I am surprised that Ms. Malkin was able to overlook Mr. Santorum’s support for SOPA.
I'm aware of the issue and it is a legitimate concern about Santorum. In Gingrich's favor, he understood the power of the internet and of information technology when most of his older colleagues in Congress were still having secretaries take dictation because they couldn't use a keyboard.
Bad policies on internet regulation can get fixed. Dead babies can't be, and moral issues are not minor issues.
Bottom line: I can vote for Santorum despite some bad positions. Every candidate has some things on which I don't agree; that's life. I can vote for Gingrich if I have to do so, despite my concerns about him. I really hope the Republican Party doesn't put me in the position of having to decide whether to vote for a flip-flopper like Romney who in the very recent past advocated women's “right” to kill babies.
Even if Romney's change of heart on abortion is genuine — and I am not at all sure it is, since it at least gives the appearance of being driven by polling numbers — we don't need a flip-flopper deciding who to put on the Supreme Court. The tenure of a Supreme Court justice is for life, the last time a justice will ever face a vote is the Senate confirmation hearing, and we don't need a flip-flopper putting Republicans on the bench who then flip-flop once they're on the bench.
Ok, people! Santorum does not support SOPA!!!
He just questions the “freedom” of the Internet as it is controlled by an oligarchy!!!
Here is an example: google the poor man’s name. How would you like it if when your children googled your name, the first thing that always pops up is a definition of their name meaning the foul liquid that emerges from gay anal sex?? Because Santorum is against gay marriage. Obviously fully supported or promoted by the king of the Internet, google.
He is against the SOPA laws but is interested in who really controls what people see there. It’s a discussion that is fair to have happen.