Ron Paul is grabbing a lot of attention in this campaign season, from his vocal opposition to the Iraq war to his $6 million one day fund raising blitz. In fact, there is a lot to admire about Ron Paul. He sticks to his principles, he appears honest, and he is impassioned. Those qualities draw the disillusioned among both Democrats and Republicans, and Independents looking for a candidate. However, while his strong speech regarding Iraq is attractive, it is his principles that need examination.
On Ron Paul's Congressional Website, he lists some of his stances and a handful of organizational affiliations:
He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values. Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending, and regulation, and used his House seat to actively promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels.
...
He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government and a return to constitutional principles.
...
He has been a distinguished counselor to the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and is widely quoted by scholars and writers in the fields of monetary policy, banking, and political economy. He has received many awards and honors during his career in Congress, from organizations such as the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, the Council for a Competitive Economy, Young Americans for Freedom, and countless others.
While Paul is a Republican, he is on the far libertarian end of that party. His stances on isolationism, small government and "pro-life," make him very attractive to the activist Christian Right (see also Christians for Ron Paul). Advocates for Self Government lists him as a Libertarian.
Let's take a brief look at the organizations which Paul honors with inclusion in his biographical sketch.
defends the market economy, private property, sound money, and peaceful international relations, while opposing government intervention as economically and socially destructive.
In short, the economic policy supported by Paul is an unfettered capitalism. Hence, his tantalizing stance of withdrawing the United States from NAFTA and the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is attractive to many across the political spectrum. However, Paul is not calling for "Fair Trade," but for the removal of all controls and oversights on international trade.
National Taxpayers Union (NTU) The National Taxpayers Union is a co-organization with the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF) sharing facilities, staff, and board (Wikipedia. The People for the American Way lists NTU under its Right Wing Organizations. Grover Norquist was an early (1981-83) Executive Director of NTU. Robert Dreyfus labeled Norquist as Field Marshall of the "Bush Plan," and he is the source of the infamous quote of wanting to shrink government "down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."
Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW and closely affiliates with Council for Citizens Against Government Waste) While interestingly featuring "citizens" in its title, the funding for the organization largely comes from major corporations (Merrill Lynch, Exxon, Phillip Morris, RJ Reynolds/Altria, etc). In other words, CAGW is yet another corporate interest masquerading as a "citizen's" organization. (Michael Smith wrote a nice expose about them.)
Council for a Competitive Economy (CCE) now the Competitive Enterprise Institute A Namebase.org search shows it highly linked to the Libertarian party, and to the right wing think tanks CATO Institute and the Reason Foundation. The CEI promotes itself as an independent think tank specializing in free enterprise, regulatory issues, and "ecology." CEI came under fire for misusing a climate scientist's work in an attempt to discredit global warming.
Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) YAF is a "conservative" youth organization, which is now primarily a conservative Libertarian organization. Here is a brief summation of the current organization from Wikipedia:
On college campuses, the independent YAF chapters have been involved in activities including rallies supporting the armed forces, advocacy for strict control of illegal immigration, demonstrations against affirmative action and protesting liberal campus speakers. YAF has also organized protests against legislation enacting anti-discrimination protection for transsexuals.
YAF's "Sharon Statement (from being adopted at Sharon. Connecticut) clearly embraces a small and limited government, a "free" market and deregulation.
Most people need to look at the philosophy behind to these issues. At first glance some of the things you mention seem odd, however, you need to understand the full intent and the backing philosophy.
I'll touch on a couple points:
Mises: Is one of the most inclusive economic philosophies. Need to understand that we haven't had "free markets" here in the US for a long time. What we have is a managed and governed market. This is one of the major causes of why we are in a financial crisis today. It's predictable.
The Income Tax: Taxing peoples income is the worst form of slavery. There is nothing wrong with reducing the size and scope of the Federal Government. In 2001 the Gov 'lost' 2.3 Trillion dollars. That equals almost 3 years of Income tax (at the time) simply lost. I'll have to check my references, but I think Clinton's admin 'lost' around 2 Trillion. The simple fact is the American People cannot afford to keep paying into a system where it ends up in the 'lost' category.
