It’s Independents’ Day

What? President Bush purchased 100,000 acres? In the Andes? First of all, do you understand how BIG 100,000 acres is? Can someone confirm this? Im not finding anything on this.....

Ron Paul has something the other candidates do not! What is that rare quality? It is called integrity.
He has stayed in the fray of the Viper's pit called Washington and not been moved from his Constitutional
roots and truth. The things that made this representitive Republic great is what he stands for. Many say that a congressman is not able to obtain the Presidentcy?
Are they right? No the time of change is now and most of the gut feelings of the electorate know that we are headed in the wrong direction and the Elitist Globalists hold their feet to the fire now but want to take away their souls and freedom. Look at the new bill passed that makes it against the law to be against Public Policy. (HR 1955) President Bush buying a 100 thousand acre ranch in the Andies where there is no extradition law. The continued trying of throwing the Amero and open borders down our thoats with
Amesty to go along. The winds of change are blowing and ushering in a breeze of freedom. Ron Paul the
voice of freedom. Cheers,

Ron Paul has something the other candidates do not! What is that rare quality? It is called integrity.
He has stayed in the fray of the Viper's pit called Washington and not been moved from his Constitutional
roots and truth. The things that made this representitive Republic great is what he stands for. Many say that a congressman is not able to obtain the Presidentcy?
Are they right? No the time of change is now and most of the gut feelings of the electorate know that we are headed in the wrong direction and the Elitist Globalists hold their feet to the fire now but want to take away their souls and freedom. Look at the new bill passed that makes it against the law to be against Public Policy. (HR 1955) President Bush buying a 100 thousand acre ranch in the Andies where there is no extradition law. The continued trying of throwing the Amero and open borders down our thoats with
Amesty to go along. The winds of change are blowing and ushering in a breeze of freedom. Ron Paul the
voice of freedom. Cheers,

Isolationist? Where the heck did this journalist pull that from? Is this journalist not educated to understand Ron Pauls message? Apparently not, he just called Ron an isolationist. Excuse me, Ron Paul follows the Constitution (as everyone should) NOT to entangle in other nations personal affairs, its NOT isolationism because we would communicate and trade with them, we just wont be the world police. Mind you, Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican candidate attending the Arab-American Institute National Leadership Conference.. that doesnt sound very isolationist to me.

Im getting very impatient with the media not doing their jobs of being objective with their reporting, its really starting to tick me off and they will loose if they do not get back to their ROLES as jounalists and just getting us the information, true, unbiased, information.

Im a Democrat, and im voting for Ron Paul.

Brad
Pittsburgh, PA

Many journalists feel uneasy with Ron Paul's message of small government. They are, almost by definition, opinionated people who know what government should do, so it is understandable that many articles about Ron Paul have some kind of a negative streak.

I don't like it but it's still with the domain of acceptable journalism. The photo, however, is betond acceptable. Out of thousands of possible pictures, Newsweek picked one of the worst, and it reflects badly on the magazine.

Many journalists feel uneasy with Ron Paul's message of small government. They are, almost by definition, opinionated people who know what government should do, so it is understandable that many articles about Ron Paul have some kind of a negative streak.

I don't like it but it's still with the domain of acceptable journalism. The photo, however, is betond acceptable. Out of thousands of possible pictures, Newsweek picked one of the worst, and it reflects badly on the magazine.

Mr. Fineman,

As a supporter of Dr. Ron Paul I was very offended by your story. Is this what passes for journalism at Newsweek? You come right out of the gate swinging by implying that Dr. Paul doesn't look the part of being a President. Then you mis-characterize his platform by stating that he wants to link the dollar back to gold. This is not his platform; he wants to legalize a competing asset-backed currency to be issued concurrently to the Federal Reserve Note so that it becomes much more obvious to people how the government debases the value of the dollar to increase its funding. Next you state, "Much of the world dismisses Paul as a libertarian crank", so I would be interested to see your research where you spoke with people the world over and got back this opinion from a majority. Finally you trot out the tired old "isolationist" tag to smear him despite his repeated statements that he is not nor has he ever been an isolationist and is a big supporter of free trade and engaging other countries. I guess in your dictionary isolationists is defined as someone who doesn't want to constantly invade other countries. In conclusion, I find your article to be either a deliberate hit-piece or poorly researched and either way you should be ashamed to call yourself a journalist.

