Paulus, I think Buchanan is suggesting what Peter Schiff was, that of the two major party candidates, Romney is the more likely to fall back on founding principles when his "corporatist" dealings bring about the nation's collapse. I detect a high degree of doubt in his statement that begins "If a President Romney held to that rule..." I think he's just trying to put up the best hope. All that being said, I'm voting for Johnson, and I would hope anyone who's researched him at all would agree that he's the best candidate. Certainly, if you're not in a swing state, I can't imagine why you would NOT vote for him. In a swing state, I can imagine why you wouldn't, but I still think you'd be wrong not to.

Are you suggesting AbigailAdams4Sure is a "Paultard," or that Stossel is? Stossel is very supportive of Ron Paul, and from your very intelligent pro-liberty comments above, I'd had thought you would be supportive of Ron Paul as well, at least on these economic issues. AbigailAdams4Sure seems to be decidedly more pro-regulation than Ron Paul or any of his supporters would be.

This is patently false. Banks and the financial sector in general are already heavily regulated. That's part of the problem. The comment below from Greenspan about banks regulating themselves is absurd (and he knew it). The banks were encouraged and even ordered to act against the interests of their customers by the very regulatory agencies you claim are required. They were encouraged to ignore their self-made criteria for loans and financial products and instead offer much more risky ones, with the implicit understanding that government would bail them out. Crony capitalism can't be fixed by government. Government is the cronies.

I submit no conservative can explain the answer to your question because the premise of your question is flawed. Which regulations were removed that would have prevented "this mess." The Republicans in Congress from 2001-2007 added 14,000 pages to the federal register (a 20% increase). How did "giving more money to the rich" help cause it? The Bush tax cuts affected everyone, rich or poor. Which social programs have been cut? Republicans added the Medicare Prescription Drug program, but I can think of no programs that were cut. Having said all that, none of those things "got us into this mess." This mess was caused by monetary expansion by the Fed providing incentives to mortgage lenders to make bad loans.

I notice that you haven't actually listed any of the supposed "pros." Romney could, and might, beat Obama, but if he continues even half of what Obama started, what good does that do us? We'll still be over the "fiscal cliff" due to the spending of the past 6 years long before Romney could bring the budget back into balance, even if he fully adopted the Ryan plan, which he isn't doing. So, yes, I think we can safely say B whether or not Romney wins.

Mr. Lepant, I have to disagree with you here. You're assuming that money is the only form of payment, but as stated in the article, many interns value the free-to-them education that comes with working in a professional environment. There is value in learning how successful people function. Internships are supposed to be like apprenticeships; both sides benefit at minimal expense to both. Above all else, however, it shouldn't be illegal to offer unpaid internships. These aren't slaves we're talking about; these would be free people making the conscious choice to accept a job in exchange for learning the workings of their chosen profession first-hand, rather than in exchange for money.

I can see from your statements that you aren't going to be persuaded to join his side, but as far as I know, his only deviation from current conservatism is in his foreign policy. Even if you believe that America should be the police of the world, surely you would concede that we can't afford to provide universal security indefinitely, anymore than we can afford to provide universal healthcare or welfare. We're broke. Ron Paul's "Plan to Restore America" is far and away the boldest budget proposal of any candidate, and I hope it is incorporated into the party platform in August. So, even if he's a RINO who's only in it for personal enrichment, he would be the best choice for the nation this year.

I assumed he was the person who wrote that particular response, as in: "I'm the President of my own life; I need to retake control of my nation." But I may have been misreading.

Did you read these sentences? "Contrary to what some Republicans say, we didn't have a free medical market before Obama came to power. We had a system that limited competition through occupational licensing, FDA rules and other government intrusions, while stimulating demand through tax-favored employer-based "insurance," Medicare and Medicaid." Isn't that (effectively) what you mean by healthcare being a "quasi governmental agency." I've never seen Stossel pull punches or be "loathe" to being honest and transparent. He even admits that the Brits and Canadians like their socialized medicine - something I've not seen from other conservatives or libertarians. He's not always right, but I thought this particular article was spot-on.

It's been a while since I've read it, but Tim LaHaye's book, "Jesus: Who is He?" points out that portions of the gospels have been found within (I think it was) 20 years of Jesus's death and resurrection, and that in all likelihood they were written before the oldest surviving copies would date them. I seem to recall that it also makes mention that records about his life are much closer to the time-frame than other generally accepted historical documents (copies of The Oddysey, for example) are to their time-frames. Records of Jesus's life have been dated to times that would coincide with the lifetimes of his followers or people who might be able to refute the contents of the documents, if necessary.