-
Sanford Resurrected in Carolina
April 3, 2013 | 140 comments
-
Bostic and Sanford Battle in Charleston
March 29, 2013 | 16 comments
-
South Carolina Showdown
March 26, 2013 | 39 comments
-
The Liberal Media Lie About CPAC
March 18, 2013 | 35 comments
-
The Hottest Ticket in Town
March 14, 2013 | 28 comments
Campaign Crawlers
Santorum’s Winning Work Ethic
Most media are missing the secret of his campaign’s success.
During the week that ended Sunday, Newt Gingrich held eight campaign events and Mitt Romney held nine. Rick Santorum held 15 events last week, and that may ultimately explain why Santorum continues his otherwise inexplicable surge in the Republican presidential race: He is simply out-working his opponents.
Ever since Iowa, where he famously visited all 99 counties before surging to an upset win over Romney in the final week before the Jan. 3 caucuses, Santorum has consistently appeared at more public events than either of his chief GOP rivals. Excepting only the last weekend of January — when he returned home to get his tax returns and stayed to visit with his ailing 3-year-old daughter — Santorum has almost always held more events each day than either Gingrich or Romney. Some days, Santorum appears at more campaign events than the other two combined. Monday, Santorum did two events in Ohio and two in Michigan. Tuesday, he traveled to Arizona for two more events, and today he will speak at a Tea Party rally in Tucson before tonight’s debate in Mesa (8 p.m. Eastern, CNN).
The national media, while spending the past week hopping from one Santorum-related “controversy” to another, have paid little attention to the former Pennsylvania senator’s unsurpassed diligence as a candidate. If all you knew about the Santorum campaign was what you learned from the media, you might be excused for believing that he has surged to the top of the Republican presidential field because (a) he’s a scary religious kook, and (b) so are GOP primary voters.
Day after day, ever since it became clear that Santorum is the last man standing between Romney and the Republican nomination, a drumbeat of hostile media coverage has followed Santorum everywhere. When he described President Obama’s allegiance to radical environmentalism as a secular “theology,” this was seized on as evidence that Santorum was questioning Obama’s professed Christianity. After draining the last ounce of outrage from that controversy — which they had, of course, created — the media then evidently decided that the public should be alarmed because of something Santorum said at a Catholic university four years ago. His August 2008 remarks during a speech at Ave Maria University in Florida, to the effect that Satan was especially targeting the United States for destruction, were a banner headline all day Tuesday on the Drudge Report, and even so staunch a conservative as Rush Limbaugh said, “Santorum will have to deal with it. He’ll have to answer it.”
It should not be necessary to explain the recording and transcript of Santorum’s Ave Maria speech did not make its way into the media by mere happenstance, but was in all likelihood unearthed by opposition researchers for some other campaign. The shadow of suspicion would naturally fall on Romney’s well-funded operation, but one cannot rule out the possibility that Obama’s own re-election campaign was responsible, because there is good reason to believe that Santorum’s rise in the GOP field has alarmed Team Obama.
A recent Washington Post article reported that the Obama campaign, which has spent most of the past year operating on the assumption that Romney would be the Republican nominee, had re-assigned researchers to begin “digging into Santorum’s background.” In recent days, the president’s Chicago-based campaign staff has “begun to consider the implications of a Santorum victory,” the Post’s Sandhya Somashekhar reported. “They view him as a weaker general election opponent, but one who has shown an ability to connect with the population that is most disillusioned with Obama: white, blue-collar voters.”
One look at the Electoral College map should make clear why, despite their description of Santorum as the “weaker” Republican candidate, Team Obama may be especially worried about his potential strengths as an opponent in the fall campaign. The so-called Rust Belt states — from Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania, across West Virginia and Ohio all the way west to Wisconsin, Minnesota — are home to many millions of those “white, blue-collar voters” and Santorum has indeed shown an ability to connect with that “disillusioned” population. These are Americans who were notoriously described by Obama in April 2008: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Despite their alleged “antipathy,” many of those bitter gun-and-Bible clingers in the small towns and cities of America’s heartland voted for Obama four years ago, but they haven’t gotten much of the “Hope and Change” he promised them. Those voters have much in common with Santorum, who speaks frequently of his coal-miner grandfather, an Italian immigrant who came to America to escape Mussolini’s fascist regime. Many of those blue-collar Rust Belt voters are Catholics like Santorum and, in recent decades, Catholics have been the crucial “swing” vote that decides elections. In 2008, polls showed Catholics favoring Obama over Republican John McCain by a 10-point margin. On the eve of the 2010 mid-term election, however, polls showed Catholics had shifted sharply, favoring Republicans by as much as 24 points — and the GOP won its largest congressional landslide in more than half a century.
Should Santorum emerge from this long campaign as the Republican nominee and manage to rally blue-collar voters and Catholics in the Midwestern heartland to the GOP standard, Obama’s re-election prospects would be quite dim indeed. And so while the hostile media continues trying to gin up new controversies around him, Santorum just keeps on doing what he has been doing every day for nearly a year: Campaigning everywhere he can, in the hope that hard-working voters will ultimately choose the Republican who is working harder than any other candidate to win their votes.
About the Author
Robert Stacy McCain is co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party (Nelson Current). He blogs at The Other McCain.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (105) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Robert Stacy McCain
More Articles From Campaign Crawlers
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/22/santorums-winning-work-ethic
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- What’s in a Name?
- The (Real) Great Divide
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Tom| 2.22.12 @ 6:26AM
Excellant article. Santorum has a much better chance of winning Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan than do Romney, Gingrich, or Dr. Nutjob. If he can accomplish that, it would be almost impossible for Obama to win in November. That's why Santorum is the most electable GOP candidate out there.
