Replies

But, he's for term limits isn't he? Or is he too good for term limits. Either way, I'm brin'in out the stick for him. It's the woodshed for that ol'boy. Liberal wind of the GOP...you don't have the manhood to say that to my face youn'un.

I didn't mean to imply that you're in the liberal wing of the party. Should have worded that better. You oppose him because of his dopey foreign policy stances and I agree with you 100% on that.

However, there is a contingent here on FR who suffer from cognitive disssonance when it comes to President Bush, and have despised Paul since before the WoT for disagreeing with the President so often. All of these people also have a hatred for Tom Tancredo who is right on Iraq.

And as stupid as Paul's stances on the WoT are, I challenge you to find a congressman who is better than him on domestic issues. It's also worth noting that Paul is not a complete scumbag like most politicians, which is refreshing. I would hope you'd also agree that it is going to be great having Paul in the primary debates making Giuliani and McCain look like the Constitutional idiots that they are.

Yes, he would be great having him on debates, etc. But the thing is that when the chips are down (as they are now when dealing with Pelosi,etc.) we need to stand firm. Ron, can't go around with a chip on his shoulder trying to make a point NOW. His fight is with congress regarding the WOT, not necessarily with the White House. He should have abstained, or just voted present.

As an aside, not a single politician in DC is straight. They are all looking for freebies or deals. I used to lobby there.