So - the "Family Research Council" cheers for war. Must be other peoples' families doing the fighting, ergo it was a bunch of Republicans.

Applauding war. Such sick family values. I'd like to know how such a un-Christian group was selected. How many were in attendance, where were they from, who did they represent?

Thanks for a good summary, and reminding me that Ron Paul is actually a social conservative.  As a Democrat who is anti-war, it has been tempting to think of Ron Paul as someone I could vote for, but I get reminded (thankfully) that he really is against a woman's right to choose, for pushing right-wing "Christian values" on everyone, and so on.

And of course, there are strong democratic candidates who have been consistently anti-war as well, so I guess I don't need to consider Paul anyway.

I think Ron Paul is barking up the wrong tree. We have lost far more sovereignty involutarily to multi-national, trans-national mega-corporations than to all of those voluntary clubs combined.  Interesting that he possibly forgot to mention NATO.

I just watched Chuck Todd on Hardball and Chris Matthews asked him which Republican candidate would drop out next and Todd went through the list of "tiers" by candidate and didn't even bother to mention Ron Paul. He couldn't even classify Paul as a long shot or bottom-tier candidate, but mentions Hunter and Tancredo when they have a fraction of the support Ron Paul apparently has.

This comes after a previous article by Todd discussing a straw poll which Paul won, yet was hardly mentioned. Todd spent the whole article discussing why Romney lost. Chuck Todd needs to get his act together.

I am not really a Paul supporter, but I find his campaign interesting and I believe the media should be paying more attention to him.

Phony christians. Mt. Zion is the new Saviour...and Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity the new preacher.

Go ahead, Chuck Todd... try and 'narrow the field' as you just advocated on Hardball. We DARE you!
- one of those nutty Ron Paul supporters

These supposed values voters have a poor understanding of social conservatism. A social conservative believes government's role in society is small in order to prevent upheaval and disruption of tradition.

A social liberal, by contrast, believes government can and should have a free hand (hence, liberal from liberty and the freedom to act) in engineering society or provoking rapid changes in it. Social liberals believe, for example, illegal immigration is okay.

Ron Paul is undoubtedly socially conservative.

Ron Paul is only pro-life on a personal level........ but he doesn't believe that the government can impose it's views on it's citizens........ so he will leave it up to the states..

So far he is my fav candidate...... and he hasn't folded on the Iraq issue like Hillary and Obama...

Let's not forget he was the only candidate besides Dennis Kucinich to vote aganist it......

I guess the deal is, as long as the war continues the right wing can say "We're still in charge," whether it's a disaster and a quagmire, or not.

(Really - give Ron Paul some ink. I'd think you'd love him - he's the only interesting Republican in a group hotly contesting for "Most Unqualified/Repulsive/Chicken Hawk-y.")

Ron Paul sounds like the name of a Rockstar more then the name of someone running for President

Funny, all the hate.

It's really obvious when these articles come out that the media is owned by all the same people.

ron paul, typical republican coward,warhawk, women hater,liar and pretender of being religion

"I am not really a Paul supporter, but I find his campaign interesting and I believe the media should be paying more attention to him."

Here here.

In response to Ruth from New York: I, too, am pro-choice. And a registered Republican. What Paul says is that laws regulating abortion should be left to the states, same as medical marijuana. I couldn't agree more. For too long have senators from rural Kansas been telling folks in LA what they can and can't do with their bodies. The sword swings nboth ways, as I don't see Congressman from New York knowing what's best for South Dakota ranchers. LET'S GIVE THE POWER BACK TO THE PEOPLE! Ron Paul '08!!

Guiliani and Clinton preach fear.  Guiliani preaches fear of terrorism, (though I've yet to see what he'd do about it besides make more empty threats.)  Clinton preaches fear of what would happen if the government didn't take care of everyone and make all our decisions.

What happened to "Give me liberty or give me death?"

Ron Paul is the only major candidate who will reverse the present trend towards dictatorship.  His ideas are not perfect, but let's talk about them instead of dismissing them.  If the United States is to be a free country twenty years from now, we need Ron Paul or someone like him at or near the helm.

