I take Ron Paul's strong second-place in the Republican New Hampshire primary last night as a very good thing for people like me who want more government respect for the First Amendment and an end to unconstitutional wars.

Yes, there are positions that Ron Paul holds which I strongly oppose - notably his call for a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion, which is inconsistent with libertarian philosophy and its view that the government should stay out of our lives.  And I'm not at all happy about the racist observations that appeared under his name in his newsletter two decades ago.

But there's  a lot to commend in Ron Paul.   He not only opposes undeclared wars but the NDAA signed into law by Obama and SOPA now under consideration in Congress.  He wants an end to the massive Federal anti-drug enforcement, which he correctly sees as an invasion of privacy.

And his Republican rivals, who share none of his virtues, share all of his serious political defects.  No Republican supports a woman's right to have complete control over her own body, and Gingrich and Santorum have both recently made racist statements.

Would I vote for Ron Paul over Barack Obama in a general election?  Not very likely.  But unlike in 2008, when I first supported Ron Paul for the GOP nomination and then withdrew that when I became aware of his 1990s newsletters,  I think our country would be much better served by an Obama vs. Ron Paul election than it would by Obama facing any other GOP candidate.