Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Many people have suddenly had the name forced upon them, with his near win in Iowa. Losing to Mitt Romney by eight votes, when he wasn't even considered in the race by many is a huge thing, if he can repeat it anyways. So now let's go over him a bit.
For those that don't know he's a former Representative and Senator from Pennsylvania. He lost huge there after serving for over a decade. Known for his Catholic ultra conservative social policies, he is extremely pro-life and very big on defending traditional marriage. He's called the most conservative of the candidates by his supporters, but that's not really what history shows.
1) Supported bills that reduced freedom and increased the size of government. He very likely would have voted for NDAA.
2) Does not support a fair flat tax, instead he states set tax amounts that are the highest amongst any of the Republican candidates. Yet at the same time desires to set up, what would actually be, a protectionist market in the United States. (Yes that link was from his own site even)
3) Has fought to keep earmarks as part of the government, as if senators and representatives are entitled to them. Even attacking Senator Jim DeMint for fighting against earmarks.
4) Voted to keep the 1930s-era Davis-Bacon Act "that forces taxpayers to pay union wages in government-funded construction and gives Big Labor an unfair advantage over non-union companies and workers".
5) Stopped the National Right to Work Act of 1995 from being voted on, by joining Democrats in a filibuster.
6) Supported those who voted for Obamacare.
7) States he's pro-life, yet campaigned for a liberal pro-abortion Republican called Specter (who later ran to the Democrat side), against a conservative pro-life Republican called Toomey.
And O could we go on. Erick Erickson was totally right to call him a "pro-life statist". That's what he is at best. Even with the tiniest amount of digging Santorum does not at all appear to be what he claims.
So I say NO to Santorum. I want someone who isn't quite so liberal as my Republican nominee.
This was also posted on Landmark Report.
To update my Syria Protests Spread piece, here's some new information for y'all.
Two of the largest Syrian opposition groups have met and signed an agreement that after President Bashar al-Assad is removed from power, they will form an interim government until democratic elections can occur. They further state that they agree all Syrian people have equal rights, and specifically mention the Kurdish population. Interestingly enough, it also calls for the liberation of Syrian territory.
Now that is an unfortunate addition. They are most likely thinking of the Golan Heights, which Israel gained during the war in 1967. Not even actually in control of the country, and already plotting against Israel. Guess we at least won't have to wonder which side they'll be on should they win.
Meanwhile, in Israel, the Israel Defense Force is preparing for the end of al-Assad's government, which does seem to be inevitable with even the Arab League being more and more against him. The IDF has many various scenarios that it is prepared for including attacks upon it by either a new jihadist government, rebel troops, or civilian mobs. No matter what Israel will be ready to face any threat that comes her way.
All in all, tis just a matter of time until President al-Assad is no longer in power. Questions really come to when, how, and what the aftermath will truly look like. We in the west, can but watch as another violent oppressive dictator slowly goes tumbling down. Hopefully this one won't be replaced by antiAmerican antiSemite jihadists. It would definitely be great if a truly peaceful democratic Syria emerged from the fight.