The comparison between Bobby Kennedy and Mr. Romney lacks detail but seems fair. The Kennedys were raised with the understanding that their inherited wealth should be used to better the lives of others. Mr. Romney has rarely even tried to see the world as others do. He is sort of like Bill Gates before he married a woman who could set him straight.

If Mr. Romney had any consideration for the rest of us, he would openly support legislation that would tax the income of financial folks like him at regular earned income rates. Why do I have to pay over 20% on my pension when he gets a free ride at 15% just because he is an "unemployed" ex bankster.

The true right wing hates the man because he may flip on a moments notice. Should he get the nomination, he'll find out once in for all what the nation thinks of his brand of wealth.

Kiow, I agree to a point; one of Paul's biggest blunders has been dropping his ideals for a party. The two party system has created a huge mess in this nation through tax, election, judge selection, redistricting, and monetary polices. It has become so entrenched in the standard practices of how things operate most voters never even question it. The blindness of voters over these issues ensures these actions are sure to continue.

"Obama or Romney for 4 years...not a real good forecast....."
It was rather Rather humorous hearing George Soros, who is a MEGA $$$ supporter of the far left causes, was a few moths back, on CNBC. When asked about the GOP race, he openly said, he hoped it will be Romney, because it will assure the major world financial community that nothing will change, policy wise, no matter who is in office. As long as you keep key players in place who support the current world monetary policy of endless liquidity, where the power structure continues to get more rich, and more powerful, they could care less who is in there.

"I read some time ago, unless America changes direction, 100% of revenues by 2020 will be the big three government programs. Social Security/Medicare, defense, interest on the debt."
.
It will be FAR sooner then that, but what does it really matter?
With fiat currency, and a federal reserve banking system that allows you to create $$ at will, it means NOTHING. They will simply do what they are doing now, when anything is insolvent...
PRINT MORE MONEY, and BAIL IT ALL OUT!

Paul's positions have been libertarian his entire career. He has been consistent with his monetary beliefs since the 70's when he warned of the major problems to come when Nixon officially removed us off the gold standard, allowing the sham of fiat-$$$ printing to be an open spigot of politicians to solve any short term budget problem. His anti perpetual wars-world policeman position has never changed.
.
He really should have never run as a (R). That was indeed a big mistake on his part. The Republican party does not at all have ANY libertarian principals. They spend just as out of control as the democrats. I can't see how anyone can deny that fact; after the past 10 or so years? I think he has run as an (R) only because the only way to be elected to any major political position these days is to associate with one of these MEGA $$$ entities. The nature of the oligarchy system now, simply will NEVER allow a 3rd party to do anything. The power structure, and alliance of big government and big business, has grasped it's iron hand stronger each and every year; as MORE government welfare is doled out every budget, all via paid for by $$$ they create from thin air.
.
The hard Paul backers, like myself, are all realists, and have said that he will win the nomination. I have said that from day one. He would have the best shot vs Obama, but that is moot, because the GOP establishment will never allow him to go any place. That's all fine and dandy, because they are committing TOTAL suicide with Mittens. And one can will be able to reap absolutely huge monetary rewards when he faces off against Obama. After the VP announcement, and GOP convention boost, my hope is Mittens will be near tied with Obama in national polls. Then I will just be UNLOADING on Obama to win. As it will take all but a week, for him to go ahead, and never look back, en-route to an absolute route.
MORE hope and change you can believe in is coming folks! HAHA

""Changing positions through life is normal. What is abnormal is swapping positions to garner support based on the base "you" are appealing toward.""
Sounds to me like what Romney does almost daily.
I hear him talking of people cross-party voting being a disgusting practice in Michigan. Yet he admits in a 2007 interview to doing the exact same thing to Ted Kennedy with a 12 year old school girl laugh.
Politicians change every day based on polls. Every one of them is guilty. Obama, Romney, all of them. Which is why I wonder why you hold Ron Paul to such a different standard?

Changing positions through life is normal. What is abnormal is swapping positions to garner support based on the base "you" are appealing toward. In Paul's case he has swapped back and forth between libertarian and republican parties because of the office he wanted to hold vs his position or stance on ideals. This pandering is no better than Perot. Sure some of his ideas are good but what will they be next year?