Good for Ron Paul.  It seems to me that not only is he the only candidate who has proven to really believe in and uphold the Constitution, but he may also be the most truly Christian.  In my Bible, Jesus taught "Blessed are the peacemakers.." (Matthew 5:9)

I don't get the Ron Paul thing...he is as rightwing in this thinking as any of the other reprehensible candidates...he is against the war, good for him, but he is also against a lot of other things too...typical repuke...they are agin more than they are fer'

Well, applause for DUNCAN for mentioning the war, BIG DEAL, what are they supposed to do boo him, that would not support the troops, we must keep up moral with applause and jingoism. They will be dropping out like flies, the money is drying up as the monied people start looking at the front runners and decicing not to waste anymore money on the bottom feeders in the REBUMBLEKIN PARTY. The party of the elephant is so fractured that we my see a real sea change in the next few years, the libertarian side seems to be gaining ground as the theological right loses power. Dr, Paul understands, when the patient is very sick, extreme measures are in order.

All this comments are from the usual complainers, all talk and no new "ideas" to make things better. Bush "lied" is their call to arms. Well maybe he did maybe he didn't but the reality is that on 911 we lost more than 3000 inocent people who only where there to do their job. Impractial war? Loosing effort? Worthless sacrifice by our nation's finest? Have you even bothered to ask a real soldier who has been in the front lines if he belives it is a "worhtless sacrifice"? Most young man including my son joined the military soon after 911 beliving the cause was just and with the forethough that is better to fight them on their turf than let them kill more inocents in AMERICAN soil. My son and his friends still belive that it is all worth it, except for those politicians who have "betrayed" them, ( the armed forces). When politicians did run a war, we ended up with VIETNAM, a long long war, in which the sacrifice of all those young american lives did nothing for our military or for America. Vietman did not attack us, nor did they harbor terrorist whom would attack us at the first opportunity. Contrast that to the current War on Terror, a real war with no enemy in uniform, who hides among the inocent and among us to do hideous things not only to their own people but to any American and foreing personel they get their hands on. In the comfort of our own living rooms is easy to forget 911, and condemm our goverment for a blotch war. Just remember you are not facing the bombs or guns of a terrorist in this great nation of ours thanks to my son and his friends and countless other militry man and women who see the need for their SACRIFICE!

Yes we must attack a candidate who is only for legal immigration, against killing ANY BABIES  and does not want the constitution burned by the scum at the U.N.that are spending 1/2 their time putting our money in their Swiss bank accounts!!The yuppie trash have progressed well in their program to turn the U.S. into one of the HERD NATIONS!

As a Democrat, when I first heard about Ron Paul and his wanting to end the occupation of Iraq, I was interested...until I found out more about him.  I'd never vote for him due to his desire to deny me my right to decide for myself if and when I have a  child. Yet, it's funny, this same "Libertarian" who wants government out of the lives of Americans wants government in the uterus of American women.  

He has stated that he would abolish all social programs. His views on Medicaid, Medicare and other programs that help people like me, the disabled and poor who rely upon such programs to live was enough for me. That ended any thought of me even considering him.

As a doctor, he absolutely refuses to give care to patients who have Medicaid or Medicare. I would imagine if he was the only doctor who specialized in care that a Medi/Medi patient needed, it wouldn't matter. He would still refuse to give that person care just because the payment method is Medicaid/Medicare. To me that is despicable!

Plus he's pandering to the ultra right wing christians. Values voters, ha, more like hate/war  mongers. Why don't they just call themselves what they really are vile hateful people who hate everyone except those who think like they do.  The only thing these "religious leaders" value is how much money they will fleece from the gullible to fill their personal coffers.  As for Mr. Paul, he is not the candidate for me and my family and I don't understand why some people are so gaga over him.  

 Dr. Paul is a ball of fire in the change he proposes to effect, and he can think on his feet as opposed to other candidates who read from their scripts, because of their robot, status-quo agendas. That won't bring about the change the assault on America's identity we've incurred will require. It's time to bring jobs back home. I believe Dr. Paul would bring us to similiar time we had around the Kennedy administration. Things have been going south ever since to put it mildly.