Christians: This is a mixed bag, because you have some Christians that want War (the bush/huckabee christians) and then you have the peaceful Christians that are very tolerant and supportive of Dr. Paul. The Warmongers are not.
I would argue that the one issue EVERYONE should be voting for this year is the Economy. Guess what? This issue is interlinked to most of the others. I have yet to see any other Candidate understand or really talk about the looming economic situation. It's much bigger than most people realize.
- National Debt: 9.1 Trillion - Future Obligations: 50+ Trillion - US Dollar: .67 vs. Euro (still falling) - Iraq/afghan war: Estimated full cost to date 3.5 Trillion - Mortgage Crisis: Will create the next depression, we've only just begun the meltdown. - Inflation: Shadow stats has it at 10% per year. - Manufacturing: most of our manufacturing base is overseas. - Jobs: 40% of the jobs created over the last 5 years were in the building industry which is now crashing. - Individual debt: average $9,000 credit card debt. - Wages: Are not rising - Housing equity/prices: Housing bubble areas are predicted to lose 50-60% of the house value. I'm already seeing it where I am.
These are just a handful of reasons why Ron Paul is the only choice for President. All of the safety nets and universal health care, social security, medicare, welfare, education, will all cease to exist unless something is done immediately. Not to mention the threat of WWIII and the next military arms race that is starting with Russia.
Wake up people!
by
Michael Twain (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 2:57:44 PM
This is a fair appraisal of Paul, who's not without his
attractive points, as the article acknowledges. In my opinion, he's not only the best of the Republican candidates (admittedly, not saying much) -- he's the only one who even deserves consideration. For that matter, he's better than most of the Dem candidates, as well. (This is also not saying much.)
It's troubling, though, that the Ron Paul campaign attracts a striking number of vigilante types & belligerent loudmouths, who are simply uninterested in -- or in furious denial about -- Paul's many negatives. The RP campaign has also attracted a number of naive so-called "progressives," just because Paul is against the war.
Many of these people are desperately searching for a candidate they can "believe in." They hear a few magic words (& indeed, Paul has some good words on certain subjects) -- and are then willing to close their eyes & ears to further information, & fling themselves into RP zealotry. Many RP supporters seem much worse than the candidate himself, but the fact that he attracts them is not without significance.
I regard the following as among Paul's many negatives. (He is admittedly somewhat difficult to generalize about, because his positions are nuanced & intricate, often based on reasoning that is the opposite of what his position might suggest.)
- opposes almost all social-spending programs, including Medicare, Social Security, student loans
- opposes government regulation of business
- is a devotee of "Austrian School" economists like von Mises & Hayek, the latter being the guru of Milton Friedman
- opposes US participation in and funding of the UN and the ICC
- opposes campaign finance reform
- against impeaching Bush & Cheney (though he supported Clinton's 1998 impeachment over sex, because "no president is above the law"!!)
- supported Reagan's "Star Wars" plan
- voted for the security fence on the Mexican border
- opposes free trade agreements but for the wrong reasons (they "impinge on US sovereignty")
-anti-choice
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1168 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:04:48 PM
I, too, missed the author's point...where is it? We need a non-frat daddy in the white house. I don't care about party affiliation....Like most americans, I want out of foreign policy and I want the debt to be paid off. Screw the patriot act!!! We supporters just need to get the word out. Every person I tell about ron paul becomes a supporter after they read up on him!!!!
by
aaron benfield (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:05:27 PM
This article does not make sense. I don't understand how the author concludes that Ron Paul is a one issue candidate.
All you have to do is watch Ron Paul speak during an interview or a rally and see that there are dozens of problems going on in the country that Ron Paul acknowledges and addresses with real solutions.
