A Christian Perspective on GOP Candidates Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich


By Brian Hughes

Here is my perspective and opinion about GOP Candidates Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich. I am still fairly new to the political arena and as a conservative. Anyway, I have been trying to choose a GOP Candidate to support for the 2012 election and I keep hitting a brick wall. As a Christian I have certain criteria that I look for in a leader. The number one thing I look at is their faith. Number two I look at his or her political stances that I feel are important to me. Number three I look at their track record. Now I have to say, this can be very tricky and you have to find good sources and cross reference the information but, the most powerful tool at my disposal is prayer.

First, I will talk about Ron Paul. I have to admit at first glance, I thought Ron Paul was very courageous and valiant to go after the Fed. I like that he wants to preserve our Constitution and live up to it as a Nation. But as I dug a little deeper I found some things that just didn’t add up.

I went to a Ron Paul supporter picnic with a friend of mine from Church who was supporting him. I wanted to remain open minded to him as the possible Candidate for my family and I to support. I listened to what the people there had to say and studied the material they had. I even got into some brainy conversations about conspiracies and the establishment. I try to be very careful with that information because by itself it is useless and can do more harm than good. I believe that conspiracy theories even if they are right are useless without faith in Jesus Christ and a relationship with Him. I went home and did research for myself.

I looked at the material and reflected on several interviews and debates I’ve seen with Ron Paul. The two things that bothered me the most about his ideology was his stance on gay marriage and his stance on Israel. I began to do more research to see if Ron Paul would be the best choice for me and my family as Christians. I went to his website and read his content. He had a nice page about his faith with a little testimony. I was linking everything so far except for those two issues.

Finally I stumbled on an article that talked about Ron Paul’s stance on gay marriage. Ron so elegantly raps his stance on gay marriage in the cloak of liberty but I found it to be a sham. I found that his faith is compromised and he is basically a liberal Christian that doesn’t believe the act of homosexuality is a sin. I prayed about this and discussed it with my Pastor and other Christians even my friend that took me to the picnic. I even wrote an email to his campaign asking for him to further explain but I never heard a response. I came to the conclusion that the deficiency in his faith has affected his policies on gay marriage and don’t ask don’t tell.

Here is the article and the radio interview with Ron Paul and John Lofton of The American View. After listening to this interview and reading the article it became clear that since he does not believe that God sees the act of homosexuality as a sin and doesn’t believe it himself, it’s affecting his political ideology. After prayer and discussion my friend from Church that was supporting him stopped and took his sticker off his bumper.

In light of voting for a God fearing leader I have to make this presumption. Rep Ron Paul does not have the fear of God in light of the act of homosexuality and sin so then it will continue to cloud his moral judgment when writing policies and governing. As Christians we should know that sin is not negotiable. Now back to the drawing board.

The next candidate I started to look at was Newt Gingrich. I had several conservative friends that liked him and I liked some of the interviews and debates he was in, especially the Thanksgiving Family Forum. A friend of mine told me that he saw an article saying that Newt was not as Pro-Life as he claims. Read the article here. After seeing his interview with Jake Tapper on ABC News and reading this article, I was a little confused when he said life didn’t start at conception but rather at implantation. After he declared at the Thanksgiving Forum 2011 that life did start at conception and has said that several other times. So I decided to do some more research and discussed it with my wife. I took it to prayer and discussed it with some other Christians that are seasoned in politics and some leaders in the Pro-Life arena.

The conclusion has been that Newt is definitely making a distinction between the two and does open the door for him to support or be in favor of the Plan B Pill or the “Morning After Pill”. My wife and I decided that Newt was not the best choice for us so we moved on to the next. This was becoming very frustrating, to find a Candidate that was Pro-Faith, Pro-Family and Pro-Life with no exceptions. I prayed and remained still waiting for the LORD to reveal the best choice for us.

It’s getting down to the wire and we need to steer the ship clear from the danger we are headed for as a Nation. Christians do your homework and look into these candidates and see which one the LORD wants to lead our great Republic. I know that with research, prayer and talking to others about them we will be able to discern the right choice and help support it to happen. If we don’t the enemy could win again.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” – Edmund Burke


Do you need an SEO Expert?


Before I Cast My Vote Tomorrow, I Have Something To Say…


By David Crespo

senator-rick-santorum-for-president-2012Tomorrow is when I will cast my vote. Many people will tell me that my vote will be wasted. Well here’s my argument: voting against your conscience is a wasted vote. Selling your principles to be on the winning team is a wasted vote. I will make the right choice, because my vote is never for sale. God knows that if I’m ever to fight, it will be for the right reasons and for a just cause, the cause of liberty.

To my fellow Christians, who are on opposite teams: tears come out of my eyes, knowing that I must fight you. When I joined this fight, I never thought that I will be going against my brothers and sisters in Christ. We both pray to the same God, carry the same Bible, seeking supplications from the same Divine Being, asking Him to take sides. I’m never worried about God siding with the right, I am only hoping that I’m on His side. Know this, that I carry no malice against you, as I fight for my beliefs.

To the Republican Establishment, the Globalist powers and Council on Foreign Relations who have rigged this election to be the candidates you have chosen, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, I have one thing to say to you: YOU WILL NEVER WIN! You may fool my Christian and TEA Party friends,but you can never fool me, for God has opened my eyes to the truth and has revealed to me your true colors.

