Tag Archives: Rick Santorum

2016 Republicans

Posted by Tim on

Is it too soon to start talking about Republican presidential hopefuls for 2016? I mean, we all pretty much know that Bill is pushing Hillary to run for President, and that’s she’s almost guaranteed to win, so why not put together a list of some potential candidate for the Republicans. The good news is that in the last few years we’ve at least gotten rid of a few moderates  - John McCain and Mitt Romney won’t be running again. Mike Huckabee most likely won’t be running either. There were a number of good potential candidates that people were pushing for in 2011/2012 that were just “too young in politics” to go for the big seat. But in another 4 years that could change.

Chris Christie

Chris Christie

Potential #1 – New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. I’m not personally a huge fan of his. In my opinion he is still too moderate to run for the Republican presidential nomination. His only real claim to fame is that he went toe-to-toe with the teacher’s union in New Jersey and won. That’s great – it shows he has some kind of a backbone. On the other hand, he’s also in favor of cap and trade, and refused to sign onto the lawsuit against Obamacare. After hugging Obama right before the election in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, Christie really rubbed a lot of Republicans the wrong way. However, his speaking skills, and New Jersey tough-guy personality could make him a real contender.

Potential #2 – Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan. Once again, I’m not a huge fan of his. Although he certainly talks a good game, in recent weeks he’s been playing the role of a typical establishment Republican; working to kick conservatives off committees if they don’t support his bills. Although he hasn’t had the strongest record for cutting spending, he is one of only a handful of Republicans to offer a solution to the Medicare crisis that is still unsolved. When Romney chose Ryan as his VP pick in 2012, it basically secured Ryan’s seat on a national level, if he should so chose. Star power.

Potential #3 – Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. Although Santorum didn’t win the nomination, he did amazingly well considering that he had virtually no money, no campaign, and no name. He won more states than any other candidate (other than Romney, of course). In my heart I believe that if Romney hadn’t outspent Santorum 50-1 in numerous states, Santorum could very well be President. With Romney out of the way, and Santorum having national recognition, he could take one more run at the Republican nomination. He now has the name, the money, the campaign, and in the grand scheme of things he’s still a pretty young guy. Unfortunately, he still has a record as a big-spender neo-conservative. His strong social conservatism may be able to tie him over.

Potential #4 – Florida Senator Marco Rubio. Sean Hannity was extremely persistant in trying to get Rubio to run in 2011/2012, and then very hopeful that Romney would pick Rubio as his VP. Neither happened, but this time around he could run. He has the name (being a favorite of Hannity, as well as radio giants Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin), and a solid record. He’s a Tea Party candidate, is a minority, and has a great story to tell about his family coming to America from Cuba. He’s also young, good looking, a good speaker, all the essentials. He’s definitely someone I could throw my support behind.

Rand Paul

Rand Paul

Potential #5 – Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. Being the son of Ron Paul, Rand could easily pick up 5% of the vote automatically from the very loyal Ron Paul crowd. He has the Tea Party, limited government, libertarian, true conservative team on his side. He’s also young, is unique in that he has “cool” stances on legalizing drugs, and has stood up strong against the Republican establishment. He’s also the only name making noise about NDAA – the power of government to detain its own citizens indefinitely. His only negative may be that he sort of “sold out” when he endorsed Mitt Romney over his own father in 2012. This left a sour taste with some Ron Paul supporters. That aside, Rand is someone I’d really love to see on the big stage.

Potential #6 – Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels. Daniels was among those who many thought might get into the 2012 race but never did. He is still popular with conservatives. He’s enacted a state-wide school voucher program, put in place fines for employers who hire illegal immigrants, and ended state funding for Planned Parenthood. Personally, I think he looks like a typical Republican from Washington, and these days looks matter. It would be nice for him to run and influence that race in one way or another.

Potential #7 – South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Republicans do seem to have better looking women than Democrats, right? Nikki Haley gave a great speech at the RNC Convention and was received very well by the party. She’s got a number of thing going for her that the GOP needs – she might be able to get more female voters, and she might be able to get more minority voters. In South Carolina she won with the most minority votes in SC history. She’s also a good speaker, is a Tea Party candidate, and has a good record as governor.

Potential #8 – Former Florida Congressman Allen West. Although West only lasted a single term in Florida, the real reason he lost was because he was massively outspent and was depicted as someone who wanted to end Social Security and Medicare; two things that kill a candidate in Florida. Listening to West talk though, you’d never know it. Recent interviews with West still show him as calm, confident, and intelligent. When this guy talks, he doesn’t miss a beat! Being a veteran could certainly help him win people over who want a smaller government, but still a strong defense. They can be confident that he won’t hollow out America’s armed forces.

Potential #9 – Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. Say it aint so! I know, he wouldn’t be my pick either. And having to chose between another Clinton and another Bush could yield the lowest voter turnouts in history. However, there are people pushing for Jeb, (W’s younger brother) to make a run in 2016. He’s supposedly a better speaker than his brother (but what does that mean?) and more conservative than his brother (again, what does that mean?). For me, I don’t want another Bush – too moderate, too much bad history with the family, and just…. ugh. No! With the likes of Karl Rove behind him, though, the neo-cons could make a comeback.

Scott Walker

Scott Walker

Potential #10 – Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Walker made international news when he stripped bargaining privileges from public unions. He stood his ground and Wisconsin’s unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in years. He turned a $3 billion deficit into a $300 million surplus. He’s one of the only politicians to ever actually do what he said. Concealed carry, voter ID, ended state funding for Planned Parenthood, the list goes on. He’s not an amazing speaker, but his popularity with both the Tea Party and the GOP could make him a prime contender.

Right now, I feel like the Democrats have already picked their candidate, and that the Republicans have a lot of potential. There are still more names out there that could make a run – Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Condoleezza Rice, and others. Only time will tell, but one sure thing is that the stage will be filled with big names.

Walker Wins Wisconsin… Again!

Posted by Tim on

History was written tonight here in my home state of Wisconsin. Scott Walker survived his recall election despite millions of union dollars being funneled into the badger state. His message was clear – “Here’s what we did, and these are the results. Let’s keep moving forward!” His opponent’s argument? Something along the lines of, “Scott Walker is mean.” Well – there’s the difference. Results and facts versus emotions. The statement was made tonight, however – while some laws may make some people mad, the majority of Wisconsinites stand behind Governor Walker.

The election has national implications as well. Leading up to election day, Scott Walker was receiving endorsements from major political players on the right – Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum, and presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Meanwhile, his opponent, Tom Barrett, only received a Tweet from Barack Obama… a day before the election. Wow. Thats a slap in the face. Is it because Obama didn’t care, or just because he didn’t want to be associated with Barrett’s loss?

No matter the reasoning, Obama’s lack of leadership in the Wisconsin recall elections shows his true colors. He’s sent the message to Democrat senators and congressmen across America – you’re on your own. Obama is campaigning for himself and no one else. Mitt Romney on the other hand is working in numerous states, trying to help however he can. He knows that 2012 isn’t all about him. He needs to win, but also have a strong House and Senate to back him up. Obama – he’s just trying to save himself.

But back to Wisconsin – does this win for Walker, reflecting a push for fiscal sanity and conservative values, represent a national movement? While the Tea Party hasn’t been making a lot of noise recently, Scott Walker was in fact called the “Rockstar of the Tea Party” by Tom Barrett. Low and behold, Walker won the election easily. Now, not every state has a Scott Walker, but every state does have a Tea Party. Tea Party numbers are strong while Occupy Wallstreet numbers are dwindling. The mood of America is changing.

Wisconsin delegates were given to Barack Obama in 2008 – he won the state by 15%! But this Walker victory tells a different story. 2010 told a different story as well. Will 2012 tell a different story? Wisconsin is no longer a blue state – we’re a swing state, which means that we could just as easily end up going to Mitt Romney as Barack Obama. That’s the next chapter in the “Save America” saga. The stage is set, and the next battle is only a few months away in November.

Moving Forward From Wisconsin

Posted by Tim on

Well, today was the day. Wisconsin’s primary for the 2012 Republican nomination. I voted for who I feel is the best candidate not only to defeat Barack Obama in November, but also to turn our country around and get it back on track. Rick Santorum, hope this isn’t the last time I get to vote for you.

While Romney leads in a number of polls right now, its always possible that Santorum could pull out another win. He’s done it before. At the least, I expect it to be a close race. While talking with some other Santorum supporters I heard the same doom and gloom thoughts that the media are repeating constantly. If Santorum doesn’t win Wisconsin, he’s done. Yeah, well that’s what they said about a lot of other states. In fact, they were ready to call the race over after Romney won Iowa. Only later did we learn that he actually didn’t – Santorum did.

Romney has been pushed on the American people for as long as the race has been going on. Both by moderate Republicans, and the liberal media. It’s painfully clear – Romney is the establishment’s choice. And who knows – he may very well end up being the nominee. But its not over til its over. Here’s what could happen.

Essentially, Romney needs 1144 delegates to be the nominee. If Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul all win enough delegates to block Romney from his 1144, the race will go to the Republican convention. There will be a roll call; each state will give their delegates to candidates based on each state’s primary or caucus. If Romney still doesn’t have 1144, the delegates are up for grabs. Each state can give their delegates, not based on their elections, but on who the Republican leaders want as the nominee. If this were the case, the tide could certainly shift to Santorum.

Then again, it might not. Romney could win at the convention too. And if that’s the case, he’ll have my support. 4 more years of Obama, especially when he has no need to curb his executive orders per reelection, would be a disaster. The economy would crumble as business owners and stockholders fear the worst. The vast majority of people who own businesses are very afraid of a second term. I’m afraid for them.

One thing to look forward to during the campaign, should Romney earn the nomination, is the left revealing itself for the intolerant people they are. For so long we’ve heard that Republicans are the bigots, the racists, the homophobes. Republicans are “intolerant”. Yet, when a Tea Party meeting is going on – what do we see? Happy faces, cheerful people. No one is angry. And I assure you, because I’ve been there – no one is shouting racist slogans.

On the other hand, we’re taught that Democrats are the honest, tolerate, peaceful folks. They work for the poor, the downtrodden, the folks that just can’t seem to get ahead. They’re for “women’s rights”, and “gay rights”, and “animal rights”. But disagree with them and they get nasty fast. Liberals are wildly intolerant, angry, and bitter. Look at Occupy Wallstreet. Then compare it with the Tea Party. Tell me who is more tolerant.

But I know all of this. I’m only waiting for the left to expose themselves. Although they tout religious tolerance, if Romney gets the nomination, his religion will be called into question. Suddenly him being a Mormon will be the worst thing ever. He’ll be attacked and ridiculed, forced to answer every question about his faith. The religion of a candidate isn’t important unless it can be spun to hurt a Republican and help a Democrat. Wait for it – it’ll happen. Trust me.

Santorum and Porn?

Posted by Tim on

NOTE: I’ve held onto this post and resisted publishing it. My home state of Wisconsin is voting soon, and I didn’t want to give any extra negative attention to Rick Santorum. BUT, I’ve decided that keeping posts private for the sole purpose of helping a candidate is something that would compromise my personal integrity. While this post may hurt Santorum, in the end, he hurt himself. Keep in mind, that while I’m ranting about Rick, I’m still voting for him on April 3rd, and I urge everyone else to do the same. 

I’ve been very open about this – I’m voting for Rick Santorum in the Wisconsin primary, and if he’s the nominee I’ll gladly vote for him against Barry Obama. I like where he stands on a lot of issues. He’s a strong supporter of Israel, he’s proposed a great tax plan to bring back manufacturing jobs to America, and he’s a hero among the Pro-Life crowd. All that being said, there are still a few things that make me shake my head about him. The most recent – “ban porn”.

So much for free markets, ey? Rick’s plan to crack down of “hardcore” pornography isn’t real far fetched. He’s a family-man. He’s a practicing Catholic, and is big on family values. I can understand Rick not liking porn and the porn industry. He has strong values, and I can see why he’s against porn. He’s also brought up the fact that porn can cause problems in relationships, and can negatively affect the brain. While I’m not sure these are really “facts”, I’ll give Rick and his researchers the benefit of the doubt.

All that being said – okay. Porn is bad. BUT… that’s his opinion. There are a lot of things that are “bad”. That doesn’t mean we ban them. Cigarettes are bad. They cause so many deaths that we can measure the deaths by the minute. Why aren’t we banning cigarettes? Come on, Rick. This isn’t a path you want to go down. Are you in favor of the free market, or not?

As I discussed HERE, banning a product, whether its drugs or porn, doesn’t eliminate it. It pushes it to a black market, where the dangers are far worse. Instead of a (relatively) clean porn enviroment, we’d have a completely unregulated “black market” of porn. Does this mean little kids getting involved? Doesn’t this mean people who are filmed without their permission? Keep it legal so we can monitor it and regulate it.

This is by no means a pro-porn post. I’m indifferent on the subject. What someone does in their free time is none of my business. Frankly, I don’t want to know. Some people may say that porn is ruining relationships, and that may be true. There might be cases where it actually helps relationships though. In the end, its each individual’s responsibility to make their own choices.

The thing that frightens me about Rick’s stance on this is that its very similar to a utopian mindset. “If only we could pass enough laws and control people’s behavior, we could create a utopia!” Banning things for “people’s own good” is what the left does. Banning porn is no different than banning guns, banning sugary foods, or banning light bulbs. Let the market work, let people make their own decisions. The government has no place censoring the internet, or magazines people get. Come on, Rick.

Santorum vs The Romney Attack Machine

Posted by Tim on

I just heard the news, and I’m absolutely disgusted. As many of you already know, I’m an avid Rick Santorum supporter. He’s not perfect, but in the grand scheme of things he’s the most conservative of the four choices for president we have. I don’t really mind the other candidates. Newt Gingrich is a great debater, has a lot of great ideas, and has turned his life around after some personal troubles years ago. Ron Paul, although I don’t agree with his foreign policy, is a very likable guy. He knows his constitution, he understands the free market, and he’s a true libertarian.

But then there’s Mitt Romney. I don’t have anything personal against him, but I strongly believe that he’d be the wrong choice for our presidential nominee. He’s continual defense of RomneyCare, the blue print for ObamaCare, is frightening. The idea that a government, whether its state or federal, can mandate it’s citizens to buy a product, entering into a private contract with another party, is absurd and un-American. Mitt Romney may have a great record as a private businessman, but RomneyCare is not defendable.

With the entire issue of ObamaCare and the role of government in people’s private lives off the table, what exactly is Romney to stand on against Obama in November? Although Romney promises to either repeal ObamaCare or grant waivers (which aren’t the same thing, by the way) I’m personally worried that he won’t actually pull the trigger. He has stubbornly stood by RomneyCare and defended it to this day. Someone who believes government run healthcare is a good thing isn’t the person we need in office.

But Mitt’s track record isn’t really what bothers me. Sure, I have huge disagreements with his policies, but that’s not enough to get under my skin. I disagree with lots of people, and most politicians, but I don’t let our differences get to me. My biggest problem with Mitt Romney has to do with his character. The kind of candidate who runs ads that constantly attack his opponents is a sleazy candidate. 2012 isn’t the first time around for Romney either. Back in 2008, Romney ran a slew of disgusting attack ads on his then rival Mike Huckabee. Mitt is using his same tricks this time around. (View them HERE and HERE.)

Back when the elections were just getting started, Romney was the only person with a huge amount of money behind him. Despite all of that, he managed to lose the first Republican caucus in Iowa to Rick Santorum, a man who ran his campaign out of his family’s minivan. Romney managed to win New Hampshire, a democratic state neighboring his home state of Massachusetts. Next up – South Carolina, where Newt Gingrich took the primary easily. That was when Romney knew he needed to attack. The next primary was Florida, where Mitt won – but he outspent Newt Gingrich 5 to 1!

How does Romney spend his money? It’s not spent on promoting his own message for America. Its not spent telling people about his mediocre record as a moderate Republican on the east coast. No, its spent running vicious attack ads against his opponents – attacking their character. This is how Mitt Romney wins elections – he outspends his opponents. In Michigan he outspent Santorum 6-1, in Ohio he outspent Santorum 10-1, and now in Wisconsin (primary coming up on April 3rd) he’s outspending Santorum 50-1! This is disgusting. This is as close as you can come to literally buying an election without breaking the law.

Despite his heavy bashing of his conservative rivals, Santorum and Gingrich, Romney has repeatedly claimed that he will not attack Obama. That’s right. He’s stated that he will not make “accusatory” or “incendiary” remarks “attacking” Obama. The man who attacks his Republican opponents so ruthlessly refuses to treat Obama the same way. The fact of the matter is that Obama has a radically different view of America than most Americans. He’s pushing to destroy the foundation of our nation and “fundamentally transform” America. But in Mitt’s eyes, Obama is “just a little over his head”.

Romney’s biggest advantage is also a window into how weak he and his campaign truly are. The fact of the matter is that Romney has failed to make a connection with the majority of Republican voters. Not only do people not like him, but they don’t trust him. They don’t feel that he has their best interest at heart. Among strong conservative voters Romney is seen as a “Massachusetts Moderate”, some rich guy from the east coast who doesn’t understand the blue collar backbone of America. From his speeches in the south using words like “gritts” and “ya’ll”, and his eery smile during debates, Romney comes off as fake.

The only thing Romney has going for him is money. That’s it. Without it he’d be running a crap campaign and would probably be out of the contest by now. His ideas aren’t popular. His personality isn’t attractive. But hey – he’s got a lot of money, so he can barrage his opponents with negative TV and radio advertising. But if that is Romney’s only advantage, it won’t be enough to beat Obama. Romney can beat his Republican rivals in the money game, but he can’t beat Obama in the money game.

Instead, to beat Obama, we need someone who is genuine, conservative, and can attract people without bashing his opponents. Rick Santorum, despite some flubs in speeches and interviews, is a strong conservative who has managed to attract enough voters to become the 2nd place candidate to Mitt Romney. Although Gingrich and Paul are still officially in, the race is essentially down to two candidates – Romney and Santorum.

Santorum has been running his campaign on a shoestring. He’s not a rich guy. He isn’t getting endorsements from Donald Trump. He doesn’t have the money to continually run attack ads on other candidates. No, he’s run his campaign the old way. He goes out and talks to people, and because he comes off as a real person and not a politician, he’s managed to win over a lot of voters. Someone who can win, despite not having a lot of money is who we need. Rick Santorum has been outspent  in every state he’s won. If Romney’s money can’t knock out Santorum, how can it knock out Obama? And, if Santorum can stand up to Romney, he has the best chance against Obama.

This idea that Mitt Romney is the strongest candidate, or that he’s even a strong frontrunner is flat out wrong. He’s spent more than all his opponents combined, and still hasn’t won the nomination. At this point, the nomination may very well end in August at the Republican national convention. If Santorum can win enough delegates to keep Romney from getting the needed 1144 that he needs to win the nomination, then this race is far from over. My goal until that point is to encourage people to get behind who I believe is the best candidate to not only beat Obama, but also to lead our country over the next 8 years – Rick Santorum.

The Contraception Debate

Posted by Tim on

I received a phone call today from a good friend who I hadn’t talked to in some time. We’d texted back and forth for a few minutes, but he decided to call me. He wanted my opinion. He’d been getting into an argument over the whole contraceptive issue that’s been all the craze. Now, it was a Facebook argument, so there’s a big no-no right away. It’s nearly impossible to win an argument via Facebook, which is why I rarely get involved. For me, the most important place to voice my opinion is here, on TimPreuss.com, where I can say everything I need to say, without bickering back and forth with idiots.

As we were talking I said something along the lines of, “I could write an essay about everything wrong with that argument.” Well – I’m going to. That argument is the one we’ve been hearing about constantly over the past couple weeks. It’s the issue of contraception, and who should pay for it.

Before I get too deep into the issue, I want to go over what the issue is NOT. No one is saying that women should not be allowed to buy birth control. No one is saying that birth control is wrong, or that every woman who is on birth control is a slut. (Limbaugh reference?) In fact, conservatives like myself fully support the right of women to chose whether or not to use birth control, and what type to use. It’s their body, it’s their money – buy whatever you want.

Here’s the first hold up – taxpayer dollars should not be spent on birth control. Our government spends way too much money. We spend too much on entitlement programs, we spend too much on union labor, and we spend too much on useless, yet expensive, bureaucrats. It is not the government’s job to provide birth control pills for anyone. Furthermore, it’s not the government’s job to provide healthcare, period. People may insist that birth control is used for more than just birth control (cramps, acne, whacked out hormones, etc.), but that doesn’t mean that it’s a problem for the federal government to deal with.

In the end, it’s each individual’s responsibility to provide for themselves. I know, that’s a startling concept, given that literally from cradle to grave, we have our government “looking out” for us. Can’t feed yourself? Food stamps. Can’t buy medical care? Medicaid. Can’t educate yourself? Public schools and public scholarships. Can’t retire? Social security. Well, the gravy train has to come to a halt. When we encourage people to live off the government, we make people dependent. A person cannot be dependent AND free.

The other equally large issue at hand is that government should not be able to tell an employer or an insurance company what they have to provide. Some people complain that their insurance doesn’t cover contraception. Well, it’s time to find an insurance plan that suits your needs. There are thousands of options, and its more than likely that one of them will include covering birth control. But its the insurance company’s right to decide what their plans will cover and won’t cover. No one, including the federal government, should be able to tell a business what products they produce. If an insurance company doesn’t want to pay for birth control, that’s their decision, and if customers don’t like it, don’t buy that brand of insurance.

But the issue doesn’t stop there. Not only is the government telling insurance companies what they have to cover, but they’re telling employers what insurance plans they have to provide for their employees. If an employer only offers a plan that doesn’t include coverage for birth control, the employee can either buy insurance independently of their employer, or they can find a new job. A business should not be forced to provide something it does not want to provide.

And there’s more. Not only do businesses have to provide insurance that covers contraception, but even religious institutions have to provide it. This creates huge problems. The Catholic church is 100% against birth control. I don’t agree with their stance personally, but it’s their religion, and we have religious freedom. (I think.) The government cannot force a religious institution to provide birth control for their employees, if birth control is against their religion. This sets enormous precedent. No longer are you free to practice your religion. First, you must practice Obama, THEN practice your religion if it complies with Obama’s vision for America.

The issue at hand is much more than birth control. It has to do with the size of government, freedom of religion, and the ever growing entitlement mentality in America. Do not dismiss this as a minor issue – it’s important. Very important. The founding principles of our nation are at stack – personal responsibility, small limited government, religious freedom. Don’t push this issue under the rug or underestimate it’s importance.

What Super Tuesday Says About Santorum and Romney

Posted by Tim on

Super Tuesday. The name says it all. Super Tuesday was the biggest day for the Republican primaries, with 10 states holding elections. A lot of delegates were up for grabs, and the cards fell pretty much as planned. There are a few points to analyze, however. The day is gone and over, but things can still change, and we can learn a lot from looking back at Super Tuesday.

I’ll start where it hurts, and go straight for Newt Gingrich. While some people may say that I shouldn’t tell a candidate to drop out, I’m going to. Gingrich and Santorum are holding each other back. At this point, if either of them want to beat Mitt Romney, one of them has to drop out. It was debatable earlier on who was the stronger candidate – Newt or Rick, but time has proven that Rick Santorum has the best odds of beating not only Mitt Romney, but also Barack Obama. Recent polls have shown that Santorum has the highest favorability among likely Republican voters, and other polls actually show Santorum beating Obama 50/45 in a head to head election.

All that being said – Santorum is the best alternative to Mitt Romney, and Gingrich should drop out, endorse Santorum, and attempt to give his delegates to Santorum. It’s the only way I see Santorum beating Romney.

And then we come to Romney. Not surprisingly, Romney did very well on Super Tuesday. At the time of writing this he’s won 5 states. The most interesting state was Ohio, however, where Romney only beat Santorum by a few thousand votes, and only 1 percentage point. Some may say that “a win is a win”, but this kind of win tells more about Romney and Santorum than we see on the surface.

Over the past week, Mitt Romney attacked Rick Santorum with a barrage of vicious attack ads. Romney knew Ohio was a key state to win, and he put a lot of money into it. Santorum did the same thing, but Santorum has much less money than Romney. Romney outspending his opponents isn’t anything new. In Florida, Romney outspent Newt Gingrich 5 to 1. In Michigan Romney outspent Santorum 6 to 1. In Ohio on Super Tuesday, people are predicting Romney outspent Santorum 12 to 1! The kicker? Romney outspent him by that much, and just barely won. Romney’s campaign strategy is nothing more than running ads that attack his opponents’ character, and his strategy isn’t working too well.

My hope in the end is that people will wake up, see the dirty tactics Romney is using, and look elsewhere. A candidate who takes such a sleazy route to beating his opponents… Well, let’s just say that it says a lot about his character.

And Santorum? Despite all the negative attack ads launched my Mitt Romney, Santorum pulled out three victories. Among conservatives (Tennessee), Rick is head and neck above the rest. Santorum IS the conservative alternative. As for Ohio – Santorum had a very strong showing, and he overcame a lot. During his speech on Super Tuesday he stated that he’d been outspent in every state he’s won. That’s a great sign. Even though Romney spends more than his opponents, Santorum can still come out victorious.

Showing how much Rick Santorum can do with so little money and little organization is very appealing. Do we want someone in the White House who is a big spender, or do we want someone who can do a lot with a little? The campaigns say more than we may think. How a candidate runs for office is a good indicator of how he’ll govern. Let’s not throw away our nomination on Romney, someone who’s past shows he’s a big government moderate – weak on cap & trade, TARP bailouts, and Romneycare. We need someone who can win on the issues, not just win because they have a lot of money. That person is Rick Santorum.

Breeding Conservatism

Posted by Tim on

It seems that a lot of posts stem from conversations I have with people, whether they be friends, family, coworkers, or even strangers. In the end, a good conversation inspires thought, and that’s what this blog is based on – thought.

The latest conversation on politics was with a republican, who I agree with on some things and disagree with on others. I agree with him on things like gun control, and public employee unions. While he considers himself a conservative, I might not call him that. More of a pseudo-con if you ask me. While he may agree with me on moral issues, he doesn’t stand up strong for them. For me, abortion is life and death and therefore very important. For him, it’s a minor league issue. You see what I mean, right?

Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum

Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum

During our talk he mentioned his distaste for the candidates running, and his disappointment in the upcoming republicans. Why aren’t we breeding the next generation of Ronald Reagans? Well, let’s pick these two statements apart. These are things I hear from people all the time, and I assure you they’re flat out wrong. People are uninformed. They see what the local TV wants them to see. They get their news from Yahoo! Don’t worry – I’ll set the record straight.

Unfortunately, people will often take someone relatively unknown, like Rick Santorum, and equate “unknown” with “weak”. This can be a fatal mistake. If you look back a few years, virtually no one outside of Illinois knew of Barry Obama. Yet he managed to run a very aggressive campaign against Hilary Clinton in the democratic primaries, and he ran a brilliant campaign against John McCain, his Republican opponent for the presidency. Unknown is not weak.

Furthermore, “weak” is relative. Who are we comparing our candidates to? Ronald Reagan? Again, if we look back – Reagan fumbled with his words. He messed up at debates. He misspoke. Our memories seem to forget that Ronald Reagan was not “the perfect candidate”. In fact, he was anything but. He was the outsider, pushing to break the status quo. Our candidates may mess up at times, but so did Reagan, and so has Obama.

I asked this person, “How many of the debates have you watched?” He told me he hadn’t watched a full debate from start to finish. Personally, I’ve watched about half of them from start to finish, then rewatched them an hour later, then read reviews on them, then listen to the radio to hear what the talk-radio-pundits were saying. If you haven’t watched the debates or done a bit of research, don’t tell me that the candidates are weak or that you don’t like the selection.

The fact of the matter is that we have had a lot of great candidates come and go, and we still have some running today. Michele Bachmann is a leader in the House of Representatives, and has a great record as a conservative. Tim Pawlenty is a popular republican governor of a liberal state, Minnesota. Rick Perry grew jobs in Texas as governor faster than all of the other states combined! These are leaders in our country, all of whom have great records, who just didn’t catch on.

Left behind is our mainstay, Mitt Romney – former governor and private sector tycoon. Rick Santorum – leading welfare reform and tough as nails on social issues. Ron Paul – brilliant on the constitution and small government. Newt Gingrich – rich resume, former speaker of the house, and the best debater on stage. These are not weak candidates. They may have their flaws, but any one of them could beat Obama!

This coming election will not be another 2008. There are a number of things that have drastically changed since then. First of all, Barack Obama ran in 2008 with a clean slate. Now he has a record, and it’s awful. Everyone knows it. Despite what the media may tell you, unemployment sucks, home sales suck, GDP growth sucks, Obamacare sucks, stimulus sucks. I could go on and on. Obama is a weak candidate with a horrible record to run on. He doesn’t have nearly the same enthusiasm behind his campaign as he did in 2008. People realize just who he is, and people are rejecting him.

Don’t count our guys out. They aren’t weak. They can all go 10 rounds, as they’re proving it right now. As I’ve stated before, Rick Santorum is who I stand behind. I’m really pulling for him to get the nomination. Seeing Santorum debate Obama on substance and issues would be a slaughter. But in the end, if Santorum isn’t the nominee, I’ll support whoever the candidate is. We have a strong few left, and any of one them is better than who we have now.

As far as “not breeding new candidates”…. well…. Here, I’ll list a few names for you – John Kasich, Scott Walker, Jan Brewer, Rick Perry, Tim Pawlenty, Chris Christie, Rick Scott, Mitch Daniels, Michele Bachmann, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio. The point is this – the next generation is strong. All of the names here could be running for president in the next 10-20 years. Our party is strong. We’ve gone through some rough times, but we’re starting to get back on track. Conservatism is not dead – it’s alive and well, and it’s ready to fight!

Big Win For Santorum

Posted by Tim on

I love to say “I told you so.” Well, maybe I didn’t tell you, but I did tell my twitter followers. A week ago I said that there was one person who could give Rick Santorum a boost. Various candidates were giving their endorsements to Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. Chris Christie, Donald Trump, and Ann Coulter all came out in support for Romney. Sarah Palin and Herman Cain both gave endorsements to Newt Gingrich. But we were still waiting for the most influential conservative voice to give his blessing.

I put out a message asking one person to endorse Rick Santorum – and later that day, guess who ended their radio show by saying there was only one candidate who hasn’t compromised their conservatism, referring to Santorum –  Rush Limbaugh. Following Rush’s pseudo-endorsement, Santorum fund raising went up 3 fold. If there is someone who can turn around the direction of an election – it’s the biggest, most powerful name in radio, and most influential voice for conservatism. Thanks, Rush!

Tonight marked a second “Santorum surge”. The first surge started after Santorum won Iowa, but was over after New Hampshire. Newt won South Carolina, and Romney won Florida and Nevada. But today Santorum won Minnesota and Missouri. (At the time of writing this he’s also doing well in Colorado, but with only 6% reporting.) Santorum is back on track, and isn’t showing signs of slowing down. He’ll be in this race for the long haul.

