Rick Santorum Defends Big Government Intrusion – Rejects “Radical Individualism” (The Video)

Granted, Rick Santorum is the clear social conservative in the GOP race today. His positions on social issues are clear. His defense of Christian values is commendable. But, despite his declaration yesterday, he’s no Ronald Reagan.

Back in 2008 Rick Santorum was speaking out against “radical individualism” – like lower taxes and less regulations.

Rick Santorum said this on NPR in 2008:

This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.

That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”

Let’s not fool ourselves that Rick Santorum is a small government guy. He’s not.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Hunter Riley

    Not fooled. The only small government guy running for President is Ron Paul.

  • Pingback: Rick Santorum Defends Big Government Intrusion – Rejects “Radical Individualism” (The Video)()

  • Valerie

    The TEA Parties must focus on the House and Senate candidates, and on writing to their elected representatives, including the Democrats.

  • west1890

    Mr. Perfect does not exist…. we need cohesion….the enemy is Obama…

  • Really?

    And Mr. Romneycare of course is our “only electable hope” and a real small government guy.
    Hey GP and Drudge:
    It is time to STOP tearing down all the possible candidates and focus on the real problem:

    BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA and his destruction of 200 years of freedom.

  • StrangernFiction

    And Mr. Romneycare of course is our “only electable hope” and a real small government guy.

    Romney is a scumbag:

    http://www.therightscoop.com/romney-supporters-remove-santorum-signs-at-michigan-event/

  • 1RedBeard

    If the Republicans nominate the corpse of Wendell Willkie, I will enthusiastically vote for him over Obama.

    I would enthusiastically vote for a Golden Retriever over Obama.

    I would enthusiastically vote for a rotten head of cabbage over Obama.

    I would… well, you get the gist.

    DEFEAT OBAMA.

  • Patty

    Wow, how many threads on Santorum this week. It is only Wednesday and every other thread is Santorum.

    Are we bringing him up or pushing him down. He is leader in some of the polls and Media on the left and right just can’t stop talking about him. “Investigating” reporters surely have other news to talk about. Seem Religion and Obama’s mandate on Contraception is out in the Forefront.

    I wonder if that wasn’t the Obama plan all along. But why, because he is so untouchable again.

    Our we really going there, nope. Media has cut up and dissected frogs less in biology class.

    But talk about Obama and his Wright, Ayers, Khaladi, College Records and escapades is off limits.

    Don’t need to wait long for another Bashing of Santorum. Give it a minute.

  • BS61

    I will be voting for Santorum on Tuesday here in AZ. Never believed that he was a small govt type, but at least we will be rid of the commie in the WH!

    Mitt’s a phoney who will never repeal Obamacare and Newt can’t be trusted on that issue either. Plus in this American Idol like competition, I agree with Michael Savage who said just picture white haired tubby Newt against O!

  • BS61

    #6 StrangernFiction commented:
    And Mr. Romneycare of course is our “only electable hope” and a real small government guy.

    Romney is a scumbag:

    http://www.therightscoop.com/romney-supporters-remove-santorum-signs-at-michigan-event/

    Couldn’t agree more!

  • indccc

    How is he defending “Big Government Intrusion”? All he is saying is that most conservatives understand that there are duties and responsibilities inherent in a free society. It seems to me that the radical individualists he’s talking about are the people who don’t believe they should have to pay any taxes or follow any laws. The ones who think they should be able to do whatever they want and to hell with everyone else. Have there been any successful society’s based on that ideology?

  • bronxdude

    Let’s not fool ourselves that Øbama does not need another 4 years…

  • dba…vagabond trader

    They all disgust me, but no one more than the GOP.

  • sorry to live in illinois

    Ya know, I’m getting pretty f-in sick of our party eating their own. Mitt, Newt, Ron or Rick. Those are our choices. They all suck. Big time. But any one of them is better than what is in office right now.

    Jeez Jim Hoff. You want BO back in office? STOP attacking our guys. STOP!

  • Fionnagh

    Hillary’s hypothetical 3:00 a.m. phone call was widely mocked at the time her ad came out. I, too, thought it bordered on silly – but that was before BHO allowed the Middle East to unravel and the U.S. pulled its support from Israel. That was before the downgrading of half a dozen countries, including ours. Now that 3:00 a.m. call isn’t looking so silly. The question you have to ask yourself is: “What would Santorum do?”

    My vote still goes to Newt.

  • mackykam

    Radical individualism is libertarianism, or anarchy.

    There is a definite place for big government among conservative ideology: It is known as national defense! Both foreign and domestic.

    That said, I greatly prefer…

    Rick to Mitt;
    to a lesser degree Rick to Newt;
    Sarah to Rick;
    my toilet brush to Ron Paul.

  • DavidC

    I have to say that if you truly believe that Romney is not going to do all he can to repeal ObamaCare, you do have to support someone else. I get that. I just ask you to deeply look inside yourself and make sure you really are convinced of that. Because that is the only reason NOT to support him.

    I think that Romney has made the repeal of ObamaCare the central platform of his campaign. I have no doubt that he will follow through. He has to.

  • Liberty

    Obama IS the enemy.

    Ron Paul is our only hope for reducing the size of government, cutting the budget, returning to sound money, reforming then ending the fed, restoring personal liberty, and re-instating a Constitutional Republic.

  • http://jonahhex.blogspot.com Dwayne the canoe guy

    “If the Republicans nominate the corpse of Wendell Willkie, I will enthusiastically vote for him over Obama. ”

    Hee hee. Imagine THAT election. Conservatives voting for a dead guy vs. dead guys voting for a Liberal.

  • indccc

    #16 Agreed! 1000%!

  • Pingback: Rick Santorum Defends Big Government Intrusion – Rejects “Radical Individualism” (The Video) | ()

  • ahem

    Jim: I don’t give a d*mn any more. Anyone—anyone—but Obama. If we beat Obama, we can gain a little more time, and maybe someone better that the guys we’re running will show up.

  • More Liberty

    Haha…man Rick “Sweater vest” is an ass-clown. Five votes to raise the national debt. He’s not part of the solution – he’s part of the problem.

    He is no conservative, although he might be a theocrat.

  • Mama Grizzly

    DavidC is correct. Repealing Obamacare is a CENTRAL PLATFORM of the Romney campaign.

    Next, Ron Paul would usher in anarchy and be made a fool of by the Senate and the House in a matter of days, let alone by the world community. He also would embolden the jihadists and Iran, etc. more than Obama. Way more. Then he’d sit back and say so what, while the world burned.

    Romney, Santorum, OR Gingrich would be much better presidents (duh) than Obama.

    One must consider who will appeal to the majority of voters–GOP, Independents, and disillusioned Dems.

    Dont’ forget that most likely Hillary will be the October surprise and will upset the race and throw all into a tailspin.

    I think Romney/Rubio, West, or Rice have the best chance.

    I’ve always liked Rick, agree with his point of view largely, but he’s really, really, really easy to spin. The media will have a lot of fun with him, which is so unfair and unfortunate. Still, if Rick wins the nomination, it’s not a bad thing. He’s not big government as far as I can tell. Politics is a science of ideology and compromise. Everyone needs to walk away with something, and things are not alway clear until after some time has passes. So everyone makes mistakes in politics.

    About the signs. PULLEEEZE. There is no indication this had anything to do with Romney. Could have been Soros and his Dem manipulation machine. Could have been the property owner. I thought it was great that the Romney people didn’t answer the “press.”

    I still believe we should have gotten behind Romney early on. Right now we’re a house divided and I still read people saying they wouldn’t vote for so-and-so, which is a vote for Obama.

    Listen, Obama is NOT ONE BIT WORRIED about the election. What does that mean? He’s got a trick or two up his sleeve and now Rahm is back in play.

    Romney best.

    Santorum good.

    Gingrich good.

    Paul no way.

    One more thing: to assert that Rick Santorum stands against the fundamental idea of the pursuit of happiness is totally stupid. STUPID. There is no indication whatsoever that he holds that position, just that libertarianism is a failed position and that he doesn’t support it.

    But unfair treatment by the media does not a winning candidate make. We must win. If we lose because of petty perfectionism, Obama will succeed in “transforming” this country into a horrible and hellish place.

    Romney is a good guy. I think people will go for him. Santorum is perceived as too fringe. Gingrich is not trustworthy is people’s estimation, although he is a hoot to listen to. I don’t think the botox is a good idea. He has to be himself if he’s going to try this.