I will stand and fight, because my love for God and country is filled with passion, it burns deep within the depths of my soul. If I am to lose, I will make you bleed for it. I will ensure that your victory will be costly. For I serve the God of this universe, who has the power to give and take away. Because in the end, every one of you globalist bastards will face the Lord on judgment day and you will all be held accountable for your crimes against humanity and your crimes against liberty.

To my Santorum friends: do not listen to lies of the enemy. Victory is around the corner and we will win this fight. I may not know what tomorrow may hold, but I have resolved to give God my best and leave Him to do the rest. Whether we win or lose tomorrow, it will not be over, we still have 46 more territories to fight for and I will give my all to conquer every single one of them.

Let us then cast our vote for Rick Santorum tomorrow and make a loud statement to the Republican Establishment bastards: That we are still here and that we will fight and fight and fight until we have won our liberty!


Do you need an SEO Expert?


Facts About Presidential Candidate Senator Rick Santorum

This article is a compilation of facts and links to information in response to issues arising against Rick Santorum. Please feel free to add to this list anything you think may help equip his supporters with facts to defend him. Try not to post links that are already in the document, and try to post your information under the appropriate heading. If there is none, add a new heading but please make sure it falls within the alphabetical order of the main subjects.

Each Topic is numbered


(Hat tip btw to the contributors and authors)

senator-rick-santorum-for -president-2012

WHY WE SUPPORT RICK: It’s a mistake to assume that Santorum was perfect over the course of his political career. That’s not why we support him. We support him for his courage, his values, authenticity, and vision. But there are controversial points as there are with every single candidate in this race (a whole ‘nother post). That said…

Advice About Mud: (for what it’s worth)

When you are confronted with Romney’s mud machine, alleging random votes in Santorum’s senate history, Ask the accuser to provide the evidence, before getting in the mud with them. Ask for specific senate vote records and the context of the senate business associated with that day’s senate business.

Often a senate vote “for” a bill, is just a vote to bury it by sending it back to committee for more study. It’s an old parliamentary tool.

Ask for the accuser to provide Rick’s press release discussing his position on the issue. If they can’t produce the record’s you can provide Rick’s consistent policy statements and the reviews of conservative opinion columnists like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Cal Thomas, Gary Bauer, Tony Perkins, Heritage Foundation, James Dobson, etc., who all side with Rick Santorum’s consistent conservative record.

You don’t have to get in the mud with anyone. And I can assure you, nothing will frustrate Romney more than if we ignore his dirt machine.

ronald-reagan-rick-santorum-republican-presidential-candidateRonald Reagan was called “The Teflon President” because he knew when to ignore attacks. His press secretary often said; “I won’t dignify that statement with a reply”.



Thanks to the new RNC rules, only 2286 delegates are approved for the national convention. (Several states were penalized half their delegates for holding their primaries too early: SC, FL, MI and AZ.) Thus, it will take 1143 delegate votes to win the nomination. Using the data below, even if one candidate takes ALL delegates in every primary between now and May 22 (the Arkansas proportionate primary date), there WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH DELEGATE VOTES TO NOMINATE until at least the California winner take all primary, June 5. And proportionate states likely will have split delegates making it even less likely that any candidate can lock up the nomination, as long as two or more remain in the race.


RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS: Santorum is a firm advocate of a citizen’s right to bear arms. He is also a staunch defender of gun manufacturers, and voted in favor of the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (Bill S 397), which among others, prevents civil suits from being brought against gun manufacturers for criminal acts perpetrated using their weapons. The NRA has called Rick Santorum “Kryptonite to Liberals” and states that “We Need his Kind”. He is the ONLY candidate with an A+ rating from the NRA.

Rick on the 2nd Amendment


The Fox South Carolina Debate (transcript)  I believe this has been the only debate to ask the candidates about gun rights.  Santorum addresses his votes and sheds some negative light on Ron Paul.


NRA’s comments on Rick Santorum and his stance on the 2nd amendment:



2. ***ABORTION***

Pro-Life: Ron Paul vs Rick Santorum


FUNDING OF ABORTIONS: Ron Paul likes to accuse Santorum of voting to fund abortions. The truth is, any Senator who has voted to approve the Federal budget has voted to fund abortion because the budget has allotted funds to Planned Parenthood. To imply that Santorum has not fought for the unborn is ridiculous. Santorum has led the fight against abortion. In fact, some groups say he is TOO conservative on this issue. You can’t have it both ways.

RON PAUL’S SANCTITY OF LIFE BILL: The Paul supporters claim that Santorum didn’t vote for Paul’s sanctity of life bill back in 2007. Here’s why: The bill never made it to vote on in the house, and Rick was in the Senate. In other words, no Rick did not vote for it, because it never was an option.



Read “Gabriel’s Story” by Karen Santorum.

I am married to United States Senator Rick Santorum, who in 1996 led the debate on a bill to ban partial-birth abortion—which even several pro-choice senators refer to as “infanticide”. The procedure is justified by its advocates as necessary in cases of fetal abnormalities detected late in pregnancy. They implied that Rick had no right to speak on the issue because it had not not touched his life.

One week later at a routine sonogram, the 20 week old baby in my womb was diagnosed with a defect that is always fatal without surgery. Through our immense heartache came the most basic of parental emotions: We had to save our child. After many tests it was determined our son was eligible for the operation that could save his life. It was a success, but an infection developed in the amniotic sac, and I was rushed to the hospital with a high fever, having contractions. I begged the doctors to stop my labor, but they said it would be malpractice, for I would surely die since these infections are untreatable.