Clint| 2.22.12 @ 6:59AM
Ricky Specter-Santorum Is Our Useful Dupe To A Brokered Convention.
The First Step Is To Make RINO-CINO Patrician GOP Fop, Mittens Romney Lose Michigan.
Then The RINO-CINO GOP Ruling Elite House Of Cards Starts To Fall For The Super Tuesday Elections.
Once There's A Brokered Convention, We Give Ricky Specter- Santorum His Walking Papers And Get Another Candidate.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 7:04AM
I think that for the first time in ages the Convention outcome is up in the air. I really don't see one clear winner. An open converntion will make for some odd bed-fellows once it is over.
For instance:
1 - Romney/Santorum ticket
2 - Romney/Gingrich ticket
3 - Santorum/Paul
Stranger things have happened.
Mike 3/505| 2.22.12 @ 11:11AM
mike 3/505 and oldfart....who knows?
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 1:39PM
Hey you know what the ground hog said?
Gopher it.
LOL
We sure as dickens can't do any worse.
Garfield| 2.22.12 @ 3:26PM
If Romney is the nominee I'm voting 3rd party or having a coin toss as to who to vote for.
W| 2.22.12 @ 4:11PM
If you will act to elect Obamat then you are not either a Republican or conservative and represent the pretend conservatives on this site who are here only to attack our candidates.
Quartermaster| 2.22.12 @ 9:36PM
Lol!@ So you would vote for a Soros approved candidate in Romney, then criticize everyone else that refuses to drink the koolaid with you. You're a riot.
W| 2.22.12 @ 10:06PM
If you cannot see a difference between Romney and Obama then you have a problem with reality.
Mike Rogers | 2.23.12 @ 3:35AM
You're missing the one combo that dare not speak its name for it is the number of the beast. 666. I mean, of course, Romney-Paul. Wake up and smell the sulphur from that unholy alliance of two liberals. You have been warned.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 11:52AM
Yes, Satan is targeting the US---we are the last vestige of opposition to the twin evils of Liberalism and Islamism. Satan always targets for destruction the decent and good, which is why he helps out Ron Paul.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 12:30PM
Well, sure---how about John Bolton? It ain't gonna be the jihadi loving jagoff.
Doctor Right| 2.22.12 @ 2:13PM
...yawn...
Anymore paranoid fantasies?
Mike Hawk| 2.22.12 @ 6:13PM
Clint is Bob (with one 'o') Casey's flack. Thanks for the Liberal flunky in the Senate, ya dope,
Mike Rogers | 2.23.12 @ 3:37AM
Posting apart from Jack lately? A falling out?
The useful dupe is Ron Paul, who is staying in to split the vote for Mittens in the hope of a Sec Treas payoff.
Jack in Wi.| 2.22.12 @ 7:04AM
The devils desciple, Santorum is a warmonger and a dimwitt. The only thing proping him up is talk radio and the boobs in the Bible belt. The only guy who would get rid of Roe vs. Wade is Ron Paul who would use the power of Congress to restrict the juridiction of the Federal Courts on this issue. Santoum is a chickenhawk warmonger who is using the life issue. He voted to fund Planned Paretnhood. That is something Ron Paul never did. He also sold out when he backed Christie Todd Whitman and Snarlyn Arlyn Spector. His voting record is generally atrocious. No Pro war Republican has a chance to carry the country. Obama will claim to be the guy who got Bin Laden, ended the Iraq war and is bringing the troops home from Afghanistan. How you going to beat that with someone like Santorum, hasn't got the intellectual or theological skills to pull off what he is starting? You also can't call yourself a prolife Catholic when you are always pushing for endless and immoral war. Santorum is in defiance of Catholic Just War Doctrine with his endless warmongering.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 8:28AM
We don't conduct our defense policy based on the "Just War Doctrine" Jackboot.
Ted| 2.22.12 @ 10:44AM
Con Chef, to a certain extent we do conduct our defense policy base on Just War Doctrin. However, please be advised that Jack has little understanding of Just War Doctrine, just as he has little understanding of the Catholic Faith he to which he professes to adhere.
Rick Santorum is not pro-war. However, Jack regularly confuses being willing to defend America with being pro-war and anti-life.
Al Adab| 2.22.12 @ 11:40AM
Ted, NB:
You are both on point here. There is a clear difference between being willing to defend America and seeking war. The past mistake was in confusing war with "nation building" which seems to extend war into the indefinate future. The Iraq war lasted but a few weeks. The misguided (Wilsonian, neo-con) nation building efforts continue unsuccessful and unabated.
Sadly the distinction is one which The Left either does not comprehend or simply overlooks and uses for its own political purposes.
As to Jack, his myopia has placed him outside any further relavance to the ongoing debate.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 11:55AM
Al: correct. The difference is this: one should not teach a pig to sing, as it won't work and one will only annoy the pig. But properly cooked pig makes fine eatin', as Con and I will both state. (Life's too short.)
Can't seem to get that across to Jack and Clint, though.
Al Adab| 2.22.12 @ 12:24PM
Having been free, since 1980, from dietary restrictions I can attest that bacon is good.
Quartermaster| 2.22.12 @ 9:38PM
I like Jimmy Dean Maple Sausage a lot more.
TrueBlue | 2.22.12 @ 12:36PM
People consistently forget that the only real purpose for our federal government is to defend the rights of American citizens. That means being willing to defend us from foreign aggressors by any means necessary.
