Fringe Ron Paul

Ron Paul is a fringe candidate.

As the Associated Press notes, he finds fans and funds on the fringe.

Those who dismissed Rep. Ron Paul as a joke in the Republican presidential primary campaign aren't laughing so hard these days.

Wrong.

I dismissed him as a joke and I'm still laughing, hard.

...Paul remains a very long shot for the nomination. But as the only Republican candidate backing a prompt troop withdrawal from Iraq — and an airing of possible impeachment charges against Vice President Dick Cheney — he appeals to a mix of liberals and conservatives who feel alienated and deeply distrustful of the government.

I don't think Paul appeals to liberals or conservatives. He appeals to nutjobs. They just happen to call themselves libs or conservatives.

"Where the extreme left and the extreme right meet, you'll find Ron Paul," said Merle Black, an Emory University political scientist and co-author of the book "Divided America."

That is so wrong.

Ron Paul does not represent the middle, the moderate, the center of the extremes.

Paul doesn't fall anywhere along the Left-Right continuum. He's floating off elsewhere, totally disconnected.

...Presidential debate moderators typically pay scant attention to Paul and two other House members seen as fringe candidates. But he has triggered some crackling exchanges on the Iraq war, unusual for primary campaign debates in which most candidates hold similar views.

At a mid-May debate in South Carolina, Paul infuriated Rudy Giuliani and others by saying U.S. troops' presence in Saudi Arabia contributed to al-Qaida's decision to attack the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.

"If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem," Paul said. "They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there."

Many Republicans condemned the remarks. But Paul's supporters rhapsodize about his candor and integrity on Web sites and at "meet ups."

Of course many Republicans condemned Paul's lunacy.

Of course, Giuliani was infuriated by Paul's remarks. Paul was pulling a "blame America first" move.

Byron York describes what happened:

Questioner Wendell Goler, of Fox News, asked, “Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?”

“I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it,” Paul said. “They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there.”

Enter Giuliani. “May I comment on that?” the mayor said, interrupting the orderly flow of things for the first time in the debate. “That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th.”

The audience loved it. As the applause built, Giuliani added, “And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that.”

I think that was a defining moment for Paul.

He marginalized himself as a loon.

I sincerely believe that Paul doesn't have a realistic view of recent history. Studying a simple timeline might be a good first step for him to overcome that serious flaw in his qualifications to be president.

The fact that his supporters "rhapsodize about his candor and integrity on Web sites and at 'meet ups' " reveals that his supporters are out of touch with reality as well.