It is to be expected that the state capitalist establishment-- those who believe that government exists to promote and protect the interests of international business-- should oppose the libertarian (no government involvement) policies of Ron Paul. It doesn't make Paul's policies desirable. Such policies would likely institutionaliz e a dog-eat-dog world where the strong devour the weak. Though the lack of government promotion of an elite, militant (1%) agenda is desirable, Libertarianism is mainly advantageous to the wealthy and strong. There is little room for compassion in a libertarian world; certainly no public expression of it. No social security, public health, public retirement, civil rights, welfare, or public assistance of any sort. All of these programs the 1% would love to eliminate; they only avoid endorsing this philosophy because they don't want to lose their own government safety net, a necessity exposed by the last financial crisis. Other libertarian atrocities include the elimination of public safety regulations, financial regulations, and virtually all business restrictions. Powerful companies would have free reign, even more than they now do; the rest of us would be free to starve.

There's nothing wrong with what Scheer writes here. He's not saying Paul is our savior, simply that Paul shouldn't be dismissed as a nut. By process of elimination, he's the best GOP candidate. He's got the right attitude about drugs, prostitution, the Fed, surveillance, and war. His stances on abortion, health care, the environment, and business regulations are... iffy at best. The other candidates are disingenuous (Romney), hypocritical (Newt), and utterly pathetic (Santorum). Paul at least makes some sense on some issues. Even if Paul does somehow get elected President, it doesn't mean he'll be able to pass his desired legislation. Congressional elections are crucial in 2012.

What's interesting is the overlap between Paul's attacks on the Fed and Alan Grayson essentially taking the same shots, albeit from a different angle (the first Fed audit since the fall of the Roman Empire)!

The Federal Reserve has been to secrecy in global banking what Opus Dei is to the Catholic Church, or if you prefer fiction, the "Matarese Circle" to Ludlum's eponymous spy novel. There's way too much outrageous shit going on behind the curtain, but at last some of it's been exposed to the light of day. The stuff Matt Taibbi recently wrote about the Fed's "lending" practices during the past 3 years is enough to give loan sharks new found respect and membership in the Better Business Bureau.

I was just watching, of all things, a 1999 episode of "Law & Order" (shot 12 years ago!), about Columbian drug lords partnering with the Russian Mob inside the U.S.(they make La Cosa Nostra look like choir boys) to launder hundreds of millions of dollars, through transfer by a private U.S. bank to banks in Russia, under the auspices of the Fed's policies and compliance approval. In the episode, usually based on factual research and/or actual headlines, the Fed received a commission on every single dollar sent to the Russian banks to be washed clean.

An example of the banking world's "situational ethics" at best, brazen racketeering at worst, as spearheaded by the Fed. Say it ain't so, Ben.

There is everything wrong with what Scheer has written. This is not the first time he has pushed for Ron Paul. And WHY does RSN keep promoting his articles? I left Truthdig long ago, because Sheer does not want to entertain any other opinions other than his own. He is not a liberal--He does not view women as equal to men, with the right to reproductive rights, etc., and he could care less about racism in this country. Scheer is essentially a mirror image of Ron Paul. @Michelle, already said, "Don't be fooled."

What would really be a showdown is a debate between Obama and Ron Paul for the 2012 Presidential Election. Not that Ron Paul would ever get the REP nomination or that he could beat Obama but if it COULD happen hearing Paul tear apart Obama on foreign policy would truly be historic.

Ron Paul's biggest political enemy is his own history and the fact that many people are starting to pay attention to what he really stands for.

Obviously, nobody here has ever read anything, books, articles, or speeches(of which thousands are on youtube) of Ron Paul. Except some 8 newsletters that appeared with his name machine stamped on them 25 years ago.
Ron Paul is not a perfect man, does not claim to have all the answers, but anything other than RP is status quo. Neocons ( a word invented by a jewish person) and neolibs of course will pull out the long knives in order to protect the Wall Street/DC axis of evil at any cost. If it means turning Americans in to fuedal serfs, then so be it, as long as they have their mansion on the hill.
Is ron Paul Obi Won? no. Compared to the other 'bots' running, and the current 'bot' in the WH, he is a hope. And what is really important, is that his lasting legacy will be inspiring thousands of young college age kids to really look hard at the machinery that runs the country and ask,"is there a better way?" Do we really need to give up our civil liberties to security? Do we need to give up our property rights for "civil rights". do we need to give up our financial privacy for secuity?

Big brother lovers both left and right have good reason to fear Ron Paul -- he will kick the warfare and welfare state off the federal budget and let the states handle it as they should.