[farmer18th]

Ron Paul is no George Mason.

I think Ron Paul can distinguish between an attack on American soil (the war of 1812) and what he would call (but I don't call) a pre-emptive war in Iraq. Where Ron might be a little challenged is in understanding the danger of Barbary pirates. As a friend of the constitution, however, he's a lot closer to George Mason than any of the current crop, on either side of the aisle. The Constitution isn't just what a post FDR generation of conservatives say it is. It is what is written in the document. Even GWB would have been well advised to read it. You don't declare war without an act of Congress. It's pretty simple. On that front, Ron Paul is more conservative and constitutional than Romney, Bush, Rooty, Huckabee, Hunter, or anyone in the field--and to compare him to the socialist Dennis Kuckle-brain is unfair.

In other words, give him credit where credit is due, even if you wouldn't vote for him for president.

[AmericanVictory]

Between Yorktown and the War of 1812 none of the fighting was on American soil. In the “undeclared war” with France and the ongoing struggle with England all the fighting was at sea or overseas and then there was the war with Islamics, which is what the Barbary Pirates were, enslaving Christians, just as they still do. Ron Paul’s positions today indicate he would not have been effective during that crucial period.