Of his March, 2007 ‘No’ vote Paul said, “If one is unhappy with our progress in Iraq after four years of war, voting to de-fund the war makes sense. If one is unhappy with the manner in which we went to war, without a constitutional declaration, voting no makes equally good sense....

Here's a new approach: Congress should admit its mistake and repeal the authority wrongfully given to the executive branch in 2002. Repeal the congressional sanction and disavow presidential discretion in starting wars. Then start bringing our troops home.”

Another recent CNN poll showed that 54 percent of the 1,013 adults polled said they thought the government was trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. Only 34% said that the government should be doing more.

Conservatives are supposed to be in favor of smaller government and less spending. They are also supposed to be proponents of accountability and personal responsibility. However, during the Republican controlled congress, according to the Congressional Budget Office, discretionary spending grew from $649 billion in fiscal year 2001 to $968 billion in fiscal year 2005-- an increase of $319 billion! So, any real fiscal conservative should be in support of Mr. Paul who has never voted to raise taxes, never voted for an unbalanced budget and never voted to increase his own congressional paycheck! In fact, Dr. Paul doesn't participate in the congressional pension program and even gives back a portion of his congressional budget each year! While plenty of our representatives are treating themselves to indulgences on the tax-payer dollar-- Ron Paul doesn't even spend his entire government-allotted budget!

On abortion, Dr. Paul is with the majority yet again! According to a May 2007 CNN poll only 37% of the population believe abortion should be 'generally available'. Another 37% believe there should be 'stricter limits' on abortion. Ron Paul is against abortion and, in fact, was an obstetrician for many, many years, delivering thousands of babies in his career.

On immigration, Dr. Paul stands with us as well. Constituents flooded their Senator’s email inboxes and voicemails with angry messages describing their thoughts on the President’s, proposed, immigration bill so effectively last month that the bill that had once been thought of as a slam dunk could not pass in the Senate. Here's what he had to say about the recently-defeated, publicly-loathed, immigration bill...

"Today, we had good news from the US Senate-not exactly a normal occurrence-when the president's immigration bill went down in flames. Here we had a vastly expensive piece of legislation that would have made the immigration problem worse, and put more controls on the economy. So naturally, the entire establishment was behind it. It was a slam-dunk, or so they thought."

Election results cannot accurately reflect the preferences of the voters. If they could, Ron Paul would be our next president.

Many of the performers at the Live Earth events are some of the worlds biggest individual polluters. They live in huge, energy-wasting compounds, fly in private jets and make their livings off of shows at venues where they will burn more fossil fuel than most people do in a year. Not to worry though-- some (very few) of these massive polluters buy 'carbon offsets!' That way, they are not contributing to global warming, they're just not helping the problem either. 1 -1 = 0, right? So, being 'carbon neutral' helps to a degree of 0 then, right? Just checking...Thanks for nothing, guys!

Of course the intention of Live Earth was not to quell global warming in one day. The purpose was to promote the alarmist’s global warming message and to have all the little peons in the audience commit to ‘greener’ lives while the super-wealthy continue to indulge. Gore wants you to trade in your Explorer for a Prius but he, himself, has no intention of giving up his enormous, non-energy-efficient home with heated sidewalks or his numerous private flights. I sure hope Gore and his cronies aren’t trying to do one of those lead-by-example things. If they are-- most of us had better start polluting 100x more if we want to join the fight against global warming!

The bottom line is this. If any of these rockstars/politicians turned environmentalists really cared about the environment they would fly commercial more often, buy smaller, more-energy-efficient homes and vehicles and very simply: live greener lives themselves. But they don't. What they actually care about is money, publicity, fame and looking like they care. People like them need the spotlight and will say or do just about anything to get a piece of it. Global warming is a great platform from which to speak and be noticed. They think the rest of us are so dumb that they can fool us into seeing them as holier-than-thou environmentalists. Madonna's next best-selling album will, no doubt, be entitled something like, 'Madonna Loves Mother Earth.' Then she'll fly around promoting it leaving one of the heftiest carbon footprints the world has ever seen and everyone will run out and buy it in order to show how environmentally-aware they are-- Hmm, maybe most of us are idiots.

So, next time you’re at Home Depot make sure you stock up on florescent light bulbs. And don't forget to buy your offsets-- we wouldn’t want Madonna or any of her super-wealthy friends to have to start flying with the riff-raff, would we?