Non-Person, Or, The Central Committee...

That's not right .... they should have at least acknowledged the cornflake's existance.

That was really stupid. In an election where every vote counts - they choose to piss off Paul supporters?

Ron Paul should have been turfed out of the Republican party years ago.

When asked on a FOX interview, at the convention, whether Paul would vote for Mitt Romney or Gary Johnson Dr. Paul said, "Put me down as undecided."
Not just RP, but all the RINOs need to be turfed.

In an election where every vote counts - they choose to piss off Paul supporters?
~a different bob

In an election where every vote counts, Paul supporters would be stupid enough to vote for anyone except Romney?
Where do you live, Quebec?

Paul declined to endorse Romney. To hell with him - self-centered ba$tard.

@Oz -- you might end up being surprised. No, they won't vote for Obama, but they may well stay at home.

The GOP seem to have a deathwish ... two unelectable nominations in a row.

This was their election to lose ... and they are looking like losing it.

Gord is right. Once the nomination battle is over it's up to the Party, ALL of the Party to rally behind the winner.

I think they should have mentioned the votes to Ron Paul.

First, to acknowledge the voting rights of those who DID vote for Paul.

And second, to acknowledge that the GOP can handle variation and argument within its ranks. It's not homogeneous; it can permit and indeed encourages debate, dissent, discussion.

That's the reason why the GOP have a vibrant young set of 'new blood' in the ranks (Rubio, West, Christie, Walker, etc) while the homogeneous Democrats have nothing, no-one, emptiness. Because the Democrats don't permit dissent or disagreement; only followers of Obama.

So, they ought to have referred to Ron Paul. Both out of respect for Paul, his followers but also out of respect for the actions of variation.

Rep. Paul: 'Put me down as undecided'

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1811199676001/

Ron Paul says he didn't endorse Ronald Reagan either when he was on the ticket either way back in 1976...

It would appear he is very diffident about revealing his hand.

Cheers

Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

Followers of Paul seem a bitter bunch. The younger ones hate "boomers" for ruining their future and often sound like truthers following naive ideology and boasting of their stopped clock being right twice a day.

Sarah Palin had enough sense to not stick a fork in this election because as much as I like her she would not win. That said she has a better chance then Ronnie Paul ever would so he should man up and call it a day.

I consider Ron Paul to be a better choice than Romney, but if I lived in the states I'd vote for Romney to get rid of Obozo. That the Republican party chose to ignore Ron Paul completely is absolute stupidity.

Ron Paul attracts a lot of young voters and, while I doubt very much that they'd vote for the statist Obozo, they could stay home on election day.

Looks like the Tea Party has a big job ahead of it in cleaning out the deadwood and RINO's that still infest the Republican party.

OZ!! Sorry man. I forgot about your amazing ability to reach into the minds of people and know exactly what they are thinking.

WTF was I thinking??

Actually I was thinking "in an election where every vote counts - why would you want to piss of Paul supporters? Maybe you could enlighten us as to where the upside to this is - oh great mind reader.

@Oz -- you might end up being surprised. No, they won't vote for Obama, but they may well stay at home.

No surprise at all.
After repeatedly threatening on every conservative blog to do so if their idol was discarded in favour of McCain last time, they did just that.
I guess you weren't paying attention.
Oh, and if you were paying attention this time, a goodly portion of the Ronulans who supported Dr. Paul against Romney for the GOP candidate this time were Democrats.

While what the party did is wrong, Ron Paul accomplished what he wanted. Getting out his message. I'm just not sure what his followers want.

Several things that Paul wanted have been adopted into the GOP platform including auditing the fed.

Paul should have endorsed Romney because he is the best hope for his children and grandchildren and for his agenda. That he didn't endorse MR is repugnant, self-centered and unhelpful, serving only to marginalize what he is trying to achieve.

Yaaaaaaaawn.

He's going to pasture. His son is more reasonable.

Now, back to regular programming.

