Please bring down Santorum before he brings down Paul

I don't find it just completely insane or whacky that they did this. It is out of the ordinary, sure, but what happened to them was an out of the ordinary and traumatic event. When you guys experience pregnancy in your (your spouses) lives, you won't think this story is so strange. When you are waiting for a baby to be born, your whole lives get centered around your new baby.

It wouldn't be AS weird if maybe it was full-term. But we're talking 20 weeks here... 1/2 term. That's a bit disturbing, if not somewhat traumatizing to their other children. Gives me the shivers.
 
Last edited:
Oh it's not heading there! lol
I'm just saying the size and appearance of an unborn child at 20 weeks is quite different than at full-term. Poor little thing couldn't have been much bigger than a few pounds at best. My cousin's baby died 2 days after being born full-term and she held him for quite a few hours after he died. But he was a full grown baby... and she didn't take him home. Saddest funeral I've ever been to though. :(
 
I don't find it just completely insane or whacky that they did this. It is out of the ordinary, sure, but what happened to them was an out of the ordinary and traumatic event. When you guys experience pregnancy in your (your spouses) lives, you won't think this story is so strange. When you are waiting for a baby to be born, your whole lives get centered around your new baby.

I have four children. I understand wholeheartedly how precious each and everyone of my children are. I am Italian and most of my family are Roman Catholics too. My family has had their share of tragedies with regards to losing small children. Growing up in a big Italian family, my family did not do anything remotely as morbid as the Santorum's did.

I cannot begin to imagine what went through the Santorum's children's head--the trauma they must have had to endure from the decision their parents made to expose them to their dead brother.

Today, if we teach our children values and morals we are considered whackos--but the Santorums bring their deceased child home, introduce the decease child to their living children, then went on to sleep with the deceased child and this is consider acceptable and understandable. Then to add insult to injury, they promote this bizarre behavior in a book. :confused:
 
Such a mistake.. you can't validate that guys nonsense by responding directly to him. He does effectively keep RP on the defense, so I would have a pat offensive quick strike prepared should Frothy go after Ron again.... like: I get the most support from the Military. How much do you get Rick? BAM - in his place. Then he can discard the topic and move on instead of playing 'defense'.
 
Focusing on Santorum would just make him look like a higher-tier candidate than he actually is.
 
The problem is when the media plays up the confrontations and portrays (in other words tells the public what they should think) them as they do, making it appear that Santorum wins against Paul. That's why he needs brought down. I don't want to bring attention to Santorum either, but until Dr. Paul can stand strong against little bitty Santorum in the eyes of Rs whose votes we need, he will be perceived as weak. That's what scares the Rs. His foreign policy to them as weak. If he can't sufficiently stand up to Santorum, how he could he match wits with Ahmadenajad (sp?) Dr. Paul needs to show that strength. I see it, but the rest of the Rs NEED to see it in a way that the media can't pretend otherwise.
 
It wouldn't be AS weird if maybe it was full-term. But we're talking 20 weeks here... 1/2 term. That's a bit disturbing, if not somewhat traumatizing to their other children. Gives me the shivers.

Depending on how old the existing children are, it could surely be construed as child abuse.

Weird doesn't even start to describe it.
 
Watching that vid where RP answers the foreign policy issue, they split screen w/ Santorum. He's the GOP hired hitman on RP, isn't he?
 
The problem is when the media plays up the confrontations and portrays (in other words tells the public what they should think) them as they do, making it appear that Santorum wins against Paul. That's why he needs brought down. I don't want to bring attention to Santorum either, but until Dr. Paul can stand strong against little bitty Santorum in the eyes of Rs whose votes we need, he will be perceived as weak. That's what scares the Rs. His foreign policy to them as weak. If he can't sufficiently stand up to Santorum, how he could he match wits with Ahmadenajad (sp?) Dr. Paul needs to show that strength. I see it, but the rest of the Rs NEED to see it in a way that the media can't pretend otherwise.

Actually that's not a problem at all. If anything, if Paul had a quotable answer, then not only will the media be hurt badly by playing up to the confrontation like what happened with Giuliani but it gives Paul some more shining moments on TV.

