Crybaby Rick Couldn't Handle Iran

That's what I get from the whining about how bad he sucked at that debate the other day. Instead of owning up to his "Team Big R" record, he then attacks the two who exposed his record. You're not running for student council, Rick, but for POTUS, meaning your past will come up. Instead of accurately dealing with your record in a way that a very, very cynical public would believe, you decide to cook up some conspiracy theory about the Goldman Sachs Fed Cartel candidate working with the pro-gold, pro-Constitution candidate. Your evidence? They attacked you  at the debate, and not each other. Here's a tip, Rick: when you're polling at #1, you're going to be the target of the other contenders. If you're playing ball and are holding the ball, you're going to be the target, understand? Ron and Mitt have the biggest war chests, are the only candidates on the VA ballot, and both have a 50 state strategy. Do you realize how pathetic you look like saying stuff like this:

You have to ask Congressman Paul and Governor Romney what they’ve got going together,’ Santorum told reporters in the spin room in Mesa, Arizona. ‘Their commercials look a lot alike and so do their attacks.’ h/t The Blaze

When you're number one the enemies attack, isn't that what you're always telling us with your American Exceptionalism act? How can you handle the Mullahs, when you can't handle a four man debate? Oh, I know, those strong military men will protect you, that is if they still give a crap about the oligarchy (yes, I'm talking about you, you bankster tool) after playing Praetrorian Guard all these years.

Awww. Ron Paul hurt poser Ricky's feewings!

And By the way, know how long I personally have been pro -life? Since I learned where babies came from. But not Rick Santorum, no sir. He decided he was prolife just as he was about to run for Congress. I would have thought it would have been when he held his first child for the first time, or saw the first sonogram, that's what does it for most people, but for Rick Santorum, it takes the political calculation of running for US Congress. What a character, huh?



Philadelphia Magazine, Dec. 1995


Listen to Doug handle this better than I can:

outtakes:

"Ron Paul would throw the Ring of Power into Mount Doom."
"If 22 years of lobbyists, women, and ego temptations in Congress didn't corrupt Ron Paul, you actually think that Mitt Romney can corrupt him?"

So Rick, I know it made you feel tough when you talked behind your comfy little desk in the foreign relations committee, but you can't handle the heat from your time on Globalist-Bankster-Team-RINO. Your're just making a fool of yourself. True, true, great swaths of the American people are fools, so you think its a perfect fit don't you, you little buttwipe? Well, the tireless minority out here knows who you work for, and we'll never, ever let you forget it.

Santorum's K Street Baggage

Nicely done vid by 147 Degrees, who would appear to be a big Newt supporter, but anyway credit where credit is due.

Isn't this just what we're studying on this little blog? Government and industry working together to shut down competition and turn the whole thing into a command economy. I've been tellin' ya Rick was a bankster boy!

Santorum right on Satan, 100 Years Too Late

Yes, Satan has attacked America, but it was via the "love of money is the root of all evil." The Lord Jesus said that, which is why when you "follow the money" you find the money changers.

The money changers have succeeded in turning our commodity based currency into monopoly money. Satan can't play on a level playing field, he has to fix it in order to win. I'm of course talking about the Federal Reserve Act that has most of your conservative "talk radio" listeners whistling past the graveyard. Yes, it's important, they acknowledge, but let's get back to the talking points our conservative media gives us. Yes, the Fed is like a huge black hole sucking our freedom away, let's ignore that and watch the moon base of shallow conservative platitudes being built. That sounds like an awesome idea. Fingers in ears, lalalala.

Oh, and by the way, these guys who set up the Fed and ran their own little cartels in their various economic sectors also laid the groundwork for the modern liberal movement. They financed professorships at all the big universities, and eventually the smaller ones to have liberal, anti-American founding professors indoctrinating people. It became a perpetual liberal-creating machine. The goal: convert America from a free-market economy to a command economy where the population is manipulated by them. Externally, these cartel money changing types use the power of the America fiat dollar to finance the subjugation of the world's resources. Pretty sweet little package the devil's got going there, too bad it won't last him more than seven years.

There's just one adult in this race who gives it to ya straight. He's diagnosed the problem, and he's got a prescription, but seems like some people don't want to take their medicine. They would rather be lied to over and over. I would just like to say right here how much of a Christian witness Ron Paul has been to me during this campaign. The class and grace he's shown those who have been downright rude is really breaking through to a lot of nonbelievers, of which we have plenty in the r3volution.

