First he talks about freedom and how the governments shouldn't impose on your life and then he moves on with how the government should impose on your life with his contraception and choice issues, and how he will destroy Medicare and Social Security as we know it. Then he will attack higher education, because everyone knows that a dumb America will be a happy America that will vote republican. Think hard while you are still smart enough America, and vote against Santorum and his ilk.

Santorum: "And now, it’s the church, people of faith, who have no right to come to the public square and express their points of view, or practice their faith outside of their church."

Inherent in the concept of "Freedom of Religion", is not only the right to select whichever religion you wish, but to select no religion at all. From this it follows that whether you select a religion or none at all, no one has the right to force a particular religion on you. So the people in the public square who do not practice religion, or who don't believe in the particular religion of those who are coming to the public square to practice their religion, have as much right as the public practitioners to express their view that they wish to be left in peace and not be subjected to the practitioners' particular belief.

It's really quite simple, Ricky. We have as many rights as your folks have.

After rejecting the Obama compromise on women's healthcare, the Catholic Church leaders have sure gone quiet. Could it be that they are hiding under their altars, scratching their heads, wondering how their poutrage backfired?

Business/capitalists also want an educated workforce.

Does it seem like all of a sudden the republican/tea bag party is at war with the American People. They say they want small government with less intrusion. Ladies does it sound that way to you? They sound like they want to push religion on everyone. Santorum said he does not believe in separation of church and state. It makes one wonder if Islam as a religion will be accepted? I'm afraid of that answer. Just imagine what America would be like if the republican/tea baggers had there way.

A man with a gun or a man with a knife does not scare me as much as a - President Santorum.

The church is indeed hiding. In the Philadelphia Archdiocese, a large number of elementary an high schools were slated to close and their parishioners were told that the decisions were made and were final. As it turns out, none of the high schools slated for closure were shut down. As usuual, no explanation was forthcoming. At this point the Catholic Church is dancing as fast as it can. It wants to maintain the doctrine they have followed for many years without losing even more parishioners because of their obstinate rulings on contraception and many others. I am one of those that walked. Enough is surely enough for me!

It sounds more to me like Santorum is trying to force his religious views on the public, instead of the other way around.

Our religious beliefs shouldn't have anything to do with any political election, especially since we KNOW that Republicans are going to say anything and everything they think everybody wants to hear, no matter how much flip-flopping and hypocrisy is involved, which is EXACTLY why they should NOT be tying their back-and-forth political positions with religion!

Obama / Biden 2012

No matter how Ricky tries to explain his theocratic ideology -- freedom my a$$ -- it's still just lipstick on a pig!

Santorum and Romney together have less brain power of Krusty the Clown. Every time I hear more empty rhetoric and out right lies from these two, I have to take a hot shower just wash off the B.S. I just can't imagine anybody with half a brain voting for ether one of these fools.

Santorum's version of "freedom" is the freedom of the conservative Catholic bishops to force non-Catholics to live according to their dogma.

'Santorum talks out of his BUTT, this guy is a PHONY"

Supreme Ayatollah Santorum, "I'm for smaller government and banning everything I don'y like and as long as you live how I tell you to you will be free."

OMG !!!!! The Taliban have infiltrated American politics and their front man is Rick Santorum……

"Capitalism is painful," he said. "We all know markets are painful sometimes. When people dont keep up, when people do things that the market doesn't like, a lot of people suffer. They suffer more if you try to rig the game. I've been consistent on that. I can go after President Obama on that. No one else can in this race can."

Hold it! Santorum is saying that the American People have NOT suffered enough, AND he intends to argue that it was because of President Obama that the American People have NOT suffered enough?

I'm sure that's an argument that President Obama won't mind having, and something that the American People would love to hear -- Santorum arguing that the American People should suffer more for the sake of capitalism!

When was the last time Santorum looked at those gas prices, and when was the last time Santorum had to pump his own gas?

First Republicans demand that President Obama leave "free market enterprise alone" then, when prices go sky high Republicans want President Obama to "control free market enterprise".

Obama Biden 2012

"Capitalism is painful," he said. "We all know markets are painful sometimes. When people dont keep up, when people do things that the market doesn't like, a lot of people suffer. They suffer more if you try to rig the game. I've been consistent on that. I can go after President Obama on that. No one else can in this race can."...I believe the question should be..just who is rigging the game as he Santorum has called it. Is it the the people who have lost their jobs because of the economy ? Or..big business, who is more concerned with their profits than the people who work or worked for them..that enabled big business to make the products to get profits. However, now..far be it from companies paying a living wage to anyone other than the CEO's...

Watching Santorum talk about freedom is like watching Hitler cry over the plight of the Jewish people.

The GOTP should be ashamed of its un-American dogma and offensive commentary. Santorum even has offended the Dutch spouting lies about their healthcare system which he incidentally knows NOTHING about! They have longer lifespans in Holland, more active seniors, less fat people, and a better educated populace overall.

Obama is no snob - just a realist - something Santorum cannot even grasp. The leading nations of the world have more educated and mre healthy citizens....and the USA is falling behind because the religious right fears their MAN-LEADERS will lose power to women and darker people.

Here are some of the idiotic proposals for government controls from the GOP that would make our founding fathers freak out!!!!!

• Required vaginal probes (RAPE) (just watch the tape of the guys in Virginia cracking jokes about women in the state house...)
• No support for advanced/college education (all the founders were well educated, and recognized the value of good education - why this country set up free education for all)
• Injecting religion into all aspects of political life (key tenet of the Constitution - keeping the church out of power)
• Insisting that everyone be of one faith (several of our founders were agnostics - read the Jefferson Bible for starters)
• Arguing in favor of not helping those who cannot help themselves (charity and caring for the porr was a major focus of christianity until these clowns came up)
• Supporting a standing army that takes more than half the taxes we pay (instead of raising an army when needed)
• Arguing against birth control so babies can be born - but not wanting to help care for those babies once out of the womb
• Sending those babies to war and then not helping the soldiers when they return (remember the GI Bill after WWII? Were Truman, Eisenhower, etc snobs?)
• Restricting who can vote based on what paperwork they have (no one used to carry ID - and it didn't change history for the worse)
• Requiring citizens to pay for ID documents (if you require them - then don't charge for them. Voting is a RIGHT GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION)
• Antagonizing Iran (who has never attacked us) intended to promote the national interests of another nation at the risk of our own economic stability and safety?

Goofballs, mental midgets, chauvenists, social Darwinists, sexists, those who want a stupid populace to ensure the publlic can't see what insanity is proposed, religious intolerants, obstructionists, rude, insulting, liars liars liars...... It is exhausting fact-checking Santorum, Gingrich and Romney..... and they stand for all the things the founding fathers ran from Europe to escape.

They are not talking about freedom. They are talking about intolerant tyranny. Don't let a pudgey guy in a sweater vest fool you, a fat guy in a big suit coat, or a rich guy in daddy jeans who is worth over $20 million. These are your choices - GOP. You hounded all the rational ones out of the party. The Tea Party has now left you with offensive fools for choices.

It is a no-brainer. Vote for the moderate. Obama-Biden 2012.

