I read that article and it hasn't changed any of my ideas.
Ron Paul votes against many things because the constutition does not say that it is something the Federal Government should be involved with. This does not mean he is against or for the particular idea. Rather that it is something the states should handle by themselves, and if not the states then the people and the markets. But not the Fed. Why is that so frightening? I support drilling in ANWAR, the gulf, everywhere there is oil. I support the seperation of church and state not the seperation from church and state. I want out of the UN, and I don't see why we should let some polity supercede our laws.
And Global warming is for sissies. :hippy:
FlyGuyOU Reviewed by FlyGuyOU on . the case against ron paul ron paul is a nut. this is coming from someone with libertarian views on many things. the guy is scary and most people who supporting him are kids on the internet who hear he is against iraq and pro legalizing drugs and think that makes him great. read this thisisby.us - The Case Against Ron Paul, by bbstucco "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance." Rating: 5