Just a couple of comments from me and I'll be on my way . . .

First, the author mentions that we'll see how Dr. Paul's campaign strategy measures out in the Straw Polls. But how will that be when his delegates are turned away at the door like they were in Texas?

I think everyone's going to be very surprised when Dr. Paul's "peeps" come out of the word work come election day. All they'll have succeeded in doing is messing up their poll results by turning these people away.

Secondly, the powers that be have put us all to sleep thinking that a police state can protect the people. They've made us fear ourselves, our neighbors, even our own family members in an attempt to disarm us.

We're being led by the nose and controlled people!

Our freedoms are being whittled away under the guise of paranoid protectionism. When we hand over all our individual freedoms to Big Brother our country and all it stands for will be lost.

Go Ron Paul! Also, if you agree with Ron Paul please sign the petition to Abolish the Federal Reserve.

Now in August 2007, the world financial systems and investment markets, real estate and the availability of credit are all under direct assault due to past actions of the Federal Reserve in the United States.

Read and sign the Ron Paul Is Right - Abolish the Federal Reserve Petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/fed/petition.html

Please link to the petition and forward this message to your friends and help the general public wake up during the current financial panic conditions to the problems we face from the Federal Reserve and Ron Paul's solution.

Also read comments from hundreds of signers who aren't shy in saying what they think of the FED.

Thanks,
Ron Holland, is author of on the new online book, The Swiss Preserve Solution at http://www.swissconfederationinstitute.org/swisspreserve10.htm and he lives at Wolf Laurel Resort in NC.

Can't believe I read this thing... I tend to not waste my time on blogs, but there were some interesting points presented...

First of all, it's a lot easier to slam someone than make a case for them. For example, I know I do not support Hilary Clinton, Guiliana, Fred Thompson etc...

I ask myself one simple question: What's the point?
I am not going to listen to one who does not have my concerns close to their heart. I don't expect anyone to.
Certainly I can express why I am not satisfied with the 'status quo'- be it graphically, numerically or even with a poem for Kucinich fans- yet backing someone would be more difficult.

For some reason, a spade isn't a spade and wedge issues are somehow recyclable. Come on, are we seriously discussing only gun control and abortion? I'm fairly certain there are some other developements in 'the world' that might be worth looking into..

I like the state's decision approach to some wedge issues such as abortion. Especially for you 'Conservatives' out there, look at the ultra-Progressive state causcuses.

I have extensively researched gun control. Look at how many killings per capita there are in Scotland compared to here; guns are banned there are it is largely the same. I would not hesitate to say that rape and robbery were in some ways inversely related the gun ownership. This is a huge solarity index etc.. issue, and I have no final answers for it. Tell you what though- I think that's why we have a Republic. It's maddening that this dominates discussion.

I don't know enough to tell people what to do. Everyone deserves a chance. We can disagree about how this is derived, but I believe the premise to be true. If you do, then I suppose we would need to think for ourselves. Cool, I've read some letters, sentences and even books to. There's plenty of people that can rehash and call it original.

I support change. I don't make out with a Ron Paul cut out. With Libertarians one must consider their reactions with corporations as well as Constitutions. Don't hate the player hate the game.

I would glady vote for the most left or most right based on integrity. Defy the conventional wisdom- it is why our country is in a conventional oven.

Thanks,
-s

The Illinois Republican Party sponsored its straw poll during the Republican Day festivities at the Illinois State Fair in Springfield. Requirements to participate were: having participated in one of the previously held Republican Presidential Debates; or having polled above 5% in a national, independent poll.

“As I watched hundreds of people literally standing in the rain to vote in our straw poll, it drove home that the Illinois Republican Party is strongly united,” said McKenna. “This was a phenomenal opportunity for the grassroots leaders of the Party to hear from the presidential campaigns.”

The Illinois Republican Presidential Straw Poll was conducted on electronic voting machines and ran from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.

Final Results:

1. Mitt Romney – 40.35%
2. Fred Thompson – 19.96%
3. Ron Paul – 18.87%
4. Rudy Giuliani – 11.61%
5. John McCain – 4.12%
6. Mike Huckabee – 3.04%
7. Sam Brownback – 1.08%
8. Duncan Hunter - .65%
9. Tom Tancedo - .33%

ARE WE FORGETTING THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ABOUT RON PAUL!!! LITTLE GOVERNMENT,LITTLE I.R.S,STAYING "OUT OF ARE LIVES"DOES THAT NOT MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU.THE OTHER CANDIDATES LIE.LOOK AT RON PAUL RECORD BEFORE YOU SPEAK..BUSH LIED!!THE WAR IS BANKRUPTING ARE COUNTRY!!THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS A PRIVATE COMPANY THAT "CHARGES US TO PRINT OUR MONEY".....RON IS AGAINST THAT. SO I SAY RUDY DID NOTHING ON 9/11 THE FIREFIGHTERS AND POLICE DID!!! HE CUT CRIME BY BEING A DICTATOR MAYOR!!! WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER DICTATOR PRESIDENT(BUSH!!!..AND ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES,WELL FORGET IT THERE SELLOUTS TO..SO DO SOME STUDYING BEFORE YOU VOTE."THIS IS ARE COUNTRY LETS TAKE IT BACK"

RON PAUL IS NOT A HOUSE HOLD NAME YET, BUT HE WILL BE IN 14 MONTHS.
I WAS AT A GUN SHOP IN MY SMALL TOWN, AND THE OWNER IS A RETRIED STATE TROOPER, AND OTHER MAN THAT WAS THERE WAS A RETRIED JUDGE. WE GOT TALKING AND THEY ASKED ME WHO I GOING VOTE FOR IN 2008, AND I SAID RON PAUL, AND BOTH OF THEM SAID WHO IS RON PAUL. THIS IS A GOOD THING, BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE KNOW WHO THE OTHER PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFULS ARE, AND KNOW THEIR TELLING US WHAT THEY THINK WE WANT HERE JUST TO GET ARE VOTE, WITCH IS 90% BULL. BUT RON PAUL PRACTICES WHAT HE PREACHES, HIS VOTING RECORD SHOWS THAT. AND HE HAS PLENTY
OF TIME TO GET HIS WORD OUT "FREEDOM"

I'll be voting for Ron Paul as well. I could jump in on the debate, but honestly if anyone were to open there eyes more they would see through all of the other BS that the other candidates are feeding us. They all have hidden agenda's. The constitution is first for me. I fought overseas and I still do not support the National ID. I also support the WHOLE constitution. Including the freedom of speech, religion, and yes THE 2nd amendment. If people honestly think that just because you have a gun your more likely to commit a homicide your drinking some good kool-aid. Hmmmmm, I spent a year in the famous country of Iraq with tons of angry guys with "Big Scary Guns". We had more stress than anyone over here could imagine. Heck we even fought eachother on occasion. (Our friends.) Guess what. NO ONE SHOT EACHOTHER THOUGH....HMMMMMMM. Point being. Controlling the gun isn't the problem. It's responsiblity. That comes as a social thing. Not a law.
Also, for those of you that don't know the 2nd amendment wasn't made so we could hunt. It was an essential part of keeping our nation more secure. I do hunt, but that's not why it should be protected. Some are sheep and some see the world for what it is I guess. I choose to be a realist. I'll keep my head out of the sand. Closing our eyes don't make the problem go away.
Also, I voted for Bush twice and I'm HIGHLY opposed to his patriot act laws. Why is it that this doesn't come up on here more as well. Who likes to have all of there information so readily available and without a court order???? That's what's happening. I'm opposed to what's being accepted and going on nowadays.

