He would need the support of 2/3 of each house of Congress and 3/4 of the states to accomplish that.

Let’s be realistic here, okay ?

It happens because “Paulestinians” don’t really have any other interests besides Ron Paul and I suspect most of them couldn’t converse rationally on any other topic on this site. :)

Despite all exuberant excitement about RP by some posters. I would really like to see the man reject matching funds and really go out and raise that money from real supporters. Supporters better be willing to open up their wallets and pocketbooks. Instead of urging RP to accept federal funds, they should look within.

It’s the libertarian way to go, and it would be a principled rejection of federal manipulation of its own elections. I think PROCESS issues are really important to many of Ron Paul supporters. Accepting federal match would be turning against those supporters, in an cynical attempt to win.

I know I would stop sending RP money if he accepted federal funds. Because then I would have already given money to him through federal taxes. He’d become part of the IRS problem.

Leave the decision re matching funds to RP.

If you support him; then turn off your computer, get off your butts, and start talking to people one-on-one. Canvass your neighborhood with voter (re)registration forms and other stuff to get your neighborhood on the bandwagon. Buy materials/slimjims from the ronpaul2008.com site.
Talk to voters and potential voters.

Don’t just waste your time preaching – no forget that – arguing – with the choir. The only result of that is that you will give yourself an opportunity to whine/bitch/moan about being a loser. Yet again.

Of course, if you don’t support RP; then carry on. Never mind.

Read about it here:

http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-New-Voting-Rules-100307.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy

If by “taking it back” you’re saying it should be returned to the taxpayers that it came from, then you’re correct. If you mean, however, that it should go to whoever can grab it first, that’s theft.

George Will indicated a different voting pattern for Paul than you’re suggesting

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17200494/site/newsweek/

No he doesn’t vote against “every bill.” He votes against those that he thinks the Constitution doesn’t authorize. As long as the stealing is permitted by the Constitution he supports it.

No, “taking money from the government is okay as long as it’s used for libertarian purposes,” but rather taking money from government is ok no matter what the purpose. Why should the government be allowed to take wealth from the private sector and spend it on what IT thinks it should be spent on? There is nothing libertarian about allowing that to happen. That’s centralized planning. The most libertarian thing to do is to not let it be taken in the first place, but if it is taken, then to take it back.

As to entitlements for Paul’s district, you neglected to mention that he also votes against every bill that includes them…assuming you bothered to notice.