Santorum Sweeps Alabama, Mississippi Primaries

Santorum Sweeps Alabama, Mississippi Primaries – Ocala

A resurgent Rick Santorum swept to victory in primaries in Alabama and Mississippi Tuesday night, upending the race for the Republican presidential nomination yet again and trying to nudge Newt Gingrich toward the sidelines.

Mitt Romney was running third in both states.

…………..

“We did it again,” Santorum told cheering supporters in Lafayette, La. He added, “Now is the time for conservatives to pull together” in an effort to defeat Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who still is the faraway leader in the delegate competition to pick an opponent to President Barack Obama in the fall.

In defeat, Romney issued a brief written statement congratulating the night’s big winner but also saying, “I am pleased that we will be increasing our delegate count in a very substantial way after tonight.” In the hours before the votes were counted, he had bristled that Santorum was “at the desperate end of his campaign.”

While Romney must regroup, it was Gingrich with the most to lose as he struggled for political survival in a part of the country he hoped would fuel one more comeback in the unpredictable race.

Appearing before supporters in Birmingham, Ala., Gingrich twice referred to remaining in the marathon contest. But he was unusually complimentary toward Santorum, a contrast to pokes at Romney. “If you’re the front-runner and you keep coming in third, you’re not much of a front-runner,” he said.

It is rare for Alabama and Mississippi to play an important role in a Republican nominating campaign, but the 2012 race has gone on far longer than usual. Equally improbable was the decision by Santorum and Romney to campaign in the next few days in Puerto Rico, which holds a primary on Sunday.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Santorum wins Kansas, GOP establishment, Newt Ginghrich hardest hit.

Stacy McCain is pleased, to say the least. Both because of Santorum’s win big, the political nut shots Newt has been suffering

This pattern of Gingrich’s fade since the Jan. 31 Florida primary — which was exacerbated by his Feb. 4 meltdown in Nevada — hasn’t gotten much serious analysis from most conservative pundits, who seem rather embarrassed to admit that Gingrich is no longer in serious contention.

Or maybe the pundits are just embarrassed to acknowledge that Santorum, the candidate they never thought had a snowball’s chance in 2012, has run a surprisingly effective campaign and emerged as the only viable conservative alternative to Romney.

Well, Santorum has surprised me, he deserves credit. And, best of all, I think he has trashed that horrid insult to manhood, the sweater vest!

As a side note, isn’t it time that Newt packed it in? I know he really wants to be president, but that was never going to happen. First of all, his head would never fit in the Oval Office, and two, he would forget which wife was First Lady. But, Newt really should step aside if he is serious about beating Romney. If he needs comfort, I am sure Nancy Pelosi still has that couch……….

The main stream media declares war on Santorum

Matt notes what we all know, the media will NEVER let this election be about the economy and also offers some solid advice to Santorum.

 The administration and MSM are on a quest to avoid the economy at all costs.  To do that with Santorum, they have to hammer him on social issues, even if they have to do some cherry picking or making some stretches to do so.  Forget that gas prices are through the roof, and expected to rise even higher.  Forget that a couple million jobs are gone, and the people aren’t even bothering to look anymore.  Instead, let’s talk about how Rick Santorum is going to ban condoms, or some other nonsense. Santorum needs to do more refocusing.  Every time he is hit with a social issue question, he needs to comment quickly and go right back to economy

Go read the rest, Matt is right. Keep going back to the economy. But, I would add that this is good advice no matter who the nominee is. And, no matter who the nominee is, the DNC and the media have an attack strategy. If Romney wins, they will play the class warfare card like never before,and they will try to make Romney look like a candidate who is grossly out of touch with the common man. With Newt, well, take your pick on any number of issues, from, temperament to past “scandals”.  So, get ready folks, this one will be very nasty. There is not one trick the Left will not use to win. No matter who our nominee is, we best get ready to work our collective behinds off.

UPDATE!!

The Reaganite Republican wonders if the book on Sarah Palin is open?