Among the issues that Ron Paul talks about are:
1. Excessive federal spending
2. Illegal, unncecessary, and counterproductive foreign wars which must stop.
3. Eliminating "foreign aid" to foreign governments.
4. Restoring the 4th Amendment and Habeas Corpus and repealing the Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act of 2006.
5. Ending the federal government interference with states' medical marijuana laws.
6. Bringing competition to monopoly fiat money printed out of thin air by the federal reserve.
7. Reducing the incentives the federal government grants to illegal immigrants.
8. Letting young people voluntarily opt out of the Social Security tax and system.
9. Reducing the motivation for suicide terrorists by ending our military occupation of 130 countries in 700 foreign bases.
I could go on and on. Ron Paul's campaign addresses dozens and dozens of important issues we face. To say that Ron Paul is a "one-issue candidate" is absurd.
To learn about Ron Paul's positions, Google "Ron Paul 2008" or YouTube "Ron Paul"
by
Jeff Schwartz (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:17:25 PM
and one that will go directly over the heads of most of Paul's supporters. These come in several shades;
avowed libertarians across that spectrum who are so blind to the damage that such a philosophy will wreak upon the social contract or who simply care not a fig for the needy. Especially the Ayn Rand variety.....get the governments hand out of MY pocket but continue to build roads, fund fire depts and police services, just do it with someone elses money. Oh and the poor, well screw them none of them live in MY neighborhood. Public schools? we dont need no stinking public schools....of course those of us who have actually studied the progress of this nation understand how valuable was the public schools system in providing a melting pot that put forth decent hard working Americans..oh well, screw them too. Everyone knows, after all, that unfettered capitalism will bring peace, prosperity and good times......errr.
Progressives who latch on to Pauls ability to sound so very sincere and his unwavering opposition to the Iraq War and simply look no further into the dark and dismal depths of his politics. Paul flourishes ( sort of) simply because there is noone who stands out among legitimate candidates. I cant wait for the ned of the primaries so all these Paulistas currently infesting these pages can go back to sitting on park benches muttering to themselves. Those that dont bomb abortion clinics anyway.....
Thanks, Ms. Wolf for a perceptive and finely written article , sadly one that will be ignored by the Paulistas...their choice of course.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:41:28 PM
Lookie here....no one is perfect. But come on. I don't like some of his views (i.e. pro-life), but I don't think you understand him all that well. He is for states rights and a lesser federal government. He believes states should choose their drug, abortion, etc laws....not the federal government. You sound like you are against the guy, but don't know a thing about him. My dad is a die-hard republican/conservative in Texas. He voted for Bush. I told him to look at ron paul...and now he loves the guy...Paul will get my dad's vote. I encourage you to look more into his what this guy is all about. But hey, if you are a pro-israel frat-daddy you probably won't like this guy.
by
aaron benfield (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:54:10 PM
Ok, Ardee, I read the Rowan Wolf piece & do not find that it accomplishes the implied goal she set out for herself -- i.e., to demonstrate that Paul is not a good choice. As one example, Wolf notes that the Mises Institute "defends the market economy, private property, sound money, and peaceful international relations". Now is that supposed to be a condemnation? From my perspective that is exactly where I want my president to be. In case you missed it, various communities have been abusing the eminent domain concept & have been forcibly evicting home-owners so that businesses could build on the stolen land. That is but one example of government excesses that Paul would work to stop.
The political reality is that Paul, if elected, will not have carte blanche to implement all of his ideas. He will have to work with Congress. One reason I support Paul is that he will work to limit government & will act as a brake on the runaway spending. The other candidates barely give lip-service to this notion.
If you know of any Paul supporters --or anyone else-- who bombs abortion clinics, please turn them into the law. As much as Paul is opposed to abortion, I'm sure he would not want such deeds to go unpunished.
by
Eric Wruck (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:59:47 PM
I am a responsible person. All who know me know they can come to me in any time of need, and I will be there for them.
