January 6th Attacks

The January 6th House Select Committee has really gotten under my skin. This made for television movie that the left has created and called a “hearing” is a joke. They are trying to make this side show look like it is an official court hearing, when it is nothing more than one sided political theatrics, with only one side presenting their case.

As I watched the two hour extremely biased production, I grew more and more aggravated. There were so many misstatements and accusations being hurled around, all to diminish the credibility and character of President Trump. Someone is obviously very frightened of President Trump running again. Truth matters and I am not one to let deceit stand. Let me list just some of the nonsense.

• Why did last night's orchestrated movie leave out Trump's words, "walk peacefully and patriotically over to the Capitol"?

• Why did the movie (supposed commission) leave out that Trump offered 20,000 National Guard troops, but Nancy Pelosi and Mayor Muriel Bowser, (who were the ones that had to OK that offer) turn it down? If President Trump hadn’t authorized troops, why was there a rejection of those troops, which was easily provable and even shown by the DOD? Liz Cheney admitted they had intelligence days before January 6th, that informed there could be violence, so why did Pelosi and Bowser turn down the help?

• Why did the movie show all the violence at the Capitol and then interject Trump's words that "these are fine people" at the precise moment of the worst chaos in the video? It was entirely OUT OF CONTEXT!! Trump was talking about the people on the Front Lawn listening to his speech, as being the "fine people" that were there. And what he saw and who he was speaking about was well before the riot took place!!! They were fine people!

• Why didn't the commission do a follow up questioning of the witness who was a film producer? This witness stated that the people he saw over at the Capitol were there well before Trump's speech ever took place....while the majority of the people were still mingling, enjoying the day, and even singing hymns on the Front Lawn.

• Why wasn't this information questioned further? It wasn't the same group! Why doesn't that matter?

• Why did the "Select Committee" hire a professional retired producer, James Goldston, from ABC to create their movie that is supposed to be a bi-partisan commission?

• Who paid the creator and producer (James Goldston) of this professionally done movie?

• Why was TDS afflicted Liz Cheney allowed to make it look like President Trump instigated this "insurrection" by encouraging his supporters to come and "storm the Capitol" prior to January 6th? When in fact, he was only encouraging them to come to the Front Lawn, listen to his speech, offer support for one another and wait for the results of the testimony and final count of the Electoral Votes.

President Trump was NOT attempting to "overturn the election" as media (even Fox) keep saying. I am tired of that choice of words. Trump only wanted the election accurately quantified.

On January 6, President Trump was giving a speech on the Front Lawn encouraging supporters as they waited to finally hear the slate of electors presented. Once presented, this would lead to states’ legislators testimony and questions, and possible contests (which is allowed) before then hearing the final word and acceptance of slates from the Vice President. This happens EVERY Presidential election! Legislators have a chance to contest election results at this time. It’s procedure! It is the Rule of Law. As example in fact, several Democrats contested the results of the 2016 election of President Trump when the slates were presented. It is a part of the process. Yet the left condemns Republicans for wanting to do what is Constitutional.

Instead, what the riots and breech of the Capitol did on January 6th, 2021, was PREVENT this testimony from going forward. Rather, it ended in a simple decision to accept the slates without discussion. It came quickly that same evening after the chaos was over and people were frightened – including VP Pence.

Who do you think gained from those riots??? It wasn't Republicans and President Trump! It prevented us from having a chance to hear what we were waiting to hear – testimony from the legislators. And the follow up decision as is the traditional procedure, ending in the final result of the election.

Now there is a difference in opinion in how this should be handled even among big time, federal attorneys. Therefore, we saw the disagreement with President Trump and VP Mike Pence. What we know for sure, is legislators have a right to contest, before the VP has the responsibility to make a decision in the election after listening to all testimony. Where the disagreement came this time, was in regard to whether this traditional procedure is merely theatrics, or if the VP really DOES have a right to speak and even disavow election results due to the presented testimony and slates presented. Apparently, Pence thought it only theatrics, President Trump wanted to hear the testimony before the decision was rendered. There were people who had committed to speaking and contesting the results. But it didn't happen and instead look at who gained from the riots that caused that neglect!! It was important to hear testimony, because half of America thought this was a fraudulent election. That should have been addressed and would have been, if not for the riots.

Perhaps the legal process of the election should be explained at this "hearing". (Yeah, right! Like that will ever happen.)