No thanks- if Noot can’t come back I’d prefer and open convention, Palin vs. Jeb Bush or some such thing.

 

Mittens would lose in November due to insufficient contrast and a disgusted GOP base. I agree he’s an improvement over Obama, (not a maniacal racist/marxist) BUT I and many others deeply resent having Romney stuffed down my throat by the GOP old guard. At this point is merely slowing the growth rate of the state sector good enough? Methinks not.

Mark me down for ‘Cuda, then: We used to fear her polling negatives, and honestly I was glad she didn’t run. But now, after how all the negative campaigning has played out… Palin looks more than worth a chance since everybody else on the GOP side has suffered similar damage from flailing negative attacks.

Hmmm, I keep hearing about the brokered convention, it would make for fascinating TV and great blogging fodder, but, I would be surprised if it happens. Of course, we already know what the media attack on Palin would be. The message would be “she is stupid” repeated over and over and…… Of course, it would be fun watching Chris Matthews head explode if she actually beat Obama. Hell, MSNBS might pack up and move to Canada. Just think how that would raise the national IQ average.

 

With apologies to Dan Riehl

I must take a slight exception to this post by Dan and no, I do not know if Dan’s comments were intended to this blog or not, I rather suspect they were not, but in any case, I felt a need to bring some clarity to my position on Santorum.

I’m going to move on from this issue, as I’m tired of people whining about various religion-based comments Santorum has made over time. What is wrong with you people? Are you incapable of understanding what he is actually saying, or simply clueless that the promiscuity and deterioration in certain values America now lives with due to the sexual revolution have had profoundly negative consequences on our society in some ways?

Dan, you are perfectly right about the effects of promiscuity and about the decline of certain values. As is Senator Santorum. I have no issue with anyone commenting on these matters, in fact, I might question their sanity if they did not see those problems.

It’s an acknowledged fact, one Santorum has also clearly stated he does not believe one can reverse through legislation, executive action, or something governmental in nature. There is no there there to all this nonsense, except for the sheepish way some of you are bowing to pressure from a liberal media intent on making a big deal of it.

Well, Dan, I would whole heartedly agree that the government cannot fix those issues. The fact is, like most things our government attempts to “fix” they would likely exacerbate the problems, and waste billions doing it.

As to some of us, “bowing” to the media on this, well, while I can only speak for myself, I must call horse shit on that. I raised these issues, and my concerns over a few of Santorum’s past statements long before the media did. Others might be “bowing to the Liberal media, but Ed Daley, nor myself are guilty of that.

If that isn’t enough for you, the current occupant of the White House worshipped at the church of Reverend Wright for one, or two decades. But, hey, no problem with that – it’s personal because it’s his religion, or whatever. Yet, you want to tell me Santorum’s devout Catholicism makes him unsuitable for the presidency? What kind of gutless wonders are you people, anyway? You call yourself conservative fighters but lack the intelligence, or can’t muster the courage to push back against silly bullshit like this from the liberal media? Then, go away. I’m tired of hearing and reading your clueless whining.

Dan, I would say that anyone who says Santorum’s Catholicism makes him unsuited for the White House is a moron, to be frank. To be even more frank, I really could not give a flip less about his religion. He seems to be a good man, with deeply held convictions, and that is to be admired and applauded. The fact is, I have liked Santorum better as this process has moved forward. He was not my first, pick, Perry was, but now, I prefer Santorum to Newt or Romney. And, of course, Santorum is  far, far better than our current president, who is a disaster frankly.

Now, the concerns I have about Santorum is ideological. As Duane Lester has noted today, Santorum seems to be slightly hostile to Libertarianism influences in the GOP.

In my podcast this week, I took Rick Santorum to the woodshed for his stance on libertarianism. Rick said this:

“I am not a libertarian, and I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement. I don’t think the libertarians have it right when it comes to what the Constitution is all about. I don’t think they have it right as to what our history is, and we are not a group of people who believe in no government.”

