You know, you'd get a lot farther if you acknowledged that yeah, we have actually read about Ron Paul. The points that you laid out are well and good, but not the points you left out. His views on Education reform are extreme and ridiculous. Why not take baby steps and get rid of the crap like No Child Left Behind instead of destroying the entire system, which has spots that are working. I'm sorry, but the free market is not a magic bullet that solves all problems. It solves many problems, but not all of them. Of schools in California ranked by the number of students that default on their student debts, the for-profit schools dominate the worst of the worst. Their education is worthless. Education is a common good that benefits all: even if you're not educated, you are benefiting from the people in your society who are. Making some bogus voucher from public money and using it to put some kid in a private religious/anti-science school is both unfair to people who prefer public schools that are already underfunded and a misuse of tax dollars from taxpayers who want nothing to do with that private school. And, as soon as you let the anti-education crowd get a grip on education, we lose the common good that comes from it, and our jobs will disappear overseas and we'll lose technological leadership. His economic views also smell of a sort of extreme, ridiculous change. I want an example of them working in real life. And his views on abortion are beyond stupid -as in catholic church stupid. It makes me angry how little informed he is. He's willing to throw away people's freedoms on a flimsy philosophical whim that a friggin ZYGOTE is a human life. Preposterous. I understand concerns for fetuses, because they're developed enough to have a primitive brain and may be able to process pain. But a zygote? Blastocyst? Does he even know the difference between the three of them? Does he ever wonder why pregnancy last nine months rather then 5 minutes? He's also woefully misinformed on Global Warming, falling victim to the twisting of statistics by the oil companies. He's clearly science illiterate, and that's not proper for a country on the leading edge of scientific advancement. His immigration views are also out of whack. He promises a lot of border strengthening but no promise to streamline the legal immigrant process so that foreigners have more incentive to come legally. Either welcome people so they're on record and on the tax process, or be stubborn about your racism and deal with more tax-draining illegal immigrants who come because they don't have another option. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Also, he avoids the idea of doing the effective thing and punishing employers of illegals. Also, he's anti-birthright citizenship. That's punishing people for crimes somebody else committed. This is the thing: I don't want a candidate that talks ideology and nothing of reality. I want a candidate who acknowledges that all ideologies have faults and that there will be exceptions to their use of ideologies for places where the ideology doesn't work. I am so tired of politicians blathering about buzzwords. The only reasons I voted for Obama last time was because he wasn't blathering about conservative, fear mongering, buzzwords. Some of Ron Paul's stuff I agree with: like being anti- National ID card and a lot of what you said, but he's hindered by his pandering to the wackaloon conservative base. tl;dr: I hate purists. Ron Paul sounds like a free-market, economic freedom (but anti- personal freedom and anti-facts) purist.