Mark Ames: Why is Ron Paul’s Superpac Headquartered in Mitt Romney’s Backyard?

By Mark Ames, the author of Going Postal: Rage, Murder and Rebellion from Reagan’s Workplaces to Clinton’s Columbine. Cross posted from The eXiled.

Last week it finally started to dawn on the slow-as-Stegosaurs media: Why is Ron Paul going so soft on frontrunner Mitt Romney, his natural ideological opposite? Dr. Paul has been flaying every other candidate, particularly when that candidate threatens Romney’s front-runner status—why is Ron Paul so protective over internationalist/neocon Rockefeller Republican, Mitt Romney? Does this point to some sort of alliance between the two? And if so, doesn’t that raise further disturbing questions about the supposed rock-solid-principles guiding Ron Paul’s campaign?

You might expect the media—alerted to this “bizarre” alliance—to go looking for a possible money trail linking the two campaigns’ interests together. This is politics after all; stranger things have happened. Naturally the media has done no such thing. But if the hacks ever do get around to following the money, they would very quickly stumble across one of the biggest WTF factoids of this primary season: Ron Paul’s SuperPAC, “Endorse Liberty,” is headquartered in Mitt Romney’s backyard: Salt Lake City, Utah.

Moreover, the SuperPAC’s staff and founders include several former Romney supporters and Huntsman supporters. And one of the founding principles of Endorse Liberty, Ladd Christensen, is something of an oligarch in Utah: Christensen is the longtime business partner of John Huntsman’s billionaire dad. They founded Huntsman Chemicals together, as well as Hunstman-Christensen.

Huntsman endorsed Mitt Romney when he bowed out of the race—in fact, Huntsman has a history of stepping aside for Mitt Romney and playing his second banana, going back at least to the Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002, which John’s billionaire dad helped to fund on behalf of Mitt Romney.

So to repeat: Ron Paul’s SuperPAC is based in Salt Lake City, and one of the founders is Ladd Christensen, John Huntsman’s business partner in Huntsman-Christensen and Huntsman Chemicals.

Nothing to see here folks, keep moving along…

That might raise some potentially disturbing possibilities to a journalist or editor still interested in chasing down disturbing details and stories. Which probably explains why the media hacks aren’t interested in pursuing this possible angle, even though it’s staring them in the face. Instead, they’re trotting out a catalogue of fatuous “explanations” for the love-fest between Dr. Paul and Mitt Romney—explanations which have almost nothing to do with money and sleaze in politics, and everything to do with how Tiger Beat magazine might approach this election campaign.

The New York Times opined that the Libertarian hero’s alliance with the Rockefeller Republican is all about their wives. It even has a Spielberg-esque headline – “Amid Rivalry, Friendship Blossoms on the Campaign Trail” – designed to make everyone feel all warm inside about how American politics works. And wouldn’tcha know it, politics it turns out works just like in the sitcoms:

The candidates’ spouses, Ann Romney and Carol Paul, “know each other better than any of the other wives,” Mr. Paul said. He and Mr. Romney talk “all the time” and “we’ve met all their kids.” Once he telephoned Mr. Romney just as Mr. Romney was calling him. “Sometimes I’m never sure who issued a call,” he said.

Mr. Paul has already provided some tactical help: When Mr. Romney began to flounder in South Carolina and was under attack over his career in leveraged buyouts, Mr. Paul came to his defense, suggesting that his critics were anticapitalist. His campaign even issued a press release assailing other rivals for, in Mr. Paul’s view, taking Mr. Romney’s quote about firing people out of context.

In other words, if you’ve seen The Flintstones or The Honeymooners, that’s all the background you need to understand the deep politics of Ron Paul’s strange alliance with his ideological foe and primary opponent, Mitt Romney.

Mrs. Ron Paul: Ann Romney’s BFF

Not to be out-dumbed, the Washington Post also explored Dr. Paul’s touching friendship with the silver-spoon Mormon frontrunner, and found a life-affirming story about Americans from different sides of the railroad tracks coming together by finding how much they had in common deep down. The Post‘s Hollywood rom-con story was headlined “For Romney and Paul, a strategic alliance between establishment and outsider” and it featured deep insights like,

Despite deep differences on a range of issues, Romney and Paul became friends in 2008, the last time both ran for president. So did their wives, Ann Romney and Carol Paul. The former Massachusetts governor compliments the Texas congressman during debates, praising Paul’s religious faith during the last one, in Jacksonville, Fla. Immediately afterward, as is often the case, the Pauls and the Romneys gravitated toward one another to say hello.

Wrong-about-everything guy Charles Krauthammer assures America that although “they are objectively allies” nevertheless “it’s not because it’s a conspiracy or collusion or because, people will say, the wives are close.” Anyone familiar with Krauthammer’s record should as a matter of reflex automatically assume it’s a conspiracy and it’s all because their wives are close. (A question for Krauthammer: How is it possible that there can be an “alliance” involving no collusion? Stupid question, I know.)

To be fair to Krauthammer (not that anyone should be), he advances a more “reasonable” dumbshit-theory than the Wilma:Betty::Ann:Carol wives theory: According to Krauthammer and some others, the Paul-Romney love-fest is all about making Ron Paul the “Number Two” guy in the Republican Party. As if this is something Ron Paul and Mitt Romney work out on their own, without the massive powerful interests behind them, or the Republican Party machine, or anyone—just a couple of guys with some homespun desires and their wives in tow.

Give MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough some credit at least: He at least isn’t buying the bullshit and demanded answers about the “bizarre” alliance between Paul and Romeny:

“The thing that went unspoken but everybody knows, and that is that Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have formed an alliance,” Scarborough said. “It is such an obvious alliance that Mitt Romney would do well to just come out and admit it. I don’t know what he’s promised Ron Paul. I don’t know if Ron Paul is hoping that his son gets in the administration. But let’s just be really honest here — for all the people for Ron Paul to form an alliance with in the Republican Party, to pick out Mitt Romney is really bizarre.”


One can argue that the Romney-Paul alliance everyone’s talking about can be explained by heartwarming personal relationships, or by the laughable hope that Rand Paul will be put on the Romney ticket, or by the sort of vague idea that by playing favorites, Dr. Paul will become the “number two” in the party. But that doesn’t make a lot of sense—Ronald Reagan didn’t become the “number two” in 1976 by treating Gerald Ford with kid gloves; nor did George Bush Sr. in 1980, when he coined the phrase “voodoo economics” thrashing Reagan. It’s possible—monkeys exuent ex-buttium-Ronius Paulius is also possible—but it’s certainly not logical.

Another possibility, as I suggested, is money/oligarchy. You know, those things we all agree now that control our politics. That is why I would suggest that while there may be nothing to it at all, that at the very least it’s worth looking into why Ron Paul’s SuperPAC is headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah—you know, the capital of Mormonstan, where Romney’s power and influence runs, as you might imagine, fairly strong. Of all the places in the United States isn’t it a little bit odd that the Ron Paul SuperPAC is based in Mitt Romney’s tribal motherland? Is it really so much to ask the media, all abuzz about the Romney-Paul alliance, to appropriate just a tiny bit of their resources into real investigative journalism, rather than more of the same fatuous, shallow celebrity-magazine fluff?

A few more details to consider here, in case you’re curious and not satisfied with the “our wives made us do it” theory:

* Ron Paul’s SuperPAC sugar daddy, Peter Thiel, whom I wrote about for The Nation, has a proven track record of using his money to play the cynical game of politics. According to a recent San Francisco Chronicle profile, “libertarian” Peter Thiel is funding a Democrat and former Obama trade official, Ro Khanna, in a primary challenge against anti-war, anti-PATRIOT Act liberal Democrat Congressman Pete Stark.