If that’s not bad enough for you, he said this to NPR in 2006:

One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. You know, the left has gone so far left and the right in some respects has gone so far right that they touch each other. They come around in the circle. This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.

Duane sums up my feelings pretty well here

Imagine that.  Being an American and thinking government should just leave people alone?  Crazy, right?  Can Rick show me where the Constitution gives moral busybodies in DC the power to legislate my behavior in my bedroom?  And don’t give me this, “Well, you can’t kill someone in your bedroom” stuff.  You know what I’m talking about.

Now, those are Santorum’s words, not mine. Whether or not Santorum means thegovernment when he says “we” is up for debate I suppose. But, I strongly disagree with the sentiments expressed there. Sorry, that is just me. I want the government to stay OUT of my life as much as possible. Again, this is an ideological difference between Senator Santorum and myself, sort of like his defending of earmarks rubs me the wrong way. I am funny that way I guess, I stick to certain principles.

Again, let me stress that I will work my ass off to get the GOP nominee elected because yes, defeating Team Obama is the most important thing.

Reaganite Republican: ​Obama machine would destroy Santorum

He raises some good points, and I agree with a lot of what he says. Of course, I am very doubtful, sorry, but it is true, of Mitt or Newt as well. My feeling as of right now, is this, the GOP, and yes, the voters, and the inane process has given us three candidates that are highly beatable. The good news is that Obama might be even more beatable than the eventual GOP nominee.

Cutting-to-the-chase, Rick Santorum is a very weak and uncharismatic candidate, one who was almost completely ignored until all more savory choices where destroyed in Romney/PAC/MSM/negative attacks. Basically, he’s still here because nobody bothered to even look at him, let alone slander. Much like Obama, he’s become a ‘blank slate’ that allows people to see what they want to see… but why delude yourself out of some false sense of necessity?

With his hollow record of accomplishment, zero leadership experience, whining demeanor, and loser’s aura in the wake of getting trounced by 19 pts last time out (as an incumbent!), Obama will simply paint him a nosy church-lady and intolerant kook as he absolutely SHREDS HIM in November.

Since the Left would love for Santorum to be the nominee, you’re not hearing a peep from them- yet.  But the the progs would have a field-day with Ricky, given the chance. Obama himself plans a billion dollar campaign… most of it negative, sure as you’re born. 

And as noted by VodkaPundit, Santorum does like to pontificate on almost any topic you care to serve-up, and therein lies another problem: Ramblin’ Rick doesn’t seem able to stay on-message -or really to even have one: a walking, talking disaster in the presidential election (even worse if he managed to find his way to the Oval Office). 

All I know is this: I didn’t just fight for three years, day-in-and-day-out just to hook up my wagon to a lame nag like this… rather go to a brokered convention and beg Palin to run. 
Never thought I’d miss Bachmann and Perry so much either… WHY did they even pack it in and hand so much to Santorum? Either would have been far more preferable from where I’m standing.

I am not quite as negative as RRR is here, but, again, some valid points are raised. Yep, it was hard to imagine that the GOP could screw itself this year, but……………

 

 

Just when I start to like Rick Santorum………..

Just when I start to think that I can overlook his over the top Social Conservatism. Just when I start to think that maybe he has realized that government needs to stay OUT of American’s sex lives, he goes THERE!

I don’t care if it’s in the Bible, I don’t care if you can point to all sorts of studies showing how it leads to bad economic outcomes or even health problems. People will not vote for Rick Santorum once they see things like this:

(Warning DKos link)

One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea … Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay … contraception’s okay.”

It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal … but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.

Again, I know most presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues.

Drew seems to agree with me, or maybe I agree with him, anyway, great minds agree that Santorum will lose to Obama if he keeps that up.

Also, one more point that folks like Santorum overlook. What if someone IS married, but in their forties, and simply feels like they are too old to have kids? Should they NOT use contraception? Not have sex? Is THAT sex somehow, “diminished”? Good grief Santorum!
 

