My expanded analysis of Ron Paul on the issues is up at The Atlasphere.
This is similar to my earlier blog post, but expanded to include new material on Paul's campaign website.
So far the feedback has been mixed: people seem either to like the piece or hate it. The haters fall into two camps: those who recognize the flaws in Paul's candidacy but still see him as the least bad among evils and those who think I'm an idiot. (Though I suppose those are not mutually exclusive).
One question that comes a lot when I criticize Ron Paul is "so who do you support then?" I don't support any of the candidates. That Paul might be closest to my own views about many policy positions is not alone sufficient as a reason to support him. I want to know why he holds those positions. But as I argue in my column, I don't think Paul's positions--as stated on his campaign website--are that similar on many important issues.
I wrote the column/blog, in part, as an exercise of my own to understand more about Paul. Part of it was also as a warning that supporters of liberty and the free society shouldn't get duped by Paul's liberty rhetoric. I don't expect John Galt to run for president, I am not looking for perfection. But I want some one who understands what liberty and a free society means in a principled way. Looking at Paul's campaign website does not lead me to believe that he meets this condition.