You guys also have to consider why Ron Paul is running as a republican. Most of you, if you've read a little bit about him, know that he ran in '88 as a libertarian. The problem with running on a third party ticket? You don't get covered unless you can buy your own ad time on tv like Ross Perot was able to do.

It seems like a major understatement to say that he merely has conservative points. His popular messages that appeal with "liberals" like are, in fact, always justified through his libertarian philosophy, at a point far enough right to seem left. We have this idea because of Bush not listening to anyone for the last six years that resistance to repressive "conservativism" must come from the left, and that, in my opinion, is why Paul seems liberal.

Paul could not get any attention on the left as a candidate who was not proposing new major federal legislation; he would start "phasing out" federal influence.

Does anyone else wish he could just simply support nationalized health care (which musn't necessarily be centrally administrated.) to give Americans what they've already been paying for? People I talk to in Europe can't believe how badly we're getting screwed over here.

__________________
"From the psychopharmalogical standpoint we now understand these [religious/mystical] states to be changes in brain chemistry. From the sociological perspective we see that they tended to be connected in some way with religion."
--Huston Smith, "Do Drugs Have Religious Import?"

Check out my first grow ever: White Widow and Santa Maria! Input obviously accepted...
http://www.rollitup.org/grow-journal...nta-maria.html