Trump Thumps Rick Santorum: “I Don’t Get Santorum. I Don’t Get the Whole Thing” (Video) | The Gateway Pundit

Via The Gateway PunditTrump does not “get” Santorum? Who the Hell cares what a publicity whore with bad hair “gets”? Someone explain to me why CNN, or Fox, or anyone gives this man any air time at all.

Trump Thumps Rick Santorum: “I Don’t Get Santor…, posted with vodpod

Please say a prayer for Rick Santorum’s daughter

To everything there is a time, and now is the time to pray for Bella, Rick  Santorum’s daughter

POLITICO reports that Karen and Rick’s youngest daughter Isabella “Bella” Santorum has been admitted to a Philadelphia hospital, and all of the candidate’s Sunday morning campaign appearances have been canceled.

“Rick and his wife Karen are admitting their daughter Bella to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia this evening. The campaign will cancel Rick’s upcoming Sunday morning Florida campaign schedule. However, Rick intends to return to Florida and resume the campaign schedule  as soon as is possible,” Santorum communications director Hogan Gidley said in an email to POLITICO Saturday night.

Bella was born in 2008 with Trisonomy-18, a serious chromosomal defect, and Santorum has discussed Bella’s health and condition on the campaign trail before.

“I have a little girl who’s 3 1/2 years old,” he told Christian conservatives in Iowa before winning that lead-off contest.

“I don’t know whether her life is going to be measured – it’s always been measured – in days and weeks. Yet here I am. … because I feel like I wouldn‘t be a good dad if I wasn’t out here fighting for a country that would see the dignity in her and every other child.”

Santorum eviscerates Romney over RomneyCare » The Right Scoop -

Via The Right Scoop

WOW! Good for Santorum! I wish he had a chance, but, again, it seems that the GOP in incapable of nominating anyone with any real principles

Santorum eviscerates Romney over RomneyCare » T…, posted with vodpod

My issues with sweater vests, and other things a man should never have anything to do with

Stacy McCain, has developed a serious man crush on Rick Santorum, who, as I have said previously, is a good guy, but too Socially Conservative for me. Sorry, but I have issues with any politician who thinks what goes on in our bedrooms is in ANY way the governments business. I detest social engineering, no matter what side of the aisle it originates from. I also cannot fathom Santorum’s support of taxing different businesses at different rates. And, Santorum is  a big fan or ear marks, which Stacy seems to be overlooking. Maybe he is too smitten with Santorum to think straight. But, this post is not about Santorum’s crush on social engineering, or Stacy McCain’s man crush on Santorum. Like I have said, the GOP nominee, yes even if it is Mitt or Newt will have my full support.

 

Image via Wikipedia

No, this post is NOT about which GOP candidate is the best qualified in my view, y’all know who that is. This post is about  things that irritate me greatly. First is sweater vests, and how I detest them no matter who wears them, unless it is a hot woman of course. It is some inherent dislike that I have always had for sweaters, and for the bastard child of the sweater, the sweater vest.I cannot really explain why I loathe sweater vests so. I just think they make the man wearing them look, well, wimpy, pretentious, and like  a douchebag. Of course there is no scientific evidence to support my suppositions, maybe because most scientists are snobby wimps who wear sweater vests. Of course, I have no proof of that either but, I am sticking with that story.

 

I suppose that sweater vests top my list on unmanly things. So, I figured I would take this chance to list the other things that, in my humble view, men ought NEVER do!

 

 

Drink wine! Especially white wines. trust me, Chardonnay is a gateway drug. Show me a guy who actually orders white wine at a bar, and I will show you a guy who not only wears sweater vests, but likely subscribes to Sweater Vests Monthly, or Cat Fancy.  I would even go so far as to guess such a man has pictures of cats IN sweater vests on his computer somewhere!

 

Drink Michelob Ultra, see above!

