OP: That's not the Truth.
Truth isn't really the issue here. This is more a matter of opinion meeting over-the-top rhetoric. Does Ron Paul really believe "nothing is worth fighting for"? That is BlackElk's inference from Mr. Paul's Iraq policy, but it is rooted in a fundamental assumption of bad faith.
This is the big problem in political discourse today. If I disagree with you, I must be evil. To hear from some uber-Republicans, if I think Bush mishandled the war because of an ideological blindness, I must be a traitor or a troll. I've gotten suspended for articulating that belief. It's alright, because I catch hell at school for articulating a pro-military viewpoint.
The thing is, Mr. Paul holds the viewpoint that we should leave Iraq. I believe that to be a disastrous policy, but do not doubt his good faith in holding it. I have no reason to believe otherwise.
Good post.
I'm befuddled and somewhat disappointed at your own support for Giuliani, but I understand your reasoning therefore. And I'm able to reject your conclusions, even strenuously, without attributing malign intent to you personally.
For that matter, speaking not only of fellow FReepers but also of the candidates themselves, I don't think it's necessary or appropriate to misrepresent the facts on Mr. Giuliani in any way: if he has cut taxes and reduced crime, it should be admitted that he has done so; if he has advocated gun control and legal partial-birth abortions, it should be admitted that he has done so. I'm content to let his record speak for itself, unbesmirched by fraudulent exaggeration or outright lies, and let each voter decide for himself whether or not they find him to be a fit candidate.