Perhaps these socialists need to figure out what the principle contradiction is

Socialist Worker recently ran this piece attacking Ron Paul. They certainly have every right to endorse whoever they chose, but I think they need to get their priorities and facts straight. First off, Paul has said that he wouldn't eliminate what little welfare for poor people there is in the USA. He expressed that it is military industrial complex welfare that has to go because thats where the real welfare is.

That being said Socialist Worker thinks that the crumbs of welfare are more important than ending the slaughter overseas and the looming police state in the USA. Socialist worker also thinks that negative positions with regards to the UN is a terrible act. Last I saw the UN wasn't able to keep strong countries from running over the weak. The UN hasn't been able to accomplish much for Palestinians or Iraqis, for example.

This reminds me of the Communist rhetoric about contradictions. Basically, if people's basic living needs aren't being met then stuff like Gay Marriage is pretty much going to have to take a back seat. Socialist Worker seems to think that subsidies for the poorer people in America is far more important than ending the war and preventing a war with Iran. A Ron Paul presidential victory would certainly be better for a lot of Arabs and Persians, they wouldn't have to worry about their countries being attacked. But I'm sure that they will understand when Socialist Worker tells them that entitlements for Americans are more important than their lives ever could be.