I will try to answer the original question as opposed to the diatribe.
If Bloomberg decides to run, he will have to make a decision by approximately the end of January. The reason for this deadline is that it is extremely difficult for a third party candidate to get on the ballot in most states in this country (and in New York it is practically impossible). It also takes a very good organization and/or a substantial amount of cash. It is not something that you can turn a bunch of untrained volunteers loose and let them handle.
Assuming that Ron Paul spends his money and time trying to compete in Iowa, New Hampshire, and the other early states and is unsuccessful, it would be rather difficult to switch gears and run as an independent (though he could always hope to be nominated by the Libertarians again).
If the GOP and Karl Rove is that opposed to Ron Paul as the Republican nominee, he is not going to be the Republican nominee. If he isn't going to get Republican votes and he isn't going to get Democrat votes, that really does not leave a lot of votes out there for Ron Paul to be a viable candidate. So I don't see why they would be trying to get Bloomberg, who hasn't really been a hardcore Republican as Mayor of New York to run.
The most likely result of Bloomberg running if Ron Paul was a candidate would be to take votes away from the Democrat nominee and the Republican nominee -- which would actually increase Ron Paul's chances (not by much, but by some). Bloomberg might actually put some additional states into play (latest I heard from early polls was maybe Washington and Missouri).
However, realistically, it has been almost 40 years since an independent or third party candidate has been truly competitive in a single state. Twenty percent of the vote nationally doesn't even qualify as being a major party under the federal election law but no one has beaten that threshhold since the post-Watergate campaign laws were enacted.
p.s. I know it is hopeless talking to anyone who believes that a federal income tax is unconstitutional but the person asking this question might want to look at the Sixteenth Amendment. If that text does not authorize an income tax, what does it do?