I liked some of the article but not all. It's like a friend who's out to get you in innocent ways. I want to like Tucker and give him the benefit of the doubt, but he keeps referring to Ron Paul supporters as 'fringe'. He helps generate that. In fact, he is more liberal in desrcibing that than any other goebellist almost. This galls me:
"It's hard to think of a presidential candidate who's ever drawn a coalition as broad as Ron Paul's. At any Paul event, you're likely to run into self-described anarcho-capitalists, 9/11-deniers, antiwar lefties, objectivists, paleocons, hemp activists, and geeky high school kids, along with tax resisters, conspiracy nuts, and acolytes of Murray Rothbard." - Tucker.
I mean, how many Paul events has he been to. And, any fair journalist would say, "Paul has some of the most constitutional loving fans who love the ideas the founding fathers fought for. They are a diverse bunch but they are just like you and me. Paul also attracts a lot of more 'fringe' type characters, but that is only because Ron Paul does not judge people. He doesn't want to stand over you with a stick and moralize you. He wants to treat you as an adult and give you the respect to run your own life and make your own choices. You are responsible and you are accountable."
Tucker said something like this earlier in the article which I liked. But he always throws barbs in and bits of sourness, just enough to colour the flavour enough that you don't want to try it again.
