How does a person learn they aren’t the most important? That ‘The Mission’ empowering sacrifice, that Governor Rick Perry made in getting out of the race before the vote in South Carolina, is good and right? It’s most easily found in men (and women) with military service. There is a tempering of the steel in a soul that happens through the heating, pounding pressure, and cooling, of those life altering decisions in battle. It’s a self selecting foundry; sorting the selfish, from the selfless, the ‘on my own’, from the God empowered.

I could mention examples from my dad’s service in AF Special Ops. But they would be unrecognized and we’d end up debating if they were real, as all are still ‘secret’. The additional reality is none of those men would ever bring attention to themselves. They point to those around them before accepting any praise. Those men, doing menial but important tasks, made their supposed bigger contribution possible. They couldn’t have done it without ‘ _______’. There is always another persons name that fills in that blank.

So, I repeat the fictional words of Tom Hank’s character in Saving Private Ryan.

‘Earn This’

Those simple words were the real story for thousands of men motivated to walk out a life, in the shadows of greater men, not for his own benefit but for the good of those that have gone before and most importantly for the benefit of the children to come. Thermopylae, Agincourt, Concord, San Antonio, Gettysburg, Normandy. Every man that fought and gave their lives in one of those battles, did so for the future of their kids.

This character trait on display in modern day politics is truly rare. Less than 1% of men volunteer for service today vs. over 20% in WWII. So we have to use other markers to identify this type of person. There is a character trait that I see in the life of people that have made a difference. It’s a self sacrificing strength that sidetracks a personal agenda for good of the lives around them.

Jim Collins, in his book, ‘Good To Great’, did an exhaustive study (1500 companies) of the character traits that allowed the leader of a company to make the kind of selfless decisions that made the company, not them individually, Great. Only 11 companies meet the criteria of sustained consistent growth. This book was added to my lifetime top 10 with CS Lewis, Frank Peretti, Philip Weld, Max Lucado, and Elmer Towns, among others.

Trying to convert the message, in one paragraph, is tough but, these leaders were humble and strong-willed rather than outgoing. Willing to lift others up rather than self promoters. The surprising thing is that these men were exclusively men of faith. The kind of man that is described as; Purified Silver, Timbers of Lebanon, and Steel that has sharpened Steel in my Bible. These men knew they stood in the shadow of greater men, A greater Man, and had a calling to pour out that grace and light and life to the people around them. This faith was the call that motivated them, and the people that worked for them, to make things better.

I know this will be a tough transition for some, but point here is trying to share the core difference I see between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney. Do you know of Rick’s Bella and the timing of her brush with death? Rick was just coming to the top of the ‘anybody but Mitt’ crowd. Any man that was running this race for himself, would have let the ‘little misses’ take care of the sick one at home. ‘The dream’ was just coming to fruition. A little more time, another interview, another hand shook, continue the push. The project he had been working on for nine months non-stop, could, would, with another moment, succeed.

Rick took a different path, a path less traveled by. He put a presidential campaign on hold for a 3 year old disabled little girl. What do you think the campaign manger said when Rick bought the ticket for home? A little girl who couldn’t even say ‘I love you, dad’. A little girl who couldn’t tell the press about her dad and how important it was for her to be first in his heart, first on his agenda. Love, Grace, Light, Life. Invested in ‘the least of these’. My true measure of a life well lived.

Watch this video of Rick describing his motivation to work for us.

http://click.cmdiemail.com/?ju=fe2b17777162017c771371&ls=fdee117273620d7e73167776&m=fe6615707164077b7012&l=fe8e107373650d7b71&s=fded1571726c00787713767c&jb=ffcf14&t=

(the contribution page loads first. Patience, pilgrim, patience). Check the web for neighbors speaking of their friends the Santorums.

Every one of us has to answer the question what kind of man are we supporting for the nomination of the highest office in our land. Not what his resume says or the positions he holds, but the strength of the timber, the finish on the steel, the purity of the silver. All we can see is the life that he has lived. It’s the testimony that I hear and it’s louder than words.

Is he lifting those around him? Is he working out life together with his community? Does he sacrifice for others or expect others to sacrifice for him?

There is a moment that every President is asked to choose between the good of the people and the individual future of the man. In my life, I’ve seen that choice made by Presidents Reagan, and GW after 9-11. Rick has looked over his shoulder, seen the shadows of greater men, A greater Man, and he will choose. He has chosen.

Us. Rick has chosen us.

Thanks for reading!

Tomorrow I will be at Liberty High School, Etch-A-Sketch in hand.

As the Mitt supporters make a statement, that distinctive shaking sound will permeate the room. The ringtone on my new phone!

Rule 40.b will be my friend.

and Rick will walk away with the preponderance of the delegates.

It’s gonna be fun. Wanna come?

