Ron Paul recirculates ad that includes an “attack” on Mitt Romney

posted at 3:50 pm on February 29, 2012 by Tina Korbe

A Ron Paul ad that attacks all three of the Texas congressman’s GOP rivals will hit Washington state airwaves today — but it’s actually not new. “Three of a Kind” brands Newt Gingrich a “serial hypocrite,” hits Rick Santorum with “counterfeit conservative” and labels Mitt Romney a “flip-flopper.”

The campaign originally uploaded the sixty-second spot to YouTube in mid-January and uploaded it again today. Reason.com’s Mike Riggs speculates that the Paul campaign “circulated the ad again to convince campaign reporters that they are not colluding with Romney.”

Pretty weak, if that’s the case. I’m not even sure this ad counts as unduly negative toward Romney. How does accurately labeling him a “flip-flopper” constitute an attack? Certainly, it doesn’t compare with stripping Rick Santorum of all his conservative credentials.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul also claims Rick Santorum is too apt to embrace conspiracy theories because Santorum has posited a non-aggression pact between Romney and Paul. But, as Katie Pavlich writes, Santorum’s theory doesn’t seem too far-fetched.

If Paul seriously wants to prove he’s not protecting his son’s place on Romney’s VP shortlist, he’ll have to do more than recirculate an ad that reproaches Romney. Just as he consistently calls out Santorum, he’ll have to issue consistent reminders that Romney was on the wrong side of this cycle’s biggest issues — Obamacare and the bailouts.

Another option entirely: Paul could quell the speculation of an alliance by admitting an unofficial one. Something simple like, “If I had to pick from the remaining candidates and couldn’t pick myself, I would pick Romney to be the nominee.” Alliances help reality TV stars win Survivor and they help candidates to win nominations, too. Gingrich and Cain helped each other early in the race, for example. It’s nothing to be ashamed of.

Paul just needs to be honest with himself that his “Romney restraint” gets him nowhere. Rand Paul won’t become Romney’s VP pick just because his dad played nice any more than Ron Paul will become the GOP nominee by never attacking the frontrunner.

More of this type of ad, on the other hand, might get him somewhere. It succinctly lists the other candidate’s flaws and provides enough information about Paul to make him glow by comparison. It’s simultaneously substantive and savvy — one of the better ads I’ve seen.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

You mean, like, by voting against Ntional Right-to-Work? Because that sure undercut the more conservative side.

You mean like voting to raise the debt ceiling five times? Because that sure undercut the more conservative side.

You mean like voting for Medicare part D and NCLB? Because that sure undercut the more conservative side.

Those are some accomplishments right there.

Oh… wait. My bad. That wasn’t Ron Paul who voted for all of those things.

It was Senator ClosetCase. The great Go-Along-To-Get-Along underminer of conservatism.

In a Parliament of Wh0res, remaining a virgin is, in and of itself, an accomplishment. Especially with bottom b!tches like the SweaterVest running around.

JohnGalt23 on February 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM

This makes my point.

Paul’s voting record is good, but irrelevant to outcome.

Paul is pure but unaccomplished, except, as stated before, when he is undercutting the more conservative combatant when it matters.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM

There is anecdotal evidence that he favors laws based on his religious beliefs. He says states should be able to ban contraceptives. He says contraceptives are evil. He says as president he will talk about contraceptives. So do you think if legislation was drafted to ban contraceptives that he wouldn’t sign it?

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Your desperation is showing. I will quote santorum:

I was asked if I believed in it (contraception), and I said, ‘No, I’m a Catholic, and I don’t.’ I don’t want the government to fund it through Planned Parenthood, but that’s different than wanting to ban it; the idea I’m coming after your birth control is absurd. I was making a statement about my moral beliefs, but I won’t impose them on anyone else in this case. I don’t think the government should be involved in that. People are free to make their own decisions.

Birth control should be legal in the United States. The states should not ban it, and I would oppose any effort to ban it.

Anecdotal, my sweet bippy.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 4:57 PM

No. It is a smear, because there is no evidence that Santorum favors laws based on his religious beliefs. None.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

On Thanksgiving Day at an Iowa candidates’ forum, he reiterated: “We have civil laws, but our civil laws have to comport with the higher law.”

The former senator from Pennsylvania warned in 2008 how politics and government are falling to Satan.

“This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country – the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age?”

“He attacks all of us and he attacks all of our institutions.”

He wants to amend the Constitution to criminalize all abortion, from Plan B to rape, incest and when the life of the mother is threatened.

He wants to amend the Constitution to make gay marriage illegal.

I could go on and on and on. And for those who say he’s just flapping his gums and doesn’t really want to legislate this crap, I say you’re nuts. That is who he is. A moralizing, puritanical, prudish busybody.

Then again maybe you’re right. Perhaps he could end this myth by making his campaign slogan, “I’m not really going to anything about it, I’m just talking.”

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 4:59 PM

(Santorum) wants to amend the Constitution to criminalize all abortion, from Plan B to rape, incest and when the life of the mother is threatened.

Paul claims to be pro-life, but maybe he’s somehow been too pure over the years to do anything about it while in congress.

I believe Santorum would do something about abortion. Paul? Who knows, in reality he’s never done anything.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

That’s the point,he says one thing because he has to. But he would really like to impose what he believes.

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Whether or not Paul and Romney are colluding is inconsequential. Santorum is still a crazed douche and he’s going to burn himself out like manics always do. Has anyone else noticed the telltale signs of lithium use by Rick? His mouth gives it away.

jan3 on February 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM

That’s the point,he says one thing because he has to. But he would really like to impose what he believes.

