Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Six Romney Family Members Hit Campaign Trail… For RON PAUL


Mitt “just doesn’t understand the constitution like Ron Paul”

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
March 6, 2012

No less than six relatives of Presidential candidate Mitt Romney have joined the campaign trail in the race for the GOP nomination, but they’re not supporting the former Massachusetts governor, they’re campaigning for Texas Congressman Ron Paul.

Three of Romney’s relatives will even speak at Idaho caucus sites, declaring their support for Paul in a story that is sure to create a buzz around Paul’s campaign as he looks to pick up his first caucus win on Super Tuesday.

The Paul campaign issued a press release Monday introducing five Romney relatives, then issued another release shortly afterwards noting a sixth.

Travis Romney, Troy Romney and Chad Romney, all cousins of Mitt Romney, will speak before Ron Paul crowds in Idaho today. Ty Romney and Jared Romney, whose grandfathers are cousins of former Michigan Governor George Romney, the father of Mitt Romney, have also declared their support for Paul.

“I don’t dislike Mitt at all,” Chad Romney (pictured above) said. “He seems like a nice guy. He just doesn’t understand the constitution like Ron Paul.”

“It’s Ron Paul or bust,” Chad Romney added, “Now, a lot of people will ask me if I’m related,” he said. “And I always say: ‘Yes, I’m related, but I vote for Ron Paul.’ ”

When asked who he would vote for if the ticket turns out to be Romney vs Obama, Chad Romney said “I don’t know if I’d vote for either one of them. I’d just write Ron Paul in there.”

“I support Ron Paul because he defends the Constitution, loves America and understands what it means to be an American, including the right to live your life any way you want as long as you respect others,” said Travis Romney, a second cousin once removed from the former Massachusetts governor.

Ty Romney, an attorney in Montana added, “Ron Paul is honest. It’s time to take a stand for honesty. It doesn’t matter whether the truth is popular or not, I know that Ron Paul will always maintain a true principle and I endorse that degree of integrity.”

Paul’s campaign suggests that the endorsements show that the Congressman can win Mormon voters, noting that the Romneys are now members of the “Latter-day Saints for Ron Paul” nationwide coalition.

Paul previously received support from Rick Santorum’s nephew John Garver, who described his own uncle as a “big government”, “status quo” politician, while urging Americans to vote for Ron Paul.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

So 6 more fools plan to waste their vote for a guy who has yet to win a SINGLE primary election. Pres Obama thanks them (and you Larry) for their (and your) continued support to give the worst President since Carter 4 more years. BTW, how is that 9/11 Turth crap working out for you? Anmy more hot leads for the news story of the century?

Larry said...

So, who are you? My sitemeter says you're from Hagerstown--do I know you? Too chickenshit to post who you are? Naturally you are. You're in Hagerstown and you're going to pretend that you don't know me? Sitemeter also tells me that you searched for my name in particular--so you must know who I am. So who are you?

Now, to address your comment. Once again, a reader ignores the point of the story. The point was not who is getting the most media attention , it is the fact that a presidential candidates OWN relatives isn't endorsing their own relative. What a shame it is that you needed that explained to you.

The reason why Ron Paul isn't winning primaries is simple: It is a mixture of voter fraud, the corporate-controlled media ignoring Ron Paul, because he doesn't serve their interests. Odd that he doesn't win any primaries but yet every single poll conducted after debates in 2008 and this time around had him at either #2 or the winner and he draws massive crowds wherever he goes with virtually no media in sight covering it. So, he wins nearly every single poll and draws massive crowds and wins no primaries? Come on, even the most non-conspiratorial person in the world has to find fraudulent activity in that alone.

As far as 9/11 goes...if you were as quick to actually post a point that I've made about 9/11 and actually REFUTE IT as you are with your ad hominem attacks [which actually gives credence to my stances] then you could be taken seriously.

I find it quite hilarious that you think our own government would tell us the 100% truth about 9/11 when their track record for telling the truth about things [JFK, gulf of tonkin, Pearl Harbor, Abraham Lincoln, etc....] has been abysmal at best.