I'll be voting for Ron Paul as well. I could jump in on the debate, but honestly if anyone were to open there eyes more they would see through all of the other BS that the other candidates are feeding us. They all have hidden agenda's. The constitution is first for me. I fought overseas and I still do not support the National ID. I also support the WHOLE constitution. Including the freedom of speech, religion, and yes THE 2nd amendment. If people honestly think that just because you have a gun your more likely to commit a homicide your drinking some good kool-aid. Hmmmmm, I spent a year in the famous country of Iraq with tons of angry guys with "Big Scary Guns". We had more stress than anyone over here could imagine. Heck we even fought eachother on occasion. (Our friends.) Guess what. NO ONE SHOT EACHOTHER THOUGH....HMMMMMMM. Point being. Controlling the gun isn't the problem. It's responsiblity. That comes as a social thing. Not a law.
Also, for those of you that don't know the 2nd amendment wasn't made so we could hunt. It was an essential part of keeping our nation more secure. I do hunt, but that's not why it should be protected. Some are sheep and some see the world for what it is I guess. I choose to be a realist. I'll keep my head out of the sand. Closing our eyes don't make the problem go away.
Also, I voted for Bush twice and I'm HIGHLY opposed to his patriot act laws. Why is it that this doesn't come up on here more as well. Who likes to have all of there information so readily available and without a court order???? That's what's happening. I'm opposed to what's being accepted and going on nowadays.

I will be voting for Ron Paul in the primary elections.

Ron Paul never voted for the Iraq War
He voted against the Patriot Act
He voted against regulating the Internet

Ron Paul supporters are democrats, republicans, independents, libertarians, right, left, and everything in between. What we have in common is a belief in the Constitution and hope for America. We want a candidate not owned by special-interest, military-industrial-complex, big corporations, bankers, lobbyists, etc. Ron Paul has the best voting record in congress repeatedly proving his integrity and honesty.

All the rich candidates are owned by the SAME special interest groups. So the power elite wins regardless of which party you vote for. Hilary Clinton is owned by the same power elite as Rudy Giuliani as Barack Obama, as Mitt Romney. The two party system is a scam. They argue over pointless stuff but on big corrupt things they all agree. All owned, bought, and paid for by same special interest groups.

Ron Paul can win if we all join together. We can overcome in a similar way that Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and our Founding Fathers who faced tough odds and succeeded in bringing positive change to the world.

Ron Paul has over 30,000 registered volunteers. More than all other candidates combined. And more registering now at Meetup.com.

Please check out these important videos about Ron Paul:

Ron Paul "Course of human events..." Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFfdB5OzlyQ

Ron Paul "Dream On" Video!!!!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IWfIhFhelm8

Ron Paul "Don't Tread On Me" Video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FG_HuFtP8w8

If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

I didn't make the too much freedom leads to slavery argument, but I'll answer the question- it leads to monopoly, stifling of competition, corruption, and thereby eventual slavery at the hands of corporations rather than governments. Hard core believers in the church of Milton Friedman (or Hayek for that matter) may argue that new innovations and demand will always keep the market open, but that neglects economies of scale, start up costs, and numerous other barriers to entry that will keep competition out- ultimately, pure unregulated capitalism is as dangerous as pure communism, the only difference being who the threat is.

Ultimately, it's not about socialims, an overreliance on federal control, or an overreliance on the free markets to solve our problems. TR said it best, "The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us." We must always balance individual freedom, ambition, and public good. Too much reliance on any one of them at the expense of the others damages our society.

nukes in iran?, hw about nukes in our country(US), israel. china, france has 'em too.
hw come china is not a target of so called terrorist, they r much closer to middle east same as france?. maybe bacause they are not messing with them. they only worry about their country and people.
why spend so much time, effort, money, soldiers to other countries.
population in US is about 300 MILLION and our government is spending BILLIONS to TRIllIONS of dollars to other country, why not give some of it to our citizens in a form of healthcare, healthier food, retirement etc. an average person's lifetime, his not gonna spend over a billion dollar!!

I'm not sure where the worry about being enslaved by economic freedom comes from. To allay your fears about being enslaved, don't worry, you already are enslaved by your Federal government. They're just nice and allow you to keep some of the money you make. Perhaps I'm just dumb, but you could explain to me in plain terms how economic freedom would lead to your "enslavement"?

Also, to those arguing (for either side) about Mr. Paul's statements on a pilot having a gun in the cockpit are missing the bigger point. The point is that we as people should take more responsibility for ourselves, and rely less on the FEDERAL government to protect us. If you've heard him speak much, when he mentions the pilot's lack of guns, he also mentions that we've been told "not to resist" because the government is supposed to protect us.

Apparently, "Chris Fox" goes around looking for sites where Ron Paul is mentioned just to post, I read almost the exact postings elsewhere so perhaps he/she has an agenda, nonetheless it's amusing to read your idiotic comments.

"If guns kill people, then spoons make people fat."

We shouldn't have to worry about Iran getting nukes then, 'cause nukes don't kill people either.

What on earth motivates people to argue with a cretin like Mr. Fox. We have serious work to do people. Ignore the idiot and lets roll up our sleeves and get to work.

RON PAUL 2008!

If guns kill people, then spoons make people fat.

It's hard to believe that anyone would still argue that more guns = more gun violence, when the facts are so overwhelmingly against them.

What has happened in the UK and Australia since they banned guns? Crime has gone through the roof!

What happened in Florida after they allowed concealed carry? Suddenly it was safe to visit Disneyworld again.

I'm sorry everyone, I'm an idiot. Please don't waste any more of your time responding to my troubled little mind. I need security and not freedom.

Maybe if the CIA had done there job and not let known terrorists into the country,allowed them to train on airliners,go to an airport and show ID, board a plane and hijack them pilots would not NEED handguns on themselves.

Problem is that most gun lovers love the war and any war really because it pumps up their nationalistic fervor.

So I don't think gun gurus will vote for Paul.

Mr. Fox, there ain't enough syrup left in the bottle to drown a gnat.

Malihini: I like freedom. Freedom is good.

I also like waffle syrup, it's tasty!

But I dont' swig waffle syrup out of the bottle.

Mr. Fox, Please read up. Ron Paul is not a corporate worshipper. Dr. Paul is simply trying to help us take back a little more of what is ours. As individuals, as Free Men (and women). Please check it out.

PS Your organ example supports the 2nd amendment.

GO RON GO!

Malihini wrote:

Mr. Fox, the government and the "financial powers" are one in the same.
==

Then why, pray tell, do the same libertarians who so paranoidly distrust the government so passionately trust the "private sector?"

I could be more on board libertarian causes were it not for this totally starry-eyed reverence for business.

I believe that corporations would kill us and harvest our organs if the ROI was good.

Mr. Fox, the government and the "financial powers" are one in the same.

That is one reason (of many) why the founders put together the checks and balances in the Constitution. Please become more informed re. the Federal reserve bank. I am just learning now myself. Learn about the CFR a very exclusive club of the very wealthy AND politically powerfull, one and the same... Is there any morality to our income being taken and inefficiently redistributed? Hell no.

My goal is not to demean or demoralize. Please learn more. Learn more about what we are facing as a nation and as a so called free people. Ron Paul is right on.

Michael, I don't agree that anarchy and chaos are the same thing. Even so, I will take chaos over slavery every time.

RON PAUL 2008!

Malihini wrote:Chris fox, "naked" and defenseless are two separate things.
==

OK, then amend my original post to "defenseless."

>>The God given right to self defense exists with or without firearms.

I don't believe in the supernatural. I do however believe in the right of self-defense but that in no way supports one's right to endanger others through excessive zeal or irresponsible behavior in pursuit of self-defense.

>>My fear is being unprepared as an individual. I am also afraid of the idea that someone or thing (government), will do it for me.

I fear the government as well, which is why I yearn for more responsible citizenry. But I fear the financial powers far more than the government, and it's been a long time since I heard a libertarian who didn't champion "economic freedom," which I translate as the freedom to enslave me.

Again, stop avoiding my questions:

From where does the FAA get the power to regulate firearms aboard aircraft?

How are allowing pilots to be armed (which they already are) and hiring FEDERAL Air Marshalls a Second Amendment issue?

Freedom cannot exist without the law. Telling Chris Fox and others to take his philosophy to the logical conclusion of serfdom is like telling you to take your beliefs to their logical conclusion - anarchy and chaos. Glad to have that gun to defend your family? You have to sleep sometime. Without the law and the social contract, life is a constant struggle to survive with the appearance of infinite freedom but without the means to enjoy them. No way I'd want to regress to such a society.

