Not bad! Any that people are finding particularly difficult? Easy?

I wouldn't say it was particularly difficult or easy. However, I did notice a pattern emerging in which quotes which you would naturally assume were comments on modern events tended to be the ones which were actually said by Dr. Paul in the 80s-90s.

Consistency means little when one's platform is fundamentally goofy.

He has always been unequivocably racist, misogynist, deeply in the pocket of the Christian fundamentalists, isolationist anti-abortion, with a clear distaste for using the power of the government to address issues of the working and middle class.

Lets dispel some oft used tropes by Paulies. He is not the only politician speaking out against our wars. Never has been. His "predictions about the current economy" are bullcrap. Taking a contrarian economic position is being a famous psychic. Nobody counts the number of failed predictions and eventually if you wait long enough you will be correct once. Its why we call it the business cycle. [These things happen]. His position on "the war on drugs" is a complete dodge. By referring it down to the states, he ensures a bigger mess with wildly inconsistent forms of enforcement. Those racist newsletters he wrote a few years ago were approved by him and he has defended them in the past and claimed them as his own.

Why is FP still taking him seriously? The guy is 4th in essentially a 2 person primary. His positions ensure he will never be elected president.

although he has shown himself to be a willing enabler of Hollywood lobbyists, but otherwise a decent politician. To be a Cicero is a tall order, particularly in today's climate.

Re Spood et al, if they have their way, we'll end up with a Caesar quicker than a Cato. Paul in the pocket of the fundies? That's strange considering the fundies are pretty pro-intervention and they do loves them some foreign aid boondoggles.

And as none of the major candidates, outside of rabble-rousing, will do any serious immigration reform, we can dispense with the claim that Paul is the only one not willing to "help" the middle and working class. And as government-driven inflation hits the poorer and middle class first, I'd have to say our bellicose, hegemonic, exceptionalist leaders are actively working against the interests of the working class and poor.

Everyone else, including Obama, are pretty much status quo. They'll talk a lot, accomplish little, and make sure their backers get a good return on their investment.

The reference: Saig? Takamori the leader of the Satsuma Revolt in Japan in 1877, a war against modernity. Had he been successful, Japan would not have modernized and more likely than not ended up as a European colony. Paul is a man full of passion for wrongheaded causes.

We already had a couple of Caesars. We called them Teddy Roosevelt, FDR and Reagan. Our system is set up to withstand all sorts of dominating personalities who take its reigns.

As for the fundies, Ron Paul is anti-choice, pro school prayer and creationist. What group of people takes these platforms.....could it be fundies? The take on foreign affairs by Fundies is neither consistent nor important to their agenda.

Ron Paul's view of "immigration reform" is a joke. He has no intention of doing anything other than make our issues on the subject much, much worse. Having an opinion on the subject is not equal to having one worth taking seriously.

Ron Paul supports neo-guilded age policies which hurt the working class and middle class. He wants to remove national level labor protections, consumer protections, environmental protections, wants to encourage discrimination of all stripes. We can dispense with the bullcrap that he wants to do anything for the benefit of those who are not wealthy.

His ideas of economic policies were ridiculous in William Jennings Bryan's age and they are moreso today. Encouraging companies to avoid paying living wages, giving decent benefits or showing accountability to the public isn't going to do much for the working/middle class.

He's a fundie? I guess that's why he said that Republicans should emphasize liberty and not religion. ( In a reference to Santorum)

"And how many democrats voted against either of our wars?"

Close to half, for Iraq. Most votes nowadays are party line, and if there were a Democratic president the proportions would probably be reversed.

"Because Paul is so wedded to bringing back the Articles of Confederation"

The last link to the gold standard was'nt broken until 1971. The Fed wasn't established until 1913, and the two previous central banks were ended without armageddon happening.

"Yet his supporters claim he does. Its one of many fictions Paulies bandy about."

I'll give you this one, just because I like the word bandy.

"That is a flat out lie."

Than refute it.

"Lets not go into the fact that he is the candidate of choice of Stormfront"

And Castro endorsed Obama's healthcare plan. Not sure how this is relevant.