I am going to take a minute to explain what was Constitutionally expected on January 6th. A quick recap: After the election in November, the electors were required to certify their votes by December 14th, 2020. Those certifications are merely fluff –basically, all for appearance. In truth, the actual election was not finalized until January 6th, when both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate are REQUIRED by the Constitution to gather in session to finalize these votes from the slate of electors. If any representative has doubts or questions, they can contest the results at this time. It merely takes one person from each chamber of Congress – one Representative and one Senator to do so and bring this contest to fruition. Once contested, then a debate will begin among the legislators as to the reasoning and legitimacy. This could go on for several hours and can occur with each slate presented. Further, in some states there may have been two slates of electors submitted. It is up to this body to decide which one will be accepted. Finally, it is the Vice President of the United States that has the final authority regarding the outcome. In fact, according to the Constitution, the VP does not even have to accept either slate presented if there are two, but simply explain there is not ample reason to accept either slate, or any.

There was the possibility Vice President Pence would choose not to contest the votes. There is precedent for that. As examples, Richard Nixon did exactly that in 1960, saying it would make governance too difficult. There is also precedent of a Vice President, contesting to his own benefit of winning the election – President Thomas Jefferson did just that. Clearly, there is precedent for both scenarios. So it was not an oddity, or something unrealistic that President Trump thought this could happen.

For this election, there were multiple incidents that would have given pause to legislators or even Vice President Pence to not accept the slate of electors. With the suspicion of fraud across the nation, with the Supreme Court scheduling a date of January 22nd in Pennsylvania to possibly be heard, (two days, too late, after inauguration) and as well, with the problems that were occurring in Georgia – these were all reasons enough for the VP to not accept either slate of electors in those states. There were also pending efforts in Wisconsin and Michigan that could give the Vice President pause to not accept the slates.

This is what I believe President Trump thought would happen. If the VP would not accept the slates, after listening to credible testimony and concerns it would have removed the votes from Biden. But those votes would NOT be merely handed over to President Trump. Instead, they simply would not be counted. If that happened in each of the contested States, it would put the electoral votes back to where they were before all this chaos began on the night of the November 3rd election – with seven states in question. If all were not accepted, it would have left Biden with 222 electoral votes and President Trump with 232. If this scenario would have allowed to be played out, according to the 12th Amendment, the election would have then been given to President Trump. And that is all according to LAW! The riots hurt Trump, not Democrats!!! And Trump would NOT be foolish enough to orchestrate them!

So. This is why the people were gathered on the Front Lawn that day. This is why they were there in an act of solidarity and hope for an election they thought was stolen. People were there to love and celebrate America. They were there in hope and in prayer for the outcome.

President Trump was not the one behind the breech of the Capitol. It is my firm believe it was a set-up, with someone manipulating extremists groups like the Neo-Nazis, "Proud Boys", "QAnon" and even confused "Oath Keepers"; in effect "stirring the masses". The riots only kept testimony from going forward which over half of America wanted to hear. (This procedure is separate from the Supreme Court refusing to hear this case – which was a travesty, in my opinion, but that came later.)

NO, those rioters absolutely shouldn't have done what they did. But I believe there were leftists in the group leading and setting them up. I even believe the infiltrated and politicized FBI may have been a part of the stirring. Someone was opening gates and saying "Come on in." We aren't going to see any of that from the "Select Committee" fake commission report and the entertaining movie they have created for television. But there are also videos circulating of people being invited in to the Capitol by Capitol police!

Those that were there instead to riot and cause problems – the ones the film producer testified to seeing at the Capitol even before President Trump spoke – were the ones that changed everything. President Trump was not in control of these people or even aware, even though media and the groups themselves tried to make it look like they had a connection. That was simply publicity for them – a “look at us” desire. The riots took away the possibility of representatives ever being able to contest the slates. After that breech, it was all over. VP Pence had an excuse to do what he wanted to do all along without having to hear the hours of debate that could be coming. He could catch his plane, that he had had scheduled for some time. He knew all along what he was going to do. The riots simply ensured he could. (I am not saying he was a part of that. He simply utilized it.) This is where the friction with Trump and Pence began. It was a difference of views in how the election results and acceptance of the slates should be handled.

Now with this witch hunt of a "hearing", a despicable narrative and attack on President Trump all comes to the forefront again, just a few months before the November elections.

Personally I believe it is orchestrated at this time in order to try to side track us from 8.5 % inflation; $5.00 a gallon fuel prices; food shortages; a dangerous, disastrous open border; illegals being transported across the nation on tax payer dime to other states all across the nation, making us ALL a BORDER state; fentanyl overdoses increasing and child trafficking nightmares; an unwell, incoherent President and a cackling, bumbling Vice President; war in Ukraine and another war about to break out in Israel; China about to invade Taiwan; and this administration getting us back into the dangerous JCPOA (Iran Nuclear agreement). !!!

This circus is basically Trump's 3rd impeachment; the last two of which he wasn't even still in office. They are still trying to destroy the man. But carry on. Go ahead and blame Trump as our nation implodes with the left's new policy. Truth is, they overplayed their hand and they badly need a distraction. People are fed up and about to wake up because life is starting to hurt!

Adoptive Son

The saga continues…and what a saga it has been! We are well on our way to choosing our Republican nomination for the Presidency. But in reality, we are not looking very Republican. You know, - "the party of values". Yeah, right. Not so much anymore. We adopted the Donald and everything changed.

Still, we did bring him into our family, albeit unwillingly. If we are to practice what we preach, we must accept him, warts and all. It’s not like we can kick him out; that’s not the American way. He has his rights to run on any party he chooses. It is up to the American people to say Yea or Nay. And we’re smart, aren’t we?

To tell you the truth, I am sick at the whole thing. I actually can’t believe this is where we are.

Now, as I have said in previous posts, I have had a political bent all my life. I very strongly believe it is our responsibility to pay attention and do all we can to maintain the government as our Founders saw fit. I believe God ordained them and that God is behind the dream that is America. We are to be good stewards of all that He gave us - and that includes the gift that is our nation and government. I don't want to even get started on Christians who think Christians should remain a-political. If we don't protect our nation, no one else will.  Rather, some will actively seek to destroy it. Many do not have our citizen's best interests in mind. Politics is nothing more than a tool for good or evil. Make your choice!

Republicans have always been the party of values. We are the conservatives, the protectors of social mores and traditional ethics. I was proud to be a member of this party, though in recent years I cringed at the in-fighting and I was sure the popular new term RINO could only bring divide. I was right. It did. And it is a divide that continues to this day.

But finally this year, I felt like people were beginning to see the importance of getting involved in politics. People were responding, asking the right questions, excited to see the debates, getting to know the candidates. But not for long!!

Merciless personal attacks; vulgarities and playground battle fights; talk of brokered conventions; confrontational speeches by former losing candidates; talking over one another in debates and showing absolutely no respect for each other, or our traditional values has been the norm this election cycle.  Paths to victory have been detoured in a way that will lose us all. Who wants to go there??? Certainly not new recruits who were at long last at least semi-interested in what is taking place. And most assuredly, old timers like myself are growing weary, as well.

None of the candidates are being very wise in my opinion and none of them seem to be thinking of anyone but themselves. My nightmare is Donald Trump (the adopted son) which I will address momentarily. But first, I want to explain what I feel about each candidate that is left in this race.

It seems Rubio has recently proven he is not a leader. Instead, of staying classy, as he has always been, he has joined in the low-blow antics - digressing, instead of rising above the fray.  He is taking us into the mire, instead of lifting us out. He didn't have to follow Trump there; he could have set another example and continued in the vein with which he started. I like Rubio. For myself and many, he is too weak on the immigration issue, but he has been excellent in the debates until his recent decision to go negative. I have come to understand why "the establishment" (for lack of better title) seem to prefer Rubio. If his latest change in tactic is any indication, it appears he is the one willing to follow their bidding. He has taken the wrong path and it is a shame because he is not the RINO many have tried to subscribe to him. He is a strong, conservative Republican, but he has now shown he is not yet a leader.

In my opinion, Kasich has come across as a coward and will do anything to look like "he is the adult in the room". But in reality, he seems to be the one without strong conviction on anything. He went left when he needed a win in New Hampshire, and at other times he stayed silent when he should have spoken his convictions...if there are any. Kasich does have experience and has done good things for Ohio. He understands our national defense and need to support Israel, but I believe he is a little too familiar with compromise. One can find discrepancies in his stance regarding Israel.[1]
 
I also believe if Kasich were a true patriot, he would have dropped out a long time ago. He has no chance to win, other than a very small possibility if a brokered convention were to take place. For now, he is pulling votes and delegates from the other two candidates that actually do have a chance to win against Trump.  