Ron Paul has the highest family values of any of the candidates. He is the only Republican candidate that can beat Hillary. Evangelicals have been duped by the lame stream media. He is the only Republican with values that  can be supported by the right and the left. Republican's with values should see this. It's like the siron near the rocks every time a candidate sings the Iraq war song. The ship is our country our families. We messed up big time lets bring our boys home.  GO RON 2008 !

Monica you need to read more into Ron Paul than just the sound bytes you hear on TV. a) He does not feel the federal government should be the one dictating abortion issue. Republicans will eventually over turn Roe v Wade...do you want it to happen with abortion issue being left up to the states...or do you want to not have abortion be illegal throughout the whole country by a new amendment? If its states rights, California people with their loose morals can keep abortions. And the religious right people in Kansas can ban them.

2-He does not plan to just turn the switch off on medicare. I don't want to take up a lot of space...so I'll try being brief...a) medicare makes medicine too expensive for everyone. Yes you might get your medicine for free, but everyone else gets to pay 3 times the price. w/o medicare, the cost of medicine will go down. b) by abolishing the IRS, you'll get to keep 1/3 of your income. With all that extra cash, you'll be able to save $$$ to buy proper health insurance, and since everyone else will get 1/3 more cash, there'll be more charity.

3. He does not refuse care for medicare patients..he refuses to accept medicare. He treated those people for free, or for pennies on the dollar. You should know that no doctor is allowed to deny any treatment.

4. He is not pandering...he is the only politican who doesn't pander. Unlike the rest of them.

I'll tell you why so many people are so gaga for him. Because he is about personal responsibility and liberties. You have to take care of yourself, America IS the land of opportunity, you just have to know where to look. And with all the money he'll save by abolishing the IRS....every single working American will be able to do so and live much better than they do now. Ofcourse if you are a freeloader sucking on the goverment's teat...then of course his policies won't appeal to you. If you swing that way, then you can always vote for Clinton or one of the other Democrats who want to give away the farm.

Banana Kid, maybe you were thinking of Ru Paul?

Monica, he did not refuse Medicare/medicaid patients, he refused medicare/medicaid payments.  He either let them make payments or took less money rather than live off of a government program.

I am voting for him because he says what he believes, and he hasn't been bought by big corporatinos.  He voted against the PAtriot act, and introduced legislation today repealing it all, the patriot act, domestic spying, Habeus Corpus, executive powers, all of it.  

He takes a stand.  For freedom, for liberty, for the rule of law.

If you're pro-choice and your candidate has to be pro-choice, then no, Dr Paul will not pander to you, he is pro life.  He's an ob-gyn, so I understand his position.  You will have a democratic congress that won't pass that kind of legislation thru anyway.  

Hillary won't guarantee you troops out by the end of the first term, OBama won't, Edwards wont.  Paul will.  Paul voted against the Patriot Act, the Dem frontrunners all voted for legislation they weren't allowed to read.

Take a stand. This is the chance of a generation.

Monica, you make that choice when you decide to have sexual intercourse.

I really like Ron Paul's message and I believe he is the only candidate that is really honest, and I have checked the things they have voted on against what they say, and Ron Paul is the real deal. That we need someone like him at this crisis in our nation is absolute.  Go, Ron Paul!

Ron Paul is right for 08. He is THE MOST consistent in thought and action amongst the candidates. Dr.Paul comes closest to understanding the true meaning of the founding of this nation. My Property rights are non-negotiable, but most republicans and democrats forget this.
I dont agree with his stand on Life vs. choice. A more consistent approach would be to not coerce Life people to pay for others abortions, by simply abolishing medicaid. I am Pro-Life but only for myself, I can not force others to be the same. I can only ask to not be forced to pay into any abortion.
I want the old " night-watchmen" the US government was initially intended of being. Not the paternal omni-potent apparatus it became.

To Monica in Southern California,

As Dr. Paul stated, and this article so reflects, he has his own personal view on abortion. I do not entirely agree with him on that stance. To his credit, however, he believes it is not up to the Federal government to make that choice. That is a decision that is rightly left to the states (at least as our current Constitution is written)

Once the power to decide is put in the hands of the states, where the Constitution said it should be, I can guarantee you that I will do everything within my power to make sure that my state stays pro-choice.

