The folly of progressives for Paul

[ProSense]

12. Seriously

"If you attack him solely on the newsletters and a few votes from years ago, it sounds like the same old bullshit. "

...are you saying that the piece only criticizes Paul on "the newsletters"? I mean, did you read the OP? Here, where is the reference to the newsletters in this paragraph:

So it is with the progressive movement's relationship to Congressman Ron Paul. Paul has policy prescriptions that seem on a superficial level to align closely with progressive values: most significantly, he opposes the continuing military presence in Afghanistan, and he opposes the current war on drugs—both of which are regarded by many progressives as total policy failures that should be ended as soon as possible. To "single-issue" progressives for whom either of these two issues, or perhaps the indefinite military detention provisions of the NDAA, are key concerns above all else, Paul's candidacy may initially prove attractive because he seems at first glance to be promoting issues of common cause. Paul-touting progressives are no doubt just as aware of Ron Paul's positions on women's rights, the Voting Rights Act, health care, and our country's entire macroeconomic structure; but they likely view Paul's candidacy as an opportunity not only to promote their own favorite issue, but also perhaps to stick a proverbial finger in the eye of President Obama, who they feel has not met their expectations.

"When I speak of his perceived strengths, I don't mean to liberals and further left. I'm talking about everybody else. "

What? The piece isn't titled: "The folly of 'Everybody Else' for Ron Paul."