    The person and platform I think will do best at this juncture is Romney. He will make Obama look like the incompetent. Santorum will get all scoldish–too mother may I. Gingrich will be overshadowed, and I’m sure Obama’s handlers will keep him out of debates.

    Okay. After tonight’s debate, the future will be decided.

  • More Liberty

    LOL..Romney. You might as well re-elect O-Bomb-a. Now where was it that Obama got the details for Obamacare? Oh yeah from big government statist Rombama/Obamney.

  • Fuquay Steve

    Welcome to kick Rick Santorum week sponsored by Paulites and Mittites. You can get a t shirt by donating 25 euros to Mitts campaign or 25 pesos to Pauls. Major sponsors however remain Jim @ Gateway and Matt @ Drudge. All aboard!!!!!!

  • More Liberty

    #26 said:
    “Welcome to kick Rick Santorum week sponsored by Paulites and Mittites. You can get a t shirt by donating 25 euros to Mitts campaign or 25 pesos to Pauls. Major sponsors however remain Jim @ Gateway and Matt @ Drudge. All aboard!!!!!!”

    So you basically agree with Rick “Sweater Vest” Santorum that our debt is no big deal? Because for a guy that voted to raise it FIVE TIMES, he sure sounds like a hypocrite which I guess isn’t a problem for neocons/liberals.

  • retire05

    Why should I vote for Romney? We already have a liar in the Oval Office and I find no reason to replace one liar with another.

    But hey, if you like supporting Romneycare with your tax dollars, although you don’t live in Taxachusetts, if you like the fact that Romney issued gay marriage licences although the MASC said it was a legislative issue using a little know Massachusetts law, if you like that he claims Romneycare is a 10th Amendment issue but then admitted on The Factor that his plan was always a federal/state partnership, if you like that Romney’s Global Warming gurus, John Holdren and Douglas Foy, both now work for the Obama administration, you are going to love Obama 2.0 with Romney.

    As to Ron Paul [who is certifiable], his family should book him a room with Shiela Jackson Lee at Shoal Creek Hospital.

  • Joanne

    There is an interesting dynamic with the GOP race. The conservatives vet their members with their continual telling of every thing they can about each other in order to triumph over each other, but the democrats have sealed lips when it comes to their candidates and especially Obama. It might have to do with them wanting a black democrat president or that he is the only one running, but they just aren’t revealing any truth about Obama and they all know.

    Rick Santorum’s idea that he can get involved in the bedrooms of Americans is disturbing to me and that he actually thinks conservatives want to get involved.

  • retire05

    MamaGrizzly, when Mitt Romney admits that he dumped Romneycare on the taxpayers of all 50 states, I might support him. Until then, he is an illegal hiring, big government, nanny state, same-sex marriage, pro/anti-abortion nor’easterner that I want no part of.

  • lizzy84

    Ditto, 1RB/#7. No one who’s watching the master of disaster in the WH could possibly fail to see what deep trouble our Country is in and sit this one out.We could lose the Supreme Court for a generation.That alone is something to think about. None of the R contenders inspire but the die is cast. For all their craziness, the libertarian party on fiscal issues represents me better than the republicans do. I do like is Santorum’s opposition to global warming hype, support of fossil fuels, position on the threats of global jihad and opposition to oBamacare. He’d be a lot more effective on the latter than the conflicted Romney. He’s more skeptical of government takeovers in the name of advancing rights. I’ll stick with him and Newt for the time being. Romney is a terrible candidate.

  • More Liberty

    #28 said:
    “As to Ron Paul [who is certifiable], his family should book him a room with Shiela Jackson Lee at Shoal Creek Hospital.”

    I know huh. I mean can you believe that he actually wants to follow the US Constitution – how f’ing crazy is that. Oh and don’t get me started on how his wacky ass doesn’t want to continue these endless wars. We need endless wars. If there is one thing this country needs, is more war defending people who hate us, or more nation building for for people that live in the 8th century. Can you believe he actually voted FOR the use of force against Al Qaeda/ Taliban in Sept 2001, but voted against the invasion of Iraq who had all those WMDs.

  • Mimi

    What GP is doing is forcing me to NEVER support Romney. Santorum is a big government spender? What about RomneyCare? The only way they got started was using Big government money. The only way Romney saved the Olympics was Big Government money.

    NO WAY, NO HOW Romney. Keep it up and Obama will win Missouri because we will sit on our hands. Romney talks about how the trees are the right height. Yep that’s what I want in a President. Then he has his own people stealing Santorum signs. Too much like Obama–no just like Obama. Religious people are the ones that get the vote out and the more Romney disses them the more

  • Diamond Girl

    #11 & #16 …Well-Said!

    You can be sure the Rove/Romney Team are working in tandem attempting to destroy Santorum…I hope this too, will BACKFIRE!

  • zmdavid

    It sounds like the clip has been spliced together in the middle. Also, it’s from 2005, not 2008. Is it unedited?

    It doesn’t sound good, but I think we should ask him to clarify.

  • http://seks-mambas.com/?t=6902 Kadeempasioncanaveral6

    Всем привет[url=http://sexsrazu.com/?t=6902][b]бесплатные секс знакомства без регистрации[/b][/url]

    [url=http://rudatings.m-00.com/s.php?f=2519][img]http://i30.fastpic.ru/big/2012/0209/80/99b5c1877d039519aabfa24900915380.jpeg[/img][/url]

    Наш порталсекс знакомств, набирающий все наибольшую популярность в интернет-сетях с каждым новым днем. Сегодня сексуальное выражение себя служит главным фактором современного общества, теперь, чтобы показать свой эротическийпотенциал интимных фантазий, вам достаточно лишь связаться с партнером на нашем портале секс знакомств, назначить встречу и отрываться! Сексуальные фантазии, обнаженные девушки, сексуальные мачо, эротика, самая крупная база юных ЛолитРоссийской Федерации и ближнего зарубежья, знакомства для секса и интима и многое другое. Для того, чтобы найти партнера для секса, сделайте свою анкету, залейте фотографию и восхищайтесь знакомствами. Вас ожидают самые сладострастные мачои девушки Москвы, Московской области, Санкт-Петербурга и различных городов России и ближнего СНГ.

    [url=http://seks-mambas.com/?t=6902][b]рамблер почта знакомства[/b][/url][url=http://erodatings.m-00.com/s.php?f=2519][b]знакомство с девушкой в интернете[/b][/url][url=http://meetka.m-00.com/s.php?f=2519][b]познакомиться с мужчиной[/b][/url]

  • Bill Mitchell

    Don’t look now but Satorum fading BADLY on Intrade.

  • retire05

    #32, More Liberty, have you ever even met Ron Paul? Have you ever sat on one of his little “committees” in his district that dealt with issues affecting his district? Why is it that everytime one of you Paulbots show up, when the truth is out, you’ve never even met the guy, and if you have, the meeting lasted 15 seconds, long enough for him to shake your hand, that is unless he thinks you just might be gay.

    And pray tell, who will be Paul’s VP choice? Will he choose Lew Rockwell, again? Too bad that hater, Murray Rothbard, who Paul idolized, is dead. Paul could pick him.

    Paul draws two kinds of people; college students who are too stupid to even know what is in the U.S. Constitution and the Alex Jones’ conspiracy theory, black helicopter types. Which one are you?

  • Sasja

    More Liberty seems to really be offended by Santorum’s sweater vests.

    Don’t trust Mittens to do one thing substantive re Bammycare. He’ll come up with some lame excuses why it’s best we keep most of it. Since he and his advisors helped Zero
    draft Bammycare, he must not have too many problems with it.

    I don’t like, nor trust, Mittens at all. Never have, never will.

    Ask yourself. Who will he favor when judicial appointments come up?

    Has he changed his mind about the hoax called global warming/climate change?

  • Mad Hatter

    When you hear how Santorum talks about ‘Radical Individualism” he was talking about the Government not getting into people’s bedrooms. We do have people that think they can do whatever they want in their bedroom, when in reality, they can’t.

    We don’t allow a woman to be a prostitute in her own bedroom, yet some people believe we should. We don’t allow people to have sex with young girls and boys in their bedroom, yet some people believe they should.