* Ron Paul’s SuperPAC sugar daddy Peter Thiel also funds other candidates supposedly anathema to antiwar, anti-PATRIOT Act, pro-gay marriage libertarians, including frothing pro-war GOP social conservatives Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce and Dan Lungren.

* Dr. Paul’s SuperPAC sugar daddy Thiel also donated the maximum allowable to the 2010 gubernatorial campaign of Meg Whitman, who was Mitt Romney’s campaign finance chair in 2008. Whitman was a protege of Romney’s when she worked at Bain capital; later, when Whitman was CEO of eBay, she made Peter Thiel rich when she bought out his PayPal in a deal roundly slammed as bad for eBay, but good for Thiel and Whitman.

Look, I’m just laying out some interesting leads here for journalists with budgets, leads that involve money and oligarchy in politics—someone out there with an expense account, for fuck’s sake, do your work! Sure, there may be nothing there—heck, it may have been Dr. Paul’s wife who suggested to Mrs. Romney what a wonderful idea it would be to base Paul’s SuperPAC in Salt Lake City. But if the media is willing to raise the question about the strange and rather unnerving alliance, it should be willing to look in strange places for unsettling answers.

One more thing: My labor isn’t free. If one of you actually gets off your ass and blows through Carlos Slim’s wallet to interview a few taxi drivers in Salt Lake, be warned: I will invoice you. Oh yes, I will.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Vance Dejesus

    Well chopped Mr Ames, a smelly chunk of inducment to stone the masses into the rigged who-gives-a-hoot. I’m coming away with the impression Paul may be the one to vote for, look how skillfully he’s playing Romney. He also says he’s ‘against’ the Pentagon-Bankster complex. Bravo!

  2. EmilianoZ

    Great piece, I LOLed many times reading this.

    Is the photo for real? Surely it must have been doctored. But it’s so well done. The letters matching the ripples of the shirts, the reflected light on the M.

    1. patricia

      I’d go with doctoring of photo. The Y on the last child is not angled into space as he is, while listening to the Great Man Himself.

      1. Jessica

        The “M” child and the “O” child are reversed. Otherwise, the 6 of them spell out ROMNEY, which would be a reasonable photo for them. So I would guess that either just the M and O were doctored or this was an outtake just before someone noticed and got the M and O children to swap places.

        1. EmilianoZ

          Very clever. That’s probably what happened. I didn’t realize the design on Ann Romney’s shirt were an R.

          Mitt probably thought he was making a good joke. One of his many gaffes.

    2. Elliot Nesspa

      To see doctoring…watch Ron Paul’s TV spot “Big Dogs” on youtube. IT is full of subliminal images, and they are there to hurt Paul. Either he did it himself to help his deal with Romney, or someone did it to scuttle him.

  3. PJ

    You have no concept of Libertarians; they are not on an evangelical crusade. They have no interest in convincing anybody. They really believe that the Savior State is doomed of its own excesses and at this point nothing will save it for much longer. They only require enough support to push it off the cliff when the time comes. Ron Paul is only speaking to a relatively small group of well placed social/economic saboteurs not “undecided voters” who know nothing. When the G20 countries go the way of the Warsaw Pac Mitt will be as good as anyone picking up what remains. Someone like Rick or Newt could go off the deep end.

    1. F. Beard

      I would love to believe RP is a libertarian but his ideas for private money supplies all involve easily cornered precious metals. That’s when he is not advocating a return to the gold standard – a fascist idea if there ever was one.

      And from a so-called opponent of the current money system I hear no calls for restitution for its victims. Instead I hear he proposes to cut social spending as if the old and poor are the problem.

    2. F. Beard

      They really believe that the Savior State is doomed of its own excesses and at this point nothing will save it for much longer. PJ

      Yet many so-called libertarians wish to see the State enforce a gold standard for them. So State Socialism is bad and doomed but State Fascism isn’t?

      1. George

        I don’t know any Libertarian who wants a gold standard.

        We want the gov out of the business of having anything to do with money. Gold, measured in ounces or grams, should be the medium that gov receives in taxes and pays for goods and services.

        But the rest of us are free to go on using the US Dollars in our bank accounts, if it suits. Once the gov stopped printing them and the economy recovered, they might be worth considering. At the moment they are a depreciating asset, at best.

        1. wunsacon

          >> I don’t know any Libertarian who wants a gold standard.

          >> Gold, measured in ounces or grams, should be the medium that gov receives in taxes and pays for goods and services.


  4. Jeffrey Kendall

    Awesome – I was sure Paul was working for Romney based on the debates alone. I wet my pants when I read this thanks, I can’t wait to vote for Obama again. He’s owned by the banksters and he does not tie his shoes in the morning without first consulting them, my kinda Pres! USA! USA!

  5. Almost Ghetto

    Is this post a joke? To suggest that Paul and Romney are somehow working together is way too much of a strech. I laugh at this conspiracy theory. I’m surprised this passed by Yves’s review.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Go rebut his allegations. He has evidence, the biggest being that RP is attacking everyone BUT Romney. All you are saying is you don’t like his line of thought. Not persuasive.

      1. Almost Ghetto

        I guess if you call coincidences and a biased partisan opinions evidence, then yeah, he gave evidence. Let’s forget the fact that Ron Paul used a fake Mit Romney in a few of his ads. This article seems to me like an attempt to label Paul as being the same as Romney and the rest of the empty suits. I’ll admit a bias when it comes to Ron Paul, but everything about this article stinks. Romney is the antithesis of what Paul stands for, so you’ll have to bring more compelling evidence to convince non-liberals that Paul is in collusion with Romney.

        1. F. Beard

          Romney is the antithesis of what Paul stands for, Almost Ghetto

          Not with regard to money creation, it seems. RP is in favor of a PREVIOUS form of banker domination – the gold standard.

          1. F. Beard

            but I believe what Dr. Paul specifically called for was competing currencies. OTAY

            The devil is in the details. RP’s idea of competing currencies ALL involve easily cornered PMs.

          2. Almost Ghetto

            People focus too much on Ron Paul’s dream of a non-fiat based currency. I really don’t see this happening because Paul get never get enough legislative support to enact it. What you should focus on is the imporant differences between him and Romney.
            1. He’s the only anti-war candidate (Obama provided left cover for war when he was elected)
            2. He’s not a crony capitalist and doesn’t talk to lobbyists.
            3. He follows the constitution, which means that he follows the rules instead of acting like a dictator (unlike the past few and current president)
            4. He is pro liberty and anti police state.

            Most of Paul supporters like him because of these points, all of which he has a long and consistant record.

          3. F. Beard

            People focus too much on Ron Paul’s dream of a non-fiat based currency.

            It’s priority number one for some even to the point of conceding all other truly libertarian goals such as ending the war on adult drug use.

            However inexpensive fiat is the ONLY ethical money form for government debts; a point RP should firmly grasp if he claims to be a libertarian and not a fascist poseur.

            This game of handball between fascists and socialists is well past old.

        2. Walter Wit Man

          “This article seems to me like an attempt to label Paul as being the same as Romney and the rest of the empty suits.”

          I agree. I often see partisan Democrats purposely conflate Paul with the other Republicans. I think part of this is bias. Many are victims of decades of partisan propaganda and look at everything through a partisan lens (Obama is good b/c he’s a D and Paul is evil b/c he’s a R).

          But I think you’re on to something. There is indeed strategy to attack Paul that does not make sense. I remember when Paul got surprise attacked by Maddow, he was shocked because Maddow used to have him in all the time to complain about Republicans and was chummy with him then all of a sudden “progressives” went on the war path.

          One has to ask what do “progressives” and Democrats get out of attacking Paul and conflating him with all the other Republicans?

  6. Georgina Calabass

    Joe Scarborough . Wow, now there is a news mouth with mega-credibility right down to the Brylcreem and the good’ol boy frown of vacancy. Bleeding-edge investigative journalism, compelling.