As far as Medicaid and Medicare are concerned, I do not understand what makes you think the fact that you are disabled, or poor gives you the "Right" to make other people pay for things that you need. Would you advocate that people who are poor or disabled have the legal right to steal money from others in order to get what they want or need? I can't imagine that anyone would support the suggestion that the poor or needy are above the law.  Yet you seem to believe that you are "entitled" to these programs that are paid for by taxpayers dollars (which are not GIVEN to the government - they are TAKEN from the people; by force if necessary), so I guess so long as the gun is not in your hand during the theft, that it's okay for the government to steal FOR you. The gun is in the Federal government's hand, not yours, so you consider yourself without blame and deserving of these ill-gotten gains.

Hate, War, Fear and Money-loving? Others in the party, perhaps, but not Dr. Paul.

If you don't like him, that's your right. We are still free enough in this country to decide for ourselves. I do, however, fear that if the Federal government grows much more, we may lose that choice as well.

Monica in So CA... You apparently need to stop listening to anti-Ron Paul propaganda and misinformation and READ his positions and voting record. He does NOT advocate taking away your right to decide on matters of your own body- he just wants THE GOVERNMENT not to decide for you- either PRO OR ANTI! His libertarian philosophy prevents ANYONE from imposing their beliefs on someone else. It should be the States and individual citizens that decide for themselves, not an unconstitutional imposition from the Federal Government.

And he has NEVER denied ANYONE care or treatment based on their ability to pay, especially if they are covered by mMedicare or Medicaid. He does, however REFUSE to accept medicaid or medicare funding on basic principles, but only refuses the fiunding- never the patient!  How many doctors do you know principled enough to treat poor people for free?

As for social programs like aid for disabled, poor people and Social Security, the media REFUSES to report his steadfast belief that NO ONE be thrown out in the street! He has stated over and over that anyone dependent on these programs will be taken care of (but the biased media conveniently omits those statements!). He just wants to get the Federal Bureaucracy out of the social welfare business. Under a Ron Paul administration, no one will be kicked off Medicare, Social Security or any other program that truly serves the social needs of those that are unable to provide for themselves. He DOES advocate a change in the entitlement merry-go-round that KEEPS people in a cycle of poverty and unable to free themselves from government dependence, as well as a change in both funding and the basic structure of social welfare in this country. He feels, as many Americans do, that money is better spent, and more efficiently at a state level, where it is closer and more responsive and available to the people who need it. Imagine what the billions of dollars freed from the Washington bureaucracy could do to help the poor and needy of your state!

Don't accept what some talking head or 15-second soundbite tells you about Ron Paul. He has been misquoted, misrepresented and slandered every step of the way. Big media, Big government and their owners and agents HATE Ron Paul because he can't be bribed, bought off or silenced. THat makes him very dangerous to the status quo, and very appealing to the average poor and working man and women. How else can he keep getting re-elected in a majority Democrat and minority district in the poorest areas in East Texas? His own party tried to gerrymander him out of office, and he got even STRONGER! THat should tell you something. Read deeper and decide for yourself.

Maybe if couples would consider the myriad of readily available and safe methods to avoid unwanted and irresponsible pregnancies they wouldn't have to make abortion a lithmus test in their choice of the country's leadership.  It is much easier and more importantly responsible to do the adult thing before getting themselves in a situation where they have to play God with a human life.  If you're adult enough to engage in sexual relations you should be responsible enough to prevent that situation if you are not financially or emotionally prepared to take the responsibility of creating life.  I don't understand why people would want to spend their precious right of their vote based on planning to exercise lack of descretion in their adult decisions.

Monica, So CA might be unable to read. Before you start talking about something or someone you should do the proper research from several different sources. Maybe you only watch Fox news?

"As for Mr. Paul, he is not the candidate for me and my family and I don't understand why some people are so gaga over him.
Perhaps it's because they actually listen to what he says and don't apply their own meanings to his words.
It's time for the sheep in America to wake up to the fleecing we've been taking all these years.
"Zeitgeist.com" has a very informative video that should be seen by all Americans, if you can spare the time away from you nap.

