Ron Paul can be brilliant at analyzing the bad brew of business greed and crony capitalism, but in the end, this Ayn Rand disciple of laissez-faire libertarianism is a leading champion of the very greed and crony capitalism he rhetorically speaks against. Shame, shame, shame. His support for Mitt Romney in favor of vulture economics against populist conservatives and populist progressives dramatizes the contradictions between Paul's theories and the impact of Paul's policies.

Does libertarian philosophy mean that anyone can get away with anything? I do not agree with this. I do not agree that theoretical excuses for bonuses that reward failed performance, or those layoffs that do not improve business but do maximize profits for the 1 percent, are either true libertarianism (which should involve personal responsibility) or true capitalism (which should involve real risk and reward based on failure or success, not unjust profits for the 1 percent regardless of failure or success).

This is why I can respect Ron Paul, and try to give him fair treatment when almost all of the major media were ignoring him, but I must strongly disagree when he defines libertarianism as an excuse for profits that were not earned, or layoffs that are not justified by business reasons but only maximize unearned wealth for the 1 percent.

It is a shame that Ron Paul endorses vulture distortions of capitalism, and vulture abuses of layoffs, and certain business practices by Mitt Romney. I had hoped Paul would join Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich in opposing them.