Dirty Money Non-Controversy

I'll take the recent "controversy" over Ron Paul keeping a $500 campaign contribution from a racist as a sign of his growing relevance. If you're irrelevant, they don't inspect the sources of your receipts, after all.

I like Paul's response- especially his decimation of Faux News' Neil Cavuto.

Neil Cavuto: There are reports, sir, that your campaign has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist in West Palm Beach. And your campaign had indicated you have no intention to return it. What are you going to do with that?

Ron Paul: It is probably already spent. Why give it back to him and use it for bad purposes? And I don't even know his name. I never heard of it. You know, when you get 57,000 donations a day, are we supposed to screen them and find out their beliefs? He sent the money for my beliefs. And if he promoting my viewpoints and my attitudes, why give it back to him if he has bad viewpoints?

And I don't endorse anything that he endorses or what anybody endorses. They come to me to endorse freedom and the Constitution and limited government. So, I see no purpose for me to start screening everybody that sends me money. I mean, it is impossible to do it. It is a ridiculous idea that I am supposed to screen these people.

If you think Paul is off-base here, consider this comment from a Reason Hit & Run reader:

The same people who criticize Dr. Paul for accepting donations from a racist hate group probably don't have a problem with the State seizing assets from drug dealers and using that tainted money for the children rather than incinerating it with the drugs.

Paul's using the money to promote liberty. I'm a-ok with that. Beyond that, I highly doubt anyone reading this considers the relative moral standing of all the people behind their paychecks. In the odd chance you do, is it the case that you shred the check if it turns out the boss is a racist? Or if a shareholder in the company beats his wife? Right. Didn't think so. Glass houses and rocks, folks.

Today's Notable Ron Paul Item

In the wake of Ron Paul scoring the biggest fundraising day ever, the question that pops into my head is, "will it continue to generate buzz?" Looks like it will. Here's today's notable item: an NPR blog item that asks Paul supporters to comment on who they are, and why they are backing Ron Paul.

There are several hundred entries. I was going to grab one or two of the best, but I found myself scrolling and scrolling and found no distinct best one, but that the mass of it was rather moving.

Various Thoughts on Ron Paul

I've had two Ron Paul bumper stickers on my car for about three months now. I am supporting him until I can get more excited about someone else. True, that's not a ringing endorsement, but what it comes down to is that I'm not excited about voting Republican.

I am excited about the strides the Paul campaign has made. I've watched his coverage go from hatchet job to serious interview on Bill Maher's HBO show. He's been on Leno, and is going to be on Meet The Press, on December 23rd. The big news is that he raised over $6 million in one day- yesterday.

Even the press on the left is taking notice, and not merely sneering. Mother Jones has an article online today. From The Nation's report:

And Paul is continuing to raise money -- largely small contributions from individuals who in many cases have never before given money to a campaign -- at a remarkable rate.

The congressman's campaign is dramatically exceeding fundraising expectations in the current quarter. The campaign's unreasonable goal of $12 million has been exceeded by more than 50 percent already and there is every reason to believe that Paul will almost certainly finish the quarter with more than $20 million raised.

Paul could well end up raising more than any of the other Republican contenders and providing the only serious competition for Democratic money leaders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

There is an article in the Washington Post online that doesn't look much like a Ron Paul article in the WP, and notable blogger Andrew Sullivan has endorsed Paul. Of course, with success come hatchet jobs. The most notable is from Daily Kos, calling Paul and his supporters "white supremacists". How's that go? First they ignore you, then they attack you...

So, it's exciting. But I'm torn. I'm a Libertarian Party partisan, but I also support non-LP candidates who will promote liberty. I'm not about to get too hung up on who gets the policies of liberty across, so long as they do.

But fact is, if Paul gets even moderate support from the Republican Party leadership, the Libertarian Party is done. The GOP will be able to say, with a straight face, that their party is the rightful home for supporters of limited government. They can't do it now, although some people refuse to see the GOP for what it is- a big government party that looks like a small government party, only because it has the Democrats to compare to.

With the burst of money and press, Paul is probably going to surge, and that's great! But as more primary election deadlines approach, many Libertarian partisans, many of whom voted for Ron Paul the LP candidate in 1988, will be changing their affiliations from 'L' to 'R'.

According to Paul's website, the following states have the following deadlines to change registrations, so as to be eligible to vote in the Republican primaries:

New Jersey - Today, Dec 17
Nevada - Dec. 19
Hawaii - Dec. 26
Kentucky - Dec. 31
Florida - Dec. 31

As enthusiastic as I am right now for the Paul campaign, I truly believe there is no way he will win the Republican nomination. It's just too much to ask of the GOP core to go from standing with the President on Iraq, and then switching 180 degrees to supporting Dr. Paul. In the meantime, earnest supporters will change their affiliations from 'L' to 'R', thus weakening the standing of the Libertarian Party in those states, and possibly threatening the ballot access for the LP. Indiana is not a registration state, so this won't be a factor here.

The LP has done nothing to make me look past Ron Paul. It's ironic, but the one libertarian candidate in the big dance might be the death of the Libertarian Party.

I'm open to other views on this. What say?