Ron Paul. like any number before him, has been marginlaized by the media because he had the temerity to express a passing convern for the fate of the Palestinians).

A candidiate could be Solomonic on every issue, in addition to being charming in every way, yet the zealots (and cowards) in the US media would find a way to dismiss the message. Abe Foxman wieghed crushing Ron Paul or ignoring him, choosing the latter. The ADL felt "too visible" in the wake of this necon enterpsie in Iraq. They want to be silent but deadly about Iran.

Some have begun to express concern that public will someday soon wake up and assess blame for all this (wars included). Just imagine—"worrying" that the public will wake up!

Well he is partially right. The feds should stay out of abortion. So should state and local governments. It is an issue between a woman and her doctor.

republicans hate America, middle class children and Gen Sanchez.

Ron Paul has stated by his voice that he wants to end all government programs such as social security and medicare. This was on c-span several months back.

His support is really limited to a large group of internet savvy bloggers. Every time msnbc runs a story these bloggers take over the site. He actually believes the government has no role in people's lives at all. nothing personal,I'm sure he is a lovely person just the facts.

right... laws reulating women should be left to the states, next it will be black people.


Ron Paul wants roe vrs wade overturned.
He believes the govt should control womens bodies...


unbelievable, states rights in the GOP is the right to control all but wealthy white males

Ron Paul should not waste his time going after these hateful pro-war 'Christians' especially since doing so alienates the anti-war independents that he needs.
http://RonPaul.meetup.com

Monica, a Hillary hack? Of course!...The only truthful statement you offered was Ron Paul was against the war. I suppose you are also dishwasher with a $1000 available for the Clinton campaign? Amazing.

Monica, you amaze me...along with the many others who share your love of abortion.  I have a hard time believing the number one issue in determining a President can be whether or not he supports abortion, but since you bring it up I'd encourage you to do one thing...actually Google his speech (it's in three parts) and watch it.

He discussed his experience of walking into a room in the hospital when a baby was being aborted.  The doctors were surprised the child came out alive and crying, weighing just over 2 lbs but fighting for its life.  He looked on in disgust as the doctors placed the child into a trash can and waited for the cries to stop.  That is as disgusting as partial-birth abortion...as Dr. Paul makes clear it is a major disconnect when a doctor is allowed to perform these procedures lawfully but a 17-year old who disposes of her new baby into a dumpster gets tried for murder.

Ron Paul advocates freedom and responsibility.  If you are going to have sex you are likely to create a child...they go hand in hand.  If you don't want a child but want to have sex have the personal responsibility to manage your sex life in such a manner that you don't get pregnant.

Considering his responsible view on so many other aspects (the war, national sovereignty, illegal immigration, taxes, monetary policy and foreign policy) it's a shame to toss ones support over one being to lazy to acquire birth control.

To Monica-

If I've understood Ron Paul's statements correctly,as a Dr., Ron Paul never refused treatment to those w/ medicare/medicaid, he treated them free of cost. He doesn't want to take away our rights. He wants us to have more control at a local level for our own lives. There's a PBS interview shown on his youtube site that better describes his view. One of the problems is that Dr. Ron Paul doesn't always get the chance to clarify his principals, which then leads to misunderstandings and snap judgements. I think if you listened to what he actually said and not someone else paraphrasing his statements you might just change your mind.

BTW...MSNBC...your lack of real-time posting is real annoying.  The idea here is to generate a discussion, or so I would have thought.  Kinda though when it takes a couple hours to see the next comment...

Monica, So CA.

