In the same way that the US invasion and occupation of Iraq was an utter, pathetic disaster for both the people of Iraq and the people of the USA, despite however strong the poll numbers for it were when it began, those who think they are serving the interests of "Israel" by continually pushing the center-hawk position are not. They are neither helping Israelis nor the US.

Boy, you got that right.

However, it is not truth that counts in politics (sadly) but perception. It is assumed that if every nation-state in the middle east is broken beyond repair that Israel would be much better off. You will have to best that idea to convince them that war with Iran is wrong. (morals never count with Americans --- anonymous native)

"Pauliacs" should just pack it in. Nobody argues with Molly Ivins or David Neiwert. (H/T Hume's Ghost)

And I'm putting you on ignore. I'll be away for awhile spreading this all over the intertubes. See ya!

Again we see the slander without any mention of what positions Ron Paul takes that makes him a Nazi (earlier thread) or an evil Bircher. You use the name of "Molly Ivins" as if she were Sophia of god; and that is it.

I read your cite the day Orcinus wrote it; odd how none of my other 30+ left blogs give him and traction on this one. Even so, when you are nicknamed Dr. No. because you vote against all taxes you have to piss of the socialists among our Democratic base.

What position of Ron Paul today do you hate so much that you campaign against him to the exclusion of all others? I can find evil in every candidate, but you --- only one it seems. A few words you that are not copied from someone else; possible?

Enjoy your trip, I'll wait for your reasons to hate Dr. Paul.

I know my prayers can only be answered by the humans here on Earth, that such prayers are not fit for a Supreme Being, should one ever exist, but still, surely it can't hurt to ask.

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeez let this not become another Ron Paul / Libertarian fest. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez.

I hear you, and I agree with you.

Why did LWM change the topic yet once again? Why not ask him?

I do not intend to let him call people Nazis and so forth without any evidence and not be called on it. I am happy to leave the topic alone, it just takes the bigots to refrain from slander. Is that too much to ask here on Glenn's site?

All things considered, I do think, and have always thought, Paul is a bit of a nut. But he doesn't stand a chance at getting the nomination, and right now he is causing trouble for the authoritarians in the GOP primaries. And that is a good thing.

I have no problems with anyone taking exception to any position of his (or any candidate), or even the choice of hire in his campaign staff. If you do not like his position on gold; find, tell us why --- or just say that you do not like it. (but at least it is a fact to work with)

However, when people stat hurling Nazi, fascist, racist, and other hate speech slurs just because they know they can --- that is bigoted, moronic, and evil. That is Rush Limbaugh tactics.

It is simple. If you have something against a candidate, say it. You did that, and I have no problem with that. As I wrote earlier (you might have missed it), I can find evil in the platform of any politician. But, I will tell you what position I find wrong, and why.

This may be the reason that no one here is willing to back a candidate publicly here --- afraid people will do to their pick what LWM does to Paul. I am sure he might, but I would not. I'll just go with the facts and my opinion plainly stated.

The other thing is that anyone with a lick of intelligence does not beak Godwin's Law every damn day like LWN does. Nazi this, Nazi that, fascist this, fascist that --- he make Rovian tactics look normal.

(note: last time we discovered to our utter dismay that some here do not know "if" or "may" and their use in conversation as a conditional --- I am using it here as a conditional, just like in proof class 101)

The logic of "It is assumed that if every nation-state in the middle east is broken beyond repair that Israel would be much better off" is the same logic neo-cons peddle. It's primal so it resonates with scared populations. American neo-cons sell it as macho "shock-and-awe" and Israeli Likudites as uber-intelligent strategery.

I do not know.

I do know that people on the left and in the center need to make the issue a priority because the right is lost in the fantasy logic that the neo-cons peddle, just as you wrote. The problem is the unfair smear tactics that we see on both the left and the right. If you work that meme to hard, you will be labeled with one very bad label.

Though war with Iran may originally been part of the Bush plan to assert itself in the Middle East (using the word "plan" as loosely as possible), I seriously doubt if any president, current or future, is going to do anything militarily against any other country in the region. Not only isn’t there a will for it, there isn't any money either. ...

Yes, you make good points. However, what if a President was willing to do the unthinkable? What if a country was willing to kill them all? That we could do.

I have not seen a major candidate take nukes "off the table", have you?

As expected, it was a short vacation.