Okay, now you're just taunting them, trolling for clicks. :)

eighty zillion tax credits

Yes. Megan is a serious economics commentator.

Here are her points:

Her MBA, a qualification quite seperate to economics, tells her Paul is wrong on economic issues.

Dr Paul may or may not have a view other people may or may not disagree with on something (evolution) irrelevant to politics.

The constitution can be amended - as Dr Paul supports and argues for e.g in the case of birth-right citizenship.

....

and journalists like you wonder why you get such robustly negative replies? Let me explain: this is a weak, and quite obviously wrong attack coming from someone I once hugely repected and read. Much like instapundit and various other soi-disant libertarian blogs. Since I once hugely respected and read them I know that they are not unintelligent and not incapable of seeing the ridiculous inanity of their attacks. Thus I conclude they are against Paul because their are fusty, and fuddy-duddy and frankly I very much dislike them now. Respect besmirched normally turns to hate.

and journalists like you wonder why you get such robustly negative replies?

The role of the media is no longer to shed light on government corruption but to divide the population through smear and innuendo.

All in the name of being objective, of course.

I wasted my time reading this

Nice one Jamie. :D

James Joyner, I don't think that I've ever read a less interesting article. You just rehash a few blogs by Megan McArdle, (who read several economics books - wow I'm impressed!) Then you fail to adequately proofread your meaningless insults (Romulans???). I hope you don't get paid for that pitiful effort.

yeah, is this like a blogworld sweeps-week James?
And you've stumbled upon a way to run up the hit counter? Just insert the RP name and sit back....
:)

Of course you idiots realize that the dollar is as good as dead, people are losing their homes, and red China, of all places, is keeping us from an utter economic collapse.

The system we have is working beautifully.

Did you also notice that laws have been passed that effectively cancel our Constitutionally protected rights? All that we require is the circumstances--such as the terrorist attacks we're aggressively courting--to feel the sting and realize just how screwed we are.

The house is on fire and you're throwing rocks at the one person stepping up with a fire extinguisher.

Yes, everything Paul proposes is nutty, but having a dollar worth four cents compared to its value in 1913, having people's savings diminish because the currency can't hold its value, having families lose their homes because interest rates are manipulated by a few private bankers, borrowing money from a brutal communist regime to wage unprovoked wars while our own citizens and borders are entirely neglected ... All this is perfectly sane.

Her MBA, a qualification quite seperate to economics, tells her Paul is wrong on economic issues.

Quite right, obstetrics give you a much better understanding of global economies.

yeah, is this like a blogworld sweeps-week James?

This whole writer's strike is really killing the blogs.

I am the last of the "tolerant" atheists I think. I think I'm the last atheist who believes that "tolerance" should be extended to those with differing views on the origin of life. I dunno, I hope someone else finds "tolerance" and uses it to the religious.

Is our dollar worth 4 cents? Wow I am one of the brainwashed ones! I thought it was worth 10.Anyway-politicians have hidden agendas some are good and some are not.The key to the coming election is to find the one with the agenda that will suit the voter not the corporation or lobbied interest.That is why Ron Paul appeals to so many .For now-we can give him 4 years and see how he runs with it.

I am the last of the "tolerant" atheists I think. I think I'm the last atheist who believes that "tolerance" should be extended to those with differing views on the origin of life. I dunno, I hope someone else finds "tolerance" and uses it to the religious.

You should tolerate belief in the unknown, but not disbelief in the know. Would you "tolerate" a Presidential candidate who said they did not believe in cancer? Because for me, not believing in Evolution is just as crazy.

Megan McArdle's post on Ron Paul's tax Policies was a joke! She dismissed out of hand his main thrust, eliminating the income tax, then proceeded to treat his transitional program as if it were the acutal program!

Logically fallacious, disingenuous in it's premise and dismissive in it's tone- any first-year economics student would be dismayed to read this pile of non-sequiters and outright misrepresentations. Of course, to anyone whose eyes glaze over at the mere mention of a spreadsheet, her treatise may sound plausible. But anyone with an ounce of economic background would see immediately that this article was a smarmy hit piece masquerading as legitimate journalism.

Perhaps Meghan would be more comfortable tackling a less serious topic that wouldn't tax her meager journalistic abilities as much.

xtrabiggg
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Why do I keep searching on Ron Paul items on Google? I got bills to pay. A job to go to. I got to walk the dog. I keep telling myself "Just one more article on Ron Paul then I will step away from the computer. But here I am again.
Fox News really messed up this time. I quit watching Fox about 9 months ago. I am boycotting everything Fox sells on it's sponsors time.

Your prediction is correct. We haven't changed our position. The reason isn't because we're unreasonable. Journalists just aren't as respected as Ron Paul. Sorry. You're not half as smart or half as right. You read a few books, get an MBA, and still don't get it. I guess you folks need better books.

Because for me, not believing in Evolution is just as crazy.

For me, you saying that is crazy, so now let's decide to not call people crazy.

I like Megan's blog, usually... but when she talks about Ron Paul's economic policies I have to wonder where she is getting her ideas from. For a few days, she seemed to think that Ron Paul wanted to abolish all fiat dollars and force the entire economy onto a single gold-standard. This is a lot different than simply legalizing competing asset-backed currencies. As it stands today, you can print off certificates and promise to honor them in gold or silver or whatever, but that gives the FBI some right to come seize your assets and force you to default against your investors.

I'm not sure how someone who considers themselves 'libertarian' can justify that status quo by distorting the alternative. I'll just have to assume she spent more time searching for humane bacon than actually reading Ron Paul's proposals.

To my fellow atheist Paul supporters:
Paul believes in evolution. He also stated that he does not think that this is a relevant issue. For most politicians, the evolution question is a litmus test that may be taken to prove that one will take away a wide range of rights from the non god fearing public once in office. For Dr. Paul, it is simply a belief. It is not a central component of his platform, nor is it a signal of intentions to discriminate against those who disagree.

Children, children...

Let's face facts.

Ron Paul is a Whackadoo.

The entertainment factor would be great for a Paul/Kucinich ticket. Both are just as viable and serious as candidates. Oh shit, let's offer Nadar some cabinet office just to make things more interesting.

But it AIN'T gonna happen.

(stirring the pot...the crock pot, that is.)

Megan is an idiot. There, a comment at the level she comprehends.

Well, someone's an idiot. I hope that's not at a level the Ronulans can't understand.

Her MBA, a qualification quite seperate to economics, tells her Paul is wrong on economic issues.

Quite right, obstetrics give you a much better understanding of global economies.

Paul serves on the House Banking Committee, and has done so for several terms.

The United States House Committee on Financial Services (or House Banking Committee) oversees the entire financial services industry, including the securities, insurance, banking, and housing industries. The Committee also oversees the work of the Federal Reserve, the United States Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and other financial services regulators.

I'd say that he's had a bit of experience in economic theory and how it pertains to government.