Ron Paul Won't Be Much of a Thorn in Mitt Romney's Side

So certain are you? I didn't see any compelling point why you would fall in behind Mr Romney other than you blindly support him. Ron Pauls supporters haven't been heard from yet and if you insist that this campaign is a foregone conclusion based on two primaries, you are too big a fool to have your job. Those young voters you trivialized are a bigger force than you apparently realize, and were a big reason why Obama won. If the GOP 'comes home' to Romney as you say, Obama will win again.

Toxic Hairball of MD 11:20PM January 13, 2012

IMHO GALUPO IS SUCH A LYING SACK...

Yeah, I read his spiel in the comments section. But five bucks Hong Kong sez Galupo votes for Romney anyways in his state's primary. And probably writes a blog post beforehand telling us how strongly he will have to hold his nose to do so, boo, hoo, hoo.

For those saying Congressman Paul didn't get bills through Congress and thus wouldn't cut it as President, getting Obama out of office in favor of someone, anyone else has caused glaucoma of your brains.

The 2012 presidential election is all about severely limiting what does get through Congress, and actually reversing a lot of what did get through Congress and previous administrations via executive orders going back to the peanut farmer's day.

And that will happen through the veto and executive-order pen in a President Paul's hands.

Now do you get it slow boys? Or are you still pissedoff about Gingrich's presidential spontaneous combustion?

As to Galupo's title for this piece, rhetorically I guess it's true. If Romney had a side that is. Romney doesn't have a side. He has sides. And they change as he rolls. The title for this piece more accurately is:

Ron Paul is a Thorn in Every One of Mitt Romney's Sides.

Romney is a squish for hire. Galupo's old boss Boehner turned out to be a squish when the House was handed to him on a silver platter. Nikki Haley right now is in full squish mode with her Romney endorsement.

Either Paul will be the next president or Obama gets reelected. Make your plans for the next five years accordingly.

------

PS: Catch Galupo's slick one in implying Paul consider's his candidacy to be 'dangerous', as if Paul originated the 'dangerous' meme himself:

"As a conservative, I generally don't care for political movements that consider themselves "dangerous," let alone revolutionary."

Bachmann was the Paul is 'dangerous' stalking horse for Romneysantorugingrich. Then she promptly fell off the face of the republican presidential candidates earth afterwards.

Paul then responded to the 'dangerous' meme with cutting insight and clarity, saying he was 'dangerous' -- to the status quo.

And slick-as-snot Galupo's whole purpose for this piece was to make the suggestion that Romney somehow is outside that status quo, and therefore Paul is no thorn to Romney.

Like I said, Galupo is a lying sack, IMHO. He's scared S-less that others may look at Romney and Paul, cut through all the bull, and recognize Paul is the conservative. That can be trusted to do what he says he will after getting elected.

dom youngross of OH 5:14AM January 13, 2012

Lets talk about 'laissez-faire' and begin to question what you think is so obvious.

What if we had 50 EPAs (one for each state). Is it possible that some would catch things that others didn't? Is it possible that a 'population' of EPAs would lead to continual experimentation and improvement? A marketplace of ideas about what works and what doesn't? Would each EPA more directly understand, respect, and address the issues of the people it represented?

Paul is not talking about no government. He is talking about smaller Federal Gov. Local power.

See. You might agree with him after all. But it takes more than a one liner to even scratch the surface of these issues. You have to be willing to do a bit of more in depth reading. Things such as "Ron Paul believes we should abolish the EPA" are just flat out wrong, and you should be ashamed to take any such trite statement like that on its face value.

You are more than welcome to the Revolution whenever you are ready.

Bob Jones of MA 4:52PM January 12, 2012

Note to Ron Paul supporters:

1) It seems many of you are dropping by for the first time. I appreciate that.

2) But please, before popping off indiscriminately, do a little homework. The last thing I am is a Romney shill; I'm on record despising the guy. I won't be voting for him in either the primary or the general.

3) Finally, note that the nowhere in the piece above did I assert that Paul voters are merely on a pro-weed lark. What I did say is that much of Dr. Paul's support is due to his antiwar rhetoric. For that reason—and for good or ill—current supporters of Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry are going to flock to Romney when their respective horses drop out.

Thanks again for reading.

Scott Galupo of VA 1:10PM January 12, 2012