Ron Paul gleefully boards the blame-Bush wagon

And now, turning again to that awful demagogue Ron Paul, he's pandering to the leftist anti-war segment by attacking the Bush administration for all the wrong reasons, claiming it was "gleeful" when 9-11 took place (Hat tip: The Blaze):

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said Thursday evening that Bush administration officials were gleeful after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because it gave them a pretext to invade Iraq.

"Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq," the Texas Republican told a group of mostly young backers in Iowa. He went on to suggest officials are now setting the stage for an invasion of Iran. [...]

Paul's libertarian views - on the foreign policy front, he wants to dramatically reduce the U.S. military presence abroad and end all foreign aid - put him at odds with many Republican voters. A poll from Gallup this week found that 62 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning independent voters see Paul as an unacceptable nominee.

And even if he were the only candidate who allegedly understands economy, he still wouldn't be worth backing with twisted, offensive viewpoints like what he's throwing out. No wonder the MSM is hoping he'll win the Iowa caucus by the chance that sensible voters would stay home in case of snowstorm on January 3. And thus, no wonder the MSM like CBS is so useless.

On “Face the Nation” last month, Paul said that while the average American didn’t cause the Sept. 11 attacks, ” if you have a flawed policy it may influence it.”

“I think there‘s an influence and that’s exactly what the 9/11 commission said that‘s what the DOD has said and that’s also what the CIA has said and that’s what a lot of researchers have said,” said Paul. “…our policies definitely had an influence and you talk to the people who committed it and those individuals who would like to do us harm. They say yes we don‘t like American bombs to be falling on our country and we don’t like the intervention that we do in their nation so to deny this I think is very dangerous. But to argue the case that they want to do us harm because we‘re free and prosperous is very dangerous notion because it’s not true.”

He added: “So I‘m saying policies have an effect but that’s a far cry from blaming America. I mean in America, you‘re supposed to be able to criticize your own government without saying you’re un-American.”

Sorry, but even blaming a government and/or its policy is far too easy. For too long now, Paul has blamed government policy yet failed to make a clear condemnation of al Qaeda and jihadism. He also doesn't seem to clearly understand that even if the west wasn't free and prosperous, they'd still antagonize, because it's part of the Koran to attack infidels. To ignore the ideologies and mindsets of the terrorists is what's dangerous, and come to think of it, so is Paul himself.