    Rick says that the Government shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. With the assault on traditional families, the radical leftists are trying to redefine marriage from being between a man and a woman, to being between any two people. This is chipping away at breaking down the family system, and having an “anything goes” approach. If the Government doesn’t define, by law, marriage between a man and a woman, then what’s next?

    When you get past the sound bite, and think through what Santorum was talking about, chances are, you’ll see he’s standing up against the “it’s my body, I’ll do what I want with it” crowd, and he’s standing up for traditional marriage.

  • Mad Hatter

    Correction, let me clear that up,

    When you hear how Santorum talks about ‘Radical Individualism” **he was talking about how there are people that think** the Government not getting into people’s bedrooms. We do have people that think they can do whatever they want in their bedroom, when in reality, they can’t.

    Another correction, third paragraph.

    Rick says that **there are those that think** the Government shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.

  • zmdavid

    I listened to the whole thing at the NPR link, not just the video, and it sounds much better in context. And it also says it’s from 2005 there, too.

  • Mama Grizzly

    I said I liked Santorum before he became popular here or elsewhere. And I still do.

    But I think Obama fears Romney. Obama can make Santorum look like a little boy or a little angry barking dog.

    I’d be happy with Romney, Santorum, OR Gingrich. Any of them. And you should be too.

    Anyone who says they won’t vote for Romney if he’s the nominee, is betraying the last hope we have of getting rid of Obama. It doesn’t matter that Romney isn’t perfect: he’s strong on Israel, strong on defense, strong on traditional values, strong on the Constitution. My understanding is that in MA, the STATE, i.e. the people of the state wanted the requirement. Okay. Not surprising. You can find fault with Santorum too. With Gingrich. No problem.

    And isnt’ that the game? Get the Right all upset over their candidates for one reason or another, then Barry rides in to save the day with the biggest “I’m the best thing since sliced bread” campaign you’ve ever seen. Throw in Hillary or some other October surprise, or some Moslem attack that our dear CIC responds to “brilliantly” and with the GOP in disarry, ta-dum . . . in again for 4 MORE YEARS.

    Romney. Santorum. Gingrich.

    BUT NO NO NO OBAMA.

  • StrangernFiction

    Mitt Romney on Romneycare for America:

    In fact, however, as Newsweek writes, “During a speech in Baltimore on Feb. 2, 2007, Romney outlined his ambitions for the Massachusetts plan. ‘I’m proud of what we’ve done,’ he said. ‘If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.’”

    At the very least, Romney has clearly viewed his efforts as a model for other states across the nation. On April 11, 2006, the day before he signed his health care legislation into law, he wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed (called “Health Care for Everyone? We Found a Way”), “How much of our health-care plan applies to other states? A lot.”

    In his book, No Apology, he wrote of Ted Kennedy (on page 174 in the hardback edition), “[T]o his credit he saw an opportunity to work in a bipartisan fashion to try an experiment that might become a model for other states.” Three pages later (on page 177), Romney wrote, “From now on, no one in Massachusetts has to worry about losing his or her health insurance if there is a job change or a loss in income; everyone is insured and pays only what he or she can afford….We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country….”

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romneycare-bout_598289.html?page=1

    But of course Mitt says he’ll repeal Obamacare. So it must be true.

  • retire05

    I will remind you again that Tip O’Neill told us years ago the difference between conservatives and the liberals (really progressives):

    “The central conserative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determine the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself.”

    The left must change the culture by implementing abortion upon demand, same-sex marriage, indoctrination of our young in their ways through union teachers who care more about their socialist agenda than they do about our children, destruction of our religious faiths, all to save us from ourselves.

  • http://fuzislippers.blogspot.com/ Fuzzy

    The fact is that Santorum is right. Every bill, law, Amendment is actually social engineering (or whatever you want to call it, apparently “big government” these days): Civil Rights, Women’s Suffrage, Prohibition (the repeal of Prohibition), every law against every crime and misdemeanor, every regulation. All of it.

    Those of us who do not want prostitution and heroine and God knows what else legalized understand what Santorum is saying and see the line between the rights and responsibilities of individuals in a society where rights come from God and the individual rights that a free-for-all hedonistic near-anarchist “society” (for it’s hardly that) where the rights come from the self and the self is supreme (that’s what Santorum means by “radical individualism”).

    I don’t know, if I have to pick between my rights coming from me or God, I pick God. Every day. And that does indeed mean that we still need laws and regulations, we still need a federal government. But it doesn’t mean that it’s the horrible monstrosity that the “government gives us our rights” crowd wants, where every darned thing is monitored, micro-managed, and regulated. I support limited government, yes, but not so limited that there are no laws regarding things that are clearly wrong and immoral (or even amoral) like the aforementioned heroine and prostitution, but toss in whatever your pet issue is –gay marriage? Want to protect the churches, religion? Can’t do that with Ron Paul. Can’t do that with Obama. What about gay penguins and masturbation being taught in our schools? You good with that? Because Santorum thinks it’s wrong, and he would have to work to change it at the national level where it was first changed. And keep in mind, he’d be president, not magic king for the four years. He’d still have to work with Congress, and he’d at least respect the Constitution enough to do so and not end-run around them with unConstitutional actions every other day.

  • Gary

    BS61 #9

    You’re right about those optics.
    But picture red-faced angry Santorum in a debate with cool, smirking Obama.

    It won’t matter that most of what Santorum says is right, because only the informed Right gets that. The rest of the country will see angry guy with strange viewpoints losing debate to cool, confident guy.

    Now Romney, granted nobody’s Conservative hero… He won’t get red in the face or lose his temper. He may stammer (on purpose), but Obama will never maneuver him into a position where he’ll come off as angry and wrongheaded.

    Of course, all that said, the debates really don’t affect the decision for most Americans (especially since most Americans don’t watch them).

  • More Liberty

    @ #37Retire05
    Actually I grew up in San Leon, Texas which is in Ron Paul’s district. My parents currently live there as well. The thing about that area is most of the people there just want the government to leave them alone. There is also a significant veteran community, as well as shrimping/fishing community, and energy industry.

    Here are other people that support Ron Paul:

    http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/jul/23/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-members-military-have-given-him-far-/

    I don’t necessarily support Ron paul the man. What I support is the US Constitution and individual liberty. These other “conservatives” have proven that they like the rhetoric, but don’t really practice what they preach. Mandates, voting to increase the debt ceiling, more war when they themselves avoided military service – and the list goes on.

  • http://www.themadjewess.com MJ

    ‘But, despite his declaration yesterday, he’s no Ronald Reagan.’

    We dont know that.
    He is not prez…yet.

  • Gary

    Redbeard #7

    +1

  • Gary

    The more I hear from Sarah Palin lately, the more I think she is toying with the idea of a very late entry, maybe even as late as the convention.
    She’s already as vetted as she can get, and this would be a brilliant way to save some money.

  • Pingback: Rick Santorum Defends Big Government Intrusion – Rejects “Radical Individualism” (The Video) | Nice Messages()

  • wanumba

    #1 February 22, 2012 at 9:20 am
    Hunter Riley commented:

    Not fooled. The only small government guy running for President is Ron Paul.
    ::::::::::::::::::::

    Not fooled either. Ron Paul has made a very good living supplementing his salary with failed presidential campaigns.

    He’s not going to win anything and he’s still there.. where dods he get his money. With his Hillary Clinton-style foreign policy, he should be a perpetual Democrat candidate tagging after Obama, but he’s always harrassing the GOP.

  • bg

    ++

    too many LIES too little TIME to waste..

    that was about as big a leap of faith i’ve heard coming from Truthers &
    Dhimmis so far, but just wait and see, as they have no limitations, ergo,
    we ain’t heard nothin’ yet!! :roll:

    ==

  • Scott M

    That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”

    And thus, Santorum has officially jumped the shark.

  • More Liberty

    Retire05 said:
    “Paul draws two kinds of people; college students who are too stupid to even know what is in the U.S. Constitution and the Alex Jones’ conspiracy theory, black helicopter types. Which one are you?”

    Of course your claim is false but I will tell you my friend. I’m a father of two, married and a home owner, college graduate, and former US Marine that served 10 years – with three tours in Iraq. Yes I was a former neocon, voted for that big government neocon Bush twice. But I have realized that these foreign adventures are nothing but wasteful. Wasteful of human life (over 4,000 in Iraq) – specifically American – and wasteful of US tax dollars. I’m no peace nik, far from it, but we are learning that we should have never been in the nation building business. We should be protecting our own borders, not the borders of foreign countries. I have no problem with using our military to kill terrorists – get in get out, or going into to secure the liberty of Americans held hostage by foreign governments or their agents. But we are going on a decade, and the warmongers and old men in Washington are beating the drums again with Iran in their eyes.

