Posted on 02/27/2012 9:29:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
In recent days, attention has focused on the unusual relationship between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney, who are purportedly competing against each other for the Republican presidential nomination.
The New York Times reported recently that Romney has “worked to cultivate” a friendship with Paul. The candidates talk on the phone frequently. And when Paul’s “campaign jet broke down last year,” Romney “offered his jet to take them home to Texas.”
Rick Santorum has directly accused Paul and Romney of working together, noting “their commercials look a lot alike, and so do their attacks.” A review by ThinkProgress of the 20 GOP debates suggests Santorum might be onto something.
While Paul has freely attacked Romney’s top rivals, he has never once attacked Romney.
This is particularly striking given that Paul and Romney do not agree on virtually any policy positions. Paul has gone beyond merely refraining from attacks. He has actively defended Romney on some of his biggest vulnerabilities. For example, when Rick Perry attacked Romney for “Romneycare” during an October 18 debate, Paul interjected:
"First off, you know, the governor of Texas criticized the governor of Massachusetts for Romneycare, but he wrote a really fancy letter supporting Hillarycare. So we probably ought to ask him about that."
(Excerpt) Read more at escapetyranny.com ...
Ron Paul actually attacked Newt for not serving in the military but ignored Mitt Romney’s draft dodging. The Paul brand is tainted like chinese dog food as far as I’m concerned.
Ron Paul actually attacked Newt for not serving in the military but ignored Mitt Romney’s draft dodging. The Paul brand is tainted like chinese dog food as far as I’m concerned.
it’s wooooorrr (as Paul would say)
Just like the others, obviously Paul wants to be the last anti-Romney candidate standing.
LOL, that's funny. Mr. Career Politician (longer than the rest of them) is somehow anti-establishment. Here is some inside baseball, Paul is as establishment as the rest playing a specific role- a political honeytrap. He is the type both parties always have to keep in their stable to keep the 'anti-establishment' voters believing they have someone on their side. They give lip service to anti-establishment rhetoric but they never actually pose a threat to the establishment. Take the Fed for example. Paul has given lip service for decades about ending it but has never done anything. At that, he has the role now in his chairmanship position to actually do something and he has done jack. He even voted against his own audit bill and sabotaged future bills. Yet, he still talks about ending it. To quote Shakespeare in Hamlet- "Words, Words, Words..."
Workin everyday to secure a job for his son.
This is becoming obvious and I think it’s interesting that neither Paul nor Romney will talk about it (at least not that I’m aware of).
Aren’t they being a bit disingenuous?
Yesterday, there was an article about Rand Paul being on Romney’s short list for VP. It explains everything.
Because he is a good and decent man.
Ron Paul has been one of the most stalwart defenders of the Jefferson/Madison States' Rights position in Congress, over the past generation.
Do not look for something ominous or covert, where only consistent principle is involved.
William Flax
Paul's stands are closer to Reagan's than are those of any of the other candidates. Your statement is ridiculous.
Remember, Reagan was forced to go along with some of the Federal domestic programs that he had attacked before his election, in order to get cooperation on his defense budget--the one that broke the back of Soviet Communism. But philosophically, Reagan was to the right of Gingrich & Santorum, who now talk a more Conservative, smaller Government role, than they actually practiced in the past.
And remember that when Reagan realized that his attempt to stabalize Lebanon was proving a counter-productive policy, putting American lives at unjustifiable risk, he reversed the policy, and withdrew. This is basically what Dr. Paul has been advocating as to our forces in other parts of the region, where we have been drawing hostile fire, with no clear gain for American interests.
William Flax
Feel free to pimp this Israel hating, Stormfront supported, Conservative hating, Truther, Reagan hating, pro Iranian POS Paul all you like. He is a fraud. For example, he goes around complaining about Ricks earmarks, when he is the king of earmarks. He loads popular bills with them and then votes against them because he knows they will pass. He then can say he didn’t vote for them. Total sham.
The only reason this loser RuPaul is in this GOP Primary contest is because the Libertarians threw him out after his campaign stole money from the party in ‘88. They didn’t want him anymore so the only way to peddle is nonsense was to leach off the GOP party apparatus. He is not a Conservative and he has no business masquerading as one or even being in the GOP.
You are either a supporter of Ron Paul or by default a Romney supporter. Ron is clearly in bed with Romney. They are both despicable people and are bad for America. I have no intention if giving them one ounce of my time or interest. In summary, Ron Paul is a loser.
My theory is that Paul doesn’t attack Romney because he sees it as a waste of time. The same could be said about me having a conversation with you. Good day sir. I said good day!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.