I think Ron Paul would agree.
The GOP is nervous over Paul's influence, but it's the libertarian philosophy that scares them the most. Limited government is anathema to politicians whose entire career is dependent on a powerful State and voter dependence. Many Americans are frightened of the libertarian message regarding limits because they plan to use the State machine as their path to a permanent job. There's a clamor to push resolution of all social ills onto the federal government, for higher taxes on the rich, so that government can grow and invest in "infrastructure", green energy, gretaer education opportunities. Most Republicans talk about cutting spending and reducing the size and scope of government, but history shows that when in power, Republicans increase the power and scope and size of government -- even Reagan increased the power and scope and size of government.
The libertarian message is that government must be reduced in power, cost and scope. The size should be in relation to the actual need for police, courts and military. The private sector must be allowed to deal with social problems, even if the methods are varied and the processes become messy and multi-faceted. The organic creation of assistance to help those in true need can only come about if government power is limited and the free market actually arises free from government control.
Ron Paul has brought this message to young people across America, and his son, Rand, is in a position to carry his father's message to even more people in the coming years. But this isn't about the Pauls -- it's about liberal principles that existed in the beginning of America. Although there were semi-repressed statists such as Alexander Hamilton who insisted on a Merchant State design, and although Jefferson eventually failed to uphold the principle of non-intervention overseas, the principles of liberalism which grew from the Enlightenment were infused in the mindset of many Americans, and it was the power of liberal principles which went against the few over the many and released the power of the many. There have been periodic attempts to squash classical liberalism, what is now called libertarianism, but it still lives. I thank Ron Paul for his efforts. If Romney doesn't advance on Paul's influence with young people and independents who favor economic liberty and non-intervention overseas, then the Republican Party is once again complicit in American decline. If both parties refuse to give back the power they've seized, then Americans in the private sector must send a loud message that government no longer has our consent to govern. It's the only way to avoid collapse, if representatives won't represent.
If, however, the Republic no longer means anything, and if majority rule determines our future, and if the majority has decided to exploit the producers and live off the productive labor of others, then it's over. Libertarianism is our way out, and although many are recognizing the need for limits and economic freedom, there are still way too few to make a huge difference. It will take someone like Romney rising to the occasion and going against the status quo -- not to give us answers, but to help get government out of the way.