Posts Tagged ‘Rick Santorum’

Free Book Giveaway! Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum

When former presidential candidate Rick Santorum and his wife, Karen, learned that their unborn son would likely not survive, they chose to continue the pregnancy and cherish whatever time they had with him.  At the same time, then-Senator Rick Santorum was fighting against the brutal practice of partial-birth abortion.

As they waited to meet their son, Karen wrote letters to the precious little boy she was carrying.  Gabriel was born prematurely and lived only two hours, but the Santorum’s strong Catholic faith, love for their son and appreciation for his short life carried them through their darkest days.

Karen’s letters to her son were published in 1998, in a book entitled “Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum.”   It is the story of a mother’s love for her unborn child and the unwavering conviction that EVERY life is precious, no matter how brief.

Now, you can be one of three lucky readers to win a free copy of latest edition!

Just leave a comment on this post expressing your interest (US residents only).  On Saturday, June 16th, I will draw three names and announce the winners Sunday morning.  

Here is the book description from Amazon:

This moving collection of intimate, poignant, and heart-warming letters was written by Karen Santorum to her unborn child, Gabriel Michael. During her pregnancy, Karen wrote letters to her son, never expecting that the letters would someday be published. Though her pregnancy began as normal, Karen ended up experiencing serious difficulties with her pregnancy at the same time that her husband Rick Santorum, the Republican Senator for Pennsylvania, was leading the charge against partial birth abortions in the U.S. Senate.

Letters to Gabriel is the story of Gabriel Michael’s short, but meaningful life, and a tribute to the sanctity of life, the deep faith of the Santorums, and strong family values. The intimate bond between mother and child is expressed by Karen with great tenderness and love. This is a deeply moving book that will touch the heart of its readers with the beauty of the gift of life, and inspire them to share it with others.

In accordance with Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255, I am disclosing that I will receive a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher.

Pressuring Parents to Abort Disabled Babies is Dead Wrong

Be Not Afraid: Every Life is Precious

Baby Audrey: the story behind “I Will Carry You”

Choosing Thomas — Inside a family’s decision to let their son live, if only for a brief time

[adrotate group="12"]

Share

The Truth about Sandra Fluke’s Dishonest Contraception Testimony


View on YouTube

This entire three ring circus has been a sham…an orchestrated wild goose chase to take the glaring spotlight off of Obama and his disastrous record.

Mark Steyn opines at the Orange County Register:

As I understand it, Sandra Fluke is a young coed who attends Georgetown Law and recently testified before Congress.

Oh, wait, no. Update: It wasn’t a congressional hearing; the Democrats just got it up to look like one, like summer stock, with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid doing the show right here in the barn and providing a cardboard set for the world premiere of “Miss Fluke Goes To Washington,” with full supporting cast led by Chuck Schumer strolling in through the French windows in tennis whites and drawling, “Anyone for bull****?”

Oh, and the “young coed” turns out to be 30, which is what less-evolved cultures refer to as early middle age. She’s a couple of years younger than Mozart was at the time he croaked but, if the Dems are to be believed, the plucky little Grade 24 schoolgirl has already made an even greater contribution to humanity.

…The brave middle-age schoolgirl had the courage to stand up in public and demand that someone else pay for her sex life.  [...]

All of us are born with the unalienable right to life, liberty and a lifetime supply of premium ribbed silky-smooth, ultrasensitive, spermicidal, lubricant condoms. No taxation without rubberization, as the Minutemen said. The shot heard round the world and all that.

Nor is the core issue that, whatever the merits of government contraception, America is the brokest nation in history – although the Fluke story is a useful reminder that the distinction between fiscal and social conservatism is generally false.

As almost all those fashionable split-the-difference fiscally conservative/socially liberal governors from George Pataki to California’s pathetically terminated Terminator eventually discover, their social liberalism comes with a hell of a price tag. Ask the Greeks how easy it is for insolvent nations to wean the populace off unaffordable nanny-state lollipops: When even casual sex requires a state welfare program, you’re pretty much done for.

No, the most basic issue here is not religious morality, individual liberty or fiscal responsibility. It’s that a society in which middle-age children of privilege testify before the most powerful figures in the land to demand state-enforced funding for their sex lives at a time when their government owes more money than anyone has ever owed in the history of the planet is quite simply nuts.

Read more at the Orange County Register

Wag The Co-ed: Contraception Distraction Is No Fluke, Reveals Obama’s Desperation

Media: What Unconstitutional Mandate? Pay For Our Birth Control Or You’re ‘Sexist’!

PR Firm of Former White House Communications Director and Mao fan Anita Dunn Representing Fluke

Sandra Fluke Revises Her Story

Who is Sandra Fluke?

Poor Sandra Fluke… She Wants You To Pay For Her $9/Month Birth Control As She Frolics in Spain & Pompeii

Sandra Fluke’s Boyfriend, Adam “Cutie Pants” Mutterperl, And His Radical Socialist Family

[adrotate group="8"]

Share

Wag The Co-ed: Contraception Distraction Is No Fluke, Reveals Obama’s Desperation

The real issue here is Obama’s attack on the constitution and religious liberty.   But he and his media cohorts would rather create red herrings to distract the American public from jobs, gas prices, astronomical debt, the unconstitutional government takeover of health care, and any other issue that is actually RELEVANT to voters.

Ron Ross write at American Spectator:

The world is spinning out of control and the spin rate is accelerating.

Having to pay for your own contraceptives has suddenly become a national crisis. In one way it is beyond belief and in another it is totally predictable.

Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student at Georgetown law school, in testimony before a congressional committee argued that she and forty percent of her fellow students are “struggling financially” because they have to pay for their own contraceptives.

The Democrat-media complex, rather than laughing in her face, is making Ms. Fluke a hero. She even got a phone call from President Obama urging her on.

How did we get to this point? Birth control is not a significant budget item. Recreational sex is not a necessity. Sex with contraceptives is not imperative for survival of the species.   [...]

The fact that contraceptives have become a hot political issue is bizarre beyond belief. Before the January 7 Republican debate in New Hampshire it was nowhere on the political horizon. In that debate moderator George Stephanopoulos badgered Mitt Romney about whether or not states have the constitutional authority to ban contraceptives. Romney was understandably befuddled by the question. In retrospect it is now clear that there was a method to the madness of Stephanopoulos’ question.

The Urban Dictionary defines “wag the dog” as follows: “When something of secondary importance improperly takes the role of primary importance.… To start a war or military operation to divert negative attention away from yourself.” President Obama cannot run on his record. His reelection team knows that. “We don’t want to talk about the economy, Obamacare, or gasoline prices. Let’s talk about contraceptives or Rush Limbaugh.

Read more at American Spectator

Obama’s ‘Contraception’ Red Herring:  Deceptive Debate Reveals The Leading Edge of Tyranny

Dems’ Ridiculous New Narrative: GOP Wants Women ‘Barefoot and Pregnant’

Obama Campaign Strategy: Use Contraception Mandate Debate To Demonize GOP Candidates

Media: What Unconstitutional Mandate? Pay For Our Birth Control Or You’re ‘Sexist’!

Limbaugh, Fluke, ‘War on Women’ and the Travesty of Cravenly Caving to Lies of the Left

[adrotate group="10"]

Share

Leftist Culture War Victories Fueling Surge In Santorum Support

Star Parker argues that it is the Left who is waging a deliberate culture war to destroy traditional morality and institutions in America, and Rick Santorum’s recent surge in the polls reflects American’s desire for a candidate who is willing to push back on more than just fiscal issues:

While the Republican Party splits on whether “values” should stand front and center on its platform, Democrats and the left make no pretense about this.

The political left, led today by President Barack Obama, is defined and energized by an ongoing sense of mission to wage a cultural war in America.

And the left is determined to win this war, to obliterate traditional values and to sever the connection between rights and responsibilities.

The three recent left-wing victories all touch these key areas: End the traditional institution of marriage as a bulwark of our society. Continue to promote sex as recreation and relegate the life created by this activity as a trivial byproduct that we allow to be destroyed with ease. Destroy the sanctity of private property so government can finance irresponsibility with other people’s money.

Obama is unapologetic about this agenda and even has the audacity to call it Christian for government to borrow trillions on the American people’s good credit and then permit politicians to determine who should be taxed to pay for it all.

The Santorum surge, I think, is being fueled by a growing sense that our economic crisis is at its core a moral crisis. And there is a growing sense among Republicans and conservatives that we must recognize the cultural war being waged and engage it with clarity and aggressiveness that matches that of the left.

An America with broken families, with an aging population growing old alone, with no educational framework to pass traditional truths on to our children, and with no private property so that our wealth and our wages remain exposed to politicians, is an America without a future.

Santorum is offering the very clear, consistent conservative alternative to this disaster. I think it’s why he is becoming the biggest surprise so far of this campaign.

Read more at OneNewsNow

Santorum Under Fire For 2008 Remarks: ‘Satan’ Attacking America

Polls Show Liberals, Not Santorum, Are The Ones Who Are ‘Well Outside The Mainstream’

Santorum Challenges Obama’s Twisted Theology

Santorum: Obama wants Americans to go to college to become indoctrinated

Michelle Malkin Endorses Santorum

It’s STILL the Social Issues, Stupid

Social Issues Cannot Be Divided From Fiscal Issues

[adrotate group="11"]

Share

Was Santorum a Senate Spendthrift?

I admire Santorum’s strong message that faith and family are key to turning our nation around.  However, I’m not entirely convinced that he supports drastically shrinking government back to only the enumerated powers granted by the constitution, or that his record proves him to be fiscally conservative.

An interesting analysis from the Weekly Standard:

Mitt Romney is now arguing that Rick Santorum’s record exposes him as one of those Republicans who “act like Democrats” once they get to Washington.  Romney surrogate Tim Pawlenty adds that Santorum “clearly has been part of the big-spending establishment in Congress.” Another Romney surrogate, former senator Jim Talent, says of Santorum, “He certainly has been outspoken on social issues . . . but when you get outside those issues into fiscal, spending, regulatory issues, his record shows that he’s been in the liberal wing of the Republican party.”

This is clearly emerging as one of Romney’s two prominent lines of attack against Santorum, the other — a related one — being that Santorum is a “Washington insider.”  But since the only reason Romney didn’t become a “Washington insider” himself is that he failed to win election in either of his two bids for federal office, and since the vast majority of the Republican party’s Washington insiders are backing Romney, this claim is likely to persuade precious few GOP voters.  That leaves Romney with only one real line of attack against Santorum:  that the former Pennsylvania senator’s record isn’t that of a fiscal conservative.

So, is Romney’s claim true?  Was Santorum a spendthrift in the Senate?  Fortunately, credible third party analysis is available to help us answer this question, so we need not merely accept the Romney campaign’s verdict as the final word on the matter.

