2.2.12 – Today’s Rasmussen poll – Santorum moving ahead

 The good thing about Rasmussen and his pollsters is that they poll registered voters – the people who will most likely go into the voting booth and vote for a President.

Today’s most recent poll results are very encouraging for Rick Santorum because even though Rasmussen deliberately skewed the poll results to include more Democrats than Republicans (30% Democrats and only 23% Republicans), the results put Santorum with 26% favorable and only 27% unfavorable.

This proves that Santorum is respected even among the more liberal and/or independent voters. After we get past the primaries, our Republican candidate will need to have broad appeal going into the General Election.

Evidently Rasmussen deliberately set up the poll specifications to be able to weigh the electability factor across party lines, and Santorum came out ahead of any of the other Republican candidates.    

Santorum’s integrity, strong family values, experience, voting record, and outspoken conservatism are quite appealing to a large percentage of Americans who are desperate for a real leader in the White House – someone they can trust and respect.

Results in today’s Rasmussen poll (deliberately skewed to sample more Democrats than Republicans) --

Santorum – 26% (favorable) to 27% (unfavorable) – minus 1

Romney – 31% (favorable) to 36% (unfavorable) – minus 5

Gingrich – 22% (favorable) to 48% (unfavorable) – minus 26

Ron Paul – 26% (favorable) to 32% (unfavorable) – minus 6

Head to head with Obama:

Obama (46%) – Romney (45%) – 1 point

Obama (46%) – Santorum (44%) – 2 points

Obama (49%) – Gingrich (41%) – 8 points

Obama (45%) – Ron Paul (42%)  -- 3 points

2.2.12 – The Weekly Standard – “Rasmussen: Obama Leads Romney by 1, Santorum by 2” -- http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/rasmussen-obama-leads-romney-1-santorum-2_620872.html

===============

1.27.12 – “The Last Man Standing” – by Donna Garner

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blogs/the-last-man-standing-by-donna-garner-1-27-12

Donna Garner

Wgarner1@hot.rr.com



Pro-Lifer Sandra Cano of Doe v Bolton -Endorse Santorum for President

Press Release

Sandra Cano, the former "Doe" of Doe v Bolton companion case to Roe v Wade in the 1973 Supreme Court decisions allowing abortion and even permitting late-term abortion, believes we need Rick Santorum for President.  "Senator Santorum has strong faith and family values.  He's our man!" 
Sandra Cano has placed her trust in Rick Santorum and her "trust" is not lightly given. 

She was taken advantage of when she was a poor, uneducated, pregnant woman.  Although she was told she was getting legal-aid for divorce and custody of her children,  instead her case was used to open the door to abortion on demand.  Sandra Cano has never had an abortion, considered abortion or supported it.  She champions the rights of the unborn and disabled children.   Recently Sandra Cano's story was made part of a documentary called, "The Gift of Life" narrated by Mike Huckabee.  
In an interview with City On A Hill Radio Show that airs in southeast Alabama, she said "I think (all) life will have a better chance if Senator Santorum gets to be our President...as long as he has God first, he will protect life and care about the people he is going to serve."   Go to  http://www.cityonahill.tv for more.

Sadly, we hear the news about of the fight for life in Rick Santorum's child Bella.  According to Santorum,  “I don’t know whether her life is going to be measured — it’s always been measured — in days and weeks. Yet here I am. … because I feel like I wouldn’t be a good dad if I wasn’t out here fighting for a country that would see the dignity in her and every other child", from Palm Beach Post 1-28-12.

Indeed with Rick Santorum one can know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he knows how precious life is and  will serve this nation knowing that-- not just in his head--but his heart.  He has a passion to see the quick repeal of the life-destroying Obamacare.  Like Santorum, Sandra Cano is a fighter for life and she says with Rick Santorum as President you can be sure--"life" has a chance.

Media contact
Diana Crews
e-mail@cityonahill.tv

 http://www.cityonahill.tv



Do Americans Have Faith In God?

Hear excerpt of interview with three prominent pastors about the Presidential election.  The future depends on whether "We the People" still believe...hope we do for in these dire times only God can save.

Hear what happened when Romney allowed same-sex marriage in Mass even though he was not required to

"In fact, it was Governor Mitt Romney who was ultimately responsible for same-sex "marriages" taking place. The Supreme Judicial Court only issued an opinion and advised the Legislature to act (which it never did). Even the Court acknowledged that it had no power to change the law.

