First of all, that was not the "Tea Party" that endorsed him. The Tea Party isn't the same as it was when it first started in 2008, when people like Ron and Rand Paul were considered the leaders of it. It's been split into different groups. Some who support Paul, some who support phony conservaties like Santorum and Gingrich because they aren't aware of what the NWO is, and some who support moderates like Romney. And, of course, some who will vote for anyone Republican just to vote Obama out of office.

I don't consider myself a tea party-ist because libertarianism is not a belief that can be adapted by Catholics. The Church, in fact, condemns libertarianism. That's not to say Catholics can't support Ron Paul for reasons besides him being a libertarian (like, for instance, the fact that he's the best to choose from in the GOP field), but the belief that everyone gets liberty -- even gαys -- is wrong.

As for Mitt Romney, no, I would not vote for him. He is just another nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr freak, another Bush. He says he supports the bill that allows the government to lock up American citizens without trial, he flip flops on abortion, gαy marriage, and gun control, he had a pretty liberal tenure as a governor, and is a Freemason.

People who think he will be a big change over Obama need to wake up and realize that the differences between the Republican and Democratic parties aren't as big as the media wants you to think. They both support a nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, they just have different ways of trying to achieve one.