Yes, well RP has a good consistent message all the way down to his whacked-out sense of International relations and aid. No secrets there but there is always that nagging bit about the people surrounding the man who would become overnight VIP, Czar, Cabinet Secretary or judge.
I can live with RPs judge selections because we need a good house cleaning in all the courts. It would be fun and quite a legacy.
As for the rest, well beware the man who sidles up to another to collect the benefits of fame. Warren G. Harding took office and reversed the ship launched by Wilson in the 'modern' age. Ok, so 'modern' here refers to the age of the FED and its ugly twin sister, the IRS in 1913 as well as the century of War to end all war.
Harding's insight turned around the 1920-21 Depression by lowering taxes, which at the time were not really that much. The infusion of cash into the pockets of the wealthy made instant friends and drove the economy bonkers for what we all know as the Roaring Twenties. 8% unemployment dropped to 6.5% within a quarter and that set off the first of marvelous decades in the 20th Century. Chemists were having a blast making stuff that nobody thought of in lifetimes and found things at the bottom of the tar pots that remain lucrative to this day.
Then there was the Teapot Dome scandal, which was more of a cover-up than anything treacherous or illegal. It wasn't the production of oil in places where oil was found, it was the destruction of the paper trail that took clearly eight years to reconstruct.
Harding quipped to his VP that it wasn't his enemies that worried him so much as the 'friends' he thought he had. I suppose Harding's Presidency was the first post-Civil War cabinet of thieves, and that's a stretch since Grant's administration failed miserably once the Kaiser pulled the rug from under the silver market leaving Reconstruction a lady at the altar.
I have similar misgivings about the people around Romney and for that reality and that alone, I fear for the U.S. if either of them rise to the summit.
Paul would be solid, but ineffective as Paul-haters in the Congress treated him so much a leper. He may rant and rave and veto, but there the Democrats would join the Republicans just to have the last word... on everything.
Romney's allure is his business acumen, but the people and the press have yet to uncover the band of thieves who work with and around the financial genius. We've heard of Bain, but it should not be confused with Romney driving the Bain bus. Mitt had a thousand lawyers making all the stuff he did legal. It is never pretty and there my friend is the omen of a lifetime.
If you hold corporate lawyers at arm's length with a mistrusting rod, you should work very hard to find another candidate to lavish himself in the White House come January 2013.
An appropriate footnote to the 2012 campaign will be RP and Romney playing roles. Of Good GOP and Bad GOP, you should see RP killing off the competition for Mitt. Nobody really expects Obama to win a second term and 'ABO' is a good battle cry for the vote. The last time it was 'Anybody but...' was Carter and you can easily see how that worked out. Change for Change's sake never works. It is the meat without potatoes and in 2012, which only means high cholesterol and heart disease.
Herman Cain is the better choice, but Mr. Cain folded in his moment of political fame when he was revealed as a man who could not honestly answer publicly, serious questions about subjects that haunt every man in powerful or prominent position. Should we worry about Cain's ineptitude with women? I believe Clinton showed us that shining path of contrition.
Is Clinton truly sorry? Nope, but he is most excellent at deflection and that is what made him Presidential.