My profile says I laugh at the wrong things, so this probably qualifies.

I want to see the best E-A-S advert idea. Here’s mine. Before the Mitt supporters complain, Do you really believe the Chicago, pro ¤’bama (found a way to put a black-hole in that O) ad agency’s aren’t drooling over themselves for a chance at this?

100 voices: ‘Mitt said what!?’

Mitt Romney face, ‘Abortion bad quote’

100 voices: Disappointed ‘Ohhhhh’

(screen shakes with E-A-S flashes), Romney face on E-A-S changes from mad to glad

Mitt quote, ‘Abortion good’,

100 voices, excited, “Ohhhhh”

Shot of the 100 people all holding their E-O-S, ’When we don’t like what Mitt Romney says, we just use our Etch-A-Sketch’ and they all start flopping all over the screen.

The ‘all flipping-and-flopping all the time’ network brought you this ad

Series on all the topics with the ending always on the liberal position to soften support with conservatives.

¤’ will have so much fun it will all seem like a game. Mr Sketchy to the rescue!

Take your best shot, I’ll laugh with you!

Even after the Blue State Illinois voted for Mr Romney on Tuesday, I was searching today if Eric’s assessment of the finality of this race was real. Was it really time to give up making calls at RickSantorum.com? I just got started!

I’ve found a few pieces of info that seem to contradict Eric’s conclusion.

There have been many posts about the delegate math. I have been dissatisfied with the conclusions drawn. The biggest problem is that there are a number moving pieces that are treated as static: The caucus voters, a candidate approaching 50% of a state or the ‘winner’ premium, challenges at the convention, and the candidate’s performance are each variables that are still unknown and will impact the conclusions posted as facts currently. The reality is that Mitt Romney has won about 35% of the vote and has received about 50% of the delegates. A little under 60% of Republicans have voted for someone else. Seems that small changes in the dynamics of the race could dramatically effect his leading position.

A new to me site is ‘Frontloading HQ’. Josh Putnam is a visiting assistant professor of political science at Davidson College. He seems to be running the only site that is taking an exhaustive approach to the nomination possibilities. He has constructed a paper on the variables for each state. There is even an evaluation of the dramatic differences between this year and 2008. He regularly posts an analysis of the SCU Media’s incomplete approach to the delegate math. Massive amounts of seemingly lightly editorialized information. I firmly believe it’s easier to lie with numbers than with words and Josh seems to be doing a scholarly job of presenting ‘just the facts’, Mam.

So yesterday he posted an evaluation of the Santorum campaign’s latest numbers (before the results were known in IL):

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-santorums-delegate-math-isnt-so-bad.html

Here is the Santorum campaign delegate estimate:
Romney: 435
Santorum: 311
Gingrich: 158
Paul: 91

The article is fact laden, as they all are, but this quote stood out:

Now, the Santorum math is predicated on over-performing in the steps of the caucus/convention process beyond the precinct phase in the non-binding/unbound caucus states. In those states — Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota, Maine, Washington and North Dakota — there are 230 delegates at stake. One way of thinking about this is that Santorum would need to receive about 54% of those delegates for 124 (projected in the above numbers)

230 is the number of current unbound caucus delegate, 124 are projected for Santorum above. I believe that is a very conservative projection that could be dynamically affected by silly things like rules, the dedication of the Romney opposition, and red children’s toys.

Can I divert you for a few moments to report on the precinct caucus I attended here in El Paso County, Colorado? It’s important because understanding a Caucus is the only way to get a lever that can adapt the above numbers to reality.

We met in the band room of a local middle school, around 130 souls. The candidates were announced and supporter statements were requested. A statement from each campaign was supposed to be read but one campaign didn’t supply a form letter so none of the others were read. 10-12 people spoke supporting a candidate, 3 Romney, 3 Gingrich, 0 Paul and the rest for Santorum.

The Colorado Presidential Preference Poll posted county wide results of 47%Santorum, 31%Romney, 12%Gingrich,  9% Paul. The Chairmen promptly thanked the attendees for coming to vote and excused anyone that didn’t want to be a delegate. 100 people walked out the door having done their civic duty. However, the nomination process for the County and State caucus had just begun. Nominations, potential delegates statements of support for candidates, and selection, all outlined the allegiances of the remaining 30 folks. There are a limited number being sent to the county and fewer to the state level so the campaign that controls a plurality potentially has the ability of sifting out all the other supporters.

Both Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter had pluralities, not majorities, that were turned into over 90% delegate counts. That’s what will happen in any state that Santorum has a plurality and some where uninspired Romney voters were first and Santorum second, but less likely if Paul supporters are the plurality. The county meetings are this weekend here in Colorado and the State are in April. I will report more over the weekend.