The National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has been rating members of Congress for 20 years.  NTU is an independent, non-partisan organization that — per its mission statement — “mobilizes elected officials and the general public on behalf of tax relief and reform, lower and less wasteful spending, individual liberty, and free enterprise.”  Steve Forbes serves on its board of directors.

For each session of Congress, NTU scores each member on an A-to-F scale.  NTU weights members’ votes based on those votes’ perceived effect on both the immediate and future size of the federal budget.  Those who get A’s are among “the strongest supporters of responsible tax and spending policies”; they receive NTU’s “Taxpayers’ Friend Award.”  B’s are “good” scores, C’s are “minimally acceptable” scores, D’s are “poor” scores, and F’s earn their recipients membership in the “Big Spender” category.  There is no grade inflation whatsoever, as we shall see.

NTU’s scoring paints a radically different picture of Santorum’s 12-year tenure in the Senate (1995 through 2006) than one would glean from the rhetoric of the Romney campaign.  Fifty senators served throughout Santorum’s two terms:  25 Republicans, 24 Democrats, and 1 Republican/Independent.  On a 4-point scale (awarding 4 for an A, 3.3 for a B+, 3 for a B, 2.7 for a B-, etc.), those 50 senators’ collective grade point average (GPA) across the 12 years was 1.69 — which amounts to a C-.  Meanwhile, Santorum’s GPA was 3.66 — or an A-.  Santorum’s GPA placed him in the top 10 percent of senators, as he ranked 5th out of 50.

Across the 12 years in question, only 6 of the 50 senators got A’s in more than half the years.  Santorum was one of them.  He was also one of only 7 senators who never got less than a B.  (Jim Talent served only during Santorum’s final four years, but he always got less than a B, earning a B- every year and a GPA of 2.7.)  Moreover, while much of the Republican party lost its fiscal footing after George W. Bush took office — although it would be erroneous to say that the Republicans were nearly as profligate as the Democrats — Santorum was the only senator who got A’s in every year of Bush’s first term.  None of the other 49 senators could match Santorum’s 4.0 GPA over that span.

This much alone would paint an impressive portrait of fiscal conservatism on Santorum’s part.  Yet it doesn’t even take into account a crucial point:  Santorum was representing Pennsylvania.

Read more at the Weekly Standard

Santorum may have scored well by the NTA, his voting record – compiled by Red State, is someone disconcerting:

NEA

Voted for taxpayer funding of the National Endowment for the Arts. . . .

Defense and Foreign Policy. . . .

Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.

Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia. [Pro-Clinton!]
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea. . . .

Nominations. . . .

Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge . . .
Voted for James Brady to be District Judge

Labor

Voted against National Right to Work Act. . . .
Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
Voted for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Voted for Job Corps funding
Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization. . . .
Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws. [!!!] . . .

Taxes

Voted against a flat tax. . . .
Voted twice for internet taxes.
Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies. . . .
Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.

Waste. . . .

Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
Voted to increase NIHnding by $700 million. . . .
Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry. . . .
Voted to increase community development programs by $2 billion.

Spending and Entitlements

Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies a new entitlement.
Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt. . . .

Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.

Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
Voted against a bill to allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.

Education. . . .

Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion. . . .

Read more at American Vision

Is Santorum a ‘big government’ conservative?

Report: Santorum’s fiscal record not in line with Tea Party

Santorum’s economic message doesn’t align with current conservative trends

The Santorum “big government conservative” debate continues

[adrotate block="4"]

Share

Could Republicans End Up With A Brokered Convention?

If none of the candidates can lock in the required number of delegates before the GOP Convention in August, we could end up with a brokered convention, meaning that delegates would be free to vote for whomever they wanted – even someone not currently in the race.

Pundits are already speculating about the possibility of Chris Christie, Sarah Palin, Mitch Daniels, or Jeb Bush becoming a last-minute nominee.  Still, August is a long way off, and it’s anybody’s guess.

Newsmax reports:

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s struggles in Michigan are fueling speculation that Republicans might have to resort to a doomsday scenario and launch a frantic search for a 2012 savior at their nominating convention in late August.

Rare in the modern age of U.S. politics, a “brokered convention” could result in Republicans ditching their current crop of candidates and turning to someone else who they feel would have a better chance of defeating Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

How did Republicans get to this point? Romney’s failure to get conservatives fully behind him and put down yet another challenger in the party – this time it’s Rick Santorum – is causing angst in the party.

Many senior Republicans do not think Santorum, a social conservative caught up in the U.S. culture wars over issues like abortion and contraception, has a chance to beat Obama if he wins the party’s presidential nomination.

When he ran for re-election as a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania in 2006, Santorum lost by 18 percentage points. But, nevertheless, he is exposing Romney’s weaknesses in Michigan, where Santorum leads polls ahead of the big Midwestern state’s February 28 primary.

A Romney loss to Santorum in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor, would only intensify the talk about a weak Republican field and feed demands for someone else as the party’s candidate to challenge Obama.

“It’s hard for me to see how Romney rights the ship if he loses Michigan,” said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak. “There is no level of spin that can overcome that disaster.”

Michigan will set the table for “Super Tuesday,” the March 6 jackpot when 10 states hold Republican nominating contests. A loss for Romney in Michigan would raise serious doubts over whether he can rally enough support to have a big day on Super Tuesday and make a big move toward clinching the nomination.

The candidates are engaging in a state-by-state battle to become the Republican nominee. The party will officially pick a nominee at its August convention in Tampa, Florida.

Read more at Newsmax

Analysis: Could Republicans Have a Brokered Convention?

