"If Thomas Jefferson were alive today, would you vote for him?"

No, he would be too old for me. About 264 years old. I'd go for James Madison at a peachy 256 years old.

And ahead of his time... Just like Ron Paul may be.

With that said, I believe Dr. Paul has to be more specific about what he would do to make America better, even if what he would propose may be painful, he needs to lay it out and let the chips fall where they may.

The American can take if, they know what you are saying is the truth. It's a lot better than sugar coating what's going on like all the rest of the candidates are doing.

Fortunately Paul comes without the slave owning baggage.

(As for those nasty newsletters, they are so different in tone and style from all of Paul's numerous columns and books that they obviously were not written by him.)

I may be a vegetarian, but I'll defend to the death my right to eat pork!

running for president today, far fewer than for Ron Paul. Where would the interest of the body politic lie if he were included in any of the so-called "debates", regardless of party affiliation? Would he be asked about his views on the wisdom of monetary policy being placed under the exclusive control of a private central bank with the unlimited power of inflation or would he be asked about his personal views regarding the ownership of slaves? Would someone care to ask him about the proper limits of a federal judiciary in deciding, and sometimes changing, the meanings of certain clauses in the Constitution, or would they be more interested in asking him whether or not he fathered a child outside of wedlock and with one of his slaves? How would his views on foreign policy (friends with all, permanent alliances with none) fair alongside the interventionist inclinations of his opponents in the face of today's great bugaboo: terrorism, again regardless of party affiliation? Given the current general mindset present in so-called modern day politics, substantive issues and critical evaluation of proposed policies, including their effect on future generations, would be among the last things to receive any consideration or even discussion. I think he would be lucky to get through a single primary without being tarred and feathered or run out of town on a rail.

Well, they might vote for Jefferson...but many would spend hours on end investing energy complaining, whining, disparaging, about how Jefferson did not do the constitution right, or bills of rights correctly, or how he should have done a better job of spending when he founded the University of Virginia.

good question. He're a really good article about that question. Everyone should read this, especially liberals...

http://www.lewrockwell.co...

I'd vote for Ron Paul!

would he be tough on terror?

-------------------------------
"Make fun, buddy" ~ Ron Paul to Mitt Romney (on behalf of the American people who are tired of being stolen from and lied to) at fauxnewz debate-Jan 10, 2008
(google Murray Sabrin)

Absolutely. He is my favorite president.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -- Jefferson

I can see an effective TV commercial starting out like that. Great idea.