I don't pass by the homeless when I see them. I offer some of whatever I have. I do volunteer work and conduct a support group for the growing numbers of middle class Americans who are going through foreclosure and bankruptcy.
And although it is not possible for me to get pregnant, being a man, it's no one's business what I and an intimate partner might decide to do about a pregnancy we created. I am pro choice. Vehemently.
Yet I also vehemently support Ron Paul, and I will tell you exactly why.
This nation was hijacked in a bloodless coup on the night of December 23, 1913. In case you're not up on your history, that was the night a thinly populated congress handed over the keys to our freedom to a cartel of international banks that is now known as the federal reserve.
The plight of the poor and disadvantaged that is so important to the true progressive can be solved in a few simple moves. Restoration of the gold standard to stop inflation, abolishment of the fed to get control of the issuance of our national currency, and closing the IRS and eradicating the economic slavery it enforces.
Then and only then, will the American dream be revitalized, and then the poor and disadvantaged will have more than the fish for a day handout government programs "provide". They will have a fair chance to improve the quality of their own lives in a free system, not the rigged game we all play in now.
Dr. Paul is the only candidate who understands this fundamental economic reality.
This reality enables the barest fraction of a percentage of the population to control almost all of the wealth, and everything else that matters. Closing down the system that feeds them will free up the vast resources and wealth of this nation so that all free men will have the one thing they want above all else. A CHANCE.
So before you continue your mindless, uninformed diatribe against Ron Paul and his supporters, I ask you to pause. Look among the others who aspire to lead us, and you tell me, who will look past the smoke to the cause of the fire, and put the damn thing out? Who?
You are crapping all over maybe the last chance we'll have to have our own country. PLEASE STOP. Go read Griffin's The Creature of Jekyll Island while you're being quiet, and then, when you really understand the problem, you can stop being a part of it, and become part of the solution.
by
Bob Tracey (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 41 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 4:51:20 PM
Nope not a chance, just like my chances of supporting a heartless and so very unAmerican political philosophy like Libertarianism. But thanks for remaining diatribe free in your response...oops , well you tried.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 7:15:39 AM
ardee D. has absolutely no idea of what he/she speaks. He/she makes grandiose statements without providing so much as a scintilla of supporting evidence.
Those of you old enough to remember the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 will recall that the government worshiping socialists (progressives) claimed that its passage would cause riots in the streets and mountains of starving babies. Such never occurred.
Ardee D., please do the world a favor and educate yourself. Until you do, please refrain from voting.
by
Mark Bennett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 11:35:53 AM
for this demonstration of your own unfitness to engage in adult debate. That you havent done the research on libertarianism, or on Paul's voting record is your own damn fault, or perhaps your genes are the real culprit.
Either way please perform an anatomically impossible task upon yourself and cease telling people what do or not to do. That you are impossibly stupid is obvious, that your rudenss and sophomoric crap speaks volumes abut you and belittles your own political position may not be known to you but I assure you it wont escape others.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 1:25:52 PM
I think based on his OpEd, the author forgot the rest of his title: Ron Paul: Not a Good Choice -- but rather the ONLY real choice!
For the person who posted: Is Ron Paul a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing? This is a biblical concept from Matthew chapter 7. How do you know if someone is a wolf in sheep's clothing? By their fruits.
All politicians SAY the right thing, but does their voting record reveal them to be truthful? Only Ron Paul's voting record and writings verify that he is indeed authentic. Americans need to examine the fruits of their words.
For the person who posted the supposed negatives of Ron Paul -- these are actually the positives! If more people were educated on our nation's founding and the unchanging principles that underlie our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, we would not be such a nation divided. I think liberals and neocon followers aren't stupid, they are just operating with limited information. The absense of the whole truth makes their conclusions seem totally logical to them. That is why many cannot get their head around this Ron Paul Revolution.