Point of the entire diversion is to say, it’s probable that Santorum supporters will dramatically over perform the numbers above. 311-124=183 are the committed Santorum (after proportional FL and AZ allocations). With 60% of the caucus voters=321; 75% =355; 90%=(like Carter and Reagan) 390. This is an 80-160 delegate swing from the current reported numbers and would reduce Romney and Paul numbers substantially. Even with IL Romney is under 500 delegates, possibly vary far under. The likelihood is is highest on the bottom of the range.

The other piece of this is that a stupid mistake that tells a big story could influence the selection and voting of those delegates. As a Red child’s toy has sprouted leg and easily could effect the outcome of those caucus gatherings. Will embarrassed and unmotivated Romney supporters not show up and be replaced by Santorum voters? Who knows, we are all about to see.

The last piece is the rule 40.b situation. It might be the death knell to both the Paul and Gingrich efforts. Without 5 pluralities or a path to them, there will be no candidate to vote for. That would seem to lessen the resolve of those supporters. If this really is a 2 man race everything changes. The premium then goes to the winner. In most states, after the RNC deadline, the states Winner-Take-All the delegates for an over 50% win. Mitt is also receiving the ‘winner’ vote which evaporates as the polls show a closer race.

This race is nowhere near over. With Newt out his voters go 60-75% to Rick depending on the poll.  10% added to the polling puts Rick over 50% in lots of places.

A Rick Santorum win is very possible. After this first round, here in Colorado, we will find out if it’s probable.

Thanks as always for reading…

As Chuck Todd reported on MSNBC Monday, rule 40.b, which is quoted by MSNBC to read,

‘RNC rule No. 40 states:
Nominations(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.’

This rule will prevent any candidate’s name being submitted that has not received a plurality of delegates from 5 states. RNC confirmed that interpretation today.

This means that without 3 more wins for Newt and 5 wins for Ron their delegates could be free actors at the convention. Rick is still up in the air until the caucuses confirm his selection. Do the math on that basket of snakes!

MSNBC:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/21/10793350-rnc-rule-means-hurdle-for-gingrich-convention-strategy

Frontloading HQ:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/03/santorum-has-rule-40-problems-too.html

This really is a two man race. So despite all the machinations; there is a conservative, and o’ light…

Which do you choose?

edited to add the quote of the rule…

So before you accuse me of being a founder member of the Black Helicopter crowd let me say that my dad was AFSOC from the time I was 10. There are black helicopters, but more likely, on a moonless night, an AC-130(u) is headed the way of the bad guys with a C-130 transport to airdrop Seals/SOC airmen/Airborne  and support. The helicopters are sent to pick ‘em up. So if I’m a crazy-intern I’m a jaded crazy-intern.

Sheldon Adelson, billionaire, social liberal, union buster. Wow, he’s a fiscal conservative, to boot. Tim Burton (the director who made Santa evil) couldn’t wish for a darker shade of Wizard. Do you think the prostitute-union was brought to it’s knees, after more than 100 ladies-of-the-evening were arrested at the celebration of Mr Adelson’s arrival in his hotel, 2010? How could they wander in, unknown, with 9.11 security measures? Yeowser, who is this guy? What is he willing to do to win?

This point alone may highlight the so-con/fisc-con divide. I would protect my family and keep them from meeting this man.

The hardest part of this is getting your brain around the money. Marketers use 1% as a measure of a ‘doesn’t matter’ purchase, simple easy no one has to check with the significant-other to buy the stuff. For a $50k earner $500 is the number. Mitt Romney net worth is ~250 Million making him a top 1% of the 1% in US income. His number is $2.5 million. Mr Adelson’s 1% is Mitt Romney. Said again, Sheldon Adelson is so rich that his ‘doesn’t matter’ threshold is every penny Mitt Romney has. $20 million to Mr Adelson is a $40 dinner for two at a steak place for someone making $50k.

He has made 20 billion in the last 5 years, 480% growth per year. Enron only had 40% per year growth. He’s done it by building a ‘New’ Las Vegas in the China Sea, on the island of Macau, the lawless Chinese Wild-West. This man bet 1 billion dollars on Chinese gambling, in the face of Chinese crime lords, and wins in spades. Allegations of Chinese syndicate involvement, tax dodging, money laundering, and prostitution. In the old world where you were judged by the people you hung out with, his money would be toxic-waste for a presidential candidate.

I’ve left this post sitting as I tried to evaluate if sharing was a good idea or not. I was encouraged when Scope posted some of this info this morning. At least if I’m driving over the cliff in a party bus! Carefully consider if you want your name associated with this post! A ‘recommend’ could be hazardous to your health and/or wealth.

Mr Adelson, heretofore, uncollected quotes in an interns order of believability:

*‘I don’t listen to anyone that is not a millionaire. I say, ‘How can you be so smart if you aren’t rich?’* (important, read again!)

