unbelievable the ignorance of some of these posters. He is always been a very strong advocate of military neutrality and is always critisizing the American forgein policy. Hexxor if you knew anything about him you would know he's been a huge critic of "defense" spending, and has said on numerous occasions that he would cut it first before you deny poor people who have become dependant on the system the things that they were promised to them.

I'm a little miffed by this...... I believe this is a major PR mistake by the Ron Paul campaign, I tried to contact and explain, turns out if you are not American they don't need opinions or advice as such. every time Ron Paul says those lines, those words, he should , but does not (for some reason???) include IN the sentence the fact that under a system with his reforms the NEED for universal health care would be negligible and the little that would need it could easily be catered for. He needs to (but does not) explain that under a system with effective competition in the market: Pharmaceu ticals would be a fraction of the price. Cost to run hospitals would be a fraction with AMPLE funding. The quality of health care also would drastically rise. So as he is technically correct, it is not a Right, it is a Need , and these needs would easily be afforded under a system where Corporate Monopolies do not take all of the wealth through profiteering and simple lack of competition. what America was heading for was Communism with none of the little benefits, what the US Administration is trying to do is ready the people for communism, and give the little benefits, of course this is far more attractive to the obvious alternative result. Ron Paul leaves out a very large part of his + argument. There is plenty of wealth in the vast US system, it currently goes to a few ‘Commissars‘ that head the Corporate monopolies. These include the Banking sector and Pharmaceuticals.

There are a good many misconceptions here. For 30 years Dr. Paul has voted AGAINST every military adventure except granting the president the right to pursue the 911 terrorists. Dr. Paul is a gynecologist who does NOT accept Medicare and Medicaid money the government stole from someone else, preferring instead to offer personal credit, discounted or even free services. Dr. Paul, like most US Citizens, believes strongly in voluntary charity, but abhors theft at gun point in the name of charity. No citizenry has demonstrated a greater capacity for voluntary giving than those of the USA. Unlike most US politicians, Dr. Paul doesn't change his positions depending on who he's talking to. He is completely consistent whether his views are ridiculed or praised by socialists, Democrats or Republicans. A benefit of honesty is that you don't have to make up new positions depending on which way the wind blows. My personal opinion is that people who can justify theft as an ethical way to fulfill some noble goal, would also commit murder to achieve the same end. If you don't believe that the US government will kill you in order to take money you earned, but that it claims you owe, try to resist the IRS when it comes to confiscate your property for non-payment. If you forcefully defend your resistance, you will be summarily killed.