    So I’m a man that respects violence when needed, but can honestly admit when it’s been used at the behest of good honest warriors while those that didn’t serve froth at the mouth for more and more blood – blood they of course will never spill.

  • More Liberty

    wanumba said:
    “He’s not going to win anything and he’s still there.. where dods he get his money. With his Hillary Clinton-style foreign policy, he should be a perpetual Democrat candidate tagging after Obama, but he’s always harrassing the GOP.”

    Actually it is the DNC that’s known for engaging in undeclared and idiotic foreign adventures. You obviously don’t know your history. But not to be outdone, like big government spending and debt ceiling increases, the neocons within the GOP are trying to take that title away.

  • Fuquay Steve

    More liberty = romulan but even scarier. Please ignore. Please don’t feed the romulans – especially after midnight.

  • Bill Mitchell

    I don’t care about all this Satan crap. I care that Santorum has NO Executive Experience and is a Fiscal Liberal.

  • burt

    When it came time to war with Hitler, big government was NOT a bad thing. No one including Rush Limbaugh is against big government when needed as spelled out by the Constitution. As for all you “Ron Paul” supporters, when the general election roll around all of you communists are going to vote for Obama. You fool no one.

  • bg

    ++

    Ron Paul is a proponent of Sharia law,
    pedophilia, addiction drug, and Pork..

    not to mention this.. :-(

    ==

  • More Liberty

    #58 said:
    “liberty = romulan but even scarier. Please ignore. Please don’t feed the romulans – especially after midnight.”

    How am i scary? I’m an advocate for the US Constitution, as well as individual liberty. Why does that scare you? I guess some people are just afraid of the truth.

  • BS61

    #15 Fionnagh commented:
    Hillary’s hypothetical 3:00 a.m. phone call was widely mocked at the time her ad came out. I, too, thought it bordered on silly – but that was before BHO allowed the Middle East to unravel and the U.S. pulled its support from Israel

    But Sanger praising Hillary would have done the same exact thing, maybe in a nicer way! She is the one calling herself a progressive, she is the one telling American’s to watch Al Jaretz for their truthful reporting!

  • Fuquay Steve

    Hey Jim, let’s get his First Holy Communion photo up – it is all white, maybe you could comment on that! And he’ll be wearing white bucks!!! Double bonanza!! YIPEE! Let’s kick a Catholic Day is way too much fun for Jim.

  • BS61

    #18 Liberty commented:
    Obama IS the enemy.

    Ron Paul is our only hope

    Agreed that Obama is the enemy, however, RP will never get Congress to vote for what he wants.

  • More Liberty

    @ bg

    I clicked on you little links, half of which just redirect back to Gateway Pundit. The others are, I guess at least real links. The pork issue is very relevant and I agree with you. I don’t like it if Ron Paul does it, Rick Santorum or Obama. As far as the “drug” issues goes, he does not advocate people using it. He just advocates that the federal government decriminalize it and allow the states to deal with it. Once again that pesky 10 Amendment bothers not only liberals but neocons.

  • Fuquay Steve

    Sure enough More Liberty, you are the ideal truth portrayer. Real honest with yourself too I see. And humble. Whatever you are sellin’ i ain’t buyin’. Something’s fishy in Denmark.

  • Gary

    Mama Grizzly

    Spot on.
    I’m in total agreement with you this time.

    I really like Santorum too. And I do think that Romney is who Obama fears most. That’s why all the smoke and mirrors about trying to knock down the “non-Romney”. They wanted our side to rally around somebody – anybody – that they felt would be easier to beat.

    As for Santorum. I didn’t want to pour it on, so I haven’t said much the last few days. I felt pretty sure that his numbers would start to fizzle again. I just wasn’t sure if it would be before or after Super Tuesday. It looks like they’re starting to fizzle now.

    And just like in the stock market, when the stock rises and falls, rises again, and falls again, don’t look for it to get back up for a while. (That’s just a rule of thumb, I know there are exceptions so spare me).

    If Santorum does pull it off though, I won’t be disappointed. I think he’s a fine Conservative. Not one of the candidates has had a pure Conservative record, but his has been pretty good on balance, and if you believe his campaign rhetoric (which I do), he stacks up as a pretty Conservative guy.

    I just don’t think he can win over the majority of Americans in the face of a brutal Obama/media campaign against him all summer and fall. This, on the other hand, is where Romney’s squishy conservatism will make it impossible for Obama to corner him into ideological boxes that large percentages of Americans will be turned off by.

    And no, it isn’t because the Conservative message is wrong, but rather, because Santorum won’t articulate it in a way that makes people feel good. And Americans, for the most part, want to feel good.

    So in sum, Santorum and Romney, not Reagan. But Romney can beat Obama and all the polls (Conservative and liberal) indicate that. No national poll to date has shown Santorum or Gingrich beating Obama. Not one.

    I reference Real Clear Politics, not going to post a bunch of links. You can go find them yourselves.

  • Sparky

    Nice to see Santorum finally being vetted.

    The picture of this man is getting more and more creepy.

    Santorum sees no problem mixing church, state and bedroom. NO thanks!

    Talk about a man who hasn’t gotten our of the Dark Ages of radical Catholicism.

  • Fuquay Steve

    Hey Gary, Romney huh? Well, kiss my sister and color me surprised.

  • bg

    ++

    More Liberty #62 February 22, 2012 at 11:54 am

    the truth is Ron Paul says one thing and does another.. the truth is Ron
    Paul is a Truther, ergo, the truth is, Ron Paul is a racist, the truth is, Ron
    Paul is an OWS, pedophile, drug addiction, sharia law, anti-American-pro
    -Hamas-Iran et al, hypoctritical pork barreling proponent..

    ==

  • More Liberty

    Fuquay Steve commented:

    “Sure enough More Liberty, you are the ideal truth portrayer. Real honest with yourself too I see. And humble. Whatever you are sellin’ i ain’t buyin’. Something’s fishy in Denmark.”

    Well join the club. There are plenty of people and politicians in our country that don’t support the US Constitution or individual liberty – you’re not the only one.

  • Fuquay Steve

    Hey Sparky, real intelligent comments there. Go to the school of Paul or has Mitt paid your tuition?

  • BS61

    #23 More Liberty commented:
    Haha…man Rick “Sweater vest” is an ass-clown. Five votes to raise the national debt. He’s not part of the solution – he’s part of the problem.

    He is no conservative, although he might be a theocrat.

    I personally don’t care what anyones religious beliefs are. Ron Paul is no conservative. Even Thomas Jefferson realized that we had to go to war in Tripoli against the non-muslim haters there and their Koran!

  • Gary

    Retire05

    Whether Romney admits that he did something that wasn’t conservative or not (and come on, do you really need his admission, really?), you’ll be faced with a choice in November, and it is almost certain to be Romney or Obama (or write in or stay home and throw your vote away).
    So if you’re waiting for Romney’s apologies over Romneycare to get your vote, I hope you hold Obama to the same standard for Obamacare that actually was loaded onto all Americans, and the detrimental effects of which we will have decades to lament should Obama get re-elected.

    Otherwise, I feel your pain. Sorry the most electable guy this time is not the most Conservative. But most people just aren’t willing to roll those dice when the stakes are this high.

  • maraz

    The true conservative was Bachmann, and with her absence, the next closest conservative candidate is Santorum. So out of the group of current candidates… Santorum’s got my vote.

    And just a thought Jim… back in 2008… I was a Liberal… but Obama woke me up and I’ve slowly made the paradigm shift to constitutional conservatism. So if you pulled any quotes of things I said in 2008 and compared them to what I say today… you’d be shocked that would probably be questioning my own commitment to conservatism and small government.

    Napolitano is a useful idiot for the establishment Repulicans and Liberal media… I don’t trust anything he conjures up.

  • http://www.cjunk.blogspot.com Paul

    Clearly Santorum does not believe in the separation of church and state given his “Satan” fixation. His comments about individualism coupled with his views that “Satan” is attacking American institutions are a dangerous combination.

