Originally Posted by filtherton

What you're forgetting, host, is that ron paul is the only person- besides the subset of the founding fathers whose writings can be interpreted posthumously as being in agreement with ron paul- who is in a position to correctly interpret the constitution. That some of his opinions run completely counter to any number of constitutional law experts only means that the constitutional law experts are wrong. Ron paul is not wrong. Economic stability is unimportant, because ron paul doesn't think that the constitution allows it. Equitable income distribution isn't worthwhile because ron paul doesn't think the constitution allows it.