    1. Auric Purplefinger

      And don’t forget world-famous media celebrity Rocky Anderson, tailoring his platform like a duck decoy for the nine or ten remaining leftists who are still gullible enough to vote – in Florida, naturally, to help make sure that the election is close enough to steal. A single candidate, that’s so nineties, you gotta have a whole product line of candidates for every purse and purpose.

    1. bob

      I think Xenu is at the helm of this op. He started with Joseph Smith. The tricky part was getting L Ron to mother a child with Ayn Rand. Of course Ayn, like most dead beat fathers, left L Ron, and L Ron had to sneak away to a “hospital up north” to give birth to Ron Paul.

      The first, truely american papacy, on the way….

  7. Jill

    This story was originally the plot for a TV series; “Sister Wives”. In focus groups it was so popular it was instead sold to the MSM for use in cut and paste.

    Jeremy Scahill gave a talk Oct. 30 of 08. He showed when the money from the defense contractors changed over from Hillary to Obama. This was likely the last time that the American public could literally see a candidate being selected to serve the elites.

  8. Ed

    One thing I find interesting about current U.S. politics is how alot of not exactly small “d” democratic stuff that has been common in local U.S. politics is going national. One example is the fake candidacy.

    Its not uncommon in a machine politics town for incumbents to run unopposed, or to have unelectable, “name on the ballot with no resume” opponents. And sometimes when an incumbent machine politician does get a credible reformist opponent, a third, quasi-reformist candidate will enter the race, among insiders its common knowledge that this is done to split the reformist vote. But the highest office you would see this stuff would be Congress or middle sized city Mayor. With the office of Governor and President the stakes were considered to be to high for these sorts of games.

    But the Republican “race” is really hard to understand unless you swallow the theory that the party insiders are trying to nominate an unelectable candidate, and this post is evidence that they are not above throwing in some split the vote ringers too! Only 1972 and maybe 1924 come to mind as presidential elections where this was also the case.

    1. Mark

      Sounds like the do nothing but sleep with your best
      friends’ wives Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris, the Eye of the Needle.

  9. Bev

    Check further into Utah, Texas and other states affected by the following without note nor complaint by the candidates or political parties:

    Permission to reprint granted, with link to

    In a major step towards global centralization of election processes, the world’s dominant Internet voting company has purchased the USA’s dominant election results reporting company.

    When you view your local or state election results on the Internet, on portals which often appear to be owned by the county elections division, in over 525 US jurisdictions you are actually redirected to a private corporate site controlled by SOE software, which operates under the name

    The good news is that this firm promptly reports precinct-level detail in downloadable spreadsheet format. As reported by in 2008, the bad news is that this centralizes one middleman access point for over 525 jurisdictions in AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, KY, MI, KS, IL, IN, NC, NM, MN, NY, SC, TX, UT, WA. And growing.

    As local election results funnel through SOE’s servers (typically before they reach the public elsewhere), those who run the computer servers for SOE essentially get “first look” at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.

    In 2004, many Americans were justifiably concerned when, days before the presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell redirected Ohio election night results through the Tennessee-based server for several national Republican Party operations.

    This is worse: This redirects results reporting to a centralized privately held server which is not just for Ohio, but national; not just USA-based, but global.

    A mitigation against fraud by SOE insiders has been the separation of voting machine systems from the SOE results reports. Because most US jurisdictions require posting evidence of results from each voting machine at the precinct, public citizens can organize to examine these results to compare with SOE results. Black Box Voting spearheaded a national citizen action to videotape / photograph these poll tapes in 2008.

    With the merger of SOE and SCYTL, that won’t work (if SCYTL’s voting system is used). When there are two truly independent sources of information, the public can perform its own “audit” by matching one number against the other.

    These two independent sources, however, will now be merged into one single source: an Internet voting system controlled by SCYTL, with a results reporting system also controlled by SCYTL.

    With SCYTL internet voting, there will be no ballots. No physical evidence. No chain of custody. No way for the public to authenticate who actually cast the votes, chain of custody, or the count.

    SCYTL is moving into or already running elections in: the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, India and Australia.

    SCYTL is based in Barcelona; its funding comes from international venture capital funds including Nauta Capital, Balderton Capital and Spinnaker.

    Here is the link to the press release regarding SYCTL’s acquisition of SOE: g-election-software-provider-2012-01-11

    quote:”In 2007…the top 250 companies in the world had sales in excess of $14.7 trillion…an amount exceeding the GDP [Gross Domestic Product] of the United States or the European Union, $13.2 trillion and $13.7 trillion, respectively…combined sales of the top five (Wal-Mart, Exxon-Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP and General Motors) was nearly $1.5 trillion — larger than the GDP of all but seven countries.” — Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making, by David Rothkopf


    It creates a vertical monopoly, in that you have one provider providing each step of the system, and a horizontal monopoly, with one provider delivering results across the majority of the geographic spectrum.


    I note an uptick in talking heads’ conversations about a brokered gop convention.

    In which case all this would be submission by both Romney and Paul to…you can quess who.

    1. Antipodeus

      As an Australian with an abiding demand for physical, paper votes, I find this sentence somewhat alarming:

      “SCYTL is moving into or already running elections in: the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, India and _Australia_ .”

      Do you have any links to prove your assertion? Thanks.

      1. Bev

        trying again but just found that Bev Harris has an international page…

        Links still work at:

        including press release at: g-election-software-provider-2012-01-11

        Bev Harris has a page devoted to all states:


        Collect, upload & share information; Ask for advice, analyze results, data, documents


        And, International:

        1. Bev

          go to Bev Harris for a working link for the MarketWatch press release page as the link here does not work.

          1. Bev

            And, just to be clear, I support Bev Harris and the many election integrity people and groups who want Democracy to work which can help our economy to help everyone.

      2. Bev

        Canada is looking at some election issues now, but, like many states and nations, Canada needs to look at the above report for even bigger issues.

        Independent watchdog says Canada’s 2011 elections may have been corrupt

        By Cory Doctorow at 9:22 am Thursday, Mar 1

        The independent nonpartisan NGO Democracy Watch says that Canada’s elections regulator has failed in its duty to prevent fraud in Canada’s elections. This comes on the heels of a voter-suppression scandal in which “robocalls” were placed, allegedly to voters likely to vote against the (now ruling) Conservative party, telling them that their polling places had changed. One whistleblower claims to have worked on the phone-bank that handled complaints from the robocalls, and says that she was instructed to tell people that she was working on behalf of the Conservative party, and to give out misinformation about where to vote. Jeff David of Postmedia News writes in the Montreal Gazette:

        “Here we are 144 years since Canada became a so-called democracy and no one can tell whether Elections Canada is enforcing the federal election law fairly and properly because it has kept secret its investigations and rulings on more than 2,280 complaints since 2004,” said spokesman Tyler Sommers.

        The Harper government scrambled to keep pace with the burgeoning scandal during Tuesday’s question period, after Postmedia News and the Ottawa Citizen unveiled new details of the election calls that had been routed through a Tory-linked firm.


        Elections Canada not doing its job: Democracy Watch

    2. Bev

      The Billionaires’ Brokered GOP Convention

      Thursday, February 9, 2012

      by: Greg Palast, Truthout | Op-Ed

      The Plan is working.

      Mitt Romney’s biggest backer didn’t want him to win.


      These billionaires are smart men. Devious men. I’ve followed them for years, and they do nothing in a straight line. The super PAC that Singer and the gang control, Restore Our Future, is supposed to be for Romney. But it’s not; it’s for Singer and Bill Koch. The future they want to restore is their own, not yours or mine – or Romney’s.

