Posted on 02/18/2012 11:09:26 AM PST by Steelfish
Rick Santorum Questions Obama's Christian Values By STEVE PEOPLES — White House candidate Rick Santorum on Saturday questioned President Barack Obama's Christian values and attacked GOP rival Mitt Romney's Olympics leadership as he courted tea party activists and evangelical voters in Ohio, "ground zero" in the 2012 nomination fight.
Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator known for his social conservative policies, said that Obama's agenda is "not about you. It's not about your quality of life. It's not about your jobs. It's about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Not a theology based on the Bible.
A different theology."
Trailing Romney in money and campaign resources, Santorum is depending on the tea party movement and religious groups to deliver a victory March 6 in Ohio, one of Super Tuesday's biggest prizes.
More delegates will be awarded in Ohio than in any other state except Georgia in the opening months of the Republican campaign. Ohio and Georgia are two of the 10 contests scheduled for March 6, a benchmark for the primary campaign that often decides who can continue to the next level.
Even as he criticized Obama, Santorum also went after one of Romney's most promoted achievements — his leadership at the 2002 Olympic Winter Games in Salt Lake City.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Thank you, that is the point.
I will not vote for Romney for a whole slew of reasons. I can vote for Rick. I do think Newt is the closest to articulating what you want to be heard. He is not bashful about outlining differences between him and Obama.
Obama attend a church for 20 years with a pastor who cursed “God, damn America.” Apparently, he never thought of getting up and leaving, or leaving Rev. Wright’s congregation for another. In many respects, black churches have been the bane of Afro-American society in the US where every self-appointed jackass (Sharpton, Jackson) become pastors. These a not sheppards but wolves in plain sight.
Yes, I do realize that, and of course I think Obama’s policies AND personal faith are anti Christian also. I think both are actually legitimate, I just don’t think Rick S is the person and now is the time to bring it up, given what else is going on related to the campaign.
The Jeremiah Wright - Black Separatism Cult issue to me is valid for reasons of policy and person. But it has to be presented in a certain way.
The question is not whether a candidate is of the same religion as me; plenty of Baptists got cured of that attitude during the Carter Administration. The question is whether the candidate's religion is compatible with patriotism - with, that is, love of and respect for the public at large. You know what Christians usually do, and you know what muslims usually do, and you know what "liberation theology" is - and it is incompatible with American patriotism. Because "liberation theology" is incompatible with having any desire to protect the liberty of others.
What has the religion to do with patriotism?
“obama’s definition of sin as being out alignment with his own values is mind-boggling, unless he thinks he is his own god. “
This actually is not an absurd thing for a communist. The communist does not see anything that furthers the communist party as being “evil”, since it is for a greater good. Herbert Philbrick, a FBI agent who infiltrated the Communist Party, wrote quite heavily of their weird, deceptive, cult-like culture. I recommend checking out “I Led 3 Lives: Citizen, “Communist”, Counterspy.”
It would make it very clear how big the communist conspiracy is in the United States, and how it is possible to get a sleeper Communist into the highest office of the land. It’s a lot easier than you would think.
“. . . Santorum throws jabs at the one and only thing that will drag every single liberal out from under their slimy rocks to rise up and attack back on behalf of Obama — social issues.
Unbelievable.”
He is a man of principle and will continue to throw jabs at the left. He can’t be any other way. Which will, yes, enrage and encourage every single liberal to attack him by their vote against him. Unfortunately what has been said on social issues is never going to go away. It is going to be a bloodbath if he gets the nomination, and there will be nothing we can do at that point. It will be too late.
Newt’s no better in the shoot from the hip dept; he’s even worse. The libs the hard left, the indy’s, the media, will literally tear him apart. We’ll lose.
I understand that for some of you here, there is valor in adhering to principle. I want to see obama removed from office, whether or not I get my “perfect” nominee, which btw, has always been Santorum. I just never believed he could win in the general, and I still don’t.
We don’t have the cultural electorate today to bring a true conservative across the finish line, like it or not.
His policy is based on his values. If you know what Reverend Wright believes and preaches, you can predict much of what Obama has done. Wright is quite in line with the views of Columbia and Harvard on the need to redistribute the wealth of the country from private hands to the Government, and from the government to the “under privileged.”
And?
We have known all that for four years.
It is not like Rick discovered some “truth”, or invented the gun powder.
It’s Obama’s record as president, not his relationd with a former Muslim, who created a so-called Christian sect, which is important.
If Santorum wants to know HOW to attack Obama, he must take lessons from Speaker Gingrich.
Newt Gingrich Campaign Rally in Peachtree City, Georgia – February 17 2012
http://electad.com/videos/newt-gingrich-campaign-rally-in-peachtree-city-georgia-february-17-2012/
You may have known it, but many others did not. And certainly McCain would never pointed it out. On the contrary, he allowed Obama to place the race card. Newt was actually the first to bring this up, and now Santorum. Romney cannot.
What has the religion to do with patriotism?
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labour to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men & citizens. The mere Politican, equally with the pious man ought to respect & to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private & public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the Oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure--reason & experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.I think that pretty well covers the waterfront . . .'Tis substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of Free Government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric. Washington's Farewell Address
bttt
Ronald Reagan September 25, 1987 — remarks in Arlington, Virginia
“How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
<>
Ronald Reagan October 5, 1981 — in an address to the National Alliance of Business
“The size of the federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern.”
<>
February 4, 1986 — from the State of the Union Address
“Government growing beyond our consent had become a lumbering giant, slamming shut the gates of opportunity, threatening to crush the very roots of our freedom. What brought America back? The American people brought us back — with quiet courage and common sense; with undying faith that in this nation under God the future will be ours, for the future belongs to the free.”
SOURCE for quotes above: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/reagan-quotes/
<>//<>
Ronald Reagan
A Time for Choosing
This Speech Was Broadcast in a Televised Address on October 27, 1964.
VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtkJmoN-zpU
I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.
It’s time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, “We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.”
This idea? that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, “The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.”
The Founding Fathers knew a government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.
Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, “What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power.” But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector.
Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we’re denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we’re always “against,” never “for” anything.
We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. However, we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments....
We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.
We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward I restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him.... But we can not have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure....
Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? . . . Today in our country the tax collector’s share is 37 cents of -very dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.
Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor’s fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can’t socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he’ll eat you last.
If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what’s at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.
They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that “the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals.” And he said, “There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.