City of Roses
Ron Paul is certainly an interesting, unique candidate among the current GOP field for the 2008 nomination.
He won't get my vote, but nonetheless I do admire his traditionalist positioning on some issues that bravely put him at odds with the current party's establishment. For instance, I highly admire his non-interventionist position on foreign policy, and he has credibility as being the only GOP presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War Resolution in 2002, who nonetheless also has advocated a strong national defense, as his voting record from the Society of Americans for National Existence shows, and was the one who spearheaded the alternative to the Iraq war in promoting Letters of Marque and reprisal so that only the particular individuals responsible for these acts of terrorism on 9/11 and such would be battled, not whole countries.
Ron Paul also has a strong anti-illegal immigration record (100% score from the Federation for American Immigration Reform) and I also admire his positioning on industrial hemp legalization, which I still find it laughable it is illegal and is just the cash crop that can benefit our economy, health and productivity by huge proportions.
However, ultimately he wouldn't get my vote because I don't agree with his positionings on many domestic policies, especially his environmental record, his somewhat abysmal civil rights record and his failure to agree to promoting alternative energies.
Nonetheless, I'm glad some secondary candidates like him are stepping up to the fore and providing more flavors to the presidential debates and national dialogue, as both national parties have abandoned their traditional roots and have become entrenched in special interests and other superrficialities, and neither McCain, Romney or Giuliani strike me as true to the party's natural principles.
"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"