There is good evidence of cheating in the entire nomination process

http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-is-being-cheated-out-of-the-republican-nomination/

Mitt Romney is not nearly right-wing enough for Ron Paul, who is a *real* conservative. Ron Paul will cut the US deficit NOW. Romney will not. It's as simple as that. A Ron Paul President:

Gun control? Gone.
Abortion funding? Gone.
Millions of paper-pushing government employees? Gone.
Cradle-to-grave welfare? Gone.
Income tax & IRS? Gone.
Passing debt onto future generations? Done.
Obama care? Gone.
Anchor baby citizenship? Gone.
Illegal immigrants? Deported.
Ponzi scheme unsustainable social security? Gone.
Free medicare for illegal immigrants? gone.
PBS funding? Gone.
Printing money? Done.
Bailing out moronic corporations (like GM)? Gone.
UN Funding? Gone.
Airport molestors? Gone.
Billions to Haiti, Bangladesh, Gaza, & North Korea? Gone.
Affirmative action? Gone.

Ron Paul cannot support Romney because Romney is a big government liberal. Granted, Romney is far better than Obama.

Principles matter.

From the article:
-Wiselot Rouzard, a delegate from Nevada and a Paul supporter, compared the situation to Adolf Hitler taking power in Germany.
“There’s nothing American about what just happened,” he said. “This is the death of the Republican Party.”

Why these childish A-Holes are trying to damage the Republican party with their BS instead of the Democratic party or just havin Dr. Paul grow some integrity and run as the Libertarian party candidate instead of Gary Johnson and voting Libertarian is something to ponder.

This minority want to takeover the conservative vote(wagging the dog) and then whine and pule when they don't get their way.
Well tough shit.
Their social policy is not conservative even if their fiscal policy is.

"Principles matter."
~Mike in Calgary

If Ron Paul had any principles he'd run for the Libertarian party candidacy.

Ron Paul's supporters cannot be ignored, fine. However, still shilling for him is flogging a dead horse. Romney is the candidate and that's all there is to it.

Ditto to what Mike in Calgary said; they don't call the GOP the Stupid Party for nothing.

Paul would also shut down the Fed. That alone is reason enough to vote for Paul.

Mike in Calgary,

How, exactly, would Ron Paul perform this list of miracles you posted?

ET and Loki are right. They should have acknowledged the Ron Paul support, and the RINOs in control need to be turfed as they will not fix the mess, but just tinker with it.

Ron Paul has a number of great to do things on his list that Mike mentions and we all know that the US needs to take some strong medicine to fix its fiscal challenges. However the people do not seem to be ready for strong medicine yet, and maybe never will be, in which case the sun will set on American exceptional-ism and the liberal democratic roots.

No one said it better than Breitbart at CPAC 2012:

" I don't care who our candidate is, and I haven't since the beginning of this - I haven't! Ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate - and that's what the Tea Party is. We are there to confront them, on behalf of our candidate. I will march behind whoever our candidate is, because if we don't, we lose. There are 2 paths - there are 2 paths! - one is America, and the other one is Occupy. One is America, the other one is Occupy. And I don't care ...anyone that's willing to stand next to me and fight the Progressive Left, I will be in that bunker. And if you're not in that bunker, because you're not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you: You are on the other side. "

Paul supporters are actually foot soldiers of the radical left.

@mike in calgary

Non of what you listed would have happened because there is no way Ron Paul - who has never beaten anyone in his own party - would beat Obama.

Romney is the Candidate with the best chance he is smart enough and more importantly he is mean enough to beat Obama at his own game.

Romney Ryan make Obama look wimpy. Ron Paul would make him look manly.

Right now the nation needs a Bain Capital type of guy. Not someone who has spent many years as part of the system.

Agree with Mike in Calgary and Loki.

Romney? Not much different from Obama really. So Obama wants to force his ideals on people, so do the so called christians in the republican party with their social conservative nuisance and fixation on gay marriage. No difference really.

Osumashi, I'm not arguing against Romney being the candidate. All I'm saying is that the GOP should acknowledge that within the ranks at the nomination some people wanted someone else, Paul.

These people should be acknowledged as Also Republicans. That is, there shouldn't be only one opinion allowed, only one Republican mind allowed. A freedom to debate, acknowledge differences, ought to be acknowledged as vital.

BUT, once the nominee, Romney is chosen, then, all GOP members should go out to help him win.

small c-conservative, you are talking about the election campaign not the internal nomination process. Within the election campaign, ALL GOP members ought to be working on behalf of the GOP which means on behalf of Romney.

But, within the internal processes, differences ought to be acknowledged. A democracy acknowledges both the existence of a number of differences and the existence of ONE winning decision... which is made by majority vote.