Santorum, as an actual practicing Catholic fully understands the phrase, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" Matthew 22:21. I think Jack may need to do some reading.
Quartermaster| 2.22.12 @ 9:42PM
There are very few constitutional duties of FedGov. Foreign relations (which includes war), and interstate commerce are about it. Fed law was originally restricted to those things and Federal territories. FedGov was not allowed to own land for anything but those duties. National Forests, national parks, wild life refuges and such are all unconstitutional.
Jack in Wi.| 2.22.12 @ 12:36PM
I know Catholic Just Doctrine far better then you do. Preemtive and preventive wars like Santorum has pushed in both Iraq and Iran have always been against Christian Just War Doctrine.There is absolutly no evidence of any nuclear weapons program in Iran, Zero. Even if they were there is no reason for an attack on Iran. We didn't do preventive attacks on the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, or Israel when they got nuclear weapons.
In order for a war to be just it must be as a last resort and only if attacked or possibly about to be attacked. It must be limited in it's goals to do only the least amount of damage to both life and property. Peace and offers of permanent peace must be the goal of all such a defensive war. Iran is violating no international law with it's nuclear program. It is a signer of the nuclear, non proliferation treaties and is under unconstant inspection. Israel is a rogue nuclear power, which has a plan to use nuclear weapons any time, any place it feels like it. Israel attacks it's neighbors every other week. Iran has attacked no one in 300 years.
The USA has made no effort to resolve it's differences with Iran. That is thanks to the abilty of the Israely Lobby to control our government by the use of bribery, blackmail, and intimidation. They use our own laundered foreign aid funds to keep buying our political class.
The present Pope Benedict has condemned the Iraq war as a complete violation of what the Catholic catechism teaches on Just War. In fact he has said that with the horrible weapons used today he finds it hard to justify any such war. Santorum has been a loudmouth chicken hawk pushing wars for years. There is no justification for such wars. They lied us into Iraq and are trying to lie us into Iran. There is absolutly no reason a Christian should ever fight in such wars.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 1:14PM
"Preemtive and preventive wars like Santorum has pushed in both Iraq and Iran have always been against Christian Just War Doctrine."
You can keep your sissified war ideology. I like Musashi or Sun Tsu better. They make more sense.
"You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing & using a timing which he does not expect."...Musashi
MikeBee| 2.22.12 @ 4:40PM
Jack,
Normally you don't seem to know what you're talking about, most of the time. When it comes to the Roman Catholic Just War doctrine, you REALLY don't know what you're talking about. While Just War doctrine calls for the attempt to resolve differences by other means than war first, it recognizes that these other means will not always work with an aggressor.
Additionally, the Just War doctrine does NOT rule out preemptive war. In fact, the Just War doctrine of the Catholic Church states first that "One cannot go to war simply to expand one's sphere of influence, conquer new territory, subjugate peoples, or obtain wealth. One only can go to war to counter aggression." However, it also states, "it is not necessary for the aggressor to strike first. A moral certainty that the aggression will occur is sufficient. Such certainty might be present, for instance, if a party with a history of aggression began amassing troops or munitions."
Iran has most certainly and clearly stated that one of its goals is the complete elimination of the state of Israel. It is a known fact that Iran is close to having the ability to make a nuclear strike. A nuclear strike on Israel would most certainly create the kind of damage that would call for a moral response by the U.S. to this situation, the moral response being War.
Today, we are exhausting the "other means" of dealing with an agressive Iran. Given that these means do not work (and they don't seem to be working), the U.S. has every right to defend Israel from a nuclear attack, preemptively.
Finally the Just War doctrine states that the damage inflicted on such an aggressor as Iran must be minimal compared to the damage that the aggressor would inflict. The U.S. taking out most of Iran's military ability would most certainly inflict far less damage on Iran than would a nuclear strike on Israel by Iran. The Just War doctrine is spelled out pretty well here: http://www.catholic.com/docume.....-doctrine. It has changed slightly through the centuries, due to different means of waging war, but, it keeps, essentially, the same basic train of thought that was developed by St. Augustine of Hippo, who first developed the Catholic Just War doctrine.
Jack, try writing on some liberal website, where those unlearned fools will buy everything you say, hook, line, and sinker. But don't try it here. Conservative folks here are very knowledgeable, and don't buy your trash.
Mike Rogers | 2.23.12 @ 3:25AM
The reliably liberal Jack tells who those liberals are afraid of and why.
Promising conservative? Call him a dimwit.
Strong defense? Aha, a warmonger.
A "devil's disciple" who would eliminate the Devil's tool of Roe v Wade? Only an ungodly liberal would conflate those.
In short, Ron Paul's supporters are liberals. Exhibit A, Jack!
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 6:35AM
"Despite their alleged "antipathy," many of those bitter gun-and-Bible clingers in the small towns and cities of America's heartland voted for Obama four years ago, but they haven't gotten much of the "Hope and Change" he promised them."
I beg to differ. The Change BO promised was to take away their Hope, for themselves and their children.
For some reason this vast swath of American is being cast aside. The values they represent are self-reliance and hard work – the so called Puritan Ethic. The color of one's skin is no more important than eye or hair color to these people. That you are willing to work is what is important.
These people are the 55% people – not the lazy bums in their 20's and aging hippies from the '60's.
These people work, pay their bills and taxes in this country. There not the bums waiting for Uncle Sugar, or some 'protest' organization to send them a check so they can get the latest smart phone and post drivel on the 'social' media sites about their latest BFFs.
Al Adab| 2.22.12 @ 11:41AM
Hope is gone, and change is all we have left.