      Now, if your ultimate goal is to beat Obama and you need Christie to do it, you want the GOP race to end in a brokered convention. Then, the billionaires become the brokers. In the best of all worlds for these super PAC men, no candidate gets the 1,144 delegates needed to win. Restore Our Future can then restore the nomination to Christie (or, say, Sen. Marco Rubio, or both), someone who can win.

      So, think about it. The Singer-Koch super PAC has access to more money than Fort Knox. It has raised over $30 million and has left as much as half sitting unspent. Yet, they didn’t bother to run major ads in cheap media markets like Grand Junction, letting Romney go down in Colorado by less than 4,000 votes.

      For a few bucks, they could have sealed it for Governor Romney this week. But they chose not to. Why?

      By moving money in and out of selected primaries like a piston, Restore Our Future can shoo Santorum and Gingrich away from the nomination – and, with a bit of luck, the Romney campaign ends up in Tampa dead on arrival.

      Then the Vulture and the Richie Rich Club can gnaw at Romney’s political corpse and regurgitate the nomination for the cat’s paw of their choice.

        1. Bev

          Indeed speculate and then disqualify loudly as unacceptable. The family having stolen two elections with help, are barred from entry so as not to steal a third. Pass it along.

      1. Bev

        Billionaire Ballot Bandits

        Wednesday, February 29, 2012

        They’re stealing it again.

        In 2000, my team uncovered how Katherine Harris illegally purged thousands of African-Americans from Florida’s voter rolls.

        In 2004, for BBC, we uncovered the Karl Rove GOP “caging scheme” that swiped that election.

        In 2008, we uncovered, for Rolling Stone and BBC, with co-investigator Bobby Kennedy, the GOP attack on voters who lost their homes to foreclosure.

        This year, there’s a new danger: Behind the election games are billionaires Super-PAC-ing the ballot box.

        But we have something they fear: deep file cabinets filled with confidential information on the billionaires behind Restore Our Future and other PAC-rats.

        (We broadcast the first investigative report of the Koch Brothers in 1996. And they’re not the worst. We MUST get this information out and soon.)

        Now, our team is prepared to dig in again, to write about and to film the scams against our civil rights — and this time, we have TV networks and major print outlets ready to take our reports.

        BUT, they can’t finance the basic detective work that gives our reports their powerful weight of undeniable facts.

        For that, we count on you.

  10. starburns

    so the premise is that ron paul and mitt “mittens” romney are allies because: (1) paul is not attacking romney during debates (2) paul is attacking the other two candidates during debates (3) salt lake city and (4) ladd christensen.

    first of all, kudos to the mormons for coming up with names like mitt and ladd. second, the article presupposes that ron paul is a lying felon who coordinates with a wealthy man who belongs to a secretive and somewhat enigmatic religion headquartered in slc.

    on the other hand, paul probably knows gingrich and santorum professionally to a far greater extent than he knows romney. he might dislike them. on the other other hand, considering the history of the mormons, it would be hardly surprising if some wealthy mormons are sympathetic to libertarian leaning politicians.

    i would submit that salt lake city is no more mitt romney’s backyard than the vatican is a tithing american catholic’s backyard or mecca is an american muslim’s backyard. i would further submit that the article basically relies on mormon stereotypes, that mormons are sneaky, arising from (some would say) peculiar and secretive religious beliefs and ceremonies, defiance towards the united states (i.e. mountain meadows and fundamentalist splinter groups), and the common perception that mormons are, by and large, better looking and more economically successful than most. in other words, mormons are like the ashkenazim of america.

    1. Walter Wit Man

      Yeah. I had a similar impression.

      He also had point 5) the wives are friends.

      Number 1) the debate issue, seems to be the strongest point, if true. But since I could care less about the Republican debates I haven’t heard much about it. It would be nice to see some video evidence or a transcript, etc.

      Since Romney is the centrist, so to speak, maybe Paul doesn’t go after him as much as he goes after the other two? Or maybe he sees the other two as being financed by rich pricks who are there simply to spread right wing ideas and make sure Paul doesn’t win. If this were Romney v. Paul it would be a much different race.

      Agreed that the other facts rely on presumptions about Utah and Mormoms and Republicans, etc.

      1. Karl Rove's Brain

        Right, good point, so even though everyone agrees (including Dr. Paul himself) that Paul is treating opponent Romney with kid gloves, while trashing Romney’s rivals–that’s all totally fine and normal and we should talk about that and speculate about their personal relationships. But under no reasonable circumstance should anyone, least of all journalists, ask why Ron Paul’s SuperPAC is headquartered in Romney’s home state. And definitely do NOT ask why Ron Paul’s SuperPac is run by former Romney supporters.

        I’m not being sarcastic. I’m saying I totally agree with some of the commenters who reacted hostilely at the writer’s arrogant proposal that “Oo, just because something fishy’s here, oo, we should explore it and ask questions.” Typical elitist. Look, I’m American born ‘n bred, so I know in my heart that asking too many questions and being all nosy is EXACTLY what got this country into the mess we’re in today. People really should mind their own business and just get on with their lives.

        Yves, the guy who wrote this really needs to take a chill pill and just go with the the flow. When did asking a lot of questions about politics and money ever do anyone any good?

        1. Walter Wit Man

          Questions are fine. I suppose it’s a somewhat interesting line of inquiry.

          Hey, even though I think Ron Paul is the least likely to be influenced by corporate influence or party machinations I am now open to the idea that he is a Manchurian candidate for establishment Republicans.

          So to me the most damning fact, the most interesting, is the identity of his top donors. They are pretty much establishment Republicans. I’m skeptical of any Romney specific allegations though–that Ron Paul is secretly working for Romney. What I’m skeptical of is that he is another Kucinich–a release valve for the two parties and he will toe the party line if asked.

          Where the PAC is located and his the connections to Romney don’t seem like much to me (although a secret deal to be VP would be interesting but the timing doesn’t fit that conspiracy).

          Also, I don’t accept the conventional wisdom about the debates. I don’t care and haven’t watched and don’t trust the circus that gets paid to create drama associated with it.

      2. Karl Rove's Brain

        Great points about the really awful demonization of mormons in this piece, like you i was so shocked and horrified. it’s so unfair to treat poor mitt romney and poor john huntsman that way, you really don’t know oppression and fear and suffering from stereotypes until you’ve been a romney mormon or huntsman mormon. it’s like what i told a date of mine who brought me to that musical “The Book of Mormon” I said “this sort of stereotyping is exactly how it started in Nazi Germany you know.”

        Oh and nice touch with your comparison to ashkenazi. whenever i see people compare anything to the holocaust i stand up and say “bravo!” don’t let political correctness cow you into making politically-correct demands for political correctness!

        1. starburns

          although i’m sure karl rove’s brain is savvy enough to realize it (after all, it is karl rove’s brain), my reference to european jews was not intended to invoke the holocaust in any way. and, as i’m sure you know, european jews were long viewed as suspicious, untrustworthy outsiders – different religious practices, distinct culture, the sense that they were by and large better off than average, etc. my point was simply that mormons are viewed by lots of americans with similar suspicion and resentment.

          look, follow the money for all i care. everyone knows that libertarians in general are full of shit. so what else are you really going to find out, best case scenario? ron paul isn’t a boy scout after all? mormons are crafty and manipulative? maybe the headline of your expose could read “excessively condescending blog reader: american politicians corrupted by money”!

          oh, and again, i don’t think that utah is mitt romney’s home state. to my knowledge, he was born in michigan (he likes the trees there), had a career in boston, and lives in new england. it is, however, mormon hq. i think your definition of home state implies that he has some sort of overriding fealty to the mormon church that transcends his mere geographic home state. and i think that lends proof to my point that, for whatever reasons, people are generally suspicious of mormons just because they are mormons.

