of the republicans, I would agree he's probably the best one. I actually read his book a few years ago. His crash and burn ideas kind of scare me. I don't think he's a nutcase, though.
I totally agree. He's the only candidate, in a long time, who I had to actively go looking for his religious views. He's definitely a christian and a pro-lifer, but I have yet to see a view he has that goes against the Constitution. I was paying attention to the anti-Ron propaganda and had my faith in him shaken a bit, but when I looked into the FULL information of his quotes, he's still on the Constitutional legality track. He understands where the federal government's powers end. He plans to take away a lot of things people have gotten used to, but, good and bad, he's right. The federal government is spending tax money illegally and that's tax money that shouldn't have been taken from us in the first place. In my eyes, he truly is a defender of the Constitution. He's trying to give states the right to make the laws they want, as defined in the Constitution. In some states, it'll suck for the residents, yes, but that's the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be. Each state decides for themselves. Separation of power is a crucial element in that founding document. Federal government's role is supposed to be absolutely minimal for the very reason that we left empire of the Church of England. Total rule by the few over the many is a bad way to go. Our Constitution says first, "We the people...".
It sounds like you are confusing the Constitution with the Articles of Confederation