Rubio is past that point now, as well. I believe he too should drop out of the race and that we should start to get behind one candidate if we want to win our party back from Trump. I don't believe Rubio has any chance to win outside of a brokered convention, either. Oh yeah, a brokered convention is legal and within  rights, but it is a really, really stupid and dangerous idea. It ignores the will of the people.

Trump....ahhhh Trump! He is the bully on the playground. He acts like a spoiled, junior high brat going through puberty. If Trump were not in this race, I truly believe this race would have remained civil.  But besides all the vulgarities and inability to discern when crass talk should NOT be used (like EVER during a bid for the Presidency, in my opinion), he has been too hypocritical (think over-seas jobs) and he has flip-flopped on the issues entirely too much. He continually speaks before he thinks. He is new to this conservative stuff, so it doesn't come easy for him. I honestly don't believe conservatism is in his heart. There have been a few too many times that he has had to retract statements after he has come to a better realization and understanding of the facts and the truth. The recent statement that the military will do what he says even if it is illegal, is prime example. At least it was only a day or two before he retracted that one. Good grief! Changing positions can be commendable if one is willing to learn and alter directions, but do we really want a Commander-in-Training? Especially at this time in our history.

Many like Trump, because they believe he can't be bought and that he answers to no one. However, they forget exactly what he CAN buy. Votes, perhaps. A big donation to a Christian organization, for example and naturally that organization would feel compelled to endorse him or support him. That would gain Trump great strides within the conservative movement and dupe people into voting for him if the endorsement came from a trusted organization. I'm not saying that happened. I am saying it could! And if one is comforted by the fact that he can't be bought, perhaps they haven't considered exactly all that he could buy, or considered the opposite side of the coin. If we consider one problem, we must look at the other side, as well.

The candidate I have come to support is Ted Cruz. He has always been toward the top of my list, but he hasn't always been my number one candidate. I cringed and all but scratched him off, when I heard he had voted with Rand Paul against a defense bill (National Defense Authorization Act) that would  increase funding to the military - the only 2 senators to do so![2] This bill also supported Israel's Iron Dome. This is extremely important to me - probably my number one issue. And Cruz voted against this! There were other candidates running that were correct in what they said about our national defense and how it should be supported, I didn't need Cruz with a record like that. But he redeemed himself with an adequate explanation and went further to say where he had gone wrong. It satisfied me. (I do still cringe over this at times, and hope I am not being ignorant in his true stance. I do not want isolationist policies! And I want some one totally supportive of Israel.) Finally Cruz voted with Rubio in March of 2015 on an amendment to increase military spending, though it did not pass.[3]

 

Cruz also lost me at the fiasco in Iowa when someone said Ben Carson's campaign had been suspended and Carson's votes should go to Cruz. It wasn't true. Cruz apologized as he should have, but the damage was done. I gave Ted the benefit of the doubt, assuming he didn't know the whole situation, but I didn't like it. When other antics occurred on the campaign trail a bit later, for a time I put my support toward Rubio. Cruz fired his campaign manager, Rick Tyler, as well he should, but a sour taste was left in my mouth over the trickery taking place. Tyler, had also worked for Ron Paul on Paul's campaigns. That explained a lot for me. Paul used some rotten tactics, as well. Had Cruz not fired Tyler, I would never have supported him again.  But again I was ready to give him the benefit of the doubt when the only thing we were left with were the childish antics of the other candidates now occurring through out the campaigns. The truth is, there is always going to be a lesser of evils that we may have to chose.  NO one is perfect. That brings me to the group that vows to never vote for Trump.  

There are many now who are saying they will NEVER vote for Donald Trump should he win the nomination. To me, these are the most dangerous people of all. They are willing to throw away an election for their pride and self-righteousness. If they have to settle for a man they don 't like, they simply won't vote at all. Real smart! Unfortunately, there are some people in this groups I highly admire and respect. But there are also people I love that have come out and endorsed Trump. I can understand that a bit better, though I don't like it at all. They are angry. They are fed up. They want things changed. They hate the establishment. (Like hating the establishment is ever going to get us anywhere.) But I can understand this group, at least. I will NEVER understand someone that refuses to vote, "on principle". Especially when the other principle lies with Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. I want to tell these NEVERTRUMP people to come down from their lofty perch, roll up their sleeves and get to work to take one step at a time. Even if it is just a baby step like having to vote for Donald Trump in the general election. 