Chris fox, "naked" and defenseless are two separate things. The God given right to self defense exists with or without firearms.

My fear is being unprepared as an individual. I am also afraid of the idea that someone or thing (government), will do it for me.

I am watching the kids this a.m. I can promise you there will be no murder here today. Can You?

RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2008!

Almost every conversation having to do with Ron Paul, has a posting by "Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide, US Congressman Ron Paul, R-TX 1997-2003." I'd really like to know, Mr. Dondero, what exactly has Ron Paul done to earn your animosity and, more importantly, who are you working for NOW?

Malihini: I'm not the one who feels naked without a firearm.

Chris Fox, what are you afraid of? Take your arguements/views to their pitiful conclusion. You are advocating slavery over self determination.

Release your grip... Please. Now.

GO RON GO!

i just hope dr. ron paul won't get assasinated because his speaking the truth and doing the right thing. just like what happen to kennedy. lots of big corporations will be in trouble when he become president.

Well there's no doubt that Paul has some extremely dedicated followers .. just look at the number of posts in this The Fix thread compared to the others, and it's still going on!

But the more recent posts are just wistful. I mean, really, web site hits as evidence of chances to win the nomination? The presidency?

GET a GRIP.

Ron Paul represents some of my views in his votes against the Patriot Act and the Iraq invasion. But his public policy positions are just plain irresponsible, sorry, and his faith in the market is a fetalization that has no place in policy in any form.

Can anyone explain how a socialist like Romney (who is responsible for a law that mandates health insurance payments by everyone in Massachusetts) is so popular among free-market conservatives in the Republican Party?

It's possible that most Republicans are simply ignorant of Romney's socialistic track record.

And, consider this. Add the votes for Tom Tancredo, Tommy Thompson, and Duncan Hunter (all of whom are more fiscally conservative than Romney) to Ron Paul's votes. The result is a true conservative, Dr. Paul, would be a very close second to Romney at this stage in the contest.

Tommy Thompson has already quit the race. When Tancredo and Hunter quit, Dr. Paul will be running neck-and-neck against Romney. Dr. Paul will then have an opportunity to expose Romney for being the flip-flop neo-conservative that he really is.

In addition to socialistic health care, Romney was pro-choice before he was pro-life. Romney doesn't have a clue about federalism (the U.S. Constitution's Article I, Section 8 limitations on the powers of the federal government combined with the 9th and 10th Amendments).

Dr. Paul, in a one-on-one contest, will make Romney look like a babbling idiot.

Google Video or YouTube search "Ron Paul"

Ron Paul is the greatest hope for America and the mainstream media does not want you to know much about him.

Watch him speak on the Internet and you will see why so many people love Ron Paul and his message.

Google Video or YouTube search "Ron Paul"

Ron Paul is the greatest hope for America and the mainstream media does not want you to know much about him.

Watch him speak on the Internet and you will see why so many people love Ron Paul and his message.

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul's Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

Learn more about Ron Paul and the peace and freedom message by doing a Google Video or YouTube search of "Ron Paul"

Interesting discussion. I did`nt know how socialist America had become.
I`m from Germany. We are far more down the road to serfdom (Hayek, one of those "free-market-nuts") and actually have some of the things Dr. Paul would like to save you from.
Unfortunately, we do not even have a constitution a man like Dr. Paul would consider worth fighting for.
Its saddening to read that not even americans cherish that document and are ready to sell it for some "safety".
One half of my country was once so safe, you couldn`t even travel abroad. And very "social and caring" (but bankrupt).

Please, think about it.

Ron did well to get 9% of the vote in Iowa, but he needs to get an organized campaign in place. I wonder about the campaign staff he has, it seems to be a slapstick operation that has worked to this point. But he only has 5 months left and a lot of people don't even know his name yet. I wish he would, out of the blue, pick a rich VP and start doing this Ross Perot style.

I suggest you all do your homework and not buy into Mainstream media news. Think for yourselves and see how the truth is unfolding.
You really think the Privately owned Federal Reserve has no control over your Government? No Motives? Why dont you ask questions instead of swallowing the rubbish the Government and Media throw at you? Dont you question the admitted Trillions of missing dollars?
Wake up and vote for Ron Paul, the only real chance you have to put a stop to americans mistreatment.
By the way im not american so i have no bias other than peace and clarity.
Government are there to serve you, you are not there to serve them. Make sure thats how it is.

Ron Paul finishes tops in many polls -
Fox News ran a poll after the second debate in South Carolina. Out of a sample of 40,000 people, Ron Paul finished 2nd to Mitt Romney and with 25% (to Mitt's 27%). Giuliani scored only 16% after that debate.

In another poll sponsored by the U.S. Military personnel, Ron Paul finished first over ALL the other presidential candidates, receiving the most votes cast (in dollars) of any candidate for the fund raising quarter ending June 30th.

And in another poll, sponsored by YOUTUBE, Ron Paul is the number one Republican candidate. Congressman Paul currently has 25,400+ votes (subscribers) and over 3 million channel views, to Mitt Romney's 2,700 votes (again subscribers) and some 700K+ channel views. Worthy to note, Congressman Paul tops ALL presidential candidates (from both parties) on the YOUTUBE platform. This is an ongoing poll.

The poll of most traffic to a Republican website in the month of August, again, goes to...you guessed it - Congressman Paul. 44.16% of all web traffic going to a Republican site went to Dr. Paul's site, followed by 16.13% to Romney's site (this is out of a mere 10 MILLION USERS) and can't be compared to the normal polling sample of 400-800 people typically used in the mainstream media's 'paid-for' polls.

Congressman Paul - wins the MySpace.com poll for most friends of any Republican; the Facebook poll for most friends; and has more grass-roots supporters using MeetUp.com than any other candidate.

Summary: Congressman Paul doesn't do well in the polls that are commissioned and paid for by the mainstream media. On the other hand, in the non-controlled, organic, on-going poll samples on the internet of 10's of thousands, even 100's of thousands of voters, Congressman Paul RULES. So, the moral of the story is - don't be fooled by those so-called 'polls' - they just aren't accurate.

why are people arguing with this whiney attention seeker. Anyone that posts ANYWHERE more than twice about anything has no life. I don't even need to name the person since He, and anyone reading it will know whom it is. Not suprisingly this sad online firebrand admires marxists. Karl Marx is to losers and underachievers what a moth is to a flame. Remember that. At any rate they have no real arguement on anything, other than to argue period, a nice woman can cure you of that problem pal. Ron Paul is a great man and dead on. Sadly he won't be elected, no one worth a damn will be. Too many guys like that in the world friends. Elections (and internet message boards) are their one place to fight back. No money, no significant other, no prospects for a better life, no skills with which to affect change, but they can vote. Oh yeah and they fight online. Think they would EVER say things like that in person? Ever? Hahahaha.

I still just don't get you people at all

The 2nd Amendment is about gun ownership by the people, not the government. So, how are federal air marshalls a 2nd Amendment issue? And, if the government cannot impede the right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment, how can the FAA, a federal agency, ban the posession of firearms by passengers aboard an airline? This isn't about some scheme to take away people's guns, this is about your basic libertarian philosophy, as stated by paul, and as defended by you guys on this page. Please explain it without going on a sidebar rant about liberals trying to take guns from law-abiding citizens.

And oh yes one more .. I've never written that the Second should be repealed though I certainly wouldn't mourn it .. frankly it's my sober opinion that people to whom guns represent some sort of societal panacea shouldn't be allowed to own them. They're just too damned eager to use them.

After VaTech there were the usual canned outcries that if many other students had been armed that one of them would have "taken out" Seung Cho and all would have been well with far fewer deaths.

And everything else on the campus, and on campuses everywhere, would have been the same. Let's think about that for a minute.

