Comment: Defamation of character. Dr. Paul was correct.

(See in situ)

Defamation of character. Dr. Paul was correct.

The ad IMPLIED that it had been paid for and approved by Ron Paul.

To get to the bottom of it is perfectly fine.

Ron Paul believes in the LAW.

You can't hide behind some facade and get away with breaking the law.

If I put a mask on and rob a bank, is it wrong for those being robbed to try to lift off the mask to see who is breaking the law?

SO - IF INDEED Dr. Paul was illegally slandered or defrauded then he had every right to unmask the perpetrator.

Apparently that judge didn't see it that way though.

The law is only as valid as the power behind it.

That judge is probably owned by big-government money so why would he ever defend a correct limited-government thinker like Ron Paul?

And don't forget that Huntsman is a Morman first and probably would support any anti-Paul actions if it helped his brother Romney.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul