You have named my biggest worry about this sudden surge that doesn't seem to upset the press or the establishment at all while they were horrified when Newt surged.
Other than disagreeing with several of his votes, I don't know anything really nasty about Santorum and maybe there isn't anything to know which would be wonderful.**
However if there is something that is bad, it's a lot better if we know it now than in late October. It isn't that I'm suspicious of him necessarily, but why is no one attacking him--especially the one with the most to lose. Apparently Romney is planning to continue savaging Newt even while Santorum is his newest and (to hear the media tell) biggest threat. Why??? ________________
**Regarding an October surprise it doesn't matter if Santorum is pure and wonderful, the Regime will make something up.
I'm wondering if Mitt will hold out on his own vetting of Santorum until just before super Tuesday or until Rick threatens to take the needed amount of delegates and I wouldn't put it past him to make stuff up like he did and continues to do with Newt.
Let's see it now and see how Santorum handles it because if he can't handle Romney's attacks, he'll never handle ones from the left. I think Newt has figured it out and will be much more able to prevail. I just question whether Santorum is tough enough when the REAL arrows are coming his way.
My guess is Mitt Romney knows that the most effective attacks against Santorum involve his personal faith and will backfire if made by Romney since they're both strongly committed to their respective churches and appear to have led a decent moral life. Mormons are not exactly known for being wild and crazy types.
Newt Gingrich also can't make the attack based on his own history.
That kind of attack has to be made either by Democrats or by libertarian-leaning Republicans who aren't officially connected with either Romney or Gingrich — in other words, by the sort of people who are making that attack right here on Free Republic.
I don't have a problem with the attack being made here and on other conservative websites because Santorum will face it in the general election from Democrats. I'm also not accusing either Gingrich or Romney of being behind those attacks; I know enough Republicans who don't care about moral values that I know lots of people really do believe that way and don't need to be prompted by a candidate to say it.
What I **AM** saying is the attack cannot be made openly in the Republican primary by a candidate or a group connected with a candidate. Who would do it? The Log Cabin Republicans can't do it openly or they'd get more people riled up and voting for Santorum. Will we see a group like “Republicans Promoting the Pill for Free Sex” show up and start buying ads as an independent PAC? Obviously not.
What we see instead is this informal and probably largely uncoordinated campaign on the web to discredit Santorum that isn't connected with candidates. Alright, fine. This is America and people can say such things. But don't expect those of us who are conservative Christians, whether Protestant evangelicals or conservative Roman Catholics, to like listening to it and quietly shut up.
America was founded mostly though not entirely on Judeo-Christian values. If you don't like that, fine, and you've got Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin on your side. But it's you, not the supporters of traditional moral values, who need to make the case for changing the moral foundations of America. And note very carefully that Newt Gingrich definitely does **NOT** agree with you, neither does Mitt Romney, and I don't think even Ron Paul believes that way.
You're really advocating a Democratic liberal agenda to tear apart American moral foundations. I'm not accusing people who think that way of being closet Democrats, but I **AM** saying their views would logically put them in a different political party — if not the Democrats, than at least the Libertarians.