"The GOP has a new health care plan, they call it NoCare" Its about time they got something done !

OBAMA / 2012 "Guaranteed"

"Capitalism is painful," he said. "We all know markets are painful sometimes. When people dont keep up, when people do things that the market doesn't like, a lot of people suffer. They suffer more if you try to rig the game."

"...when people do things that the market doesn't like...". Huh???

Well I suppose that's the Republican mantra - the MARKET rules ALL. And we should just put our faith in it and get screwed.

Been there, done that.

I wonder if this is a new theology?

He should "Free Willy" ..Maybe then he will shut the f up!

The only freedom Santorum is after is the freedom for his hateful theocratic political organization to interfere with women's reproductive rights. With him, it's a crusade in the worst sense of the word.

So, Santorum, you claim to be talking about freedom. Well let me give you some information that you might not know: people of faith CAN run for office. I am a Catholic, and last time I checked the only thing barring me from the Oval Office is my ideas and my charisma, not my faith. JFK was a Catholic, and the only opposition he faced was from extremist Protestants and conservatives who were unsure of a Catholic's viability to become president. And last time I checked, JFK was the BEST president we have EVER had in 40 some years. Even Obama, with all his wit and charisma, cannot compare. John F. Kennedy stated in his actual speech that he wanted freedom of religion and religious tolerance. He NEVER said anything that religious people had no place in government. This guy was facing criticism from Protestants and conservatives who were suspicious of Catholics, and he was trying to separate his faith from his policy. He didn't want to look like a Catholic leader; he wanted to be seen as an AMERICAN leader. And this guy helped Catholics like me and you to be able to get to office (I am not an office-holder, but it clears the path for me in the future). Is this how you repay the man who helped people of different faiths to become president. Oh and Santorum: so wanting every American to go to college means that they want them to be "indoctrinated" by liberals??? So apparently only people who want to be "brainwashed" by liberals ought to go to college??? Well then I and millions of conservative, independent, and moderate Americans will face that risk gladly: personally being indoctrinated by a liberal is less of being brainwashed and more of having my beliefs supported.

And how dare you offend John F. Kennedy, one of the best presidents this nation EVER had. Separation of church and state is one of the CHIEF tenets of the American spirit. The Founding Fathers, as you conservatives like to refer to time and again, were adamantly against religion being a part of government, and wished to have freedom of religion AND freedom from religion in America. Not all of the Founding Fathers were moral Christians. Thomas Paine was a radical left-wing philosophers who was as close to anarchism as one could get without actually being one. Thomas Jefferson wasn't necessarily a Christian, and he was more of a scientific guy with Deist leanings. Ben Franklin was a ladies' man. John Adams was anti-Catholic. Not all of the Founding Fathers were moral Christians. In fact, many were slave-owners, which nowadays is illegal and immoral. So f*** you, Santorum. YOU and your stupid right-wing Christian radicals are trying to purge this nation of "immorality" and indoctrinate people like me with your damn right-wing Ronald Reagan-worshiping brand of ideology. Well I ain't buying it!!!

Oh and Santorum, while your preaching about the values of conservatism, let me give you a simple summary of the conservative values that YOU believe in: homophobia, anti-woman's rights (even a male like me who can be chauvinistic at times can realize that women have rights like contraception), Christian radicalism, and prejudice against non-Christians and non-conservatives. If it's a war you want against the left, then somebody point me to the nearest recruitment office. Maybe the blood of millions of young Americans, including moderates, independents, and maybe a few conservatives, will convince you to turn from your theocratic right-wing extremist ways. May God have mercy on you, for the American people shall spare no quarter. Call me a socialist if you will, but I am a liberal, and I'm proud of it.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Democratic Congress 2012

Notice there are no Tea Party people jumping in on this one?

I think the entire Republican party is bowing their heads and saying, "Where is Ronald Reagan!"

None of the top four have a chance. Thank, goodness!

Don't worry Tricky Ricky, pretty soon you're going to have all the freedom you can handle - or at least a lot more free time to devote to things outside of running for national office.

Santorum: "And now, it’s the church, people of faith, who have no right to come to the public square and express their points of view, or practice their faith outside of their church."

Santorum needs to move to Saudi Arabia and experience first-hand what it's like to live in a country where A.) the majority religion is not his religion, and B.) he must practice the majority religion, or no religion at all.

Then maybe he'd understand how it would feel to be a Jew, a Muslim, or a member of another minority religious group in America and have evangelical Christianity shoved down his throat "in the public square".

No one forces Catholics to use birth control or get an abortion, do they? Yet Santorum wants everyone to abide by his religious beliefs. I'm not asking him to abide by mine.

I am Catholic and this fanatical TOOL makes me want to vomit with his unbelievably backwards and moronic views!

Here is why Sanatorium don't want people to go to college: Because if you come to your senses, you will not vote for him. He wants American DUMB so you will all fall under his control. Yes, he is a control freak - dying to get out of that vest!!

He is jealous of Obama, because Obama is an intelligent man. So no, he don't want the people to be as smart as Obama. And what is so wrong with that?! Shouldn't we all aspire to be smart and educated?~! Geeeezus, we are falling behind other countries in education and technology! The future is in high tech and that requires math and science and more importantly CRITICAL THINKING! This turd is so out of touch with reality! Even God said in the Bible " man help yourself then I will help you"

Another theory here - he's a puppet of some mega corp lords ( I would presume oil plutocrats - remember he is a DUH-bya kiss-ass.) He is so clueless as far as what is best for this country. Back to samo-samo, cut cut cut and trickle down economics that DOES NOT WORK.

Here are some good stuff George Carlin had said. And RIP George! You got it right !

How about freedom from Santorum's religiously political beliefs?

In so many words, he recently said that Americans shouldn't allow their kids to get a college education because they might learn "liberal" ideas. You know -- like science courses, biology, philosophy, the humanities and world literature, world history, etc. Such curricula is, "much too liberal," for Santorum's promotion of home-schooling and Bible Study.

I suppose if he becomes President, by the power of his promised mandates, America will no longer have any need for doctors, engineers, scientists, teachers, artists, computer experts, and so on.

Santorum is a prime example of why our constitution guarantees separation of church and state. As a card-carrying member of the Christian Taliban, Santorum wants to require that all people live by his religious dogma. He hides this under the guise of religious freedom while he decries government intervention in people's lives.

It is a small wonder that he wants to home-school his children. His statement about higher education being bad because educated people become more secular demonstrates that a good education is an excellent tool to overcome opto-rectalitis. Too bad he didn't get one.

Whatever, I think they are all actors in a conspiracy to reelect President Obama. Why is it that the only people that want to reduce the deficit, cut taxes, inspire private industry and restore liberty to the people also have to be religious wingnuts? Seriously think about it, our country is a melting pot of cultures and gender equality. Who runs on one religions values, restricting womens rights and alienating 3/4th of the country and expects to win? Is it really all that impossible for our country to produce a real candidate?

Maybe Ricky should start practicing his faith, instead of insisting that the government is preventing him. I haven't seen any churches being closed, or Christians being fed to lions, so what's stopping him?

Strange -- Rick claims to be such a great Catholic but not even the Pope agrees with much of what he advocates.

