Yesterday, I posted briefly about the fact that Ron Paul--who has been subjected to all sorts of "He must not be allowed to share the stage with *decent* men like Rudy Giuliani!" agitprop since the first GOP debate--had, in fact, been one of the few GOP candidates to actually take seriously what JPII said when the Bushies and their media shill were agitating for war. I was particularly irritated that FOXNewscritters Hannity and O'Reilly had denounced JPII, that FOXNewscritters had fished for (and gotten) pledges of fealty to the New Bush Torture Ethic from virtually the whole field of candidates except McCain and Paul--and yet Paul was being treated like the Mad Uncle in the Attic. I found that too absurd to swallow.
To the best of my knowledge, no serious figure has criticized Ron Paul or suggested that he be barred from the debates due to his position on torture. It is instead because of his isolationist foreign policy views that he is currently ostracized by a majority of conservatives. And while McCain is hated or at least strongly disliked by any number of conservative figures, I suspect that you'll find his views on torture pale greatly compared to those who hate him because of McCain-Feingold, immigration, or the "Gang of 14." Indeed, most conservatives who criticize him because of his views on torture are at least willing to acknowledge that he holds a principled position on the matter - possibly because his views as he has expressed them are far more reasonable than those expoused by Mark Shea.
Also, this is just rich:
n fact, I remain cordialy skeptical of Libertarianism. However, if Paul remains as sensible on the few things I've noticed him talking about in the press, I'm willing to give him a listen. Until his Libertarianism makes war on the Catholic teaching concerning the common good, I have no problem with it. If it never reaches that point, then he may get my vote. So far he's impressed me. But if he turns out to be a kook (as Libertarians often do), I'll have to reconsider. Small kookiness I don't mind. Big kookiness can be dangerous. So far, on the big issues, his main kookiness has been of the right kind: he does not want the GOP to become the Big Tent of Torture and Abortion. If that's kooky, we need more of it.
Big talk from someone who has repeatedly derided libertarianism for years as an ideology for selfish people without children. But hey, I guess it goes to show how fast principles can be compromised in pursuit of the correct course of action. Incidentally, if Ron Paul's kookiness were only about torture and abortion, I suspect that he would not currently be a pariah among conservatives. It's his whole isolationist foreign policy argument that we tend to find the most repugnant.