Ron Paul doesn't need to play the propaganda game. A scary answer would just mean the media might not show it or they will show it but they will extrapolate it in ways that make Santorum sound better. Paul just has to be Paul. He kind of break that a little bit by bringing up Osama. He was wise enough before to only reserve that statement for interviews where he couldn't be interrupted by the crowd, I really have no idea why he opted for that route. It was as if he was more interested in laughing/smirking at Santorum than being careful with his answers.
 
Over 90% of the people in Afghanistan don't even know what 9/11 is, and they probably couldn't point out their own capital on a map, yet we're supposed to believe they all hate us for watching too much television and wearing bikinis to the beach. It couldn't be for the fact we intervene in their country and region for decades at a time. There are so many ways Paul could respond to these 9/11 attack questions, but when he doesn't address them aggressively, the media shows Santorum smirking and plays the "Ron is a kook" card. I've simply had enough of it and wish he would just bury this guy already. Yes Giulianni gave Ron Paul attention, but Giulianni was stupid! Giulianni had no chance of winning either, and if he plays cat & mouse with this guy its going to go the same route. It is possible to be an aggressive voice of reason, believe it or not.
 
I think Santorum is pretty creepy. Does anyone remember this?

Karen Santorum wrote a book about the experience: Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum.[14] In it, she writes that the couple brought the deceased infant home from the hospital and introduced the dead child to their living children as "your brother Gabriel" and slept with the body overnight before returning it to the hospital.

I've seen that David Lynch film!
 
Over 90% of the people in Afghanistan don't even know what 9/11 is, and they probably couldn't point out their own capital on a map, yet we're supposed to believe they all hate us for watching too much television and wearing bikinis to the beach. It couldn't be for the fact we intervene in their country and region for decades at a time. There are so many ways Paul could respond to these 9/11 attack questions, but when he doesn't address them aggressively, the media shows Santorum smirking and plays the "Ron is a kook" card. I've simply had enough of it and wish he would just bury this guy already. Yes Giulianni gave Ron Paul attention, but Giulianni was stupid! Giulianni had no chance of winning either, and if he plays cat & mouse with this guy its going to go the same route. It is possible to be an aggressive voice of reason, believe it or not.

Guiliani was stupid but I think when he first entertained Paul, he was a lot smarter than Santorum because if Paul gave Giuliani the same attempt he gave Santorum - Paul would have been eaten alive.

What made Paul's answer then important was that not only was the answer something that brough blowback into the limelight but Paul answered it from a concerned point of view. It was by far Paul's best showing in the previous election. He not only gave a statement that was anti-war but he gave it from a conservative rather than democratic viewpoint. With Santorum, Paul smirked, then it was as if he was a deer caught in the headlights by bringing up Osama Bin Laden. He may have been more quotish at it but the fact was Paul sounded like a democrat then.

Not only that, against Paul - Giuliani couldn't answer back even w/o the clappingand the reactions. Against Santorum, Paul was attempting a statement where Santorum could have easily answered back an ad hominem even if Paul didn't get booed.
 
Last edited:
Karen Santorum wrote a book about the experience: Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum.[14] In it, she writes that the couple brought the deceased infant home from the hospital and introduced the dead child to their living children as "your brother Gabriel" and slept with the body overnight before returning it to the hospital.

http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/pdotforms/pa_driversmanual/chapter_5.pdf
I can't find an exception, so I hope Mr. Law-and-order buckled his son into an approved rear-facing 5-point harness child seat while transporting him to and from his house.
 
When any animal dies it starts decomposing and after a few hours it stinks pretty bad. After a whole day the smell would be almost unbearable.
 
Hey Rick. I don't think the Prince of Peace would approve of your affection for spreading American's goodness around the world at the point of a gun. Just answer this one two part question honestly for me and the audience. How would you like it if you looked off the coats of New Jersey and California for the past 70 years and saw Iranian, Syrian, Libyan, and Iraqi aircraft carrier battle groups? How do you think people in those countries feel about seeing American aircraft carrier battle groups off their coasts for the past 70 years?
I just don't see how you can call yourself pro life and pro war yet see no contradiction.
 
Back
Top