 

Another thing that ought to cost a man his man card is going to a sports bar to watch golf, especially during football season. Doubly troubling is the guys that go to the sports bar dressed like the golf players! You have seen these miscreants before. Sporting their Tiger Woods red polo, and of course their stupid Nike visor too. To top it off, they might even be wearing, you guessed it, a SWEATER VEST!! Come on guys, football fans do not wear cleats and shoulder pads to watch their teams play do they?

 

Another thing men, as a group ought never do is ask their server to split the check after a night out drinking and dining. Whats next fellas? Going to reach for your smart phone with the tip calculator app?

 

Also, NEVER ask for an ice water “with a lemon”. Do I really need to explain why?

 

Of course, I shouldn’t need to list vote for a Democrat should I? I mean face it, voting Democrat is the intellectual equal of hitting yourself in the head with a hammer. Why not just get a sweater vest with the words “I want to pay higher taxes” on it?

Image via Wikipedia

 

A man should NEVER  take more than ten minutes to get ready to go out either. The only guy who takes longer than that is probably re-upping their subscription to Cat Fancy. Or perhaps they are pondering which sweater vest matches their shoes.

When dining out, order an ADULT burger. Honestly, what kind of guy gets a burger with just meat and cheese? I will tell you. The kind of guy who fears getting mustard on his sweater vest!

 

Tipping? Glad you asked. Nothing is more unseemly for a man to do than to be a poor tipper.  Especially the man that orders premium booze, insists on getting the tab, and offers to bu anything in a skirt a drink. If you drink big, then dammit tip big!

 

Enough for now, maybe I will do a post on things women should never do some time soon.

 

Breaking: Court To Decide If Gingrich, Huntsman, Santorum, Perry Will Be On Virginia’s Primary Ballot

Breaking: Court To Decide If Gingrich, Huntsman, Santorum, Perry Will Be On Virginia’s Primary Ballot – The Foundry

A very big development in the ballot access lawsuit filed in federal court in Virginia by Texas Governor Rick Perry and joined by Newt Gingrich, Rich Santorum, and Jon Huntsman. Judge John Gibney just filed a five-page order in which he states that…

…there is a strong likelihood that the Court will find the residency requirement for petition circulators to be unconstitutional. The authorities make clear that circulating petitions for candidates is a form of protected speech, and that the Commonwealth has a heavy burden to justify the restriction on speech by showing not only that the limitation achieves a valid state interest but also that the limitation is no broader in scope than necessary to achieve that purpose. As in all strict scrutiny cases, the state has a difficult task to demonstrate the propriety of its limitation on protected speech. For this reason, the Court believes that the plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits, at least on the issue of the validity of the residency requirement.

Yesterday, Judge Gibney ordered the Virginia State Board of Elections to notify all local county electoral boards that they are barred “from ordering any ballots” or “from mailing out any absentee ballots” until after the judge holds a hearing on the case on January 13. The judge says in the order that he will make a decision on the merits of the temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction being sought by the candidates on the 13th.

Additionally, the ACLU of Virginia filed an amicus brief today on the side of the Republican presidential candidates, arguing that Virginia’s 10,000-signature requirement for a presidential candidate to appear on the ballot “reduces the quantity of [political] speech available in Virginia, and directly infringes on the First Amendment rights of candidates, voters, petition circulators, and political parties.”

The ACLU also argues that Virginia’s residency requirement for petition circulators is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. In fact, the ACLU says that Virginia has “fail[ed] even to articulate a compelling interest.” It asks the court to grant the plaintiffs’ request for a TRO and a preliminary injunction. Looks like the judge agrees with the ACLU.

