I think two other recent articles are worth posting with this, the first is a
WSJ article by Peggy Noonan where she stated:
The debate was full of fireworks about Iraq, about its essentials -- the rightness of the endeavor, and what should rightly be done now. From the libertarian Ron Paul a blunt argument against the war: We never should have gone in and we should get out. "The people who say there'll be a blood bath are the same ones who said it would be a cakewalk. . . . Why believe them?" His foreign policy: "Mind our own business, bring our troops home, defend our country, defend our borders." After Mr. Paul spoke, it seemed half the room booed, but the other applauded. When a thousand Republicans are in a room and one man of the eight on the stage takes a sharply minority viewpoint on a dramatic issue and half the room seems to cheer him, something's going on.
Ron Paul's support isn't based on his persona, history or perceived power. What support he has comes because of his views. As he spoke, you could hear other candidates laughing in the background. They should stop giggling, and engage in a serious way.
The second is this article:
Bringing Politics Back to the People - The Do it Yourself Campaign of Ron Paul, a fiery call to activism, regardless of political persuasian, IMO.
I happen agree with alot of what Ron Paul says. The sad thing is that he will never even be given the opportunity to be a serious candidate. Today, the only possible way to win the Republican nomination is to toe the party line and to not rock the boat. It’s ashame that this is the way it is. I wonder if Ronald Reagan would be able to get his message across today seeing as how he didn’t toe the party line either.