Jay| 2.22.12 @ 6:46AM
I cannot be any more gleeful that this man has a microphone and keeps talking. I support the president and we can pretty much sit back and watch the Republicans destroy their party. Women who are CONSERVATIVE are scared of this guy.
You right-wingers who have deluded yourselves into thinking more than 20% of America supports vaginal probes and banning contraception and chiding the GIRL SCOUTS...you just keep on talking.
The Republican party is destroying itself. The damage the freaks in your party are doing to it now will last well beyond 2012.
Nice work, FELLAS!
Texas Jayde| 2.22.12 @ 7:03AM
hey jay, wouldn't the daily kos be a better fit for you? why would we let a bilious obamalamadingdong like you persuade us who to vote for in the republican primary?
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 7:05AM
Hey Jan - the fact that you even post a comment like that indicates the the Democraps are worried.
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 7:05AM
Sorry - I mean Jay. Just a slip after reading your post.
Doctor Right| 2.22.12 @ 7:12AM
So, genius...
WHAT exactly is your boy, Obama, going to run on?
His record? Oops!
You Lib-fools are as transparent as glass. For over a year, you've been prepping to run against Mitt "Milquetoast" Romney, and now that's not so certain, is it?
Despite your exclamations of glee at a surfing Santorum, I don't buy it. Santorum, like Reagan in 1980, scares you pansies to death.
Unlike Obama, Santorum is a real American who loves his country and can connect with blue-collar and white-collar citizens.
This year is "ABO", dumbass...In truth, it's the Democrats who are in disarray. Most of you know you bought a lemon in 2008 when you dumped Hillary for Barry Hussein.
President-Elect Santorum. Get used to it, prole.
Deborah D| 2.22.12 @ 11:23AM
Amen, Dr., Amen!!
Doctor Right| 2.22.12 @ 7:13AM
So, genius...
WHAT exactly is your boy, Obama, going to run on?
His record? Oops!
You Lib-fools are as transparent as glass. For over a year, you've been prepping to run against Mitt "Milquetoast" Romney, and now that's not so certain, is it?
Despite your exclamations of glee at a surfing Santorum, I don't buy it. Santorum, like Reagan in 1980, scares you pansies to death.
Unlike Obama, Santorum is a real American who loves his country and can connect with blue-collar and white-collar citizens.
This year is "ABO", dumbass...In truth, it's the Democrats who are in disarray. Most of you know you bought a lemon in 2008 when you dumped Hillary for Barry Hussein.
President-Elect Santorum. Get used to it, prole.
loulou| 2.22.12 @ 11:41AM
"Women who are CONSERVATIVE are scared of this guy."
No they're not.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 1:33PM
To refute Jay's moronic assertion that "conservative women are scared of this guy," I offer this, from Politico:
"Conservative women who are sympathetic to Santorum say they believe that gender-based criticism of him is unfair, stemming either from misrepresentations of his record or simply a lack of familiarity with the candidate.
“I don’t think the criticism’s fair at all. I know him. I know him to be very supportive of women. I’ve known him for 20 years. He’s always been very supportive of my career,” said Concerned Women for America president Penny Nance, a Santorum endorser.
“But he has to work hard to make sure that who he really is, is presented to voters. … I think they’re being intentional about it. I think they will be, hopefully, employing the use of women surrogates to help him with that.”
Former Pennsylvania Rep. Melissa Hart, a Republican who has known Santorum since college, said she believed her former colleague could overcome any hesitations among women with a strong message on jobs."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/.....14925.html
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 11:58AM
We'll see how Bathhouse Barack does against Saint Rick. Incidentally, I order vaginal probes for obstetric ultrasounds all the time---no patient has ever complained to me.
Women tend to be more adult than men.
Mike Rogers | 2.23.12 @ 3:28AM
The damage is being done by the unholy alliance between Mittens and Pauly boy.
Bold colors, not pale pastels: I'll take Newt's vision, even if the bold colors resemble a Picasso, or Santorum's moral clarity, anytime over the three liberal amigos, Obama, Romney, and Paul!
Appleby| 2.22.12 @ 7:14AM
I am getting "advice" from my longtime so-called "libertarian" friend in New Zealand (who is a socialist, in fact, but calls himself a libertarian because he Knows Best and if people would just listen to him, all would be well) about whom to vote for in the upcoming election. I am going to write a carefully crafted reply to him that doesn't say "Who cares what you think?" but will let him wonder if in fact that's what I said. It's what I have to do with lots of my friends who live outside the USA and want to meddle.
As for me and my family, we are supporting Santorum. So there.
Appleby| 2.22.12 @ 7:15AM
And by the way, why on earth would they put a Debate on ASH WEDNESDAY? I will not be watching. I will be in church.
Bruce| 2.22.12 @ 8:59AM
Appleby;
Because that is when the MSM folks wanted it. They knew a lot of people would be otherwise engaged. The Repubs continue to be driven by the people that oppose them most.
MikeBee| 2.22.12 @ 10:22AM
Appleby,
The MSM have scheduled the debate for Ash Wednesday because they had no idea that today was Ash Wednesday. They don't go to church, or value God at all.
Since the debates are run by liberal commentators, anyway, there will be no substance there. It will simply be more, "He said this about you; what do you say about that?!" The liberal commentator's job in the debates is to bring out more that the Obama reelection team can use against the candidates later. Mitt and Newt were too stupid to see through all that, and played right into their hands. Santorum seems to be the only candidate who knows what's going on.
That said, when Santorum wins the nomination, he should hire Romney to help run his ad campaign. Seems like Romney is the only Republican who has the guts to use the negative campaigning. So far, past Republican candidates have been too afraid to say anything negative about the O.