I personally am Gaga as you called it over Ron Paul because he stands for freedom.  I live in California as well and I am so sick and tired of the government in my pocket and all the illegals in this state.  Ron Paul has never said he would take your abortion right away from you, he is simply stating that it is not an issue the federal government should be deciding and should be dealt with at the state level. I personally do not believe abortion should be used as a form of birth control, your comment sounded like thats what abortion was. As a Doctor, Ron Paul did not accept Medical/Medicaid but would actually offer his patients a lower fee or not charge them at all, did you know that?  I realize some folks have to depend on the government for support, but before we all start doing that, whatever happened to families taking care of each other? You don't see that much anymore do you?  I have worked hard all my life and never once thought of receiving govenment assistance. When times were hard, I lived with less, and worked 2 jobs if I had to.  I personally would go to family members for help before turning to the government.  To me the sole purpose of the government is to protect our freedom and security, its not to financially support people with social programs. I would like to mention that I am a minority (hispanic), 3rd generation legally born in the United States of America. My family did it the right way, they did not sneak over borders, they paid the price to be here and did the paperwork to be here legally. Wake up America, be responsible for yourselves, be proud, vote for Ron Paul, he is our only chance.  We need changes in this country, we need to change the way people think, and go back to the Constitution.

No candidate is going to be perfect. The article above limits discussion to Ron Paul's most questionable issues. But like he said, getting rid of Medicare and Medicaid, if that can happen, would be done just like getting rid of the Federal Reserve - with the cooperation of Congress.
Hear this: RP is a man that will return power from the executive to the People (Congress). Regardless of his particular position, he first abides by the Constitution, which means no signing statements, no illegal wiretapping, restoration of Habeas Corpus.
The only value expressed by this meeting is the value of following this president over the cliff. They don't stand on any real values if they can overlook torture,  indefinite imprisonment without a trial, attacking nations on dubious grounds and running this economy into the ground with incredible debt.
So some of RP's views are a little radical, but returning powers to the states returns it to the people. I think women should have the choice to terminate a pregnancy up to half way to term. Even though he's opposed to it, he's not evangelical - he doesn't force his view on others, like nearly all other candidates.

The only one that stands a chance of winning the election and the Republicans won’t vote for him. He's about the only one that can pull in some Democratic votes as well.
Bottom line the top Republican candidates can not pull any democratic votes, Ron Paul appears to be the only one that can.

I guess we'll have to suffer threw Hillary since the majority of Republicans can’t seem to pull there heads out of there butts.

Monica, So CA: "He would still refuse to give that person care just because the payment method is Medicaid/Medicare. To me that is despicable!"

Please, get your facts straight. He never refused care to anyone. He would refuse payment through Medicaid/Medicare, but he would either work out a payment plan with the patient individually or just do the work for free.

From http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070930/NEWS01/709300331 :"As a doctor, he refused to accept government insurance such as Medicaid because, he said, 'I thought that was one stop too far.' If a patient couldn't afford treatment, 'I just took care of them.'"

Isn't that what real compassion should look like? Dr. Paul emphasizes personal liberty and responsibility, and he clearly shows that he practices what he preaches.

Back to Monica...you describe Ron Paul's advocating of removal of "social programs" as if it is a bad thing.  (I prefer the word "entitlements", as it casts a better light on how the receipients of the "free money" seem to look upon it.)

Look closer and you discover the root issue is money...not the amount of it per se but the soundness of our currency.  Ron is the only one addressing this issue by advocating a gradual withdrawl of fiat currency and moving towards sound money.

Since your money is now worth more than the 4 cents each dollar is currently worth you can buy more with it.  Compound this with his desire to allow you to not pay income tax.  If you are not paying income tax what are the chances you can properly afford your current lifestyle and have comprehensive insurance?

He has stated that anyone who is due to receive the benefits will get them, but he is also aware the barrel is going to run dry soon.  Decades of politicians (Dems and Republicans alike) have postponed the payment of bills the will bankrupt this country, but the rising generation is becoming keenly aware of what a mess they are about to inherit.  He is the only one I have heard address this issue directly and comprehensively.

For those who believe your tax dollars are actually doing anything read about the Grace Commission's report to President Reagan.  It's a sobering statement of abuse that only Ron Paul seems to understand.  

Socialism in its many forms always fails eventually.  It's due to our willingness to support illeagal immigrants that they come here...and I can't fault them for doing so.  Free healthcare, free education...there are banks who allow illegals to apply for an account without a SS number when we have to comply with the Patriot Act.  

I don't think the man is perfect, far from it.  But until you show me someone with better answers to these issues (and others) he has my vote.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):