Why are basic mindless puppets so afraid of the Pauls?

1) Ron Paul won't get into office because he talks about things like dismantling the income tax entirely. It frightens most corporations, who get a lot of taxpayer subsidy, and for whom many externalities are paid for by income tax revenues, and it frightens most voters, even if they like to say they'd dismantle the income tax when April 15th is looming. Rand Paul won't win because he's a confusing mix of libertarian and socially conservative populist extremism. He's an embodiment of all that is contradictory in the Tea Party, and he is only likely to secure the Tea Party vote. Moderates will not vote for him.

2) What will you return to that wouldn't require fractional reserve banking? If you don't dismantle fractional reserve banking, the point of the gold standard is lost. And Paul certainly has advocated a literal gold standard in the past, so you can understand people's confusion. Frankly, I have no reason to believe he still doesn't support it.

3) I don't care if he hates gays or not. The idea of "letting states decide" is very un-libertarian. If I have a right to do something in California, I have that right in Maine. You can't vote my rights away just because we live in the same nation, so why should you be allowed to do so just because we live in the same state?

4) Prop 8 passed in November 2008. I don't know where you're getting this "Bill Clinton" stuff, but it's not accurate.

5) Dismantling protections for the poor (like minimum wages) without dismantling market distortions that favor large corporations (like patents, and limited liability) is exactly what it means to be in bed with large corporations, and has nothing to do with letting states decide.

6) I agree about the drones, the Patriot Act, and NDAA.

7) I agree about auditing the Fed.

9) No, the Pauls are not "immaculate." Their libertarianism is questionable. Here is a decent discussion and criticism of Ron Paul by right-libertarians (if you can spare an hour and a half):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZsOZO5hmk

Is it possible that 95 to 98 percent of the population don't understand how the world works but the small percentage that follow Ron/Rand do? Anything's possible but let me try to answer your question the way most Americans might.

Gold Standard: Money was invented as a medium for exchange. It works best when it has no intrinsic value because people typically won't hoard it. (They "put it to work" rather than hide it under their mattress.) This is why the entire world uses a fiat currency. Switzerland was the last to give up commodity-based currency (in 1995) and switch over. If money isn't going to be fiat (hypothecated) or as you put it, dreamt, it must be fixed to some sort of commodity. There are two problems with commodity-based currencies other than hoarding.

1. Fixed currency doesn't have the flexibility to manage a hugely successful, world changing surge or soften the blow of an economic crash. People die in unmitigated financial disasters. The poorest among us (third world residents) would be forced to pay the ultimate price for the folly of a wealthy few in Ron/Rands' fixed currency world.

2. When a currency is based on a commodity, the underlying commodity is subject to manipulation by private individuals or groups of individuals. Check out all the bank scares, depressions, panics, recessions, crashes that occurred during the "free banking" gold standard and bi-metal standard period from 1836 to 1913.

Racism: No, I don't think Ron/Rand are racists but what difference does it make if their policies unwittingly cause racism? Let's say a bar owner does have the right to refuse service to a black man. What bar owner in New Jersey would ever gain more customers by taking that action? If anything, he'd be boycotted. It's the free market at work. What about the bar owner in Jackson Mississippi? Would he lose business by refusing to serve blacks? Don't delude yourself. It would be Jim Crow all over again in the South. 50 years of desegregation down the drain but I guess that's a price the Pauls are willing to pay for the Libertarian version of Utopia.

Ron Paul hates gays: "Democrat God Bill Clinton passed Proposition 8"? Really? Most Libertarians I've met are at least reasonably well informed. I won't hold your ignorance on this subject against the entire party. The Pauls should be for gay marriage. They're libertarians posing as Republicans--part of the tea party freak show.

In bed with corporations: I don't believe that specifically but it should be noted that one of the two owners of the second richest private corporation in the country has the chairmanship of Cato Institute, the Libertarian think tank. What difference does it make if Ron/Rand are in bed with corporations if their libertarian deregulation policies (no minimum wage law) do that bidding for them? The Pauls would gut the social safety net too so people would have to work for $2.00 per hour if that's all that they could find. If the wage levels fall to $1.50 per hour, Foxconn could start building Apple factories here. Wow, no unemployment. So what if people need to work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week to get enough calories in their systems to show up for work again the next day?

Republicans courted Ayn Rand most of my adult life but the 2008 crash proved Objectivism doesn't really work because it can't protect long term benefit from short term gain. Even Alan Greenspan, her best pupil and life-long friend, kicked her to the curb. Unfortunately, due to their own brand of confirmation bias, Libertarians are ignoring these facts.

Audit the Fed: Answer this question for me please. When the Federal Reserve System makes a profit in a given year, where does that money go? The correct answer to that question dispels the conspiracy theories that circulate about our central bank. There are legitimate concerns that may warrant an audit but national security issues bar that from happening. Central banks around the world must keep their own council or they'll turn into subjects of derivatives gambling and lose control of their respective currencies. The Pauls would like that I think but millions upon millions would die. What the heck. Like the 20 - 40 million who died during Mao's "Great Leap Forward", that's the price of the Pauls' brand of Utopia and they're obviously willing to have the world pay it.

Mat 4:17 From that element Jesus began to evangelise, and to declare, Repent: for the dominion of heaven is handy. a million. "From that element..." 2. The message is "Repent". 3. the clarification is given: for the dominion of heaven is handy. Jesus' message replaced into rather particular as to who the recipient replaced into and to who it replaced into no longer Mat 10:5-8. cp Luk a million:80, Joh a million:11. many of the failings that Jesus taught have been under a then-modern-day Kingdom and its impression. That Kingdom replaced into got rid of. Matthew 21:40 3. If Paul had taught the "top comparable factor" as Jesus, he could be a liar.

Because Paul(s) is all hot air - the original empty suits with no solutions for anything except southern revisionism and hating Washington.

Your premise is false. No one is afraid of the Pauls.