‘It’s legal to influence an election and so I do. Anyone that complains is just jealous.’

‘I’d spend 10 million; I could spend 100 million on this election.’ (translation $200 in normal money)

‘He’s supporting Newt but would be ok with Mitt winning in the GE’

‘He’s not against Rick (the only current candidate that didn’t come to the Adelson Con-Fab) Santorum’

I don’t meet Mr Adelson’s definition of, ‘worth listing to’. I’m literally an ant he could crush without thinking.  But if I could mind-meld with the planning strategy as ‘Newt’s biggest (over 7 million in the last 10 years) supporter’, with unlimited resources, I would report they were applied  with the same efficiency that made 20 dollars for every one invested in Macau.  Even I, a lowly honorary intern, could elect a president.

I’d start Newt’s super PAC with funds at the beginning so he got to a fast start and as there were successes double down. Keep it on the DL so ‘our guy’ isn’t tarred and feathered with Dark Wizard stuff, set up a 501c(4)(‘corporations are people too’), so contributions are anonymous. It will be good to have the President beholding to your aid, right?

So what happened? The really rich/smart guy chose a very different path. No money in the beginning. No money at Newt’s first peak. As Rick Perry starts to beat Romney, the first public, contribution of 5 million (10$) is made. Great debate performance in SC, second public, 5 million ($10) contribution. So Newts on the way to FL. Big media markets-lots of money needed to fight the anonymous Romney super PAC. Newt overwhelmed 5-1. No more money until Rick Santorum starts to beat Romney and Newt is a 5% candidate, then a, crazy public, 10 million (20$) contribution, that netted a Forbes cover story. As a dumb intern, I’m even more confused than usual. The actions are speaking, I’m struggling for words to describe them.

Do you believe that actions speak louder than words? Mr Adelson is one of the smartest guys. Forbes, end of Feb, shows he made more money than lots of other heavy hitters over the last five years. Why would he do such a lousy job of getting Newt the money when the campaign needed it for such an insignificant (to him) amount?

How does it all start to make sense? Well, what if we believe Mr Adelson’s first,second, forth statement above? What if I muck around the margins and change the definition of ‘his guy’ to Mitt Romney. Now look! Seems every expenditure was made at exactly the right time for Mitt’s benefit.

Newt rising in the fall, no money. Mitt building cash and Newt attack ads until Newt loses support. Perry outrunning Mitt? Give Newt money, publicly, split the conservatives on so-con fault line with the very public contribution. Wait a minute, Governor Perry quit!? There’s no split in the conservative vote so Newt’s winning again. Jerk the chain, no more funds.  FL could have been a stake in Mitt’s campaign with level spending from Mr Adelson. Newt got almost half the counties with the 5-1 spending divide, Newt’s destroyed with no money to answer. Rick Santorum rises to seemingly stop Romney in MI and OH, give Newt extra chain now. We can’t let Rick beat ‘our real guy’, again averting a Romney collapse.

Just exactly who is the candidate of this billionaire? What team is he and those he supports playing for? There is only one that meets Mr Adelson’s fundamental definition of someone ‘worth listening to’, it’s Mitt Romney. A Wizard will have you look one way while ‘the action’ moves another. Where have we all been looking?

Do you know that the operator of Mitt’s super Pac is Carl Forti, ‘Karl Rove’s Karl Rove’? He’s the guy that ran Mr Adelson’s Super Pac after Mitt’s loss in 2008, reportedly for $200 million. This is the Dark Prince of Republican politics, who got the disclosure rules to evaporate. Carl and Sheldon have been working together for years. Sheldon let us all know he was contributing to Newt for a purpose.

Why cut funding to Newt when he’s having the biggest successes? When you don’t spend money says as much as when you do. Are Newt and Mitt innocent bystanders or do they owe Mr Adelson? Is Newt even in control of his own destiny, anymore? Rick Santorum will win the nomination or be neck in neck at Tampa, if Newt quits. Could Newt quit if he wanted to? Has the nomination devolved to a three against one? …As Newt will be required to support the ‘rich’ candidate of Newt’s ‘biggest supporter’ and Ron already seems in Mitt’s back pocket. Is that why we heard all the ‘act of God’ talk last weekend?

What does a candidate owe the Wizard and Prince who made him the nominee absent conservative Republican support, which is 60% of Republicans?  When money is given to the guard dog on a chain, ‘our real guy’ isn’t smeared with so-con disdain. The ultimate Wizard anonymity, give the money to Newt, but in a way that helps Mitt.

Are we the stupid ones to let a man, I would not invite into my home, decide who our candidate should be?