Garfield| 2.22.12 @ 3:28PM
Actually I think Newt should be the nominee.
There is also plenty of stuff available to hit Obama with without resorting to Romney's Chicago style smear tactics.
Deborah D| 2.22.12 @ 11:28AM
Because: "This is CNN" -- that's what they do. Why Republicans continue to allow themselves to be abused in front of liberals and the media (but I repeat myself) is a mystery to me.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 9:03AM
Yeah, I read the UK Daily Mail & Sky News almost every day. The comments are full of those who believe that Santorum's gonna install some kind of religious theocracy. There are a few who like him & wish that someone like him would rise to prominence in the UK, but they're aren't many.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 9:04AM
Oops:
"...THERE aren't many"
Wordmonger| 2.22.12 @ 2:14PM
Or , "they're not many".
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 3:22PM
I thought of that one as well. Hey, it was 9 in the morning & I wasn't even done with my 1st cup of coffee yet.
Quartermaster| 2.22.12 @ 9:46PM
Blogging afore coffee? That there's a very serious crime.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 12:03PM
Appleby: I hope things are MUUUUCH better for you, as you are quite wonderful. You know my opinion of Kiwis.
And I'm attending my County Republican convention this Saturday and, as the precinct Captain, will make damn sure the delegates are chosen 3:1 for Santorum, just like the vote went---56 for Santorum, 18 for Paul, 8 for Romney, 2 for Gingrich.
I also tossed in my $100.00 for the Rickster. I work with Native Americans and see the horrible damage that drugs do to their families and culture. It is horrifically bad, beyond belief.
Observing this damage, and its costs, tends to make one a social conservative---I'm busy enough dealing with the horror I have, and I don't need the extra work Dr. Paul would create for me.
Orygun| 2.22.12 @ 1:20PM
I have been supporting Santorum since the start as he seems like he is the only sincere candidate that has a message that doesn't change. He is one of the last decent pols I have seen. He has my prayers and support. It is a struggle between good and evil and anyone who has lived long enough knows exactly what I mean.
Christopher C| 2.22.12 @ 1:42PM
I/m also a denizen of NZ. Santorum strikes me as the one who actually can take on the O and win. And as the rest of the world has so much at stake in a US that's restoring its sanity, I'm actually praying that he is the R nominee.
Quartermaster| 2.22.12 @ 9:48PM
He is the best of a rather sorry lot, and I doubt he'll win, but very much hope to be wrong.
Christopher C| 2.22.12 @ 1:47PM
Dear Appleby - even though the government in NZ is supposedly "center right", that description fails any sound truth in advertising laws. The country is collectivist to its core. The only reason the place muddles through is that it's small. Collectivist idiocy stays visible, rather than playing out far away, and involving people nobody and no bureaucrat knows.
Von Mises Jr.| 2.22.12 @ 7:25AM
Men such as Santorum through his grandfather's experience with "fascism," understand the threat of Obama and his so-called "crony capitalism."
This Wall Street cronyism is great for the corrupt politicians and rent seekers in Fortune 500 firms and green energy scams who use influence to realize power and wealth through rigged, planned economy.
The other side is the "soft tyranny" that Tocqueville spoke of as described in Barone's column the other day. For those to dull to figure it out, or perhaps just not economic geeks; the subprime mortgage crises was a vast redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy and poor who's votes are for sale. Agenda21 is the nail in the coffin. Land use restrictions, zoning laws, inability to subdivide and all the nuances of Agenda21 will make your property values plummet. Then almost all will be underwater. And guess who holds your mortgage? Fannie, Freddie, HUD, GMAC (Chrysler bailout).
The trap is about to be sprung, and the last thing Obama and the progressives (fascist) need is a guy like Santorum who knows how the story ends, and works diligently speaking the truth.
oldfart| 2.22.12 @ 7:50AM
Right after Chris Dodd and Barney Frank did their damage to the mortgage industry we asked our selves what would happen if this house of cards falls apart.
Therefore:
1. We refinanced the house at the lowest possisble rate to help our cash flow.
2. We paid off ALL unsecured debt and then secured debt such as car loans.
3. If we can't pay cash -we don't buy it.
Folks - it is all about cash flow. I cannot legally print legal tender so I can't spend 125% of my personal GDP like the idiots in DC, London, Paris, Lisbon, Athens, Rome et. al.
Take a hint there is NO easy way out of this economic problem - no matter what some political hack tells you.
Choose the person who is running for President who is telling the truth. Clinton got it - ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID. Obama is so far in left field he should be left out.
Jack in Wi.| 2.22.12 @ 7:51AM
Santorum's grandfather and most of his family were died in the wool Italian Communists. That is why they left Italy. I don't hold that against Santorum or his wife's long affair with an abortion doctor. People can change. What I do hold against him is his constant and immoral warmongering.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 8:32AM
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."...Churchill
Tell us all about how your buddies in Iran are true practicioners of the "Religion of Pieces." Isolationist halfwits like you are every bit as lethally stupid as the leftist Islamophiles. The disgusting part about it is that they make no bones about hating their country. You try to pass yourself off as a "patriot." You're a joke, Jack. Decended from a line of cowards who's father told him as much. "Its better to be a live coward," I believe you told us is what he said to you.
Jack. Mr. "Proud 4-F." Need we say more?
Doctor Right| 2.22.12 @ 2:19PM
"Santorum's grandfather and most of his family were died in the wool Italian Communists. That is why they left Italy."
