Hi Dave,   
      
    RW> YEah, unless you count Paul in there, which I notice you   
    RW> didn't.  HE's not considered even in the running by the   
    RW> republicans though it seems.   
      
    DD> I can add and subtract - Paul would be an economic and diplomatic   
    DD> disaster.   
      
    RW> There is that.  Just noting that even among the Republicans   
    RW> Paul isn't considered in the running.  Folks have to   
    RW> remember that Paul was elected as a libertarian, and changed hats later   
    RW> on trying to gain some mainstream acceptability. I don't think that's   
    RW> working out for him .   
      
   DD> Or his kid - who is an even worse nutter. As Bugs Bunny used to say   
   DD> "What a maroon".   
      
   YEp, but note Matt Taibbi's piece in for February 16 about   
   Romney's meltdown in South Carolina.  HE stated in that   
   column that Paul was the only one who even looked like he   
   might hold his own in a head to head against obama.  The   
   wack jobs the Republicans are putting up (political insiders all) don't do   
   nearly as well.   
      
   NOt that i"m a fan, but one wonders if they aren't listening to some of the   
   real concerns voiced by all the folks who   
   join the tea party or occupy.  Don't they (the leadership of the Republican   
   party) grasp this at all?   
      
   Regards,   
              Richard   
   ---   
    * Origin:  (1:116/901)