    I think the man has Old World Catholic views where church, state, and bedroom mix freely with “Church” taking the lead. So much for constitutional conservative ideals.

  • BS61

    #24 Mama Grizzly commented:
    DavidC is correct. Repealing Obamacare is a CENTRAL PLATFORM of the Romney campaign.

    Hey Mama Grizzly. I would never implement Govt controlled healthcare at the state level, would you?

    I have principles that I would NEVER compromise, I would have quit. We cannot count on Romney!

  • Mimi

    Romney has no defense when debating Obama on ObamaCare. Obama will just point out the Romney said that Romneycare, “was a model for the nation.” Romney has no defense against Obama on Cap and Trade because Romney in Massachusetts signed the first law in the nation regarding Cap and Tax.

    What Obama has done is systematically helped Romney take out every conservative one by one so he will face Romney. Why would people chg their vote from Obama if Romney is the Same.

  • More Liberty

    bg commented:
    ” truth is Ron Paul says one thing and does another.. the truth is Ron
    Paul is a Truther, ergo, the truth is, Ron Paul is a racist, the truth is, Ron
    Paul is an OWS, pedophile, drug addiction, sharia law, anti-American-pro
    -Hamas-Iran et al, hypoctritical pork barreling proponent..”

    I’m sorry bg but you are so entrenched in your love for big government, endless wars and fear-mongering that you obviously don’t support liberty or the US Constitution. Your lies about Ron Paul must make you feel comfortable when you pull the lever for some guy that voted to increase debt, voted for mandates, is a bigot, a hypocrite, or chicken-hawk. Some people simply don’t deserve freedom.

  • Gary

    Wanumba#53

    You really nailed that. I meant to post that one day but I don’t think I ever did.
    Ron Paul should run as a Democrat. It’s that simple. It would be way closer to correct alignment. The Democrats of old more or less respected the Constitution as Paul does. It wasn’t the hard left of today. Remember Reagan was a Democrat for most of his life.
    Paul should have challenged Obama in a primary, and he might even have given him a run for his money.

  • bg

    ++

    Ron yin Paul is to the Constitution what
    Barry yang Obama is to the Constitution..

    iwo: one extreme to the other..

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    More Liberty #80 February 22, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    not even clever..

    ==

  • Gary

    Further on that point, I know that nobody has the authority to say who is and isn’t Conservative or who can or can’t be a Republican.
    I just think that, while there is room for a mixed bag of Conservative belief systems in the Republican party, there are some things you just shouldn’t be able to espouse and still retain party membership.

    One of those is the idiotic notion that Iran has a much right to a nuke as anybody, and another is that (not quoting) we brought 9/11 on ourselves.
    Sorry, Ron Paul. You’re not in the R party.

  • Pingback: Rick Santorum Defends Big Government Intrusion – Rejects “Radical Individualism” (The Video) | Liberal Whoppers()

  • democraps suck

    unfortunately Newt is the only one who MAY stand a chance against the mooslime….mark my words as of today we are doomed

  • retire05

    Anyone who supports Ron Paul doesn’t know him. And they have to ignore his associations with people like anti-semite, Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell.

    Ron Paul is a fraud, a charletan, a poser. He is not what he pretends to be and I thank God every day he is no longer my representitive.

  • More Liberty

    BS61 commented:
    “I personally don’t care what anyones religious beliefs are. Ron Paul is no conservative. Even Thomas Jefferson realized that we had to go to war in Tripoli against the non-muslim haters there and their Koran!’

    So here I’m going to debunk this lie. Like Thomas Jefferson, Ron Paul also realized that we had to go to war against those that carreid out the attack. Below is the roll call vote for the AUMF (Authorization Use of Military Force) against the Taliban/Al Qaeda. The vote was held on September 14, 2001. It stated “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
    organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the
    terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations
    or persons….”

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll342.xml

  • Gary

    Fuquay
    If you can provide any convincing evidence that either Santorum or Gingrich stands a better chance of beating Obama, I’m all ears, er eyes anyway.

    There certainly hasn’t been a poll taken by either side that has reflected it.
    It’s primary season, so you’re free to push the candidate of your choice. Just don’t expect a lot of traction.

  • Mimi

    VA Governor Bob McDonnell Hangs VA GOP Out To Dry

    Is he abandoning pro-life legislators as the price of being Mitt’s running mate?
    This is the headline from RedState and this is just the kind of policy dodging we will get from Mitt Romney. This will happen on ObamaCare as well. People this is who Romney and his people are. I find it hilarious the Romney calls Santorum a Washington Insiders when it is Romney who has the blessing of the Washington Insiders as well as Wall Street. Romney is devious.

  • More Liberty

    “Ron yin Paul is to the Constitution what
    Barry yang Obama is to the Constitution..”

    And there it is bg. You are part of the problem. Like many of these other “conservatives” you don’t care about the US Constitution, although it’s good for your rhetoric. You like it when it supports some of your views, but don’t like it when it gets in the way. Got it.

  • bg

    ++

    More Liberty #66 February 22, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    perhaps youmaybe you think don’t understand the definition of HYPOCRITE:

    Ron Paul = says one thing, does another..

    or could be you believe being an advocate for
    an non advocated avocation makes sense??

    ==

  • jorgen

    He is no Reagan. He is half a Romney.
    Go for Newt!

  • Freddy

    Ok, so what exactly is it that I am to learn from this snippet?

    Am I supposed to think that there is no difference between conservatives and anarchists? Am I supposed to pretend that Santorum, since he clearly does not support anarchy, is now not conservative?

    This is an absurd post.

  • bg

    ++

    More Liberty #91 February 22, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    yeah right miss comprehension..

    ==

  • BS61

    #47 February 22, 2012 at 11:15 am
    Gary commented:
    BS61 #9

    You’re right about those optics.
    But picture red-faced angry Santorum in a debate with cool, smirking Obama.

    It won’t matter that most of what Santorum says is right, because only the informed Right gets that. The rest of the country will see angry guy with strange viewpoints losing debate to cool, confident guy.

    Now Romney, granted nobody’s Conservative hero… He won’t get red in the face or lose his temper. He may stammer (on purpose), but Obama will never maneuver him into a position where he’ll come off as angry and wrongheaded.

    Of course, all that said, the debates really don’t affect the decision for most Americans (especially since most Americans don’t watch them).

    Totally agree on most American’s – they’ll be getting Jon Stewarts take on things!

    Romney lost it in the debates too and was flustered…

  • maraz

    @ Paul #77

    “Clearly Santorum does not believe in the separation of church and state…”

    Uh… Paul… clearly you’re an uninformed Obot… otherwise you would know that the constitution does not have any mention of a separation of Church and State. That separation concept was an interpretation by a progressive Judge and Liberal media has been promoting the concept ever since. You obviously fell for it…. huh?

  • bg

    ++

    Freddy #94 February 22, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    yes, yet another exercise in futility, ergo, i totally agree..

    ==

  • Little Joe

    Rick Santorum has ALWAYS been a big government Republican. He is NOT a conservative in the true sense of the word.

  • Gary

    Maraz#76

    Agree totally.

    Bachmann was the most consistently Conservative, and the most outspoken Conservative, and the one Conservative who voted the Conservative line time and again despite what the leadership wanted her to do.

    But where was her traction? Why wouldn’t people line up behind her after the Iowa straw poll? They were busy jumping on the Perry bandwagon and the Cain train, then settling down Newt Gingrich. Meanwhile Bachmann ran out of money and a Conservative voice was silenced.

    Anybody who wants can bash me for saying that Romney is all but certainly the nominee, but you can just as easily go back over the past year and see who was the first one out advocating Bachmann.

    Santorum is the 2nd Conservative behind Bachmann, but he presents his message in a way that makes it look like he wants to be perceived as extreme. Conservatism isn’t extreme. He’s politically savvy enough by now to know that he could put his message out better and not come off like the stereotype that the left wants to paint him. So why doesn’t he?

  • maraz

    @ Freddy #94

    “Ok, so what exactly is it that I am to learn from this snippet?

    Am I supposed to think that there is no difference between conservatives and anarchists? Am I supposed to pretend that Santorum, since he clearly does not support anarchy, is now not conservative?

    This is an absurd post”

    Great response… I agree…

  • John Delanor

    Conservatives support small government. Why would we support Santorum? If we wanted 4 more years of big government, we would re-elect Obama.