      3. cwaltz

        Point 5 seems to counter the position that Paul knows Santorum and Gingrich better that Romney. If the wives are fast friends then I find it doubtful that Paul doesn’t know Romney that well.

        Not that I overly care what our bought and paid for duopoly have planned but I’m sure that Ron Paul is going easy on Ron Paul because it is in Ron Paul’s best interest to do so. It’s the libretardian way.

        1. Walter Wit Man

          Yeah. Good point on the wives thing.

          And I don’t care either. It’s stupid.

          Now I know why I avoid teevee and mainstream media (and even partisan blogs like Daily Kos, etc.); they invent whole stories out of nowhere and then jam it down our throat.

          Uh, okay, interesting theory. But this is the ‘conspiracy theory’ that the mainstream media wants to propagate? Stupid. This came from Chris Mathews and all the other dickheads btw. So that tells you something.

  11. Bastiat

    Alleging that Mormons somehow have some special connection to Utah would be as offensive as saying Jews have some special connection to Israel.

        1. Mark P.

          The original Bastiat lived from 1801 and 1850, by the way, and was a French writer and economist who said this: –

          “When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”

  12. Anonymous

    I like most of the guest contributors to this blog, but Ames has a bug up his ass about libertarians and that makes him sloppy and angry. Ron Paul’s PAC is headquartered in Utah, where there are a lot of Mormons, and one of its founding “principles” [sic] is a guy who is friendly with Huntsman who is friendly with Romney. That’s pretty fucking thin.

    Wealthy people donate lots of money to lots of different campaigns, sometimes with different platforms. Maybe it’s because of personal connections with the candidate, or maybe they’re single-issue voters who don’t give a fuck about the broader platform. It’s pretty easy to see vast conspiracies everywhere if your logic consists of “X donated to A and also B! A and B are in cahoots,” especially if X is a corporation or a rich guy like Thiel.

    On the basis of that we’re supposed to infer some vast conspiracy to do… what, exactly? Take down noted Washington outsiders Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich? You can’t have it both ways. If these guys are just interchangeable suits, then why the need to infer some vast conspiracy?

    All of this ooga-booga misses the most simple and direct explanation, which is obvious to anyone who’s been, you know, observing the campaign. Ron Paul fucking hates Rick Santorum. Santorum has been explicitly anti-libertarian his entire life. He spent the first few debates shitting on Paul for his anti-war stances, although no one paid much notice because there were 62 other candidates running at the time. Now that the field is winnowed down, Paul is in a position to return fire and have people notice. Simple as that.

  13. Another Halocene Human

    If Thiel was from PayPal, then you are looking at a scum and a half. The only reason he is “libertarian” is to evade banking regulations, ie RULE OF LAW.

    PayPal made all its money by PRETENDING TO CONSUMERS TO BE A BANK while making damn sure that according to US regulations, they are NOT A BANK. They have fought off attempts to regulate them. The upshot is that they can take your money, freeze your money, refuse to refund your money and you have no recourse. (Especially if you are not in the US.) Now, many people have threatened suit and gotten money back and there have been some famous websites that got their money back, but many more have been ripped off for alleged violations of PayPal’s TOS. Google “regretsy paypal” for a fairly recent tale of woe. But this stuff has been going on since PayPal showed up on the internet.

    They are scum. Behind every fortune a great crime, yadda yadda.

  14. icanhasbailout

    I’m told this is where I check in to pick up my tinfoil hat?

    Seriously people, use Occam’s Razor. Paul doesn’t attack Romney because his strategy is to become the anti-Romney, which means clearing the field of the other anti-Romney possibilities first.

    Also with respect to Gingrich and Santorum, both of them in their legislative careers have given Paul first-hand knowledge of why they should not be trusted. Paul worked with both of them for quite some time in Congress.

    The underlying idea of the article – that Ron Paul can be bought – contradicts decades of behavior that prove he can’t be bought. He is, after all, the only member of Congress who refuses to meet with lobbyists.

    This kind of article is sour grapes from Santorum and Gingrich supporters. It’s not Ron Paul’s fault – or Romney’s – that those two are horrible candidates. Santorum is a neo-theocrat and Gingrich has burned so many bridges that a good chunk of the GOP will vote for Obama before letting him become President (as poll after poll confirms).

    1. Clinteastwood

      Your comment nails it, unlike the author or other commentors. Once Santorum and Gingrich implode again, America will have no choice except the Constitution or the banksters. Follow the money, people. Who supports Obamney? Who supports Dr. Paul? Who is a liar/flipflopper? Who is consistent? If you can’t answer these questions with intellectual honesty, you are part of the problem, and are without excuse. Are you getting the idea yet?

      1. F. Beard

        America will have no choice except the Constitution or the banksters. Rawhide

        If ONLY! Instead, RP is so blinded by shiny metals that he thinks the Constitution mandates them!

        Hey RP,

        Please get a clue. Liberty requires shiny metals as much as worshiping God requires a Golden Calf.

      2. C-SPAN-Watcher

        I completely agree. The years and years of consistency should be all that you need to back up the fact that Ron Paul would NEVER “get in bed” with Mitt. As for Paul not attacking Mitt in the debates: If you watch the debates, Ron Paul only answers the questions posed to him (the moderators don’t even let him do that sometimes). He has been polite to Newt as well, even stating that “If I could only get him to come over on foreign policy…”.
        The rumor came on because an attack ad against Santorum ad was mentioned in the debate, and Santorum held a grudge against Paul for calling him “Fake”. Santorum is childish and ignorant (“They attack us because of our freedoms” hahaha), and after that debate you should have seen how he “shook” Paul’s hand. Santorum would have made a vicious attack ad against Ron Paul if he could have found ANY dirt on the guy. He did something else instead, he whined about how the mean people were ganging up on him. It was the best thing he could find “Why doesn’t he pick on Romney too?”. Well, he does, in fact the “Three of a kind” ad was on air (limited circulation because Ron Paul can’t spend millions all over the place like some guys), long before the accusation.

        As for the precious metals argument: Ron Paul directly quotes our founding fathers when he says that only gold and silver should be used as currency.
        Look up what our founding fathers said about paper money, and while you’re at it, look up what they said about letting central banks issuing money.
        FIAT money is being printed into hyperinflation with no regulation. Federal notes ARE ILLEGAL, but good luck using anything else to pay for goods and services in this country. We aren’t even allowed to audit the Federal Reserve, WTF?
        Libertarians have some sort of evil agenda? Really? Like what?

        The founders of this country created something beautiful and amazing that gave the power to the people. Unfortunately, the people have done exactly what the founders warned against and stopped being vigilant, ever since then politicians, banksters, and corporate interests, have been tearing apart the constitution. The worst part about it is that the people have been applauding the restrictions put on them by a government that was supposed to be restrained by the people!

        The article is just plain flimsy. Go, send journalists to investigate, it’s your time and money, doesn’t bother me one bit.

        Research, learn, and wake up, don’t do a huge write-up based on the rantings of an angry man-child that also makes the claim that “Rape babies are gifts from god”.

        Silliness, pure silliness.

    2. Peripheral Visionary

      I think you’re right – there is no love lost between Paul and Santorum, and between Paul and Gingrich. He sees both of them as picture-perfect big-government conservatives, who in his book are just slightly less bad than big-government liberals.

      One other factor would be that Romney could be more easily “bought” than the others. Romney wants to be President very, very badly – so badly that he may be willing to make big concessions to get Paul behind him (Vice Presidency may be too high a price, but who knows.) On the other hand, Santorum and Gingrich have enough animosity toward Paul that they are not willing to countenance making concessions to him.

      That’s not completely out of line with the allegations in the original article, but it falls far short of a conspiracy theory. As I mention below, there are good reason for Paul to be in Salt Lake, and likewise, there are good reasons for him to stay on Romney’s good side.