Palin: ‘Competition Elevates Our Game. Competition [Will Lead] Us to Victory in 2012′

Poll: Plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as dark-horse nominee

Poll: Voters Want Sarah Palin As Nominee In Case Of Brokered Convention

[adrotate group="10"]

Share

Santorum Challenges Obama’s Twisted Theology

Obama dragged theology into this election by claiming at the National Prayer Breakfast that Jesus would have supported his Leftist agenda.

I’m not sure that chasing Obama’s theological rabbit trail was the best campaign strategy for Santorum (there are plenty of Christian and conservative pundits that have taken up that fight), and he needs to get off this distraction quickly and focus on Obama’s failed record and his own plan to turn it around.

Still, it’s nice to hear a candidate call Obama out for distorting scripture to fit his twisted Marxist ideology.

Joel B. Pollak writes at Big Government:

On Saturday, surging Republican presidential candidate Sen. Rick Santorum attacked President Barack Obama’s governing philosophy: “It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology–but no less a theology.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The mainstream media, predictably, portrayed Santorum’s criticism as a revival of fringe claims that President Obama is not a Christian, but in fact a Muslim.

Yet Santorum was not attacking Obama’s religious identity. He was attacking the content of Obama’s religious beliefs–beliefs that Obama himself has put at issue.

Recently, at the National Prayer Breakfast, Obama claimed that his Christian faith motivated his policies of economic redistribution. At the same time, Obama claims the power to decide which Catholic institutions are “religious,” as he imposes abortion and birth control mandates.

Obama has also intervened in non-Christian faiths. A year ago, he told Jewish leaders to “search your souls” about Israel’s willingness to make concessions to Palestinians, as if Israel had not done so many times already. And when U.S. Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden last May, the Obama administration insisted that he did not symbolize Islam–but then went to great lengths to arrange a pseudo-religious Islamic funeral at sea.

What Santorum has done is to push back against the persistent religious hypocrisy of the Democratic Party and the left in general, who habitually raise false alarms about Christian encroachments on the constitutional separation of church and state while manipulating religion to suit their own political ends. Under Obama, Democrats have become ever bolder in substituting left-wing revisionism for traditional religious doctrine.

There are three essential elements in the so-called “liberation theology” of the American left. The first is the creed of social justice–the notion that it is our job to perfect the world by removing wealth and power from some and giving it to others. The second is the institution of the state–that the government is the ultimate source of moral virtue. And the third is the Prophet Obama Himself–the messenger and interpreter of the true faith.

It is no exaggeration to note that the left and its representatives in the media deified the president–“he’s sort of God,” said Newsweek editor Evan Thomas in 2009–and Obama played along. In building up to the 2012 elections, he has made social issues important, not just to distract from his economic failures and to rally liberals, but also because “liberation theology” is a weapon against resurgent conservative constitutionalism.

Obama honed his theology in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s church, and uses it in a strategy of divide-and-rule that often pits the political leaders of a community–who covet access to power–against the rank-and-file. When tested against traditional faith–at the Saddleback debate in August 2008, or in California’s Proposition 8–Obama’s theology fails. Yet it persists and thrives because of its self-appointed missionaries in the media.

Read more at Big Government

Rick Santorum: Obama’s Agenda Not Based on the Bible

Barack Obama Abusing Scripture

Obama Claims Jesus Would Support His Socialist Policies

President Obama Overlooks Another Famous Scriptural Passage, ‘Thou Shall Not Steal’

Political Leaders As Our High Priests?

[adrotate group="23"]

Share

Obama Campaign Strategy: Use Contraception Mandate Debate To Demonize GOP Candidates

DC0217

“It’s as if we passed a law requiring mosques to sell bacon and then, when people objected, responded by saying ‘What’s wrong with bacon? You’re trying to ban bacon!” ~ Glenn Reynolds

When George Stephanopoulos began grilling GOP candidates about contraception while moderating a debate last month, most pundits were wondering why on earth he was asking such seemingly irrelevant questions.  Now we know he was laying the groundwork for Obama’s false new narrative that Republicans want to deny women contraception:


View on YouTube 

Obama has since declared war on the Catholic church by requiring religious institutions to cover birth control and abortion drugs as part of their employee’s health care plans, even though to do so would clearly go against their faith.

Senator Rick Santorum, due to his comments in 2006 that contraceptives are harmful to women (which, in the case of the pill, is medically accurate), has been put on the defensive by the Leftist media, who are intent on painting him as a religious extremist on a mission to ban contraception.   This testy exchange with Charlie Rose is just a taste of things to come:


View on YouTube

I hope Santorum is on to their game. Obama wants the media narrative to be that evil Republicans want to ban birth control (a ludicrous straw man) and he’s the hero on the white horse riding in to save women’s health.

The whole farce is meant to distract from the fact that Obama’s orchestrating the nationalization of health care by forcing Catholics out of the business completely – the second largest health care provider in the US, and the government’s biggest competitor.

Santorum better clue in quick, stop trying to defend himself against a straw man argument, turn the narrative back to the REAL issue, and go on offense!

Paid Democratic Hitman’: Stephanopoulos’ Bizarre Debate Question Suddenly Makes Sense

Dems Blame Christians For Obamacare Assault on 1st Amdt, Claim Church ‘Discriminates Against Women’

Rick Santorum and ‘contraception conservatism’

Santorum: Contraception Would Remain Legal if I Was President

Why Rick Santorum doesn’t owe us a “contraception speech”

[adrotate group="12"]

Share

Santorum Sweeps Missouri, Minnesota and Colorado

Santorum: ‘Conservatism is alive and well’ in MO and MN

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

View at NBC News

Rick Santorum scored a stunning upset tonight over the establishment-crowned “heir apparent” Mitt Romney in Missouri, Minnesota and Colorado.

