Wrong Paul

This article sucked and NewsSpeak *eh-hum* Newsweek sucks-- therefore an epic fail by a bunch of skeptic snails that are still caught in a delusion of government propaganda and dis-info. Oh and by the way, the title of this article is missing the word 'not' before wrong, please fix the title you lazy cretins.

This article is amazing! Too bad it is not factual and appears to be from the same NeoCon base that has taken our country on an aggressive downward spiral. Fazsha has it right, but there are even MORE facts about how the SP&P is hiding many of the things happening behind the scenes. There is even video of Mr. Bush denying the Highway. Many landowners in Texas would passionately disagree with you as well. Also, disassociating from the Reagan administration is a long way from disrespect for the man himself. It has been widely reported that the Iraq war ALONE costs over 100b a year. So far we've only spent $1 trillion on the war, so that's not too much, right?? So, your three counter points come from you and you don't even bother trying to interview the man himself - or go to the source of your criticism. It's ok, though. We who follow the revolution know that people against it are exposing themselves more than they realize. You reveal yourself when you say things like you apply your efforts...why not just report the news for a change? What a novel idea! Allow we the people decide who we want to fix our broken country. Is the alternative media kicking your butt too much that you are losing readers? Well, with misleading and biased articles like this, get used to it.

Miller...
You need to climb out of bed before you get behind the Pen!

Doesn't exist? I guess you mean on paper, right? The Trans-Texas Corridor exist. Tens of thousands of Texans will attest to that FACT. After you accept this as fact, rather than a myth, you have to ask yourself, "What happens to the 'Trans-Texas Corridor when it reaches the Northern most point of Texas?" Myth? I think not. Just because we don't know where the Universe ends doesn't make it a myth.

Miller:
You need to climb out of BED before you get behind the Pen.

How about NewsWEAK!

I've been following the Paul campaign quite closely. Certainly there are some of Paul's followers who confuse things and are prone to hyperbole, but Paul himself is as sane as granite. When Newsweek reports contra-wise it only reinforces the conspiracy suspicions of those on the fringe -- and even makes those of us in the middle a little suspicious.

"The Mouse that Roared: Why Ron Paul won," by Doug Wead is the best new article out there.

Wead is a real authority, unlike the hacks who keep publishing this drivel. Wead is a presidential historian, philanthropist, public speaker and he was Special Assistant to former U.S. President George H. W. Bush.

Mr. Miller...
This is a career chance of a lifetime for you.
The possibility to publicly debunk the leader( and millions of bloggers, financiers and followers) of the biggest, most controversial and widely funded political revolution in the last decades in USA is within your reach. If you're sure and convinced of what you report, take the man on in person and make it grand. This subject, (wherever you stand ) surely deserves more than "web exclusive" coverage. Get the cover for your conversation with Paul, sit down with the man one on one, be all inclusive, talk about Nafta etc but also talk about his voting record, and his clean personal and moral slate. You can even throw in the newsletter, racists remarks issue for the whole picture on Mr. Paul. It's a win win for you and your employer. You have a shot at journalistic history. Your employer's bottom line will surely benefit. Ron Paul on the cover will surely sell you more magazines than whoever you have on deck for it. You would do your country and profession a great good. If you're serious about this, confront Dr. Paul, one on one, publicly and transparently. Whether you agree with him or not, Dr. Paul has at least been clear and transparent
Can you step up to the plate?

Ron Paul makes no secret to where he gets his information, his facts, or his historical sites. He is very clear where this information comes from, and if we had responsible journalism, they would report on that as well. Unfortunately we have people like Joe Miller that make claims and include statements out of context and out of historical consistency. Ron Paul continues to get support from an outraged people that are tired of Washington telling them what to do. Everyone is screaming change! But now we are going to have a Republican candidate that is happy with 100 years of war in Iraq, and is endorsed by the most irresponsible fiscal president in my lifetime. On the left, the people are screaming change all over the country, and giving Obama landslide victories, but the system's "Superdelegats" are more than likely going to swing it back to Hillary. We will have an election this year that offers absolutely no change. I went to my caucus. Out of the 90 people there, maybe 5 of them were under 40, and I would say half were over 60. The young people in this country have to get educated, they have to get mad, and they have to make a change. This system is corrupt, and these journalists are corrupt.