A campus full of people at peak of hormonal stimulation, barely out of adolescence, many of them in the tumult of first girlfriend, many more drinking for the first time, even more drinking heavily for the first time, all of them away from home for the first time .. and yeah, everything would have been exactly the same. Teenagers are so good about impulse control, and so scrupulously sober and rational.

That was sarcasm, by the way.

Compare to you guys the most academic Marxists have a *stranglehold* on reality.

I'm not libertarian or an evangelist.

Pete: perfect example of a libertarian evangelical argument: artificially narrowing the argument, pre-empting all options but the ones that support your position. Google "false dilemma."

Lots of countries in the world have stricter gun laws than we do and things are simply not at all as you suggest. And in places where guns are everywhere life is chaos.

Chris Fox

I know that my point with you is about gun control someone asked me what I thought about the IRS.

I don't own a gun, never shot a gun, never even been around someone with a gun. I do believe in the second ammendment though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

Read it everyone having guns is definetly worse than no one having guns. However we can only control ourselves when it comes to having guns or not so by making them illegal it just makes criminals who obtain guns at a greater advantage.

Overall utopia, no one has guns. Next best thing is that everyone has guns. Worst thing is that law abiding citizens don't have guns and crimals who obtain illegal arms are at a huge advantage. That is all.

Pete, you are all. Over. The. Road.

I wish that once and for all people would understand a basic truth about libertarians - that just because they do want someone to have a right, that does not necessarily meean they would wish someone to exercise that right. By abolishing the laws, libertarians would like to put the power of choice back into the hands of all individual people.
==

Look, we get it, OK? We don't think it would work.

Yeah, it would be great to have a choice between different fire departments, it would be great to have my own police force and for my warlord neighbors to have their own militias too, and everyone would be so VERY polite knowing that a misinterpreted cough could lead to a massacre.

And it really would be enriching to not only have seven hundred brands of aspirin to choose from like we do now but to take on the added responsibility of having to keep track of which ones of them are cutting corners and poisoning me .. so I can exercise my freedom to choose in the marketplace.

Ugh.

Sounds more like hell to me.

Chris Fox:

I think I clearly stated and made a valid point that gun control is a prisoners dilema. If you know the first basic thing about game theory then you would understand.

Secondly, the person who asked what I thought about getting rid of the IRS. Well the way I see it there is no need for the IRS, its sole responsiblity is to make sure the government gets your money.

If you have a national sales tax and remove income taxes. You put 100% of earnings into people's pockets and then let them decide how to spend it. Social Security needs an overhaul because its just a Ponzi scheme. The top of the pyramid take from the next level who take from the next level who take from the next level. Unfortunately with birthrates declining the pyramid's base is no longer bigger then its middle.

Jean steepled fingers and wrote of me:

"Chris Fox has the mindset that allows nations to fall to a dictatorship. Unfortunately there are far to many people just like him that do not have the ability to think clearly."
==

Nice to know I don't think clearly heh heh heh.

I'll place my reasoning skills up next to any of the crap I've read from the gun nuts in here. I mean, the very idea, people knowingly going to their deaths are going to waver and resist there might be some resistance .. you guys are completely unhinged.

That's what comes of obsessing over one issue day in and day out and avoiding all other viewpoints. Marching in lockstep, bleating in tune and time, and saying it's the OTHERS who can't think for themselves.

Happily, no libertarian will ever get more than 2% in any national election

I wish that once and for all people would understand a basic truth about libertarians - that just because they do want someone to have a right, that does not necessarily meean they would wish someone to exercise that right. By abolishing the laws, libertarians would like to put the power of choice back into the hands of all individual people. Libertarians do not presume to say how those individual people (and when working together, people in corporations, or organizations, etc.) would choose to act. While libertarians might suggest some possible way and means, that does not mean that they believe those will inevitably be the results, just that there are many possible outcomes. Indeed, libertarians hope and pray that there will be many outcomes, offering many choices to people so each individual can decide for themselves which outcome they prefer. The marketplace would presumably offer different results of various kinds for people to choose between. And each person would pick the outcome they prefer.

"But the ships did have cannons, and pirates were still a major problem, what exactly is your point?"

My point:
Legislation to disarm only disarms law-abiding citizens.

Maybe a common misconception is that ALL criminals get their illegal firearms from the same place that people get the legal firearms. Granted, some firearms dealers become criminals themselves and sell to those who should not have them, but a HUGE black market for guns exists in this country.

"But the ships did have cannons, and pirates were still a major problem, what exactly is your point?"

My point:
Legislation to disarm only disarms law-abiding citizens.

Maybe a common misconception is that ALL criminals get their illegal firearms from the same place that people get the legal firearms. Granted, some firearms dealers become criminals themselves and sell to those who should not have them, but a HUGE black market for guns exists in this country.

Interesting video clip about the investigation into the 9/11 event. Our national government employees assure us there is, and never has been, any coverup.

http://action.downsizedc.org/media.php?cid=74

One thing that disturbs me is that so many of the contributors to this column alude to the "HI-JACKERS" as if there were hi-jackers on those planes. Sufficient investigation by pilots with years of experience do not believe those planes were piloted by man but by remote control. The whole story is a farce which is why an investigation was stalled for 2 years and then when finally forced to put on a dog and pony show they place people there to obsfucate and cover up rather then to do an honest and objective investigation. It was just another JFK type investigation. No truth allowed.

One thing that disturbs me is that so many of the contributors to this column alude to the "HI-JACKERS" as if there were hi-jackers on those planes. Sufficient investigation by pilots with years of experience do not believe those planes were piloted by man but by remote control. The whole story is a farce which is why an investigation was stalled for 2 years and then when finally forced to put on a dog and pony show they place people there to obsfucate and cover up rather then to do an honest and objective investigation. It was just another JFK type investigation. No truth allowed.

"Lord help us if these fanatical libertarian types ever get any real power."

Yeah that'd be horrible! the (17)70's all over again!

Alright, I got bored halfway through reading this, but one thing really got to me. The idea that people should not be allowed to have guns because 5% of them aren't responsible.

Nearly every single person in this nation can drive. A lot more than 5% are irresponsible. You can kill just as many people with a car as you can with a gun. Based on the arguement that people should not be allowed dangerous things for fear they might misuse them, your position should be anti-gun, anti-vehicle, anti-gasoline (A ten year old can go down to a gas station and no one's going to stop him from buying 2 Gallons of Gas for a lawnmower. It just so happens that that much gas is equivalent to half a stick of TNT.), anti-ect...

The only real difference between cars and gasoline is that a gun is specifically designed to kill. But an objects designed intention doesn't limit it's effectiveness at it's unintended uses.

On airlines: No one has any right to tell airlines how to run except the owners. Unless they are breaching a contract between employees or customers, or are harming someone with intention or knowledge of doing so, or by being reckless or negligent, the government has no right to interfere with them. And it would be the courts who would interfere on behalf of one party.

If the opposing arguement has any grounding, it's not rooted in pilots having guns being against the law, it's that such an action is severely negligent, and severe negligence is against the law. However this is countered with the opposition (I assume) not being anti-car and gasoline. And also with the fact that it may be negligent to disallow the arming of pilots for safety of passengers. Anyway... guess I'll read the other half of the posts now...

Chris Fox has the mindset that allows nations to fall to a dictatorship. Unfortunately there are far to many people just like him that do not have the ability to think clearly. He is one of those limp wristed individuals that is so afraid of a gun that he wants no one to have a gun except the gestapo. Those who turn their guns into plowshares will plow for those who don't. Ron Paul is head and shoulders above all other candidates, Republican or Democrat.But he will not get the vote of the ignorant.

* If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
o Thomas Jefferson, The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a money aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken away from banks and restored to the government to who it properly belongs."
- President Thomas Jefferson

..............

who owns the Washington Post?

who owns MIApollo Investments Ltd?

-----------------
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

- George W. Bush, during a photo-op with Congressional leaders on 12/18/2000. As broadcast on CNN and available in transcript on their web site.
-----------------------------------

A statist position would be, we are going to force you to pay us to protect your property - thereby not protecting your property according to our own violation of our stated purpose -- and you still have to pay. Oh yeah, plus we're gonna take away your ability to defend yourself. Feel safe?

