[Redcloak]

His opinions on the war is shared by over two-thirds of the country. How are the other RINOs going to get these votes?

I don't want a candidate who panders to the idiocy some voters. I want a (Get this!) principled candidate who says what's right instead of what's popular. A staggered surrender (The Paul/Clinton plan) is still a surrender and the wrong thing to do. As the so-called "Libertarian Candidate", one would have expected Paul to understand that one of government's proper functions is to protect its people from the aggressive use of force. Paul forgets this in his pandering, moonbat mode.

[rom]

I don't want a candidate who panders to the idiocy some voters. I want a (Get this!) principled candidate who says what's right instead of what's popular.

If you apply this philosophy to the other candidates, you'd have no one to vote for, right? Well, I guess Rudy has been pretty consistent. Not conservative, but consistent.

As far as I can tell, Ron Paul has been very consistent, even though he's staked out positions that are unpopular in the *Republican* primary. He could have had an 11th hour conversion like the other candidates have on a myriad other issues in order to pander to the base. But he hasn't.