He wrote in his book that insurance companies should be free to deny care to HIV-positive individuals since, "The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim -- frequently a victim of his own lifestyle -- but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care."

thanks for pulling out these brilliant quotes which remindsed me of why i support ron paul in the first place. this is just basic common sense, yet we are supposed to be offended that somebody would dare say them. what is best you don't even say what is wrong with that positions - we are just supposed to be so disgusted that our brains get frozen.

One thing you can take comfort in:

When Ron Paul is sitting in the Oval Office in January 2009, you can consider yourself a member of the opposition. You'll be opposing a government based on the Constitution.

Racism and Dr. Paul.
"A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities."

"The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism."

"Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people's hearts by passing more laws and regulations."

"It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government "benevolence" crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us."

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.

If you can't actually refute his arguments, SMEAR HIM!

Your "smears" are hardly interesting, anyway. For example, you pull out the old canard that Paul is a racist but don't actually substantiate it. Regarding the letter you say, "It probably reflects his views." (Evidence?) Regarding the Taft Club you merely rely on guilt by association, even though Paul rails against racism on his web site. I'm sure we could smear you with guilt-by-association if you were running for president.

Donna Goldstein, Dana whatever, WHAT A JOKE YOU ARE!!! THE DEFINITIVE (I HOPE) TAKEDOWN OF RON PAUL!?!??! What makes you think a CACKLING YENTA HYENA LIKE YOURSELF, A PERSON WITH NO HONOR LIKE YOURSELF, A PERSON WITH THE SOUL AND HEART OF A SLAVE LIKE YOURSELF could EVER take Down Ron Paul??
Obviously it's your FEMINAZI training that leads to this fake confidence. On your best day you could'nt shine Ron Pauls shoes. And look at what a coward you are, you don't even have belief in yourself, you say "the takedown - I hope...what the hell is that all about. Be a warrior and stake your claim, yet you want to lob dirtbombs at a Sovereign Man, founding father material and then don't have the balls to stand behind it.
You are a joke, move to China or Europe, go and live with the socialists in your workers paradise....Pathetic.
Get a clue and stop being a slave. NO ONE OWES U ANYTHING!!!!

I think you are the racist, instead of treating people like individuals you treat them as groups. And by the way Charlie THE STATES are supposed to pay for public education (SCHOOL TAX??PROPERTY TAX????) NOT the federal govt. The Constitution DOES NOT, DOES NOT authorize for a Dept of Edu. This is the brainchild of socialist/communists who want to centralize power, and erode our individuality. ALL the teachers I know HATE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, they hate having politicians in DC dictate what they have to teach, how fast their kids have to learn it and micromanage their curriculum.
Live as a free man Charlie and NOT a slave. Dana, get over your fear of freedom and liberty, and as for your pathetic attempt to bring down The Honorable Ron Paul, the ONLY PATRIOT running for Office, please note:

Ron Paul on choosing a running mate:
"Paul: Well, I don't know, but if I won, you know, I'd want a recount. You know, lets be certain about what's going on here.
But a running mate. Somebody like WALTER WILLIAMS. Walter Williams is a very good economist. "

Who's Walter Williams?
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/

Your eyes don't deceive you he's black, yeah he's black.

Since when is being racist illegal? Since when does giving money to a candidate mean he obviously supports all of your personal beliefs? It's an idiotic smear attempt that anyone with a ounce of logic could destroy.

I bet every single candidate out there has taken money or associated with someone that does illegal drugs in their spare time. OMG that must mean all of the candidates actually endorse drug use! Get a clue, people!

I can't believe anyone woudl buy into the notion of Paul being racist. I've met the man personally and I can tell you he is one of the best men I know. I am American of Hispanic ancestry and I am sick and tired of the groupism mentality. Ron Paul will free us from this divisive negative attittude.

I never thought, in my lifetime, I would see others try to smear a person/candidate who believes in the Constitution. I don't get it. Why do people want to be taken care of by the state? Why are we not accountable for our own actions?

