[Jean S]

"And since they can't actually find anything on Dr. Paul..."

He accepted a donation from Stormfront. How can you defend that?

[mosquitobite]

It's not like he went and sought the money from Stormfront, nor did he go to one of their functions to pander. In case you missed it Dr Paul had over 50,000 individual donors on Sunday, and over all his campaign has had over 100,000 unique individuals. The majority of funds come in from the web. Is he supposed to pay someone to investigate every supporter?

And giving it back? What does that accomplish? It just means the media will continue to look through every single donor til they bleed the man's campaign.

I donated.
I had an abortion 14 years ago.
ZOMG! Dr Paul supports abortion now!!!

Perhaps you can now see how silly this argument is?

[billbears]

He accepted a donation from Stormfront. How can you defend that?

No he accepted a donation from someone clicking on a donate button most likely. What? You plan on requiring a check on every person that donates to any campaign? Do you realize how much that would cost? Who is going to decide what equates 'good' and 'bad' speech? You? Me?

There are positions that other candidates hold that I disagree with. Shall I have the right to demand they return the money to those supporters? Do you even see how ridiculous this position could get very quickly? Unfortunately it has gotten that way almost already hasn't it? And it is exactly what Dr. Paul says it is. Pandering.

Of course you don't actually care, you have a predisposition against Dr. Paul so by default he must support racism. That about the gist of it?