      1. Karl Rove's Brain

        You’re totally right, there are AWESOME reasons for Paul’s SuperPAC to be in Salt Lake, and there’s absolutely no reason at all why journalists should investigate it. Not unless they’re gonna wear a tinfoil hat!

    3. Karl Rove's Brain

      Ah, an Occamstard! What took you so long to troll this? We’ve been sitting here waiting for someone to haul in this ol’ comments-section cliche about “Occams Retard” and really you Occamstards are starting to disappoint. You took way too long with this article. By the rules of “Occam’s Retard”, there should be a troll within 3-6 hours of any story that upsets people, demanding the application of Occams Retard (as opposed to “Occams Razor” which doesn’t in the original mean what Occamstards falsely claim it means).

      I’ll just be heating up the popcorn here…please, do go on…

      1. Walter Wit Man

        Stating a contrary opinion is hardly trolling–especially since it was done in a nice way.

        If you disagree you should rebut the arguments rather than calling the author retarded.

    4. Anonymous Jones

      “The underlying idea of the article – that Ron Paul can be bought – contradicts decades of behavior that prove he can’t be bought. He is, after all, the only member of Congress who refuses to meet with lobbyists.”

      You and I most certainly have a different definition of the concept of “proof”.

      As always, it is difficult to underestimate the gullibility of human beings who desperately wish something to be other than it is.

      [NB. I have no compelling evidence one way or another on the substance of the comment or the original post. I do think the questions raised by Ames merit further consideration.]

      1. Walter Wit Man

        Ron Paul often votes against the wishes of his party and against the wishes of some of the biggest donors to his party.

        One could say this is a cynical ploy and he is not voting and making speeches with sincerity . . . . but his actions show him to be the more independent of his party and the party supporters than any national politician I know.

        Do you have an example of someone who is more independent?

        1. Karl Rove's Brain

          Yeah, totally independent. Here’s Ron Paul as chairman of the Koch Brothers’ lobby outfit Citizens for a Sound Economy (now FreedomWorks):

          Poor Dr. Paul lost his election and the only way someone can keep their independence is by working as a billionaire’s lobbyist.

          Oh, and Ron Paul’s main donor Peter Thiel makes money as CIA contractor that spied on US citizens who were political opponents of the US Chamber. So yeah, you’re right, totally independent guy!

          1. Walter Wit Man

            I’m not saying he’s totally independent. I don’t trust any Democrat or Republican. I’m just saying that he seems to be the closest thing to the real deal. Do you have an example of a pol that is more independent than him?

            I’ll check out those links. I am really interested in the top donor guy. I am suspicious that Paul is like Kucinich and is allowed to be independent on a lot of issues but when it really matters (like Obamacare or wars), he will toe the company line.

            So it’s not a matter of me thinking Paul is pure . . . it’s more of an indictment on the entire process . . . and seeing Paul as less of a problem than other pols (and even offering slight hope–like at least having someone dissent on our imperial wars).

    5. Walter Wit Man

      Yep, you state a much more likely hypothesis: it’s Gingrich and Santorum that are “conspiring” to play the spoiler and are not running serious campaigns.

      That probably explains Paul’s hostility to them.

      He’s right to be hostile. If the race were just Paul v. Romney then Paul would have a much better chance.

  15. F. Beard

    We want the gov out of the business of having anything to do with money. Gold, measured in ounces or grams, should be the medium that gov receives in taxes and pays for goods and services. George

    You were being ironic, weren’t you? But here’s Gary North’s own words:

    “The government does have the right to establish the form of money that citizens must use to pay their taxes. The government should limit itself to a statement regarding the weight and fineness of the tax coins. If private enterprise produces coins that meet these standards, the government must accept such coins as valid for the payment of taxes. The government lawfully controls the form of taxation; but it should not have any power to monopolize the production of coins. Governments have always asserted this authority, and they have always done so to the detriment of liberty.” Gary North from

  16. Publius

    Basically, the Repugs are holding Dr Paul’s son, Rand, for ransom. Essentially, “You can say your message. Might even bring us crucial extra votes, big tent and all. And it makes us look as if we have some economic smarts. But if you go off the reservation, it will hurt Rand’s political career.”

  17. Peripheral Visionary

    There is a simple reason Paul’s campaign is based in Salt Lake City: the Mountain West, particularly its more remote areas, are where his strongest supporters are located.

    A casual drive through the area would quickly confirm that. Suburban Utah is very much pro-Romney, but rural Utah, Idaho, Colorado, Montana, Nevada (where Paul won one of the counties) have a lot of Paul supporters. Despite the fact that he is somewhat in the shadow of Romney in the area, he gets a lot of his money from supporters there.

    I have relatives who live in the Mountain West, some of whom are staunch Paul supporters, and have been for some time. It makes perfect sense that Paul would want to be close to his supporters. If there is any sort of a conspiracy, it’s news to them.

    1. Karl Rove's Brain

      Right, so it makes sense to be in any mountain state, so therefore why not Utah, and why not have former Romney supporters. Totally makes sense and warrants no further inquiry. By the way, can you cite evidence of Ron Paul’s popularity in Utah? Evidence as per your theory that Utah is a major stronghold of Ron Paul support, and therefore nothing weird at all? Waiting…

    2. Because

      Lets remember, for the “Rockafeller” Romney, Paul’s biggest financier is the Rockafeller money trust itself.

  18. klare


  19. Rob Seabrook

    Before this so called scandel came along, Ron Paul couldn’t get arrested in the MSM. No mention unless as part of another story. Now he’s all over the news. All publicity is good publicity. Thank you Mark. Keep up the good work. Dr. Paul is really greatful to you.

  20. Jackrabbit

    It *could* be entirely innocent (in a not-so innocent kinda way).

    Romney and the GOP establishment needed to neutralize the Tea Party.

    A bigger bull horn for RP (via SuperPAC funding) may be one way to split the Tea Party vote.

    And RP may have pulled a few punches to further Rand’s career (sorry RP worshipers, fatherly affection trumps ideology).


    I would question the motivations of some of the other candidates as much, or more:

    Huntsman (as already noted in the post).

    Cain, Perry: these ‘flash in the pan’ candidates siphoned votes from Tea Party sweetheart Bachman.

    Santorum: this very ‘establishment’ guy (the establishment is solidly behind Romney) pulls ‘anti-Romney’ votes from Newt.

    Newt: who is funded by a strong supporter of Isreal at a time when 1) the ‘smart money’ sees Obama as the winning another 4 years, and 2) Isreal needs US support to counter Iran.

    1. Jackrabbit

      Oh, I think Perry entered the race after Bachman left (or just before) but I think his candidacy did little but muddy the waters – which essentially helped Romney.

      Although he essentially left the race to reconsider his candidacy, he _chose_ to contest the South Carolina before dropping out (primarily at the expense of Gingrich and Santorum).

    2. Jackrabbit

      Just to be clear, what I am suggesting is that Romney any help for Ron Paul by Romney supporters/’GOP establishment’ does not have to mean that there is an outright alliance between Romney and RP.

      RP has little chance to win the nomination AND if he did win the nomination he would have little chance against Obama. Romney supporters can contribute to RPs campaign with little risk to their candidate, while RP knows that taking on the ‘GOP establishment’ candidate could engender anger toward his son Rand (who otherwise has a bright future in the GOP).

      This game-theoretic arrangement doesn’t require outright collusion or any sort of material reward for Ron Paul (some have suggested above a possible VP slot).

      The real takeaway of a _cosy_ relationship between Romney and Paul may be the competitive disincentive built in to all aspects of a crony capitalist system. Market participants, so to speak, arrange their affairs with a knowledge of likely outcomes based, in part, on the market power of other participants.