Poirot,
Thanks for your concern and the nickname. Your contribution is greatly appreciated. Toodles.

Wow, this has become a total train wreck of a comment thread.

RON PAUL IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT WHO IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE CFR (Council on Foreig Relations)

Who is Honest and doesn't change his views like someone changes their underwear

Who IS NOT A SOCIALIST

Who will Abolish the IRS

Will Abolish the Fed

Will keep America Sovereign

Will restore true value to our currency

and

WILL RESTORE THE REPUBLIC!

Wake up people, Don't be slaves! Live as free sovereign men and women!

As far as ANY funding that is used for ANY social program or department, you need to ask yourself two questions. Where does that money come from and do the contributers agree to the uses of it. That is not a hard concept to grasp (with the exception of the author apparently). This idea that Ron Paul is evil for suggesting that you have a say in how YOUR MONEY is spent is preposterous. Even down right ignorant.

If I tell you I am taking your money to help your neighbor pay for his handicap ramp because he is after all handicapped and can't fend for his self, are you then suggesting I have moral grounds to do so and you have no say? Of course not. I can't just take your money and spend it as I see fit. It's yours!
How would the taxes we pay to fund aids research be any different. I mean shouldn't it be up to the individual that had the money taken from them (by mandatory taxation) to decide how the money is spent? Get a grip, either you think that socialism is the law of the land or you think this is a Constitutional Republic. Guess what the law says???

It's unfair to equate Ron Paul's stance on the war to Obama's. Ron Paul's stance is much tougher: bring troops home now, we had no reason to be there in the first place, and their continued presence there is destabalizing the world, increasing the terrorist threat and destroying the financial basis of our nation. He even calls the war immoral.

Obama's stance: the war was a mistake, a tactical error. We should reduce our troop levels, but keep permanent bases and a significant and lasting troop presence. Continued troop presence decreases the threat of a terrorist attack, and possible military escalation may occur in the future if other countries don't follow our rules.

Obama's stance on the war, like the other Democrat frontrunners, is barely distinguishable from the neocons.

I’ve come to expect trite, predictable opinions from The American Prospect magazine; however, I generally thought the editors would weed out slander.

As a board member of the Robert Taft Club, it’s news to me that we have “close ties” to the white nationalist movement. Being that we have actual close ties with so many other reputable conservative thinkers and organizations, I find it odd that Mr. Goldstein would not mention these and then invent others.

One of our board member works for Patrick Buchanan’s American Cause; however, to call this group “white nationalist” is bizarre. Buchanan is an analyst for liberal-leaning MSNBC, a bestselling author, and twice came close to securing the GOP nomination for president.

Other mainstream conservatives like Terry Jeffrey (Human Events), Richard Viguerie (ConservativeHQ), Michael Tanner (CATO institute), Tom Bethell (The American Spectator), John Derbyshire (National Review), James Antle (The American Spectator), Jim Pinkerton (The American Conservative, Newsday), Charles Murray (The American Enterprise Institute) and many more have taken part in our meetings.

Jared Taylor, who one might call a kind of “white nationalist,” was a guest; however, he appeared on a panel with John Derbyshire, who rejected many of Taylor’s claims, agreed with others, and Kevin Martin, an African-American conservative associated with the National Center for Public Policy Research.

I think Mr. Goldstein has chosen to reject our group out of hand because he lacks the fortitude and intellect to offer any serious criticism. We’re a rather dissident conservative group – who are eager to question the Iraq war, the Religious Right, and the conservative movement in general. Because Goldstein can’t fit us into a FOXNews box, and thus might find dealing with us to require some intellectual effort, he’s simply chosen the easy road of slander.

Look at some of the comments that have been stirred up by this thread:

"...she [Goldstein] plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy."

"You obviously want federal control, and federal categorization of every people type you can think of."