Governor Romney created these "marriages" through an unconstitutional and illegal directive to his Department of Public Health (to print new "marriage" licenses), and through his legal counsel threatened to fire any Town Clerk or Justice of the Peace who failed to implement the (non-existent) "new law". He was not required by any constitutional mandate to do these things. On the contrary, his actions clearly violated his oath to uphold the laws of Massachusetts.  Search on the net and you'll find confirmation from even gay websites--thankful to Mitt.  Here's more

Benjamin Franklin said ----

In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, graciously answered....

I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel...

I therefore beg leave to move- henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business...

National Review Online: The reality is that Rick Santorum’s instincts and intellectual choices consistently tend toward freedom.

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/287441

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com        

Rick Santorum, Conservative Stalwart By Quin Hillyer January 9, 2012 4:00 A.M. Excerpts from this article: … The attempt to attach a “big-government conservative” label to Rick Santorum for some rare wanderings from the conservative reservation makes about as much sense as arguing that record-breaking Drew Brees of the Saints is a poor quarterback because he threw 14 interceptions this season. The reality is that Rick Santorum’s instincts and intellectual choices consistently tend toward freedom. On taxes, for instance, Santorum has always been superb. The Club for Growth’s white paper on Santorum, calling his tax stances “very strong,” confirms that “Santorum has consistently supported broad-based tax cuts and opposed tax increases either by sponsoring key legislation or by casting votes on relevant bills.” His record on a host of other conservative issues is as solid as that of any politician in the past two decades. He has been firmly and repeatedly against all sorts of regulatory abuse, against McCain-Feingold and other restrictions on political speech, for school choice, for tort reform, for a strong military, and for a balanced-budget amendment. Obviously he has been as stalwart a defender of social conservatism, for 20 full years, as any other public figure. And as virtually every conservative involved in the judicial wars during Santorum’s time in the Senate has confirmed, in person or in print, Santorum and his staff were the go-to people in the Senate when you needed to find tireless, committed advocates for conservative jurists.  Santorum is, wrote Ed Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, “the candidate in whom I have by far the greatest confidence” in terms of how likely he would be “to appoint excellent Supreme Court justices and lower-court judges and to work tenaciously to get them confirmed.” Meanwhile, as Santorum frequently (and entirely accurately) reminds anybody who will listen, his work on the single most important conservative policy reform of the past half century, the 1996 welfare-to-work effort that cut spending and poverty rates simultaneously, was seminal, indefatigable, and remarkably effective. Iowa’s Sen. Chuck Grassley explained to the Des Moines Register a week ago that he was unconvinced about welfare reform until Santorum paid him an office call and “took a lot of time to convince me of his point of view. . . . The sincerity and effort that he has to get his point across in the presidential campaign is almost a total reflection of how he operated as a United States senator.” Grassley yielded and voted for reform. More broadly, until Rep. Paul Ryan’s recent prominence, nobody in Congress has been as passionate and fearless an advocate for entitlement reform as Santorum. Medicaid block grants. Investment accounts for Social Security. Medicare payments controlled by the beneficiaries rather than third-party payers. Choice rather than government mandates. Indeed, Santorum was the first candidate this year to fully embrace Ryan’s proposed reforms — with this exception, as he reminded me in a phone interview on Thursday: “I’ve criticized Ryan on one thing: waiting ten years [for many of the reforms to kick in]. We can’t afford to wait. We’ve got to start now.” It was his enthusiasm for entitlement reform (probably combined with pressures from being in the Senate leadership at the time, although he won’t say so) that, Santorum says, led him into the vote about which rightward critics most often carp: the creation in 2003 of the Medicare Part D prescription-drug program. As expensive as it was, Part D did embrace three conservative goals. “First was health savings accounts,” Santorum has said. “They were a passion of mine since 1992 when John Kasich and I introduced the first bill proposing them. This bill allowed them, for the first time. Second was the Medicare Advantage program: a precursor, I thought, to what Ryan is proposing now, a private-sector proposal for Medicare prescription drugs which we thought