At least the mafia doesn't claim that what they do is for your own good.

Anonymous wrote:
That whole argument sounds like:

Explicitly, when you choose to move into the block where the mafia has control, you are tacitly agreeing to get robbed or your thumbs chopped off. I mean, if you didn't want the price tag, why did you move into this neighborhood?
==

That's a libertarian argument. A non-libertarian argument would be that we don't allow people who chop thumbs to control neighborhoods. We consider that an initiation of force and we mobilize the Men With Guns® to move in and enforce the social contract.

The one you didn't sign.

That whole argument sounds like:

Explicitly, when you choose to move into the block where the mafia has control, you are tacitly agreeing to get robbed or your thumbs chopped off. I mean, if you didn't want the price tag, why did you move into this neighborhood?

Mixing arguments between private and public is crazy. A restaurant is not the mafia. One you can enter freely, the other is forced upon you. The existence of some implicit contracts does not mean that all claimed are just.

Arguments like those assume that any given authority is just, instead of proving.

The root of most statist fantasy, is the denial of distinction between force and consent. This is to equate rape and sex, in the name of protecting the rape victim.

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/faq.html#evangelical

#7

"Social Contract? I never signed no steenking social contract.

That argument and some of the following libertarian arguments are commonly quoted from Lysander Spooner.

The constitution and the laws are our written contracts with the government.

There are several explicit means by which people make the social contract with government. The commonest is when your parents choose your residency and/or citizenship after your birth. In that case, your parents or guardians are contracting for you, exercising their power of custody. No further explicit action is required on your part to continue the agreement, and you may end it at any time by departing and renouncing your citizenship.

Immigrants, residents, and visitors contract through the oath of citizenship (swearing to uphold the laws and constitution), residency permits, and visas. Citizens reaffirm it in whole or part when they take political office, join the armed forces, etc. This contract has a fairly common form: once entered into, it is implicitly continued until explicitly revoked. Many other contracts have this form: some leases, most utility services (such as phone and electricity), etc.

Some libertarians make a big deal about needing to actually sign a contract. Take them to a restaurant and see if they think it ethical to walk out without paying because they didn't sign anything. Even if it is a restaurant with a minimum charge and they haven't ordered anything. The restaurant gets to set the price and the method of contract so that even your presence creates a debt. What is a libertarian going to do about that? Create a regulation?"

I have this wonderful social contract that you may have never signed but clearly states that you owe me at least half of your material worth.

Extortion is extortion regardless of who is the extortionist.

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/notreason.htm

Pay up.

For future reference, compendium of answers for these nutzis:

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/faq.html#evangelical

Ah, how easy it is to elicit the rancor towards the "gun nuts". The liberal peanut gallery rails constantly against the people who produce the least amount of gun-related problems in a free society -- legal gun owners. Why not allow the pilots to carry guns, I wonder? What's that old adage about bringing a boxcutt--err knife to a gun fight?

Zeeder wrote:
And Anyone who says Tyranny = Libertarianism hasn't been paying attention.....to life.
==

That would be me saying that, and I have been paying attention not only to life but to libertarians.

It might surprise you to know that I used to vote LP and in one case I still do, Mark Wilson, local LP congressional candidate. He's a sane and reasonable man whose positions make sense.

But he's an exception. The rule is more like Harry Browne, who wrote at the peak of Clinton's prosperity that the only reason crime was down was because of some incrementally easier access to, yup, handguns. Browne was a complete idiot.

And Internet libertarians are just crazy, simpleminded contrarians who find endless ways to say black is white and only idiots believe black is black.

But even they aren't usually dumb enough to talk about bringing more guns on AIRCRAFT.

I think those who tow the mainstream line proudly wear their absurd positions like a badge of honor; they have been infected with a false confidence by the system that raised them. Without that system, they are lonely, confused, scared and without a home.

Too damn bad -- I'm sick of paying their rent.

LIBERTY MUST SURVIVE!

PLEASE SUPPORT RON PAUL!

This has to be the oldest thread on WaPo still getting posts .. the Paulsheviks are bleeding from a thousand cut after their standard-bearer made such a poor showing in yesterday's poll despite their heroic (OK, loud) showing of support.

But the gun nuts have hijacked it so that's no surprise. And like the free market zombies they have the same answer to everything: more guns.

Schoolyards get shot up by crazies who had no trouble getting weapons? The answer is easier access to weapons.

Deregulation leads to breakdown in basic services, rampant corruption, Enron debacles? The solution is more deregulation.

You guys are all crazy. "Whomever you support, I oppose" sounds like a safe first approximation.

Kudos to Chris Fox! Someone needs to debunk the nonsense Ron Paul supporters post every opportunity they get. There's no mystery about Paul's alleged 'huge Internet fan base.' It consists of people who post the same screeds numerous times to numerous sites and vote numerous times in online polls. But, then reality bites. They can't amplify their actually small voice in person, where an individual can be only one place at a time. Paul's fifth place finish in the Iowa straw poll should put an end to the delusion that he is a serious presidential candidate for anyone other than his cult of brainwashed followers.

Chris Fox:

Highly taxed and highly regulated society is called socialism and communism.
==

Oh.

"Remember the pirates? From the days of sailing... around the 1500's?
If Britain, France, Spain, Portugal etc... had all agreed to not have cannons on the sea, would that have stopped the pirates? NO! I'm sure that the pirates would have had a "they don't have cannons anymore" party."

But the ships did have cannons, and pirates were still a major problem, what exactly is your point?

"Firearms in the hands of the victims SEVERELY DISCOURAGE brazen acts of violence"

Or it leads to rapid escalation of violence when more guns are added to the equation; whereas before you just had a simple robbery where the guy never intended to fire the weapon, now you have a greatly increased chance of someone (more likely the victim of the crime) ending up dead. Again, catastrophies like VT might be prevented, but is it worth it if 1 incident every ten years is prevented in exchange for 5-10 1 victim shootings on college campuses every year?

Pete,

Chris Fox is, in my opinion, a lost cause. He (or she) has exibited intransigence and an unwillingness to engage in rational discussion on this thread. It seems to me time would be better spent exploring the depth and breadth of liberty rather than try to reconcile any aspect of the Chris Fox interpretation of reality.

What are your thoughts on Ron Paul's proposed elimination of the IRS should he (or, perhaps, another of his thinking) ever be placed in a position to make that happen?

Hah, Eric Dondero, you were fired from Ron Paul's campaign for good reasons. Take your litter elsewhere, my friend. The dirt is on you. Americans are smarter than that now, just look outside your window. Even in Upstate NY, Guiliani & Clinton country, there is more visible Ron Paul support than any other candidate.

Ron Paul 08!

This is the funny thing about the gun lobby- they always present it as an all or nothing proposition. I know of no serious politician or faction with national ambitions who has the goal of banning all weapons, it would never fly and is absurd, so why continue to raise that strawman other than to preach to the choir? Second, interesting statistics, and flawed logic. During the same period, more cops were added to the streets, the assault weapons ban was passed, there were broad demographic shifts, etc., numerous changes that relate to crime besides the concealed weapons laws (not to mention that similar crime rates dropped in states that placed greater retrictions on weapons). It's a classic correlation=causation fallacy.

The analysis of the straw poll wasn't mine; however, I'll thank you on behalf of the poster.

Remember the pirates? From the days of sailing... around the 1500's?
If Britain, France, Spain, Portugal etc... had all agreed to not have cannons on the sea, would that have stopped the pirates? NO! I'm sure that the pirates would have had a "they don't have cannons anymore" party.

Firearms in the hands of the victims SEVERELY DISCOURAGE brazen acts of violence and would have forced the terrorists to come up with a different plan because the terrorists would not have had firearms on the plane because security would not have let them. One or two U.S. Marshals or even the premise that they be armed and on board.

Ron Paul was correct in his assessment that we should have more respect for the second amendment.

Chris Fox:

Highly taxed and highly regulated society is called socialism and communism. You do a better job taking care of yourself than the government will.

