...and you base this on what? Objections to Paul here have been primarily: 1. His foreign policy with respect to trade is unrealistic and potentially destructive to the very free trade he wants (and I want). 2. A return to the Gold Standard would likely be devastatingly destructive in the modern economy. 3. His foreign policy with respect to the use of the military and his beliefs about the root causes of and solutions to terrorism are naive and could become dangerous (they're a lot like Carter's in the 1970s). I sure don't see a lot of posts objecting to Paul based on his domestic pro-freedom stance.