  • Gary

    More Liberty 91

    I’d say you got it backward.

    Yang is the good side, Yin is the evil side.

  • mamagriz68

    I hope we can all agree that we need to vote for “Not Obama.” The real battle will be for senate and house seats to further our agenda for less government and fiscal sanity.

  • BS61

    #59 Bill Mitchell commented:
    I don’t care about all this Satan crap. I care that Santorum has NO Executive Experience and is a Fiscal Liberal.

    So who do you support?

    Personally, I’m not voting for anyone who ran for Prez before. :(

  • Gary

    BS61

    Yes, Romney got flustered, but where was the red, angry face? That’s exactly what Obama would like to paint our side with.

    Go back and look over the debates. Finding a shot of an angry faced Santorum is pretty easy.

    Now go back and look at Reagan/Carter or Reagan/Mondale. Reagan slipped the dagger in like it was coated with butter, and he had a twinkle in his eye when he turned it.
    Santorum doesn’t have that skill.

  • maraz

    @ Gary #100

    “Santorum is the 2nd Conservative behind Bachmann, but he presents his message in a way that makes it look like he wants to be perceived as extreme. Conservatism isn’t extreme. He’s politically savvy enough by now to know that he could put his message out better and not come off like the stereotype that the left wants to paint him. So why doesn’t he?”

    Total bull

    Santorum presents conservative principles and is not cowarding from the Liberal media who wants to vilify Santorum for his conservatism. Liberal media had a plan… steer all the masses sheeple to vote for Romney so that Obama could win the general election. The Liberal media also expects to call all the other candidates on any conservative ideas expressed and they expect the conservatives to apologize and coward away from their remarks. When they stand up for their statements… the media labels it extreme.

    So I think you need to go back to the WH and get your next talking point instructions.

  • maraz

    Apparently Santorum is Arpaio’s guy too… :-)

    Sheriff Joe briefs Santorum on Obama probe – ‘As a matter of fairness in case he wouldn’t want me to support him’
    http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/sheriff-joe-briefs-santorum-on-obama-probe/

    ‘Toughest Sheriff’ to release Obama birth probe – ‘I don’t have press conferences just to have my name on television’
    http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/toughest-sheriff-to-release-obama-birth-probe/

  • wanumba

    #81 February 22, 2012 at 12:12 pm
    Gary commented:
    Wanumba#53

    You really nailed that. I meant to post that one day but I don’t think I ever did.
    Ron Paul should run as a Democrat. It’s that simple. It would be way closer to correct alignment.
    ::::::::::::::::::::

    Exactly. So that begs the question … who does he really help when he shills for donations, runs and never wins, as the Democrat media bends over backwards to be sure he’s always included in debates … always hurting the GOP in some way to the advantage of the Dems. Always.

    The highest public office he’s managed in DECADES is Rep. – not even enough state-wide appeal for senator or governor, and his PR has ALWAYS been is one of the oddest combinations of slacker skateboard internet spamming edgy … and retired fuddy-duddy. Very Odd, as in don’t make any sense … so what’s going on? Really?

    I notice the panic rising though on the threads here … so let’s remind everyone of this inconvient fact when we get to “know” Ron Paul better:
    the last primary poll results showed the interesting combo of Dem/IND and a few GOP is Ron Paul’s “base” – a “base” that 2/3 of which will vote Obama in the general.

    Yuh. That’s pretty much what one would expect after focusing a critical eye on the anomoly of Ron Paul.

  • BS61

    #88 More Liberty commented:

    So here I’m going to debunk this lie.

    I agree More Liberty that we actually need Congress to declare war, my point was that Ron Paul doesn’t see the danger of the Muslim Koran where it states to kill all non-muslims like Thomas Jefferson did.

  • bg

    ++

    maraz #97 February 22, 2012 at 12:27 pm

    let me forecast the future of that Obama notion:

    “Welcome to the New Global Sharia World”

    please click on links, connecting links, and
    scroll threads for more, or not, your choice..

    without the separation of state & church/mosque/temple/etc..

    we would not have “religious liberty”, we would have a “poligiousity”
    aka: Rule by Sharia Law aka: an inseparable political/religion state..

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    btw, for the life of me.. i still cannot see how the US Constitution
    condones and protects porn, most specifically ” virtual” child porn
    as being “freedom of speech” per the USSC.. would fornicating in
    public be a form of free speech?? oh wait, they already do that in
    parts of San Fran.. *sigh*

    and sorry, but no matter how free we
    be, that is a sign of a very sick nation..

    ==

  • maraz

    @ bg #111

    “without the separation of state & church/mosque/temple/etc..

    we would not have “religious liberty”, we would have a “poligiousity”
    aka: Rule by Sharia Law aka: an inseparable political/religion state”

    Liberal Judges and Liberal media use the phrase separation of Church and State as a tool to separate prayer on any premises that they interpret as public or state or whatever other label fits their model. The real goal of the term separation of Church and State is to separate the people with their connection to G-d.

    Personally, I prefer the language of the constitution instead:

    U.S. Constitution – Amendment 1

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

    There is nothing in that quote that separates religion from state… it only states that congress can make NO LAW to establish religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. NOTE: That includes NO LAW for the establishment of Global Warming as the religion of choice too.

  • bg

    ++

    Gary #103 February 22, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    😆

    damn, i knew people would misconstrue the yin yang insert..

    ergo, if you cannot understand that it is mean to highlight “opposite
    ends of the spectrum”, then just forget yin yang is in there because
    both extremes are BAD for US..

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    maraz #113 February 22, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    Amen, that’s much better.. :-)

    but did you read about Obama’s New Covenant, etc??

    ==

  • BS61

    #99 Little Joe commented:
    Rick Santorum has ALWAYS been a big government Republican. He is NOT a conservative in the true sense of the word.

    Agreed Little Joe! NONE of our candidates are for a smaller govt except RP, but I totally disagree with his Alex Jones view of foreign policy. So in my mind, I’ll vote for whoever the R candidate is, because they spend less than the D’s

  • http://partizensunite.proboards.com/index.cgi MustComment

    Jim, perv alert. @#36 Kadeempasioncanaveral6.

    *********
    The more we pound on our GOP candidates, the more I get a sick feeling Obama will serve another 4 long years…

  • Gary

    Maraz

    I think you have it backward.

    I think the the media strategy is to steer the sheeple to shun Romney and get behind Santorum because he will be so easy to villify to the uninformed masses.

    As for the message, I’m not attacking Santorum’s message. I’m saying that I think he knows when something he is about to say will come off as controversial and he goes with it for the sake of the controversy it causes, maybe to get himself more exposure, or maybe because he enjoys the attention. He was elected to the Senate in a fairly purple state, so that’s why I say he knows better. Pennsylvania is like a microcosm of the US in one way. It has pockets of high-population liberalism and large swaths of low-population density conservatism. People who get elected in Pennsylvania have to be good talkers and able to articulate their message in a way that appeals to more than just the base.

    That’s why I say I think it is intentional rather than just clumsy wording.

  • Little Joe

    @116 BS61,

    Agreed! Any of the Rs would be better than 0bummer.

  • Gary

    Maraz 101

    I didn’t read your whole comment.
    You’re telling me to go to get my WH talking points?
    Who the hell are you?
    I was attempting to have a thoughtful conversation. But that isn’t possible with dumba$$es so go $crew yourself loser.

  • Little Joe

    @108 maraz,

    I am a Southern Arizona Native and am SOOOOOO looking forward to Sheriff Joe releasing the results of his investigation.

  • Gary

    bg 114

    No it’s just all those years in China. I can’t resist showing off my Chinese language knowledge:

    Yang = Sun/ Bright/ Man/ Good

    Yin = Moon/Dark/Woman/Evil

    Love those Chinese.

  • maraz

    @ Gary #118

    More BS.

    The conservative message wins every time…. not to be confused with diluted and ambiguous conservative messaging.

    I think you have it backward.

    I think the the media strategy is to steer the sheeple to shun Romney and get behind Santorum because he will be so easy to villify to the uninformed masses

    LMAO… Now I know you’re delusional. You better check with MSNBC for your next talking point.