Ron Paul will cut the US deficit NOW. Romney will not. It's as simple as that. Mike in Calgary

Let's put it this way, if Romney does not out-Reagan Reagan, he won't last a year in office.

By the way, Mike, how does Paul achieve that list? The US is not a parliamentary system - effectively one party control of government - but a system of checks and balances which limits the president's ability to ram through his program. If a Congressman bucks him, the president has limited, indirect means of retaliation - that's one reason the US is so far in the red.

The president must be a true leader for Congress to feel the need to support his program, but, for all his virtues, Ron Paul is not, and never will be the leader of 90% of adult Americans, or even conservatives. ( He does much better among the very young and inexperienced. ) If he were made president, he would sink without a trace.

ET: why would I want to work on behalf of Obama Lite? So far Romney has provided no actual evidence he is going to fix the problem. Paul Ryan's so called budget fix does little.

Its beyond the point of supporting crappy candidates. I'd rather support someone who represents what most Americans actually want. Gary Johnson is the next best thing at this time.

The last thing needed is Romney to win, fail out like Obama in terms of economic distress, and have people blame so called free market capitalism even more. Then we get the rebound that's even worse than Obama.

I'd rather have Obama completely fail out and provide that much more evidence for the undecided who really decide who becomes the president, that Obama economics is wrong.

To win as president you have to win the undecided. Like it or not, they are not against gay marriage, they don't want to completely ban abortion, and they don't like useless wars that the Demos and Repubs have been doing these many years.

Even better though, would be a republican senate and congress, with Obama as president. Then at least we might expect the same Clinton situation where real efforts were made to balance the budget as much over spite than anything else.

For those who seem bewildered with how Paul could achieve Mike's list, about a third of it could be accomplished just by enforcing the law,
and another third could be achieved by not requesting stimulus or bailout money from congress.

Only Obamacare, income tax and social security changes would require any real legislative changes, and Romney has committed to two of those three.

Even the liberal U.S. media and pollsters have suggested that the GOP will likely have majorities in both the upper and lower House.

Ron Paul wouldn't have had the support necessary to make much happen.

Ron Paul invented the Tea Party movement.

If Ron Paul were to run as a Libertarian, he would steal 4-5% of the GOP vote. Not Good.

Ron Paul is not running for President. This is good.

"Their social policy is not conservative even if their fiscal policy is."

Wrong. Ron Paul is pro-life. States will decide their own abortion outcomes. Ditto for gay marriage. If you believe that Ron Paul has a liberal social policy, read my list again.

Ron Paul is the *most* conservative candidate. Mitt Romney is a distant second. Regardless, Romney is now the nominee, and Romney needs our support. As for Ron Paul's endorsement... who cares. Ron Paul's a "whackadoo" (your words, not mine), and he's not running.

ET - Paul was unwilling to have the RNC see his speech, and that's why he was denied a spot.

And the Ron Paul candidates you saw in the count today got there by the Paul people gaming the rules. They will argue til they drop they were robbed, but, in truth, they were very badly beaten in a fair fight.

Unfortunately, they would much rather take vengeance on the country with another Obama term rather than swallow their pride, and actually try to come up with the most votes next time.

They may hate Romney because he has succeeded far in excess of them, but like Occupy, they will never reconcile themselves to the fact that very few people share their views, and refuse to climb onboard their crazy train.

I'd rather have Obama completely fail out - langmann

Not going to happen, if he wins another term. Once government controls healthcare top to bottom, it skews politics way leftward for generations: look at UK; look at Canada. If Obama gets another term, millions more illegals will be let into Texas, and once Obama enrolls them, the Republicans will never win another presidential election.

This is the last chance to make immigration controlled and orderly; all the US needs is a President who will sign legislation and patrol the borders, and Congress will provide the legislation.

They could have handled this better. Leaves a bad taste, no matter how you try to justify it. They have now sown the seeds for a Libertarian Party.

...they don't like useless wars that the Demos and Repubs have been doing these many years. langmann

Which " wars " are those? The war in Iraq resulted in the elimination of an enemy state. You call that useless? The gloves should have come off, and Afghanistan should have been wound up long ago, but war was exactly the right prescription for Afghanistan, as well.

If the war on terror has not been successful, then why was there no follow on after 9-11?

Wouldn't you say war - a war of conquest - is exactly what is necessary against Iran?

