[stephenjohnbanker]

No need for humbleness.......you are spot on!!

[counterpunch]

Ron Paul is a leftist in the entire area of foreign policy and trade, not just war.
His policies of isolationism and protectionism are among the most dangerous in the entire presidential field.

[counterpunch]

BTW, that shouldn’t say “Ron Paul = Hillary on the War”, it should say “Ron Paul = Dennis Kucinich on the War”.
Ron Paul is even worse than Hillary when it comes to national security issues!
 

[Kevmo]

Rut roh. Does this mean there’s going to be a purge of Paulistinians?

[2ndDivisionVet]

Rudy is our Hillary, Ron Paul is our Dennis Kucinich, Mitt is our John Edwards, John Cox is our Mike Gravel, and Fred is our new Ronald Reagan with a Southern accent...

[Buffalo Head]

Use of the deliberately misspelled “Klintoon” greatly diminishes the effectiveness of your post. Please don’t lower yourself to the level of the kooks on your forum.

[Reagan Man]

So let me get this straight.

Ron Paul = No vote.
Rudy Giuliani = No vote.
Hillary Clinton = No vote.

Gotcha, agreed.

Go Fred go!

[Dragonspirit]

In the primary, I would not vote for either.

In the general, if my choices are Hillary or Rudy, I will vote for Rudy. EVERY Republican is better than ANY Democrat in this election.

[de meanr]

And let me add that, whatever your views on gun control, Giuliani’s use of the courts to punish a legally functioning industry is an abuse of the legal system.

It’s too bad Giuliani is not as zealous an advocate for conservative issues as he is for liberal issues.

[dayglored]

Good summarization.

I find Ron Paul's utter inability to acknowledge the seriousness and necessity of the war against Islamofascism incredibly disappointing, since otherwise it would be kinda nice to have someone with his other positions in the race as a serious contender -- it would spark some good debate. However, I cannot bring myself to support him.

Giuliani is so far off the mark I can't bring myself to write about him, much less support him.

I truly hope Fred Thompson mounts a successful challenge to the Giuliani juggernaut, since otherwise I don't hold much hope for the Republican ticket in 2008. I find Thompson's positions straightforward and comprehensible, and his style refreshing. I'm not a Fredhead (yet anyway), but so far he's looking the best of the litter.

[explodingspleen]

I'd say Ron Paul is pretty conservative... probably one of the most conservative as far as smaller government, etc. goes. I also don't think Republican is a very redeeming label anymore, if it ever connoted more than "the party conservatives tend to choose more often than not." My major problem with him is that he is FREAKING NUTS. I wouldn't trust that guy with a pointed stick, much less five thousand nuclear warheads.

Rudy is indeed a lot like Clinton, and in more fundamental respects than mere policy... he is capable, intelligent, and evil. Assuming the last is a given, I would prefer to do without the former two. Heck, I'll take Ron Paul over Rudy.

On the up-and-up, if Ron Paul winds up running as a third party, he's going to draw off an awful lot of the Democrat vote. Or, to be more accurate, he will draw off an awful lot of the formerly Republican vote. As far as that goes, I say he's a great candidate to have around. ;)

[perfect stranger]

What he said.

[Maynerd]

Ronald Reagan always advocated a big tent. As conservatives we still need to get to 50% +1.

[elizabetty]

What is your take on the almost identical positions and level of responsibility of Senators McCain and Thompson in giving life to McCain/Feinold?

[jackieaxe]

Ron Paul never voted for the war, Hilliary did. Ron Paul is not a liberal democrat.

[wagglebee]

Ron Paul is a nutcase, he’s a cross between Ross Perot, Ralph Nader and Kucinich. He’s probably WORSE on the war than Hitlery.

Hitlery is NOT a pacifist, she is more of a Stalinist. She would love to be able to claim victory in a war.

[James Deffenbach]

Congressman Ron Paul of Texas enjoys a national reputation as the premier advocate for liberty in politics today. Dr. Paul is the leading spokesman in Washington for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He is known among both his colleagues in Congress and his constituents for his consistent voting record in the House of Representatives: Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.

Dr. Paul's consistent voting record prompted one Congressman to comment that "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are." Another Congresswoman added that "There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."

Clearly we can't have a nut like this in the White House. After all, we wouldn't want to set a precedent of electing someone who actually believes that oath they all have to take is binding on them, would we? The man is clearly a menace. Yes, we need another RINO to carry on the glorious tradition of unconstitutional wars and out of control spending, further shredding of the Bill of Rights and casting the Constitution out the windows of the White House in bits and pieces. Good thinking, comrade!

[lormand]

I’m withya Jim!

[Petronski]

The Ahmedinajad thread on ronpaulforumsdotcom today was quite disturbing. L.Ron has some very sickening followers, and seems to be unwilling to repudiate them.

[mnehring]

Nice and concise. Couldn’t say it better myself.