Well there we have this messy, messy election cycle in all its glory. I now feel Ted Cruz is the best candidate going forward. He has come out against the brokered convention which I believe would be an absolute nightmare, and could even throw us into revolution. But Cruz also has the best chance to win against Trump without going into a brokered convention, having won 6 states and only being about 80 delegate votes behind Trump at this time. Ted Cruz is a born again Christian and has always stood for conservative ideas. That is important to me. I vote for him not because he is perfect, but because he is better than the others. And in that regard, he, too, is only the lesser of evils. That is simply the way of life. No perfection this side of Heaven.

And about that adoptive son. I don't want to send him back from whence he came. There are actually some things I kind of like about him. Even some things that are kind of endearing. (Think Dennis the Menace) He simply needs to clean up his act and get rid of his childish ways. He needs to  learn to be Presidential at ALL times and understand the importance of respect. He needs to understand conservative values just a bit better.  It isn't #NEVER TRUMP; but rather, #NOT YET TRUMP. I just want to be sure our new adoptive son gets raised right. And that's going to take some time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

I would love to hear your comments.

Footnotes:

[1] http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/332914/gop-http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/332914/gop-candidate-john-kasich-defends-israel-settlements/

[1] http://freebeacon.com/politics/report-kasich-once-proposed-freeze-on-israel-military-aid/

[2]http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/dec/22/marco-rubio/marco-rubio-says-ted-cruz-voted-defense-cuts-rand-/

[3]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/15/ted-cruz/gop-debate-cruz-says-he-voted-rubio-defense-spendi/

[3]http://freebeacon.com/national-security/cruz-rubio-feud-defense-spending-civil-liberties/


 

Before You Vote...

This video is Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) last night after his visit with President Obama. Well worth listening to as we consider our Biblical mandate to support Israel. I know you will be impressed with this strong, diplomatic leader that understands the importance of defending his nation.

This video is Ron Paul's view on Iran acquiring nuclear weapons during one of the Presidential debates this winter.

More Topics of Importance

Senator Santorum's Speech at AIPAC - A clear difference.

                            

                    Prime Minister Netanyahu to AIPAC March 2012

 

Running the Race

The Presidential primaries have certainly been interesting so far. I believe the candidates just finished their 18^th debate. Beginning with about 11 candidates, we are now down to four.  Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the two front runners at this time, but it has been interesting to see the manner in which each of the candidates may have risen for a time, but then fell. Early on Michelle Bachman won the Iowa Caucus by a land slide, but eventually could not continue with that early momentum.  Rick Perry reportedly had lots of money to spend to keep his campaign going, but he just never seemed to be able to catch the tide that would take him where he needed to go.

Ron Paul has recently stated he will remain in the race until the Republican convention.  No big surprise, there.  We already knew that by the pattern he set in the 2008 Presidential election. If he had any character, with the low ratings he has received he would bow out now and throw his support behind one of the candidates, thereby lessoning the chance of us ending up with one of the more liberal candidates. Paul supporters, though many of them have a liberal, libertarian social agenda, most likely would bring their votes to the more conservative Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich rather than Romney. I believe this because many of Paul's supporters do indeed strongly support the Constitution. Paul, however, is not a true Republican, stating as much on the Sean Hannity show this fall, and demonstrating that fact by throwing his support to the "Constitutional" candidate Charles Baldwin in the last Presidential election. So one can't really predict what the majority of his supporters will do.

Mitt Romney, I would say, is not more liberal than Paul; but he is by far not as conservative as Rick Santorum or even Newt Gingrich.  A recent video about Mitt Romney can be seen at the Newsmax website and is in fact pretty darn frightening. There are other reasons why I would really hate to see Romney become the nominee, but the main reaosn would be “Romneycare”.  In the last debate, Rick Santorum did a fantastic job of explaining how detrimental a “President Romney” would be in the ability to defeat “Obamacare”.

Without a doubt, I believe Sentator Santorum to be the best candidate.  I have watched him for a number of years, and he has been consistently conservative, always standing strong on the difficult, conservative social issues.  He is in fact the one that was successful in writing legislation to end partial birth abortion.  He has an A+ rating with the National Rifle Association; and he has consistently stood in support of our Middle East ally, Israel - understanding the Biblical mandate as well as foreign policy maneuvers that would be detrimental to the USA, should we not walk that rope carefully.  There is no one I agree with more on foreign policy than Rick Santorum, and there is no one that explains the importance of the Middle East Region as well as Senator Santorum.