Also, I find it interesting that even individual douchebags like YOU fail to refute ONE thing that 9/11 truth people say, but you're shocked that the truthers claim that the government covers things up [when I assume you claim there's no proof of them covering anything up]---and YOU can't even refute one thing. I'm wrong you say? OK, Im all ears, lets hear some refutations then.

Obama is hardly the worst president we ever had. I give that title to Lincoln.

So, your comment was nothing but ad hominem attacks and misinformation. Your Ron Paul comment was just a plain and simple smear----implying he's not worth voting for because he hasn't won a primary, but yet REFUSING to refute any of his stances and policies.

Typical of people like you to engage in attacks and smears, yet not offering one single piece of evidence to support your smear. A first grader can do that. Even a 3 year old can attack and smear something and call another person names, but the real task and difficulty is providing evidence their attack and smear is warranted. You fail to provide that----because you can't. If I'm wrong, provide the evidence behind the smear then.

I'm listening.

Anonymous said...

As usal Larry has a temper tanturm, goes into personl attacks, and plays the victicm card. Like Obama supporters, you make excuses as to why your guy is f"ing up, losing support, and plays the "fraud" card. Or could it be Ron Paul blew it when he said several times America deserved 9/11? I rememebr how the corwd reacted and Rudy chewed him up on such an insane comment.

Not to emntion his racist newsletters he claimed not to know anything about


Ron Paul is not worth voting for becuase HE WILL NOT WIN. It is OVER and yet the Paulnbots keep ranting how the election was stolen from him. Much like The Gorebots and Kerrybots did in 2000 and 2004

If you are such an expert on 9/11 send your "proof" to Dan Rather. After all he is an expert in exposing huge stories right beofre an election Larry. You may even make it on the Chris Matthews show and sit next to Ron Paul

(and welecome to Fantasy Island)

Larry said...

Personal attacks? Other than call you a douchebag [which you are...not an attack] when did I attack?

YOU on the other hand resort to ad hominem attacks {I'm guessing you don't know what that means] by attacking 9/11 truth without one refutation of our claims---and you still provided none in your latest post.

No "fraud card" about it. Ron Paul is most elected GOP candidate, having won an election 12 times [for Congressman]. Way more than Santorum, Romney and Gingrich [who has won NO elections] combined.

He gets massive crowds everywhere he goes and wins nearly every poll after debates and wins almost all straw polls---and you're telling me there's nothing fishy about him not winning one primary?

The 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen and there's massive amounts of evidence supporting that.

All you have to do is read my site to see that I have already showed proof of a cover-up in 9/11---but naturally, you won't post under those stories, because that will give the assumption to people that you have read those articles and you have no intention of reading them, because you hate facts.

Just from the shit you already posted about Ron Paul, it is clear you have no interest in facts about this topic, let alone 9/11 or any other important one.

Ron Paul never said "America deserved 9/11". He said that our foreign policy TRIGGERED 9/11. There is huge difference in the two...one says that the American PEOPLE deserved to die and the other says that our foreign policy gets innocent American people killed. The fact that I even have to explain the difference pretty much says you're a babbling fool---for any 1st grader could know the difference between the two.

As far as the racist newsletters. There is not one shred of evidence pointing to Ron Paul knowing about those and endorsing them. It is nearly impossible for a libertarian to be racist, because libertarians fight for the rights of individual people and do not have collectivist mentalities and put people into groups [blacks, gays, etc...]. I've written several stories about this, but of course, you won't post under those stories.

And because you think Rudy Giuliani won that debate with Ron Paul in the debates is clear evidence that all it takes for you to declare a winner is just hearing the crowd cheer after a comment. Ron Paul tore Giuliani a new ass in that debate and explained to him what blowback is and how blowback got Americans held as hostages in Iran in 1979. That was the direct result of American foreign policy in 1953.

Giuliani got cheers because all he has to do is mention 9/11 [and he did, hundreds of times, exploiting it rather than honoring it] and that was the direct culprit in his early drop out in the race---while Ron Paul stayed in the race until it was just him and McCain.

You didn't answer my question...who are you? You're in Hagerstown--so do I know you? Or are you going to be Mr. Coward the entire time?

Anonymous said...

I have read your site Lary and you are STILL a kook and in your Twilight Zone world you are right while the rest of the world is wrong

I was hoping by now you would have gotten the help you so desperatly needed - but alas you have not

So I am not surprised your tiny little site has not grown

Take care and please take some meds

Larry said...