The downside: delegates from these states won’t be awarded for several months yet.

Michael A. Memoli reports at the Los Angeles Times:

Rick Santorum scored another victory Tuesday night in Minnesota’s caucuses, fueling the former Pennsylvania senator’s case that he is the leading conservative alternative to Mitt Romney in the GOP race.

In 2008, when it was a “Super Tuesday” state, Romney carried Minnesota by nearly 20 points over John McCain andMike Huckabee. Preliminary returns showed the former Massachusetts governor actually in third place tonight, behind Santorum and Texas Rep. Ron Paul.

Forty delegates will ultimately be allocated by Minnesota Republicans. But like Colorado, the state’s caucuses are only the start of that process. Congressional district conventions will be in mid-April, and the state convention is on May 5.

Still, Santorum can lay claim to a swath of the heartland, with victories also in Iowa’s caucuses and the Missouri “beauty contest” primary.

The Denver Post has called Colorado for Santorum, as well:

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum upended the race for the Republican nomination Tuesday, winning three states including Colorado.

Colorado’s race see-sawed throughout the night until 11 p.m., when Colorado GOP Chair Ryan Call declared Santorum the winner. But the race was a near tie.

“This is a major upset,” said Denver-based political analyst Floyd Ciruli. “Definitely, there is a new story now.”

Even Romney, who easily won the Republican contest in 2008 with 60 percent of the vote, acknowledged in his speech from the Auraria campus his new challenger.

“This was a good night for Rick Santorum, but I still expect to become the nominee,” he said. “I look forward to the contest to come.”

Read more at the Denver Post

Leon H. Wolf observes at Red State:

As of today, Rick Santorum officially has no more delegates than he had yesterday. That said, as CNN is just now this moment calling Colorado for Santorum in a stunning upset, his clean sweep of the states who voted/caucused today is a stunning rebuke to both Romney’s purported march through February and Newt Gingrich’s position as the favored not-Romney candidate.

Santorum’s performance was impressive in each state, vastly outperforming his position in the polls, which had him losing by 9 points in Colorado (he won by 5) and winning by only 9 in Minnesota (he won by 18). It is hard to tell who got clobbered worse – Romney, who fell all the way to third in Minnesota, or Gingrich, who finished well behind the flailing Romney in every state. Newt Gingrich didn’t even bother to give a speech tonight, which was probably a good idea if Romney’s shell-shocked and confused concession was any indication of what we could have expected. Although Santorum didn’t get any official delegates tonight, he certainly has bought himself one heck of a news cycle, and has in one day sucked the oxygen out of virtually every other campaign with the stunning results tonight.

For about the 9th or 10th time during this news cycle, the race has fundamentally changed its structure. For the first time I can recall, we are less than a month away from Super Tuesday and no one has any idea what is going to happen. Right now the question becomes whether Rick Santorum can get himself the money and organization to make this last beyond this week and into expensive contests in the larger states. One thing is for sure – this thing is a long way from over.

Romney Campaign Now Targets Santorum

Is Santorum a ‘big government’ conservative?

Michelle Malkin Endorses Santorum

[adrotate block="4"]

Share

Michelle Malkin Endorses Santorum

Michelle Malkin has come out in support of Rick Santorum:

Rick Santorum opposed TARP.

He didn’t cave when Chicken Littles in Washington invoked a manufactured crisis in 2008. He didn’t follow the pro-bailout GOP crowd — including Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich — and he didn’t have to obfuscate or rationalize his position then or now, like Rick Perry and Herman Cain did. He also opposed the auto bailout, Freddie and Fannie bailout, and porkulus bills.

Santorum opposed individual health care mandates — clearly and forcefully — as far back as his 1994 U.S. Senate run. He has launched the most cogent, forceful fusillade against both Romney and Gingrich for their muddied, pro-individual health care mandate waters.

He voted against cap and trade in 2003, voted yes to drilling in ANWR, and unlike Romney and Gingrich, Santorum has never dabbled with eco-radicals like John HoldrenAl Gore and Nancy Pelosi. He hasn’t written any“Contracts with the Earth.”

Santorum is strong on border security, national security, and defense. Mitt the Flip-Flopper and Open Borders-Pandering Newt have been far less trustworthy on immigration enforcement.

Santorum is an eloquent spokesperson for the culture of life. He has beensavaged and ridiculed by leftist elites for upholding traditional family values — not just in word, but in deed.

He won Iowa through hard work and competent campaign management. Santorum has improved in every GOP debate and gave his strongest performance last week in Florida, wherein he both dismantled Romneycare and popped the Newt bubble by directly challenging the front-runners’ character and candor without resorting to their petty tactics.

He rose above the fray by sticking to issues.

Most commendably, he refused to join Gingrich and Perry in indulging in the contemptible Occupier rhetoric against Romney. Character and honor matter. Santorum has it.

Of course, Santorum is not perfect. As I’ve said all along, every election cycle is a Pageant of the Imperfects. He lost his Senate re-election bid in 2006, an abysmal year for conservatives. He was a go-along, get-along Big Government Republican in the Bush era. He supported No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit entitlement, steel tariffs, and earmarks and outraged us movement conservatives by endorsing RINO Arlen Specter over stalwart conservative Pat Toomey.

I have no illusions about Rick Santorum. I wish he were as rock-solid on core economic issues as Ron Paul.

And I wish Ron Paul was not the far-out, Alex Jones-panderer on foreign policy, defense, and national security that he is.

