Now this is what I'm talking about. Andy "Don't Call Me Andrew" Sullivan at Reuters actually digs into a candidate's stated policy goals and proposed actions, and looks at what would happen to the U.S. should Paul get elected. It's strange to be so excited at seeing what really should be the job, and Sullivan does have to frame the story within the horse-race format that the other 99% of political news stories use in election years. And all the information Sullivan presents isn't really arcane; it didn't require ProPublica-style investigation, and many of us already knew various pieces of Paul's whacky notions. (Let's leave aside the question of whether voters will and/or should make their choices based on such policy positions or horse-race data, and the chicken-and-egg of whether that's an effect or cause of the 99% horse-race coverage.)
But let's applaud even this collect-and-overview piece. Where are the accompanying reviews of the stated policy plans for all the other candidates? I bet each and every one has at least one "can you believe this?" stated position.