Ahhh yes, still more ad hominem attacks without ONE refutation of my claims.

Does it bother you in the least bit that you can't refute ONE thing I say, yet you you resort to constant ad hominem attacks and call ME the kook who needs meds??

Who is more nutty? The one making a "so-called" nutty claim, or the one who fails/refuses to debunk it???

Think about that.

I will just assume that after asking you twice who you are, since I know you're from Hagerstown, that you're a scared little pussy who is afraid to give up their real identity----on the other hand, you call ME the nut, yet I'm the one posting MY name for all to see.

So not only are you an uninformed moron, but a coward as well.

Anonymous said...

Larry, what have you said that needs to be refuted?

1) Paul is not going to win because like you, he treats people who disagrees with him with contempt. Like Paul, you think you can insult and brow beat people into agreeing with your insane and crazy rants

2) You are still a tin foil kook who thinks that 9/11 was "was an inside job" yet noone has produced any p[roof of the claim

3)I only hope that one day you grow up and/or get the help you need

In the meantime keep feeding your ego with your little board and keep thinking you are really acccomplishing something by insulting people with a different POV

Anonymous said...

wow, larry has once again destroyed his competition , larry you own this guy . hes a fraud.

Larry said...

"Larry, what have you said that needs to be refuted?"

Well, according to YOU, everything I have claimed!! You say you disagree with everything I say and then have the nerve to ask me "what needs to be refuted?"--makes NO SENSE. The answer is----everything you claim is false...that's what needs to be refuted, you dickless twerp.

"Paul is not going to win because like you, he treats people who disagrees with him with contempt."

Yet you offer ZERO proof of this.


"Like Paul, you think you can insult and brow beat people into agreeing with your insane and crazy rants"

Name one time Ron Paul has done what you claim I do. You call what I say "crazy", yet have not refuted anything I have said---in fact, you ask instead "what needs to be refuted?"-----you answered your own question---what you're calling "crazy". Jesus Christ you're a moron.

"You are still a tin foil kook who thinks that 9/11 was "was an inside job" yet noone has produced any p[roof of the claim"

Ahhh, yes, the ad hominem attacks keep coming. You must think ad hominem attacks are the exact same thing as evidence. You figure if you call someone a nut and kook all day long, that will overshadow the fact that you're a lazy ignorant asshole that does nothing to research a single issue about 9/11 and that you just accept what the government says hook, line and sinker. It is YOU, the one who believes government stories that not only is in the minority, but makes you a bumbling idiot---since so many "official" government stories past and present have already been deemed untrue.

"I only hope that one day you grow up and/or get the help you need"

Another ad hominem attack substituted for actual research and investigation.

"In the meantime keep feeding your ego with your little board and keep thinking you are really acccomplishing something by insulting people with a different POV"

I don't insult anyone's "point of view", I expose people who outwardly lie and deceive and I PROVE it..most of the time with their OWN words compared to what they have said at other times.

It's my point of view that whole milk is better than skim milk, but it is NOT my point of view that, for example, Abraham Lincoln was a colossal racist and did nothing to free slaves---or that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are war criminals---or that 9/11 has been covered up by our own government---these are all FACTS, not a "point of view".

I challenge you to list a few of my claims and actually refute them. A 2nd grader can come to my blog and say I'm a kook. Are you saying you can't be of higher value than a 2nd grader??

This is EXACTLY why you refuse to go to other stories on my blog and copy and paste my words on the thread here and then actually refute them with researched facts. You CAN'T--you're unable to. That is the main reason why dicknuts like you resport to calling people kooks and resorting to ad hominem attacks---it's the only weapon they have..because they are too lazy to research things themselves and they have no idea if the people they are condemning are wrong or not---they only care that their claims SOUND nutty---so they begin with the attacks and never EVER offer ANYTHING resembling a refuted fact.

They simply are unable to.

Anonymous said...

larry, this guy thinks you treat people with contempt. wow. hello kettle this is pot, your black. lol...lol..lol.. proof zero. facts zero. info zero. i seee now just claim the other guy a kook and you win.. fn fraud.

Anonymous said...

you scared another fraud away larry.