could be an example to transform the whole system. Third was competition among insurers [rather than service delivery through the government].” “What I tried to do is take lemons and make lemonade,” he said. “I said even at the time that it was a 51–49 decision for me.” Those features of the program worked, with individual premiums and the government tab both running as much as 40 percent below original projections. Most conservatives still will argue, rightly and convincingly, that the prescription-drug program wasn’t worth the cost unless it was part of broader Medicare reform. The good thing is, there is no doubt that a crusading President Santorum would try to accomplish just that. As for overall spending and his much-discussed history of support for “earmarks” (a position also shared by tightwad Ron Paul), conservative groups’ ratings show that Santorum was better than the average Republican, despite representing a state far bluer than those of most of his Republican colleagues. He demonstrated particular courage in his support for the Freedom to Farm Act and in frequent opposition to floor amendments that would have put additional spending in appropriations bills. Denizens of Capitol Hill in the 1990s fondly remember Santorum’s repeated use of a prop during floor debate called the “Spendometer,” which he used to make a persuasive (and entertaining) case against wasteful federal largesse. Out of office, he vociferously opposed TARP, the various “stimulus” packages, and the bailouts of car companies and of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. All those stances were perfectly in line with the voting record he had established in the House and Senate. A final criticism, emanating from Rick Perry’s camp, concerns Santorum’s votes in the mid-1990s against federal right-to-work (RTW) legislation. Santorum now says that as a senator representing a non-RTW state, he objected to national legislation on federalist grounds. He notes that federalism is not, in his mind, an all-encompassing consideration for individual states’ prerogatives, but one that should be the default position absent a sweeping moral imperative (such as the protection of unborn children). He has always supported RTW at the state level — and he has long since changed his position to favor it at the national level as well. Spokesman Matt Beynon said the switch was sincere, growing in part from discussions Santorum had with tea-party favorite Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina.  However the switch came about, Santorum answered all nine questions on a recent survey from the National Right to Work Committee in ways that should thrill any conservative. He pledged to oppose compulsory union dues, support repeal of mandatory union representation for federal workers, oppose “card check” union elections, oppose “project labor agreements” requiring union wages even for non-unionized federal work, and took the RTW position on all five other issues in the questionnaire as well. Because friend and foe alike agree that Santorum’s word is his bond, there is every reason to trust each of those pledges. Perhaps, though, the wisest way for conservatives to assess Santorum is not with exhaustive issue-purity tests, but rather by considering the man’s overarching values. For anybody who has watched Santorum’s career since his first upset victory in 1990, the idea of him as anything other than a solid conservative on economics, defense, or social issues is patently absurd. Conservative-movement leader Colin Hanna, president of the Let Freedom Ring public-policy organization, is a Pennsylvanian who has followed Santorum’s career closely since his first Senate race in 1994... “I think Rick was sounding the themes of the Tea Party long before the Tea Party came along,” Hanna told me. “He talks and acts like a freedom-agenda, Reagan guy. He has a deep passion and you see that in every aspect of his personality. He truly believes that most government programs, particularly social programs, trap rather than empower the people they are designed to serve. . . . His attitude was to make these programs work by liberating their beneficiaries rather than enslaving their beneficiaries. Therefore the solution to big-government social programs is in fact their restructuring, and perhaps their outright elimination. Ipso facto, that leads to smaller, not bigger, government.” Or, as conservative talk-radio host Mark Levin asked me rhetorically Thursday night, “If Rick Santorum is not a consistent, principled conservative, certainly in the 90 percent category, then who is?” Of one thing conservatives can be absolutely sure: Unlike politicians who lack the courage of conservative convictions, Rick Santorum will fight for his causes and not be scared off by “establishment” criticism. In four uphill elections and in legislative skirmishes for conservative ends too numerous to count, Santorum has won a decidedly impressive number of his fights. — Quin Hillyer is a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom and a senior editor for The American Spectator.