Gabriel Michael Santorum was born at 12:45 AM on Friday, October 11, 1996. He was a beautiful boy. He did not give a cry or open his tiny eyes. We baptized him, bundled him, and held him ever so close. We sang to him, held his little hands and kissed him. Gabriel lived for two hours. In those two hours something simple but profound happened. Rick and I became parents to a newborn baby and welcomed him into our family. That was all….but it was everything. His life was so brief, yet his impact so great. In two hours we experienced a lifetime of emotions. Love, sorrow, regret, joy—-all were packed into that brief span. To have rejected that experience would have been to reject life itself.

Regarding the lie that Karen Santorum had an abortion in 1996.




 Attorney and former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania. According to USA Today, “Santorum, R-Pa., has won high praise from the Humane Society of the United States for pushing legislation aimed at ending breeding facilities known as puppy mills.” PETA also finds him to be “a friend.” According to the article, “About the only legislative issue on which Santorum has gone against PETA’s view was oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Santorum filed an anti-puppy mill bill in 2001 similar to the PAWS bill. It passed the Senate and was part of the 2002 Farm Bill but was deleted before final passage, in part because of opposition from small breeders worried about over-regulation, Santorum said.” Santorum, in 2005, introduced the Pet Animal Welfare Statute (PAWS), requiring the USDA to regulate breeders who sell 7 or more litters of dogs or cats per year. The bill failed, causing the HSUS to “take it to the states.” He has supported and promoted anti-cockfighting legislation and more funding for federal oversight of animal breeding facilities. The article states “The animal rights political action committee Humane USA gave $5,000 to Santorum’s 2006 re-election bid and has pledged to campaign aggressively for him. ‘We support elected officials who have a proven record of leadership on animal welfare issues and Rick Santorum fits that characteristic precisely,’ said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the Humane Society and a Humane USA board member.” The Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), a division of the HSUS, gives Santorum the highest score of all candidates with a 60% score out of 100 and considers him to be “the most active on animal issues.” As of October 14, 2011, reports show no monetary donations to the Santorum campaign from the HSUS.d form


THE ARLEN SPECTOR ARGUMENT: Has been addressed numerous times, but short version is: The GOP had a one vote advantage in the Senate 51-49. It was apparent that President Bush would get at least one Supreme Court appointment in his second term. Specter was going to be the head of the Judiciary Committee, and he was the guy who demolished Anita Hill’s credibility to get Clarence Thomas approved. Santorum asked Specter for a commitment to get Bush’s Supreme Court appointments through. Specter said he would. And Specter was a sure bet for reelection as opposed to Pat Toomey (who was elected in the tea party wave). A 50/50 Senate split would endanger the possibility of a conservative justice appointment. So Santorum endorsed Specter and we got Justices Alito and Roberts. Now, can anyone plausibly make the case that they saw a supermajority for Dems in the Senate and a liberal President to pass Obamacare coming 4 years later? Unlucky, but this is hardly a case of Santorum “going rogue.”

“One of the foremost reasons I support Rick Santorum is the same position causing others to dismiss him–his support of Specter over Toomey in 2004. He knew conservatives would revile this decision and perhaps never forgive him, but yet he assessed that Toomey would have a hard time winning and if Spector were removed as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the opportunity to confirm Alito and Roberts would be gone.”

CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRO-ABORTION CANDIDATES: Yes, these candidates were pro-abortion. But who were their opponents? Christine Todd Whitman (NJ) ran against James McGreevy, yes that guy. Doug Forrester (NJ) ran against Frank Lautenberg. Charlie Dent picked up Pat Toomey’s seat in PA when he gave it up to run for Senate. Jim Greenwood was the incumbent GOP congressman in PA. What do they all have in common? All these pro-abortion candidates were in the Northeast. Santorum and Toomey were the rare exceptions to the rule that most of the Northeast demands socially liberal candidates (as we saw in a certain 1994 Massachusetts Senate Race). But you can hardly blame Santorum for supporting the GOP in Pennsylvania races and trying to get a couple less-bad candidates elected in New Jersey. (If he had contributed to Chris Christie, he would be guilty of the same thing).

Defending Specter Endorsement

–From Foster Friess http://www.voicesempower.com/rick-santorum-profile-in-courage/

–From James Leonard http://theo-politico.blogspot.com/2011/12/skeletons-in-candidates-closets-is.html

 —From The American Spectator http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/23/re-specter-roberts-and-alito

5. Great Article: Rick Santorum, Specter, Sotomayor and Toomey – The Facts



WHY IS SANTORUM NOT ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT IN ALL STATES? Newt is not on the ballot in Missouri (52 delegates). Santorum is not on the ballot in DC (19 delegates). Neither Newt nor Santorum are on the ballot in Virginia (49 delegates). Other than that (and finishing up in Indiana) the rest are easy and shouldn’t be a problem. None of these are game changers.



FEDERAL MANDATE ON HEALTH CARE: Rick Santorum has stated on numerous occasions that he is opposed to a federal mandate on health insurance.  He has been quoted as saying otherwise, but his words have been taken out of context.  What he said is that employers would be required to OFFER health insurance, but nobody would be required to PURCHASE it.

Santorum favors Health Savings Plans, and he explained at a town hall meeting that for people whose employers did not offer health care benefits and who therefore had to purchase their own insurance, there was no way for them to get the same kind of pre-tax benefit as those who got their insurance from their employer. By using the health savings plan they could get the pre-tax benefit when purchasing their own insurance.