So we should know by the end of the day on Friday whether Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman and/or Santorum will be added to the ballot or if the only choices for Virginia voters will be Mitt Romney and Ron Paul in the Republican primary on March 6. With this latest order from the judge, it is highly likely that there will be additional candidates on the ballot.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Well, now that you put it that way

Rick Santorum, debating some snot-nosed college brats on Gay marriage had this line

“if that’s the case, then everyone can marry several people”

OK, in that case, I will marry Salma Hayek, KateBeckinsale, and Halle Berry. I am kidding of course, but seriously Santorum is right, marriage, once re-defined is bound to be re-defined over and over and, well you get the point. Personally, I doubt there will ever be a constitutional amendment defining marriage. I think too many of us just do not care if Gay people get married. If it were up to me it would be a state by state call. Of course, we all can see the problems with that can’t we? The lawsuits against those states NOT defining marriage the politically correct way would be filed by the ACLU, Gay rights activists, and others who want to force their ways upon the states.

We could go the route of allowing civil unions, but again, the activists would not be sated by that. Like most activists, they are control freaks who are really about forcing their will upon everyone else. So, what is the answer? Hell if I know folks, Hell if I know.

Rick Perry jokes about remembering cuts | The Right Scoop

Good answer, I sure hope some people start paying attention to what Perry’s record is.  In the clip from Rush I posted last night, he said Perry has a reputation for being less than intelligent. Sorry, but anyone saying that is NOT paying attention, or is not that sharp themselves. Lord knows we keep voting for the guy that is “a good debater” rather than the candidate with a solid message and record. Yes, I know, Romney is “electable” Well perhaps, but it ought to occur to voters, at some point, that the ONLY thing anyone supporting Romney ever says is that he is, “electable”! Sadly, it looks more and more like we will get another nominee with a weak Conservative record.

Yep, Santorum is”surging” and will flame out soon enough. But look at his record on spending, the guy loves earmarks people. Isn’t that what we are so fed up with? Political porkers? I mean yes, you have to love Santorum’s passionate defense of life, and you have to say he is a good man. But he also favors giving preferential tax rates to manufacturing companies. I though we were against government picking winners and losers.

Newt, oh how “smart” he is. And no doubt that he is. But the guy has more baggage than Samsonite, and has serious character flaws. And do not forget, Newt has oft flirted  with climate change nuttery, and never forget his endorsement of Scozzafava in NY 23.

COME ON FOLKS! We can do better! There is one candidate who walks the walk, one! The record is there.

Rick Perry jokes about remembering cuts | The R…, posted with vodpod

Your must read post of the day!

Is at Pundit & Pundette. Jill does a great job exposing the culture of death that infects many on the Left.

Mark Steyn weighs in eloquently on the zombified Left’s creepy, soulless attack on Rick Santorum. Just a bit:

Two weeks ago I wrote in this space: “A nation, a society, a community is a compact between past, present and future.” Whatever my disagreements with Santorum on his “compassionate conservatism,” he gets that. He understands that our fiscal bankruptcy is a symptom rather than the cause.

The real wickedness of Big Government is that it debauches not merely a nation’s finances but, ultimately, its human capital – or, as he puts it, you cannot have a strong economy without strong families.

Santorum’s respect for all life, including even the smallest bleakest meanest two-hour life, speaks well for him, especially in comparison with his fellow Pennsylvanian, the accused mass murderer Kermit Gosnell, an industrial-scale abortionist at a Philadelphia charnel house who plunged scissors into the spinal cords of healthy delivered babies. Few of Gosnell’s employees seemed to find anything “weird” about that: Indeed, they helped him out by tossing their remains in jars and bags piled up in freezers and cupboards. Much less crazy than taking ‘em home and holding a funeral, right?

Steyn is a wise man, and Jill quotes him often. Steyn is one of the few people today that I would put on par with our Founders, that is how much I respect his wisdom.

Jill has more on the abortion doctor cold-blooded butcher in Maryland

Meanwhile, in Maryland, more details emerge in the case of late-term abortionists Steven Brigham and Nicola Riley, who allegedly operated a handy drive-thru style service in which the patient would be induced in New Jersey but deliver her baby expel the contents of the uterus in Maryland, where it’s legal to abort late-term babies. After having her cervix dilated the young woman in question allegedly drove herself to the second location for the finish.