So yes, Santorum, Satan is the father of lies. I've got to wonder though, did you ever question where all the K Street money was coming from? Do you wonder where we're going to get all this money to fight these endless wars and rumors of war that you conveniently have never served in? It's from the fiat monopoly money of the Fed are these things temporarily possible. I'm just a housewife and I've got that figured out. You were a US Senator with a staffed office and you were never the least bit curious about how we got to this point. Seriously, I'm supposed to buy this dung? (an apostle Paul approved excrement term)

Value of US Dollar since 1913
Thank you moneychangers!

Santorum voted for Sonia Sotomayor

Haven't we learned by now what happens when we don't carefully examine a candidate's record? Erik Ericson at RedState, who would not jive with my particular views 100%, but has put together the fully back-linked accounting of Candidate Santorum's voting record while in the Senate. If you removed the name from the list, I would have thought this to be a liberal democrat's voting record. However, finding Santorum's campaign linked in with so many banksters and Elites, it doesn't really surprise me. He's like the Republican flavor of statism, the guy who'll hand you the convenient form to get your benefits from the new government program along with a slice of fresh apple pie. I hope you guys are smart enough not to take treats from Statists. If your mother didn't tell you not to trust a politician, then let the republican mother tell you - never, ever trust a politician without checking to see who's greasing his wheels.


I'm just going to give you a few of the eyebrow raising picks:

• Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge

Wasn't there a big hubub about what a liberal she was? Did she suddenly turn liberal in the last few years or did Ricky vote for a lib to be 2nd Circuit Federal Judge. Where do you people think Supreme Court Judges come from? They don't sprout out of the ground.

• Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea

I'm sure the poor North Koreans got a square meal! (Eye roll)

• Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions.   If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.

Tough on terrorism, eh? Well to be fair, most of the Senate went along with this. But to also be fair, the POTUS this time around doesn't need to "go along to get along" for all our sakes. But I get the feeling that Ricky votes like he's told...just like Barry does.

Ayatollah Santorum the Sanctimonious (ASS)

This little nugget was written by
 Thomas DiLorenzo
via LRC.

The freedom to do whatever you want to do – as long as you do not harm anyone else or interfere in their equal freedom – would "lead to libertinism and lead to chaos" said Sanctimonious Santorum, who has also pledged to do what he can to put an end to contraception if elected president. Contraception changes "the way things ought to be," he says. Santorum is self assured that he, and he alone, understands "the way things ought to be" and pledges to use the powers of the state to forcefully impose his "understanding" 

But the founding fathers are known as champions of freedom, are they not? But what kind of freedom? According to Santorum, who apparently fancies himself as an historian, freedom in America means "the freedom to do what you ought to do – what you are properly ordered to do [by a politician like himself] – as someone living a good, decent, and ordered life" (emphasis added). "That’s the differentiation that I believe Ron Paul and I have with respect to what liberty is," said Santorum. To Rick Santorum, "freedom" means doing what government "properly" orders you to do, as long as government is controlled by good, proper, moral people like himself, the K-Street lobbyist for the Pennsylvania coal mining industry (and anyone else who will pay his huge fees for influence peddling).

This is not the view of the American founding fathers, as Santorum claims. It is more likely to have been the mindset of the founders of the Soviet Union, not the American union. It is the mindset of the neoconservatives whose founding members were, after all, Trotskyite communists. This includes the self-described "godfather" of neoconservatism, the late Irving Kristol, who reveled in talking about his youthful Trotskyite roots. 

If Santorum really wanted to know how the founding fathers defined freedom he would not make up imaginary, two-century old dictionary entries but would read what the founders actually said. A good place to start would be Thomas Jefferson’s first inaugural address where he stated: "[A] wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government . . ." It is hard to imagine that Jefferson, the author of the 1786 Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom that strongly opposed the governmental imposition of any religious views on anyone while defending religious liberty in general, would have admired an Uber-Catholic Theocrat like Santorum. For government to compel a man to support a religious cause with which he disbelieves, wrote Jefferson, is "sinful and tyrannical."

 I would argue that Ricky isn't an uber-Catholic, but a political hack who'll keep pimping out his religious affiliation for as many gullible fools as possible. Am I being unjust? Not for a guy who took $100k of taxpayer money to cyber educate. That's a lot of field trips man...