Santorum believes all people should have access to the same kind of plans Congress has–a variety of plans that can be tailored to an individual’s needs (ex., maybe they want to pay higher premiums and have more things covered, or maybe they’d prefer to pay lower premiums and take care of most routine stuff on their own, or somewhere in between).

SINGLE PARENTHOOD AND BIRTH CONTROL: Santorum was asked about his position on contraception, something that critics have accused the social conservative of being against.

“This is crazy,” said Santorum, in explaining that his opposition in the landmark Supreme Court Case Griswold v Connecticut, is not to the court’s decision to invalidate a Connecticut law prohibiting the use of contraceptives. Rather Santorum is opposed to judicial activism, and “the creation of new rights because the court says so.” In the Griswold case the Supreme Court decided that the contraceptives law violated “the right to privacy,” which later led to the decision in Roe v Wade which said that the same “right to privacy” invalidated state laws that banned most abortions.

Rick Santorum Isn’t Coming For Your Birth Control


Some contraceptives harm women



CEO VS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF: Newt Gingrich decried Romney’s support for the “Wall Street model where you can flip companies, you can go in and have leveraged buyouts, you can basically take out all the money, leaving behind the workers.”  Rick Santorum insisted, “the commander-in-chief of this country isn’t a CEO.”

PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN: Santorum admits the Republicans made two mistakes with the Prescription Drug Plan.  First, they made it universal, when in reality only 15% of seniors needed it.  He spoke out against that and lost.  Second, they approved it without funding it, but funding was not an option on the table at the time of voting. The Republicans had plans for a program that was substantially less money than the Democrat program. They also included substantial reforms for Medicare as well as Health Savings Plans in this bill.


DEBT CEILING VOTES: While Santorum was in Congress, we had surpluses and deficits, and the national debt went up and down. Most of the time the debt ceiling was increased, it was based around funding for war and military spending. It is significant to note that the increases they voted on were not in the trillion dollar increments that they have been under Obama.

SANTORUM ENDORSED ROMNEY IN 2008: Santorum explains his endorsement of Romney in 2008 like this… “First off, I endorsed Mitt Romney, I think, five days before Super Tuesday. I didn’t endorse anybody for a long time. My focus in the 2008 election was on making sure we had someone other than John McCain. That is what I was publicly stating because I thought that he would not be a strong candidate for us in the general election and I didn’t think he’d be the best candidate for us to do the things that were necessary for this country. And so, my principle purpose, I said this from the very beginning, was to wait and see who was the best able to beat John McCain when the time came.”


-Rick champions the intrinsic value of the human person as the founding principle of conservatism.

-Rick exposed the House Banking and House Post Office scandals.

-Rick is the author of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act.

-Rick authored legislation that outlawed Partial Birth Abortion, the “Born Alive Infant Protection

Act,” the “Unborn Victims of Violence Act,” and the “Combating Autism Act”.

-Rick fought for a balanced budget and a line item veto.

-Rick advocates for reforming the Social Security system

-Rick authored the “Syrian Accountability Act” and the “Iran Freedom and Support Act” to

impose sanctions on these rogue nations and promote democracy around the globe.

-Rick has led the fight to rid the scourge of AIDS from the continent of Africa.


Recent comments have been taken out of context and made it sound as if Santorum is against the tea party.  In reality, he is against the free-for-all liberalism that some have tried to pin on the tea party as one of their goals.

Rick explained, “I don’t agree that people should be empowered to do what pleases them the most. We have a responsibility beyond [ourselves].” Santorum characterized the “liberal view” as “anti-responsibility,” saying it holds, “I should be able to do whatever I want to do as long as no one gets hurt.”

He continued:    Particularly in the area of sexual freedom and personal issues, this is the mantra of the left. Which is, “I have a right to do what I want to do.” And that is not the kind of freedom that our Founders envisioned, and it is not the kind of freedom that makes up a society that is devote to the common good. The definition of liberty as our Founders understood it, was freedom with responsibility. Responsibility to who? To themselves? No. It was a responsibility to others. It was responsibility to your family, but not just your family. It was a responsibility to your neighbors and to your country.

Santorum complained that we have “an entire culture that focuses on immediate gratification and the pursuit of happiness and personal pleasure, and it is harming America.”

Rick Santorum has a long history of cutting taxes, reducing spending and fighting for a balanced budget amendment.  He even took on leaders of his own party in that fight. He has never voted for a tax increase, and one year introduced more original bills cutting spending than anyone else.

Sarah Palin said Rick Santorum’s “been consistent in saying we need to slash the federal income tax.”

Santorum is a member of the “Gang of Seven” that exposed taxpayer scandals at Congressional bank and Congressional post office. This is one of the reasons the Washington Post praised Santorum as “a tea-party kinda guy before the tea party even existed.”

Rick Santorum has called for significant tax rate cuts for middle class Americans and will cut wasteful spending to take the growing deficit off the backs of our children.

On a conference call to tea party folks, Rick said he supports the tea party and their principles, saying he’s repeatedly praised them around the country and noted the huge gains they’ve helped accomplished. He was especially appreciative of the educational forums the tea party provides.  Rick made a point to say he’s a Reagan Conservative, not a Libertarian, which makes us isolationists and ignores faith and family.

TOO CONSERVATIVE TO WIN?: Too conservative to win? What has been interesting to watch is how he interacts with people about his so-called ultra conservativism, and by the time he’s done, the people end up agreeing with him.