AH a point finally emerges. Changing parties or positions? Just because you change one, certainly doesnt mean that you change the other.
As long as I can remember Paul has been anti-war, anti-foriegn aid, anti-big government, etc. Has he modified his positions on certain issues? Sure. Can you please point out ONE that hasnt? Just ONE.

More whining about fox and rush, wonders never cease.

There are many reasons to question Paul on his ability. The most glaring one is his changing parties to gain a personal advantage. Either you stand for a position or you don't. His inability to gain admiration from many voters is not on single issues, it on his many positions depending on the year or the political party he wants to participate in at the time. He is running against Obama if he wins the primary, who also has some good positions but the totality of his record is not worth a single position; just like Paul.

So who is?? Will you be voting Ron Paul? He seems to fall in line with your foriegn policy opinions. Seems to fall in line with your true small govt. What I cannot figure out is why on Earth Ron Paul is not the front runner for the repubs? He is wiping the floor with these idiots in every single debate, why do so many run from him? He is EASILY the most serious about cutting spending. He should be the runaway winner.
I have an idea, because Fox noise dismisses him over and over again. Disagree?? It seems to me that Rush and Hannity should just run on a joint ticket, since they seem to control the process from their bully-pulpit

again Vato we agree, did a reasonable person take your account over??

Did RAF say something to ME...AGAIN? More blather from a poster with nothing to add, no points to defend, just an angry old man. Feel sorry for you.
To make yourself feel better you can come back at me with a label , a condescending remark or whatever helps your self-esteem.

Below I commented on what I didn't like about Romney, now I'll comment on what I like about him.
Money, fame, position didn't go to his head like so many other successful people. After he became a millionaire, he still taught Sunday school in his church. Still married to the same gal he married in 1969. Ann Romney BTW has Multiple Sclerosis since 1998. They tithe 10% to the church plus gives away another 5%. As governor of a liberal state he had to work with liberal legislators, and turn a deficit into a surplus.

Romney was at the forefront of a movement to bring near-universal health insurance coverage to the state, after Staples founder Stemberg told him at the start of his term that doing so would be the best way he could help people, and after the federal government, due to the rules of Medicaid funding, threatened to cut $385 million in those payments to Massachusetts if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services. Despite not having campaigned on the idea of universal health insurance, Romney decided that because people without insurance still received expensive health care, the money spent by the state for such care could be better used to subsidize insurance for the poor.

The Bain Capitol way (getting a group of the best people to solve a problem) will bring bring America back from the brink of financial collapse. I read some time ago, unless America changes direction, 100% of revenues by 2020 will be the big three government programs. Social Security/Medicare, defense, interest on the debt.

President Obama with billions of dollars for negative campaign advertising, Mitt selected some of the meanest dirtiest political fighters in the USA. As we used to say in the military, "No such thing as a dirty fight, except the fight you lose".

"Tell me the last or FIRST time one of them mention "like firing people"; "not knowing NASCAR but knowing team owners"; "my wife drives 2 cadillacs"; "$multiple 100k not much money"; etc..."
.
That's why he is so far beyond cooked in a general election. Any time he attempts to act like a normal-regular guy he comes off even MORE as a phoney. Remember when John Kerry tried to 'connect' with the common Ohio voter, by going on a staged duck hunting trip? Went into some back woods, fired a few blank shells in the air, and some political operative handed him a dead duck. He came out holding a duck, that looked like it had been on ice for weeks. The average hunter was laughing their a$$ off, and it alienated them even more. Just like when Romney says "he doesn't know many NASCAR people, but does know many team owners". LAUGHABLE; as the die hard fans of a driver usually HATE the team owner!
.
If he stays on this path, he may actually lose the south as well, and then you are looking at a landslide the size of Reagan vs Mondale.

