When asked in 2007 about the Birch Society, Paul stated:
“Oh, my goodness, the John Birch Society!” he said in mock horror. “Is that bad? I have a lot of friends in the John Birch Society. They’re generally well educated, and they understand the Constitution. I don’t know how many positions they would have that I don’t agree with. Because they’re real strict constitutionalists, they don’t like the war, they’re hard-money people. . . . ”
As someone who is personally more liberal but is interested in libertarian principles since that is the political party of my upbringing, I'd question if Paul believes some of the positions now, as opposed to some stated in the past, as an example, I don't believe:
Liberals are secret communist traitors who provide the cover for the gradual process of collectivism, with the ultimate goal of replacing the nations of western civilization with one-world socialist government.
Sad to say, though I do know people who do feel that way, and I don't think all of them are John Birch Society Members.
I ventured over to the John Birch Society website expecting to see a bunch of extreme positions. None that I noticed, in fact it was much more laid back than some of the "Focus on Family" type material that I've seen out there. I really don't think speaking with people who are members of this group is anything "bad" and if we are going to follow the whole "if it's wrong, it's wrong" theory, then if people are not supposed to worry about some of the closer relationships our current President had? Ron Paul's Birch connection is not one to worry about...