So? You're a Neo-Nazi scum-bag.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 3:23PM
SHHH, Doc! Jack is the EPITOME of an American Patriot!
Snark, snark!
Casey Abell| 2.22.12 @ 8:11AM
I know it would be unnecessary on the Spectator (a.k.a. Santorum For President). But why doesn't this site just formally endorse Santorum? Might as well be upfront about it. It's not like anybody thinks you're neutral in the race.
loulou| 2.22.12 @ 11:44AM
You haven't been paying attention, have you? TAS is for Romney.
Casey Abell| 2.22.12 @ 12:32PM
"You haven't been paying attention, have you? TAS is for Romney."
I can only hope this is sarcasm. Anyhoo, I think Kaminsky might actually be a closet Romney guy. At least he's dared to criticize Santorum on economic issues. But it would take a brave Romney supporter to openly admit the thought-crime on the Spectator.
POST American| 2.22.12 @ 8:18AM
ONE AND ALL!
CHECK OUT that latest independent little video
of Santorum being confronted over
BOTH his support for the ANTI-Constitutional
NDAA 1021 (ie secret arrests and permanent
'disappearance' of US citizens)
---AND!
his links to the Globalist plundering
GOLDMAN SACKS finance mafia.
Catch those expressions!
---One case where the surface really is
the soul.
---------------------PRICELESS
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 8:54AM
The fact is, Mr. McCain's absolutely correct. Santorum's Iowa ground game was like the political version of a team like LSU running the triple option. The man is all about the proverbial "pressing of the flesh" with the would be voters. He seems to be in his element, & at his most relaxed, when he's speaking to crowds of supporters or individuals.
His religious convictions have his detractors on the left & right pissing their pants. And I love every minute of it. As the saying goes, "if you're not getting any flak, then you're not over the target." If ANYONE can present the best contrast to the current putz in the White House, its Santorum.
Anyone else see on the news this morning where BB King (G*d's own blues player) played the White House last night? And how ironic that one of the songs he played was "The Thrill is Gone." Lord knows, that's one of 2 blues songs I think describe this current regime. The second is more appropriate for last November's elections & the ones upcoming: "Wall of Denial" by Stevie Ray Vaughan.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 12:05PM
Con: For Santorum, it's "Let her roll." Nothing like BTO to get moving.
Dave Williams| 2.22.12 @ 12:20PM
How about, for the Obamabots, "Chain of Fools?"
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 12:28PM
For Obama, and his minions, there is nothing better than Napoleon XIVth's immortal classic: "They're coming to take me away."
Lyrics:
"Remember when you ran away
And I got on my knees and begged
You not to leave
Because I'd go berserk?
Well!
You left me anyhow and then
The days got worse and worse
And now you see I've gone
Completely out of my mind.
And
They're coming to take me away, Ha-ha
They're coming to take me away, Ho-ho
Hee-hee-haa-haa
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see those
Nice young men in their clean white coats and
They're coming to take me away, ha-ha!
You thought it was a joke
and so you laughed, you laughed,
when I had said that losing you
would make me flip my lid.
Right?
You know you laughed
I heard you laugh
You laughed, you laughed
and laughed and then you left but
Now you know I'm utterly mad
And
They're coming to take me away, ha-ha,
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho,
hee hee, haa haa
To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket-weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, ha-hahaha...
I cooked your food, I cleaned your house,
And this is how you pay me back for
All my kind, unselfish, loving deeds,
Hah?
Well you just wait, they'll find you yet
And when they do they'll put you in the ASPCA you mangey mutt!
And
They're coming to take me away, Ha-ha
They're coming to take me away, Ho-ho
Hee-hee-haa-haa
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see those
Nice young men in their clean white coats and
They're coming to take me away, ha-ha!
To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket-weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, ha-hahaha...
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see....."
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 1:21PM
Dave & Occam:
Dave Mustaine, lead singer for heavy metal group Megadeth, has come out as a Santorum supporter. In light of that fact, I think that Santorum should run an anti Obama commercial showing pictures of Obama's America & economic stats. And the music in the background can be the Megadeth hit, "Symphony of Destruction."
Being only 33, I'm a HUGE fan of this song. I can remember many a soccer game pre-game warm up & weight lifting sessions listening to that (along with older Metallica) kick ass song. For those of you who haven't heard it, here's a YouTube video of it, complete with lyrics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....plpp_video
Anthony| 2.22.12 @ 2:36PM
B.B. King played the White House last night eh? Was Michelle Antoinette back from her ski trip, or was Obozo having a night on the town without madame harpie?
These folks sure do live life large on our dime!!!
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 3:24PM
If she was, then she'd probably have lectured BB on his diet, since he's a diabetic.
WG| 2.22.12 @ 9:11AM
I would feel more comfortable with Santorum if he emphasized how his taxing and spending plans as president would help the economy and improve the job market. A social issues campaign alone is not enough to win which I believe Santorum's advisors recognize. Perhaps, he should give a major speech at somewhere such as Notre Dame that highlights his past views, puts them in context, and then announces that his campaign will no longer address these questions and he will be focusing on the economy. Right now, it appears that events are driving Rick's campaign which gives the Democratic media the opportunity to spin him as the return of the Dana Carvey's "Church Lady.
To win, I believe that Rick desperately needs get out his own economic plan out through message discipline. The media will continue to sieve through through Santorum's lengthy time as a public servant with the game plan of presenting him as a theocrat.