Fox will throw a few democrats on there, so they can claim it's fair and balanced. To say it's not a outlet of the GOP is insane; however. MSNBC is clearly an outlet of the DNC. If you watch these networks UN-objectively, it is pretty clear to see this, just by the agenda their network sets out. I will say that show "the 5" should just be made into "the 2". Bob Beckel, and Greg Gutfeld, are the only ones worth listening to. The two pin head woman, are clearly just there for their good looks, like most of the pin headed Fox info babes. I don't always agree with Becekel, but at least he has some personality, and can make reasonable points, and enlargements, out side the same tired out pin headed talking points.
.
Fear-rhetoric:
I think hard line left groups got Glen Beck taken off the air; as they made constant threat to any company advertising during his shows airing.. A BIG mistake on their part, as I think he was doing more damage then good. His chalk board logic was getting so far fetched in conspiracies, that one was beginning to wonder if he was going schizophrenic?

fear your hypocrisy is never ending. When someone declares media bias, factual or perceived, you jump up and down declaring them whiners. While at the same time your similar actions making comments about fox and rush, to you are not whining. This and similar positions you have "dribbled” on these comment sections have taken your discourse to the same echelon of mouse. Good for you.

Romney considers what, 375k, as a minor amount? That's because he knows that's middle class money. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29...

fear-I am a proud Fox fan. I guess I don't understand if what you say is true, why do they (the Democrats) keep going on? If I take my car to a mechanic and it never gets fixed but I keep going back should I blame the mechanic? I saw many interviews with Weiner and he gave as good as he got. I meant common sense-he had none.
No law school for me but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

nemisis,
Tell me the last or FIRST time one of them mention "like firing people"; "not knowing NASCAR but knowing team owners"; "my wife drives 2 cadillacs"; "$multiple 100k not much money"; etc...
.
Seriously, President Obama is being called a snob by Santorum for wanting people to have greater access to college while Romney says the above AND MORE!
.
I think when it comes to being a wealthy politican... you earn your attacks for your wealth. You must admit.... Romney has done that and made it EASY for his opponents (Democrats AND REPUBLICANS)

The writer only reports on the wealth of Romney and how its a problem. No mention of the wealth of Obama, Pelosi, Reed, Clinton, Schumer, Boxer, Kerry, et, al.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi42gRAsm...

"Some people say"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivb...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBPBdW2wX...

Being an intelligent politician usually requires being a talented LAWYER knowing the law. Not sure if you have gone through law school PR but it may be the most challenging profession to pursue aside of a Doctor.
Weiner is a very bright man , agree or disagree with his politics. Just like Paul Ryna is incredibly intelligent as well. Sometimes you have to recognize a person's brilliance regardless of political allegiance. the video I posted Of him and Megyn Kelly is indicitive of Fox and what most of them try to do to left leaning guests. They seem to give speeches instead of asking questions in an interview. I would suggest you check out the Documentary "OutFoxed you may hate the premise because you are a Fox news fan, but it is made by former employees of the network that are exposing the network for what it is sheer and utter propaganda.

fear-If they would be honest once and not follow the party line in every interview and answer a question they wouldn't get cut off- watch the 5 and see the dems on there make their points. What was Wiener so brilliant in besides politics?

Yeah I see dems on Faux as well poor, they are always being talked over and cut off when they start to dominate the conversation,"Sorry we are out of time" then going to comercial!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1os57-n9v...

Too bad Wiener was a perv, because he really was a brilliant guy.

Pamama-I saw the DNC chairperson this morning on Fox. If that's whats running your party you guys are in major do-do. But we really know all the strings are being pulled in Chicago by those honest pols down there.
And by the way, I've seen more of your liberal buddies on Fox then I care to count. And is it only bad when Republicans are rich, not Democrats?

Kiowa- I dont disagree entirely, Rather was a complete partisan, Brokaw as well. What you rarely see on say the Nightly news at 5:30 is an anchor interviewing someone they would like you to percieve as independant, while doing their very best to trash the President or any other Left wing politician. Turn on Faux in the middle of the day. Megyn Kelly does it all the time, Bill Hammer, all of their so-called "news" anchors are just more slanted talk shows. Tactics I just do NOT see on CNN nearly as much. I am sure that RAF and a few others will try to tell me how wring I am, but I just dont see it.
I will admit that the Rather story sickened me. So did the Chris Mathhews soundbite of his "leg getting tingly". Which sucks because I actually think that Matthews has the potential to be great on politics if he could leave out the bias. Unfortunately its there and cannot be ignored.
What I dont get is why Fox dumped Glenn Beck, he is exactly the fear monger that fitted right in over there!! They just ought to have Beck, Hannity, and Rush like hosts on all day with opinion sows, thats essentially what they have now just less sensationalistic(Except megyn Kelly) who is smokin hot BTW. I can watch her TV show I just have to mute the TV.:)