    3. Walter Wit Man

      Good points.

      If there is a conspiracy it is that Paul pretends to be independent and is only doing so to keep people in the Republican party–like a Dennis Kucinich.

      And if there are ulterior motives for running a campaign I think Santorum and Gingrich and a few others are better places to look.

      Heck, Ron Paul was the only Republican that could beat Obama in a recent poll. If Gingrich and Santorum weren’t in the race and it was just Romney and Paul this could be a much different race.

      1. Jackrabbit

        What poll was that? My understanding is very different (as reflected in what I wrote above):

        If RP really has a realistic chance to a) win the GOP nomination and b) beat Obama, then he has no reason to pull any punches or ‘play nice’ with Romney and the GOP establishment.

        It is RP’s lack of elect-ability that AND his appeal to some parts of the Tea-Party that fosters the (otherwise unlikely) Romney-Paul ‘connection’ (for lack of a better word).

        1. Walter Wit Man

          The rationale for RP to attack Gingrich and Santorum and not Romney:

          1. Gingrich and Santorum are stealing RP’s votes. RP has a Hillary Clinton type strategy–which is really an old school get the electors strategy. The Republican elite is using Gingrich and Santorum to pick up electors that can easily be flipped to Romney if Romney wears RP down, whereas if RP could pick them up now he will be able to mount a stronger attack during the convention.

          2. Anger. These two are being funded by shady people. As in millions of dollars from individual donors. Basically, the elite can buy a candidate to stay in a race and promote their policies and attack other candidates. Gingrich and Santorum are not even getting on the ballots in all the states. They are not real campaigns, whereas Paul is mounting a much stronger (and stealthier) campaign. Paul is probably pissed at them.

          3. RP is pretending like it’s a two man race by treating only one guy with respect and the other two as a nuisance. Democrats do this as well. He’s trying to make this the reality by pretending that it is.

        2. Jackrabbit

          OK, I see your reasoning. LOL!

          So RP is being nice to Romney while he dispatches the surrogates. LOL!

          Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. LOL!

          It’s such a change in outlook that I can’t hardly contain myself (thanks for the laughs).

          I’m not say’n that you’re wrong. And I respect your support for your candidate.

          I definitely see a strong establishment (backed by wealthy/corporate $) vs. others divide – and I don’t imagine that RP is part of the establishment (that’s one of the reasons why I wrote what I did above). But if RP has a *real chance* to win the Presidency, then it seems to me that he should be campaigning differently.

          For example, Romney spent A LOT of money running against Gingrich in Florida. MAYBE that was an opportunity for RP to attack Romney forcefully??

          Anyway, it seems that if he were to win the GOP nomination, the corporate $ would just go to Obama (a dynamic that is not considered in the Rassmussan Poll.)


          FYI, from, which averages several polls shows (click on link):
          Romney-Obama Obama by 4.6
          Santorum-Obama Obama by 5.1
          Paul-Obama Obama by 6.6
          Gingrich-Obama Obama by 12.4

          Also note that the Rasmussan Poll is of “Likely Voters”, whereas most of the others are of “Registered Voters.” (I imagine this means a younger average age for the Rasmussan Poll)

          You may also be interested to know that RCP GOP voter breakdown (Nationwide) as:
          Candidate Voters Delegates
          M.Romney – 35.3 – 153
          Santorum – 29.3 – 69
          Gingrich – 14.8 – 33
          Ron Paul – 11.3 – 26

          And lastly, Intrade Prediction Market odds:
          Candidate GOPNom President
          M.Romney – 83.7% 33.3%
          Santorum – 5.0% 1.7%
          Gingrich – 3.4% 1.7%
          Ron Paul – 2.6% 1.3%

          Also note:
          Obama to be President: 59.9%
          Brokered GOP Convention: 15%

          1. Jackrabbit

            Even if RP wanted to compete forcefully, there is almost unlimited money for the establishment candidates of either Party (relative to the non-establishment candidates).

            While its interesting to watch the campaigns, any candidate not blessed by the Party has an uphill battle.

            Then there’s the wildcard. If RP has any real chance, that’s probably it. (Pass the popcorn.)

          2. Walter Wit Man

            I fail to see what’s so funny. LOL

            1. The polls have shifted in part because of the attacks on Paul and the fact he gets no support from the party or the media (and then liberals like you pile on and it’s amazing he has the support he does). In America our “democracy” is such a sham that whatever stooge the Republicans throw out there under the media spotlight does well. And the reverse is also true.

            And btw, much of the recent warmongering has had the effect of unifying Republicans around their pro war base which has hurt Paul.

            2. Re Florida. Didn’t Paul not campaign in Florida because of the way the electors are decided there? Or because it’s not friendly to him?

            3. I don’t trust polls or Mr. Market to accurately predict or reflect reality. I know it cuts both ways and I cited a poll, but it often works as a way to move public opinion rather than reflect it. Political news is focused on the horse race so that we are distracted from real issues. And frankly, I’m so sick of politicians from both sides that I don’t really care about the drama much anymore, my interest in this post being a rare exception.

            4. I’m getting pretty sick of *certain* liberals pretending that lefties like myself that make the comments I do about Ron Paul is a secret Republican or something. But I guess that’s why you do it. To piss people off and get under their skin. Kind of like how Republicans say shit about Al Gore inventing the internet or saying Obama is a socialist.

            Ron Paul has been a target of *progressives* because he is dangerous–not because he is going to win but mostly because he demonstrates that Democrats are worthless. Actually, it’s the Ron Paul haters that seem to have a fetish. And I think it reveals that they feel guilty that the person most of them will end up voting for, Obama, is to the right of Paul.

          3. Jackrabbit

            I didn’t mean to offend. As I explained, my LOL was due to the surprise and cognitive dissonance of a new way of thinking about the race.

            Mark Ames hinted at some dark collusive aspect of the Paul-Romney ‘nice-ness’. I chimed in with what I thought could be a natural explanation for that ‘nice-ness’ that didn’t require collusion. Then you took that further than I could ever imagine with your explanation of the race.

            I’m not a Ron Paul supporter but I respect that RP supporters are trying to stay true to a set of principals – and I think we need more principled people.

            I recognize that Polls can only explain so much and there could be alternative explanations for Florida and other things. Still, I think we will have to agree to disagree about Paul’s prospects as a GOP candidate. (But there’s always if RP wants to pursue that.)

  21. Tertium Squid

    Interesting article. I have wondered about Paul’s apparent alignment with Romney – an attitude that does not endear Dr. Paul to me.

    I wonder if there might be some promise in the bag – Ron Paul has outsider cred and might not be the worst Veep pick for someone like Romney, eager to peel off some indies and Libertarians from the undecideds. I wouldn’t want much more to do with him for selling out, though…

  22. OTAY

    Therein lies the catch 22 of metals. How doe’s a non-credit based fiat escape becoming sullied? Owning PM’s today no longer imparts a RP belief of monetary policy for many, rather a tired view of “Full Faith and Credit”. Perhaps in a measured way we have all cast our lot with the Irish.

  23. Fíréan

    Ron Paul on Tuesday shot down the idea he’s in cahoots with Mitt Romney, saying Rick Santorum is a conspiracy theory “addict” who “dreamt that up.”

    Paul told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer there is no truth to the idea that he is in a secret alliance with the Romney campaign. After Blitzer asked if the rumors were true that he was protecting Romney in order to see his son Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on the ticket, Paul laughed off the suggestion and said it “hasn’t crossed my mind.”

    That was tuesday.

    1. cwaltz

      I’d be surprised if the guy hasn’t hedged his bets and donated to everyone. That’s how these sleazeballs usually work. Their logic being that if you bet on red AND black then you can’t lose.

