Of late the two bear striking similarities.  With The New Republic's article on Ron Paul's newsletters coming out, Lew, other than dragging up an eighty year old article from The New Republic sympathetic to fascism and was taken from a Rothbard quote, decided to do his best Sergeant Schultz impersonation.  I see nothing,  I see nothing.  I am on the net all day and I do not see all these articles talking about a newsletter I had a part in and did write for and I was also called out as the supposed writer by numerous people in the know, but I tell you I see nothing at all.  Don't listen to the smears and smear merchants huh Lew?  Let's just all stay in denial and pretend nothing ever happened.  

Either Lew is blind or mute.  He either does not see the necessity to act just or he does not think speaking on the subject matter is required.  Both possibilities are bad for the movement.  Both possibilities turn the movement away from reason and logic.  You are Ron's partner in many business ventures, an adviser, and a friend and if both of you are friends to the movement you will quit this little act and shoot straight.  Both parties have stayed quiet and avoided full disclosure.  That leads me to ask what is next?  What will the next story be?  Can I even trust you guys if you assured me?  The response has been terrible.  For a candidate that explains policy so well, his explanation of this incident was deficient and unsatisfactory, with the very real potential that more news can be on the way.  No preparation on the topic between zero and twenty million dollars.  And of all things, the next money bomb is on Martin Luther Kind Day.  This looks like a sick gamble.  How stupid will people look if there is a bigger bombshell?  The longer they stonewall, the more them and their supporters look like the Republicrats.  Once this movement departs from reason, the rEVOLution becomes the REVOlution.  Point the finger where it belongs at Ron and his Sergeant Schultz.

I was going to write Ron Paul in before there was ever any possibility of him running, let alone gain as much steam as anyone expected and that is part of the problem.  See what happened is Paul originally went in figuring he could get a little name recognition and say what he believed because this country is going right down the tubes if you are a true fiscal conservative, believe in Federalism, care about the expansion of Federal "Law" Enforcement, care about civil liberties, detest big government, believe in the concept of sovereignty, detest open borders, care about privacy, respect the bill of rights, dislike deficits, abhor corruption, dislike lobbyists current clout, don't think we should be the world's policeman, or are libertarian minded.  Also no Republican candidate that is "viable" will address any of these concerns.

But what is the worst part of this story is that Ron didn't have a contingency plan of dealing with this, that he didn't properly explain what exactly was going on as he does when he explains policy.  He is hesitating to do so.  What is bad about this is that many many non kooks, I can assure you that, donated money to this man.  I think many reasonable people would fall under the grievances I cited above, whether all, or just a combination of these, or just one important one, many of these people are regular people who just take an interest into politics as others take to the lives of celebrities, mindless entertainment, or whatever skill they might take interest in. And there are some of us who remember what being a conservative meant in the 90s or at least how it was marketed.  But Ron took advantage of that group, he failed to address the issue, on very devastating news, that most people should know about if you are asking them for 2300 dollars.  That is fraud.  His record in congress is why so many people like him, it is excellent and his votes versus any other congressman's or candidate's votes and he beats any of them.  Most people couldn't see this coming and the ones that did know didn't talk.  There was that one blurb about the one newsletter piece, but the story cut the majority of its quotes from the same article and made it look like it was numerous times, and not much came of it.  A one time thing that he did not know about was pardonable, considering the writing style was much different than Paul's writing style.  If they knew that the content was this rampant, somebody should have dealt with this one way or another before the campaign took off.  

The rEVOLution is now the REVOlution, but there are still a lot of people who find our current nominees in all major parties as completely unacceptable and now that they can read stories on the internet from multiple sources, along with ease of association through simple internet tools and they will have a network that will be maintained long after Paul fades out.  That is not going anywhere.  The political climate doesn't look the same for those with sympathies and allegiance to parties and their mouthpieces as it does with the Paul supporters that are just going to step aside for the time being and not defend a man who does not deserve to be defended.  His personal transactions and the reporting of such does not take away from the ideas because he didn't invent them.  I did not gain my political convictions from Dr. Paul, and his fading will not change my political convictions, which is my perception of reality, and a lot better than the people with their blinders on, from the Republicans, to the Democrats, and the other Paul supporters who are going to try to believe the BS they spew as they defend the indefensible, just like so many on Townhall "Conservatives" do in their columns everyday.  If you defend Paul's actions you are no better than the Busheviks, both mean well, but both are completely divorced from reality.