Santorum and Romney has been talking constantly about religious beliefs and the evils of abortion, Yet, neither one of them has talked about how the Michigan republican party fought for and won the right to end taxpayer funded abortions, while at the same time they fought for and won the right to keep abortions in their taxpayer funded healthcare package. Both of them talk about the evils of obamacare and how wrong it is to force people to buy health insurance they do not want, but they say nothing about how republicans in Lansing are forcing us to pay the healthcare cost for every former politician and their dependents for life. Buying healthcare for ourselves is wrong, but buying healthcare for republicans is alright. Abortions for us is murder, but abortions is not murder when they need one. Santorum and Romney, why is the things both of you are so gung-ho about stopping, is perfectly ok when other republicans use them???

"All reporters in the back, they say, 'Oh there's Santorum talking about social issues again,'" he said. "No, I'm talking about freedom.
I'm talking about government imposing themselves on your lives."

Yes - you are talking about gov't imposing itself on our lives.

Santorum: "And now, it's the church, people of faith, who have no right to come to the public square and express their points of view, or practice their faith outside of their church."

Strawman Argument

Santorum has a different definition of the word 'freedom'. It's not unusual for Republican politicians to play word games these days.

And some of you need to stop picking on the Catholic Church. Santorum may be catholic, but he is no MORE Catholic than 1 billion plus other people around the world. If he were the Republican nominee, American Catholics would nbo doubt vote overwhelmingly for President Obama.

a large number of elementary an high schools were slated to close and their parishioners were told that the decisions were made and were final. As it turns out, none of the high schools slated for closure were shut down. As usuual, no explanation was forthcoming. At this point the Catholic Church is dancing

Nobody's dancing. It's expensive to run a school. Tuition covers only a fraction of the cost. When not enough other people contribute, or money has to be diverted for other purposes, the schools get closed. It's a serious issue, and one that is discussed widely and openly, within the Church. What did you expect, notices to all the local newspapers? When a school closes there are discussions with the local parish, the parents, the Diocese, and with neighboring parishes about various things that can be done short of school closure. Saying that the decision is made and final pretty much means, "don't bother to offer to take up a one time collection, because that won't save the school." It's necessary to say such things because otherwise people WILL want to make a one-time fundraiser, but their well-intentioned efforts wouldn't be enough to save the school.

People who get INVOLVED in their church know theses things. And they get a lot more out of church than those who just show up every once in a while. Church is like anything else: what you get out of it is directly proportional to what you put into it.

A lot of people leave the Catholic Church after a divorce, because they do not want to go through the annulment process prior to re-marrying. That's their choice. It doesn't mean the Church is bad, or that the annulment process is bad. It usually just means they are embarrassed and don't want to talk about it anymore.

Rick claims to be such a great Catholic but not even the Pope agrees with much of what he advocates.

Exactly. Santorum is at odds with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on a number of issues.

I seriously can't wait to see this doofus have his arse kicked back to wherever it is he came from.

The fact that Santorum is even being taken seriously, as a candidate for presidential office, underscores what dangerous waters we, as a nation, have drifted into, over the years.

What Mr. Santorum proposes is very frightening and totally unconstitutional.

He proposes doing away with the Department of Education and letting "local governments" set the standards for education. Since the various versions of the Christian faith are still the majority in this country and make up the majority of "local" leaders we will see prayer in schools and other defacto embodiments of a "state religion" which is strictly forbidden by the constitution.

We will have a theocracy. We will have the American Taliban. "Christian values" whatever those are, will set policy and define local governments. Jewish? Hindu? Muslim? Buddhist? Atheist? need not apply, this is a "CHRISTIAN NATION" and we are "EXCEPTIONAL". Manifest Destiny redux.

That's exactly what the founding fathers wanted to avoid. No state religion like in England. You have the freedom to worship as you please without government interference OR sponsorship.

THAT'S AMERICA, Mr. Santorum.

What you propose is something whole the other.

Obama/Biden 2012

I wonder if Rick or Mitt is married to any women.

commonsense, I don't believe in voting for or against anyone on the basis of his/her professed religious beliefs. How can we separate the truly religious from the poseurs, and why should we have to? Morality is not the sole province of those who sit in a church pew.

Santorum is making his religion an issue in the campaign to woo religious conservatives, not independent or Democratic voters. The vast majority of Americans do not share his ideas about contraception, education, or the role of religion in politics.

He could go about campaigning, saying whatever he wishes on social issues, and leave the Catholic church out of it. Santorum is making Catholicism look bad. You ought to be telling him to stop picking on the Catholic church. Non-Catholics cannot be expected to know whether or not his views are mainstream in the Catholic church.

Instead of defending our own personal religious choices, we need to leave religion out of the campaign entirely. Start with Santorum.

At this point. Ricky just sounds like Charline Browns parents. All I hear whenever he opens his mouth is - a muted and muffled trumpet sound.

santorum is an imbecile. apparently to him, people going to college are snobs. anyone want to take me on a bet that he pays for his kids to go to college.

scumbag. him and his GOP ilk are scumbags.

Jack (post 1.2),

My respect for you grows daily. I totally agree with your post. I am not a religious person but I respect those who are. All I ask is for the same respect in return. Unfortunately too many on the extreme right are unwiling to give it. They feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on everyone. They don't.

One of those guys, maybe Santorum, is going to be the Republican nominee. After campaigning with all this ultra-right conservative dogma, I wonder how they hope to change their message to appeal to the large block of moderate swing voters?

And now, it’s the church, people of faith, who have no right to come to the public square and express their points of view,

Are you kidding me? You can't get them to shut up long enough for anyone else to get their point of view in.

I don't think that they actually breathe between sentences. Ol' Frothy needs to start his own party if he doesn't get the GOPer nod. The American Taliban Party.

The Teabaggers won't be happy until they stir the pot enough that there's rioting in the streets again like the late 60's and then they'll sit back and say, 'See! I told you so!"

Dave-2550157

One of those guys, maybe Santorum, is going to be the Republican nominee. After campaigning with all this ultra-right conservative dogma, I wonder how they hope to change their message to appeal to the large block of moderate swing voters?

Dave, I think when Santorum flames out (that's WHEN, not IF) he will have met his goals in the campaign: Getting $ millions in contributions and increasing his name recognition across conservative America. He'll segue into a career as a conservative pundit...great way to sell his books, earn money from speaking engagements, etc. He's following right in the footsteps of Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and their ilk.

Conservatism is just a front. It's all about the bling. $$$$$$$

Santorum definition of freedom is he has the freedom to take away our freedom of choice, our freedom to use contraceptives, the freedom of gays to marry, the freedom of parents who want a better life for their kids to prepare them for higher education, the freedom to not be under the tryany of a religious fanatic. Santorum GET OUT OF THIS RACE KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY BODY AND YOUR NOSE OUT OF MY BEDROOM.