"He [Paul] opposes the New World Order..."

"...keep your theivery away from my family."

"You hate white gentiles just like your parents told you to and are a good liar just like Mom and Dad too."

Ron Paul has some attractive policy positions, but when I want to know what a candidate is really about--where is he really getting his money? what dog-whistles is he using?--I take a look at the supporters. The comments I quoted above aren't the exception but the rule for members of the Paul base, and I'm steering clear.

I am an Afriacn American gay Democrat...

I'm gay and I support Ron Paul...

Im a Canadian who...

As a black woman I would never vote for a racist! And that is why I WILL VOTE FOR RON PAUL!!!

[I am] an African American woman...

I have a gay friend who used to support Hillary, but now supports Ron Paul...

I had no idea that Ron Paul's coalition of Libertarian sock puppets came in such a wide palette.

ron paul a racist? I'm an arab-american muslim and a veteran of OIF 2 and 4. To say that dr. paul is a racist is so asinine!

from my personal experience of going door-to-door, african americans have welcomed the ideaologies of ron paul and I have gotten many many signatures from them.

the arab-american and persian communities are backing ron paul. ron paul came to dearborn, michigan to speak to the arab american institute and he was welcomed by thousands from the community. we have also put a ron paul advertisment in the arab american newspaper (#1 publication) and we have received very good feed back.

so to acknowledge that ron paul is a racist based on your weak blog entry is comical at best.

and believe it or not, the false acquisation of ron paul being a racist will indeed HELP him because the vast vast majority of white america is indeed racist on the inside.

go ahead and try to smear dr. paul... its a compliment that this is all you can come up with. this is what happens when you have a solid voting record and love the american people. your pathetic attempt to "takedown" the doctor is weak...

We pay, and pay dearly, for government to "protect" us from sexual harassment. Legislation and enforcement cost money, and the government has a monopoly on this service. If we weren't culturally conditioned to look in the direction of government every time something bad happened, the market would have solved this problem already. Why aren't there company blacklists? Where are the private certification authorities that would otherwise keep companies accountable? If this is something people really wanted, and government got out of our way, the market would solve the problem without the help of government.

However, I'm not convinced there is much of a market for this service. I don't know of many people (especially those who are living month to month) who would give up some of their salary for vague assurances that they'll be protected against sexual harassment. Yet that's what all of us are currently forced to do. Explain that to the victim you claim to be speaking for.

Hey Robert M., We don't need you anyway pal. I guess you are pro-new world order, pro-Federal and what else? I think we will "steer clear" of you and the rest of your pro-big banking/world government buddies. You are the enemy and you are vastly out-numbered (:

Dear Dana:

Just so you know, Ron Paul does have Jewish supporters, (http://www.jews4ronpaul.org/) despite the White Supremicists. That's becuase we are smart enough to judge Ron Paul by his actions, not by his supporters or what someone else may have written about him without his approval. Ron Paul is an individualist libertarian, and that by definition is ant-racist. Ron Paul has never been beholden to any special interest -- just look at his voiting record. If you want to see a candidate that who is racist:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/810600/posts

And why does Barrack Obama attend a Black Separatist church?

The way Paul sees it, and I agree with him, is that that is $500 less that that white supremacist has to spend his ugly agenda. The only special interest Paul is beholden to is the US Constitution.

Wonderful post, Dana, but now I want my bleeding eyes back from reading all the idiots who keep expecting to be in the 1% in the new world order while they put their feet in everyone elses' backs.

I wonder... how can all rights be based on property if well over 2/3rds of the world is property-less? Are those 4 billion not humans? Or are libertarians just more "inherently special" than they are?

If you want to see a candidate that who is racist: http://www.freerepublic.com...

Ah, freepers. It's good to see the market has provided a venue for all of the crazy people to gather together as one.

