What is interesting is that he is so extreme on several issues, both left and right, I would think that he would poison the well on both sides. Instead, people on both sides are obviously willing to overlook certain hot button issues in favor of others. I think that is interesting given that in past elections, someone like him would not have gotten much traction, I think

I am intrigued by the way he has positioned himself and his popularity. I've been reading his website recently, and I think the the left supports him at their peril.

His scheme for across the board lower taxes and government reduction is completely urealistic, and I think would ultimately benefit the wealthy (a true republican idea) and further enable big business to take over and exploit and pollute the US. Similarly, his position on property rights, I think, is a veiled guise for dangerous lack of oversight

He wants the US out of the UN and the UN dissolved. This would be a foreign policy nightmare

He is a rabid anti-abortionist - This is a dealbreaker, for me.

...For separation of Church and State

At least, not in Iowa. But he has played this up pleanty in otherstates like California and Florida, and in the unlikely event that he wins the nomination, you can be sure that the people in Iowa (and Idaho and others) would hear about from Republican TV ads against him.

This has less to do with an assumption about intelligence, and more to do with the pervasive pandering that candidates can get away with, preaching this to these people, that to those people, and a lazy media that fails to connect the dots

Then, in stage two, Operation Phantom Blunder, we'll give all the bullets to the Marines, and all the guns to the Army, thus diversifyig our forces. The Army guys can throw the bullets at insurgents, while the Marines beat the Taliban over the head with their guns.

Or two, even. I always joke that our first son would come out pickled, not that my wife drank THAT much, but a glass a night, maybe more, maybe less.

He is extremely healthy and smart, and that is not just my opinion, but that of caregivers, friends, and random people on that street who can't help but take notice of him.

Our second son, just as much

On second thought, maybe pregnant women shouldn't breath so much.

Get a grip

But he has had an interesting life, and is a real renaissance man. His childhood autobiography "Uncle Tungsten" is a great read.

So do I.

Unfortunately, as usual, the candidates themselves, and the many factions of the democratic base, including most posters here, seem so intent on cutting down all who are not their own personal chosen candidate, that the eventual nominee will probably limp into second place...again.

I can respect, if not agree with, much of what Paul says, but his position on abortion is the dealbreaker. Sending this issue to the states is not acceptable.

Others may debate about when life begins, I don't care. The rights of a living, breathing woman will always trump that of the fetus, in my mind. The "fetus as life" argument is a red herring that the right uses to divide our nation and institute religion as government.

This is a civil rights issue, a human rights issue, and the woman is at the center, not the fetus.

Should we let the states decide if blacks can vote? If blacks can marry whites? If women can vote? No. And as the debate of Gay rights edges closer to the national stage, I think that this will be a national issue as well. As with slavery and gay rights, these things often state as states rights issues, but inevitably move to the national stage.

Many comments here, and in other threads in this vein, have revolved around HRC-bashing and how her nomination would bring out the republican base.

I am no Hilary booster, but this assertion is not supported by history.

The base, by which I think everyone means the social conservatives, are motivated more by who the republicans nominate. If it is a social conservative, they come out, if not, they stay home. Ron Paul, for example, will bring them out, but they won't vote for Rudy, so they won't vote (Unless a third party canididate comes on the scene)

Bush won, in part, by bringing them out. Of course, I use the word "won" in its loosest, most nominal meaning.