Why Liberals Should be Nervous about Santorum’s Super Tuesday

Global Comment ^ | March 8, 2012 | Kristin Rawls

[Texas Fossil]

9 of the original states had established religions.

The last was disestablished in 1833.

Surely you do not suggest that should be an issue today?

I know there are some Catholics who think that Monarchy is still an acceptable form of government. (An opinion I do not share)

But an establish “faith” in an existing state would seem impossible without absolute subjection. That of course is what the left proposes. Establishment of Atheism as a state religion and Communism as the form of government.

What do you think would happen should any power try to pull that off in Texas?? hee hee hee

[Texas Fossil]

Appropriate statement.

[Popman]

-——I’m not sure why the author is using the term Christian Fundamentalist-——

Code word for liberals that mean white racist hateful gun loving bible believing patriotic males who want to impose their religion on America

These people don’t actually exist but in tiny numbers, but in the warped mentally diseased minds of liberals they are legion and number in the millions .... Just waiting to take over America ....

[Jack Black]

The whole premise of this vanity is ridiculous. There is not party aparatus that sets out to groom people, or is controlling the process. The process is the one you see: people with the fire in the belly to run do so. Some of them are better at it than others. They raise money, debates, try to get on TV, try to go up in the polls, figure out how caucus's work, go on talk radio, hire consultants, buy ads.

It's a complex process. It doesn't favor amatures, even talented ones, but mere competence and good advisers isn't enough either. (Pawlenty, had both but failed. Cain had neither but did pretty well.)

It doesn't matter what the supposed "big wigs" think: there are four peopole who want to be POTUS who are running. Two of them have a chance: Santorum and Romney, though Santorum's chance is small.

Romney really wants to win. He's not there as a place holder for anyone. He took a shot in 2008 and came up short, but finished decently in 2nd or 3rd depending on how you view him compared to Huck. He obviously learned a lot, some breaks came his way (the other moderates were pretty lack luster, there were a lot of conservatives splitting the conservative vote, etc.)

It's way to early to say that Romney isn't going to win. Obama is hated in much of America. I had a 21 year old black girl sneer at me "you're not going to vote for HIM again are you?" at the mere mention of his name.

In general whoever gets the nomination has a 50/50 chance of being President. Bush's elections were both very close. Barry did a bit better, but when you look at the State by State vote, it's obviously going to be a hard sell for him in the electoral college in 2012.

[HapaxLegamenon]

So it’s fair to say that the 1st amendment prohibits the federal government from establishing a religion. But the states were allowed to and did.

Until the 14th amendment which states: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."

As a citizen of the United States (national citizen), I have the right (privilege and immunity) to be free from government intrusion in my religion. This national right is also made a state right by the 14th Amendment.

However, I do agree the separation is one-way. The state cannot dictate religion, but religion as a cooperate body and individuals based on religious conviction can and should be allowed the same political rights as secular institutions. Therefore, Planned Parenthood can have a public political voice but so can the Catholic Church.

[x]

The whole premise of this vanity is ridiculous. There is not party aparatus that sets out to groom people, or is controlling the process. The process is the one you see: people with the fire in the belly to run do so. Some of them are better at it than others. They raise money, debates, try to get on TV, try to go up in the polls, figure out how caucus's work, go on talk radio, hire consultants, buy ads.

That's true. Sometimes lately I wish there were such an apparatus. If there were, they might have picked better candidates and groomed them better.

And Santorum a fundamentalist -- a "Christian fundamentalist" no less? I thought he was a Catholic.

"We should be looking more closely at R.J. Rushdoony" even though he and Santorum have nothing in common with each other?

We should be "looking at him" simply because it's a convenient smear to throw at Santorum?

It's not often you see that smear mechanism operating so openly.

[moehoward]

"I am sick of stupid commentators saying Obama is likely to win."

IMHO the likelihood of hussein getting a second term drops proportionally to the difference between him and the GOP candidate. There's a huge difference between Rick and hussein. An even greater difference between Newt and hussein, and so little with mit it's not worth mentioning.