The only candidate that has refused to give tacit approval to this man is Rick Santorum. He did not go to the Adelson Con-Fab in Nevada during the caucuses. I do wonder who the other candidate (useful for character gauge in the future) was that didn’t go. I believe a man that walks away after recognizing a Dark Wizard and a Dark Prince has real vision that I can trust. Actions will speak louder for Newt and Mitt as this process works through.

Sometimes you may never know the reason, but actions do speak louder than words.

Temerity-Excessive confidence or boldness; audacity: “no one had the temerity to question his conclusions.”

The first time I heard a living person use the word, The Speaker described the ‘rebellion’ that came from the house leadership and removed him from his position as Speaker. Old words, old ideas from a different age of black and white, right and wrong, an age where the Speaker’s authority was unquestioned.

It was Sean Hannity’s show, the Speaker’s first interview after the dirty deed. It showed me a side of Newt Gingrich that seems incredibly self important. At no time, in that 10 plus year old interview, did Newt considered the ground he had laid bare to allow Dems to take back the House. Giant violation of the ‘don’t c**p in the punchbowl’, maxim. His words seem even more egotistical and hypocritical now as the current revelations of Callista and terms like  ‘open marriage’ are tossed about. There was cause, good cause, and The Speaker’s response was, ‘Temerity’. Somehow he failed to see it wasn’t all about him.

Skip forward to days before the South Carolina primary. Rick Perry (who I dismissed out of hand before understanding there was a conservative, Mitt Stream Media) gave a speech from that old time of honor and responsibility; ‘I understand the mission is more important than the person, the mission of election a conservative to the White House. I terminate my campaign and give my support to Newt Gingrich to carry that mission forward.’

With that honorable endorsement Newt won the only state he has carried, outside his home state of Georgia. I suggest Newt won SC because he had the endorsement of an honorable man, not from his debate performance. That endorsement was burned off in, what can easily be described as, temper-tantrums in FL. Newt is polling neck and neck with Rick today in AL. Even in the South, the power of that endorsement is gone.

Just for giggles imagine with me a 60 second advert that shows Newt being asked a question and the flash of anger that crosses his eyes and face, no words. New question, new flash, and again, and again (there is plenty of raw material). The Angry-Newt face, face, face, flipped on the screen. Cut to the ‘Daisy’ commercial from the 60′s and the announcer asking how we can trust him with…. cut to the thermo-nuclear-explosion-mushroom-cloud???? Super Tuesday exit polling shows Newt with 45% plus negatives. Every day he stays in this race those numbers are getting worse. Does he ever ask why?

Most of the people that spend time here at Redstate believe that replacing o’bama (wish I could make the ‘o’ smaller, as it’s vaporware) is key to restoring the prosperity of our nation. With the issues on the table, Mitt Romney is the worst of all the choices.

The Virginia vote for Ron Paul of over 40% is staggering. So subtract the Pauliacks (ducklings quacking and following their mother) at around 10%. Can it be true that some 30% of Republican voters supported the nut job, who believes nuclear holocaust in the Middle East is an acceptable form of conflict resolution, rather than vote for Romney? I can understand. I would have been tempted with those choices.

So after Super-Tuesday we find ourselves with: Gov Romney’s whack-a-mole, carpet bombing (12 to 1 dollars in Ohio), of only the candidate that rises to challenge him; Adelson’s dog leash support of Newt (to maintain the division of conservative voters), the Mitt stream Media’s continuing drumbeat of his inevitability (we have to make it look like Mitt’s the victor of something).

All this will give us a candidate that has engineered a hostile-take-over of the Republican Party nomination with 35% support. Quite an accomplishment for Mitt, not a winning strategy for US (as in the country we all love). The way a person wins says a lot. The soulless accusations that are being directed at Rick shows me a campaign that is willing to win at any cost. Not someone I want leading the country.

Can I make this point any stronger? Mitt is the worst candidate running with the situations that confront US today:

• Unemployment beaten back and the economy restored by the man whose ‘soulless vulture capitalism’ made money on the backs of the 1,000′s of peasants. He left the shards of companies that had to be paid for by the government saviors, and enjoys firing people to boot? That is already the MSM narrative, do you believe the ‘occupy’ cretins are gone for good?

• o’bama-care defeated and liberty restored by the man who 2 years ago, in video on all the networks, supported it? Chris Mathews suggested all o’ needs to say is, ‘thank you for Romney-care’ to win the debate point.

Adelson’s support will shift to Mitt (check the WSJ) but o’ will have liberal loony left, George Soros, and company. The carpet bombing/divide and conquer approach that has worked, so far, for the nomination, can’t work when there is only one well funded opponent. A third of Republicans didn’t vote for Mitt in Virginia. How can he hope to win? The Mitt stream Media ignores the fact that Newt in the race (funded by Adelson, btw, Who is the candidate of the Billionares?) has produced those supposed game changing Mitt ‘wins’.

