re: #10 Charles

Andrew Sullivan continues to defend Ron Paul.

[Link: andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com...]

Pathetically thin rationalizations masquerading as deep thoughts.

In his post, Sullivan writes, "he [Paul] deserves to be judged on his recent history as well as his increasingly distant past." Well, one of the most important aspects of Ron Paul's "recent history" is how he has handled, and is handling, the news about his white-supremacist personal associations.

This is a question of CHARACTER. A person of admirable character, with a past like that, would be abjectly apologizing all over himself. This is conspicuously NOT what Ron Paul is doing now.

There's an interesting contrast with, of all people, former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman. A long time ago, Fuhrman wrote a book about the OJ Simpson case. The first page of that book was a heartfelt, abject apology. I was positively impressed with Fuhrman's character, just from reading that awesome apology. (I'm sure I wouldn't agree with him about many things, but that apology was one of the most admirable things I've ever read.)

Contrast this with Ron Paul's brusque treatment of CNN's Gloria Borger, when she asked him about the newsletters.

Ron Paul is showing his true character TODAY, just as he's done for all those past decades. Until and unless Ron Paul pulls a Fuhrman and meets this issue head-on, as a changed man, I don't see how anyone can continue to defend him.