When Ron Paul says that such victimless crimes as prostitution or smoking pot should be decriminalized, says Santorum, "that’s not the moral foundation of our country," once again pretending to be The Expert on the thinking of the founding fathers. There’s one problem with Santorum’s historical revisionism, however. Prostitution was in fact pervasive in Colonial America. Prostitutes traveled with George Washington’s army, serving as nurses and cooks as well as prostitutes. In fact, there were no laws in America banning prostitution until Massachusetts enacted the first one in 1917. (The 1910 "Mann Act," named after Congressman James Mann, prohibited "white slavery" for the purpose of prostitution). Federal laws against prostitution were first enacted after women got the right to vote and immediately outlawed prostitution in the vicinity of military bases when their husbands and boyfriends were off serving in the military. In other words the founding fathers agreed with Ron Paul, not Rick Santorum, on personal liberty issues.

 America is "not just a collection of freedoms," said the insufferably sanctimonious Santorum. It is, instead, a collection of orders from the state defining what "proper" behavior is. Stalin himself could not have said it better.

and blogged by me with one hand while holding a sleeping baby with the other.

Santorum Questioned on Fed - What You'd Expect

It ain't pretty. It just confirms what you already knew, Santorum is one of them. Who does them refer to? Lawsie, you're behind the curve if you have to ask that. Start here and make today the day you get a handle on the band of traitors taking down our country financially. Any terrorists that are out there are popping dates and eating pita bread with goat cheese laughing their behinds off at us. Banksters are sufficiently terrorizing the American people at this point.

Notice how he says we have to have inflation and then runs away. He says the dollar lost its value under the gold standard before RUNNING away. Attention Senator Stupid:

Conservative Collectivism

 No, Obama didn't say this, it was Rick Santorum:

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

Ok. Let's unpack this thing because it is instructive to understanding everything that is wrong with our country. If you want to really get into some deep thoughts about individualism in the United States, I suggest you check out the documentary, The Century of Self, which is all about psychologists (oppositions of science so falsely called) who are employed to control the masses.

Anyway, personal autonomy is a big deal. Rick Santorum is trying to couch the issue in the veneer of "society", just like the progressives of yore. He's trying to tap into the disgust that most decent people experience when observing our "society" today. But government most surely is not the answer as it was government that started the rotting process of our civilization to begin with. Had the progressive era not have happened, we'd be living in a completely different country today. Let's go through the factors that I believe have led us to Sodom and Gommorah and point out how the government and collectivism, NOT the individual was responsible for each point:

