We hear a lot of people say something along the lines of "I like 50% of what Ron has to say, but it's the other 50% that is SO crazy that I can't support him." A huge number of undecided voters are sympathetic to Ron, and we need to start tapping into that base by smoothing over his ideas that are often rejected.

The campaign should have Ron release a youtube video to clear up everything in his own words. It's very tough to give a strong statement in 60 seconds during a debate or a television interview to such complex issues. A youtube video would give Ron the chance to strongly articulate his stance on the issues without being interrupted. They can do a series of them where he talks for 5 minutes straight on each issue.

On Paul being an isolationist- State very clearly he's not an isolationist, but believes in a non-interventionist foreign policy. Meaning stop handing out billions of dollars in foreign aid that is being taken from the taxpayer, and wasting it overseas instead of having that money spent here at home. Point out that foreign aid doesn't even do any good, as the countries who have received aid for decades still live in poverty. Cutting off foreign aid would promote sovereignty. We can set a good example here in America of how to run a country, and they would be able to follow suit when they reach the same capitalistic conclusion that we did. Point out that we would object similar activity that we engage in overseas if it happened to us. If China came over here and tried installing their policies and culture on us we wouldn't welcome it, we would reject it outright. Mention that we shouldn't go to war unless it's a declared war authorized by the constitution, and that he voted for the Afghanistan war. Talk about how he wants to treat everybody like Canada in the sense that we would talk to them, trade with them, allow travel, etc. That's hardly isolationist. And hammer home that those who want sanctions on other countries that discourage talking, trading, and traveling are the true isolationists.

On the killing on Osama Bin Laden- Say we could have worked with Pakistan. We did it after the 1993 WTC bombing. We got Sheikh Mohammed by working with them. Why not do it again? We give them billions of dollars in aid already, we’re supposed to be friends, so why did we go behind their back during the raid? It’s no way to treat an ally. To counter the idea that Pakistan knew where he was, cite a couple of America’s most wanted suspects that hid in plain sight right here in the country for a number of years before being brought down. Our government wasn’t secretly harboring them. It’s a conspiracy theory with little merit. Note that Ron would have gone about the capture of Bin Laden differently right from the very start. He would have issued letters of marque & reprisal as authorized by constitution. A small team (similar to the size of Seal Team 6) would have focused their efforts directly on those responsible for the attacks. No killing innocent civilians, and no spending billions and billions of dollars. Attach a link to this video predicting that OBL was most likely sitting there in Pakistan back in 2003,s o he would have sent the team in the right direction early on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyHtT...eature=related

On the war on drugs- State that as a doctor and Christian you think that using drugs are a foolish health risk, and you personally detest the use of them. But you swore to uphold and defend the constitution as a congressman and would as president. The constitution has no mention of marijuana, cocaine, or any controlled substances. Therefore the federal government has no business regarding drugs. The tenth amendment allows the issues of drugs to be left to the states. Make it clear that Ron has no intention to legalize all drugs and make it the law of the land. Then hit the moral issue of drug prohibition. Does the government own your body, or do you? It’s wrong for the government to decide what you can and can’t do with your body. Why are people being locked up for non violent crimes? On the economic side of it talk about job creation. Dispensaries opening would curb unemployment. The billions of dollars spent annually on federal drug prohibition would go back to the taxpayers, giving back individuals more of their own money. Finally the overall efficiency. Talk about the failures of alcohol prohibition, and the failures of current prohibition that people simply ignore the laws and do what they want. Cite Portugal’s successful decriminalization.

Ron has mentioned a lot of these talking points already, but they have been scattered all over the place. In a lewrockwell article, in a speech on the house floor, in a chapter of a book, a tv interview, and a response during a debate. He needs to hit every angle he can on every “extreme” issue he has in one clear and direct spot. Youtube is an excellent forum to do so.