[Prov3456]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

What you say is true. However, this line from the first amendment also clearly says that Congress/the government shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion.

Why is it that so many people don't understand that the government IS prohibiting the free exercise of religion when it (he/they) dictates what citizens can and cannot do and think as part of their religious faith and practice?!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Where does it say separation of church and state in the Constitution?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

The phrase "Separation of Church and State" is not in the constitution. But it explicitly states there will be no "established" State Religion.

The socialist project has been to cry “establishment of religion!!!” when they are actually engaged in the censorship of free exercise of religion. The same people who ratified the First Amendment hired chaplains. What the framers, and the public who ratified and reelected the framers, understood by “an establishment of a religion is a far cry from what exercises “liberals” today. An establishment of religion would be a tax supporting a particular Christian denomination at the expense of others. Obama feels no compunction about requiring the largest Christian denominations in the country to pay for people to do things in violation of longstanding religious tenants. It is painfully obvious that he actually intends to make Christians feel aggrieved about what he presumes to force us to do.

What is hiding in plain sight all the while is the fact that wire service journalism behaves precisely as a cult. Its reporters are “priests,” and the newswire is their deity. How else explain their quasi-religious belief in their own objectivity? Subjectivity is best defined, IMHO, precisely as a belief in one’s own objectivity - so it would be a miracle indeed if journalists who claimed objectivity actually delivered on the claim. Which patently they do not. If they were objective, the Duke Lacrosse “rape” case would have dropped out of the headlines within a week, which was ample time for anyone not biased against the “privileged, rich, white males” to discern that the only thing sustaining the story was precisely self-interested prejudice. But self-interested prejudice sustained that story for months on end, until an adult named Cooper finally showed up and pricked the balloon.

And after the story was punctured, the journalists simply dropped the subject, with no thought to any apology owed to young men who had been placed in serious jeopardy of punishment by journalistic fecklessness. Just like the story after election night 2000 was not the erroneous premature call of FL for Gore while some of the polls were still open in FL. No, the reporters only wanted to talk about the “premature” correct call of FL for Bush by Fox in the wee hours of the morning, long after the polls had closed and no votes were being influenced. The wire services unify all journalists around the cult of journalistic "objectivity.”

And make no mistake about the tendency of the government to make the cult of journalistic objectivity the Establishment in America. You need look no further than “Campaign Finance Reform” legislation in general and McCain-Feingold in particular to see that wire service journalists are “more equal” in law than the rest of us. The money spent propagating journalists’ opinions and “reports” is pure as the driven snow, you see, while the money you spend promoting the candidacy of your preferred candidate is presumably a corrupt influence don’t you know.

[annalex]

But Focus on the Family is not what we are talking about when we consider Santorum’s politics. We should be looking more closely at R.J. Rushdoony, a man little known outside the Christian Right who is nevertheless considered the father of Christian Dominionism

Correct. And excellent news for America. I hope very much Santorum wins the nomination and then wins the presidency, but he already accomplished what no conservative candidate could before: He showed that a consistent Christian conservatism, -- the kind that homeschools, the kind that opposes contraception on moral grounds, the kind that intends to bring the Christian worldview into politics where it belongs, -- can credibly contend for the Republican nomination and one day, it shall win.

[napscoordinator]

Completely a piece of trash. Nothing even remotely true in the article. Even the “Operation Chaos” FAILED in Michigan as Romney won. So whatever games they are trying to do these liberals can’t even do that right. Santorum has principles which considering most Americans don’t would scare people to death. Now more than even I hope he wins the Presidency. Man it will be fun to piss off the liberals!!!!!

[Washi]

But the language says “Congress.” Several states had “established” religions at the time and continued to have them after the passage of the bill of rights. Other states did not. The establishment clause means just what it says: “Congress [the Feds]” can’t do anything in the area of establishment of religion. OTOH, the state governments, are free to establish or disestablish a religion (see the 10th amendment).

