An Open Letter to Rick Santorum supporters
The time has come for hard decisions and now each of you needs to make that hard decision.
I understand why you like Santorum. He’s a decent guy. What he did in Iowa was nothing short of incredible. Unfortunately for him the game is now over.
Right now, Rick Santorum is in a distant fourth place. He will not be able to continue after South Carolina.
His race is over.
If you support Santorum, it says something about you. It says you are conservative. If you are a conservative, you want to see the Republican Party nominate a conservative and if you are a conservative, you agree Mitt Romney is not a conservative. He is a liberal.
Santorum can no longer win the race. There are a number of states where he is not even on the ballot and even some states where he is on the ballot but has no slate of delegates. In other words, no matter what, he cannot win.
By staying in the race, all Rick Santorum does at this point is to divide the conservative vote. This has been the Mitt Romney strategy all along. See the conservative vote divided and shattered so that by the time conservatives can unite behind one candidate, it is too late.
The question each and every Santorum supporter has to ask themselves today is, if I vote for Rick Santorum in South Carolina, what will that vote mean?
The painful answer to that question is, all it will mean is a greater chance that Mitt Romney will be the nominee.
Rick Santorum has run a good race. Rick Santorum’s life in public service is not over, but he will not be President this year. The only candidate left now, with any chance of becoming the Republican nominee are Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney is a northeastern liberal. The Republican Party is the party of Reagan, not the party of socialism. The Republican Party is the party of conservatism, not the party of tax, borrow and spend liberalism. The Republican Party is the party of freedom and liberty and not the party of having the government run our lives.
If you are a conservative, you must agree that Mitt Romney is not a conservative and must be stopped from getting the Republican nomination.
The only candidate left who can stop him is Newt Gingrich. Do not let Mitt Romney continue to divide the conservative movement just so he can become President and destroy what Ronald Reagan and our founding fathers stood for.
Join me and support Newt Gingrich for President. Join me in voting for Newt Gingrich in the Republican Primary for President.
Join me and let’s stop a liberal from destroying the Party of Reagan.
Tags: conservative, gingrich, liberal, mitt, newt, republican, rick, romney, santorum
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Vern Shotwell on -
Do some research?
LBJ's great society put in place in '64: Newt was a Freshman Congressman in '79. Massive commitments in the intervening years, growing into the '90's and beyond.
Your complaint, then, is that Newt's not Superman? (Superman is not real...created by a Canadian)
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. B. Leland Baker on -
No my friend,
I am saying that when you have the power you use the power to advance Conservative agenda:
Smaller Government, Strong Military, Balanced Budget, Less Regulation and adherence to the US Constitution. . .
The only one he came close was almost a balanced budget based upon downsizing the military ...
He was NOT a conservative in the Reagan tradition ... Newt's progressive inclination is a disease!
Respectfully, Leland
http://www.voteronpaul.com/newsDetail.php?Newt-Gingrich-A-Crime-Aga...
-
Permalink Reply by Marcia Wood on -
there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. B. Leland Baker on
-
Here are the debt figures: It went up every year ...
Fiscal Year Gross Debt
1993 4,351
1994 4,643
1995 4,921
1996 5,181
1997 5,369
1998 5,478
1999 5,606
2000 5,629
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_his...
Very Respectfully,
Leland
Debt
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. B. Leland Baker on
-
I also did the Debt numbers on January 21st of each year as well without rounding off:
2000 - 5,711,817,746,476 1999 - 5,600,287,708,585 1998 - 5,501,520,207,927 1997 - 5,310,267,076,516 1996 - 4,988,397,941,589 1995 - 4,796,537,934,595 1994 - 4,503,707,505,503 1993 - 4,174,218,594,232 If we had a "surplus" then the numbers would not have increased every consecutive year.
Respectfully, Leland
LOOK: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
-
Permalink Reply by Vern Shotwell on
-
Right Marcia, there was a functional surplus. One has to look beyond the crudest of numbers.
Some people just post
all this extraneous stuff. Links would have done nicely. Much better in fact!The key graph line, of course is the top one, entitled "Public Debt"
Remember that Newt's term was '95-'99 Further, the budget affected the Next year's spending. and sets baselines for following years. Notice the dip? At '97 through 2001? This would be the
Newt Effect!
Sorry to present the graph in such small size. Didn't want to take up the whole page! You can see it larger in at PoliticalGuide@http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/House/Georgia/Newt_Gingri...
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. B. Leland Baker on
-
Exactly my point ... public debt is just part of the equation ...
Marcia was asking about "borrowing" from social security which means total debt
... not the "scewed" figures as in this chart.
Respectfully,
Leland
-
Permalink Reply by Vern Shotwell on
-
Exactly so. I chose my chart with care, merely to prove a valid point. A positive aspect to an extremely complex analysis!
Many solutions exist. One that I find interesting is to abruptly end Social Security benefits. Perhaps I could start a firm for the manufacture of tin cups? And, wholesale pencils to the elderly: let 'em beg on street-corners. I've seen it functioning in third world countries....several ways exist to fix this big problem!
By the way: I might not form a tin-cup manufacturing firm, without a defined system of taxation! Nor shall I be berated for making a profit! Fair share is a variable today isn't it?
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. B. Leland Baker on
-
Vern
I do not understand the point proven by using partial data.
Obviously one would prefer not to abruptly end it ... but Social Security will end very soon because there are trillions in unfunded liabilities.
Hence it is not a question of "if" the Ponzi will end ... but "when" it will end. My cost analysis is that we will not be able to continue payments after 2020. May want to start the tin cups now ...
Had we stopped dumping Social Security contributions into the "general fund" in the 70s, 80s or 90s ... then it might not be on the verge of collapse today.
A sarcastic thank you to every "Speaker" we have had since 1970! Bush was warned, Newt was warned, Bush Jr was warned ... none of our "conservatives" fixed the Ponzi. They all talked about a lock box that did not and does not exist.
Respectfully,
Leland
-
Permalink Reply by THOMAS S. WRIGHT on -
FOR RICK SANTORUM THE RACE IS "OVER", RICK WOULD DO WELL TO PUT HIS SUPPORT BEHIND NEWT GINGRICH RIGHT NOW. TO SUPPORTERS OF RICK THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT DEFEATING obummer. and RICK CANNOT BEAT obummer. you have to come to TERMS WITH REALITY. we CONSERVATIVES REALLY NEED TO GET BEHIND ONE CANDIDATE AND PUSH HARD TOGETHER AS ONE UNIFIED PEOPLE behind NEWT. OTHERWISE DIVIDED WE FALL. I mentioned that quote before but it is a FACT. IF YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT. YOU WILL WIND UP WITH obummer for a second term. NIGHTMARE U BET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. I plead for you all to move with us on to VICTORY OVER obummer. LET US GET WITH NEWT. you will not be SORRY. FOR UNITED WE STAND FOR NEWT AND CONSERVATIVE VALUES.
-
Permalink Reply by Becky Shotwell on
-
Party of Reagan? What sort of baby-boomer fantasy is that?
Rick has the religiosity of G. Bush & we need to make this country more Christian! Newt is morally bankrupt.
-
Permalink Reply by Barry W Gaugler on -
Becky,
I was morally bankrupt also. Thank G-d for His Grace. Who are you to judge? What is past is past. G-d makes all things new.
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
