Winning Does Not Require Compromise

"He's been tossing hanging curve balls for two debates."
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/05/remove_ron_paul_from_the_debat.html

The guy...I don't get him. I take a keen interest in Rep. Paul for two reasons: he is a Libertarian and my mom lives in his district. I always tell my mom, who always told me she "votes for the person; not the party" (which, as I go on in life, I'm finding out is a mistake) and doesn't follow politics much, that she has a good congressman. I agree that the federal government should be much, much smaller than it is, and applauded him when he said "let's start with departments themselves" in response to Goler's invitation to improve upon Gov. Thompson's answer on cutting spending. And I also agree with him and libertarians' stance against the ongoing War on Drugs. What a waste of money and infringement on personal liberty! Didn't we learn anything from Prohibition.
But I have not noticed him say anything about that topic, nor should he at a GOP debate! That's one "hanging curve ball" he has held back (thus far, anyway). Why won't he hold the others back? THIS IS A FREAKING GOP DEBATE, RON! If you want to score points, talk about the things libertarians and conservatives agree on, like trade, the budget, personal responsibility, taxes, social security/entitlement reform, campaign-finance reform, etc. Every time I've seen a budget or spending question posed to him (granted, I have not yet made it all the way through the second debate), he always tries to explain in on foreign policy terms. If that's what he believes, fine. He's standing on principle. I admire ANYone, conservative or liberal, who does that. But you're not compromising that by sticking to, or more closely to, conservative/Republican talking points on which you agree. If these are some things you want to change about your party (nominally speaking, anyway), fine, but get elected first and work from the inside.
I would have zero problem whatsoever if a libertarian-leaning (acknowledging your description of him as just a straight-out libertarian) candidate was ever elected. It would at least, in my opinion, pull the country in a better direction. Hell, Rudy is close to that based on his socially liberal views and his professed interest in a flat tax, for example. But Congressman Paul's performances so far, by and large, are unfortunately helping me see the light on why libertarians are seen as somewhat kooky.