OK, so Kerry nailed the crackpot part and raised you a shyster. Apparently he does don't mind making a few dimes off of the gullible by selling his snake oil. Seems if he was really concerned with the future of American and the "New Money" he would be going public with his information and put it up for peer review.

Being from texas and having the initials R.P. means (traditionally) that you have one good idea and loony on all the others. See Perot, Ross.

Yeah
 

Never had a chance, due to some extreme ideals but mostly because he is not an accomplished liar a prerequisite for higher office.

Links to his various "Newsletters" are all over the place.

Was this the medias fault?

Yeah, of course it was. Writing about the LA riots in one of his "newsletters" he opined that the riots died down because the rioters had to go pick up their welfare checks. The media didn't report that.
So, see? He never got a chance to have his true position aired.

Wowza again,

Actually, the news letters are rather old news, going back to the mid to late 70's.

Ron Paul newsletters - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, to be fair, those letters have his name on them and that is enough to attribute the content to him in some regards. However, if that is the standard, would the same standard apply to our illustrious leader who openingly hacks his books commenting about his excessive drug usage and other things?

I guess applying that same exact logic makes B.O. a doper and one who supports the illicit drug trade since he was actively involved in at least the demand side of the supply-demand equition. And, all the horrors that the drug underworld brings with drugs and its usage. I guess it would be straying from the topic at hand to discuss B.O.'s other involvment with certain unsavory characters.

Obama has direct the DoJ to stop going after the small users as recall so that is one good thing that may have come out of his drug use. I wish he would advocate the entire abandonment of the war on drugs, at least marijuana and cocaine. It would free up a lot of money and man power for more practical things the right wants like border security.

How's Ron Paul a kook and shyster again ? He does not solicit PAC money or lobbyiest like B.O. B.O. loves the money. Make no bones about that.

B.O. shamelessly hacks his books and other promotional items all over the talk shows.

And, looking at their policies, B.O. is really no different than Bush. I guess it's B.O. open endorsement of drugs ? His pandering to the crowds and buying votes through tax payer "gifts"? If so, that is quite the standard to elect a leader.

President Obama openly disclosed his teenage drug use publicly in his biography. Did Mr. Paul publicly do the same? Can't equate the two, but I suspect that you knew that already.

You obviously don't understand Ron Paul's message. He would leave drug issues up to the state and not the Federal Gov. He has always been very consistent. I find it very hypocritical for our illustrious leader to boast about his drug usage, yet his DoJ puts how many people in prison every year ? My guess is that if you condone and like drug usage, then you should like Ron Paul ... at least in a state out of the 50 which would be accepting of drugs.


Q: In your 1988 campaign you said, “All drugs should be decriminalized. Drugs should be distributed by any adult to other adults. There should be no controls on production, supply or purchase for adults.” Is that still your position?

A: Yeah. It’s sort of like alcohol. Alcohol’s a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on drugs has just been horrible. Now the federal government takes over and overrules states where state laws permit medicinal marijuana 1 for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in and arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory sentences. This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level. That’s where I stand on it. The federal government has no prerogatives on this.
Q: But you would decriminalize it? A: I would, at the federal level. I don’t have control over the states. And that’s why the Constitution’s there.

Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 23, 2007

I do understand the libertarian styled message of Mr. Paul, thank you very much. However I think you misunderstood my response about his past writings to his constituency and the biography of the President.

The media didn't kill the Ron Paul campaign as your original post suggested.

If you read the piece I linked and concluded he wasn't a kook or shyster, there's not much more that can be said.

With the passage of time, more and more of the things he talked about are coming true- witness the latest coup in Egypt that isn't really a coup according the administration. Granted, he is out of the "mainstream". How has all that "mainstream" stuff worked out over the last 40 or so years? What do we have to show for it?