Santorum hits Romney hard in new ad

I agree. I got a bunch of them in my local 912 group, just told them they’re just like a bunch of Obama-like drones in their worship of Paul.

They won’t ever criticize Paul for anything. Not on the racist newsletters or nothing but excuses for the Paul-Mittens alliance.

I’ve about had it with this 912 group too. No one seems to care about this alliance and all I get is garbage for even bringing it up. Pathetic.

Paul knows certain things really well. He isn’t the best at these hack “hurry up and get it out” media manipulated debates. When he is answering a question, or responding to other people, he goes to what he knows best, and that is philosophic principles. You might have noticed that he rarely studies up on a particular subject for the purpose of using it against a particular candidate. Santorum is really good at this, and Romney is pretty good as well. Gingrich avoids it as much as possible, but it comes out occasionally. Paul usually criticizes with generalities, and usually in response to another person’s comments toward him. Paul knows who the establishment guys are, and what they were doing in the past, but probably only brushes up on details so that he can use them, if needed, in a debate. Paul is weak on his ability to verbalize specifics about other people’s past, so he just generalizes philosophically most of the time.

Paul’s support comes from the liberty movement. The conservatives who have wanted small government, but never see it happen, are coming his way because they are giving up on the system. Paul addresses the system. Gingrich addresses the system, but it is a different big government system. I think that he surged because he did well in sparking a response in the small government people, but has lost his support because they eventually saw through it. This is where Paul is strong. People eventually choose him, then stick with it because they trust him.

Paul has been warning about totalitarian rule for many years. He has stated that this government medical system will hurt people. He was complaining about the government in medicine in the seventies and ran for office to change this kind of government intervention.

If you are so focused on one individual that you miss the rest of it, you don’t give the message of liberty due exposure. Buying into party political rhetoric, or just attacking the current leader, or front runner, is not a good tactic, because the goal is to expose the whole system of corruption and tyranny. Paul regularly says that there is, ultimately, no difference between the other three candidates. He lumps them all together all of the time.

Repeating what Santorum, Romney, and Gingrich say almost every debate, does not help Paul’s goal. There is no lack of exposure of Obama Care, or Romney Care. Why waste your time focusing on it? Paul is trying to create a clear image of contrast from the other three.

I know about the Islamist ideology, and so does Paul. Neither one of us consider it to be a real threat to our freedom. The US will never fall to Islam if we protect “our” rule of law. The Koran is as much of a governing and legal document as anything else. That is how they get away with their totalitarian theocracy in the middle east. If we protect our own “rule of law”, based on the “constitution”, then we don’t have any problems. If we protect “our own” borders, then we don’t have any imminent “Islamic terrorist threat from them”. None of this requires us to fight wars in those countries.

You assume that he is ignorant of it, when the fact is that he just cares more about us, than he does some theoretical threat. I know that Islam is a terrorist religion, but nobody on the debate stage is saying that. Why? You should be mad at Santorum and Gingrich for denying that Islam is the real problem. Mitt Romney as well.

They all know that it won’t help them get elected. The other three only want wars in big oil nations. They don’t say anything about Islamic genocide in African countries where there isn’t any oil. Why is that? Are they ignorant about it? Why just the middle eastern oil countries? Shouldn’t we be fighting the real threat of Islam, and calling out the religion as the real problem? What’s up with these guys? Are they all so stupid that they just don’t get it? Throw them all out and vote for……….. Oh yeah, I forgot. We only get who the media and the GOP establishment puts up for us to vote for.

But wait. Ron Paul is the only one who isn’t funded by the banks. He is the only one relying on individual people to fund his campaign. He doesn’t get money from the GOP, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc. He doesn’t get a single dollar from the Fed Res golden children. He was the one who was cut out of debates the last time around, but couldn’t be ignored this time. Then they tried it again in the media, and his support still grows.

If this election is about Obama Care, we are screwed. Paul was right when he said “it isn’t likely to be repealed”, when asked if it would be. He didn’t say that he didn’t want to, he explained that it wasn’t likely to happen. Which was the only honest answer to the question. What does it take to repeal it? How many other bills like this have been repealed, and why? None, and because the GOP drops the ball every time they have the chance. Why? They don’t really appose it on the power structure level. Its the same for abortion. Paul had the solution when the GOP had the majority, and the white house, and they refused to do it. Why? They don’t really care. Our country is murdering babies every day, but the GOP couldn’t be bothered to bring it to a vote.

Wake up people.

Santorum supports all the wars, but does not say that Islam is the real war to fight. If we are fighting Islam, the true threat, then we should fight the real war instead of these oil country wars. This is crony capitalism at its worst, not specifying the target as the religion, and changing tactics to battle the religion. If you go to war against the religion, you have to address it in “this” country as well. They want to leave it alone here, and use the religious rhetoric to fight oil wars. That makes a lot of sense. If they want to be credible on this issue, then address Islam as the focus of our efforts, and quit toppling middle eastern oil countries. Go to Africa and deal with the Islamic genocide head on, where there isn’t any oil. Then, you would have credibility.

If you can offer even a possibility as to what Paul could have forced over five hundred other colleagues to do, I will listen. The fact of the matter is, the establishment GOP controls the power structure, and keeps bills out that would change the status quo. The status quo includes what the liberal before them did. Paul introduces bills all the time. Bills that would get rid of the fourth amendment destroying Patriot Act. Do you appose that? The republicrats in power, such as Bohner, and previously Gingrich, won’t introduce these bills when they have the power to do it. Even when they could have destroyed the supreme courts authority over the abortion issue, they said “no”. Yes, Paul does suggest these things. He does introduce the bills. You are buying the lie that the republicans, like Santorum and Gingrich, actually care about these things.

