[tvtimeout]

So, Ron Paul is a pragmatist who understands that his best chance to bring about change is to work within the party that best reflects his set of beliefs. Yet, you support Ron Paul, ridicule the Republican Party, and claim that there are no differences between the two parties. Do you think that Ron Paul's decision to spend his political career as a member of the GOP was simply an arbitrary decision? Would he be equally as comfortable in the Democratic Party? Do you expect him to throw away his vote by abstaining or voting for a presidential candidate who is not a member of the Republican Party?

It sounds like you, like many other Ron Paul fanatics, are dismissing the good example that he has set for you.

That is why he continues to Ron so he can have a say at the Republican Convention. He has had great influence with the start of the Tea Party. However, the republicrats, hate this guy. They hide behind the idea of the Republican Party, they have hijacked what the party once stood for. Ron reminds the party of what it once was... I call out Republicrats including Hal Rodgers of the 5th Congressional District. We need term limits, but you would never get a Republicrat to agree to that concept even though Republicans are suppossed to be for limited government. Same points can be made about the military.

The Republican Primary is about this ideas coming to the front. Republicans have lost their way because they are set on the idea that Romney can beat Obama.

However, my question who said that any other canidate could not beat Obama...I know "we report you obey".