Paul is a divisive politician, beloved by younger Republicans, untrusted by religious and social conservatives and feared by the party establishment. Yet it is his non-interventionist worldview that represents the biggest threat, particularly to the neocons for whom perpetual war offers the healthiest returns.
Even Romney can spot that inequality is the current cause célèbre. However shoehorning a man who once said "corporations are people" into Russell Brand's "doyen of the downtrodden" plimsolls will be a Sisyphean task. It would be easier for Donald Trump to run as an African-American, or Hillary as a man.
A year later and the black flags of the Islamic State (formerly ISIS), currently fluttering across lands from from northern Syria to the Iraqi province of Diyala north-east of Baghdad, have once again pushed the noxious issue of intervention to the forefront of the US foreign policy debate - a discourse that is further dividing an already fractured Republican Party, with the question of action versus non-action likely to run all the way to the 2016 election.
Did anyone ever think that Bill Clinton, perhaps the greatest politician of our time, even rivaling LBJ, would ever go "gently into that good night"? WJC now seems to be in his element, relishing the fact that GOP hitman-in-chief Karl Rove has thrown down his chain-mailed gauntlet and gone after his beloved Hillary, questioning her health and ability to serve as president.
Let's face it, what we Americans take for granted - endless political campaigns rife with cash and a terminal election elimination process rife with guile, distrust and humiliation - even our most politically savvy friends across the Atlantic scratch their collective heads and declare... "When is enough, enough?"