There’s no doubt that Rick is a true conviction conservative with a record of results to back it up.  But his conservative vision actually unites Democrats, Independents and Republicans because his vision for America is rooted in common sense.  The Made In America Plan, the Manufacturing Plan, the Balanced Budget Amendment, the economic plan, are undoubtedly rooted in conservatism and common sense — and that’s what we need

WE NEED A MODERATE?: Some folks are arguing that we need a moderate to beat Obama – someone more middle-of-the-road to appeal to more voters. Well, John McCain was a moderate and look how well that turned out…

Article Defends Santorum as small government


On Big Gov


Rush Limbaugh defends Rick’s conservativism


Rick on Hannity defending attacks on him being big governmnet.


10. ***CREW***

REGARDING THE CREW REPORT: Check out the names of the Democrats on their report, William “Cold Cash” Jefferson, and Maxine Waters, etc. But I have one question for you, “Where’s Charlie “Tax-dodge” Rangel? Not on this list, even though they take pains to point out every “appearance of impropriety” on the part of Republicans, including Santorum. Then check out their blog post on the 60 Min report on congressional insider trading. Particularly the segment below. Now compare the benefit of the doubt they give Nancy Pelosi while calling out Santorum for trying to cut taxes on large breweries six months after a contribution. Seems like only republicans get the “appearance of impropriety” treatment.

“The transaction in question for Pelosi dates back to her time as Speaker of the House in 2008. In March of that year, her husband purchased 5,000 shares of Visa stock as part of an initial public offering. This purchase, 60 Minutes contends, came “just as a troublesome piece of legislation that would have hurt credit card companies began making its way through the House…the credit card legislation never made it to the floor of the House.” The implication is clear: Pelosi and her husband purchased the stock, and in order to profit financially from the purchase Speaker Pelosi killed legislation the credit card industry opposed. If true, CREW would be the first to sound the alarm. But the facts simply don’t add up.

The legislation at issue (pertaining to swipe fees) was reported out of the Judiciary Committee on October 3, 2008, the last day of the regular legislative session and on the same day the House was consumed with responding to the financial collapse and bailout. Thereafter, the House had merely four days of lame duck session in November and December and there was no chance the president would sign the swipe fees legislation into law. But it was under Speaker Pelosi that the House of Representatives passed not only the Credit Cardholders Bill Rights in 2008 (legislation fiercely opposed to by the credit card industry), but also the Dodd-Frank legislation in 2010, which incorporated a more robust version of the swipe fees legislation. Anyone who watches Congress knows that just because a bill is reported out of committee doesn’t mean it is set for passage by the full chamber. There are always political considerations involved, and in this case the swipe fees legislation zeroed in on by 60 Minutes was not slowed down by Rep. Pelosi, but rather the political realities of the day.”

Regarding Crew- Receives funding from George Soros- ’nuff said.


CREW CALLS SANTORUM CORRUPT: “The group that called me corrupt was CREW,” Santorum said at the recent GOP presidential debate. “If you haven’t been sued by CREW you’re not conservative. CREW is a left wing organization that puts out a list every election of the top Republicans in tough races and calls them all corrupt because they take contributions from PACs.”

In 2010, CREW published a “Crooked Candidates” list that included . . . Marco Rubio (R-FL – elected) . . . and Allen West (R-FL – elected)!

11. ***EARMARKS***


Rick actually supported a moratorium on earmarks because the earmark process was being abused by his colleagues, many of whom were dishonest about where the money was going. The funding for that bridge was hidden in an appropriations bill.

Megyn Kelly asked Santorum about accusations in the ads, including his support of the Gravina Island Bridge, more commonly referred to as the “Bridge to Nowhere”. When Santorum was in the U.S. Senate, he voted for the bridge in Alaska that if built would have cost taxpayers almost $400 million.

Santorum responded that the money came from an earmark that was going to Alaska. He went on to explain, “My determination on all these projects is, if this is money that’s going to the state and the senator from the state says that this is where I want to spend that money, who am I in Pennsylvania to tell the people in Alaska what the priorities of the state of Alaska should be.”

He argued that holding down spending is the problem, not earmarks as suggested by Ron Paul. Santorum retorted, “Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, [Paul] was the number four earmarker in the United States Congress in the last few years. He’s a huge earmarker. The only difference with Ron Paul is he earmarks bills and then he doesn’t vote for them and says he is for lower spending.”

Rick Santorum responds to ron pauls accusations on ear marks


The truth about earmarks


EARMARKS: During the early stages of both the Afghan and Iraqi wars, an early threat to the lives of our brave soldiers became apparent: IEDs. At the time our troops were equipped with Humvees that did little to stop an IED attack. In Congress at the time there was talk about an armored vehicle, that we now know as the MRAV, which has saved countless lives. The Pentagon at the time denied funding for the development of this vehicle. Senator Rick Santorum among others EARMARKED funds for the development of this vehicle which has been instrumental in clearing paths to insurgent strongholds and saving American lives. The Pentagon has since funded the project.

I am sure all who read this are familiar with the drones that we hear about on a daily basis. AGAIN, a program in which the Pentagon opted not to fund. Again Senator Rick Santorum amongst others earmarked funds to develop these drone which have been instrumental in not only saving lives but also providing key reconnaissance on insurgent movements and supply chains

Last but surely not least lets speak on the LARGEST earmark Senator Rick Santorum brought back to the state of Pennsylvania. Senator Rick Santorum earmarked funds for a doctor who was working on a ground breaking project, the regeneration of limps, appendages, etc. This project is not being funded by the federal government and has benefited thousands of wounded warriors.

