Liberal love for Ron Paul

No, not all liberals love him. The traditional, classical liberals know exactly who he is and what he stands for. But the shallow liberals--the ones who owe their liberalism to an opposition to the Iraq battle and a few social programs disfavored by Bush--seem to like him. Probably that "EVOL" has to do more with a Republican ripping on his own establishment, too, but maybe not all.

Writing in Huffpo, James Freedman noted Dr. Paul's black and whiteness, which goes like this:

"You could [unilaterally] change the foreign policy and bring troops home and save a lot of money. And you could start repealing executive orders that have been so onerous. And you could refuse to enforce laws that are put on the books through regulations and by court orders or executive orders."

Freedman is reporting from the trail and offers no definitive opinion on Paul's vision, but others have lauded his prime mission of ending the Iraq war.

Occasionally a reporter will dare challenge him with some "what-ifs", ie, what if Iran attacked Israel? He answered correctly in that it was a poorly worded what if. The real question is what if Iran THROUGH HIZBALLAH AND HAMAS, attacks Israel again? Or what if another big attack happens on America after Paul circles the wagons? Where will be lash out if proxy terrorists are blamed? What will be do if Iran chokes oil traffic through the straits of Hormuz or invades Iraq? These are the kinds of questions he's yet to give rational answers to in front of large crowds.

But that doesn't bother the libs. They'll be glad to let him win so long as he carries through on ending the Iraq war and making the Bush regime look bad, making themselves look good for opposing it. After that's said and done they'd have plenty of time to crucify his anti-children, anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, anti-tax, anti-gay marriage, anti-government intervention administration.