If Ron Paul were not actively working to discredit the mission of our troops in a war declared upon us by Islamic jihadists (hence “jihad” - their declaration of war) I might be able to give Paul an audience for his views. Instead I distrust and despise the man for being such an awful voice at a time when America must muster the resolve and will to win what will be a very difficult and challenging war.
If Ron Paul were not actively working to discredit the mission of our troops in a war declared upon us by Islamic jihadists (hence “jihad” - their declaration of war) I might be able to give Paul an audience for his views. Instead I distrust and despise the man for being such an awful voice at a time when America must muster the resolve and will to win what will be a very difficult and challenging war.You are exactly right. The Paulites scrambling to find issues that put RP in a good light -- after he's stabbed our troops in the back by voting with the worst of the leftist in the House -- is a bit like trying to promote the fact that Hitler was a vegetarian and was kind to kittens and puppies.
Who gives a sh*t? So what if RP gets a few things right? I don't.
He votes with the Friends of Jihad in Congress, in 2007, in the midst of America At War. I don't care if he also spit-shines his shoes or if he gives money to orphans in Uzbekistan. That doesn't matter to me. He's a traitor to our troops, and on the side of the RAT Jihadists in congress. That trumps everything.
Yeah, yeah -- "Everything that George Bush does is true and righteous altogether. For daring to question the all-holy George Bush and suggesting that a given Foreign Policy will actually make us less safe, Ron Paul is just a blame-America-defeatist-traitor-coward moonbat." I already posted your script at the beginning of the article. We've heard it already.