They care so much that they vote for bills that give Planned Parenthood millions of dollars. Paul votes against them. They care so much that they vote for “No Child Left Behind” and grow federal power and spending. Paul votes against it, every time.

If you want to trust the very people who screwed us over royally when they had the power, go ahead. As I said before, I expect them to get in. I’ve been around too long, and seen too much to think anything else.

Paul’s policies actually solve the problems that you are talking about.

“Get out of the UN.” “They have no authority in the US, and our politicians are selling us out”.

“Get out of the middle east, and develop our own energy”. “The constitution does not give the federal government authority to stop production here, or push people around over there”.

“Bring our troops home, and put our National Guard on border patrol”. “Spend the money securing our borders, not Afghanistan’s”, Iraq’s, ect.”

“Our biggest national security problem is our economy and devaluation of the dollar by the Fed Res”.

If you want to support the guys who sold us out, go for it. People who support Paul, don’t buy into their crap anymore. Once you take the red pill, there is no going back.

I agree with Santorum’s view on earmarks. This is how the two parties divvy out the cash. If the government didn’t steal our money, then give the most corrupt power brokers the check book, it would be much better.

With that said, the whole system is unconstitutional. Yes, Paul knows that it will be passed, and puts in for his district’s share of earmarks. This allows him to try to get his constituent’s money back, but protest the system with a “no” vote. The whole thing is corrupt.

I supported no child left behind as well. It was because I believed the lies of the establishment GOP at the time. Now I say: “the federal government has no authority, or moral right, to take from the people and distribute it as they wish”. Santorum doesn’t say this, because he wants to steal from the people, and distribute it as he wishes. He just apposes some things, now.

The Patriot Act gives the government authority to infringe upon our rights. It doesn’t give them the right to infringe upon our rights. Right is right, and wrong is wrong. The PA is wrong. If you are willing to allow this, or support it, then you are telling them that they can take whatever they want from you. This will lead to totalitarianism. It always does.

Most of what the federal government passes, and does, is illegal. We have a supreme law, and they break it all the time. We have a criminal government. They are not legitimate. They just have the ability to write laws that are “illegal”. What else do you call law breakers? Every other law breaker is called a criminal. “Criminal”, should be in front of every reference to “government” when talking about the federal criminal government. They can change this if they start following our supreme law. They can change the supreme law, but it appears that they would rather break it.

We’re not buying into anything. We going by what we see Ron Paul doing and saying. Look at the way he acted in the debate last night.Look at his ads. He literally goes after the Republican that rises to the top with laser like focus and ignores Romney. You defend this all you want, but I find it despicable.

Not one of these videos shows Paul going after Romney’s record in the debates. Just a disgreement about money in the budget.
His ad going after Romney on Bain is a real turn off. He’s attacking free markets with that ad. TURN Off.
Again, nothing on Romneycare and nothing in the debates.

Uh huh. Again, nothing in the debates. Nothing where he could have called Romney out face to face. NOTHING in the debates.

Whoopie. He denies it in an interview on CNN. So what? I’m talking about in the debates. He has never gone after Romney’s record. Never gone after him for the liberty stealing Romneycare. If Paul truly cares about liberty, he’d have gone after Romney more than any other candidate.

I must confess, your feeble attempt to cover for Paul makes me dislike Paul even more. All your videos have done is prove that Paul has not gone after Romney on Romneycare.

What pathetic logic. The way you Paul supporters contort yourselves in defending Paul is unreal. If Paul truly cared about this country he’d go after Romney, not the Conservatives. I’m tired of him acting like this is a game. It will take a conservative to get o out. NOT the Rhino Romney.
I have yet to see Paul go after Romney in the debates. Nor have I seen him run a neg. ad against Romney.

If he is doing what you are saying then he is truly a selfish j@ck@ss and he needs to drop out of the race. That is, if he wants O out of office.

If Paul is truly about individual liberty, he would go after Romney over Romneycare. Gov’t deciding whether we live or die is the ultimate loss of liberty. Paul’s silence is deafening.

I also find it odd that he did not go after Romney in Florida.

Apparently you did not see the debate where Paul said he did not see himself getting rid of Obamacare. And please don’t tell me it is Congress that has to pass the law to overturn it. I am well aware of that, but we need a president that will go after them to get it done. His limp wristed, “I don’t see myself getting rid of Obamacare” is not what I want in a president.

Both Santorum and Gingrich said that is the first thing they will get Congress to do.

Please give me a specific bill that Paul tried to get thru Congress back when we had a Rep. House and a Rep. Senate. I never heard of him before the 2008 presidential election. Never heard of him in Congress fighting to stop bad bills or get a liberty bill passed. Never heard him do diddly.

Your post is the same general platitudes

Uh, I am well aware of how bad the “media” is in this country.

I am not misquoting Paul. He said he did not see himself getting rid of Obamacare. I heard him say.

NO, it was the SC debates where he said he did not see himself getting rid of Obamacare. Anyway, none of those other videos are of the debates. He spent the whole evening attacking Santorum and now Romney is in the lead in Michigan. Who would you prefer, Romney or Santorum? I would prefer Santorum.

I’m done with you. I do find you Paul supporters to be beyond reach and quite tiresome. I’m not interested in hearing or seeing any more videos of your senile and despicable candidate.

I think I agree with what you said.

If we don’t fix the voting problems in this nation, then we will pay for it.

Frankly, I’m not much of a fan for the electoral college or delegate system.

Again, as I understand what you said… I think I agree with that.

Thanks for your response.