>He gets support from conservatives because he’s purposely mislabeled himself, and his minions have perpetrated the myth.
Ah yes, the hoary old myth of dumb conservatives getting led astray by packaging and labels. Are you sure you are a conservative?
The GOP as a whole does not represent my values, and the typical GOP officeholder is indistinguishable to me from most Democrats. OTOH, nearly all of the handful of politicians I do like are Republican.
So, Paul is to be taken as never claiming to be a conservative.
You then write: "Ah yes, the hoary old myth of dumb conservatives getting led astray by packaging and labels. Are you sure you are a conservative? The GOP as a whole does not represent my values, and the typical GOP officeholder is indistinguishable to me from most Democrats. OTOH, nearly all of the handful of politicians I do like are Republican."
Now, while RP doesn't consider himself a conservative, you question my conservative credentials since I question his. You also note that the GOP doesn't represent your values because they're indistinguishable from Democrats. The clear implication here is that you're the conservative; not me, not the GOP. Yet RP isn't but you support him wholeheartedly. It's either that or, RP isn't a conservative, neither are you and that's why you support him, and the GOP doesn't represent your values because they align with RP; not conservativism. Which is it?
UCFRoadWarrior writes: "As I look into Paul’s background, more and more his critics look like whiny liberals. Also, I think the real fear they have of Paul is not his stance on Iraq, but his opposition to Globalism, NAFTA, big government....all anathema to the Global-Socialist liberals that have taken over the GOP.
Its funny that Paul’s opponents label him a “liberal”. His critics have no understanding of what a conservative really is
Again, here's another RP supporter who considers RP as being a conservative, yet we non-supportes misguidedly label him 'liberal'. Two supporters now, who characterize him as 'conservative' yet you state he himself considers he's a constitutionalist. Which is it? Or is it neither, is he a 'libertarian', and is he/are you unwilling to properly acknowledge your beliefs, and find it necessary to mischaracterize others in order to maintain your sham?