Read more at Michelle Malkin

Rick Santorum’s Iowa Speech

[adrotate group="10"]

Share

Romney Wins New Hampshire With Wide Margin

Romney’s Victory Speech

View at YouTube

*Forehead slap*

Really, New Hampshire?  REALLY?  I know he’s your favored Northeastern son and all, but did you really have to pick the second coming of McRINO?  Seeing as how that pretty much clinched our defeat in 2008?

Fox News reports:

Mitt Romney scored a decisive victory in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday, securing his second win in the first two contests of the presidential nominating season and trying to turn his front-running campaign into a steamroller.

His New Hampshire performance puts Romney’s campaign in strong position going into South Carolina, the next primary on the calendar and one that historically has been key to the GOP presidential nomination. But Romney still has a fight on his hands, as the five other candidates vowed to press on and meet him in the Palmetto State.

In New Hampshire, Ron Paul finished in second and Jon Hunstman finished in third. Rick Perry finished in sixth place. Any remaining drama in the state is the race for fourth, between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Both candidates were pulling in 9 percent of the vote.

Allahpundit opines at Hot Air:

Somehow this is even more depressing than McCain’s victory in 2008, no? There was no tea-party revolution back then to be betrayed by nominating the godfather of the individual mandate, and the field, quite frankly, was stronger than this one. Huckabee was a more effective social-con populist than Santorum and Fred Thompson was a more effective southern “true conservative” alpha male than Perry. And McCain, for all his faults, was a war hero. Somehow we’ve backslid to the point where not only is one of the also-rans in that race the frontrunner now, he’s a juggernaut — the first Republican since Ford to win both Iowa and New Hampshire. Despite the fact that only a small part of the party seems passionate about him, he’s 11 days and one win away from wrapping this race up. Unbelievable.

Daniel Horowitz argues at RedState:

Romney, just like Obama, denies the fact that government interventions in the private market will invariably harm all consumers and businesses.  Perforce, he will have no response to Obama other than the vapid “that was state, this is federal” argument.  Yup, something so terrible on a federal level is so superlative on a state level.

In other words, Romney will completely disarm us of our most successful electoral weapon.  We should be able to harness the anti-Obamacare sentiment even more deftly this year than in 2010, as the higher premiums stimulated by the bill are being actualized.  Yet, we will squander this paramount opportunity because none of the other candidates seem to care.  As Philip Klein ominously predicts, “should he [Romney] become the nominee, the Massachusetts program will no longer be a problem just for him, Romneycare will become a thorny issue for the entire Republican party.  [...]

After three years of campaigning against Obamacare, we are on the verge of elevating the Thomas Edison of anti-free-market healthcare to the party’s highest honor.

Erick Erickson of RedState, however, thinks there still might be a chance for Perry to win back some momentum in South Carolina:

Here’s what everyone thinks about this year. If Romney sweeps Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina he wins. It is conventional wisdom and conventional wisdom is usually right.

But this year there is an anomaly. The first several rounds of primaries and caucuses are not winner take all, but proportional…[T]here is still a long way to go.

That is one reason Perry stayed in after finishing fifth in Iowa and expecting to finish at the bottom in New Hampshire. Not only does South Carolina not care about Iowa and New Hampshire, but they are not really relevant to South Carolina, the first Republican primary in a consistently Republican state.

Read more at RedState

I hope so.  The only reason voters came out in 2008 was for Palin, not McCain.  We can’t afford another excuse for them to stay home in 2012.

Mitt Romney Refuses to Call Obama a Socialist

RINO Romney’s Greatest Liberal Hits: What He Doesn’t Want You to See

Drive-by Media: RINO Romney is Their Man

Iowa: Romney Beats Santorum By Only 8 Votes

Virginia Voters Forced to Choose Between Romney & Paul, All Other Candidates Disqualified

[adrotate group="36"]

Share

Ron Paul Supporters Join Occupy Protesters to Harass GOP Candidates

Just before the New Hampshire vote, Ron Paul supporters and Occupy protesters surrounded and harassed Rick Santorum, his wife and two of his children (H/T Weasel Zippers:

Rick Santorum had his final rally tonight before Granite Staters start voting Tuesday morning in the first-in-the-nation primary.

Supporters and press mobbed the candidate as he made his way around the packed restaurant and bar here. As he exited his final primary eve event, he was surrounded by a mix of protesters from the Occupy movement and Ron Paul supporters.

As he walked out of Jillian’s in downtown Manchester, his staff surrounded him and the protesters tried to form a circle around the former Pennsylvania senator. They chanted, “Bigot, bigot!” and “Shame, shame!” as he made his way to his car.

Police and security were on hand and during the crush one member of the candidate’s entourage got shoved to the ground, as did one of the protesters.

Santorum smiled as he walked the short distance from the restaurant, but a serious scuffle ensued, and his wife Karen had a frightened look on her face. Two of his children Elizabeth and Daniel followed closely behind. His other children, including his 3-year-old daughter Bella, who has a rare genetic condition, are already in South Carolina.

Read more at ABC News

Newt Gingrich was forced to cancel an appearance because of a similar incident:

Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich canceled an appearance at his New Hampshire campaign headquarters after protesters swarmed the entrance.

About 40 protesters showed up Monday evening carrying placards reading “Ron Paul” and “Occupy.” One played speeches by presidential candidate Ron Paul from a loud speaker.

Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond says the former House speaker’s private security detail decided to cancel the event because of security concerns regarding the entrance and exit to the building.