The Record Speaks--Why Santorum by Donna Garner

“Why Rick Santorum?”

by Donna Garner
1.18.12

We support Rick Santorum as our Republican candidate for many reasons, some of which are that he has integrity, is honest, and has a strong moral compass -- just the type of person we need in the White House – someone whose word we can trust -- to lead America back to its former role as the respected leader of the free world.

Along with his personal qualities, I like the fact that Rick Santorum has a strong, conservative record in Congress that demonstrates he had the knowledge, personal communication skills, and political wisdom to be able to work effectively as a member of Congress for 16 years.  

One of the best ways to analyze Rick Santorum’s voting record is to look at the Interest Group Ratings while he was in Congress. Please go to this link:  http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/27054

SANTORUM’S PLAN TO CUT FEDERAL SPENDING

According to The Hill, 1.9.12,  Rick Santorum wants to cut federal spending by $5 Trillion over 5 years.

That is even more than the amount proposed by the House Budget Committee under conservative Paul Ryan --$1 Trillion over 5 years.

The  conservative House Republican Study Committee (RSC) has proposed $2.3 Trillion.

Rand Paul wants to cut $3 Trillion using the CBO's baseline as a comparison. 

Ron Paul has proposed a cut of $4.1 Trillion in 4 years.

To get to the $5 Trillion level of spending cuts in 5 years, Santorum wants the changes in Medicare proposed by Paul Ryan to be sped up; but the changes would only apply to retirees from 2022 onward.

NEWT

Newt Gingrich was a Congressman but exhibited such a lack of moral character that even Republican members who served with him have refused to support him for President.

ROMNEY AND PERRY

Mitt Romney and Rick Perry do not have a Congressional record because they have only worked at the state level as Governors. 

RON PAUL

Ron Paul certainly has no record of success in Congress.  According to non-partisan GovTrack.us ( http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400311 ), “Ronald Paul has sponsored 421 bills since Jan 7, 1997 of which 418 haven't made it out of committee and 1 were successfully enacted.” (This site appears to be quite current because it tracks bills filed as late as Oct. 20, 2011.)  

Since 1997 to the present time, Congressman Ron Paul has been able to build the required support for only one of his bills to pass.  Even worse, only three of his bills have even made it out of committee. This record demonstrates a startling lack of leadership on his part and reveals how little trust his fellow Congressmen have in him.  His record also explains why he has been nicknamed “Dr. No.”

Please go to the following link to read “Ron Paul and Obama – Dangerous Men”

by Donna Garner, 12.26.11: http://educationviews.org/2011/12/26/ron-paul-and-obama-dangerous-men/

SANTORUM VS. RON PAUL ON THE CONSTITUTION  

Please listen to the attached 4-minute interview with Glenn Beck in which Rick Santorum explains the differences between himself as someone who believes in the U. S. Constitution and Ron Paul who supports Libertarian beliefs.  

POSSIBLE CABINET PICKS BY RICK SANTORUM

Because Rick Santorum is a highly principled person with a well-defined moral compass, conservative voters could count on him to choose the same principled type of people to put around him in his cabinet and in his administration.  Just think how exciting it would be to have the following experienced experts to serve under President Santorum:

Michele Bachmann – Vice President or Department of Health and Human Services

Jim DeMint – Vice President or Office of Management and Budget

Mario Rubio – U. S. Trade Representative or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Paul Ryan – Office of Management and Budget or Council of Economic Advisers

Rick Perry – Department of Agriculture

Herman Cain – Department of Labor or Department of the Treasury

John Bolton – Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

John Ashcroft – Department of State or Department of Justice

Robert Scott (Texas Commissioner of Education) – Department of Education

Sarah Palin – Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, or Environmental Protection Agency

Mario Rubio – U. S. Trade Representative or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Bobby Jindal – Department of Health and Human Services

Newt Gingrich – White House Press Secretary

*Not a complete list of appointed offices

To become familiar with Rick Santorum's positions on various issues, please go to the following link and https://www.ricksantorum.com/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=2&utm_source=RSGS100001&gclid=CM_405vE160CFW-HtgodnE6Wlg

Donna Garner

Wgarner1@hot.rr.com



Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul--Comparisons from Christian Perspective with God's answer to economic problems

Isaiah 65:2

I have stretched out My hands all day long to a rebellious people,
      Who walk in a way that is not good,
      According to their own thoughts;

Hebrews 4:12

For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

---Here are some interviews to give you more food for though on this Presidential Primary--it's important you know as our future depends on how "we the people" vote...  May God help America.

Listen to internet radio with City On A Hill Radio on Blog Talk Radio

It is always good to set the stage--to put our minds in the right frame so that we can see things through the eyes from whom all blessings flow.  If you are serious about loving God and wanting the best for this nation then get ready and remember:

Hope at this point you will pray for wisdom from the God who can give it to you.

You will have to do research to properly compare so here are points and links to make you think:

Rick Santorum

• Pro-Life

• Defines Marriage as between man and woman

• Meets the test of the Founders when they said choose ye men that fear (respect) God

• Believes in the Constitution and Original Intent-

• Has been seen as for big government

Read and learn...

Mitt Romney

• Perceived as savvy and will know how to grow the economy

• Developed Romneycare-bankrupting state according to Mass State Treasurer Cahill

• More on developing Romneycare by Romney

• Allowed same-sex marriage in Massachusetts

Ron Paul

• Promotes freedom in almost everything--from marijuana to Iran getting nuke

• His stand on Iran is dangerous

• His stand on Israel is dangerous

• He has a problem with calling  homosexuality as sin

And do not seek what you should eat or what you should drink, nor have an anxious mind.  For all these things the nations of the world seek after, and your Father knows that you need these things. ³¹ But seek the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added to you.  Luke 12:29-31

Listen to David Parker who recounts what happened to his elementary school children--every parent should hear to understand what is before us...