Ron Paul has:
1. Given a speech on the floor of the house against the Civil Rights Act
2. Voted against the Civil Rights Act
3. Voted not to renew the Civil Rights Act
4. Said the Civil War was unnecessary
5. Had a racist newsletter
6. Does not disavow white supremacist supporters
7. Accepts money from white supremacist supporters
8. Has criticized Brown v. Board of Education

He isn't a racist at all, I don't know what you are talking about. For shame.

As a journalist you are right to investigate every candidate. But insinuation is about as much as you can throw at Ron Paul. Much more intensive effort would be required to collect the details of the flaws of the media's favourite candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. An investigation of Hillary Clinton would probably result in a Encyclopeadia of information on why she is unfit for the job. This probably explains why her supporters are starting to turn to Obama and Edwards. Problem is the media have warmed cautiously to Obama with the comment (he is inexperienced-well HRC is experienced and useless-is that any better).And the media totally detests Edwards (well is is a union man, and that would be bad for advertising/corporate America).
And in the midst of this Ron Paul threatens to be everything that Hillary Clinton cannot be. Therefore gun Ron Paul. The real problem with Ron Paul-he is showing up the inadequacies of Hillary Rodham Clinton, as much as the inadequacies of Guiliani etc... The media want a celebrity president. The population at large just deserve somebody to fix the countryand end all those pointless adventures in other people's affairs. Ron Paul wants to end US foreign policy (making it almost Canadian). Ron Paul also wants to stop the pointless subsidies to select industries that are continually lobbying Congress, at the expense of the taxpayer and the citizen. Criticism of the bureacratic approach to national policy is merited, and worthwhile, especially in consideration of the results of the US education system.

Wow, this comments thread is reaching Sadly No!-like proportions. It's like when you turn the lights on out on the porch and the moths just come swarming.

God, a 140 member circle jerk and still going strong.

You're all a bunch of delusional twelve-year-olds. If you don't like what the government has given you (education, infrastructure, national defense) then give it back. And get the hell out of my country.

You're just a bunch of whiny nerds who don't want to pay taxes. Grow up and shut up.

Dana,

If you ever get this far...

I'm not a Paulbot. Not voting for him. I, too, think he's a crackpot. But I think this post was really flimsy and weak.

When you post "The definitive takedown of Ron Paul", you should do better than gotcha statements about twice-removed connections to politically incorrect people. Ron Paul has *genuinely* crazy positions about shrinking the American government that would throw millions of people into poverty and tens of millions into chaos. There are *policy* reasons to find Paul crazy. And you don't even touch them.

I don't want to read this rumor-mongering stuff. A very poor article.

Will Rogers obviously never met brewmn. Toodles!

FYI:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/05/do_tell_ron_paul_on_babies_pro.html

"Sleuth: If you were to defy the polls and the odds and win the nomination, who would be your running mate?

Paul: Well, I don't know, but if I won, you know, I'd want a recount. You know, lets be certain about what's going on here.

But a running mate. Somebody like Walter Williams. Walter Williams is a very good economist. John Stossel, John Stossel would be good."

...Seems to me that Ron Paul knows more about and cares more about the opinions of Walter Williams than he does about the opinions of Don Black. How many other Republican candidates would publicly state that they would have Walter Williams as their VP?

Don Black's $500 is helping to fund a Paul/Williams run.

Paul-Williams in '08!

When the Paterson NJ crackhouse surveillance tape comes out the worm is going to turn and he is going to be holding a noose.

I guess we are supposed to think that that Ron Paul fans read the American Prospect website everyday and never comment on all the left-leaning economics articles.

Hoooooly crap.

Now I understand why Wonkette has declared war on these people.

forthepeople

Maybe you could educate me and point me to the provision of the US Constitution that gives the federal government authority to operate the Department of Education and the Department of Transportation.

Actually, I can save you the effort...its not there. The federal government has mostly ignored the Constitutional limits on its powers since the 1930's.