No Crying RAF just stating facts. Your intent on injecting drama and quoting me on every thread is hilarious!!
Rush is an out of touch adulterous drug addict, FACT. Didnt he spend 20+ years on the radio bashing drug addicts as the lowest people in society? Do you sense tears in my post?
Fox news may be your favorite network(obviously youve been Hannitized in the no spin zone) but they, like the "liberal" mainstream media paint themselves as non-biased(Fair and Balanced). They enjoy citing "studies done by the non partisan Heritage Foundation" of positive stories done about this politician vs negative and percentage breakdowns. I watch Fox quite a bit to watch how so many very intelligent people can look so damn stupid.

Actually RAF, fearandrhetoric4dummies along with others are not crying about Fox New but rather they are mocking Fox News. The joke is, some conservatives believe Fox News is one of the few national networks that presents unbiased reporting and that most of the other major new outlets are all out to destroy Republicans. Of course everyone but a few conservatives realize that many Fox News commentators and Rush Limbaugh are only buffoons masquerading as "new reporters". The fact is Republicans have, over time, developed a very sophisticated and unique way of self destructing all on their own. It's been quite evident during the Republican Presidential campaign process, don't you think? Or is it the "media's" fault Romney claims $374,000 is "not very much".

Fear:
NO DOUBT faux is a mega arm of the GOP machine. "fair and balanced" is BEYOND laughable. Turn it on any time, and it's just one giant campaign, and talking point network of the GOP.
.
That said; it must indeed be acknowledged that most of the other media outlets are very liberal biased. In the 08 election many network reporters actively admitted to being Obama giddy, and fully supportive of him. The whole sham of the "big 3" unbiased media (NBC, CBS, ABC) was totally exposed when the supposedly 'objective' biggest name anchor; Dan rather engaged in cooking up documents to try and sink bush.

Mittens is beyond cooked in the general election. As a side wager with Republican friends of mine I don't offer offer to them if he'll beat Obama, but just how big of a wipe out it will be electorally? I maintain Obama may take 400, or better, electoral votes vs Mittens. This may be THEE biggest stiff the GOP has EVER offered up. This is the 2012 Rep version of John Kerry. Amazing how parallel the situation is here, with parties in reverse. You have an incumbent who SHOULD be very vulnerable, just as Bush was in 2004. However; when the opponent is so out of touch. A elitist MA yuppie, who can't relate for one instant to the common man, and is so transparently BEYOND PHONEY, he is TOTALLY DONE. It does not matter how bad the incumbent is, or what they have done. People did not care that Bush sold endless propaganda, and lies, to get us into a war that killed thousands. Public sentiment was BIG time against him...However; it did not matter, people just showed up to vote against the out of touch snob; Kerry.
.
People will show up IN MASS, not to vote for Obama, but to vote against the flip flopping mascaraing 'common man' who is such a phoney, that unemployment could be 20%, and gas at $10 a gallon, and I STILL think Obama would have a great shot to win vs this complete stiff. I literally fall off my chair laughing to hear the Faux news boys talk like this guy can actually beat Obama. It would be like saying (And trying to promote)the Kansas City Royals having a great shot to win the world series.

Mittens has a credibility problem.
Lie #1. Mitt would have served had his draft number been lower than 300 in 1969. HA! Mittens, you graduated from high school in 1965. You the went to Standford for a year with academic deferment. After Mitt dropped out of Stanford he received a missionary deferment to France and sat out the war.
Lie #2. Saved the olympics. He hired five lobbyist to get taxpayer money. The Dem's are saying 1.3 billion. Mitt gets the glory, we got the bill. 3.5 million for trees! Mitt, did we really need that many trees for the olympics?
Lie #3. Rick Santorum never had a job in the private sector. Rick is a lawyer, he did work in the private sector before going to congress.

