We'd better support his campaign with some fake $$$ or he doesn't stand a chance.

Local candidates effectively focusing on local issues may make some progress.

Turning to the lead press release on the national level: The torture question was answered by Congress some time ago. Torturing someone in a foreign country is a felony. If the victim dies, the penalty for the torturer is *death*. There are no exemptions for Federal employees. The fellow who tells the President 'we can get facts out of this person if we torture him', besides being a liar, is also--if anyone went along with him, helped fly the victim from one place to another, etc.--a felon, too. It's called 'conspiracy'.

The rule of law is fundamental to having a free country.

Today do the right thing and donate to Dr. Paul. He will get familiarize more people with libertarian views in a few days than this website will in years.

Ron Paul is up to nearly 6 million! Not bad and the day isn't over yet!

$ 6.3 Million! The entire party should just call off for 2008 and support Ron Paul... He actually does have a chance!

The LP is too rigid to endorse Paul. And that is why it does not flourish. Look at the RP campaign, and the young people it draws. The LP could be drawing on that well of future leaders, but it is too doggon stubborn! Relax your ridiculous stance immigration, for pity's sake, so we can start making some ground (if there are no borders, there is no America -- that's anarchy, which is a few pegs beyond libertarianism as the Founders knew it). All my life I've watched America die the death of a thousand cuts due to lesser-evil voting. The LP could change that if it would just *loosen up*!

I think I was not clear above (tired). When I say loosen your stance, I mean loosed the rigidity with which the LP holds to its "people can go where they please" immigration platform. That's essentially what it is, and it flies in the face of liberty HERE AT HOME. If you're talking about liberty for outsiders who want to come in, you eventually start talking about a world government. Eew! Yucky world government! Me no likey! So when I say "relax," I mean "open your mind to the idea of becoming less relaxed." OK now I'm confusing myself. Bedtime.

By the time you read this Ron Paul will have raised 6.5 million dollars. (fake dollars to Clark) Have all the Libertarian presidential candidates combined ever raised this kind of cash? I don't think so. Maybe it's time to reevaluate our goals. See you (and be in your face) in Denver!

Arin Sime - Endorsed by the newspaper and still gets only 8% of the votes. What do we have to do to get the American public to "think outside the bun?" Any ideas. After 20 some years I am so tired of the LP making NO inroads.

JAMES R. FARTED: "By the time you read this Ron Paul will have raised 6.5 million dollars. (fake dollars to Clark)" (END)

..No doubt it will come as a surprise to the Republicrats here but it is my understanding that at one time people referred to ‘dollars of gold’ and ‘dollars of silver’ in the same manner that today’s Republicrats refer to, for example, ‘pounds of hot dogs,’ ‘kilos of marijuana’ etc.

..but somewhere along the way the Republicrats have been brainwa$hed into using, for example, the phrase ‘silver dollar’..in reality, assigning to a term of measurement (‘dollar’) the faculty of being an entity!!..(the poor brain-laundered Republicrats!)

..Think about it, JAMES R. and other teevee-addled Republicrats: it is as if you are consuming ‘hot dog pounds’ and ‘marijuana kilos!’ ;o)

Ron Paul's ideas about immigration are the least of his problems. Besides, not all Libertarian candidates favor open borders. George Phillies, for one, supports welcoming legal immigrants but enforcing existing immigration laws.

Ron Paul is a social conservative. In this radio interview http://www.theamericanview.com/dictator/media/898/aview_20070825.mp3?PHPSESSID=da0fb7564466b18359c8064c4708f011 he agreed with the host that in any case where the law contradicts God's law (the "inerrant" Bible, in his view), it is not law. Putting the Bible ahead of the Constitution is worrisome in someone who would be sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. It should likewise be worrisome to any Libertarian.

In the same interview, he says he believes abortion should be prosecuted as murder, though he equivocates about what the penalty should be for women who get abortions. He believes that abortion-as-murder cases should be barred from appeal to the federal level to keep Roe v Wade from entering into the discussion. He alternately says Roe v Wade should be overturned and, as in this interview, that Roe v Wade should simply be ignored. Again, calling for Supreme Court rulings to be "ignored" is troublesome in a would-be President.

In this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeKA-U_QCkc Ron Paul, a practicing OB/Gyn, says he knows of no cases where abortion could save a womanпїЅs life. Apparently in all his years of practice, he never came across any women with severe diabetes, dangerous heart conditions, blood clotting issues, kidney failure, liver failure. Other OB/Gyns have. This is why the decision should not belong to the government but to a woman and her doctor.

He also supports Don't Ask Don't Tell, and in another blatant nose-thumbing at the Supreme Court and the Constitution, he supports the Defense of Marriage Act. The Supreme Court ruled in 1967 in Loving v Virginia, the landmark case that ended anti-miscegenation laws nationwide, that marriage is a basic right of Man, and the Constitution holds states to honoring each other's contracts.

Those Libertarians who are inclined to support Ron Paul, especially those who believe he promotes personal freedoms, should pay close attention to the interview I linked as well as the video. The radio interview's rather long, about 45 minutes, but it is quite eye-opening.

People say Ron Paul is helping the party by getting the word "Libertarian" into the mainstream vocabulary, and with that point, I will agree. But in other ways, such as his followers, whether with his knowledge or not, calling up members of state Libertarian organizations and asking them to change their party affiliation to Republican and drawing off campaign contributions both of time and money, at least some of which would otherwise be going to Libertarian candidates running proudly under the Libertarian banner, his campaign is harming the party.

To Carolyn:

Do you really think 2 issues (and a couple menial positions) are enough reason to give up what may be America's only hope of electing a libertarian president.

If Libertarians like you do not vote for Ron Paul you have doomed us all to Hillary Clinton's wrath.

RP08!!!

Carolyn,
I have not changed my party affiliation. I dare you to name one Libertarian who has a chance of even getting into the presidential debates. Go ahead, I'm waiting.

I think Clark is running out of verbs.