Ron Paul the Conspiratorial, Cont.

Both Ramesh Ponnuru and Rich Lowry put out essays today cataloging the various absurd and wrong-headed positions that Rep. Ron Paul has taken over the years and why he should not be considered for the Republican nomination.  Rich perfectly encapsulates Mr. Paul in this statement: "Throughout his career, Paul hasn’t been able to distinguish between fringy cranks and aboveboard purists. He has taken a principled anti-government position and associated it with loons and bigots."

Ramesh brings up a 2004 vote in the House that was passed by the count of 414-1.  As you can guess, Paul was the single "heroic" vote against the resolution.  And what was the resolution in question?  The celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act.  In his speech on the floor explaining his no vote, Mr. Paul stated the following:

The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

So under this reasoning, it was perfectly justified that owners of restaurants and lunch counters deny service to blacks.  And this was all supposedly within the confines of the high principles of the Founders.

And finally, going back to the newsletter fiasco that should be getting more attention than it is, today on the blog for Commentary Magazine, Alana Goodman (obviously a Jewish conspirator against Mr. Paul) notes this interesting fact:

Even if Paul didn’t write the newsletters, he defended the content when it was first exposed in 1996. At the time, he even took responsibility for writing the bigoted comments himself, and blasted his opponents for taking his words “out of context.” A few years later, he backtracked and claimed he never wrote them, demanding the media move on.