Ron Paul's quote: "America was founded by men who understood that the threat of domestic tyranny is as great as any threat from abroad" reminds us of Dr. King's view that "In one sense the civil rights movement in the United States is a special American phenomenon which must be understood in the light of American history and dealt with in terms of the American situation. But on another and more important level, what is happening in the United States today is a relatively small part of a world development." When US governments are instrumental in rigging elections or give diplomatic backing to autocratic strongmen in central Africa (Museveni & Kagame), this goes against these views expressed by Dr. King. To discuss the civil rights movement outside of this international dimension would be a disservice to King's legacy. As King said: injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Instead of paying lipservice to King's legacy, both liberals and conservatives should try to connect the dots. Ron Paul takes King's words seriously and has made a serious attempt to integrate it into his own platform. Has he been succesfull and do we agree with Paul's interpretation of King's legacy with it's impact on domestic and foreign policy? That's the fundamental question and that's how his campaign should be covered.
Ron Paul as Dr. King defines our constitutional liberty not in opposition to faith in God as opposed to "Ayn Rand" libertarians.
(My reaction on this New York Times Editorial was not published yet)