I don't remember what I said to upset the "community" but here is my stance on contraception issue. Since I believe life begins at conception not later at some magical date and the pill works by keeping the fertilized egg from either implanting or developing it's use is murder. Before you all tell me Others don't agree with me I was guilty when I was younger of the same sin. I have learned different during my conception of my daughter. Now I have no right to stop you according to our laws. And if you weren't trying to force me to pay for your choice I would have nothing to say. As a Catholic you will either force me to stop supporting my church( where do you think the money comes from?) or be an active participant in what I consider murder. It is my rights under the second clause of the first amendment that are at stake.

Yes - it's about freedom and how many Santorum and his pals intend to take away. Women will have no rights - men will make all decisions. So, Ricky, don't be upset if you find you get few women's votes. The ones with brains won't vote for you!

lonereb - So if a man masturbates, that's murder also, right? What a stupid concept. If the pill is murder then clearly masturbation is also. At what point do you wake up and realize how stupid that sounds????

Lonereb, if you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one, period. But just because you believe something does not make it true. We cannot control where they spend our tax dollars, we can get mad but that's just about it. Republicans here in Michigan will not pay for poor women to have an abortion, but these same republican politicians are forcing these same poor women to pay for their abortions. Taxpayer money cannot be used to pay for abortions except for politicians, and you think we're being unfair?

Perhaps your comment was collapsed in an attempt to prevent the spread of misinformation. The birth control pill does not stop a fertilized egg from implanting. It prevents an unfertilized egg from being released from the ovary. Sperm and egg do not shake hands. No commingling , no "dead baby." No murder. No fertilization. You can now rest assured that you did not commit murder when you were young and ignorant. Well, it sounds as if you are no longer young...but ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge...it's curable. Just get an education, and you will no longer be ignorant. Oh, yeah, but you might be snob...

SeekingSanity--The answer to your final question is: Never!

I won't vote for Santorum, he's too far out there. But he doesn't represent the whole Republican party. Why would anyone call someone from the other party scum Mr. Zaruski? So some of our beliefs are different, but I don't think any patriotic American wants to bring the country down. The main issue is the economy and jobs. Once we get the country back on firm footing we can worry about prayer in schools, abortion, and contraceptives. As long as our leaders continue to spend more money than we take in, we are on the road to ruin. Obama won't get my vote this time, he's shown he's not a good leader.

A mental exercise: It is 2015 you were raped a month ago. Your doctor has just confirmed that you are indeed pregnant. Other than your rape you have not had intercourse in a year. President Santorium made abortion illegal six months ago. Even in the case of rape. Now ask yourself how free do you feel? Now ask yourself what if instead of you being raped it was your wife or your daughter? Now how free do you feel?

Big government economic liberal.

Big government social conservative.

The worst of both worlds is Santorum. Like Al Gore c. 1985.

Santorum isn't running for president of the United States, he's running a rebellion of the white Anglo-Saxon evangalistic Catholics AGAINST the United States.

Shut this guy up Michigan... PLEASE!

American Girl #1.15 -- Santorum is more conservative than the Pope. He was emotionally scarred for life with a strict Catholic upbringing, apparently, and he takes it to extremes that most Catholics don't. Part of that is the idea of suffering. Whether many Catholics realize it or not, whether it's conscious or not, the idea has been imprinted on them from childhood that suffering is a virtue and the path to heaven. It's part of the preachy, sanctimonious mentality that causes him to constantly bring up birth control, suffering, blah, blah, blah. He can't seem to come up with a thought or come out with a campaign statement that doesn't invoke religion. Tiresome beyond belief and scary as h*ll.

Taxpayer money cannot be used to pay for abortions except for politicians, and you think we're being unfair?

Your comment reminded me of Santorum's hypocrisy on the abortion issue. His wife had an abortion. She was pregnant with a fetus that needed intrauterine surgery to correct an abnormality, and when that surgery resulted in an infection, the doctors induced labor. The 20 week old fetus was not viable and survived for only two hours outside the womb.

In all the hubbub about the Santorums taking the stillborn fetus home with them, the central fact that it was an aborted fetus is never mentioned.

There you go. abortion, 250,000 cap on medical malpractice, benchmarks, education. What next? He is a hypocrite. He may speak against all the aforementioned, but he and his wife has committed all the above. hypocrisy at it's best. Who is the snob santorum?

Amen Feisty

Feisty

I agree but you forgot to mention that both Santorum and Romney are in hot competition for GOP village idiot, so they will say anything to capture that coveted title..

"Santorum is a loser that will say anything to get elected, the guy is a Phony"

Santorum + Romney = A Whole Wit

Every time the clown car stops in the middle of the ring, Tricky Ricky scrambles to be the first one out, but continues to get his floppy shoes caught on the droppings from the right side of the GOP elephant. Then M. T. Suit has to come along and use his seltzer bottle to clean him up. I'll admit it is pretty funny, but they should get some new material.

Ron Paul is the one that will do the best job at keeping the Federal Gov out of our State's business. He is also the only one that will not lie to us. RP 2012.

"In the land of the witless, the half-wit is king"

The republican power structure will never, ever allow Santorum to get the nomination.The caucuses and primaries are just fake scenery. If you listen to the republican political consultants and advisers, they have now moved to openly questioning Santorum's sanity. They don't like Romney but they are never going to nominate the Pennsylvania Poopchute. Let's everybody float back down to earth on this guy. He soon will be back lobbying or doing whatever it is he does. I think his "higher education equals snobbery" comment was the capper. He's toast.

Rick tries to act like Ron Paul but his voting record will never reflect the consistency of Paul's. There is only one constitutional conservative running in this primary who has and will continue honoring his oath to the constitution. But in a country where half the population thinks we live in a democracy (as opposed to a republic) I worry about our future.

Given his positions on the First Amendment and the Civil Rights Act, I wouldn't bring too much attention to Paul's voting record...

And we live in a democracy. And a republic. Because a republic is a form of democracy.

Well, surfer dude, let me counter your argument. It's not that I don't like Ron Paul, but the man has some wild notions that states should be more powerful than the federal government. Plus he's not as honest as you think. He says that the problems that faces this nation is because "big government," and that the best solution is to go to the Constitution, which is like a Bible to Constitutionalists like him. The problem with that is that the Constitution was itself flawed. I mean, it's drafters weren't perfect, nor were they aware of future technological innovations like the automobile, the factory, the oil rig, or even things like housing markets. And big government does not necessarily mean less freedom or more problems. Big government can be beneficial a lot of times, like when education is controlled by a local-state-federal joint partnership, or when agencies regulate markets and corporations to keep the environment safe, mainly because it is not necessarily wise to let the free market handle that due to externalities. Plus a large government does not always mean less freedom; for example, a government that spends 30% of a nation's GDP could, in theory, have the exact same amount of freedom (however one can measure it) as one that spends only 20% of GDP. There are many countries that have both freedom and an active federal government, like Canada.
In addition, states are not always the best to handle things. States have a tendency to cut social programs when faced with budget crises, which can devastate the quality of education. Since the federal government has more resources and a larger overreach, it can manage schools without necessarily cutting them out when a deficit occurs. And states often fight with one another and try to compete, so the federal government can be used to address these problems and manage the nation in a broad manner.