No amount of Newtonium (a newly discovered substance that blinds normally rational people to the self destructive nature of a national Newt Gingrich campaign) can overcome the fact Newt’s negatives are long established and getting worse. He can’t get the nomination in Tampa without the waiving of a magic wand. Newt and o’ will never be on a stage together. Even if they were, would the MSM or o’ give Newt a ‘softball’ to get ‘the flash’ that helps?  But wait, not a big enough ‘flash’ to melt down Newt’s campaign? When I hear someone say, ‘Newt will win the debate with o’. Oh really?! You’re willing to bet the next 4 years on Newt’s tempered-temper?

The Romney campaign seems to be the political version of a vampire (do you see anything in the mirror?) that no one can stop. Newt could have put a stake through the beast 10 days ago and had the same undying respect that Governor Perry has earned and really restarted his political career. But, Adelson gives Newt 10 million and the egotist sees it as approval to continue on.

Did Newt ever consider the bigger question about ‘The Mission’, to elect a conservative President? Were there just 1 1/2% in Michigan and 1/2% in Ohio voters tilted by Newt’s national media buys?  I’m frustrated and disgusted about how non-mission focused Newt is. It’s getting harder to mention Newt’s name without a catch in the back of my throat that has a bile taste to it.  The conservative punch bowl has a putrid odor coming from it, again.

So, Governor Perry, with temerity, I ask. Is the mission still the most important thing? Because of the sacrifice you’ve made for your fellow warrior, your future in conservative politics is bright. The horse you came in on keeps stumbling in the same gopher holes. It will keep him from winning this race.

There is another scrappy battler who has the possibility to turn purple states red and fights for freedom. The conservative ideas put forth by Rick Santorum will overwhelm the Romney vampire machine and put it out of its misery. Conservatives banded together can stop the o’ train. Will you change the dynamics of this race and give the conservative mission a chance? Will you change the horse you ride out on to Rick Santorum?

Thanks for your time and consideration.

I would ask you to help me connect these points , but I already have the string and I just need to pick up the push pins. My computer screen with all the tabs open looks like a crazy person lives in my house. 22 inches just barely holds all the links. The pins.. the screen..Somethings wrong. Maybe I just watched ‘A Beautiful Mind’ too many times last night.

• Mitt Romney is not stupid. He knows about the problems Bain brings and the Occupy creeps. He won’t talk about his faith. The Mormon church approved his running so there is some kind of deal. Had to make sure they won’t get battered in his run, so his lips are sealed about the Temple. How does he win without Non-Mormon Christians? He gets 35%, all day long, because of his financial success.
• People who seem like naturally opponents of Mitt are his most vociferous supporters. Conservative talking heads in TV and radio.
• Ron Paul appeals to the independents outside of the repubs better than in. He piles on with Mitt and runs a Gingrich attack add in Florida and a Santorum attack ad in Michigan. Have there been any Romney attack adds from the (not Pauliacks) campaign? Did you see the interview with Bob Scheaffer Sunday, where he says Mitt, the signer of Romney care, as a ‘severe conservative’,  has a ‘Management style wins between the other three’!? Why is there is no stink up about a Pauliack county in Maine completely cancelling their caucus, that would have given Ron the state win? Whats going on?
• Have you heard the Pauliacks say they control many more Caucus delegates than they should?
• So onward and upward, Mitt, Rick, Newt, and Ron keep working for the nomination. No one winning the nomination because Millionaires keep all four going…. Wait who’s the Millionaire’s candidate?
• Here’s where the Pauliacks freak. Paul gives his delegates to Romney for the veep seat. Coronation of Mitt by the  by the fiscal-anti-social repubs. Apostle Ron is forgiven for giving up the dream because he can work from the inside. Mitt gets their passion. McCain-Pailin II without the social angst. MisMedia falls all over themselves.
• Mitt announces his Cabinet laced with the afor-unnamed conservative talking heads to get the Evangelicals to fall into line. They have a deal now, that’s why their supporting Mitt, so vociferously.
• Mitt and Ron make a powerful appeal to the fiscal-conservative-non-religious-independents and win in November.

Friends and (Red)country-folk,

This weekend was great on redstate with the back and forth about social con vs fiscal con, Rick vs Mitt (Newtonians a little quieter). Haven’t yet seen a Paul supporter actually say that they were, out loud. There just seems to be a lot of complaining, in general, about Rick’s rise in the polls. I want a repub to win. I’m a caucus voter in Colorado and don’t want it wasted. Looking at the poll and splits I don’t see how any other candidate puts together a coalition that wins in November other than Rick. These issues and environment (there is some overlap) creates a singular opportunity for one of these gentlemen to win back the White House. Which one? So instead of Bring Your Own Beer its The Bring Your Own Candidate, Club. Try to make a positive case for your guy and contrast the others.

