Originally Posted by Rusty
The lip-service to Ron Paul's racism drives me nuts.
Are you sure he's clearly a racist? And here's why being sure matters. There's a red line beyond which no support, tacit or overt, is legit. David Duke is a nonstarter -- whether he agrees with me on AfPak or not. Now perhaps Ron Paul is a bit of a racist (who's not?) and maybe even more than your average "who's not?" Or maybe not, but let's assume he is. His son's stance on civil rights, which perhaps he shares is, in my view, odious but not necessarily racist. However, there's little doubt it will appeal to card-carrying racists, hence the newsletters, etc. For that alone, not to mention that Paul and I have almost opposite views on social justice, I would never vote for the guy.
That said, on what is perhaps the single most important issue of the day, I agree with him and with no other candidate of either party. Since I know he won't be elected president, I see little wrong in promoting his candidacy in order to promote the views that are kept silent by the media. US foreign policy means the lives and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, so it's hardly a technical issue like, say, Fed policies.
The moral argument against this position seems to be, "But that's what people did with Hitler in Weimar Germany. People then said, No chance he'll be elected so let's promote his wonderful views on building autobahns and helping mothers procreate..." If that's the moral charge, then it's so silly I don't need to refute it.
Strawman perhaps. If the charge is more of a Sartrean "dirty hands" thing, then I have to plead guilty. I voted for Obama in '08 and, by doing so, I've enabled the deaths of thousands of innocent people for no justifiable reason. My hands are plenty dirty. A shoutout to Ron Paul won't make them any dirtier.