• Marriage - It was the progressives that pushed the marriage licenses, especially in the early 20th century for eugenic reasons. Prior to that, it was a church issue. Gays could not get married before marriage licensures because no church would marry them. Up until the mid-19th century, cohabitation was seen as proof of marriage. Marriages were recording in the family Bible, and there was no tax benefit to being married, so the focus of marriage was the family, not tax breaks and insurance claims. Why do gays want to get married? It does provide them with the tax and insurance benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy.
• Reproduction- Regular readers of this blog and those like it ought to know by now that it was the big industrialists like John D. Rockefeller who funded Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. They also should know that the supporters of Planned Parenthood have been some of the wealthy and powerful people of our country. Not "leftists" or "radicals", but people like Prescott Bush and Bill Gates Sr. Why are they obsessed with reproduction? Because they view human beings not as individuals, but as a commodity, a human resource. Overproduction is a dreaded possibility and the population bomb scare came about right as things were really getting automated in this country, meaning they didn't need as many of us anymore. Again, don't project your morality on these people, they don't share it. They wouldn't blink at genocide, and they didn't with the Holocaust, but did change their label from eugenics to population control.  And just like the Pope said, mass contraception will lead to a debasement of the human being. It's really just common sense. It's something the Muslims understand, and their numbers are increasing by employing the simple "womb weapon" of out-populating your opponent. But it was the power of the state that pushed this unnatural view of reproduction on us all through their tax-exempt foundations. Foundations that pass under the scrutiny of the people because of the bought-off media, are designed to socially engineer a country without voter participation. I view them as an extension of the government, for they bought the laws the shielded them from the free market and from public scrutiny. One could also add that the homosexual agenda was backed by these foundations also. God made them male and female, but these social darwinists who oppose God wants to make us androgynous, and they do studies with government money on these sex studies. Nice, huh?
• Education - We've talked at length on here about how and when it went so horribly bad. The biggest turning point was in 1962 when prayer was removed from the classroom.  The prayer in question was so generic, it could have come out of a fortune cookie. At this point, the United States was already two generations into bankster-funded mind control education. Let those who read Gatto and Iserbyt understand. In fact, the atheiests, probably funded by the same godless creeps who funded eugenics, tried to get prayer removed from public school repeatedly since the Republic began. It was only when maximum collectivist density on Supreme Court had formed, did they finally get it though. Many of those appointees were selected by our good buddy FDR, the Wall Streeter par excellence. The tax exempt foundations also played a huge role and continue to do so in setting the education agenda. The books are written by those who were education on NGO scholarships and stipends to have a certain collectivist point of view. The teachers are given a teachers manual with a script on what to say. Conformity is key. Freedom of action is nonexistent. Morality is not discussed. The Bible, the book which Western Civilization is based upon shall not be mentioned unless it is to mock it. State control of education is a goal of every totalitarian society. Rick Santorum voted for more of it.
• Unsound money--Causing inflation and making us either do with less or making parents work harder to make ends meet. I'm not trying to be sappy, but they've got it rigged where a home-dedicated parent trying to teach their kids how to be decent, civilized people have it tough. But when the going gets tough, we get tougher. A debt-based economy is not sound and it does not please God. In fact, throughout the Proverbs, you can tell that weighted scales (rigged money games) really, really displease Him. Arguments over money is a the number one reason for divorce.
• Regulation- Yes, it destroys our society because it grinds down small businesses who cannot afford the exemptions that the large corporations enjoy. All by design. They want all of it in a few hands. They want to make the family business and local entrepreneurship a thing of the past. How do I know this? They freaking write books telling us so!!!
• Foreign Wars - Oh my, will I hit the hornet's nest here!! People who don't have money don't get to take vacations. People like me. Similarly, countries that don't have money, don't get to do a lot of traveling either. THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT!!! All we have is monopoly money that isn't worth toilet paper should the right wind hit our financial house of cards. But having bases everywhere along with extended deployments is destroying families, if you care about that kind of thing. Military suicide is off the chart, not to mention all the other impacts these things have according to Gen. Smedley Butler himself. He says the whole thing is racket, and when you get brave enough to turn off your TV and talk radios and do a little googling, you find that he is more right than you ever wanted to know. When you start tracing how money and technology was transferred from the US to the Soviet Union all while the United States Government, not to be confused with America, was supposedly fighting the Viet Cong, who was in turn receiving aid from the United States. It's just so crazy only the devil himself could be behind it. Anyway, I know people in the military whose personal lives have been adversely affected by this Praetorian Guard that the US military has morphed into. Rome anyone?? Furthermore, instead of protecting our physical borders, the globalists have encouraged hordes of Mexicans to flood our country for the express purpose of diluting our American values. 

As a Christian, I believe that only the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can change a person's life. I believe that God through His Son Jesus Christ saves people radically and permanently and INDIVIDUALLY. This is the opposite of Satan, who wants to categorize us all, but praise God, He knows the number of hairs on our heads and made us each special and individual. That's what I call radical individualism. So yes, our society or culture has fallen, but ask yourself the cause? It was government intervention that did all this along with the bankster foundations. The remedy is the freedom to choose Christ, not some fake fascimile or Christian cult. In a truly free society, without the burdens of government (school, onerous taxes, regulation, prolonged deployments) Christianity would thrive and grow. I believe that when Christ has His Kingdom on Earth it is going to be spectacularly free (the Bible backs me up here!) and I can hardly wait!

If Paul is Unelectable, then who the HELL Is?

You may not agree with all this, but if we don't have it out now, the liberals most surely will in a contest with Obama (or whoever they might put in his place--don't discount that possibility.) This is a great piece by Evan Mazur that just goes down the line with our GOP candidates. Here are the choice bits:

"Ron Paul is unelectable". You hear it all the time from the mainstream media and "conservative" commentators. Ron Paul says the war on drugs is unconstitutional and a failure just like the prohibition of alcohol? Unelectable! Ron Paul says that the Federal Reserve, the Communist Manifesto's central bank of the 5th plank, is a failure and should be abolished? Unelectable!

...

But somehow the media, the pundits, and the blowhard commentators are very reluctant to call any other Republican 'unelectable', even if the truth is staring them right in the face. If they were to expose the other candidates' hypocrisy by comparing them to the Republican Party platform that supposedly espouses Constitutionally limited government, low taxes, and low spending, it might go a little something like this:

...

