April 10, 2012
The New York Times has chided Ron Paul for staying in the race and not dropping out in deference to the establishment’s handpicked candidate, Mitt Romney.
“Of course, at this stage Mr. Paul is little more than a distraction to Mr. Romney, and the two candidates are said to be quite fond of each other. Until now, Mr. Santorum had also been pinning some of his hopes on Texas, which, with its 155 delegates, has the most delegates of any contest to date,” writes Gerry Mullany.
The Times can’t understand it. Why would Paul continue to run when there is no way the establishment will nominate him and its corporate media has all but stop reporting on him?
Paul’s campaign chairman Jesse Benton made it clear why Ron Paul continues to run. He released the following statement earlier today when it was announced Rick Santorum was cashing in his chips:
“Congratulations to Senator Santorum on running such a spirited campaign. Dr. Paul is now the last – and real – conservative alternative to Mitt Romney. We plan to continue running hard, secure delegates, and press the fight for limited, constitutional government in Tampa.”
It should be obvious by now what Ron Paul’s strategy is. Benton alluded to it – to “press the fight for limited, constitutional government’ all the way to the convention floor in Tampa.
“Ron Paul may not get the GOP nomination for president in 2012, but whoever does will be leading a party much different from the one that exists today. It will include delegates to the national convention, activists, and party officials who support a non-interventionist foreign policy, sound money, and civil liberties. You talk about a nightmare for the party oligarchs!” Kenn Jacobine wrote last month.
The New York Times and the Republican establishment, of course, do not want to hear this. And they don’t want you to hear it, either – that’s why they no longer report on Ron Paul and only do so when they want him to fade away into the sunset.