FULL INTERVIEW ADDED – Santorum: We’re on the Illinois ballot

Yes. He looked rested and perky. It was all a good interview till the very end when it came to earmarks and entitlements. He mentions entitlements are the problem. So why did he expand Medicare?

No kidding, O’Reilly was the pinhead on that interview….totally set him up to be the “weird” religious fanatic…and Santorum had the States authority issue correct, not Bill. I wanted to throw something at him…total hack job interview.

Let’s give D.C. to the Chinese as partial payment on our debt. Most of the politicians would feel right at home in the CCP.

Why apologize, that article is totally germane to the subject and character of Rick Santorum. I do believe his social conservatism positions are what we need to begin the correction of our moral decline. Rick Perry is an equally qualified candidate in my opinion and either one of them would be a big win for this country.

He really went after Newt either Thursday or Friday on the radio show. I don’t get it either…he acts like he’s had some divination into Newt’s soul and just MUST prophesy for us about this….which gets a bit creepy in itself a LOT here lately with Beck. He has also said-and so have the 4th hour guys bigtime-some really anti Catholic comments. Which makes me doubt he really really thinks Santorum could be like George Washington as he put it.

I felt like sending Beck the Walid Shoebat video where he explains from a biblical perspective that Islam and Mormonism are similarly derived cults, coming from the same heretical footing, both denying the divinity of Christ and the Holy Trinity…which technically speaking folks IS the basic tenet of Christian belief. You’d think if was seeking the truth in all his historical research he’d figure that little tidbit out. But, I guess as much as he seems to think he’s an oracle here lately he has no problem with Joseph Smith getting a little extra revelation.

When candidates give all talk we all hear different things depending on our own hot buttons and perspectives. I thought what Santorum said about EARMARKS was very enlightening.

1. McCain introduced it as an issue because McCains record on Entitlements was horrendous.

2. Earmarks are constitutional

3. The history of congress was for Senators and Representatives to make sure that their districts got a reasonable share of federal spending allocations.

4. What made Earmarks bad, was the ABUSE of the process where important legislation could only be passed if powerful senators or representatives (e.g. Harry Reid) were allowed to attach earmarks to the bill. I suspect Rick Santorum never added irresponsible and inappropriate spending to bills.

5. Santorum is so refreshing, open and honest about his record. NONE of the other leading candidates can match him for his candor. He openly and unapologetically tells us what he did, why he did it and provides perspective. If his position changes, he then articulates some very sound reasons why his position has changed, if it has. Another thing about Santorum is that he has been very, very consistent through his entire political career.

6. Similar to Jim DeMint, Santorum went on the record in 2010 as opposing Earmarks because of the abuse of the practice.

LETS GET AWAY FROM THE EARMARK ISSUE. IT IS A RED HERRING!

It won’t be pretty and our side will lose the fight.

People don’t want government in our healthcare and sure don’t want government in our bedrooms.

Unfortunately, it is NOT the job of government to lecture and teach morality, it is the role of churches. Let’s just say it. Our churches are so busy building mega business organizations, they have lost their way… they have failed us.

The only minds that the state media plants seeds of doubt in are those who will vote against Progressives (Rep and Dem).

We just have to understand why they are doing it and ignore it.

No offense to my Chicago friends, but if they built that fence around Chicago instead of our southern borders, the rest of Illinois would be ever so grateful, politically.

Think about it … were there “pundits” telling the colonists they should not rebel against the British Empire? Same with any “fork in the road” moment of our nation’s history.

The pundit has made (some) people intellectually lazy and complacent. We have essentially “outsourced” our own opinions and thought processes to these people.

Its time to divorce ourselves from the professional pundit who has no ties to the everyday concerns of citizens, and completely divorced from daily life.

To me, something worth having is worth working and sacrificing for.

That’s what I think Santorum was meaning-on that point, I agree wholeheartedly.

Too many people (Republican, Democrat, conservative, liberal, libertarian, name your niche) seem to have lost their way, wanting instant gratification, which, IMHO, includes instant happiness.

That “culture” has been pushed not only by the media, but by advertisers, government, promising instant anything, from weight loss to music to movies to meals, to the entitlement culture, where rights and privileges are “demanded”. There again, it is our culture, from government, to schools to advertisers to the media who promote this mindset – it’s all about me, me, me” – and it is going to take a lot to get people away from it-a whole culture shift that a new President or Congress can’t do alone.