Not only that, but when Ron Paul got nominated by 6 states-enough to get on the nomination list-the GOP heads voted for a rule change to make you need 8! The GOP is about as evil and crass as the Dems they are just less smooth about it. I guess they want the only enthusiastic section of their party to go vote Johnson. GARY JOHNSON 2012

LAS - is that the same Ron Paul who endorsed Cyntia McKinney in 2008 for her support of balanced budgets? Huh?

Most of you are angry and defensive because you know how despicable This is. It is shameful and you people know it.

Their social policy is not conservative even if their fiscal policy is.

You mean they want to consistently keep the government out of people's lives? AND they think beyond a 2-party BS paradigm? HOW DARE THEY.

And the Ron Paul candidates you saw in the count today got there by the Paul people gaming the rules. They will argue til they drop they were robbed, but, in truth, they were very badly beaten in a fair fight.

Lies. We have just seen an example of how the RNC games its rules to come to a pre-determined outcome. I think Romney would've won anyway, so it just makes it even stupider.

This isn't so important. The Ronulans are on the inside now. They are replacing the party machinery. The TP is out there, loudly fighting, we are inside, silently taking over what's ours.

LAS - please answer the question. Is this Ron Paul you mention the same Ron Paul who endorsed Cynthia McKinney in 2008 - and Ralph Nader?

I don't know. Who's Cynthia McKinney?

"They have now sown the seeds for a Libertarian Party..."

I disagree. Most conservative Americans are not looking to smoke a bowl while waiting for the first strike. The libertarian party was very attractive this go around because of the righteous nature of its fiscal policy. But this is a policy based on anarchy, the ultimate path of the libertarian, and a distraction for the conservative. Many conservatives later realized that this party was not for them and the GOP still needed cleaning. Too late now in terms of the presidency but not in terms of the House and Senate elections.

I think the Tea Party membership was more conservative than libertarian. Next cycle will bear that out. The question is how much damage has it done to this election? A Romney candidacy is an admittedly poor result.

Bad form; not to count the Ron Paul votes, not conservative, and... a bit un-American,.. no?

But this is a policy based on anarchy, the ultimate path of the libertarian

More lies.

This isn't so important. The Ronulans are on the inside now. - LAS

Kind of like Spinal Tap backstage at the Xanadu Star Theater. I hope they can find a custodian to show them the way around.

By the way, they won't have much success convincing the Republican voters that Nader and McKinney are preferable to non-Marxist candidates, like John McCain. But at least now they are on the inside, so they can trash the place. How many of these nuts did time in Occupy, before they plowed into the Republican Party?

Ron Paul DID NOT invent the teaparty. That is a complete falsehood. Much of what the teaparty is fighting for RP vigorously opposes. Teaparty Defense and foreign policy is diametrically opposed to that of the Paulians for example.

And ET I am all for acknowledging Paul just as soon as he throws in 100% behind the nominee - not before. As it stands now Paul's ego is an impediment to the unity of the party and to the defeat of the greatest threat that America and the free world currently faces : the re-election of BHO.

All you Romney lovers are clueless. He's no different than all the characters who preceded him whether democrats or republicans. They all believe in papa government; they are all huge spenders and they all love the wars of America. Romney is simply Obama-lite. His political track record proves it.

Cynthia McKinney is a truther, former Congresswoman, Green Party candidate, and staunch supporter of leftist dictators in Latin America. She was arrested by Israeli authorities off a ship the Free Gaza movement docked in Gaza, and takes mony from supporters of Hezbolah and Hamas. Oh yeah, she supports a "thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System.", which was the purchase price of the Paul endorsement.

You are all causing me fatigue.
Focus. Romney doesn't matter, he's an imperfect means to an end. I truly believe we are in a last stand fight against communism taking the world. This presidential election is a watershed event for our way of life.

Ha ha. small c conservative.

Yeah as much as you'd like to think we're winning in the Middle East we most certainly are not. Not only do most of the vets I know support Ron Paul's ideas so do Military Times polls, as well as Ron Paul's ability to raise funds from them.

Now I certainly don't want to portray the entire military supporting Ron Paul or anything because that's BS. However he does well, and he does well when you also read books and articles from ex CIA and other people experienced in these areas.

Therefore his ideas have credibility. Its not just BS to be shrugged off. Its something we should be talking about.

Personally I fail to see how my taxes going to support corrupt governments in Islamic countries is going to help us over here. But YMMV.