- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Joe Conason
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I agree with Glenn that the Houston Chronicle article is the most disturbing thing that has been put out there. I hope that Ron Paul has a good explanation for it. I look forward to Glenn's interview with him.
Having said that, if Ron Paul is the one candidate who is espousing the political issues that I agree with, more or less, should I not support him even if he actually did have some views that I disagree with or find offensive?
For example, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. That disgusts me. Should I then say, "Well, this Declaration of Independence stuff is nonsense because Thomas Jefferson espouses it?"
Ron Paul has argued against racism. He is on record saying that it is collectivist nonsense. He should get the benefit of the doubt. It is also worth noting that he never advocates any policies which disproportionatley benefit one group at the expense of another. He clearly insists that all people have equal rights.
motherwell -- I am very much opposed to eminent domain. If the government cannot give you a price that you think is fair for your land, I don't think they have a right to take it. As for pollution, (say, when your sewage line floods your neighbor), that is a property rights issue. If we injure someone accidentally, we do owe them compensation. I don't think we disagree very much on this.
