He admits there's nothing "conservative" about it, but insists that this is what the vast majority of Republicans believe and want.
This at least provides a rational explanation of why Ron Paul should not be nominated to represent the Republican Party.
It also means that I and anyone else who wants smaller government and understands that means not getting more government programs are out of place in and out of step with the Republican Party. We can count on them to field candidates who will "talk the talk" on the campaign trail, but if we want someone who will "walk the walk" once elected we're going to have to look elsewhere, because they aren't having it.
Sounds like the Republicans are about to go the way of the Whigs.