Thanks for the reply. Yes, I've been telling Ron Paul supporters that they should become Libertarians if Ron Paul doesn't win. Many, however, are thinking of "taking over" the GOP from the inside. I don't think that's a bad idea but I believe it's time for a third party. Most Libertarians aren't paleoconservatives, so they wouldn't mix well inside a reformed Republican Party. I think there's a big difference between traditional conservatives and libertarians.

1. I'm not anti-communist, I think communism is a flawed system. I'd still support free trade with a communist nation. Most paleocons HATE communists. It's like the "War on Terror" on communists with them.

2. paleocons tend to be anti-immigrant. I'm not.

3. most paleocons oppose Roe vs Wade because they're anti-abortion. I oppose it because I believe in state's rights, that's the way this country was constructed.

so yea, I think there's a big distinction to be made. Many Ron Paul supporters come from the Constitution Party, ever hear of them? They HATE homosexuals. They're like anti-war neocons lol.

I don't think of libertarians in terms of left and right, that's why I think the LP needs to come out as THE third party, not just a party that could steal votes away from a GOP contender. That's how the media marginalizes us.

libertarians / paleocons - I think there's a difference, do you? I think paleocons are the "old right," I don't see myself as being left or right, I'm fiscally responsible, socially tolerant.

I might be interested in running. How will that work?

Where will the convention be held? I'm probably only old enough for Congress.

I'm also interested in setting up, or joining, a county organization.

Writing? hm. I'm not exactly a columnist, but that sounds interesting

thanks