Does this sound like a man on a shopping spree or a man who thoroughly researched projects and allocated funds towards developments than can TRULY help Americans?

Though Rick Perry called Santorum out for taking earmarks, he failed to mention that Texas pays a lobbyist to do exactly the same thing. The Federal budget was designed to utilize earmarks, and monies not used go to the President to use at his own discretion. However, when Santorum realized that his colleagues were abusing the earmark system, he called for a moratorium.

Earmarks are an allocation process for a more efficient use of monies granted to a state. A representative can make sure that certain things get funded that a DC bureaucrat wouldn’t know about. In addition, funds avoid going through liberal institutions (cf., James Inhofe, OK). For example, Rick was able to fund a Catholic hospital with money so it could buy medical equipment–something DC would not have done. Earmarks can serve a vital purpose, but once they started to be abused, Rick was against them.

But entitlements are worse than earmarks because earmarks make up only a tiny slice of the budget. Rick has been a leader in entitlement reform. John McCain, on the other hand, was a coward in entitlement reform, and in order to make himself look fiscally conservative, he took up the earmark cause.

Ron Paul loads bills that he KNOWS will pass without his support with earmarks. He brings home the money, but then he votes AGAINST the bill so that he can say that he never voted for an earmark.

Rick Santorum has been consistent and clear that out-of-control spending in Washington has to be stopped.  In fact, Rick has relentlessly fought for a Balanced Budget Amendment, he exposed waste at the Pentagon, and his Welfare Reform Bill reformed an entitlement program and greatly reduced fraud, waste and abuse. Rick has never voted for a tax increase, and he supported a moratorium on earmarks.

Megyn Kelly asked Santorum about accusations in the ads including his support of the Gravina Island Bridge, more commonly referred to as the “Bridge to Nowhere”. When Santorum was in the U.S. Senate, he voted for the bridge in Alaska that if built would have cost taxpayers almost $400 million.

Santorum responded that the money came from an earmark that was going to Alaska. He went on to explain, “My determination on all these projects is, if this is money that’s going to the state and the senator from the state says that this is where I want to spend that money, who am I in Pennsylvania to tell the people in Alaska what the priorities of the state of Alaska should be.”

He argued that holding down spending is the problem, not earmarks as suggested by Ron Paul. Santorum retorted, “Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, [Paul] was the number four earmarker in the United States Congress in the last few years. He’s a huge earmarker. The only difference with Ron Paul is he earmarks bills and then he doesn’t vote for them and says he is for lower spending.” 


12. ***EDUCATION***

NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND: Rick addressed this on a tele-town hall for tea party members. He said it was something he was not a fan of and that he had some real concerns. It did have some things that were good, and he voted for it, but he admitted it was a mistake. He stated, “Looking back, I should have known better. I didn’t listen to my better principles. One of the first orders of business will be to repeal it and the funding for it.”

In a separate conversation from the above, Rick said it was a mistake, and that he held his nose and voted for it because it was the President’s highest priority and it had some good stuff in it.  But he admitted it was inconsistent with his view of education, and that he has been vocal about getting education back not just to State level but to local level. He said he violated his principles on that one, and he regrets it.

On Dept. of Education and Energy




CAN SANTORUM BEAT OBAMA?: This article lays it all out very nicely:


Rick Santorum has won many tough races. His election to the US House of Reps in 1990 was considered the biggest upset of the year. He was re-elected overwhelmingly in 1992 despite having a new district that was over 60% Democrat.

In 1994 Rick was successfully elected to the US Senate. He was one of only two people to defeat a sitting Senator that year.

In 2000, Rick was successfully re-elected despite being the number one target of Democrats, in a state that has a more than 1 million voter registration advantage for the Democrats.

When Rick lost re-election in 2006, it was the worst environment possible for Republicans.  President Bush’s approval rating was remarkably low in Pennsylvania.  Not only was Rick defeated, but the Republican candidate for Governor lost that race by 20 points, and 4 Republican members of the US House of Reps were also defeated.

Santorum is considered an outstanding debater and will be a formidable opponent for Obama.

SANTORUM LOST HIS LAST ELECTION: When Rick lost re-election in 2006, it was the worst environment possible for Republicans. Some historians, in fact, have characterized the 2006 election as the worst for the GOP since 1932.  President Bush’s approval rating was remarkably low in Pennsylvania, which is also neither a reliably Republican nor a reliably conservative state. Not only was Rick defeated, but the Republican candidate for Governor lost that race by 20 points, and 4 Republican members of the US House of Representatives were also defeated.

Furthermore, if Senator Santorum’s loss in the 2006 Senate race disqualifies him from consideration as a Presidential candidate, then by the same logic, Mitt Romney’s refusal to run for reelection as Governor of Massachusetts in that same 2006 election–when his own internal polling data indicated that he would lose very badly–should disqualify him as a Presidential candidate, as well.

14. ***E-VERIFY***

Ann Coulter accused Santorum of opposing E-verify. His response?

Santorum explained to the Iowa folks that he voted against “E-Verify” when it was part of John McCain’s amnesty bill in 2006 — a bill that Coulter and every other American with a shred of honesty, intelligence or patriotism also opposed.