And tell me, would you really want the state government to handle something like healthcare all on its own?? Sure they are closer to the people, but healthcare is extremely expensive, and many states cannot handle the financial burden. That is why the feds have more power over the states; to do what they cannot do or are not very good at doing. And to all those saying that an active federal government is against the Constitution, I ask them this: what did the Constitution try to do??? No, it did not try to restrict the power of government; in actuality, it expanded the government's powers while keeping them under control. As every generation matures, new problems arise, and so governments naturally grow bigger to handle a growing country. Plus the Constitution is 230 years old; one cannot abide by it word for word. A nation must maintain a flexible perspective of its constitution so it can sustain itself and adapt to modern society yet respect the document and honors its' principles. I don't care if education is supposed to be the states' business; as long as 49 out of the 50 states have a mandatory balanced budget amendment and are banned from ever having any deficits whatsoever, then education ought to be managed by both the state and the federal government so it can be properly funded and maintained.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

How many accounts are you using today, Bob?

Bob

If Santorum gets elected, he'll make sure there's a change in that accessibilty thing. I wonder when he'll get to something YOU want access to?

Why am I mandated to help pay for all those beautiful, rich, famous women at the 84th Annual Academy Awards last night ... Angelina Jolie and company in their $5-$10K dresses and jewels looked like they are doing OK.

That is a lot of presumption on your part to assume you are in the same class that allows you access to the insurance carriers they can afford.

Bob is only concerned with his access to airport men's. I bet he would buck if that were infringed upon.

They are talking about NOT giving access through public funding BOB

Well since I a Catholic got an e-mail from a pastor of a denomination that has hated my church more than atheists do for 200 years. The letter started out Thank You President Obama for doing for christians what we have not been able to do for ourselves for 500 years.

"I’m talking about government imposing themselves on your lives."

And I'm proud to say I'm all for it. We are going to make you listen to our religious message, damn the Constitution. We are going to monitor your reproductive activities to make sure you do not have protected sexual contact and that any consequences of that activity will draw the scrutiny of the police and courts.

We are going to impose our disdain of scientific investigation and environmental concerns on your education systems.

It is funny that the woman who gave Roe vs Wade "life" in USA is now pro-life, but I don't see the media asking her why she changed her mind.

actually, I was wondering if Santorum the Sanctimonious is running for Grand Inquisitor so he can start an American version of the 15th century Spanish Inquisition....

Hey Ricky, maybe your relgious rhetoric might work in Iran but this is America.

Magnol
Why should we ask her anything? Roe v Wade is the law of the land. If wasn't this case it would have been another. What beliefs are now are only applicable to herself.

Santorum calls our President a "SNOB", Last week he compares President Obama as Hitler. This Ricko is a total loser. Ricky you lost your bid and you are not Presidential material.

OBAMA / 2012 "Guaranteed"

"Accessing" - new liberal code for making others pay for your stuff ... even if you don't need it.

Who paid for Santorum's kids' education while he was living in a Virginia house that he bought for $2M? The taxpayers of Pennsylvania!

Looks to me like the new conservative code - "making others pay for your stuff ... even if you can afford it."

General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Politico/GWU/Battleground
Obama 53, Romney 43
Obama +10

General Election: Santorum vs. Obama
Politico/GWU/Battleground
Obama 53, Santorum 42
Obama +11

General Election: Romney vs. Obama
USA Today/Gallup
Obama 47, Romney 47
Tie

General Election: Santorum vs. Obama
USA Today/Gallup
Obama 46, Santorum 49
Santorum +3

General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Rasmussen Tracking
Obama 43, Romney 45
Romney +2

General Election: Santorum vs. Obama
Rasmussen Tracking
Obama 45, Santorum 43
Obama +2

From RCP

I guess the politco poll is the only one the counts huh?

The only poll that counts is the one that will be taken at official polling places on November 6.

Stay tuned, DB.

Funny that not one of you genuises could answer the simple question - Who doesn't have access to contraceptives.

Judging from some of the comments - half are jackasses that can't even come up with a cogent thought.

Why spend time answering an asinine question?

@kaybee, LOL funny. In 2008, Obama won with the largest margin since '84--running w/ health care reform as a primary plank. Immediately upon introducing health care reform, the refrains were for--WAIT FOR THE MID-TERMS! The mid-terms were won by GOTP screeching jobs, Jobs, JOBS! Bill #1? Abortion. Now you say the only poll that matters is in November? The only time you and yours support democracy is if you win. Otherwise, rule of the mob is just fine, right?

bob,

who doesn't have accesses to contraceptives?.....Women making minimum wage who don't have an additional $200 for a doctors visit and $30 and up a month for the prescription

Lori -

Last I checked, you dont need a doctors visit to get condoms, the morning after pill, dental dams, spermicidal lube....list goes on. Its the nature of people to want stuff for free.

It's funny, DB misquotes some poll numbers, but leaves a link where you can see there are 9 different polls, only one of which has Santorum ahead, 8 with Obama ahead of Santorum.

I guess u are for larger corporations intruding into you life, and extreme Christians intruding into your bedroom, get out of the dark ages doedick

When ever I wonder how American politics reached the bottom of the barrel all I have to do is listen to ANY GOP politician and I have my answer.

"Santorum is anti-gun rights, this guy is a idiot"

Although Santorum is not a member of the NRA - he has an A+ rating with the organization - according to the NRA. And no, the NRA is not endorsing any candidate at this time, and neither is Santorum claiming they are endorsing him.

Such BS that goes around. And Patriotic, I don't mind setting the record straight.

Well, that is an interesting turnabout. Originally he said God told him "NO", but now he admits it was his own decision.

Red, LOL! Good one.

"Marilyn Monroe, Rocks" !!!

More than just Mike are discouraged from running. The GOP voters are wondering about the quality of their candidates should keep in mind that since the Tea Party took over steering the GOP, those high quality, intelligent members whom they WISH were running faded into the woodwork. Those quality candidates know that the Tea Party is too toxic and will make them twist themselves into pretzels to win the nomination. And the public will remember how they sold out to the crazy of the Tea Party long after the TP has gone. Do you think Chris Christie or Mitch Daniels or Collin Powell want to be thought of in the same breath as Donald Trump or Sarah Palin in 2016? No thanks. That way lies madness!

Huckabee is one to talk about a toxic environment. He was in agreement with McCain to stop Romney at one time in 2008.

Naa......Ricky can't just help himself. It's part of him and he'll always dabble into this same crap. It's in his DNA. This man is running for the wrong office. He should be in Rome.

Pen

Agree. Not sure if he's from this planet.

Santorum's interpretation of the "separation of church and state" is absurd: that it should protect religions from government involvement, but not in any way protect the government from religious involvement. He doesn't understand that you cannot have one without the other (see his previous nonsensical comments about a "one-way wall of separation").

This thinking is common among members of the religious right who see no problem at all in imposing their religious dictates on the nation through law because they believe that they are right about every moral issue and that anyone who disagrees with them is evil. While they firmly believe that the government cannot impose laws upon the church, they believe it is the church's duty to "take dominion" over the government.

Well I believe in (absolute) seperation of church and state. I would be happier if I thought Obama did. His idea of seperation is to jam your social agenda which is contrary to my beliefs down my throat while his idiot federal judge rules both against and for prayer at graduation in Texas High Schools in a two month time span. And Good Grief this is one of the three stooges holding my voting rights in his hand. I'll probably never see the inside of a voting booth again.

