Although not actually on the cover (yet) of the Rolling Stone Magazine Ron Paul is getting the attention of political writer Tim Dickinson. While not a supporter of Dr Paul he seems to be coming around to that conclusion.
Here are a few of his comments made recently:
I've been snarky about Ron Paul's campaign, which admittedly is a poor substitute for substance. Here's the deal. I actually admire Dr. Paul. He's got a coherent worldview and he's sticking to it.
He's hardly a tough guy - his affect is more Harry Reid than Dirty Harry - but he's by far the 2008 field's toughest and most unyielding anti-war voice. That's a public service. And his willingness to stand up to an opportunist like Giuliani in adressing the root causes of the 9/11 attacks is an object lesson for many Democrats in how to grow a pair.
Paul's defense of constitutional liberties is also deeply patriotic. I admire his clarity on our guaranteed freedoms, not the least of which is freedom from our government - habeas corpus, the 4th Amendment, etc. The heart begins to swell.
And there are times when D.C. seems such a morass of special interests and unprincipled ambition that the traditional Republican message of deeply limited government holds a seductive appeal.
So there's some Ron Paul substance - good, bad, and tin foil hat. Now back to our regularly scheduled snark.