The right to bare arms is a prisioners dilema. If we both agree to not carry weapons everyone is safe. But if one decides to knowing the other won't then that person is at a huge disadvantage. So naturally both will arm. However when regulation states that you can't arm you are at mercy of the other.

To Eric Dondero:

Yours is the second reference to embarrassment with respect to Ron Paul that I have read in this thread. May I ask just what it is that Mr. Paul has said or done that has caused this embarrassment?

To Iraqi War Vet, from a 1980s Navy Vet:

I appreciate your service, but saying that the Mainstream Media is ignoring Ron Paul is just plain idiotic. They're covering him all over the place. They're giving him way more coverage than he's deserving of.

9.1%, 5th place is nothing to get excited about. He placed less than 2 points above Tommy Thompson who is now dropping out.

There's a lot of dirt under the carpet on Ron Paul. The media has only scratched the surface.

They're giving him a free pass, cause they love the fact that he's bashing Bush and the War in Iraq. He's the one Republican the Liberal Media loves to cover.

As for those of us who live in his Congressional District, we're embarrassed by the guy.

Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul, R-TX
1997-2003

Tom Tancredo has my vote, here's the reason why:
"This is our culture - fight for it. This is our flag - pick it up. This is our country - take it back." - Congressman Tom Tancredo

Club for Growth Pork Report Card
Tancredo 84%, Paul 29% and Hunter 26%

Brownback and Huckabee are late to the dance. They are for amnesty and place illegal aliens above American citizens. A good read for Ron Paul fans are articles b S. J. Miller, the author can be found on News with Views and the Federal Observer.
Check out the "Ron Paul Mystique".

There's just a whole lot of us folks in Texas who are ashamed that Ron Paul is a Texas Congressman. But then he has been able to get electricity to his district--most of it. And nearly all of it has indoor plumbing today.

William,
Excellent synopsis of the Straw Poll results! Being a Ron Paul supporter, I was a bit disheartened by the 5th place showing, but I lacked the information you had regarding money spent by all candidates and tying that altogether to come up with a good way to deduce meaning from the results. Thanks again.

I personally felt that Ron shouldn't have come on so strong against Roe v. Wade WITHOUT making it clear that his position is to return such issues like abortion to the States. I realize he is against abortion, and I have leanings in that direction, but I do not want the Federal government to be legislating to the entire country - let each state, and the people therein, figure out how they want to regard the abortion issue.

Although all this debate regarding guns and the possible prevention of 9-11 is mildly interesting, it has all been done before. As far as 9-11 is concerned, the more important, and overlooked argument, is on how our governments policies foster and promote such hatred and attacks against its citizens. The real argument is the one about defending our borders and not tramping about the world supposedly 'defending our interests' (which is actually defending the interests of SOME of us at the expense of all, courtesy of the IRS and taxation). If Exxon wants to influence foreign governments to oppress their own people so it can get drilling rights and access to 'cheap' oil, then that's their business and THEY will be held accountable for their actions by those they harm. But to use government to 'do the dirty work' for them, which drags all US citizens into complicity and therefore heightens each of our risks to retaliation constitutes a grave abridgment of governments sworn duty to protect us.

The market does not require nor benefit from government involvement, we are all quite capable of organizing voluntarily and providing whatever service or regulatory agency we feel is in our best interest - and the market will do so with as much a realistic view on how much resources to allocate towards each endeavor based on demand. We CANNOT afford absolute safety, security, health care, education, ad nauseum.

Ron Paul - A man who understands we are each more than capable of being responsible for our own lives - and we are the best at doing so

As a pot smoking, pro-choice on abortion person I support Ron Paul completely and unhesitatingly. I don't have to agree with Dr. Paul on every issue, I trust his judgement, his consistency, his 20 years in Congress obeying his oath of office to defend the Constitution. He is intelligent, articulate, science & reason based, and he loves liberty. He understands the 9th and 10th Amendments better than anyone else. I'm a believer. Put me to work beside those pro-lifers and lets choose a President together who can respect all our liberties and perogatives under the Bill of Rights.

Here is my review of The Ames Straw Poll:

14,320 votes were cast, a lower than expected turnout. Each voter had to pay $35 for a ballot and be an Iowa adult.

Mitt Romney is esimated to have spent $5 million to $7.5 million dollars leading up to Ames Straw Poll, only to be able to bus in 4,516 votes, an average cost of $1,250 to $1.750 per vote received!

Mitt Romney was first at 31.6% 4,516 votes of 14,320 cast

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee was the real winner in second place for
18.1 % of the vote, 2,587 votes.

Mike Huckabee did not spend big money, he has little in the bank, but came out with more votes than the much larger campaign budgets of Sam Brownback, Ron Paul, and Mitt Romney.

Huckabee is the big winner at Ames. Romney came in first but he really lost because the obscene amount of money spent to get 4,516 non-binding votes is shocking and embarrassing just to "win" a non-binding, very regional test of one's campaign support. Huckabee polled strongly despite a low key, low cost campaign.

Sam Brownback is a Senator from neighboring Kansas state, and came in third with 15.3% of the votes cast, 2,192 votes.

Brownback spent much more than Huckabee, had lavish large pavilion tents, but three creationists (Brownback, Huckabee, Tancredo) and one Mormon are lobbying for the religious conservative vote. Brownback has Mormon Romney and Creationist Huckabee ahead of him, and a surprisingly strong showing by relative unknown Tom Tancredo just behind him. Brownback's campaign will be challenged to put a good light on this outcome. Huckabee and Tancredo got a big boost, Brownback essentially stalled with his base.

Iowa Republicans are largely anti-abortion, pro-war, and the three Creationists at the Straw Poll polled 47% of the vote between them. With Mormon Romney added, 78% of votes went to Creationists/Mormon candidates. That shows us that Iowa Republicans probably tip the scales into "extreme social conservatives."

Tom Tancredo received 1,961 votes for 13.7% of the votes cast. This may be the biggest surprise. Tom Tancredo has recently said that the USA should bomb Islamic holy cities if there is another terrorist attack on the USA. Tancredo's campaign is a one note thing, he's AGAINST illegal immigration, in a big, loud way, and this Iowa base rewarded his Creationist and anti-immigration positions.

Tom Tancredo, I want to note, has supported State's Rights to Medical Marijuana by voting for the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment each year. As a Presidential candidate, he's an animated wild-eyed extremist with a limited menu of positions, but he's maxing out on them in the right forum here at Ames.

With hard-core fundamentalists getting 78% of the Ames Straw Poll, how did Ron Paul do?

Coming in fifth, Ron Paul received 1,305 votes for 9.1%

In his podium speech, Paul established his Lutheran bonafides at the outset, speaking about his pro-life beliefs, his position against illegal immigration and birthright citizenship. He then moved on the Constitution, the war, the defence of liberty. Ron Paul's supporters were very visible and loud and with alot of great signs.

Ron Paul only opened his campaign in Iowa earlier this week, and had two of his largest fundraisers in his campaign so far. Ron Paul spent $200,000 on the Ames Straw Poll, including television ads. Paul raised over $110,000 this week in Iowa. Coming in a solid fifth, Ron Paul established that he has a foothold in the race and probably will derive more momentum from the Straw Poll than anyone else but Mike Huckabee. 9% is a solid beginning in a state that is hardly the best prospect for Dr. Paul's campaign. New Hampshire and Nevada primaries should be better. Dr. Paul got his relatively new message out in Iowa in all the mainstream media, as he was interviewed extensively. Congressman Paul spent the entire week campaigning tirelessly. Carol Paul, Dr. Paul's wife of over 50 years, was hospitalized for exhaustion today.Ron Paul's support visibly appeared even larger as hundreds of out of state supporters trekked to Ames (smack in the middle of the Hawkeye state) to hold signs, eat Romney's barbecue, and buttonhole other supporters, and share the vibe.

Because Ron Paul's internet base has INTENSITY, Ron Paul's status was never at risk as his campaign is still developing its own unique momentum. Fifth was good enough.