Mitt Romney said, 'We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them; I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.' Mitt Romney described his political views as 'progressive'. When asked if his MA health care mandate, which made up nearly 1/3 of of the state's $1.3 billion deficit in 2009, would be a 'good model for the nation', Mitt Romney replied "well I think so", and White House records show that Romney's health care advisers went on to help craft Obamacare. ...Mitt Romney is unelectable.

...

Newt Gingrich said the book that best defined him was Alvin Toffler's The Third Wave, which described our constitutional system as one that “served us so well for so long, and that now must, in its turn, die and be replaced.” Newt Gingrich repeatedly praised liberal champion Franklin Roosevelt as "the greatest democratic president of the 20th century and in my judgment the greatest president of the 20th century." Newt Gingrich said he would "reluctantly and sadly" support the $700 billion Wall Street bailout bill of 2008. ...Perhaps Newt Gingrich should be considered unelectable.

...

Rick Santorum voted to increase the size, scope, and cost of the Department of Education by supporting the No Child Left Behind Act. Rick Santorum voted to support the Bush Medicare D drug expansion program, and I'll remind you that former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker referred to it as "the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s." During the 2008 GOP presidential nominee process, Rick Santorum stated 'If you're a conservative there really is only one place to go.. Mitt Romney'. ...Rick Santorum is unelectable.

Read the rest..

Consider the wide support that Ron Paul is receiving from liberals and independents. I've heard some try to say this means he's a liberal too! What a joke. The man has principles that he's written tomes about. He doesn't stick his finger out and check the wind, he doesn't try to be a team player and help unconstitutional bills get passed. He's the only candidate talking about the brownshirt TSA army that has leaped from the airports, to the subways, bus stations, trains, and now at interstate weigh stations. He's the only candidate talking about your right to choose your own food and medicine. He's the only candidate that has homeschooling on his website as an issue and understands what it is (looking at you Santorum (100k, really?).  He is the only candidate on either side talking about how wasteful the drug war is. It's easier for a middle schooler to get pot than beer for a reason, it's called the black market. The facts are astounding on how failed the drug war is, but the defenders of the system will never call it out, because vast sums of money are made there and the government is tied into it according to several ex-CIA operatives. Anyway, Ron Paul has such a broad appeal that there is no way Obama could hold up to him in the general. That's why they're planning this Americans Elect Party as a back-up to split the vote for those who have been conned into voting for anyone besides Ron Paul and Obama. In fact, a guy tried to get me to sign a petition for Americans Elect in the Wal-Mart parking lot yesterday. I asked him who the petition was for and when he told me, I said no way! They're CFR! And then I ran off because I had things to do, yes I probably should have explained to him how banksters control our government's policy through a myriad of planning groups and think tanks, but I had to hurry through some errands.

Some of you will say his foreign policy makes him unelectable. But the man sat on the Foreign Relations Committee and heard the same intelligence everyone else did. No one asserts that he is stupid. Could it possibly be that Ron Paul is giving it to us straight? Could it be that those who are tied in with the Bailout Banks who stand to make enormous sums off of military action, might actually be pushing war for a reason other than your defense? If Newt, Ricky S, or Mitt cared one bit about your security, they would have dug to the bottom of this financial situation and discovered the Fed the root cause and be clamoring for sound money too. The fastest way to control a large population like the US is not through bombing us or terrorism, it's through making our money worthless and disrupting the means by which we can eat. If Newt, Ricky S., or Mitt cared about our national security, they'd start drilling the crap out of ANWR, but that's not going to happen because their masters at the Fed, and by extension the BIS, don't want that. Are we getting the picture here?? One of these people is not like the other.

So anyway, congratulations, conservative wing of the Bankster Party, through the years of corruption, you've managed to allow the true slime to rise to the top of your barrel. Don't be so surprised when the majority of us don't find the slime to be electable.

Update: Thanks to Herman Cain Forums! for this little gem wherein Rick Santorum says he will work to discredit this new movement in the conservative party.

Santorum Surge Explained

This is important information no matter who you support. In this video, which really needs to go viral, GOP Insider Dee Dee Benkie tells us all how it really is.