The issues I’m looking at are: TARP (solyndra et al. green loans), Obamacare, O’s engineering the doubling the price of gas, doubling the national debt, the debt bankrupting My Social security benefit 2 years ago, repubs in congress having no clue how to fight the usurping of our constitution, senate not passing a budget in 3 years, O’bama(Rescue Me, it was an Irish election!) outspending McCain by 2-3 times. What others will matter? Trying to build an important list not a exhaustive list.

The environment issues are: longest recovery since the depression, Israel/Iran, Crazy unemployment numbers (peps on so long they drop off ‘looking numbers’, before payments runs out), Vamping MisMedia (as in they miss the point), Catholic bishops getting involved in O-care mandates, Occupy Movement or the 99%. O’ will use the James Carville playbook and try to smear whoever our guy is with all the cash Soros can funnel. Again what will make a difference?

I believe hoping for a brokered convention guarantees repubs loosing; someone else being nominated means no organization or fundraising to come up with 1.2 Billion dollars in 2 months. So, one of these guys wins.

I think the Reagan Coalition is available to be put back together, it’s the only way a repub has won since Tricky Dick was around. We Elephants remember, there won’t be another like him for a while, the old line, fiscal only candidate. The fun part is it really seems like we are running against Jimmy’s angry nephew (his what?!). Same certainty that he’s right the same disdain for those that disagree. I even saw a story about O’ adjusting the timers on the tennis courts, just like Jimmy did the thermostats in the White House. Peas in a pod. Can O’ be beat by the same kind of candidate? I believe so.

The advantage of this coalition is that the MisMedia is foreign to our thinking. The MisMedia sees all of us as flyover country and the rust-belters feel it just like I do in the mountain-west. The uber-educated liberal look down their nose (Andrea Mitchel catching her breath over an asprin!) So the vamping that happens is moderated but we still need someone who can stand toe to toe with them and then talk about the issues that win. What are the issues and how should they be spoken of? This coalition’s Christian thinking will understand Rick and his appeal in a way that these high-n-mighty (think Chris Mathews) MisMedias will be blindsided by. I just see Rick as the best vehicle to accomplish that goal, but with a supercharger of evangelicals and practicing Catholics working together in a more organic way because of O-care. Rick’s financial success in the last years is sufficient but not to much so that he can still talk to a common man about his common problems without the Occupy chants.

Obviously it takes 27o electoral votes to win and I believe Rick makes the rust belt and southwest viable in a way no one else does. Ron Paul is the only way we lose the south. Here is a map/calculator that gives some history and a way to click and change the states. http://www.270towin.com/

So here is my quick swat at the others,

Mittens (the kitten, will that help Acat?) was talking about ‘the height of trees’ in the state that is a must win. His stump speech is mind numbing. Someone call his tin ear, ‘Silver-Earplugs’. He has lost support of 34% of Independents in MI since last summer. How does Mitt put a winning coalition together? http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/02/19/mitt-romney-s-michigan-problem-reagan-democrats.html. The problems with his ‘Venture Capitol’ career is giant. eg: Does Bain have a forfeiture clause in their contract? I’ve seen a few of these contracts and every one says essentially, ‘if things don’t work out like you say we get everything by x date.” It’s how you come up with ‘vulture barrons’. There will be a ‘Vulture capitalist Pac’.. His Mormon faith will be a scab the MisMedia won’t let go, all to isolate him from other repubs. The drum is already starting to beat. http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/100375/romney-mormon-election-religion. There is an ex-mormon.org site with steps and all. Maybe the trees are too tall and I just can’t see but I think Sarah may have this one right.

Newt is the smartest candidate and may even have the best ideas but he can’t build a consensus to implement those ideas. Do you remember how he was on the cover of every news magazine in 1998? The libs wanted blood to get even for the impeachment of Clinton. He was a pariah. Do you believe the MisMedia (and Nancy P) have fired all their rounds? I considered supported his ‘new Newt’ routine until I heard the same self important guy. He is the worst polling candidate Head to Head against Obama because of those old negatives. He did his Mr Hyde impersonation in Florida and self distructed. How does that get better? 3/4 of his supporters go to Rick if Newt quits which is giant problems for Mitt (heyyy… all that new money for Newt… Mitt, you just hung up the phone from who!?) Kidding. I know where the $100 million came from, not 80,000 (like Rick) contributors….

Ron Paul sorry to say but I see as the path to the biblical Armageddon. His lack of support for the only stable government in the middle-east is horrifying. I know it’s bad to say out loud but all that rolls through my head when he talks is radioactive glass, the results of the test explosions in the 40′s. The result of his policies to cut loose Israel is an attack that comes from the ‘Arab-spring’. Israel will responded with deadly force. The gold standard is a farce, as we trade in ideas now not gold. I have 5 kids (not Catholic) I want to see them grow up and have kids of their own. The Paul crash in real estate I don’t want to see.