Paul's fifth place showing is the first sign in the voter marketplace that Ron Paul is not only an internet phenomenon, but that he can mobilize feet into voter booths. Further, Paul's campaign demonstrated they can spend money in conventional politics and make some waves. Mainstream media coverage for Dr. Paul has soared in recent weeks.

Dr. Paul is the bottom line in the Straw Poll however. After Ron Paul's fifth place showing, its all wreckage after him.

After promising to bow out if he did not come in first or second, former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson received 1,039 votes for a 7.3% showing for a weak sixth place. Thompson's bank account is empty, and Wisconsin is a neighbouring state. If he can't do well in Iowa - and Tommy is a nice guy - he's conceding defeat. He'll announce his campaign is over in the next 48 hours.

The Straw Poll knocks out Thompson, who campaigned in all 109 counties. Tommy Thompson, who promised to stop raids on medical-cannabis patients if elected President, was Health Secretary for George Bush from 2000 - 2004.

Scratch #6 candidate.

Way down in votes at 7th position was stalking-horse candidate Fred Thompson, a TV actor and undistinguished one term Senator from Tennessee, with only 203 votes and 1.4% of the votes. Fred Thompson mingled in Iowa a few days this week but his 203 votes does him no favors. This is a dubious showing for a phantom candidate.

Ghouliani, as Ron Paul Revolutionaries have taken to referring to Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, received 183 votes for 1.3% of the vote. The Ghoul did not campaign or participate because these devout social conservatives would have ripped him to shreds so he didn't run the gauntlet here. 183 votes of 14,320 cast is a poor showing. I think thats a sign that in the cornbelt and the south, Giuliani has some obstacles in this contest.

However, Fred Thompson is still testing the waters, is flush with millions in cash, and has a fan-base. Giuliani has $15 million in the bank.

US REP. Duncan Hunter, coming in ninth with 174 votes, 1.3% of those cast, did appallingly. Hunter is a Congressman from California's 4th district and is a war hawk.

I have run for office numerous occasions and when I campaign in rural, farming, or small communities, I wear jeans, a clean working mans shirt, cowboy boots if I have them, and I get rid of slick, big city talk and behavior. When you campaign in the heartland, everyone is just regular folks. In resource towns and rural farming communities, no one owned a suit that I could tell. If I would have shown up in my Armani suit (which I wear for media and city appearances), I would have been treated as if I were from THE CITY or some place far away from heartland reality - and I would INSTANTLY lose any credibility with these people.

I could tell Duncan Hunter did not belong in Iowa. Slick suit everywhere he went. He obviously doesn't hang around farmers much. He just wasn't comfortable and he didn't fit in. It was a crushing end to Hunter's invisible campaign and he too will inevitably announce his withdrawl from the race later this week. Scratch #9.

John McCain in certain ways defines "walking wounded". He looks dignified but stiff, uncomfortable, his facial skin stretched too tight over that skull. He's broke, tearing through $13 million so far this year, with peanuts left in the bank ( perhaps only a million dollars), and his showing here shows a complete lack of connection with this kind of heartland audience. John McCain came in tenth with 101 votes. 07% of the votes cast.

This is awful for McCain. He did not officially campaign at Ames and thus did not participate in the convention-like atmosphere. He made no impact, has no supporters here, no campaign, no money. He is considered a has-been. Ames will further damage McCain's ability to raise money.

Scratch #10 McCain. It won't be immediately, but McCain will be out by November or December when he sees that he just won't have the money to compete in the January - March primaries, which will require $5-$10 million minimum in the bank without bills by December 31.

A Illinois accountant named John Cox got 44 votes for .03% of the votes cast, sparing former "front-runner" McCain the extremely humilating close call of being "Dead" last at Ames.

Scratch John Cox, #11, later this summer.

I made a typo... =) sorry

Handgun homicide rate
-41% (dropped 41%)

I, for one, am glad that Chris Fox is able to express his 1st Amendment right on the internet -- a medium that, unlike EVERY other candidate, Ron Paul NEVER wishes to regulate. (I research politics myself from all sources) Controlling what children see on TV or the internet is a PARENTING issue. Raising and providing for our children is not the responsibility of the federal government and not the responsibility of another's productive effort.

I won't attack Chris Fox because he is entitled to his belief, logic and thought process; and the following should not be taken as such an attack.
I'd also ask the rest of us to behave maturely and turn this thread back into a discussion instead of finger-pointing and name-calling.

Chris Fox states that he believes:
"in a highly regulated and highly taxed kind of capitalism because that's what works. Paul is a supply-side loonie and someone should buy him a calculator."
I'd like to hear the explanation that Chris was probably going to offer before he was wrongfully attacked for his opinion.

Chris, without comparing the modern USA to other countries, please explain the aspects of your views and highly-regulated capitalism that will work in all 50 states as a federal law/regulation. Also, in light of the following statistics which I have provided instead of my opinion, please provide your insight on why concealed carry permits are not a deterrent to violent crime.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTS FROM
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

* Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%

*Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. At the time the law was passed, critics predicted increases in violence.
When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them.

* Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:

Homicide rate
-36% (dropped 36%)

Firearm homicide rate
-37% (dropped 37%)

Handgun homicide rate
-41% (dropped 47%)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From the preceding facts, I can deduce:
Gun control disarms the law-abiding citizens.
Most armed crimes are committed with illegal firearms by criminals fearless of an unarmed populace.
The amount of violent crime drops after right to carry laws are passed.

On the "voting for whom" issue:
"A vote for Paul is a vote for the democratic nominee."
FALSE
Such a statement is erroneous because:
1. Voting for a REPUBLICAN in the REPUBLICAN primaries helps only to select which candidate gets the REPUBLICAN party's endorsement.
2. Dr. Paul said that he wouldn't run as a 3rd party candidate, so he won't detract any votes, like Perot did, from the republican candidate who gets the endorsement.
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY -- Voting for "who you think will win" is a great way to "give" your vote to the Radio and TV stations who tell you who the "front-runners" are. How can ANYONE POSSIBLY have an idea of who is more popular with such widely contrasting results in all polls?
4. Ron Paul is a 10-term, REPUBLICAN congressman.

Continue to support your candidate of choice, no matter who it is. Please don't let other people decide for you.

Ah yes! President Paul. The name sounds refreshing already. When President Paul takes the oath during his inaguration, it will be a genuine oath and not just some obligitory utterance to satisfy a formality. President Paul will immediately end the illegal U.S. occupation in Iraq and strickly enforce our immigration laws.The IRS and Federal Reserve will be joyfully dismantled and the power of the executive branch will be reduced to that for which it was intended, public service.

Viva President Paul! Our numbers are swiftly growing.

Armed Air Marshals and good old fashioned security are the best ways to keep airlines safe. The GOP fought against having such things until 9/11, and even after that they still want to nickle and dime the security efforts, fearing the poor old airlines are suffering.

The only real way to eliminate gun violence in this country is for Americans to be taught not to fear so much. We are the most powerful nation on the planet yet we are the most paranoid about security.

B. Reyes,

Hear, Hear. When I actually met Dr. Paul, he didn't glad-hand me and put forth some tripe. He simply said hello, shook my hand, and went on to the next supporter. He's not here to be liked. He's not here to play the f-ing saxophone and do a stand-up bit for the press. He's here to get some work done, without the influence of money, power, or prestige. He IS the Champion of the Constitution, and if some of these hacks have ever read the Federalist Papers, they would know that this IS the candidate that we have been waiting for.

I must say-- there are some pretty mis-informed people on here that have a distorted view of Dr Paul.

Ron Paul is, in my opinion, the most honest and compelling candidate I have ever seen, regardless of political affiliation.

He's not compelling to me because he "looks" presidential, and not because he is "charismatic," or anything that political hacks think is important. He's none of those things. To me, what matters more are his ideas and integrity. There's definitely a "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" quality about him. He's not some partisan hack.

Don't ask me to believe anything Hillary, Guiliani or Romney says. But I believe Dr Paul when he speaks.