Iowa GOP officials say "cut the crap" and take out the GOP upstarts. Remember the machine in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington? I think of that big boss telling that weenie butterball governor how to vote and see that going on here. Ms. Benkie goes on to mock the average age of the typical caucus goer as 80, and then the host of this show mocks the average age as "dead". She then marginalizes Ron Paul's supporters as all being college kids "being down with the man". Ironically, she works for the "man" and the "man" don't like Ron Paul. She then says that the Iowa GOP were really, really worried about Ron Paul actually winning first and were coming up with pressuring plans to make sure that didn't happen. Of course how could Ron Paul win first if all his support was just a bunch of college kids? Don't point out their contradictions, republicanmother, just accept what the talking head says as fact.

I won't get into the secret location where the ballots were counted, but anything that happens at the last minute and is a deviation from tradition is suspicious to me.

So, cutting one trillion dollars out of the budget will make you some enemies. The Powers That Be have their people everywhere to ensure that the sheep are all within their defined corrals and nothing disrupts their fleecing process. Problem is, they ran out of candidates, and Santorum shall too fall. Especially when all this weirdness about him gets out. He's a hypocrite on just about every single issue you can imagine. Of course, it doesn't really matter for me, he's not on the ballot in my state anyway.

The way you win elections in this country is getting the independent vote. TPTB have always spun this as moderates, needing a moderate (read ever more liberal) approach. Independents broke for Ron Paul by a substantial margin. Ron Paul is not a moderate. You think in a contest between Mitt and Obama anyone is going to see a difference? You think independents would even give Santorum the time of day much less vote for him? This is far, far from over - there is a new top tier, and it's pretty much Mitt and Ron. There is no more fitting diametrically opposed line-up. Let's hope that will be an educational tool to wake more people up to the corporate control of our government.

Rick Santorum is Everything Wrong with the Republican Party

Once again Jack Hunter brings it on with that annoying historical record that spanks the behinds of collectivisits everywhere. You'll have to drill the memory holes deeper.

Santorum Surge Bogus

We all know that the MSM plays games with hype, but the google trends tool is an interesting way to track public interest on a topic. Now I've googled Santorum in the last few days, but it doesn't mean I'm a fan, so a high metric doesn't necessarily equal support you understand. But there is one GOP Candidate that is at least a couple of orders of magnitude above the others.Observe:

You will notice that this is for the last 30 days. The orange is Ron Paul, Mitt Romney is the blue and Santorum is the red. You will notice that the only place Mitt is out-searching Ron is Salt Lake City, which is understandable. You can see a slight bump for this past holiday weekend where the MSM (I now include Rush, Hannity and club in that) was hyping the "Santorum Surge".  Now let's go to where it really counts, Iowa:

It seems like if you plan to go to a caucus, which is a lot more of an ordeal than going to a primary like I do and pushing a button, you'd be reading up on your candidate a little more. Mitt Romney and Rick didn't have enough search volume for ranking on the big graph. Looks like a few people in Des Moines are checking Rick out. hmmm, yeah..

Notice the news reference volume graph. This is the one that tracks how many mentions the search term got in Google News stories. You can see at the beginning of the month, how the MSM was pushing Mitt, now that he's not got in in their dirty little bankster bag, they've been slinging the mud on RP here lately.

Then you've got this cryptic tweet from PPP, for those who think "they" don't mess with the polls

Selzer had Santorum at 9% Tu-W. We had him at `10% M-Tu. Surge quite possibly generated by CNN poll that was quite possibly wrong.

ruh roh.

Then you've got this bit of (bad) press on a local TV station:

ouch. Don't mess with people's apoltical football time, dude. That's so not cool. As one DPer astutely commented

Maybe it was how I was raised, but I usually look to the small things a man does to get a good measure of him.When he sees trash floating down the street does he stop to pick it up and dispose of it?Does he hold the door open for a lady?Does he say please and thank you?What kind of handshake does he have?Those types of things are what I look at. The first thought that came to my mind when I saw him "bypass" the people waiting was "who the "f" do you think you are Rick"?I know I'm not the only one out there with my personality type (although it often seems like I am the only one) and I guarantee this video will resonate with folks like me.We don't need to be pandered to or fawned after to gain our vote. Live like a decent human through your actions and we will be your most loyal supporter. Treat people as underlings and think your celebrity status means something? We will be your most fervent enemy.Respect is a two way road, and none of these men put their pants on differently than any of us. Rick Santorum should be ashamed of his actions. They speak louder than words right?So when Rick had a chance to show some decency and compassion for average Americans what did he do?There was a great article about Ron eating his breakfast all by his lonesome at an Embassy Suites a few days back. Like I said, how you act when the cameras are off and how you act in the little things in life tells more about what kind of person you are than anything else.