    2. starburns

      it makes sense to hedge if you don’t care who wins so much as you want to make sure that the eventual winner won’t fuck with your interests.

      and, for what it’s worth, endorse liberty seems to be going after romney on paul’s behalf. see “fake politicians” channel on youtube. i suppose el’s work could reflect it’s principals’ cynicism but, if so, that would seem far more problematic from the money is speech angle than from the elaborate mormon conspiracy perspective.

  24. CIA Broom Closet Attendant 101

    I read this and as usual was woken up rudely, but what’s new in politics. I researched and it pretty much all adds up. Not only that but awhile back RT had a very interesting article about how the Ron Paul REVOLUTION would play out. According to the Kremlin the USA was headed for some 1930’s style fasci style maneuvers.
    Well they were on the money. Not that the Kremlin wouldn’t like Ron Paul as a POTUS or VP but as usual the Russians having lived through assorted political intrigues were easy to spot the game, set, match so to speak.
    My friends like Ron Paul a lot, but I’m now off the bandwagon. Not that the Central Casting Spook is my main squeeze, I’m starting to think “tending ones own garden” might be the most practical advice ever, seeing the gaggle of rather dark swans floating like some kind of karma squadron on the horizon.
    Sometimes I wish like some people I know that I could get excited about Dancing With the Stars, Obama, or American Idol, but I can’t.
    A curse I geuss from being the child of foreigners.

  25. Fiver

    What’s at the root of this persistent effort to destroy Ron Paul after the job was already done on him by the mainstream media, and he can’t gain anything through Romney, ’cause Romney can’t win unless a very potent, truly wild card impales Obama?

    Especially when the charge against him is that he supports an Obama policy twin for the Republican nomination rather than either of 2 clearly dangerous freaks?

    I have to think the fact that so much of the “left” was so thoroughly lObomatized through the crucial 1st year (or even longer) of this Admin they are deeply scarred by the fact they squandered their best opportunity in decades, and maybe ever, for real change by NOT grabbing the ring of huge popular disgust from the get-go and vigorously opposing Obama from the first minute he started bailing banks, handing out free passes for atrocious crimes, and placiing artificial lifeforms in top posts like Treasury Secretary. Obama would’ve backed up all the way Kansas.

    Move on from Paul. Worry about who WILL be President for the next 4 years.

  26. Spencer Mac

    Author, you need to understand the level of support intermountain west/I-15 dwelling (mormon belt communities give Ron Paul and Why. The libertarian streak of conservatism is a psuedo-religous political experience for most mormons. Ron Paul alligns himself perfectly with many in those area, he has tremendous support in these area, just like Wash, he will probably be runner up in Idaho and Utah, Montana. I have relatives in Napoleon Dynamite town Preston that are crazy about his candidacy as well as their friends and extended family. His Super pac headqaurters is a default location for the libertarian headquarters not Romney headquarters.

  27. Dick

    Thanks for peeling another layer from the Ron Paul onion. When someone like Joe Scarborough attacks Paul, it only adds to his populist appeal. It’s valuable to have honest critiques of Paul’s policies, connections and purposes rather than sloppy dismissals from the loathed mainstream media.

    Various independent journalists like Webster Tarpley and bloggers like Deadeye Blog, Real Currencies, Liberty Revival and others have for months been critiquing Paul’s ideology for being the true expression of “conservatism” rather than the radical departure it’s painted to be.

    Paul must be torn down, but only to the detriment of the rest of the field, including Obama. It does the world no good for his candidacy to be “martyred”, metaphorically speaking, at the hands of people who share his radical feudal agenda.

  28. DachsieLady

    “Why is Ron Paul going so soft on frontrunner Mitt Romney, his natural ideological opposite?” This “going soft on Romeny” has been the consistent stance of Congressman Paul all along — nothing new here. Also, no way is Romney Paul’s “natural idological opposite.” Read Washington Times article, (“Paul backs Romney’s record at Bain Capital” Jan. 12, 2012 where Dr. Paul praises “basic free market conservative principles.” Dr. Paul also says those who criticize Romney are showing “resentment of success.”

    Mr. Ames, I like your article very much though I think it is coming a bit late in the game. I also think your message and content stand strongly on their own and do not need the vulgar verbiage. We do need to follow the money and name names. But we also need to give the true definition of capitalism which I regard to be “state-sponsored usury”. And we need the true definition of “usury” which is charging compounding interest, ANY RATE AT ALL OF COPOUNDING INTEREST, on a loan of money. (Charging fees in connection with a loan is not usury.)

    Since there was metion of Ron Pauls and Mitt Romny’s relligion, I point out that Libertarian and libertarin economics is Austrian economics, a economic school founded and promoted almost exclusivly by atheist Jews.
    (Carl Menger,
    Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, and
    Friedrich Freiherr von Wieser.
    Ludwig von Mises,
    Friedrich Hayek,
    Joseph Schumpeter.
    Murray Rothbard,
    Israel Krizner,
    Ludwig Lachmann,
    Peter J. Boettke, and
    Peter Schiff. )

  29. Igigi redpill

    Apparently…Mr. Ames,you have little ability to think outside the box they say. Any body with half a brain realizes the NWO is planning to completely destroy the U.S. We are getting closer by the day and the end IS in sight. The F.E.M.A. camps are being made ready right now.
    Now…who do you suppose is going to take the blame for this collapse? Obama? Bush? Bernanke? maybe Soros. Great changes,or as they say nowadays a black swan event, come out of the blue…totally unexpected,surprising just about everybody. Maybe Paul is preparing to expose the total corruption of the “Mittens” Republican party at the convention and then run against both of the exposed puppets.
    But..EVERYBODY knows Paul “can’t win”. There is a saying on wall street that “what everybody knows is not worth knowing”. It would take a lot of “awaking” (before November) to get past all the voting corruption, but nowhere near impossible. Then we get to play problem-reaction-solution with the NWO. Ron Paul would of course be the problem, counting on us to provide the desired reaction and then they would provide the hard core, police state solution as soon as all our guns were collected.
    Paul believes we could turn this country around far faster then they imagine thus avoiding their “solution”…We shall see.

  30. anon

    And here comes the establishments latest anti Ron Paul ploy, since they can’t attack him on any of the issues they’re now creating a conspiracy that he’s secretly joining forces with Romney.

    What a joke.

    Ron Paul is the only candidate running who is not in the pocket of corporate America(and abroad). To insinuate he’d be politically allied with Romney(who is the poster boy for corporate America) shows a lack of common sense at best, and at worst highlights a calculated disinformation attack on Ron Paul’s campaign.

  31. Elliot Nesspa

    At the site, you will find a story that Ron Paul’s own TV spots are using subliminal messages to hurt Ron Paul as well as the two other potential front-runners.

    Can you link to that here? I think it is very relevant due to the info you have revealed in this story.

  32. 1776again

    Who paid this guy to come up with the same ignorant innuendo that the so-called medical experts come up with to scare the public so they can sell theri snake oil” People that eat beans are likely to live longer, or people that drink water

  33. FreedomRules

    First it is important to point out that “Endorse Liberty” is not “Ron Paul’s Superpac” that is misleading. It is a Superpac that can spend any money any way it wants.

    That being said, I have never donated to that Superpac as Revolution Pac is clearly for Ron Paul, they work very hard, they’ve been around longer, and the people there put on live streaming webcasts for the followers and allow participation…they are die-hard Ron Paul supporters and advocates of liberty and the Constitution.

    So donate to RevolutionPac instead of the other one…problem solved.

  34. FreedomRules

    @Fbeard…you are completely ignorant of…well everything. I don’t know where to begin but you are clearly an obsessed troll and partisan hack.

  35. F. Beard


    You are completely ignorant – of me. Partisan hack? Which one, pray tell? The stupid Demoncraps or the evil Repugnantcrumbs?

Comments are closed.