But hang on a sec. If you’ve never experienced the sensations created by a dilating cervix, whether naturally occurring (bad enough) or chemically-induced (much worse, I’m told), you may have passed over that phrase too quickly. The pain experienced by the 18 year-old as she drove must have been blinding and panic-inducing. And then it got worse; somewhere along the line her uterus ruptured. I don’t know what that feels like, thank God. The good doctors were then allegedly forced to dump her at a Maryland hospital. It appears she nearly bled to death. Whether her uterus survived its run-in with safe-n-legal, I can’t say. But let’s have a round of applause for Justice Blackmun, Margaret Sanger, and all the selfless warriors who made “choice” the most important right of all. It’s been very empowering.

That last part I highlighted speaks volumes doesn’t it? It speaks to the evil obsession the Far Left has with promoting Collectivism. And it speaks to their loathing of individual liberties. This ties in with their obsession with death as well.

The Left celebrates, no, consecrates abortion. The Left sees as sacred the collective right of women to “control their own bodies”, unless a woman wants to be in charge of any other health care decision of course, then her individual liberty must be surrendered on the altar of Universal Health Care. And, in their defense of abortion, which they see as a Collective Right, the Left is willing to dispense with the individual liberty of the unborn child that men like Mason, and Jefferson wrote about. Yes, that “unalienable right” to LIFE? It must go in favor of the Collective right of “choice”.

The history of the Totalitarian Left has many tales of evils, its path to the utopia of Collectivism is lined with unspeakable atrocities. From Stalin, to Pol Pot, to Mao, to Castro and Che, the Collectivists AKA Marxists have slaughtered tens upon tens of millions, and brought suffering, starvation, and evil to tens of millions more. All of their deeds have been in one way or another been cloaked in the desire to achieve a “common good”.

When individual liberty is sacrificed for the collective good, the individual is made expendable. The individual is stripped of all their value and worth. After all, what is one individual really worth, in comparison with the collective good the Left argues. But, in the end, all the Left has ever achieved, in their morally bankrupt pursuit of the common good is first the loss of individual liberties, followed in short order by abject misery for the collective.

Yes, Rick, you did say “Black people” and no you should stop weaseling your way around it

Because frankly, there was absolutely nothing wrong with what Santorum said. It is good to seek to help people get jobs, or better jobs, and to get them off government dependence.

The problem is that Santorum looks bad, not for what he said, but for trying to lie about it by denying he said it!

Iowa runner-up Rick Santorum said Thursday that he would be “a much bigger player” than expected in the New Hampshire primary and denied saying that he didn’t want “to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.”

Santorum allegedly made the controversial comments when discussing welfare in an interview Wednesday night with Fox News, but he maintained that people misheard the word “black” when he stumbled on a word.

“I looked at that, and I didn’t say that. If you look at it, what I started to say is a word and then sort of changed and it sort of — blah — came out.  And people said I said ‘black.’ I didn’t,” Santorum said.

 “And I can tell you, I don’t use — I don’t — first off, I don’t use the term ‘black’ very often. I use the term ‘African-American’ more than I use ‘black’ … I think sometimes you want to give someone the benefit of the doubt if it’s a little bit of a blurred word.”

Come on, DEFEND what you said man! Make the ideological points about why you are right instead of whining that you did not say it! In other words act presidential!

By the way, if anyone wants proof of what Santorum said, The Last Tradition has the video

Are there really “fake” Catholics?

Apparently some folks are questioning the authenticity of Rick Santorum’s Catholicism, Adrienne has the scoop Jill has even more

As for me, I do not believe in questioning someone else’s faith. Believe me, I have trouble enough with my own. But seriously, I have serious reservations about Santorum. He strikes me, as I have said before as a bit too socially Conservative. Not that I think he is a bad guy. I am not going to take the low road just because I prefer Perry to Santorum. Yes, I will question ideals, principles, and the records of the candidates. But, as for making half-assed slurs? Nope! Let other bloggers post this type of crap

A story on Rick Perry’s decision to stay in the race (an updated and expanded version of this post by Josh Hafner), which mentions Joe Allbaugh and Dave Carney among the crew of idiotic “strategists” responsible for running the doomstruck farce that is the Perry campaign. Evidently, Allbaugh and Carney didn’t get enough humiliation in Iowa to suit them, and are determined to utterly destroy any future political prospects for their client, the once widely-respected governor of Texas whom they’ve turned into a national laughingstock.

