Ron Paul is the best candidate for President in 2008

First of all, you should try separating your posts into paragraphs as it would make them easier to read. Now onward... I will concede my point about Paul's isolationist policies. I was unintentionally spinning the data, as he is not truly isolationist. However, he does take non-intervention a bit too far. The UN does not undermine United States authority. We entered Iraq without their permission, we often ignore any requests made by the World Court... Our participation in the UN is already lackluster and half-assed. The UN was not put in place to dictate what countries can and cannot do within their territory, but rather so that the world could come to a consensus easily. Where would we be without the UN? Would there be a Kyoto Protocol? Who knows? If the United States were to withdraw from the United Nations, the only effect it would have would be to remove our already negative voice from mostly positive proceedings. On the other hand, I take extreme issue with your statements about Sudan. What can we do about it? We can submit aid through the United Nations. The simple presence of troops would prevent the mass killings and slave raids that occur in the country. The belief that we cannot do anything to help the citizens in another country is incorrect. And we don't even have to invade them! Sure, one could argue that Sudan should be able to overthrow the dictatorial power themselves. The question isn't whether the negative leaders should be removed from power, but instead whether or not they should have to wait 20 years after thousands and thousands of deaths. Your argument when it comes to Universal Health Care is quite correct. Managed care has done little for this country. I for one, support universal health care for multiple reasons. Most citizens simply cannot afford health insurance, it is provided by their employer. Yet more and more companies are dropping employee health insurance, at a faster and faster rate. The number on uninsured is rising and the cost of private insurance is still rising. In reality, it comes down to whether you believe health of body is a right or a privilege. I believe that everyone should be given equal access to health at a high level of care. I do believe that private health insurance could work, but it would still not provide support to the entire nation. However, if we are analyzing Ron Paul as a candidate, it is not a positive attribute for him to leave this issue up in the air. I do not support leaving issues that are so important up to each individual state. That is why the federal government was created in the first place--no mater how large or small it should be. When it comes to the economy, Paul does have a strong understanding, but claiming it is stronger than Kucinich's is a bit much. To claim this and cite no evidence is a bit pointless. Ron Paul is a true conservative and is against taxes, but if you see the way our country has been wasting money for the past seven years, we have to be realistic. This country has an enormous, multi-trillion dollar debt and simply pulling out of foreign nations is not going to change this. The Iraq War is not even included in the nation deficit, yet it is sucking our resources out of us on even an hourly basis. If we are going to rid ourselves of this debt, we have to be realistic and realize that taxes are not going to kill us. They are for the good of the nation, and a higher income paired with more responsible spending can result in an a progressive nation that is moving towards energy independence while cutting outrageous military spending and creating a nation surplus. I am going to jump to your claims about energy and oil for the moment. To claim that the United States should not be regulating the drilling of oil is outright ridiculous. We have to realize that when it comes down to it, the oil companies are there for profit, not to provide a service to the people. They will continue to operate however they can to produce this profit and if it means drilling in Alaska and the Arctic, so be it. The federal regulations were instated to PREVENT pollution, not simply for show. Our country's policies are already extremely pro-oil and what we simply do not need is the deregulation of the oil industry. Sure, they may pollute on private property, but when it comes down to it, what individual could stand up to multi-billion dollar corporations? Especially if those multi-billion dollar corporations are making record profits as the price of oil continues to rise. In addition, to claim that the government has no right to regulate the auto industry is too much. American automakers produce cars at the cheapest level possible, meeting simply the lowest standard of gas consumption rates. Had the United States not begun regulating the consumption of oil, we would be drinking it like water. An example of this? There are no CAFE standards for Hummers. They are not tested by the government for consumption rates but get around 11 mpg. I realize that for a product to be built, there must be demand, but there will always be people who get their cars for looks and not for fuel efficiency. The deregulation of the auto industry would result in the same backlash that a deregulation of trade would. Ford vehicles are already known for falling apart due to bad assembly. The fact that we still use oil powered vehicles is a bit ridiculous as well, when we could be using electric vehicles. There is a car that runs on compressed air. Why aren't we all using these vehicles? The idea that American automakers still have the right to sell their product. However, if a product is deemed harmful to the environment and there are other viable options, what right does that product have to stay on the market? If we halted production of internal combustion motors we could conserve consumption of oil to such a degree that we would have time to finish research on alternative energy sources. I also still stand by my argument that Paul's stance on gun control is an absolute campaign killer. This country's murder rate is already high enough. We do not need people walking around with shotguns hidden beneath their coats, loaded and ready to shoot, if need be.