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Is it, then, your opinion that the states can make laws abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?

[unlearner]

“And as the object of ‘Operation Hilarity,’ Santorum flirts with Quiverfull ideology all the time. His children are homeschooled. He opposes contraception. He endorses traditional gender roles. He insists that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. And most mainstream Americans write him off as the product of what they think they know about conservative Christianity. They see a man influenced by James Dobson”

Wow. I have realized for some time now that I am a tea party person without having ever joined anything. Now I learn I am a part of another movement I’ve never heard of - the Quiverfullers. Cool. Feels nice to belong.

[Texas Fossil]

No argument, you are correct.

Obozo has declared war against all Christians, Jews and some other faiths. He has assaulted the Freedom of Religious belief granted by God (not government) and written in the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. And the founders had foresight enough to require an oath of office for officials that stated they would “protect and defend the Contitution”.

Obozo is a Traitorous Liar, Fraud, Commie, Bastard.

[Texas Fossil]

Atheism is the religion of Leftist Statists.

Communism is their preferred form of Subjection.

It is time their little play houses are destroyed.

This time the Christians, Jews and some others must pull together and destroy the enemy who assaults our freedom, economy and our military. IT IS TIME!

Unfortunately many do not perceive the danger we face.

[ModelBreaker]

“Is it, then, your opinion that the states can make laws abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?”

Unless the State law prohibits such activities, emphatically yes. The Bill of Rights did not limit the States. The States retained all powers not granted to the feds. That’s why the first amendment says “Congress shall make no law...” That’s pretty unambiguous.

In fact, before WWII, that’s pretty much where things stood according to the Supreme Court also. After that, the Court dreamed up the fiction that the bill of rights was incorporated into the 14th amendment and that the bill of rights therefore, applied as against the states (gross oversimplification alert—but essentially true). “Incorporation” of the Bill of Rights as against the States is a pretty recent notion, consitutionally speaking, with little support in the text or legislative history of the 14th amendment and none at all in the text or history of the original Consitution.

[ModelBreaker]

“Surely you do not suggest that [a state establishing religion] should be an issue today?”

Nope. That states had established religions at the time of the Consitution tells you what the founders meant by the Establishment Clause. It meant the feds couldn’t disestablish the states’ religions. It meant the feds couldn’t create their own established religion. It meant the feds were out of the establishment of religion business altogether.

I would not want to try to establish a religion in Texas either. But if you think about it, the Feds are trying to establish the religion of secular humanism in Texas when they force secular humanist notions on other religions. The Catholic church must now obey secular humanist notions about contraception and day after abortion pills. And, make no mistake, secular humanism is a religious belief in the non-existence or unimportance of God and the wonderfulness of Man.

[ModelBreaker]

Your reading of the 14th amendment is, of course, consistent with the Warren Court incorporation rulings. I’m not so comfortable with that thinking—it would have been so easy to say “The Bill of Rights applies against the states” as part of the 14th amendment. Yet Congress did not. But in the context of the post-civil-war era, it’s very hard to figure out what Congress meant. It clearly meant to end slavery. But it also clearly didn’t mean that anything a modern progressive could dream up is in the 14th amendment. 14th amendment law is a mess because of the lack of specificity.

[The_Reader_David]

Anyone who thinks Palin hinting at a 2016 bid is a sign of anything is deluded or over-interpreting. I’d had the clear sense she was running for the nomination in 2016 (or 2020) from before she took herself out of contention for this round.

[Gene Eric]

>> Consider that Santorum, more than any other candidate, has pushed to make contraception a matter of national debate in 2012.

An involuntary reflex.

It’s great this non-issue has become THE issue.

Santorum is an establishment bit player, and the inability to escape this sideshow is a testament to his lack of competency as it concerns leadership.

I like Rick Santorum. He’s inspiring, a great family man, but not the man that will orchestrate the retaking of the Fundamental Liberty that’s been stolen from the Citizens of the United States.

Go Newt!!!