  • bg

    ++

    More Liberty #88 February 22, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    Jefferson’s Opposition to Standing Army-Navy

    [America’s most strategic seaports were of great concern to many, given
    the might exhibited by the Spanish and French navies. Thus, there was
    strong support for a buildup of U.S. navy forces as a showcase to the
    world, demonstrating America’s might.]

    btw, Rumsfeld is of the same mind so to speak..

    not to mention relativity, iow: what was or
    was not imperative at that time in history..

    Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates

    [When Jefferson became president in 1801 he refused to accede to Tripoli’s demands for an immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual payment of $25,000. The pasha of Tripoli then declared war on the United States. Although as secretary of state and vice president he had opposed developing an American navy capable of anything more than coastal defense, President Jefferson dispatched a squadron of naval vessels to the Mediterranean. As he declared in his first annual message to Congress: “To this state of general peace with which we have been blessed, one only exception exists. Tripoli, the least considerable of the Barbary States, had come forward with demands unfounded either in right or in compact, and had permitted itself to denounce war, on our failure to comply before a given day. The style of the demand admitted but one answer. I sent a small squadron of frigates into the Mediterranean. . . .”

    The American show of force quickly awed Tunis and Algiers into breaking their alliance with Tripoli. The humiliating loss of the frigate Philadelphia and the capture of her captain and crew in Tripoli in 1803, criticism from his political opponents, and even opposition within his own cabinet did not deter Jefferson from his chosen course during four years of war. The aggressive action of Commodore Edward Preble (1803-4) forced Morocco out of the fight and his five bombardments of Tripoli restored some order to the Mediterranean. However, it was not until 1805, when an American fleet under Commodore John Rogers and a land force raised by an American naval agent to the Barbary powers, Captain William Eaton, threatened to capture Tripoli and install the brother of Tripoli’s pasha on the throne, that a treaty brought an end to the hostilities. Negotiated by Tobias Lear, former secretary to President Washington and now consul general in Algiers, the treaty of 1805 still required the United States to pay a ransom of $60,000 for each of the sailors held by the dey of Algiers, and so it went without Senatorial consent until April 1806. Nevertheless, Jefferson was able to report in his sixth annual message to Congress in December 1806 that in addition to the successful completion of the Lewis and Clark expedition, “The states on the coast of Barbary seem generally disposed at present to respect our peace and friendship.”]

    What Thomas Jefferson learned
    from the Muslim book of jihad

    [Ellison’s use of Jefferson’s Quran as a prop illuminates a subject once well-known in the history of the United States, but, which today, is mostly forgotten – the Muslim pirate slavers who over many centuries enslaved millions of Africans and tens of thousands of Christian Europeans and Americans in the Islamic “Barbary” states.]

    more @ link/s, connecting link/s, and thread/s..

    American Leadership & War

    like i said, Ron Paul says one thing and does another,
    or is that does one thing and says another, hmmmm..

    ==

  • BS61

    Ron Paul is indeed the one who supports shrinking govt. But I’m sorry to say that he won’t win. Because his foreign policy is not mainstream. We need to slow govt now, and that means voting R because they spend less and spend less fast!

    His supporters seem to believe that when the US collapses, he will ride in to the rescue and we will have a Republic back, I see Chairman Obama’s reeducation camps for them.

    I think it was someone here that posted, Republican’s have us creeping to socialism while Dem’s have us leaping to socialism.

    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Chesterton (1924)

  • maraz

    @ Little Joe #121

    I am a Southern Arizona Native and am SOOOOOO looking forward to Sheriff Joe releasing the results of his investigation

    So am I… and I’ll be attending with Corsi. I imagine it will be live streamed by wnd.com

    You might enjoy our debate with Woodman at the following link…

    VIDEO: Catch the Fireworks as experts debate Obama’s birth certificate – Idiot John Woodman takes on New York Time bestselling author Jerome Corsi, as well as computer experts Karl Denninger, Tom Harrison, and Mara Zebest, Nellie Ristvedt, founder of the Butterdezillion Blog
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbW_MpQvjJc

  • bg

    ++

    Gary #122 February 22, 2012 at 1:15 pm

    i know what they mean, and i’ve never been to China… 😉

    ==

  • BS61

    #106 February 22, 2012 at 12:34 pm
    Gary commented:
    BS61

    Yes, Romney got flustered, but where was the red, angry face? That’s exactly what Obama would like to paint our side with.

    Go back and look over the debates. Finding a shot of an angry faced Santorum is pretty easy.

    Now go back and look at Reagan/Carter or Reagan/Mondale. Reagan slipped the dagger in like it was coated with butter, and he had a twinkle in his eye when he turned it.
    Santorum doesn’t have that skill.

    None of the GOP have that skill unfortunately!

  • bg

    ++

    all i ever heard was Reagan this, Reagan that, Reagan the other thing,,

    well here are, we have Gingrich, the closest thing to Reagan in anyone’s
    lifetime, and what are the so called Reaganites saying about him?? LIES,
    LIES, and more LIES.. well i say:

    GING OBAMA ONE FOR THE GIPPER NEWT!! :-)

    ==

  • BS61

    #119 Little Joe commented:
    @116 BS61,

    Agreed! Any of the Rs would be better than 0bummer.

    Well Little Joe, I totally agree with you agreeing with me! :)

  • BS61

    #124 February 22, 2012 at 1:17 pm
    bg commented:

    Thanks!

  • http://americanprotestant.tumblr.com Wesley Mcgranor

    He is a Catholic, and they reject individualism in context or out.

  • bg

    ++

    BS61 #131 February 22, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    your welcome..

    re: BS61 #125 February 22, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    and thank you..

    btw, forget about Ron Paul being a “make love not war”
    prez, we already have B Hussein O, how we doin’?? /s/

    ==

  • Liberty

    BG… you are acting like a typical neocon HACK, serving as a fount of disinformation and smears against Ron Paul on this forum. It would be far more intellectually honest if we could simply debate the issues.

    Can we agree that the BIG issues/CONSERVATIVE issues are:

    1. Smaller Government (cutting spending)
    2. Less taxes/revive free market principles
    3. Addressing/Correct the Financial Crisis (debt crisis)
    4. Stopping government intrusion in our daily lives & personal liberties (i.e. ObamaCare, etc)
    5. Eliminating bailouts of “too big to fail” corporations and financial institutions

    Ron Paul’s positions are CONSISTENTLY CONSERVATIVE on each of these CRITICAL ISSUES. All of the other candidates have either NON-CONSERVATIVE POSITIONS or INCONSISTENT TRACK RECORDS on one or more of these points.

    Care to compare your favorite candidate with Ron Paul on any of these 5?

  • mybcjazz

    Yesterday, Drudge came off my list of morning reads. And now it’s time to take for GP to go. See ya!

  • Ausonius

    Let’s be fair about something, Jim is no objective observer, but a very pro-Newt fellow who would like to swing interest back into his candidate.

    It is a distortion of the truth to equate big govt with those who despise radical individualism, which is just another way to describe that there should be limits to conduct.
    In fact, Jim may not like it, but we as a culture use to consider the proper place for radical individualism to be limited was at the local level (before courts began imposing rights upon us).
    So does that mean that all of you kneejerkers desire rights by courts?

    I thought conservatives opposed judicial activism, which is what unleashed radical individualism upon us.

    Jim, you’ld do well to not spin this guy’s record. You will find he’s on the right side and you, by ridiculing it, are not.

    The recent Satan is attacking America statements that Jim and others have decried we now know mirror Reagan’s own statements.

    The more some of you try to make a mockery out of him, the more you look to be very un-conservative.

  • Ausonius

    Liberty:
    wake up call.
    Beside the fact that Paul has never been shown to be a serious contender, many conservatives cannot stand his forfeit of the culture war which Ron says is unwinable.

    Many do not desire the legalize dope, homosexual marriage, and any other vice that the uberwise libertarian declares (much the same as the activist judges do) that they are out of bounds.

    Then there is the foreign policy nightmare that is Ron Paul. It goes something like this: if we don’t bother anyone else, no one will bother us. To say it is simplistic and dangerous is an understatement.

    Then there is the issue that Paul never seems to be very critical of Mitt, but always seems to go after his opponents. It is regular enough that, coupled with his low poll numbers, invites the question if his presence does anything more than to bolster Mitt.

  • Liberty

    Ausonius,

    Either you’re intentionally distorting Ron Paul’s positions or your uninformed about his positions you mention:

    “Forfeit of the culture war” – RP is against the expansion of American “empire” and believes in the sovereignty of individual nations. He supports free trade and cooperation between sovereign nation states.