Mr. Fineman,

As a supporter of Dr. Ron Paul I was very offended by your story. Is this what passes for journalism at Newsweek? You come right out of the gate swinging by implying that Dr. Paul doesn't look the part of being a President. Then you mis-characterize his platform by stating that he wants to link the dollar back to gold. This is not his platform; he wants to legalize a competing asset-backed currency to be issued concurrently to the Federal Reserve Note so that it becomes much more obvious to people how the government debases the value of the dollar to increase its funding. Next you state, "Much of the world dismisses Paul as a libertarian crank", so I would be interested to see your research where you spoke with people the world over and got back this opinion from a majority. Finally you trot out the tired old "isolationist" tag to smear him despite his repeated statements that he is not nor has he ever been an isolationist and is a big supporter of free trade and engaging other countries. I guess in your dictionary isolationists is defined as someone who doesn't want to constantly invade other countries. In conclusion, I find your article to be either a deliberate hit-piece or poorly researched and either way you should be ashamed to call yourself a journalist.

-Chris

Congress goes around putting sanctions on other countries; the equivalent of "I'm not talking to you, anymore, unless you change." That's isolationist. Ron Paul wants to let individuals trade and communicate with each other freely, in mutually beneficial ways, anywhere in the world they want to (or not, if they don't). There's nothing isolationist about that.

If we sent the Red Cross, or Habitat for Humanity, instead of tanks, you wouldn't call that isolationist, would you?

I'd like to respecfully correct your naming Dr. Paul as an foreign policy isolationist. He is in fact just the oposite. Regarding use of military force, he will protect our national interest at home and abroad using all necessary military force to win the war declared by congress. Aligning himself with the founders of our Republic, he upholds the principle of nonintervention in the affairs of other sovereign nations. But he will go to war and he put forth every bit of militry strength to win the war, however, he will NOT keep our military incountry using money illeaglly/immorally confiscated from the US taxpayers to build schools, highways, wireless phone networks and other humanitarian efforts. Regarding foreign trade, he is the only president who is not an isolationist. NAFTA, CAFTA, and other so called trade agreements are extreamly restrictive to true free trade. These isolationist agreements give special privilidges to certain countries and invoke huge tarrifts on others that ultimalty hurt the US's ability to conduct international commerce on an even playing field such that it benifits all US businesses instead of a selct few. So you see, he is not an isolationist in any sense of the word but in fact just the oposite. He is fighting for freedom and liberty to live and conduct business without the heavy hand of the federal government injecting itself into every activity of human life.

I'd like to respecfully correct your naming Dr. Paul as an foreign policy isolationist. He is in fact just the oposite. Regarding use of military force, he will protect our national interest at home and abroad using all necessary military force to win the war declared by congress. Aligning himself with the founders of our Republic, he upholds the principle of nonintervention in the affairs of other sovereign nations. But he will go to war and he put forth every bit of militry strength to win the war, however, he will NOT keep our military incountry using money illeaglly/immorally confiscated from the US taxpayers to build schools, highways, wireless phone networks and other humanitarian efforts. Regarding foreign trade, he is the only president who is not an isolationist. NAFTA, CAFTA, and other so called trade agreements are extreamly restrictive to true free trade. These isolationist agreements give special privilidges to certain countries and invoke huge tarrifts on others that ultimalty hurt the US's ability to conduct international commerce on an even playing field such that it benifits all US businesses instead of a selct few. So you see, he is not an isolationist in any sense of the word but in fact just the oposite. He is fighting for freedom and liberty to live and conduct business without the heavy hand of the federal government injecting itself into every activity of human life.

For the record, Dr. Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist. Free trade is one of the issues that he considers most important to our relationship with the rest of the world.

For the record, Dr. Paul is a non-interventionist, not an isolationist. Free trade is one of his strongest commitments.

I must also disagree with your "Much of the world" crack. Ron Paul actually has many meetup groups supporting his campaign OUTSIDE the US! What other candidate can say that? Based on that, I think that your comment should read "Much of the world looks to Ron Paul for hope". How about that?

I must also disagree with your "Much of the world" crack. Ron Paul actually has many meetup groups supporting his campaign OUTSIDE the US! What other candidate can say that? Based on that, I think that your comment should read "Much of the world looks to Ron Paul for hope". How about that?

It seems that many people are weighing in, online anyhow, to see what Paul stands for. Thank God. Over the past five months the media's handling of election news has been terrible, and an insult to intelligent Americans. The debates are a joke...lacking the meat and potatoes that American's not only are looking for, but in reality, need desperately. Ron Paul is a meat and potatoes guy...Just what we need.

"Much of the world dismisses Paul as a libertarian crank." Really? I didn't realize his name recognition was in the billions already. Say, how do you say "libertarian crank" in M??ori?

Hey Fineman,

Why don't show some respect towards Dr. Paul? He has accomplished more in one lifetime than what you would accomplish in ten lifetimes. Don't forget that you were a water carrier for Bush, on the Iraq war. You are inexplicably tied to Bush's legacy. Whataputz!!!