All I can say is this, anyone who does not respect Perry has problems I cannot help them with. The man’s record is rock solid, far more than Santorum I would say. I can say that because I have never heard Perry whining that he love earmarks, but that they were “Constitutional” so therefore the were OK. As to the national laughingstock crack, well we will soon see how Santorum fares won’t we? Likely he will be the 2008 version of Mike Huckabee, ensuring that once again we get an establishment nominee in 2012. Of course, that would not make him a laughingstock, not at all. Santorum is a good man, although he is not as Conservative as we are led to believe by his fans. Santorum hates big government, unless it is doing what he thinks is best. Santorum would be far preferable to President Empty Suit, or Mittens that is true, but I fear he is more Huckabee than Reagan.

Picking winners and losers, Santorum style

I like Rick Santorum, but his support of this type of thing bothers me greatly.

The next piece is his economics section, but while he sounds the same general theme as the other campaigns—too much spending and statism, and the need to cut the size of government—he spends a lot of time talking about his proposal to eliminate the corporate tax on manufacturing. The reason we need to give special status to manufacturing, he says, is that the sector is fungible. Goods can be produced anywhere, so Santorum believes we need to give those businesses special protection to keep them in America. Captive businesses—my words, not his—can be taxed at the normal rate because, he says, it’s harder to relocate those jobs. Why should florists and restaurants pay corporate taxes but not manufacturers? “Because,” Santorum says, “this restaurant isn’t moving to China, right? The florist isn’t moving to China.”

Hmmm, I must say, we should have one flat, and yes low, rate for all corporations, and individuals, that makes sense. But, giving one industry lower taxes than others is just another way of allowing government to pick winners and losers. Taxes ought never be used to punish, or reward certain behaviors. And the same rule ought to apply to taxing companies.

What Santorum is advocating here is making some businesses pay more corporate taxes than other businesses. Sorry, Senator Santorum, but that stinks, and it is sad that you would support such a policy. Frankly, it seems as if you do not want less government as much as you want the government meddling in ways that you approve of. Andy at Ace of Spades asks the obvious question

Wait. What? Sprinkle the word “green” in there a little and this quote could have come from Obama.

I thought we were against picking winners and losers via the tax code, but it seems that none of our potential candidates can resist it.

I would add here that one candidate does see one tax rate for everyone. Hmmm, who is that? Oh yes, Rick Perry!

The best endorsement for Rick Perry I have yet seen or read

From Ace, who lays out solid reasons for supporting Rick Perry for president. It is long, but worth the time invested. I have tried my best to lay out my reasons for supporting Perry, and Ace touches many of the same reasons. Go read it all.

As an aside, some other blogger, whom I respect immensely is endorsing Santorum, who would be my second choice. Santorum is a good guy, and solid as a Conservative, but he is not as qualified as Perry is. I, unlike this Other blogger will not go negative or say ugly things about his candidate, and I will never use Michele Bachmann’s fallacious attacks either. Lord knows what Bachmann would say about Santorum if he ever gets to leading the polls. Likely that he eats kittens or something.

So when I lashed out at Ace for his endorsement of Rick Perry, you’ve got to view this as an emotional reaction to campaign-induced stress. And also because anybody who endorses Perry is either dishonest or naive, or quite possibly retarded by the Gardasil vaccine.

See, I understand that RS McCain, blogging genius, is joking. Or maybe he is just worried about Bama losing to LSU. I know that he will be on Team Perry when Perry is nominated, and he will enjoy the way Perry turns America around.

*VIDEOS* Washington Post/Bloomberg GOP Primary Debate – 10/11/11

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.