No lonereb don't do that. Even if I disagree with you I want you to vote. I spent 22 years in the service so that you could. Write in someone but don't disenfrancise yourself.

lonereb, Obama did no such thing. Unless he's forcing you to get 'gay married', he's not forcing anything on you. As to the judge, he upheld the Constitution. You should really read the ruling. It found no other reason for DOMA other than to single out a minority and restrict their rights with no evidence of benefit to the government or society in general. This is from a judge appointed by George Bush by the way. It is not some left/liberal judge. The only reason DOMA exists is because the Catholic/Christian right have forced their religious views into our government against the wishes of our founding fathers. Separation of Church and State goes both ways. It not only protects the government from undue influence from any religion, but it also protects your right to practice (or not) any religion you choose. The two should never mix.

As to you prayer comment, prayer has always been allowed in schools and still is to this day. It is state (school) sponsored prayer that is not allowed and rightly so. We send our children to school for education. We send them to church for religious upbringing.

lonereb

How about doing some fact checking before making totally inaccurate statements. The Obama administration dragged this country back from the abyss that the Republican Party tried so hard to push it into. If you feel you don't require health care then don't go a doctor but I hope you don't mind if the rest of us that don't watch Fox "news" do.

The separation was that government was not promote any church (denomination) as the state religion, and the government was not to make laws infringing on the beliefs or religious practices. There was also not supposed to be any religious test to participate in government or voting.

Think about this, if the forefathers were for a total separation of church and state, then why on earth was opening each house and senate session with prayer included in the Constitution. Why on earth did they permit the "Ten Commandments' and the image of Moses to be on the approved design of the US Supreme Court?

Seems to me a lot of people here are promoting a non-law version of excluding people because of their religious beliefts - and many of them from the "party of tolerance".

I personally am glad that many religious people in this country have also stepped back from the abyss that is the Radical Right. Take me, for example. My church is adamantly opposed to gay marriage and abortion, and doesn't approve of contraception and (I'm guessing from support of abstinence) non-abstinence education. Yet I won't let the church conform my beliefs; I will conform my own. Personally, I cannot wait until the older, more traditional generation of preachers retires so that the new generation can make our various religions more tolerant and contemporary.

Oh and lonereb, tell me how Obama has forced his social agenda on us??? Obamacare is expected to save money and not expected to ruin the economy. It isn't a complete overhaul of healthcare, but it's a start. Repealing DADT and advocating same-sex marriage legalization simply supports the rights of a minority that has been oppressed for decades. Putting the law on contraception forces churches to adhere to standards that apply to other profit and non-profit institutions. I don't see why my church, or any church, has the right to receive special tax breaks and benefits from the government and gets to lobby without doing something for the government. Last time I checked, freedom of religion and from religion cuts both ways. That mean churches should give their employees benefits that are important to their health, and that includes contraception, mostly for women.

And lonereb, I believe its the GOP that is forcing its social agenda in America. Take the anti-contraceptive laws in Virginia and Alabama, and a law in two states that will extend self-defense to people killing abortion doctors to save the fetus, even if the woman consents with the abortion. In fact, Virginia is trying to force women to having a probe sent through their private parts even when the procedure is unnecessary. And did you know what else?? That law, written by conservative Republicans, will punish physicians who don't comply with it with a huge fine or 10 years in jail. An entire decade in the slammer for not doing a procedure that is deemed unnecessary to a woman who doesn't want to have her body penetrated. Last time I checked, that was both insane and an example of Big Brother. You say that the left and Obama are acting like Big Brother, and yet you forget about the right's dictatorial agenda.

Oh and about having something penetrate a woman's body sexually without her consent, I believe that that is known as rape. I thought that was illegal??? Either way, I thought sexual harassment was illegal??? It was, until the GOP came up with the idea that rape can be beneficial....

DB Akron, the House Chaplain, which is what you are referring to, can be of any religion, and the role has included many guest chaplains from numerous religions, including Judaism, and Islam. This role and choice by the house was also questioned, even then:

[President James Madison - 4th President of the United States]

Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom?

In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation.

The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority] shut the door of worship agst the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain? To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers, or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.

The role itself basically caters to those with a need for a chaplain, much like you would find on a cruise ship, or a hospital, etc. You imply that this role has always been seen as 'ok' when clearly it was not, even back to the time of our founding fathers. Even then they questioned whether it violated the Bill of Rights and the Separation of Church and State.

The founding fathers knew exactly what dangers are posed when you inject religion into government. We had left Europe for those very same reasons, to escape religious prosecution and to find religious freedom, only to find that the newly established colonies were returning to their old ways and selecting state sponsored religions. This is why the bill of rights was drafted in such a way to separate state and religion. The founding fathers knew that if you selected a state sponsored religion, then eventually those who did not follow that religion would be treated unfairly. They had already left this type of system behind and understood the dangers.

As to why they continue to approve such religious structures, that's and excellent question. Other examples are 'In God We Trust' which was added to coins in 1854, and to money in 1957, or adding 'Under God' to the pledge on 1954. They do these things because they dismiss the past, or fail to recognize the danger. The separation of Church and State does NOT strip you of your religious rights. You as a senator and as an individual, could pray all day, ask god for guidance, get down on the floor and pray to Alah. It protects the government, as the ruling body, from influence by religion, and as a result, protects YOU from being forced into a government sponsored religion. One need only look to the middle east to see the results of mixing Law with Religion. I find it ironic that people so proud of their religion and their freedom to express it might not have that right if it were not due to separation of church and state, unless they happen to be the lucky ones who practiced the same religion as the majority. One need only look to DOMA to see examples of religion causing undue treatment for no other reason than it conflicts with the religious belief of the majority. America is not run by 'mob rule' and these protections are important for this very reason. DOMA singles out a minority based strictly on a religious belief, and treats them as a sub-class of citizen.

Religion in government serves no purpose and offers no benefit that reasoned thinking, and fairness cannot provide. Clouding decisions in mysticism and faith when reason, logic, and simple morality (which does not require religious beliefs), serves no one. One does not have to follow God to decide that if one man stole from another, it is wrong, or if one man harms another, it is wrong. These things are common sense, and those social structures exist across every continent on the planet, regardless of and in the total lack of religion. What benefit would there be to inject religion into such a decision?

DJ,

I'm sold

James Madison for President 2012

I am not saying I don't want to vote but since my March 3rd, April 3rd, April 17th, May 29th primary looks like it will be moved again till after the convention. I'm saying I won't be ALLOWED to vote.

Following up on what DJ wrote, this past weekend, I heard Dr. Paul speak on television. Yesterday, I heard Rick Santorum speak. Both claim their positions on religion are supported by what the Founding Fathers said. Santorum was waxing on about how he doesn't believe in the separation between church and state and that the Founding Fathers never wanted to cast aside religious groups as full participants in our democracy. Dr. Paul has said, "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance."