The thing about this MSM strategy of "surging" one of their own, Santorum is that it is rather ineffective for a caucus state. It might have more impact on a "press the button" primary, but at the caucus state, there's a lot more organization to pull it off. These prideful Elites were too busy taking everything for granted, that they didn't work on that these past four years, even forgetting to put themselves on the VA ballot.
gee whiz...

Update: VA AG backs off.

The Saintly Santorum?

This is an excerpt from an April 2003 interview of Senator Rick Santorum found in USA Today

AP: Speaking of liberalism, there was a story in The Washington Post about six months ago, they'd pulled something off the Web, some article that you wrote blaming, according to The Washington Post, blaming in part the Catholic Church scandal on liberalism. Can you explain that?

SANTORUM: You have the problem within the church. Again, it goes back to this moral relativism, which is very accepting of a variety of different lifestyles. And if you make the case that if you can do whatever you want to do, as long as it's in the privacy of your own home, this "right to privacy," then why be surprised that people are doing things that are deviant within their own home? If you say, there is no deviant as long as it's private, as long as it's consensual, then don't be surprised what you get. You're going to get a lot of things that you're sending signals that as long as you do it privately and consensually, we don't really care what you do. And that leads to a culture that is not one that is nurturing and necessarily healthy. I would make the argument in areas where you have that as an accepted lifestyle, don't be surprised that you get more of it.

AP: The right to privacy lifestyle?

SANTORUM: The right to privacy lifestyle.

AP: What's the alternative?

SANTORUM: In this case, what we're talking about, basically, is priests who were having sexual relations with post-pubescent men. We're not talking about priests with 3-year-olds, or 5-year-olds. We're talking about a basic homosexual relationship. Which, again, according to the world view sense is a a perfectly fine relationship as long as it's consensual between people. If you view the world that way, and you say that's fine, you would assume that you would see more of it.

Dear Rick,

Um, they were all under the age of consent, Rick. Are going to tell us that boys who can shave and are in the care of Roman Catholic priests are fair game for a "basic homosexual relationship"??? According to America Magazine, half of the victims were middle school aged boys. It's like was using this question to inform us all about the dangers of moral relativism.

Yes, the liberalization and moral relatavism are problems in the Catholic church and every other church. But instead of holding it up as a monster to destroy from without, you first have to make sure that you are right within. This is the difference between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul. One says that some outside force is going to have to make the individual do "right" . The other says that each individual has to be convinced in their own mind, like Paul said. 

So Rick, why haven't you done the deep research on moral relativism and where it came from if it bothers you so much? The whole bunch of perversion we see today came directly from the laboratories of Alfred Kinsey in Indiana and was paid for my a handsome endowment from the Rockefeller Foundation. Why didn't you ever seek into why our public school system teaches secular humanism as its official albeit unspoken religion? I did and I found again tax-exempt foundations lobbying and paying for charter programs and foisting mandates upon local school systems by bribing state governments. Why have you not bothered to trace how the liberals and moral relativists infected your own church? Why wasn't it that president of Notre Dame that really let the gates of the Catholic Church here in America down by allowing liberalism in there. And guess what? He was chairman the board at the ol' Rockefeller Foundation too. Wonder if he ever met Dr. Kinsey? Look, Rick! I'm finding dots, why don't you connect some of them if you really care about moral relativism and liberalism in our churches?

But we both know that you can't do that. We know how the Rockefeller Foundation,    the Ford Foundation (brought us feminism and La Raza for starters), and the slew of other similar foundations are very closely interlocked to the nice people who enrich your campaign coffers and keep your bread buttered. That would just not do, so let's just talk about ambiguous terms like moral relativism and liberalism so that we have no chance whatsoever of identifying the roots of our social decay and dealing with them. That works out Jim Dandy for our oligarchical overlords who would like nothing more than to have all vestiges of the family and religion wiped out of memory and replaced with their ghoulish Brave New World.

You can't play both sides Rick. Choose this day whom you will serve.

TRM

Thomas Aquinas says: Rick, Just Follow the Just War Theory!!!

Rick Santorum: Let's Dig a Little Deeper

I've given many of the other candidates the same treatment, and came across an interesting listing by a fellow DPer. I will attempt to verify the information, which tests my internet research prowess. I love a challenge!