THIS is what they think “democracy looks like?”

Ron Paul needs to condemn this kind of behavior from both Occupy and his supporters (though it appears there’s not a lot of daylight between them). His silence is tacit approval.

Ron Paul Praises Occupiers, Says He Can ‘Connect’ With Them

DOJ inspector general refuses to investigate Occupy public safety threats

Occupy’s Overtures To ‘Find Common Ground’ With The Tea Party Are A Trojan Horse

[adrotate block="4"]

Share

Occupiers Plan Gay Pride Parade & ‘Funeral for the American Dream’ to Disrupt NH Primary

The Occupiers did everything they could to harass candidates and voters and in Iowa disrupt the caucuses.  Now they’re targeting New Hampshire, having already begun by infiltrating townhall meetings for candidates they clearly have no intention of ever voting for, and only want to argue with.

This is “what democracy looks like” to Occupiers: disrupting the legal, democratic electoral process for anyone who dares to disagree with them.

Billy Hallowell reports at The Blaze:

In New Hampshire, which holds its primary election Jan. 10, Occupy protesters are planning a gay pride parade Saturday and a “funeral for the American dream” outside a candidate debate the same day. They expect hundreds of activists from along the East Coast to join their events.

Lauren Dickson of Occupy New Hampshire said activists would be trained on the art of “bird-dogging,” or confronting candidates with hard questions. She credited Iowa’s protests with bringing attention to the movement.

Read more at The Blaze

Occupy NH plans events ahead of primary

Occupy Wall Street Planning All-Out Class War in 2012

Communists Work on a New Improved, Pro-Obama ‘Occupy’ Movement 

Van Jones Planning To Take ‘Occupy Wall Street’ To ‘Phase Two’, Begin Recruiting Radical ’99%’ Candidates

[adrotate group="8"]

Share

Rick Santorum’s Iowa Speech

Santorum addresses supporters after coming in a razor-close second in the Iowa Caucus:

View on YouTube

Rush Limbaugh says the speech provided a sense of the GOP being a team again.

Patrick Burke reports at CNS News:

On his Wednesday show, Rush Limbaugh said Sen. Rick Santorum’s post-Iowa Caucus speech evoked the vital concept of “team” and its ability to energize a campaign.

“Santorum comes along, there’s something about this whole thing last night, for me, felt inclusive being part of a team. And that’s important…There’s something energizing and unifying about that.”

Limbaugh said that disenfranchised conservatives are eager to be part of a “winning team”:

“[I]t’s been a facet, or an aspect, of politics recently that has been absent, at least for some of us on our side. “

“It’s not that there hasn’t been a team, it’s been that the team is comprised of people that don’t win. And who wants to be on a losing team at the end of the day?”

Although he did not say this concept of team will definitely take shape, Limbaugh said he thinks it has the potential to be very powerful, rallying influence:

“And to the extent that whoever our nominee is can create that reality for people, that we’re all on a team, there’s nothing I can think of that’d be more inspiring and motivating.”

Read more at CNS News

One of Santorum’s appeals is the fact that during these tumultuous economic times,  he has reminded voters that the nuclear family is key to reducing dependence on government and creating an environment where personal responsibility, creativity, hard work and innovation can prosper.

The flip side is that like many social conservatives, Santorum would like some of these issues to be handled at the federal level rather than at the state and municipal level, where they belong per the 10th Amendment.  But since the Executive branch doesn’t have the constitutional power to dictate policy on such issues, anyway, it’s a moot issue for me.

Ed Morrissey of Hot Air asks, “Is Santorum a ‘big government’ conservative?

When one becomes a front-runner, the scrutiny starts — and Rick Santorum has just stepped into the arena with a surprising and inspiring finish in Iowa.  His reward? The closer look every second-tier desires and dreads as a consequence of getting called up to the majors.  David Harsanyi spells out the case for conservatives looking to oppose Santorum, calling him a “conservative technocrat”:

Rick Santorum, like most Republican candidates, fashions himself the one true conservative running in 2012. If the thought of big, intrusive liberal government offends you, he might just be your man. And if you favor a big, intrusive Republican government, he’s unquestionably your candidate.

People are taking a look at Santorum. Important people. People in Iowa. Even New York Times columnist David Brooks recently celebrated his working-class appeal, newfound viability and economic populism, noting that the former Pennsylvania senator’s book “It Takes a Family“ was a ”broadside against Barry Goldwater-style conservatism” — or, in other words, a rejection of that Neanderthal fealty for liberty and free markets that has yet to be put down. Santorum’s book is crammed with an array of ideas for technocratic meddling; even the author acknowledges that some people “will reject” what he has to say “as a kind of ‘Big Government’ conservatism.”

Santorum grumbles about too many conservatives believing in unbridled “personal autonomy” and subscribing to the “idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do … that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom (and) we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.” …

Today, Santorum tells voters that Medicare is “crushing” the “entire health care system.” In 2003, Santorum voted for the Medicare drug entitlement that costs taxpayers more than $60 billion a year and almost $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Santorum voted for the 2005 “bridge to nowhere” bill and was an earmark enthusiast his entire career.

These days, Santorum regularly joins a chorus of voices claiming that he would greatly reduce the role of federal government in local education. When he had a say, he supported No Child Left Behind and expanded the federal control of school systems. In his book, in fact, Santorum advocates dictating a certain curriculum to all schools. The right kind. It’s not the authority of government that irks him, but rather the content of the material Washington is peddling today.

Fair points all, and these will get threshed out in the next couple of weeks, as they should.