    “Many do not desire the legalize dope, homosexual marriage, and any other vice that the uberwise libertarian declares” – RP does not believe that there should be FEDERAL laws governing these “vices”. They should be left for the states to decide. RP is a firm supporter of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution and believes we are a Constitutional Republic – radical, I know.

    “Then there is the foreign policy nightmare that is Ron Paul. It goes something like this: if we don’t bother anyone else, no one will bother us.” – This is a gross distortion of RP’s position. He is a non-interventionist and believes in a strong national defense. He believes that when faced with a true threat to our national security, we should DECLARE WAR congressionally, as stated in the Constitution, and win the war. Again, I know this “rule of law” stuff get’s complicated, but bear with me.

    Oh, and regarding Mitt, RP has produced the hardest hitting television ads of all other candidates against Mitt Romney to date.

  • Blacque Jacques Shellacque

    Let’s not fool ourselves that Rick Santorum is a small government guy. He’s not.

    That’s why I’ve said I might be able to support Santorum if he’s the eventual nominee. I still have my reservations, however.

  • bg

    ++

    Liberty #134 February 22, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    who ya gonna call, Dr. Feelgood Paul!! cigarettes are legal, and
    they kill millions, can you imagine if & when everything else is?? :-(

    but hey, forget about collapsing the US economy and creating a NWO
    via taking the long road to decreasing the population, legalizing drugs
    would make for a great short cut via directly collapsing the population,
    ergo, the economy much faster.. heh, double pop for the price of one..
    what could possibly go wrong??

    ==

  • Freddy

    Hey there Liberty,

    IF Red China were to invade Taiwan what would President Ron Paul do?

  • bg

    ++

    the true threat to our Republic no longer lies across any body of water..
    more fact than fiction is, it’s not only in our own back yard, but residing
    in the White House, not to mention Congress, and the US-SC.. we the
    people’s enemies are those we have chosen to represent US, and they,
    albeit individually, very well may.. however, they neither represent what
    is best for US as a whole, nor for the whole of America.. seems like we’re
    being sold to the highest bidders for 30 pieces of silver.. but hey, not to
    worry, the Elites got theirs don’t they.. think they want class warfare??

    Obama says he’s the only thing standing between them and the
    pitchforks?? hah!! Obama IS the pitchfork the Elites are using to
    stick it to US.. gah!!

    iow: we the people are on our own, as our representatives no longer
    represent US, they seem to have risen above their pay grade, oh wait,
    they’re all millionaires, and the president is Richie Rich too, go fig.. /$/

    ==

  • Ausonius

    Liberty
    I know, having dealt with enough of the Paul supporters, that facts rarely get in your way, BUT:
    He just stated recently that running as a values candidate (or something to that effect) was not a winning proposition.
    He stands by a notion that posits blame for the 9-11 attacks as our fault.
    And he can’t win a primary.
    And his states rights claim of opposing federal solutions on things like homosexual marriage is in utter denial of the fact that activist judges will not allow them to remain state issues.
    And I’m rather certain he goes beyond just saying these matters should be left to the states- he thinks they are bad ideas (especially drug laws). So don’t tell me I’m distorting his record when you clearly are sugar coating it.
    And his position on a nuclear Iran is absurd and dangerous

  • bg

    ++

    Liberty #134 February 22, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    saying it don’t make it so, and here you go..

    scroll down for more, or not, your choice..
    but don’t say i didn’t answer your question

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    Liberty #134 February 22, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    other than maintaining his millionaireship,
    what esle has Ron Paul accomplished??

    thanks..

    ==

  • http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/ reliapundit

    RIGHT ON RIGHT ON RIGHT ON RIGHT ON.

    SANTORUM IS THE FOOD STAMP PRESIDENT!

    http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2012/02/santorum-is-food-stamp-candidate.html

  • http://www.themadjewess.com MJ
  • CatoRenasci

    Santorum is an ultramontane Catholic who dislikes individual liberty as much as the reactionary 19th century Pio Nono (Pope Pius IX). He rejects the separation of church and state and he rejects the fundamental idea of America.

  • bg
  • bg

    ++

    #148 February 22, 2012 at 5:32 pm
    CatoRenasci

    i bet you make excuses for Islamists

    ==

  • daryl

    Lord, if only all of us were so informed as bg. But possibly not so quick toshow it.

    Sure are slicing that bologna thick, kid…..

  • maraz

    Thanks MJ #147

    VIDEO: Romney endorses #OWS rhetoric, vows to make “the top 1% pay their fair share or more.”: Romney talks the 1% in Arizona
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjpmWpPKYmI

  • maraz

    @ CatoRenasci #148

    ” He rejects the separation of church and state and he rejects the fundamental idea of America”

    Santorum is correct to reject the separation of church and state… All conservatives reject it.

    Liberal Judges and Liberal media use the phrase separation of Church and State as a tool to separate prayer on any premises that they interpret as public or state or whatever other label fits their model. The real goal of the term separation of Church and State is to separate the people with their connection to G-d.

    Personally, I prefer the language of the constitution instead:

    U.S. Constitution – Amendment 1

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

    There is nothing in that quote that separates religion from state… it only states that congress can make NO LAW to establish religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. NOTE: That includes NO LAW for the establishment of Global Warming as the substitute religion of choice as well.

  • Questionman

    Obama wants to lower the corporate tax rate and close tax loopholes, so the playing field is more level, fair, and transparent.

    Why will Republicans oppose this?

    How will they spin this into the whole, “Obama is a socialist” argument?

    What hate speech will they use to attack Obama on this move?

    How will they argue that Obama hates America when he lowered taxes for workers and wants to do the same for corporations, and just wants millionaires to pay the same rate as workers?

    And I highly doubt that Obama is a traitor to America, as you are supposing, because he made it big in this nation. Are you really sure a guy who became successful in part because of this nation would really want to destroy it??? If you did, then I’d feel sorry for you. Cut the anti-Obama and Commie bashing crap and abandon the SS Republican Party. They are a sinking ship, so best you save yourself. Seek the truth, for the truth shall set you free.

    The President is not the Enemy and does not fall under the guidelines you are trying to use. NEXT!

    You are a disgusting racist piece of crap and a disgrace to mankind! Un-American puke!

    Klansmans, thanks for proving my point!
    The republican are the party of racist, bigots, extremists liars!

    Obama is not communist, you are a racist!

  • maraz

    @ Questionman # 154

    “Obama wants to lower the corporate tax rate and close tax loopholes, so the playing field is more level, fair, and transparent.

    Why will Republicans oppose this?”

    Was Obama’s mouth moving when he said that? If so… that’s how you can tell he’s lying. Obama’s says his plan lowers the corporate tax rate when in fact it is raising it. He’s all smoke and mirrors… and look to Obama for the spin… not us.

    Proposed Obama budget includes surge in tax hikes
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/14/proposed-obama-budget-includes-surge-in-tax-hikes/

    Obama’s Budget raises taxes on ALL, not just the rich
    http://news.investors.com/article/601205/201202141851/obama-budget-includes-tax-hikes-on-all.htm

  • maraz

    @Questionman #154

    “How will they spin this into the whole, “Obama is a socialist” argument?

    What hate speech will they use to attack Obama on this move?”

    With the truth… read the budget plan…. you might learn something… see above links in post #155

  • maraz

    @Questionman #154

    “And I highly doubt that Obama is a traitor to America…”

    He absolutely is a traitor to American and not eligible to be in the position. And if the truth is the new hate speech then so be it. Apparently you can’t handle the truth

    VIDEO: Pennsylvania Press Conference on Obama Ballot Access Challenge, 2-17-2012
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MW0rVEqEAo

  • bg

    ++

    #154 February 22, 2012 at 7:47 pm
    Questionman

    re: [“How will they spin this into the whole,
    “Obama is a socialist” argument?]

    re: [republican are the party of racist, bigots, extremists]

    scroll for more..

    you’re turd droppings are funny..

    ==

  • Pingback: ORBUSMAX ARCHIVES » Links From 2/22/12()

  • Pingback: Liberty Postings » To Vote or Not to Vote: That is My Question (h/t Shakespeare)()

  • RageFury

    That quote was funny. Apparently he forgot what this culture was like not long ago.