Both of these constitutional nincompoops are corrupting the truth. Anyone who claims that the Founding Fathers wanted a "tolerant Christian nation" or encouraged religious believers to press their religious views to make public policy and that there is no separation of church and state required under the First Amendment's Establishment Clause is demonstrably wrong, according to no less an authority than the United States Supreme Court, which has consistently recognized that the purpose of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was to build or erect a wall separating Church and State, according to Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, whose group crafted the clause:

"[A]t the first session of the first Congress the amendment now under consideration was proposed with others by Mr. Madison. It met the views of the advocates of religious freedom, and was adopted. Mr. Jefferson afterwards, in reply to an address to him by a committee of the Danbury Baptist Association (8 id. 113), took occasion to say: 'Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions,-I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.' Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured." Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164 (1878).
"Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'" Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 16, citing Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.

"This Court first reviewed a challenge to state law under the Establishment Clause in Everson v. Board of Ed. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 67 S.Ct. 504, 91 L. Ed. 711 (1947).1 Relying on the history of the Clause, and the Court's prior analysis, Justice Black outlined the considerations that have become the touchstone of Establishment Clause jurisprudence: Neither a State nor the Federal Government can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither a State nor the Federal Government, openly or secretly, can participate in the affairs of any religious organization and vice versa.2 "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State.' "Everson, 330 U.S., at 16, 67 S. Ct., at 511 (quoting Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164, 25 L. Ed. 244 (1878)). The dissenters agreed: "The Amendment's purpose ... was to create a complete and permanent separation of the spheres of religious activity and civil authority by comprehensively forbidding every form of public aid or support for religion." 330 U.S., at 31–32, 67 S. Ct., at 519–520 (Rutledge, J., dissenting, joined by Frankfurter, Jackson, and Burton, JJ.); accord, Lee v. Weisman, 505 US 577, 599-600 (1992).

Dr. Paul said about these court decisions: "Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity."

So these arrogant imbeciles purport to be a higher legal authority on what the Founding Fathers intended by the religious clauses in the First Amendment than the Supreme Court, the final authority on what the Constitution means, has consistently ruled since 1878. To me, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum resemble lots of conservatives, who rant about a variety of things being unconstitutional without knowing much about the Constitution or how it's been interpreted by the Supreme Court.

Michael L. Marowitz
J.D., J.S.M. (Master's Degree in Law with emphasis on constitutional law, Stanford Law School, 1981)

Is he from earth? We should look at that question. If I wanted to destroy the people of earth how would I do it. Have them destroy themselves. Has sanatereums DNA been tested? is he in fact human? I want credit for starting this conspiracy theory and I want to see his birth certificate.

The GOP can only win with the dumb a$$ vote, which is a shame.

Yes, they are.

They think if there are more ignorant people, they'll get more votes. Haters, ignoramuses, and religious fanatics. Hmmmmm....don't bet on it. Don't think there are enough of those folks to make it happen.

Rush is an example of why college should be mandatory. Only the uneducated tune into that gas bag.

Sam - How can a man like Santorum who holds three degrees, BA, MBA and JD say college is bad? Why hasn't someone called him on this?

And as far as blue collar roots - his father was a Clinical Physiologist and his mother an Administrative Nurse

Why hasn't he been challenged on his lies?

Barbara - because what you are being told about what he said is wrong.

College is not for everyone, just as cleaning the sewers aren't for everyone. By trying to send everyone, you then create a new shortage for people in others and a bloat of people who can't use what they learned.

When I went to the School of Architecture, the number of students who could graduate was limited by the schools to insure that only only a little more than enough architects for the demand would graduate. Then government dropped limited liability protections, so the number of graduates left the field or stopped getting registered. The only reason we aren't noticing a shortage of Registered Architects is that the economy shranks so much that registered architects are happy to get drafting work right now.

Then on top of that, the schools started dropping 5 year degrees for 6 year Masters degrees. Interestingly the market only needed Bachelor degrees. Requiring 6 years is a bonus to the school and leaves the kids in greater debt and because the economy is so down, not likely to get a entry level job.

DB, of course college is not for everyone. How in the world does ANYONE think that President Obama is mandating college for everyone?? Just another inflammatory, twisted spin by the radical right wing. I've said it before and I'll say it again...they are scary, folks....a devious few (rush, laura, etc) creating works of fiction to boost their ratings and inciting the blind, ignorant masses into actually believing it.

DB- you are right- college isn't for everyone- notice however, that Santorum has made sure that his kids are in college. Why didn't he encourage them to take vocational training to become machinists or electricians? He talks the talk, but he ain't walkin the walk.

-and while we are on the subject- you went to architecture school. Why didn't you take up a trade?

We will always have jobs for uneducated unskilled workers. Who would do these jobs if everyone had a college degree? I went to a state college when it was affordable over 30 years ago. Can anyone tell me why the cost of an education has went up so much faster than inflation?

We need more trade schools. I worked in the automobile service for years and it is getting more difficult to find skilled auto technicians even though it a good paying job. One of my good friends is an auto technician with a 2 year trade school degree and he makes a little over $100k per year plus benefits. My mother retired after more than 25 years as a school teacher and she never made more than $45k per year.

I want my son to attend college as well, but it will be his decision. He's 12 and talking about a career in the Air Force. I'm sure he will change his mind many times over the next few years.

Obama never said everyone needed to go to college. He said a college education should be attainable for anyone who wants to go. But, of course the GOP and DB have twisted his words to suit their lies.

Here is what a Pulitzer Prize winning site has to say about Santorum's lie that Obama is wanting everyone to go to college:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/27/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-calls-barack-obama-snob-wanting-ever/

And this from the people who marched against the mosque opening in the Ground Zero neighborhood.

There is a reason they are known as the hypocrisy party.

You may be right but you may be wrong too. I got a letter today in my e-mail that started Thank You President Obama for doing for christians what they have not been able to do for themselve for 500 years. This sent to a Catholic by a pastor of a denomination that has historically hated Catholics more tha atheists do.

Umm...I get emails from Nigeria every day. I get all kinds of odd emails. I hit delete.

Ah but I think it is funny HAHA except his premise is true. Nice for awhile not to have to explain to christians that as a Catholic I am a christian. Gee we can't even agree on how many books are in the bible.

Maybe he's trying to detract attention from his horrible economic plan???

Santorum is so desperate, he's making ever wilder statements. His "blue collar" background? Hardly. His father was a psychologist with multiple degrees (incl a Ph.D.), mother an administrative nurse. He says Obama's a "snob" for saying people should go to college, yet he (Santorum) has two degrees (law & MBA)ans is making sure his kids are in college. He denigrates the Kennedy speech on separation of church and state, which was given to placate Episcopalians the he would not, as a catholic, take orders from the Vatican.

He's positioning himself to be the most dangerous candidate since Barry Goldwater.

R Bell,

I couldn't agree with you more, but republicans have nothing to offer us here, so they are putting up all of their traditional smokescreens.

What happened to jobs, the debt and the economy?

These are not issues Obama and the liberals want to talk about in the election since they will look bad on Obama.

If what you say is true, why do the Republicans keep bringing up social issues? Of course, they provide a distraction for Obama and the Democrats. If the GOP wants to campaign on social issues, they'll lose big time. Most voters don't care about the so-called culture wars.