Ron Paul makes no secret to where he gets his information, his facts, or his historical sites. He is very clear where this information comes from, and if we had responsible journalism, they would report on that as well. Unfortunately we have people like Joe Miller that make claims and include statements out of context and out of historical consistency. Ron Paul continues to get support from an outraged people that are tired of Washington telling them what to do. Everyone is screaming change! But now we are going to have a Republican candidate that is happy with 100 years of war in Iraq, and is endorsed by the most irresponsible fiscal president in my lifetime. On the left, the people are screaming change all over the country, and giving Obama landslide victories, but the system's "Superdelegats" are more than likely going to swing it back to Hillary. We will have an election this year that offers absolutely no change. I went to my caucus. Out of the 90 people there, maybe 5 of them were under 40, and I would say half were over 60. The young people in this country have to get educated, they have to get mad, and they have to make a change. This system is corrupt, and these journalists are corrupt.

Ron Paul definatly wasnt the first and wont be the last to talk about that superhighway. Typical smear article... actually I wouldnt call it an "Article" its more along the lines of diarea in your eyes.

Let's cut to the chase. What's really going on here? Ron Paul's advocacy of individual liberty and free markets chafes Miller's Marx-o-holism. Miller's factually-challenged accounts of Ron Paul's discussion of the NAFTA superhighway is worthy of Pravda or the Berkeley Student Union. I can't help but think of a quote from Ayn Rand when she said that, "Those who believe in slavery should have the grace to call it by it proper name"--- but when has a Marxist ever been honest about anything?

Let's just cut to the chase. What's really going on here? Joe Miller is having a temper tantrum because Ron Paul would restore individual liberty and abolish the welfare state. THIS is what chafes Miller's Marx-o-holism. His factually-challenged accounts of the NAFTA superhighway and of Ron Paul's stance on the Reagan Administration are worthy of Pravda or the Berkeley Student Union. I couldn't help but remember a great quote from Ayn Rand when I read Miller's smear piece: "Those who believe in slavery should have the grace to call it by its proper name."

You really had to stretch the truth quite a bit here didn???t you? Looks like you dug for info that supports your anti-paul agenda and ignored everything that supports his claims and reasoning along the way.

1: please show a quote where Paul refers to the NAU as a "secret conspiracy". Are you so naive as to believe that business giants have not considered the benefits of a North American Union? Of course they have, you moron.

2: Our "empire". There is so much info to support that we are spending more than a Trillion dollars overseas. When was the last time that our government stuck to the budget? We spend billions on projects that Americans never get to know about. I want you to go listen to everything Paul has ever said. He has said "we spend a trillion dollars overseas" but when talking about cutting he has always said "we could save hundred of billions of dollars". You took Paul out of context and put words in his mouth. You should be so ashamed. I wish you had the nerve to try and spout your uneducated, false propaganda to my face, you piece of sh!t.

3: Reagan. Reagan talked the talk .. he did not walk the walk. Reagan said some kind words about Ron Paul. Where is the fault in quoting him? It in no way affirms that Paul re-endorses Reagan. He has, on several occasions, during this campaign sited his disappointment with Reagan never changing the size and scope of government. Reagan???s words were an inspiration to many .. Paul wants to bring to light that his actions did not match.

We have one guy running who could put action to his words and you use your energy to smear him. Keep supporting your thieves and liars. You are a disgrace!

How is this journalism? Where are both sides of the story? I have grown weary of this kind of reporting on the Ron Paul campaign. You failed to mention that Ron Paul won 21 percent of the vote in Washington State, 21 percent in North Dakota, 25 percent in Montana, 19 percent in Maine, to name a few. Your focus on his outlandish claim is majoring on the minors. These claims are not central to the Ron Paul Campaign and the public could care less about them. What is central to Paul's campaign is lower taxes, relief to the middle class, sound monetary policy, limited government, non-interventionist foreign policy, and civil rights. His candidacy ought not be an enigma. His message unites voters from both parties including independents and it is those issues that Ron Paul supporters rally around. Next time please stick to something that is fair, accurate and of importance.

Reagan, who spoke on behalf of Barry Goldwater at the 1964 convention, was less fiscally conservative in practice, than in words. With the national debt soaring, why should Ron Paul be bound to supporting a person's actions that no longer reflected his own beliefs?

I am fairly young, but I know I have heard of this superhighway project for a while now. Everyone in Texas was talking about eminent domain issues.

Using the word "conspiracy" is meant to colour the perception of the reader.

Ron Paul is the only person out to protect your rights, despite your overzealous use of the first amendment. What happened to idealistic Journalism majors? Have they all become cynical paycheck collectors?

Barry Goldwater began a movement and that movement lost its way. Ron Paul is picking up that flag and Neo-Cons and Liberals cannot stand anyone threatening their power and beliefs.

You sir, are part of the problem and not the solution.

Well won't it be nice when there are no more english readers here in America to read your Newsweek rag? You should truly get what you vote for, more recession, more huge government tax debt to China, more illegals sucking up your tax dollars, more people loosing their homes, and more tax dollars going to never winable wars in Iraq and Afganastan.