What really sets me off, and I could forgive all the above, is Mitt hired Charlie Crist's attack dogs that campaigned against Marco Rubio in one of the dirtiest senate races Florida seen in 2010. Andrea Saul, and Stuart Stevens were Charlie's henchmen, now on team Romney.

"Love the whiners about the media" says the poster that continually cries about fox and rush...

the "liberal media" term coined and repeated by......Fox news-"Fair and Balanced". Way to counter the "liberal" media, with a conservative propaganda machine painting itself as moderate. Love the whiners about the media, if you hate it so much just turn on your channel and "let not your heart be troubled"- sean Hannity. Youve been Hannitized in the "No Spin Zone", because we are Fox News, Fair and Balanced!!! LOL.

""They are eager to tell of republican sneezing wrong but have yet to tell of the Obama/Biden administration decisions, miscues and blunders which all are taking away our liberties."" Examples please of liberties lost, just one.
Maybe you should be talking about the Patriot Act, that piece of trash uses the word "Patriot"as a punchline. Who passed that intrusion of privacy? Obama/Biden? Hmmmm......Again I ask you of a policy decision that has "stolen" a shred of your personal liberty, just one. Please leave your right to get screwed by health insurance out of it. Anything.....Ill wait.

nemisis,,I don't find this article partisan at all. As far as not being friendly to Republicans, the author of the article is a Republican. Gerson was a top aide to President George W. Bush as Assistant to the President for Policy and Strategic Planning. Please provide an example of "miscues and blunders which all are taking away our liberties."

If this country is in the dire straits that some would have the rest of us believe, then why is the Republican A-squad sitting this one out? If Obama is such a threat to the greatness of this country, why would GOPers that actually have a chance of winning, like Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan, shy away from standing up for their ideals. You'd think if they even believed half of the conflated BS rhetoric, they would long ago have fallen all over themselves for the chance to go head to head with President Obama. Instead, what do we see? One of the weakest Republican fields in recent memory.

The media is not a friend to republicans. This article proves it. They are eager to tell of republican sneezing wrong but have yet to tell of the Obama/Biden administration decisions, miscues and blunders which all are taking away our liberties.

Romney: let them eat cake
Santorum: the American Taliban
Gingrich: moon unit had as many wives as a Mormon
Paul: Keebler's elf who didn't read his own racist newsletter
None of them can win the general election.

And Grover of course.

Oh and just so we are clear if you have watched these debates, which I have(all 20) Ron Paul is mopping the floor with these guys. My guess is that he is too independant for Fox or Rush to get behind, because lets be honest here, they are the entities that set the field for the repubs anymore.

Obama is getting re-elected, LOL. So get used to hate because you have at least 4 more years of it, and then Hilary. Not saying thats what I want, I am telling you its REALITY.
I can make a list of Obama failures as well, BUT, president Romney? President Santorum? President Gingrich? Not in my lifetime, Hate him all you like the republicans have failed tremendously at putting forth a viable candidate, they really didnt need anyone that great. What I cannot figure out is how on EARTH with all of the tea partiers out there, and all of the small govt Repubs, HOW oh HOW is Ron Paul not your guy? He would fare much better in a general than Romney OR Santorum. He at least has his own thoughts and has actually thought through his positions, and is consistent. Something NONE of the candidates(including Obama) can claim. Are we that afraid of what real change to the system might look like??

"Obama's problems are the fault of the Republicans," and we need to stop playing the partisan game.

Got it.

Unfortunately Midnight_Ride, almost all of the "Obama's problems" you mention are squarely rooted in 8 years of Republican presidency. Seems our problems don't really care if you're Democrat or Republican, but keep playing the parisan game, it's what you're expected to do.

Obama's gas/oil problem. Obama's Obamacare problem. Obama's jobs problem. Obama's apology problem to dictators. Obama's transparency problem. Obama's mandate problem. Obama's spending problem. Obama's tax problem. Obama's division problem amongst the classes. Obama's division problem amongst the parties.etc..etc..etc..