Paul says he won’t support GOP nominee

It didn't surprise me to learn that Ron Paul had stated this during one of the earlier debates, this whole try to destroy each other when campaigning then have the hand holding moment where you decide that the "other party" is really the real bad guy (or girl) and you have to now do what is best for the party never seemed to be something that Ron Paul was going to buy into.

Yet, it's made the news and quite of the blogs recently that:

Last month, during a Republican debate, Ron Paul was asked whether he promised to support the GOP nominee next year, no matter who emerges from the primary process. “Not right now I don’t,” Paul said, “not unless they’re willing to end the war and bring our troops home.”

Apparently, in the ensuing weeks, “not right now” has become “no.”

Paul called his Republican presidential rivals, including frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, “neo-conservatives” whom he couldn’t support in the general election should his own bid fail.

“They think we’re supposed to spread our goodness through force,” Paul said. For example, none will pledge not to wage war on Iran, he said. “How could I support something like that?”

Apparently, he can’t. But it means that of the top seven candidates in the Republican field, Paul is the only one who isn’t prepared to support the party’s eventual nominee. It’s not the kind of thing that will go over well within the party, but then again, Paul’s interest in the Republican Party appears nominal — it’s a venue for him to advance his ideas and agenda, not necessarily an opportunity for him to lead the party.