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Unlike Paul, who’s never ‘imposed’ what he says he believes.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:12 PM

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 4:59 PM

The remarks about satan were not in a political context. They were at a university, and they prove absolutely nothing about him wanting to legislate his morality. Nothing whatsoever.

As for the abortion issue, I saw Santorum criticized here on HotAir because he favored the Hyde Amendment:

“The Hyde Amendment allows rape, incest, life of the mother. That is the common ground we could get, and I would support that.”
—2006 Senate debate

Now, more recently he has said he doesn’t support abortion for rape and incest, but I haven’t seen anything about “life of the mother.” Even if he does have that personal viewpoint, do you think he’d ever get that through congress, if he becomes president?

You’re hysterical. Take a chill pill or something.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:12 PM

While I’m no Paul fan, I do respect the fact the he is sincere in wanting to have our laws comport with our Constitution rather than with his bible.

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM

That’s the point,he says one thing because he has to. But he would really like to impose what he believes.

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

So, despite evidence that debunks your claims, you cling to your OPINION that he wants to legislate his beliefs? So, tell me, then, how, exactly, would he go about doing that, as president?

You are also hysterical and need a chill pill.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 5:15 PM

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM

You’re right. It isn’t as though PBHO showed us how badly a POTUS can screw up our lives in the most personal and intrusive ways without Congressional involvement. I’m sure Santo won’t lift a finger to effect any of the things he obsesses over and talks about every darned day.

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Shinty, that’s the line that Ron Paul walks. He claims to be the most pro-life but then chooses his libetarianism over the unborn. My point with Santorum is that he makes incindiary remarks about birth control which render him ineffective. Birth control will never be illegal, and I get that. I’m all for them putting their money where there mouths are and say you will campaign to repeal roe v wade. But Dantorum says something is not okay, and then says it’s will just remain not okay. Why even bring it up?

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

jan3 on February 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM

I have to wonder what lies you pull out of your nether regions to try and smear Santorum with next. Stay classy.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

He won’t do anything about it, he will never be president and he knows he can’t do anything about it. My opinion is he focuses on things that most people disagree with him on and then says what people want to hear once it turns people off.

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I have to wonder what lies you pull out of your nether regions to try and smear Santorum with next. Stay classy.

JannyMae on February 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Look it up. Bipolar disorder. I’ve seen it a hundred times. And you appear to be dealing with a touch of cognitive dissonance, but maybe it’s just contrariness.

jan3 on February 29, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

He was just making chit chat. Ask JannyMae, she’ll set you straight.

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 5:22 PM

While I’m no Paul fan, I do respect the fact the he is sincere in wanting to have our laws comport with our Constitution rather than with his bible.

MJBrutus on February 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I think there’s more overlap between the two than most would give credit for.

If I thought Paul was serious and had the capacity to make constitutional government happen, I would have much more respect for him.

As it is, I’m just tired of him taking out the more conservative combatant when the chips are down.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Shinty, that’s the line that Ron Paul walks. He claims to be the most pro-life but then chooses his libetarianism over the unborn. My point with Santorum is that he makes incindiary remarks about birth control which render him ineffective. Birth control will never be illegal, and I get that. I’m all for them putting their money where there mouths are and say you will campaign to repeal roe v wade. But Dantorum says something is not okay, and then says it’s will just remain not okay. Why even bring it up?

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

I didn’t think Santorum was that incendiary, but he is a bit awkward, isn’t he? And the media (and Paul, apparently) will not let a conservative slide.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Jannymae, please don’t say “smear Santorum” there is no need to be discusting.

Shinty, you make good points, thanks for the diologue.

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Gingrich and Cain helped each other early in the race, for example. It’s nothing to be ashamed of.

how’s that working out?…for the both of them?

g2825m on February 29, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Rusty Allen on February 29, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Ditto.

shinty on February 29, 2012 at 5:37 PM

I believe Santorum would do something about abortion.

Paul? Who knows, in reality he’s never done anything.

I read this stuff and wonder what planet people are on.

Rick Santorum as president will do the same thing about abortion that Romney would . ZIP

the supreme court says its legal.Roe versus Wade will not be overturned even if either one can get more conservative judges.

gerrym51 on February 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

gerrym51 on February 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

.
and SCOTUS will make the call on Obiecare as well. Thats how it works.

FlaMurph on February 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM

If Paul seriously wants to prove he’s not protecting his son’s place on Romney’s VP shortlist, he’ll have to do more than recirculate an ad that reproaches Romney. Just as he consistently calls out Santorum

Personally I think Ron Paul should concentrate on winning votes rather than disproving conspiracy theories spread by one of his more dishonest opponents, but I do agree he should go after Romney harder.

FloatingRock on February 29, 2012 at 6:58 PM

.
and SCOTUS will make the call on Obiecare as well. Thats how it works.

FlaMurph on February 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Not really. The states can – and should – invoke nullification.

Dante on February 29, 2012 at 7:05 PM

The “we’re-not-in-cahoots” ad. lol

Fallon on February 29, 2012 at 4:22 PM

….came pretty quick, didn’t it?

KOOLAID2 on February 29, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Santorum HAS no conservative credentials. Plus Santorum called Paul ‘disgusting’ and Newt, who in fact IS a hypocrite, said he’d never vote for Paul if he got the nomination and is ‘dangerous’. Romney never attacked Paul personally (although I suspect he is pushing these ‘alliance’ memes to cut enthusiasm for Paul.)

Paul is fighting Romney in places like Maine and Idaho. Less in places Paul is going for proportional delegates, because Romney’s squish establishment voters aren’t going to vote for Paul on hearing his record. Santorum and Gingrich have some people deluded they are conservative. That deserves to be attacked.

windwardtack on March 1, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2