And no, I don't agree with some of his views, but hands down he best represents what I believe is needed in this country right now.

Even where I disagree with him, I can understand his views because he actually answers questions instead of running through a series of rehearsed talking points like everyone else. He gives his views and backs them up logically.

Learning about a presidential candidate is worth your time, no matter who it is. It's a waste of time to mudsling and name call. So that's why I urge everyone, to spend some time and learn more about Dr Paul's views. You might be suprised.

What do I stand for, Mr. Fox? I stand for the ideas of civic virtue, that all Americans ought to engage their democracy, or it will be replaced by those who are willing to take advantage of its function and discard the constitution that was written by people far more wise and intelligent than we can ever be. I stand for the right to protect myself when my life, liberty, or property is threatened. So why don't you just come out and say it; that you believe the constitution and its principles are quaint and you believe that you could have done a better job conceiving America that our founding fathers. Proceed with the overanalysis of my statements and ignore the honor and dignity of their origins. This is tangent to Ron Paul in every way because he is the Champion of the Constitution.

why not ron paul not really into politics but since i have been reading up on this man i have become somewhat intrested i am a little tired of being treated like a robot for this government and only hearing what the main stream media wants me too hear or being taught what the government wants me too be taught i think letting the states have more power and letting the government have less is a good idea i also think that fixing america should be first and i think ron paul will truly try did you like ronald reagan ron paul endorsed him he cant be that crazy are you not tired of hearing the same crap from these tired old politians black white women or bush clinton its time to change and show the world that were really not robots and we do have brains and want to change

I would LOVE to see the anti-gun people go back in time and tell their tripe to the Americans that won us this country... George Washington being told he cant have a gun... can you imagine?

"Basically, you want to assert the right to pollute wetlands or beat animals to death .. because you own them. To hell with you guys."

There would be financial incentives for a property owner not to pollute their own land. (You wouldn't burn your own house down, would you?) As for beating animals to death, if there was some sort of incentive (perhaps the animals are used as food?), then the quickest most efficient death (e.g., most humane) would probably be used.

"What nauseating conceit."

Well said, your comments are quite nauseating and conceited.

It seems more effort is spent by most of you responders on nonsense. If the constitution was adhered to we would not be in this dangerous economic crises. Our country is run by bankers utilizing phony fiat (worthless paper) and it is they who robbing us all of any financial future. Wise up! You are on a path to financial hell unless we begin thinking in a new paradigm. Time is quickly running out-read the financial news and vote for a candidate who can embrace a new way of thinking. The constitution explains what real money is and nowhere does it mention a privately owned Federal Reserve. Gold and silver are true money. I highly recommend you start acummulating some. Best Wishes.

Brock demanded of me:
"Mr. Fox, just tell me, what do you stand for? For some reason, I sense a fool behind the mindless semantics."
==

Well I'm not going along with changing the topic from Ron Paul's irresponsible positions to my person but if you search this page for the phrase "I believe" you will only have to type four characters to get an answer to your question.

And what do YOU believe in? That as you sit and oil your "piece" for the third time this week, you are the bulwark defending the Constitution against tyranny? You can cousin Billy-Bob and your local Wade's franchise? What nauseating conceit.

Oh Coop. Just because someone is strident and cocky, it doesn't mean they aren't right. Leave it to people like you to not elect someone like our founding fathers. If Thomas Jefferson was here in everything but in name you would call him a fanatical libertarian. You know why? Because you are strident and cocky.

What, pray tell, is a brownshirt type? At every RP group or event that I've attended, there have been a wide array of people, from many backgrounds, who simply are tired of the "Best Haircut for President" method of electing the leader of the Free World.

And really, Star Trek analogies? Perhaps if you weren't watching so much fiction, you'd know your facts.

for 'Chris Fox'

The way to stop gun violence is dead in its tracks insisting by law every American Citizen over age 17 carry a concealed weapon with instructions to use it immediately some whacko nut case starts shooting up a campus, theatre, parking lot, or whatever. Maybe the whacko will get one, but armed and willing American Citizens will make sure there is not a second or subsequent victem.

Chuck, a RP supporter, says: "I classify all of the neo-con crowd the devils spore."

As I previously stated: a lot of the Brownshirt types seem to support RP. Reminds me of a star trek episode -- (Patterns of Force: episode 52) -- where the followers of the neo-nazi leader all sound so sure and cocky and strident all the time. Scary, survivalist, pac n west types. Lord help us if these fanatical libertarian types ever get any real power.

Interesting blog... I have been a staunch admirer of Ron Paul for over 23 years now... One thing that Ron Paul has going for him is the fact that he tells the truth and when you tell the truth you don't have to think of the next lie...

Chris Fox is a bloviated idiot, but it takes a few idiots to make the world go round... Sorry about the 'name calling', but I classify all of the neo-con crowd the devils spore and thus mentally deficient akin to mattoids...

Mr. Fox, just tell me, what do you stand for? For some reason, I sense a fool behind the mindless semantics. You may wow others with your conventional, ambiguous wisdom, but I have not heard out of you one solid position. You sit back and bash everyone's arguments, yet you take no stances of your own and leave others to assume what you stand for. So stop covering your ass and tell everyone what you, the all-knowing, all-mighty voice of humanity stands for. I assume you don't believe in God or at least aren't committed, because no one who truly believes in God could be as far up their own ass as you are.

It always shocks and amazes me that when some people, when presented with well-reasoned, well-articulated arguments, resort to name-calling and insults. Chris Fox, just make a notepad entry on your desktop that just says "You're stupid. Shut up, dummy.' Use cut-and-paste, and let that be your boilerplate response.

I DO have a right to own firearms, especially in light of the fact that criminals own them illegally. If you think that I'm just going to curl up in a little ball and allow my family to be victimized by someone who is NOT going to obey the rule of law, then YOU are the loonie. Sure, it's the same rhetoric that us 2nd Amendment Wackos have been spouting for decades. Why? Maybe because it's the truth.

I am a strident Ron Paul supporter, mainly because he is a decent, intelligent, hard-working, principled man who has served his country for many years. I do not completely agree with all of his arguments, but at least I know what his arguments are on just about every major issue facing America today. For his detractors who consistently question his integrity and intellect, you show your own colors. Why is it such an insane idea to want to reduce the size and scope of government? Why are people willing to turn over this nation to the unelected and unaccountable in return for a third of your income? It is my belief that in return for getting rid of the Department of Education, we can, in 20 years or so, regain our rightful place as a leader in Education. (Since the DoEd was founded, we've dropped from #3 in the world to something like 47th...pitiful).

I do not believe that Napoleon was correct in saying that the Common Man is unable to handle the responsibilities of liberty, but the more that I hear the Fox News-style rhetoric and kindergarten debate tactics, the more I wonder.

Wake up, people. Do what's right, not just what is expedient. Read up on Ron Paul, preferably in his own words, and you will see that he has been consistently correct for many years now.

RP2008

Ron Paul attracts a lot of neo-brownshirt types, it seems.

Anti foreigner, anti Jew, anti-anybody-that-disagrees-with-me -- guys it mostly seems, (as if that's not telling) -- disgruntled folk. They are to the Right what daily kos if to the Left; a bunch of extremists and narrow bigots.

Thank goodness we'll not have him for president. Shudder.

He was talking about under covered armed employees

why does the left wing media hype Ron Paul? Because they know he's our Dennis Kucinich or Lyndon LaRouche.

He has some fantastic ideas about abolishing about 1/2 of the federal government, but that cannot be reconciled with his isolationist/surrender foreign policy. He cannot command the world's sole hyperpower with such timidity.

There is no revolution. Ron Paul's online support is probably a Moveon.org tactic to identify the least palatable republican and surge the online voting and activity. They do this all the time and WaPo shows, again, that they are total suckers.

Ron Paul is America's Champion. Go Ron Go! Get well soon Carol!

Maybe the "problem" is the "wrong" person got too many votes.

FOX is reporting there were "problems" with the Diebold machines, possibly due to "humidity."

Geraldo has not mentioned Ron Paul ONCE.