Rick supports E-verify and even voted for it twice. The vote in question was when John McCain and Ted Kennedy put e-verify in their amnesty bill. Rick doesn’t support amnesty. Never has.  Never will. So he couldn’t vote for any amnesty bill.

On E-Verify http://theothermccain.com/2011/12/30/rick-santorum-to-ann-coulter-i-mean-ann-should-i-have-voted-for-amnesty/



ON THE FEDERAL RESERVE: Senator Santorum has stated that he supports an audit of the Federal Reserve Bank, but that he does not support ending the Fed. He supports returning the Fed to a single mandate of controlling inflation.

On the Fed




FOREIGN POLICY: Rick Santorum has more foreign policy credentials than the other candidates – especially dealing with Iran, one of the biggest threats we are currently facing.

He served 8 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee where he led the fight to transform our military from a Cold War force to meet today’s threats. He also exposed millions in waste at the Pentagon.

Rick was a leader on US-Israeli relations, authoring both the Syria Accountability Act and the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which he successfully fought to pass.

17. ***GAY RIGHTS***

Rick talks gay marriage to college students, makes valid argument.


Santorum’s Openly Homosexual Aide of 10 Years Defends Rick



To fully understand what went on here, one must read the transcript which can be found at this link:


Santorum tried to work with Lautenberg, but Lautenberg wouldn’t do it.


IMMIGRATION: Numbers USA gave Rick Santorum an A- on Immigration. It is the highest score of any candidate, and he is the only one who got positive marks an each individual criteria under this topic. He strongly supports LEGAL immigration.

On Border Security


20. ***PATRIOT ACT***

PATRIOT ACT: SANTORUM: “We created the Department of Homeland Security because there was a complete mess in the internal — in protecting our country. We had all sorts of agencies that had conflicting authority. We had no information sharing that was going on. This was right after 9/11. We saw the problems created as a result of 9/11. And we put together a plan to try to make sure that there was better coordination.”

21. ***RACISM***

RACIST COMMENTS: Santorum was quoted as saying, “”I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.”

Santorum said he “mumbled it and changed my thought” in mid-statement. “I‘m pretty confident I didn’t say ‘black’,” he said. “I’ve looked at it several times. I was starting to say one word and I sort of came up with a different word and then moved on.” But, he conceded, “it sounded like black.”

Santorum told Bill O’Reilly:

“And I can tell you, I don’t use — I don’t — first off, I don‘t use the term ’black’ very often. I use the term ‘African-American‘ more than I use ’black.’ I can tell you as someone who did more work for historically black colleges, I used to have — every year, I used to bring all the historically black colleges into Washington, DC to try to help them, because they get very little federal money through the bureaucracy, and so I help to try to introduce them to people in the Department of Education so they could have more resources.”

22. ***RIGHT TO WORK***

DAVIS-BACON ACT (RIGHT TO WORK): According to the Library of Congress, the vote was 68-31. Santorum wasn’t the swing vote, he was the freshman senator from a union state where he won with less than 50% of the vote just 18 months before. To cast a vote against unions when the bill was already defeated would be pointless and self-defeating. From reading the roll call, I suspect that a few of the swing republicans voted no only when the 60 vote margin was cleared, including Santorum. That won’t please purists who prefer martyrdom, but remember: Partial Birth Abortion Ban wasn’t passed until 2003. Would it have been passed if Santorum had already been voted out for sticking his finger in the eyes of his working class base for a vote already lost?


SOCIAL SECURITY CUTS: Rick Santorum beleives that we need to address the problem with Social Security now because we don’t have any money. He is for means testing SS even further, and explains that those people who depend on SS for their entire income or even 50-60% would not be effected.  Rather, he would want to lessen the amount for those who are wealthy and do not depend on SS for their income. He explains it in further detail in this NH Town Hall: http://www.c-span.org/Campaign2012/Rick-Santorum-Holds-New-Hampshire-Town-Hall/10737426806/

ON CUTTING BACK SOCIAL SECURITY: Quote from Sunny Rinker: He said he is NOT for cutting social security benefits for those who are currently receiving benefits and who depend on it for a majority of their income.  He is FOR continuing “means” testing for those who have LARGE ASSETS and receive a majority of their income from interest & dividends from those assets.  He believes their income from social security should not be as high as those who DEPEND on it. I referenced the AP story which is being used to quote him and he said he DID not say what the report says. Straight from his mouth. Link to phttp://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/05/nightside-republican-presidential-candidate-rick-santorum-joins-dan-rea/odcast


In 2002, when Rick Santorum nominated the Sanduskys for the award, no formal accusations had been made against Jerry Sandusky. In fact, at that time, no authority outside of Penn State had been told of Sandusky’s crimes. The grand jury that ultimately indicted Jerry Sandusky wasn’t even convened until 2009.

Rick Santorum has never met the Sanduskys personally. Though saddened to see scandal taint the name of Penn State, Rick has stated publicly that he supports the firing of Sandusky.


25. ***SOPA***

SOPA: Red State put out an article titled Rick Santorum Supports SOPA.  It’s a lie. They took out of context what he said. Here’s the direct quote from Rick Santorum: “I can’t say that, with respect to that bill, that I’m familiar enough with it that I can say that I have an opinion one way or the other on it.”

Clearly Santorum is one who believes you have to actually READ a bill before you can make a decision on it, and certainly before voting on it!


there was no vote



The headline alone is repulsive to any committed supporter of former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign: “Santorum and Specter team up on stem-cell bill | The compromise measure would involve creating altered embryos as a source for the material.”

