...Duke is not noxious to you, then insert someones name who is. Pretend they support Paul and then ask yourself...
...why do they support him?
It is, to use your new favorite word, a non sequitur to say David Duke supports the constitution. Supremacists, by definition, don't.
Duke is a white supremest and I am not. Duke is not obnoxious (maybe he is, I don't know him) but his ideas are. That still does not mean that Ron Paul needs to say anything about Duke unless he is asked.
Supremacists believe they believe the Constitution. I think they miss some equality issues.
I am a strict constructionist as is Ron Paul. Knowing the Ron Paul is a strict constructionist, I know that Ron Paul does not miss the equality issues.
Some of the major current problems are the way the 14th Amendment equal protect clause is parsed and applied. There are problems in the way the 1st, 2nd, & 4th Amendments are interpreted and the 9th and 10th Amendments are ignored. The Constitution is twisted and construed to mean and authorize all sorts of things that were not intended and are not if the wording is read using strict English construction.
A strict constructionist reads the words and the English construction and does not parse them like a lawyer to twist some meaning to suit their purpose. The Constitution says plainly what it means and means exactly what it says.