Couldn’t find the source of this article, it disappeared as I was posting it.
The conventional wisdom, prior to this [$4.3 million] breakthrough, was that the Paul campaign was political vaporware, existing exclusively online and not in the material world. Yet that meme is quickly falling by the wayside as his polling numbers are rocketing upwards, from New Hampshire to Nevada. . .Yes, the smears are getting really ugly, but precisely because of that the Smear Bund is generating a pro-Paul backlash, particularly among those who consider themselves liberals of the old school.
From Rolling Stone.com
Ron Paul may be an old-school Republican, but no other candidate running for president — in either party — has spoken out against the war in Iraq as bluntly as he has.
Q. What do you make of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and current U.S. posturing toward Iran?
RP. . . .We get hysterical over a guy who doesn’t have a single weapon, and nobody’s proven that he’s ever violated the arms-nonproliferation treaty. Matter of fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency is going to have an agreement with him by the end of the year. That’s why you have all of this warmongering going on: It is to try to find an excuse to start bombing him before they prove that he doesn’t have a chance of having a weapon. That’s exactly what we did with Iraq. I’m scared to death they’re getting ready to do that with Iran.
Of Ron Paul’s donors, the top three listed employers are Google, the Army and the Navy. Compare them to the media-anointed front runners of both parties, whose top donor lists read like a Who’s Who of the housing bubble and credit implosion ponzi-schemers behind the destruction of the US economy. Too bad the Old Media was too busy sniffing the FEC reports for wizards, clowns, strippers and Nazis to point this out.
Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com
Greenwald dissects several Ron Paul smears piece by piece and exposes them for what they are, including the grossly false idea that Paul advocates outlawing flagburning.
I’m not trying to be Ron Paul’s advocate but, still, outright distortions and smears are distortions and smears. . .Paul’s efforts. . . may be “odd” in the sense that virtually nobody else seemed to care all that much about systematic unconstitutional actions, but that hardly makes him a “weirdo.”