Why is that? Because your approach suggests that the other candidates are not even aware of very legitimate questions that Dr. Paul has raised about our handling of our foreign policy, in the last twenty years. (I disagree with him, myself, as to Gulf War I, but that is not a current issue.)
I would urge everyone to re-read what George Washington had to say on dealing with the World in his Farewell Address, particularly his analysis of human psychology and the effect of some of the rhetoric that Newt Gingrich & Santorum have been employing. Washington explains the points better than Dr. Paul, but the points are valid.
Incidentally, I have not endorsed Dr. Paul this time around. I have not endorsed anyone, but am hoping for a younger candidate, because the next few years will be extremely trying.
William Flax
Ron Paul’s nuttiness aside, when did it become conservative to be world police and military subsidizer?
I don’t hear Dr. Paul saying he would let the world go nuclear without interfering, what I heard was that he would just have constitutionally declared wars rather than conflicts everywhere.
And when did it become “conservative” to shout down free speech and insult people (paulbots, paultards, etc), rather than debating ideas HONESTLY. Most posts about Paul are out of context or downright dishonest.
flame on