The momentum generated by Ron Paul's 2012 campaign for the Republican presidential race seems to have forced the media to consider him a serious contender. It is easy, on one level, to understand why sections of the media are less than happy at his success... after all, it was they who predicted he would do no better than stay on the fringes of the entire race.

However, following his performance in Iowa and New Hampshire and a surge forward in nationwide polls, the mainstream media houses are almost forced to provide some manner of coverage.

Predictably, though, the coverage seems more negative than positive. Reports from media organizations like The Charlotte Conservative and The Inquisitr are interesting in that they depict the extent to which certain other sections of the media will go to, in order to avoid covering or misrepresent a candidate.

 Against such a background, if one were to examine the coverage available, it seems to suggest a barrage of criticism going Paul's way.

The problem for media houses positioning themselves against Paul is that he has a proven record of integrity and a solid ideological base; there are no instances of him having flip-flopped on key issues. Moreover, if we were to examine his poll records so far, they do suggest he has a loyal following.

The fact that he has been criticized for being an extremist is, in itself, not a troubling point. This is to be accepted, since increased discussions on ideological positions are always welcome. Such debates will result in educating people on the pros and cons of different perspectives, hopefully leading to wiser decisions.

Unfortunately though, this is not what is happening. Instead, most media houses seem content with smear campaigns, of a sort, as reported in an RT.com report.

In fact, the only serious criticisms so far are alleged racist overtones in some newsletters that carried his name; these were published decades ago. Apart from such instances, an objective analysis emphasizes the frivolous nature of most criticisms leveled against him.

For instance, the press coverage on prostitutes in Nevada supporting Ron Paul was reported with titles like prostitutes pimping for Ron Paul. The question to be asked now concerns the choice of words... Can Ron Paul be declared guilty for being politically supported by prostitutes?

Another allegation that proved popular was that Paul travelled First Class during his congress days. The reports suggested he was a big spender of Government money. The truth, however, is that he actually spent less than a number of other Congressmen.

According to the Sunlight Foundation's House Expenditure Reports Database, in that year, Paul spent $56,000 on travel expenses, which made him the 178th biggest spender in Congress. In contrast, the top spender on travel, Don Young, (R-Alaska), shelled out $234,000.  That fact, unfortunately, was buried by certain sections of the media.

Sunlight
Sunlight Foundation’s House Expenditure Reports Database-showing Ron Paul's Travel Expenses

The latest news, then, is that Paul was against declaring Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a Federal Holiday... a fact contradicted by his supporters.

The bottom-line seems to be that his opponents have been unsuccessful, so far, in bringing genuinely serious allegations against Ron Paul... this despite his long career as a Congressman.

That fact should stand testimony to why he has attracted a loyal fan base.