That's an easy one:

The Global Financial System

Ron Paul isn't a part of it, isn't completely ignorant of it, or both. It can be proved with a couple of Truth Tables:

To be "Electable" is a logical OR operation. You have to be either stupid, corrupt, or both:

Electable = Stupid | Corrupt (p OR q)

Ron Paul = !Stupid & !Corrupt (!p AND !q)

Work out the Truth Tables, and you'll see that:

Ron Paul = !Electable

Apply the same logic to all the rest of the candidates and you'll see that ever candidate mentioned in this story is, you guessed it, Electable!

Yes, because only the Government can stop kids from looking at porn...

I thank you. Your analysis of Ron Paul is both new and interesting. How refreshing it is to hear something so fresh and insightful. Congratulations, I think you are the first person in the history of the Internet to avoid the real issues and call Ron Paul and his supporters clever names instead. It's cool, the war and the empire are worth all of the murder and mayhem to you. You don't have to say it or admit to it, I know that you think it is true. Now all that is left is for you to make up some bullshit horror stories about how President Paul is going to turn the public schools over to Enron and Blackwater.

Yes, we all know that being the only candidate on both sides (that is getting over 1% of the vote and/or isn't a sellout to the warmongers anyway) that will put an end to American Imperialism, repeal the Partiot Act and the MCA, restore Habeas Corpus, do something about FISA, stop the Black Ops, end the slaughter and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, end the Drug War, stop rattling the saber at Iran, and do more to help the economy than worship Ben Bernanke is "bark at the moon crazy".

We all know that "not being crazy" means supporting and not ending endless wars based on lies and the selling off of America. The Dems didn't end the war and have no intention of doing it, those bombs and missiles aren't free and congress has the power of the purse. In fact, the war and the slaughtering of over 100,000 civilians is being spun as a "second tier" issue by the media. And we all know that "not being crazy" means advocating more programs we can't afford with tax money we don't have and will try to pay for by borrowing money from oppressive monarchies and communists.

If not being crazy means parroting the lines of the establishment and living in an unsustainable dream world while gilded platitudes save us all with big ideas and money we don't have, then I would rather bark at the moon.

I don't think so.

Saying that you are doing something "for the children" is one of the lowest forms of pandering and political fearmongering that has ever existed in the history of civilization.

Billo would sic the thought police on everyone in sight and turn the United States into a Surveillance Police State if he could, you know, "to protect the children".

how do we protect kids from the constant deluge of prurience, violence and cynicism that washes over them to sell products?

What does "the constant deluge of prurience, violence and cynicism that washes over them to sell products" have to do with someone watching Porno on the Internet? Because you can stop "the constant deluge of prurience, violence and cynicism that washes over them to sell products" by not watching TV and by maybe not letting your kids watch porn with you.

You could use that one method, you know, the one you seem to consider "quaint". The same method that has been used for tens of thousands of years to "protect kids from the constant deluge of prurience, violence and cynicism that washes over them" whenever they went outside. Is it cynical to think that parents are too irresponsible to properly raise their kids? Or that your kid's friends' parents are too irresponsible to not show your kids violence and porno? Or is it somehow cynical to think that parents don't need a nanny state raising their kids for them?

What is your solution? End all porn and send it to the black market? Spend billions of dollars on a tattletale or surveillance apparatus to accomplish something that can be done in about 10 minutes with freeware from the Internet? Spy on your friends, family, and neighbors? Or will you let the State do the spying for you?

The first amendment isn't there to be cherry picked by relativists.

apparently you got hung up on her anti-porn sentiments.

Afraid not. I just love calling out "progressives" for what they really are, big-government loving nanny statists and communitarians who want to use the coercive power of Government to control "everyone else's" behavior, making us good little sheep to the whims and "good, healthy, ideas" of whatever authoritarian leader happens to be on the throne telling us what to do.

Just take your "progressive" agenda to its logical conclusion already, like they used to, before "Eugenics" became a dirty word.

No need to hide behind that anonymous tag, tiger. You give yourself away too easily.

Frankly, speaking as a dep left winger, I am embarrassed by our culture.

Then go somewhere else? How about China? Big Government + Tightly Controlled Internet (censorship), sounds like it is right up your alley. Just don't be alarmed when the same apparatus that is used to silence the speech and images you don't like are also used to silence the speech and images you do like.

If you care that much and aren't savvy enough or can't keep your kids from watching porno in your own house, then throw your computer out the window. Are you saying that you can't properly raise your kids with the help of the nanny state and government coercion? If so, might as well follow the computer.