“In the technical sense, in the economic definition, he is not a socialist,” the Texas Republican said to a smattering of applause at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.I find this interesting. Paul, a Republican, admits that Obama is not a socialist, and the crowd cheered. So if Paul understands that matter, then what does it say of the remainder of the Republican Party? To me, it shows that the GOP is using language of socialism to rile the base, but they aren't informing their supporters, they are simply misrepresenting information to get them to continue offer support.
“He’s a corporatist,” Paul quickly added, meaning the president takes “care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”
The other thing I thought interesting was his statement that Obama takes "care off corporations and corporations take over and run the country," which is really a conservative philosophy. Isn't this essentially the trickle-down theory, but Paul probably won't admit that, as well as any other Republican, because what is instantly brought to mind is Reagan's supply-side economics, or as George H. W. Bush called it - "voodoo economics."
Paul had lost in the straw poll at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference to Mitt Romney by just one vote, so while many at the conference believe Obama to be a "corporatist", a little bit more believe him to be some sort of "neo-monarchist."