The biggest irony here is that most people on this list (and I'm open to correction on this point, but I'm speaking from my general sense of things) are pro-war. They completely endorse and approve of the idea that we should have a military presence all around the globe, which should stand ready to kill anyone the President points at (WITHOUT a congressional declaration of war) without hesitation, upon being offer the flimsiest of excuses.
Most people on this list would be completely at ease with unleashing the dogs of war upon businessmen and other property owners who engage in consensual capitalistic acts with tan-skinned, non-english speaking people who haven't asked for permission from some pencil pushing bureaucrat to be able to mow a lawn, re-roof a house, or pick some lettuce.
Its most of the people on this list that are just chomping at the bit to use the State to impose their values upon others.
At least I'm using words and not guns, like the State does.
The problem with this little piece is that is assumes that all property in the US is owned collectively, by "us"...to which "we" can govern how its used.
What do you call that kind of system?
Keep on rockin, Comrade!
If you buy that perpetual war and empire are conservative values (they're not)... then I would challenge you to find one issue on which Ron Paul is less conservative than any of the other main candidates.
I invite our new colleague Jason to elaborate on his accusation that conservative SOB-ers have displayed communistic / socialistic / authoritarian tendencies. Hopefully he can do it passionately and persuasively ... and without empty rhetorical grandstanding and ad hominem attacks.