Rick Santorum is claiming Mitt Romney and Ron Paul forged some secret backroom non-aggression pact with each other, and today a Think Progress study is adding fuel to that story. Out of the 20 debates Paul has participated in so far, he’s directly attacked the other candidates 39 times – but hasn’t once laid his gloves on Romney:
Rick Santorum has directly accused Paul and Romney of working together, noting “their commercials look a lot alike, and so do their attacks.” A review by ThinkProgress of the 20 GOP debates suggests Santorum might be onto something.
While Paul has freely attacked Romney’s top rivals, he has never once attacked Romney.
Twenty debates and no Romney attacks? As Allahpundit quips, “Out: Conspiracy theories advanced by Ron Paul. In: Conspiracy theories involving Ron Paul.”
There’s clearly a pattern here, but it’s important to get perspective. The same “Romney alliance” rumor has gone around about other candidates, including Michele Bachmann before she dropped out. Legal Insurrection detailed the theory last December:
The speculation was fueled by Bachmann’s relentless and often inaccurate attacks on everyone who rose to be the lead challenger to Romney, first Pawlenty, then Perry, then Cain, and most recently Newt. Yet Romney was spared the wrath of Bachmann, other than the “Newt Romney” line.
Bachmann’s former campaign manager Ed Rollins later speculated that she took it easy on Romney because she was holding out for a VP slot. A less calculated reason could be that she knew she wasn’t going to win and didn’t want to alienate the party’s most likely nominee.
But Paul also has a personal and professional interest in maintaining good relations with Romney. Like Bachmann, he knows he can’t win the nomination. But he’d like some signs of respect at the GOP convention, and wants to leave as many bridges intact in the party as he can for his son. Beyond that, Paul and Romney seem to have a friendly rapport, while Paul has had a rocky personal history with both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. It’s a perfectly logical reason, but not a scandalous one.
Oh sure, and we're Jewish supporters of Mittens here and we're fine with that. Reasonable, logical. Our favorite mannequin from nowheresville just likes an old coot who used mailing lists from Liberty Lobby to implement (born Jewish) anarcho-libertarian Murray Rothbard's brilliant idea to use resentment to meld an alliance between libertarians and the nutter fringe of conservative outliers, which just happened to harbor deep seated antipathies ot Zionist international finance congenial to Ron in any event. No scandal here. Move along folks. n nLooks like Romney's flexible pragmatism in the service of nothing much rubs off. n nHey, when it comes to chat fests about "why does the United States always send money and soldiers to israel" there's nobody more congenial than the Good Doctor. And the criminal conspiracy of the Federal Reserve. Mittens could pick up on that. This is the United States of America dammit, where is the gold? n n
This might be the case. What I thought when the charge was first raised was that Paul always went after people who were in the legislature (because he is) and compared how his votes were always right with his positions, but that Santorum and Gingrich didn't always vote the way they're talking now. And I didn't take his attacks (I'm one of the few out here who really hope Gingrich makes another comeback) as very meaningful. Romney attacks with venom. That's the way it comes across to me. And besides, has Romney put forth any position besides "me too"?
The question may be whether Paul can provide Romney with any electoral support.
Santorum called Paul "disgusting". Gingrich wouldn't support him against Obama. Romney has said nothing against him. That, by itself, is reason enough for the comity between them. Personally, I think Romney stands a better chance against Obama if he adopts Dr, Paul's foreign policy positions including his belief that the U.S. should cast Israel adrift.
Absolutely, a "Republican" who denounces Abraham Lincoln and publicly proclaims bin Laden a freedom fighter with every right to be "upset" with America killing hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Muslims, is absolutely Mr. GOP, well if you are cough cough "anti-Zionist" with none too much concern for American history, culture or domestic issues or someone whose core values float on the surface of their political biography like unattended water lilies. And that's two types of drift right there. For sure Romney could well adopt the Good Doctor's left-wing foreign policy or that of Mr. Ed the talking horse, depending upon circumstances. It all depends. True, an Israel freed from American pressure would be an interesting place once the Bibi-Kadima-Laborite block finds itself denuded from the cover provided by its supposed connection to American power elites.
It's Mormon voodoo . . being nice to people is just this weirdo's manager trick . . or that's what I think Newt might say privately.
This conspiracy theory sounds very persuasive…