Washington Examiner's Tim Carney is angry at the media for ignoring Ron Paul's showing in Iowa:
Paul came within one percentage point of straw poll victor Michele Bachmann at Ames, and scored more than twice as many votes as third-place Pawlenty. … So, again, why doesn't Paul get the attention he seems to deserve? Mostly because the mainstream media and the Republican establishment wish he would just go away. One reason the bipartisan establishment finds Paul so obnoxious is how much the past four years have proven him correct — on the housing bubble, on the economy, on our foreign misadventures, and on our national debt.
Jon Stewart was hilariously on-point on this last night. It's not his domestic views that upset the establishment; it's his daring to broach the catastrophe that is the Bush legacy in foreign affairs. But in so many ways, he should be the candidate of the moment, as this tongue-in-cheek video shows:
In last Thursday’s debate, Paul dismissed the significance of Iran getting nuclear weapons (a radical regime that has called for "Death to America" and wiping Israel off the map). To be clear, it isn’t a matter of him being against sending troops to Iran, or bombing Iran — he is even against imposing sanctions, or taking any other actions to attempt to stop them from getting nukes. He also warned that assassinating terrorists would "translate our rule of law into a rule of mob rule." In May, Paul said that he wouldn't have ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden because "it was absolutely not necessary." This is just a small inkling of the positions he’s taken recently.
Derbyshire sides, in a somewhat confused fashion, with Carney.
(Chart by Alex Holzbach)