Read more at Hot Air

Iowa: Romney Beats Santorum By Only 8 Votes

Santorum Won Among Iowa Tea Partiers, Romney Among Tea Party Opponents, Says Entrance Poll

[adrotate group="14"]

Share

Iowa: Romney Beats Santorum By Only 8 Votes

Eight votes.

Romney spent millions of dollars on campaigning in Iowa, and the PAC run by his former staffer spent millions more on negative TV ads.  Yet for all his money, Romney only managed to squeeze out 8 votes more than Santorum, who barely spent $30,000.

Newsmax reports:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won the Iowa GOP caucus early Wednesday morning by just 8 votes after an intense three-way battle throughout Tuesday evening that underscored the depth of opposition to him within the Republican Party.

The race had shaped up as a two-way dead heat between Romney and Rick Santorum with Iowa GOP chairman Matt Strawn announcing Romney’s victory shortly after 2:30 EST. The final vote total for Romney was 30,015 to Santorum’s 30,007.

Read more at Newsmax

Daniel Horowitz contends at RedState that the results prove “They Didn’t Want Mitt in 2008;They Don’t Want Him Now“:

The results of the Iowa Caucuses are in.  To the extent that you can draw conclusions from the votes of 123,000 individuals, here are some quick observations.

1) The Media will invariably focus on which conservative candidates should drop out.  They will also focus on the fact that there is nobody who has a definitive roadmap to defeat Romney.  But the larger point they will overlook is how much the Republican electorate dislikes Romney.  He spent million of dollars in 2008 and got crushed by Huckabee.  He spent millions of dollars this year, yet he failed to improve on his 2008 showing (Santorum spent just $30,000 on ads).  The punchline is that 75% of GOP voters are willing to vote for anyone anyone against Romney.

2) It appears that Romney’s base of support is limited to rich secular voters.  That’s not exactly the appeal you want to have going into this election.  There is very little overlap between Romney’s 2008 voters and his current supporters.  In other words, he is last cycle’s McCain.

3) As we head into New Hampshire and South Carolina, I have a feeling that Romney will finally incur aggressive and sustained attacks from multiple candidates.  In particular, Newt is seeking his revenge – to the extent that he wants Romney to lose more than he wants to win himself.

4) With 27% of the electorate being Independent voters, and Ron Paul garnering support of almost half those voters, can we finally end this nonsense of having non-Republicans vote in a Republican primary/caucus?

5) With the prospects of electing a conservative president becoming dimmer by the day, we really need to divert some of our attention to the congressional races.  In a presidential election year, all of the primaries are much earlier, including those for Senate and House candidates.  We need to mobilize for conservatives down the ticket.  Our Republican president will need a strong conservative Congress to prevent a rehash of the 2001-2006 era of compassionate conservatism.

6) The most important observation from Iowa?  Republicans are dramatically underwhelmed by the current field.  In a year when Republicans are fired up to defeat Obama, they barley broke the 2008 turnout record, and when the increase in Independent voters is factored in, there were probably less Republican voters this time around.  Unlike previous elections, there is a huge opportunity for a conservative candidate to enter the race and sweep the field.  Unless someone else gets in, Gingrich appears to be the only one who still has a decent level of national support to drag Romney into a protracted primary battle.

7) On a personal level, I’ve always said that I would support the anti-Romney whomever that would be (except for Paul), just as I would support any Republicans nominee against Obama in the general election.  For now, with Perry headed back to Texas and Santorum with little support outside of Iowa, it appears that Newt is the only hope for those who proudly declare: Mittens Delenda Est.  McCain’s impending endorsement of Romney will only galvanize us to kill (politically, of course) two Republican imposters with one stone.

Though he finished strong in Iowa, Santorum has neither the money nor the organization to compete at the same level in New Hampshire or South Carolina, and is already seeking donations to fill his war chest.

Ron Paul finished third, largely due to Democrats who re-registered as Republicans to vote for him.  Iowa allows voters to register “Republican” at the door only minutes before the vote, so saboteurs have no trouble getting in and skewing the results.

Gingrich has already taken out a full-page ad in New Hampshire to fight back against the Romney camp’s fierce attack ads.

Perry is heading back Texas to reassess his campaign after finishing 5th, rather than heading to South Carolina as expected.

Sarah Palin is encouraging Bachmann to bow out and make an endorsement.

It’s anybody’s race at this point.

[adrotate group="10"]

Share
Become A Subscriber!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Follow ConservThoughts on Twitter

Support This Blog!

This blog is a labor of love for you, the reader who loves this country and wants to stay informed of the threats to our liberty and how to make a difference. I receive no compensation for blogging and pay for web services out of our family budget. Would you consider making a small donation to help? Just like the fight for liberty, every little bit makes a difference!

Categories
Archives
Note: Please keep your comments respectful and relevant to the topic at hand. I will not approve ad hominem attacks or profanity. Nor will I approve comments by advertisers using their business or product and hyperlink as their username. This blog is not a forum for free advertising.
Free Gift!
FREE Pocket Copy of the Declaration & Constitution!
PJTV
Change A Child’s Life!

Get stickers, T-Shirts and more at the Patriot Depot!

Preparedness Pantry Blog

Copyright Trolls Sue Thoughts From A Conservative Mom

Join The Fight!
You Are Visitor
Powered by web analytics software.
Learn more about us debt.
DiscoverTheNetworks.org
Help A Friend In Need!
A non-profit organization facilitating generosity between people.
Financial Freedom
Get on the road to financial peace with Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University!

Journey to true financial freedom with Crown Financial Ministries!