Who do you dare trust --man vs God?  It should be elementary for the faith-filled and here in America--history is so rich in God's Providence--so the ball is in your court.  God has given you choices--whom shall ye follow?  Choose wisely so that the dog eat dog mentality will not prevail and God's ways reigns to bless us all.  By the way remember the example of one bad apple named Barney Frank--has almost led to worldwide economic destruction.  Please pray for wisdom from the one from whom all blessings flow.

For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. 2 Timothy 1:7

Rick Santorum--Iowa Studied Him and Found A Solid Conservative Candidate

“Reflecting on Yesterday’s Iowa Caucuses”

By Donna Garner

1.4.12

The vetting process of the Republican candidates is taking its normal course. The process is supposed to reveal as much about each candidate as possible because we are going to elect the person who will be the next President of the United States -- the person who will sit in the most powerful office in the world.  

Last night’s Iowa caucus results have helped to narrow the field, and that is a good thing because now conservative voters can begin to coalesce behind one solid, conservative candidate – Rick Santorum. 

What made Santorum’s rise to fame so amazing is that Mitt Romney beat Santorum by only eight votes even though Romney’s SuperPAC spent $3.4 Million and Santorum’s only spent $537,200 ( http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-503544_162-503544.html?tag=hdr ).

ANALYZING SANTORUM AS A CONSERVATIVE

One of the best ways to analyze Rick Santorum’s voting record is to look at the Interest Group Ratings while he was in Congress. Please go to this link:  http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/27054

The first issue listed is Abortion.  Please click on the name of the organization to see how other elected officials (listed by state) were rated on the same issue.  Then you can compare Santorum’s percentage score with those elected officials who are known to be liberal and those who are known to be conservative.

For instance, Planned Parenthood gave Rick Santorum a 0% rating but gave a 100% rating to such elected officials as Barrack Obama, Joe Biden, Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Lynn Woolsey, John Kerry, Barney Frank, Barbara Mukulski, Debbie Stebenow, and Carl Levin.    

On Education, Santorum was given a 0% rating by the National Education Association; but the NEA gave a 100% rating to such elected officials as Henry Waxman, Jon Corzine, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, Lloyd Doggett, Chris Dodd, Sheila Jackson Lee, Mark Udall, Charlie Rangel, Dennis Kucinich, Alcee Hastings, Sr.

LEGITIMACY OF RESULTS FROM IOWA CAUCUSES

Yes, I am a little bit concerned about the legitimacy of the Iowa caucus voting results because voters could register to vote at the caucuses themselves.  All they had to do was to show an Iowa non-driver ID card, out-of-state driver's license or non-driver ID card, U.S. passport, U.S. military ID, ID card issued by employer, student ID issued by Iowa high school or college.

In lieu of a photo I. D., the person could use one of the following documents to show proof of residency: residential lease, utility bill (including a cell phone bill), bank statement, paycheck, government check or other government document.

It is possible that the Iowa caucus results were somewhat skewed; but from the first-hand reports made by people who attended the caucuses, the meetings appear to have been conducted fairly; and the people who attended them were spirited and well-informed about the candidates.

FUN TO THINK ABOUT RICK SANTORUM’S CABINET PICKS

Because Rick Santorum is a highly principled person with a well-defined moral compass, conservative voters could count on him to choose the same principled type of people to put around him in his cabinet and in his administration.  Just think how exciting it would be to have the following experienced experts to serve under President Santorum:

Michele Bachmann – Vice President or Department of Health and Human Services

Mario Rubio – Vice President, U. S. Trade Representative, or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Bobby Jindal – Vice President or Department of Health and Human Services

Paul Ryan – Office of Management and Budget or Council of Economic Advisers

Rick Perry – Department of Agriculture

Herman Cain – Department of Labor or Department of the Treasury

John Bolton – Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

John Ashcroft – Department of State or Department of Justice

Robert Scott (Texas Commissioner of Education) – Department of Education

Sarah Palin – Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, or Environmental Protection Agency

Mario Rubio – Vice President, U. S. Trade Representative, or U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations

Bobby Jindal – Vice President or Department of Health and Human Services

Newt Gingrich – White House Chief of Staff

*Not a complete list of appointed offices

TREAT YOURSELF TO MICHELE BACHMANN’S SHORT SPEECH

Please take a few minutes to listen to Michele Bachmann’s powerful and unforgettable concession speech.  It is one that our country will not soon forget:  

1.4.12 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpOalZh11YQ

Donna Garner

Wgarner1@hot.rr.com