Santorum isn’t just another republican nominee. He sets himself apart in a few important ways. First of all, he’s the only true conservative in the race. While Romney and Gingrich both claim to be conservatives, only Santorum has the record to back it up. Government run healthcare isn’t a conservative principle, Mitt. TARP bailouts aren’t a conservative principle, Newt. On the issues themselves, Santorum wins. Hands down, he’s the most conservative candidate left in the race.

But we all know, it takes more than ideas to win an election. It takes money and organization, which is why Mitt Romney may seem like the best candidate. Frankly, the only reason Romney has done so well is because he has the money to run vicious attack ads on his opponents. Mitt has more money than the other candidates. But, (and this is important) he does NOT have more money than Barack Obama. If Romney’s only advantage is that he has money, that’s not enough to beat Obama, because he can’t beat Obama in the money game.

When the ads don’t matter (like tonight), Mitt Romney can’t win against his republican opponents. His ads won’t matter against Obama, either. Could Romney win in November? It’s a tough call. However, when money isn’t the issue, one candidate sets himself apart. Santorum is the candidate best suited to draw a stark contrast with Barack Obama in November.

Tonight we also saw that if Gingrich is out of the race (he wasn’t on the ballot in Missouri), not only does Santorum beat Romney, but he mops the floor with him! Gingrich ought to leave the race, endorse Santorum, and that would seal the deal for the nomination. Reports came out a few days ago that the Gingrich campaign is over $600,000 in debt! If this man can’t keep his campaign out of debt, how can we expect him to keep get our country out of debt?

Santorum said is best tonight. “I don’t stand here to claim that I’m the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney… I’m the conservative alternative to Barack Obama!” While Romney and Gingrich fight back and forth, the American people have gotten tired and are looking elsewhere – Rick Santorum. Game on!

Disappointed in Coulter

Posted by Tim on

I don’t put a lot of stock in people. I don’t mean to sound like a total downer, but by and large, I don’t trust humanity. That’s probably why I don’t trust a body of people deciding what kind of healthcare I receive. Human nature tells us that we look out for ourselves first. If that’s the case, I’m going to stay pretty reserved when putting a lot of faith in anyone. I trust my friends and family and some of my co-workers, but they’re the exception.

This goes for celebrities and all the talking-heads on TV too. I know who I agree with, but I don’t just tow everything they say. My beliefs don’t come from pundits; they come from observation of history and reality. That being said, there are a few people I expect certain opinions from. I expect Scott Walker to deal with the big issues regardless of whether it’s politically popular. I expect Donald Trump to endorse idiots (he endorsed Nancy Pelosi AND Mitt Romney… hmmm) and exaggerate his influence. I expect Ann Coulter to stand strong with the most conservative candidates… but… she’s let me down.

I was catching up on some Fox News tonight while writing emails and eating a chicken I got for free at Wal-Mart. (Yeah, they gave away a cart full of chickens the other night to people leaving the store. Pretty sweet.) In an interview, I heard Ann Coulter making her re-run endorsement of Mitt Romney. That’s nothing new. But tonight she said something that I couldn’t let go of – “Mitt Romney is the most conservative candidate in the race.”

Wow. She’s way off, and it leads me to believe that she’s no conservative herself. Apparently, someone who endorses government run healthcare, believes the global warming myth, supports cap and trade, supports TARP bailouts, supports gun bans… the list goes on and on… is “conservative”. Not only is he conservative, but apparently, he’s more conservative than people who are the direct opposite of those things. Santorum – against government run healthcare (whether it’s at the state or federal level), against legislation based on global warming myths, against cap and trade, against the TARP bailouts, A+ rating with the NRA.

Then again, until Coulter endorsed Romney, she was begging Chris Christie to run for president. The big fat dope from New Jersey has a few things going for him – he’s a great speaker, and he took it to the teacher’s unions. That doesn’t mean he’s a conservative, and it doesn’t mean he’s even a good governor – New Jersey’s credit rating was downgraded not too long ago. (Side note – Wisconsin’s wasn’t. Thank you, Walker.)

This is why I can’t just go along with and base my views on what someone else says. While Ann Coulter may be right on many issues, she’s flat out wrong in regards to Romney being the most conservative candidate in the race. She’s also wrong about Christie being the only candidate who can beat Obama. While I like Coulter’s attitude and spunk, she’s strayed from the path. I can only hope that she doesn’t drag too many sheep off the path with her.