First, Jeff I’m glad to see you posting here on Red State. I’ve read a few of your previous blog when Stacy McCain (who is generally a Ron Paul fan and a down-the-line conservative) has linked to you. Unfortunately, I wish your post here were under happier circumstances.

Someday, someone will write a very interesting book about the obsession that a small group of conservatives have with tearing down Ron Paul. With all of the vitriol spilled, you would think that somehow the Republicans had gone down to ignominious defeat in the last few elections because they had hewed so closely to Ron Paul’s line, rather than pretty much doing the opposite.

I have several criticisms of Ron Paul, and even more of some of his supporters (Though I find most of them– and I suspect I’ve met many more than Jeff has– to be both polite and very well informed), but I also feel that he plays a very valuable role in the Republican Party and that he has often been the conscience of the party on many important issues of federalism and Constitutional principle. With all of the corruption and incompetence in the party establishment, I’m not about to spend my time tearing down a man who plays what in my view is a very valuable role.

I could go point by point debunking some of the issues you’ve raised here, but I’ll only point out one, because I think it is so indicative of the nature of much of the more vitriolic criticism of Paul. You note at the top (with incredulity) Paul’s asking about a potential linkage between the Fed and Watergate (among other misdeeds). This was the subject of a nasty previous diary at Red State (which does not deserve the courtesy of a link) that unfortunately had many recommenders., all of whom talked about how this showed how crazy Ron Paul was.

A few days later, Congressman Paul entered into the Congressional Record a statement from the source of these allegations, which you can read at

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=33004

The author,, Prof. Robert Auerbach, is a distinguished economist at Professor at The University of Texas School of Public Affairs. He also had extensive experience on the Hill as a staff Economist on the House Financial Services Committee. He is regularly cited in our leading financial media. The book in which these allegations were made was not printed by some strange self-publishing conspiracy shop, but the University of Texas Press.

I do not know whether Dr. Auerbach’s allegations are in fact accurate, but given the respected source, it seems entirely reasonable to find out– and It was embarrassing that Bernanke was entirely unaware of these criticisms– not that Paul raised them.

To me, this incident was indeed classically indicative of Ron Paul, but in the opposite way than his critics suggest– He brought up an important and little-known truth of which many people had not been aware. He was mocked for it (just as he was mocked before the financial crisis). And ultimately, his concerns were vindicated– or at least, he was shown to be much more informed than his detractors.

And now, let’s move on. I really don’t like responding to these diaries, and only do so because I don’t like to see a single Congressman with a lot offer be used as a rhetorical punching bag.

I’d much rather talk about how we can defeat the Democrats in the 2010 elections, and help restore Constitutional limited government to our country.

Thanks.