I saw Chaim's video on Ron Paul. I usually like what Chaim has to say, but I think he makes some very fallacious arguments.
Arguing that x and y support Ron Paul is a fallacy of guilt by association. Yes, one of the fellows at StørmFrønt donated money to his campaign, but does that make Ron Paul a Nazi or racist? Sure, he could have turned it down, but that would undermine the grassroots element of his campaign.
Chaim also grossly fails to grasp what Ron Paul said with regards to our foreign policy and 9/11, as well as equating that in having "Truther" supporters, Ron Paul himself is a "truther." Yes, I'm sure some his supporters think 9/11 was an inside job and the government was behind it, but this more than a stone's throw away from Ron Paul said at I think was the first debate. He said the terrorists were ultimately responsible in later interviews, what he's getting at is that our foreign policy is angering the Arab world, and our policy in effect served as a contingency for the 9/11 attacks, and that we should review our foreign policy. I think an apt analogy is that we don't like illegal aliens taking our jobs, and the Arabs don't like us having military installations on their land.
I point this out, because Ron Paul is the most conservative and only actual conservative running. He wants to eliminate the IRS and virtually all federal programs, he's the only one who is against the Iraq War and voted against it, and he will keep us out of unnecessary wars.
