Paul actually looks poised to take Iowa, and his campaign is in it for the long haul.

As for the Gold Standard, he is very mis-understood on this point. Partially it is his own fault, but monetary policy is difficult to articulate in a sound-bite.

Pauls actual policy is to audit the Fed , and legalize competing currency. What does this mean? Mostly its a capital gains tax exemption for things designated as currency. Right now, for example, if you try to use gold or silver coins as currency - when you spend them, you actually have to pay capital gains tax. Sure, you can trade in a couple without major issues.. but any attempt to trade in large volumes of anything that is not USD and you can get really hammered by the govt if you dont do paperwork and pay capital gains tax.

The thought is not that the Fed will be abolished, but rather that over time the market will decide that other currencies are better and thus the Fed becomes less important and will eventually be phased out. But Paul is not for an immediate transition back to the "Gold Standard", it would rather be the market, over a long period of time, that chose what currency standard to use.

Also, though Paul believes in the sanctity of life - he thinks it should be a State level issue. He is against tax dollars funding abortions because he is against tax dollars funding plenty of things.

Regarding Paul bringing home dollars to his own district on spending bills he voted against, well of course he would do that. He has to do whats best for his district, if govt is going to tax and spend his districts money - its his job as he sees it to bring what he can of that money back to the people it was taken from. I wouldnt blame him for that, blame the rest of congress who voted yes. He votes no on bad spending whether it is likely to pass or not, but he has to be pragmatic to a degree regarding the best way to represent his district - which is his Constitutional duty.

I never found anything morally questionable about it in the slightest. At least noone can accuse him of doing to receive kickbacks or lobbying dollars like the congress critters who actually are crooks.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)