Dr. Paul’s foreign policy, as Michelle Bachman and Rick Perry both stated in one of the earlier debates is just downright “dangerous".  I will get to Dr. Paul in later posts.  This man in many regards is extremely dangerous to America.

At this point in the process, we are all anticipating the Florida primary which will be held this Tuesday. Florida is important in some regards because it could flush out another candidate.  As I said Romney and Gingrich seem to be leading in the polls and given the Florida constituency, it seems the vote could easily go to Romney.  So far, Santorum has won Iowa, Romney has won New Hampshire, and Gingrich took South Carolina. This gives each of the candidates, except Paul, a victory.  As more wins take place, theoretically, we will loose some of the candidates – except as I said Paul, who has other motives, I believe.

Sarah Palin recently encouraged Florida voters to cast their votes to Gingrich. This would enable the vetting process, through debates, additional caucuses and primaries, to continue a bit longer.  If Newt looses, he will experience pressure to step down.  If Romney wins, because of his strength as the longtime front runner, and the amount of money he has at his disposal, we can be certain he is in for the long-haul, unless Gingrich can upset Romney’s momentum with another win.  This will also force Santorum to reconsider whether he can stay in the race. It has been reported and he has said himself that he does not have the funds that the other candidates have.  I believe, Sarah Palin, knowing the inside skills it takes to maneuver in these campaigns, knew that IN FLORIDA at least, Santorum wouldn't be able to pull off a win, and another victory by Romney would automatically make him the Republican Presidential candidate.  I believe Governor Palin is correct. Newt is the only one (in Florida at least) that can pull enough votes to prevent Romney from winning. Governor Palin is thinking strategically; exactly what a politician needs to do to run in our modern day election process. Whether we like it or not, that is fact.

I believe Sarah Palin, and many others (myself included) would be just fine with a win by Newt, or a win by Rick Santorum – these are in fact the two most conservative candidates running. What Palin is trying to prevent in making the statement she did is prevent another win by Romney, thus keeping this vetting process alive for a bit longer. This will give any dirt about Romney more time to surface.  So far with his bank account he has done a pretty good job at throwing mud, but he really hasn’t had to endure much himself up to this point.

Newt in actuality is more conservative than the liberal media or Romney would have us believe.  He was in fact the voice of conservatives in the 90’s when he was the Speaker of the House.  I remember the bashing he took during this time because of his conservative stances; therefore, I have a hard time believing some of the reports we are seeing through the political think tanks like Politico, MSNBC and CNN.  Without a doubt, Gingrich brings the most experience, political knowledge, and fantastic debating skills to the primary process.

My candidate, Rick Santorum - my candidate of choice from the onset of the process – brings experience, a Biblical understanding of foreign policy, (yep, I said Biblical) and a conservative voice that springs directly from his heart as a man who not only believes in conservative principals but has lived them. He and Newt have worked together on a number of issues and are in actuality good friends as each has stated repeatedly.  My belief is these two are the only ones that understand that at some point the winning candidate and the losers are going to have to unite at the end of the day to enable the Republican Party to enjoy a victory over Obama. Though Newt and Rick may take a jab or two at one another, they have been careful to be respectful of each other.  This is the way a primary process should be.  Romney – the so-called front runner - and Dr. Paul the one consistently at the bottom, would be wise to take a lesson from the two candidates in the middle.

As a side-note, Senator Santorum, whose platform is Faith, Family and Freedom, has once again shown us that he practices what he preaches when he returned home from campaigning in Florida to be with his three year old daughter Bella who has a genetic disorder called Trisomy 18 Disease.   

Bella was recently hospitalized for pneumonia, but through the prayers of family, friends; and, I might add, an entire praying nation, is reportedly doing better at this time. Santorum will return to the race in Flordia today. Senator Santorum is a man who has his priorities right. What a blessing he would be as our next President.

Because each of these three candidates have had a win, no one except Paul - who continues to place with roughly a 10% rating - should be leaving the race at this time. I’m afraid another win for Romney, however, with the money he has to continue his campaign (which includes attack ads against the other candidates) will give him the standing to make him our Republican Presidential nominee.