Message discipline is necessary and he needs to ignore responding to the social issues for now. It is clear that Rick is a true believer in his faith so why continue to accentuate that point. It is drowning out his other strengths such as national defense strategy, economics, etc. that will appeal to other voters than the social conservatives.
loulou| 2.22.12 @ 11:47AM
Santorum seems to be doing fine without your advice. So, thanks but no thanks.
No offense but you seem to be the type of person who is always "running scared". Have you ever thought of manning up and going on the offensive for once?
Josh Marihugh | 2.22.12 @ 12:27PM
The reason for Santorum to continue to emphasize faith and the social issues is that it is what has gotten him this far. Clinton's now-infamous "It's the economy, stupid" bit aside, it's really NOT about the economy.
It's about fundamental change in the way America lives and operates. And that's why I'm solidly behind Santorum.
Bill| 2.22.12 @ 9:50AM
Santorum is a "flawed" candidate because his opposition on the "Right-to-Work" law makes him a very close to those union thugs. Oops, I forgot, he's from PA. Whatever!
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 10:33AM
Ah, yes. Bill the Nathan Bedford Forrest wannabe speaks up. Gee, Bill, you think if Rick was representing the fine people of TN, he would've voted against that legistlation? Aren't Senators & Representatives elected to serve their constituents?
Al Adab| 2.22.12 @ 11:47AM
NB:
The word Representative does seem to imply a duty to reflect the preferences of ones constituants. It is always a balancing act between adherence to personal principle and representing the voters. Moving beyond from Congress to the White House however, brings a different perspective into play. There we expect the man to adhere to principle, to explain them and to lead accordingly. This is why the Romneys of the world so often fail for they value pragmatism over principle every time.
Occam's Tool| 2.22.12 @ 12:23PM
Rick has stated that he would support a National Right to Work law. Does he have a history of going back on promises? I wasn't aware of that.
Romney's fatal mistake, it seems, was supporting Romneycare nationally. He should have stated: "Look, I was governor of a Blue State, I ameliorated it the best I could, and I don't support it now."
Had he done that, it would be buried and he'd be comnfortably ahead. Bizarre that a man that changes positions more than Flipper is choosing that hill to be consistent (and causing his campaign to die) on.
I like Rick as a human being. Good, solid guy with good decent values.
Orygun| 2.22.12 @ 1:27PM
That is Rick in a nutshell and I think people are starting to come around. Just give me someone in the White House to believe in before I leave this earth. Let the nightmare end!
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 1:24PM
Al Adab:
Well stated, my friend. I think Mittens would be a weather vane of a President. I want someone with some steel in his spine. Rick certainly does.
bull-gator| 2.22.12 @ 10:07AM
Santorum has stated his position on social issues. Fine. What he needs to do now is hammer on the economic and foreign policy screw ups of the present nit wit administration. Hammer hard all day, every day and speak in language most Americans can understand...meaning "just the facts, jack". Ignore the other candidates and focus in like a laser on the failed policies of the current doofus-in-chief.
JAC| 2.22.12 @ 10:11AM
Well, he IS 11 years younger than Romney, 15 years younger than Gingrich, and 23 years younger than Ron Paul...
David| 2.22.12 @ 10:53AM
Hey WG, where have you been? Santorum addresses ALL of the issues/problems facing this country and the world - not just social issues.
Drek| 2.22.12 @ 11:09AM
I warned THE OTHER MCCAIN, and his quasi cult-following, that Santorum was over apt to pronounce upon religious matters. But even I didn't think it would get this bad, this fast.
This guy is appearing to every American adult like the Church Lady.
Yet we were told that Gingrich was the one with "baggage," and that the media/Dems had nothing on Santorum. And that was all because Santorum was this wonderful "family man."
Well Senator SV, {sweater vest} has before our eyes morphed into Church Lady people.
You know, it's not too late to bail on Santorum. All kinds of voters in Michigan have done just that.
Santorum is already imploding in the polls.
Casey Abell| 2.22.12 @ 12:57PM
"Santorum is already imploding in the polls."
Well, yes and no. He's lost his lead in Michigan and may be falling slightly behind. He's definitely losing Arizona big to Romney.
But he's not polling that badly against Obama. He's only down six in the latest RCP average (including a ridiculous AP poll of all adults) and moving closer. Just shows how vulnerable Obama is.
Drek| 2.22.12 @ 3:06PM
The numbers track what we saw with Gingrich. He too was still leading in national polling before the saturation of attacks against him reflected itself there too. So look to the states first, because that's where he's getting pounded, then look to the national polling.
Santorum is getting pounded by Drudge and the national media, but also by the ad campaign.
If Gingrich couldn't weather it, I don't see how this guy will be able to do so.
I don't see anything in him personally, or in his candidacy that distinguishes from the other campaigns that were driven down by this kind of unrelenting attack.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.22.12 @ 1:25PM
Since when is being proudly religious a bad thing in a candidate?
Drek| 2.22.12 @ 3:10PM
It's not. Nor should it be.
Which is why I suggested on another thread that Santorum has two choices, ignore it and focus on the economy, OR RAISE THE STAKES, immerse himself more deeply in the issue, extend the issue to encompass all of America's Christians and her Christian heritage.
We all saw how the media/Dems shifted from the issue of abortion to contraception, which means shifted from an issue that's no longer a winner for them to an issue that is.
Santorum should do the same here, shift the issue from one of Satan, to one of how do America's believing Christians desire their faith to inform America's public and social policies.
That's what I would do if I was Santorum.
David| 2.22.12 @ 12:31PM
Hey Drek, I will just call you dick, and leave it at that.
Drek| 2.22.12 @ 3:07PM
I'll take that under advisement..........