So, I’ve already violated my own rules by talking smack about the other guys. But I haven’t hidden I believe there is only one answer. Make your best case, put BYOC in the title or respond here and lets have some of this pontificating make a point.

A longer time ago than I care to admit, here in Colorado Springs, a man would actually ‘get up on his soapbox’ downtown at the concrete amphitheater in Acacia Park on a weekend morning. He was careful to say what he meant, as he only had one shot. As the words were projected into the cold mountain air, the only record was if they caught heart and mind of a gathered listener. It was a real marketplace of ideas, some crazy, some brilliant, all had to be sorted through with what my Dad inelegantly called ‘The Crap-Detector’ or the ‘TCD’. It was a time when you could visually compare what a man said to how he dressed and carried himself and his history in the 30,000 people community. TCD either multiplied or neutered his words.

Skip forward now some 40 years. The once per month mimeographed  newsletters are gone and virtual places, like RedState, have killed off that marketplace of ideas. Today, only the homeless and crazy occupy that space downtown. And You, dear reader, have lost the way to measure what I say against the life that I live. The words themselves have gained an authority, just because they catch someone’s attention. That attention is measured each time you click on a link from this crazy internet of ours. Google’s sole value, brought to the market, was measuring if our attention was ‘good’ or ‘bad’. A Billion dollar company was born. The value of what others think is immortalized every time we do a search. The ability to measure those words against the life one lives is washed from the system.

People being people, a method to game the system soon followed. There are people today who make a living first, building a web site and then virtually building a bot that ‘clicks’ on the link for that web site uncountable times per day. Effectively lying to the counters at Google, moving a virtually place that has no real people visiting, to the top of the list, the top of what others think. To the uninitiated it looks like people really ‘agree’ with a, manufactured in every way, site and then supposed people clickers.

My dad’s old fashioned ‘TCD’ is screaming in the background, but no one can hear it, it has been washed from the system. Eventually, Google becomes a little embarrassed by foreign bot sites and starts to subtract bot results from their listings. So the ‘TCD’ is now captured, sanitized and editorialized. The method to determine a bot click vs a real person is proprietary, billion dollar company, ‘value’. Forgive me for suspecting a gatekeeper function. It seems the definition of a bot, and therefor whether it will be added or subtracted; changes based on whether, the behind the curtain Wizard, Google agrees or not.

Bring to this ‘new’ world a man who lives out his convictions and speaks from his heart and life experience. He’s a man that would have received grand multipliers at the amphitheater because his walk through this life is a living testimony. His words are not preaching as others do, he walks the talk. Passes ‘TCD’ test with flying colors. There is another man who is offended by this walking-talking life. This second man hides his life, would literally be booed down at the amphitheater, but he knows how to send in the bots. So a new word is created by the bots. It uses this walking-talking mans name, the name of his parents, and children and attaches a vile reprehensible meaning to his family. In the old world people would stand up against this kind of evil attack and drive it and it’s originator from their community. In this new world there are only ghosts and phantoms, there is nothing to push back against.

So, the incestuous MSMedia types S-A-N-T-O-R-U-M into their Google search engine, and back come the results, in code, with only 16,000 ‘likes’: ‘This is a man that stand against us, and our consumption of the American Soul and Spirit. If people see the man that went home to help his sick, disabled, daughter; from national responsibilities, they will start to believe him. Destroy him in any way you can. Reflect back the hatred we have for him and his living-walking life. Tag him with, extremest, hater, poser, religious simpleton, neophite… 100,000 bots will do the work.

The sad part of this tale is I now hear my conservative brothers and sisters repeating the words of the bots. Will you honor the memory of the amphitheater and TCD and the value of a life well lived? Don’t take the media’s word for anything about Rick. Go watch the video, read the document, find out what really happened. Then tell three of your friends what you found. I’ve found a man that walks out his faith with a humbleness that is inspiring. I supported him when the pols said he was uninspired, single digits, also ran; because of who he is. Tears come with a smile when he talks about Bella and the rest of his family.  The MSMedia had a hard time vilifying a man that loves his family so much. I’m inspired when he talks of restoring jobs to America that NAFTA has stolen. Because of his life, I believe he can do the heavy lifting required to balance the budget.

Rick has stood against the attack of the people behind the bots for his entire career. They don’t like anyone to stand against them and will continue to unfairly attack any one that does. Will you let the vote of 100,000 bots steal your real vote? I see the Google definition of santorum in code as well. I see a man standing for the America that could be, that should be, that city on a hill. Rick has already done that with his life. I believe him when he says he can help us build that lighted city with our country. I stand against the bots and what they mean, will you?