With the unemployment rate going down, the economy improving, and debunking all the faux tax/budgetary plans proposed by the republicans, these ARE the issues that will make Obama look good.

Obama attacked the Catholic church and put the fear of God in protestants. So no one is going to care about jobs or anything else. Divide and conquer. I think it might backfire on him. He just united people who have been at each others throats for 500 years.

It is religion that has waged war on American by insisting they are entitled to break any law they do not agree with.

You know, lonereb, you keep saying that over and over. Obama didn't attack anyone, and you saying it over and over doesn't make it so. This is about health care and not an attack on religion.

Yes, people do care about jobs, but some guy saying he thinks contraception is dangerous and all the other intrusive ideas he is touting will make only hard right people vote for him. That is going to backfire on him. Obama put the fear of God in protestants? Where did you even get that?

Santorum put the fear of losing control of contraception in protestants...lol.

R Bell- they know they can't win on the real issues, so they go to the standard fall back GOP modus operandi: trot out the social issues and play to the base, hoping to blow enough smoke to confuse those who aren't really paying attention- i.e. brain-addled Fox propaganda addicts.

Ram the money that the Catholic church spends in the US on hospitals, schools etc does not appear magically. It also doesn't come from Rome. It comes from me and every other American Catholic. When you force my church to provide what many of us consider support for murder you are forcing that on each individual Catholic citizen. It is the rights of each individual citizen of the Catholic faith whose second clause of the first amendment rights you are violating. You will either force me to stop supporting my church like I have any organization that supports Planned Parenthood or force me to pay for the sin of murder. Thus you have violated the free exercise thereof clause.

lonereb,

Obama didn't attack your Church or the free exercise of your Catholic beliefs. Nothing Obama has done stops your Church from preaching whatever it wants from its pulpits this coming Sunday or on any other Sunday in the future. Nothing Obama has done stops you and fellow believers from believing anything you want, including that life begins even before conception, now or in the future. If you don't want to use contraceptives, then nothing Obama has done forces you to use them contrary to your religious beliefs.

However, neither the Catholic Church nor any other church nor you, lonereb, can, in the name of religious freedom, dictate that the employees of secular business enterprises operating under the Church's name enjoy fewer healthcare options than are enjoyed by their counterparts in similar businesses that don't operate under the Church's name. Unfortunately, too many religious adherents fail to understand or pay short shrift to the phrase "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

That the College of Bishops has the gall to continue to press for a special exemption for the Church as an employer of business entities bearing its name is actually a perversion of religious liberty, an attempt to foist the College's notions (actual Catholic women use contraceptives just like non-Catholic women) on those who do not share the Church's religious beliefs. Certainly, the Church's foray into politics raises substantial questions about whether the Catholic Church should continue to enjoy a tax-exempt status.

"By not taxing churches, the government is prevented from directly interfering with how those churches operate. By the same token, those churches are also prevented from directly interfering with how the government operates in that they cannot endorse any political candidates, they cannot campaign on behalf of any candidates, and they cannot attack any political candidate such that the effectively endorse that person's opponent.

"What this means is that charitable and religious organizations which receive a 501(c)(3) tax exemption have a clear and simple choice to make: they can engage in religious activities and retain their exemption, or they can engage in political activity and lose it, but they cannot engage in political activity and retain their exemption.'

http://atheism.about.com/od/churchestaxexemptions/a/churchpolitics.htm (boldface added for emphasis).

The Catholic Church is not the victim of anything other than its own arrogance.

sonmanvb - Obama is more likely to talk about the economy, jobs, the debt than Republicans are. The GOP has nothing to say. obama is making progress and the GOP just hates that things are improving. So, they concentrate on hatred for everything that isn't demented - you know - typical Tea party nonsense!

Son, you twist well..lol. Now run along and pick up your toll paycheck:)

oddly enough, the troll brings up a nice point.

Europe has been pushing austerity measures the last couple years, and its driving their economy the rest of the way off the cliff. You know, Austerity measures, that magical plan the Republicans are pushing for all they're worth.

so wait Obama is at 45% and 43% in the same poll? interesting.

Fox Polls! lolololol

LMAO @ Ms Haley.. She doesn't get it. The GOP don't get it. They complain the Prez won't work with them, yet its the Republicants who have said NO at every turn since 2008!! They want to scalp Education, Social programs and Entitlements, yet they want to add to defense for their impending holy wars with Iran, North Korea and any other Muslim nation. They don't get it that spending trillions to fight unnecessary wars will only destroy America further. We can't waste trillions on nation building until America is rebuilt and better than ever! The GOP don't get it that forcing 1 religion on America, as in Slick Ricks model, Judea-Christian Sharia law will also be the downfall of America.

America was NOT founded on christian laws. If so, every law would be based on the bible and nothing more, nothing less. OUR founding fathers knew the problems of a intermingled Government and Religion. Yet we have lost those ways. America was not and IS not a conservative nation. The very thought of our founding fathers being conservative is laughable. Conservative men don't have the gusto, forethought, or the testicular fortitude to set out and start a new nation in the face of one that was as Religiously Oppressive as the then Kingdom in England. America was founded because of the 1 religion rule in England. Not because of the "taxation" issue we only hear about!

A vote for Slick Rick or Slick Mitt will only cause America to slide further down into 3rd world status. If you want more unending wars vote for Willard or Slick Rick!

And I wonder just exactly what 'action' they want? Do they have any ideas? I listened to most of that speech and he did not tell them to give more money to education. He called for reform. He also told them they needed to lower tuition costs in state supported schools or risk losing federal funds.

So they want 'leadership' and for the President to take 'action'. I suppose they are just admitting that they have no ideas but will most certainly NOT like any the President puts forward. Typical Republican...

Just more GOP BS- when you have nothing substantive to offer, blow smoke.

No no no no no

We already have Perry. Send him else where. May he can go to the moon with Newt. Or Antartica. But Texas has enough kooks. We don't need more. Too many of our 'good' citizens are lacking in common sense. They might elect him to something.

For starters, it doesn't really matter that it is unconstitutional. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, etc. don't really care about our constitution at all.

What actions do you want to declare unconsitutional? They sell their products at the going rate. Why not declare what gold miners, commercial halibut fishermen, and farmers do as unconsitutional.

ESOR TR,

Just because you don't like something doesn't make it unconstitutional. Laws and acts by governmental officials may be ruled unconstitutional by courts if, but only if, they violate specific provisions of the Constitution of the United States (or the Constitutions of the individual states). There are no specific constitutional provisions banning individual companies or companies that market commodities whose prices have an effect on the operations of all other business in America.

The closest thing to what you're talking about are anti-trust laws, which seek to bar monopolies in a given industry. But these are laws that regulate a single industry in the name of fair competition, which presumably leads to lower consumer prices, and not constitutional provisions that could lead to a judicial decision of unconstitutionality.

When making claims of unconstitutionality, be sure that you know which provision of the Constitution you believe is being violated and have a cogent argument why that provision is violative of that provision. General gripes about government or lack of governmental action are not constitutional arguments.

Michael L. Marowitz
J.D., J.S.M. (Master's Degree in Law with emphasis on constitutional law, Stanford Law School, 1981)