Unfortunately, the only ones that could force the federal government to comply with the US Constitution...the American people...are, for the most part, completely unfamiliar with, and ignorant of, the Constitution. Most people seem unaware that there are Constitutional limits on federal power

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negociation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.'--James Madison, Federalist 45

What a bunch of circus freaks you people are. Thanks for the laughs, you bunch of morons (and make no mistake, I mean each and every one of you, Paul supporters and haters alike).

Fools And Their Rights Are Soon Parted !!!

I Vote For Virtue, I Vote For Ron Paul !!!

Dr. Paul has said numerous times this campaign is about the idea, not the man. As with ANY human being, he harbors flaws. But his IDEAS are far superior to those of all the other candidates combined. Special interest groups and political action commitees have not snared him in their webs of influence. And for this he is despised by the fascist state. Look up "fascist" before you dare flame me for this comment.

"At first, they ridicule you.
Then, they ignore you.
Next, they attack you.
Then, you win."

Dr. Paul in 2008 is truly the only choice for the thinking person.

I for one have ideas and positions that appear to be out of sync with that of the good doctor.
Still, I believe it is because I'm able to get past the premise that my positions on issues are always right and consider in stead that there are people out there such as Dr. Ron Paul who has demonstrated his intellect over and over again by not only graduating from a renowned institution of higher learning such as Duke University Medical School but has become a learned person on History, Economics, Government, Law, etc. and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in the areas where we may disagree. Maybe you should too!

Ron Paul is an American Hero who stands for Liberty and the Constitution. Call him what you like to drive fear into the masses, but his record stands for human liberty and freedom. I guess some people don't like that though.

Ron Paul is the lesser of all the other choices in 2008.

"You're just a bunch of whiny nerds who don't want to pay taxes. Grow up and shut up."

Nailed it.

Ron Paul is horrible. Everyone who supports him is horrible. It would be a great improvement to our world if you all left it. Sadly, because you and others like you won't, there won't be much of a world left for the rest of us a hundred years hence.

"THE DEFINITIVE (I HOPE) TAKEDOWN."

That cracked me up. Oh, the hubris. You could be a pro wrestler with that act.

See you after Iowa.

First, a few thoughts. If I disagree with Dr. Paul, I am automatically branded a hater? This is supposed to make me want to vote for the man how? Also, all politicans pander, and in the case of Ron Paul judging by the response of his supporters he has done so successfully. Another point, be careful what you (Ron Paul supporters)wish for, you just might get it. Libertarians often complain about government services being too much, or too expensive, yet instead of dissassociate themselves from those very same services they use them like everyone else. Why is that I wonder? Final point, if someone writes something that show a side of Ron Paul that is not a part of his "Mr. Clean" image, don't go after the one who reported the story. Posted above, someone made the point that if the points in this or other articles are negative about Dr. Paul the refutations should be given, with clear links to the source material. Not snide remarks, insults, or threats. That is never a way to win an arguement, and is to some extent part of the reason I won't vote for Ron Paul.

Peace, and goodwill to all!

Holy shit - Clearly I don't read this website enough. I was totally astonished at the spittle-flecked vitriol spewn by the Paul supporters. If I was ever thinking of supporting Ron Paul, the hatefulness and ignorance of his supporters would make me reconsider.

It is remarkably telling that these people consider his obvious racism to be at worst, a distraction, and at best, an asset. I don't expect Andrew Sullivan to respond, because he's never believed that racism is as serious a problem as he thinks homophobia is. But I certainly do hope Greenwald addresses this, espeically in light of Paul's recent comment that 95% of black males in DC are criminal.

Betsy wrote:

>espeically in light of Paul's recent comment that 95% of black males in DC are criminal.

I'm not a Paul supporter at all, but apparently that comment was made in a newsletter of his in like 1993, and he claims he didn't write it.

There's an awful lot of smoke here, though...

-Jason

Hmm so this is what happens when the randroids attack.
Kewl, liberty is a fun slogan when it is for you, but when you are pregnant, nawh.