A true study of history and government reveals that all those things listed that Ron Paul is against is the reason that our nation is in a moral and economic decline.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, only a small irate minority keen on setting brushfires of liberty in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams
"Every generation needs a new revolution" Thomas Jefferson
by
Liberty in Law (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 9 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 3:44:08 PM
How many poorly written and unsubstantive opinion pieces am I going to have to suffer through. These vacuous inane attempts at dissuading readers, who coincindentally are probably Paulites, are very tiresome and lacklustering. The only reason people write about Ron Paul is for hits, because it is evident these intellectual lilliputians have not put a scintilla of effort at elucidating why a huge amount of DEBT caused by government spending and war is GOOD and ACCEPTABLE. Ron Paul rocks.
by
Rich Lake (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 4:13:13 PM
We the people are too stupid to know what to do with our own money and our own lives. And we're too selfish to help people if they need it (we might decide only to help those who we think deserve it or something, like our own children or parents<gasp>). And some of us might become well off without getting permission first.
We need these superior beings of the elite ruling class to tell us what to do and to take control of all of our money, spend it on what they think we need, and maybe let us keep half of it.
Ron Paul must be a bad choice because he is stirring up the natives (us).
He is against outlawing smoking, too. What will they think of next, letting people go to the bathroom without raising their hand and asking first?
Give me a break, please!
by
John Danforth (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 93 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 4:24:36 PM
And that one issue is the Iraq war, everything else should wait, you cannot do everything at once anyway. Not to mention the next president will have to try to oversee the recession/depression of the american economy, the falling strength of the dollar and numerous other problems. I do not see ANY other candidate even talking about any of it. It's like they're in denial or something, or don't want to wake up the sheeple.
by
ibrahim turner (25 articles, 31 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 176 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 4:58:30 PM
the only people saying ROn Paul is no good ,are people with an agenda .Hes the only candidate that is good
among the other douche bags and warmongers he stands out like a sore thumb.
HE doesn't beg to Israel for approval nor does he stoop to cheap tricks
Americans you are faced with dire consequences if he is not elected there is a depression coming your going to lose it all your pensions 401k,welfare state all will be gone unless you act now.
If on the other hand you choose to have a country that has lost it's constitution and has lost it's freedom along with all the safety nets and even control of their country to treaties like spp/Nwo/NAU then vote for one of the douche bags thats douche with a capital D
Ron paul's record stands before the AMerican people the other prefer you do not know their records because they are all war mongers and Douche bags.
America the ball is in your court
its the Constitution or Satan's pit your choice
Make no mistake America is on the brink of collpase though you would not know it by reading American Media outlets
except this one and a few others
by
dave stanley (5 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 286 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 5:19:52 PM
I am vehemently anti-libertarian. At the end of the day, libertarianism supports unfettered capitalism - which these days means unfettered corporatism. Libertarianism is "every man for himself" which does not work well in a nation - or a community.
On its surface, it is an attractive ideology (in the U.S.) because it appeals to the myth of the rugged individualist, and the myth of capitalism, and the myth of social class.
The well worn myths are that capitalist class is premised upon everyone having an "equal" chance and that individuals rise or fall based upon their own efforts and abilities. Such is not the case, and never has been the case. Concentration of power via wealth is main function of capitalism. It is a doctrine of creating inequality - not equality. The ongoing mergers in media and finance are prime examples of removing the controls on corporations. As is the power that they hold in our government - also due to "deregulating: controls on their participation in policy and influence. No, I am not a "communist" or "socialist."
The Bush administration (which I imagine at least some of you have problems with) shares part of the "unfettered capitalism" ideal. Certainly they share it as far as deregulating and privatizing everything that they can. Neo-conservative economics and Libertarian economics share this. That is why both receive such large amounts of corporate support, and why Ron Paul is no threat to the corporations.