Crystal Method of the Siddhas| 2.22.12 @ 1:18PM
“Should Santorum emerge from this long campaign as the Republican nominee and manage to rally blue-collar voters and Catholics in the Midwestern heartland to the GOP standard, Obama's re-election prospects would be quite dim indeed.”
That’s some HUGE “should”, pal. Also, you’re prospect of being correct about Santorum’s chances against Obama are quite dim, indeed.
The more voters get to know about the Catholic Santorum, is there any doubt that they will be more and more scared and turned off? Just imagine a REPUBLICAN preacher a la Jimmuh Carter! Yikes!
Face facts---people are AVERAGE, “on average”. That is, while 100 is the middle average IQ, there are just as many people under 100 as above 100. So, quite a few people will take a while to get the Santorum “message”.
For a TODAY example---at National Review online, the daily poll about whether Ricky boy has had a good week “in your opinion” is 60% YES! I was shocked---but shouldn’t have been. Since NRO is a conservative site, I guess the essential point is that most of its readers still find Romney questionable, and are continuing to go for the latest not-Romney.
Place your bets, ladies and gents!
Enough voters will get the total Santorum message in time to toss him onto the ash heap, just like the other losers like Perry, Gingrich and that 9-9-9 guy---what’s his name? I’ve ALREADY forgotten.
Reality is ALWAYS at the cutting edge, which means that it is so new that wannabe prognosticators are playing a fools’ game---most of them, anyway. NOBODY knows the future, because “future” is just a word indicating what is still to come---out of the well of the UNKNOWN.
Nobody is ever in danger of knowing a SINGLE thing.
To be whatever you’re appearing to be doesn’t make a damn bit of difference!
“If you are troubled by what arises, you are simply not in your proper relationship to things.” Franklin Jones, “The Knee of Listening”, page 201.
“This moment IS the moment of reality, of union, of truth. The only truth is radical truth. Even the moment of self-indulgence, or avoidance, of separateness IS the moment of reality. Nothing needs to be done to it, or to you, for this to be so. Nothing needs to be avoided, transcended or found for it to be so. This is the greatness of truth, of understanding, for it disarms all fear, all circumstance, all dilemma. It is already the case.
We are never at any moment in the dilemma we fear ourselves to be. Only this radical understanding in the heart of life is the ground of real peace and joy. All else is seeking and strife and fear.” “The Knee of Listening”, page 224; 1972
Bill| 2.22.12 @ 2:28PM
Santorum opposes the "Right-to-Work" law, establishing his pro-union stance, and guess what! Those labor unions will pour millions of dollars destroying Santorum if he gets the GOP nod.
W| 2.22.12 @ 3:03PM
Right to Work is a state issue under the 10th amendment, and concepts of federalism. Under the Taft Hartley Act any state can pass a law to ban union membership as a requirement for employment. There is no reason to have a federal law nationwide to further increase the power of the federal government. In fact right to work states, mostly in the South, prefer the current system because they can attract companies that prefer a right to work state.
Bill| 2.22.12 @ 4:02PM
Santorum failed to stand up to those union thugs. It ain't help him in 2012.
Garfield| 2.22.12 @ 3:22PM
I don't mind the fact Santorum is religious. I do mind the fact that he called Protestants nonchristians. I honestly don't care what context he supposedly said it in.
Protestantism formed due to corruption in the Catholic Church. We can argue as to whether or not the catholic church has fixed things or not, but the point is Protestants are just as Christian as Catholics.
You know I also find it interesting that Gingrich is supposedly the one that shoots himself in the foot. Yet his drop in the polls were the result of Romney and the Establish launching a vicious smear campaign.
Romney has shot himself several times in the foot (which will probably be used against him in the general).
Santorum has also shot himself in the foot here recently cause he lets the left define the narrative.
I think Gingrich is the one whom hasn't been shooting himself in the foot.
David| 2.22.12 @ 5:27PM
Garfield, please let us know the source for "Santorum does not believe Protestants are Christians". Sounds like BS to me.
David| 2.22.12 @ 5:30PM
Okay Bill, you f_cking moron. Santorum has said over and over that as PREZ (NOT A SENATOR FROM PA) he would support a National Right to Work Act.
You keep repeating the same BS, moron.
All you need now is to determine if YOU trust his word. I emphatically do.
Al Adab| 2.22.12 @ 5:45PM
Gentlemen:
May I remind you all that, too often, Perfection is the enemy of Success.
PCP Smoker| 2.22.12 @ 9:41PM
Fuck you McCain. Fuck you and your Mitten Romney.
POST American| 2.22.12 @ 11:23PM
---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------
---Santorum VOTED for the brazenly
ANT-Constitutional NDAA 1021.
He's been pubicly embrarassed about his
links to Goldman Sacks.
He wouldn't --DARE-- take on the
deadly, ANTI-Constitutional 'FED'.
He's --OBVIOUSLY-- yet another front
for the CFR Globalist 'Age-enda'.
(ie BUSH/ Clintons/ BUSH Jr/ Obama
-----------ROCKEFELLER-------------).
"--RON PAUL ---IS--- the game changer."
-MAN COW
(yesterday)
Such as he is--
-----------------------RON PAUL-------------------------
porno | 2.23.12 @ 7:11PM
The loopholes are the big problem. While many exemptions have the best intentions behind them, a system like ours encourages companies to essentially buy preferentially treatment from Congress.
Judikay Humes| 2.24.12 @ 6:21PM
I think another reason he is surging is that people finally can see his heart for America, his wisdom to know what and how to do, and the youthful zeal and good health-energy to do it. He seems to be a genuine faithful patriot to The United States of America.