If you want to see unfettered capitalism (capitalism with no controls) then look to Iraq. This was the first initiative put in play. Namely to transfer all public/government controlled resources and industry into private (corporate) hands. That has remained one of the "sticking points" of the Iraqi government's lack of "progress" (from a U.S. perspective) as they have refused to ratify the transfer of the public oil resources to the highly skewed PSAs (profit sharing agreements).
Another glaring aspect of this is the use of mercenary forces in Iraq who are not accountable to either Iraqi law or U.S. law. Welcome "deregulated" corporations forming private armies. Private armies which tax payers must finance,<b>and</b> one of those few functions of government that libertarians support - defense. If war profiteering is an issue for anyone, then deregulated, uncontrolled corporatism should be an issue for you as well.
Libertarians (as mentioned by one of the commenters) do not support public funding of the social net - be that social security, public education, or national infrastructure. If we want to move to privatization, then prepare for every road and bridge to be for pay use only. No regulation of air or environmental quality. No emergency response system (which has been gutted and increasingly privatized under Bush). No public fire or police departments - pay for your own protection ... which was a sad lesson learned in the great Chicago fire.
Throw out the public schools - and with them broad education of the populace. Hey who cares if we have a globally competitive workforce anyway? Every man for himself right? If you can't afford an education for yourself or your children well that's tough and not <b>my</b> problem. However, we do not "compete" globally as individuals - we compete as workforces.
While there is a prevalent philosophy that the enemy of my enemy is my friend (a philosophy I do not share), it is instructive to look at who is attracted to Ron Paul's positions (and who Ron Paul associated himself with). His most vehement supporters seem to be from the far right. His more recent support comes from all over and is largely based in a single issue (out of Iraq, pro-life, anti-immigration) though that issue varies from block to block.
I do not doubt Ron Paul's honesty or integrity. He has a firm track record on holding to his values. However, I find those values and principles more than problematic. I respect him for his integrity, but I cannot agree with his positions.
Further, if Paul did become President, he would do so in a United States that is far down the road of corporatism. A President does not rule alone (even Bush has had the largely willing compliance and support of Congress), and Paul would step into a morass that in part follows his desired direction (corporatism, unfettered capitalism, deregulation, dismantling of much of the government), and in part does not (the neo-cons are decidedly imperialists and Ron Paul is not). Since the former is now heavily embedded and profiting from the latter, Paul might well be hamstrung by his own "free market" "small government" agenda.
I have not heard anyone ask Ron Paul how he would address this dilemma, nor have I heard him voluntarily speak about it.
I do not believe that we need more capitalism and deregulated markets: sub-prime mortgage mess anyone, "voluntary" pollution controls anyone? I do not believe that we just need more of the same that is crumbling under our feet.
by
Rowan Wolf (72 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 96 comments)
on Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 6:18:34 PM
1) How unfettered capitalism played out in Iraq doesn't really approximate how it would play out here, because our laws and Constitution are different from what they were working with. Obviously, if a corporation here raised an army and started threatening people, they would go to jail for attempted manslaughter or whatever the case may be. We're not rallying for anarchy here.
2) I wish that those of you who rail against regulation would also grant the downside of it: limited access to goods and services that collusion between corporations and government have restricted; choked-back potential for progress when new and improved products and services are overregulated and can't compete, etc. Please grant that neither system is a panacea.
3) You wrote: "If you can't afford an education for yourself or your children well that's tough and not my problem." To have a good education really isn't as difficult or expensive as people think. Consider the famous autodidacts who learned to read and "cipher" with the most rudimentary materials: Lincoln, for instance, and Booker T. Washington, and countless others. The one-room schoolhouse was not well-funded according to today's standards and yet it commonly produced scholars who, in the eighth grade, would put our college grads to shame.
I homeschool my children. I taught my oldest son to read with a book that cost me $15. That's all it cost me. He just turned 8 and reads at an 8th grade level. Because he loves to read, he teaches himself an awful lot. He is smart and set to excel.
Consider that education doesn't have to be expensive or public to be successful.
by
Ingrid (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 118 comments)
on Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 7:48:16 AM