But what was inside the May 6, 2006, article published by The Philadelphia Inquirer would be deal-breaker for just about anyone considering Santorum’s campaign, if only it were entirely true. But, before we take a look at the merits of the article, it’s important to provide some key facts related to this article.

A decade ago, genetic scientists had begun developing therapies for a wide range of maladies that involved the use of “pluripotent stem cell lines.” There was just one catch: these special cell arrangements could only be created by using the cells of human embryos, which destroyed the embryos after they were extracted.

Many Christians found this process morally reprehensible, and rightfully so, because it destroys human life. Santorum, then a member of the U.S. Senate, was among the most vocal opponents to the use of embryonic stem cell research.

Ironically, his chief opponent — and chief supporter of embryonic stem cell research — was the other member of the Pennsylvania delegation, then-Sen. Arlen Specter. He was the chief sponsor of a bill called the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which would provide federal funding for research on leftover embryos donated by couples undergoing fertility treatment.

In 2001, President George W. Bush had pushed a compromise that allowed embryos harvested prior to his executive order banning research that destroyed embryos to still be used. The “logic” behind this was the embryos were no longer “viable” and could not be implanted in a woman’s uterus to produce a human child.

Five years later, Congress was still embroiled in a debate over what could be done with regard to stem cell research. With the senators from Pennsylvania deadlocked on opposite ends of the spectrum on the use of embryonic stem cells, common sense dictated they sit down to see if some sort of middle ground could be achieved.

Mind you, Specter and Santorum were both Republicans, regardless of what any of us have come to know about the former’s political leanings. And, they were both from Pennsylvania. So, it was hardly a shocker that they would sit down to discuss the issue.

To help bridge the divide, the President’s Council on Bioethics had issued a report that outlined what it considered “ethically uncontroversial” means of obtaining the strings of stem cells researchers needed to do their work. Among some of the “uncontroversial” concepts was one in which an embryo is engineered so that it would stop growing at a certain point in its development — in essence, it contained the genetic code of a human being, but it could never reach that full potential.

At the time, this could not be done with adult stem cells. But, the research in that area was limited, at best. So, Santorum authored the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act, which gained the support of five other Republican senators: Richard Burr of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, and Specter.

The bill was clearly an attempt to find alternative means to gain the benefits that could be enjoyed from embryonic stem cell research without using cells derived from embryos. In fact, the first provision of the bill makes that more than abundantly clear:

In accordance with section 492, the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] shall conduct and support basic and applied research to develop techniques for the isolation, derivation, production, or testing of stem cells that, like embryonic stem cells, are capable of producing all or almost all of the cell types of the developing body and may result in improved understanding of or treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, but are not derived from a human embryo.

The bill also clearly stated it could not be used as a loophole to allow an expansion of existing embryonic stem cell research:



1. Rick Santorum – “Profile in Courage”


2. Blog page with excellent references to some of Santorum’s accomplishments


3. Rick’s Made in America Plan outlined


4. Rick on the issues Comprehensive list


5. Overall Profile of Rick, his family and political career


6. Rick’s Facebook Page


7. Key Votes


8. “It Takes a Family” Transcript Interview


9. “Where I Stand”


10. On Muslim Brotherhood


11. On Science and Global Warming


12. Article defending Rick’s part in Welfare Reform


13. Women in Military


14. Autism


Santorum: ‘Past Time’ for Help on Autism – **Autism Votes **


15. Body Armor http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2006/false_claims_about_body_armor.html

16. EMBRYONIC STEM CELL http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/common-sense-setting-the-record-straight-on-santorum%E2%80%99s-support-for-stem-cell-research/


18. Rick Santorum, Specter, Sotomayor and Toomey – The Facts



To find out more go to www.ricksantorum.com

Donate to Rick Santorum’s Campaign

Volunteer for Rick Santorum’s Campaign

We help you get to the top of Google

Setting the Record Straight on Senator Rick Santorum’s Stance on US Military and National Defense

By Brian Hughes

rick-santorum-for-president-2012I would like to set the record straight, The rumors floating around out there about Senator Rick Santorum not being for our US Military or a strong National defense are lies. The truth is that Senator Santorum is PRO-US MILITARY AND PRO-STRONG NATIONAL DEFENSE. Stop listening to the sounds bites the media feeds you and do your own research.

Here are some facts about Senator Rick Santorum from his resume published on RedState.com

“In 2003, Rick authored and successfully fought for the passage of the “Syria Accountability Act” to combat the terrorist threat posed by Syria.  By 2005, Rick was one of our nation’s first leaders to understand the threat posed by Iran, so he authored and passed the “Iran Freedom and Support Act” in the face of Democratic and Bush State Department opposition, which authorized Federal monies to support pro-democracy movements in Iran and keep the tyrannical dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Though the war in Iraq was unpopular in 2006, Rick refused to shy away from his belief that we need to confront our enemies. Though ridiculed by many in the mainstream media as a chicken little for talking about the threat posed by Ahmadinejad and Iran, Rick spent much of his campaign focused on the gathering storm that our enemies pose. In an election that was a referendum on the war, Rick was defeated.

Though he lost at the ballot box, Rick has not stopped fighting for the defense of our nation.  Since leaving the Senate in 2007, Rick created the “Program to Protect America’s Freedom” at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he worked to identify, study, and heighten awareness of the threats posed to America.  Through his work, Rick spoke at dozens of university campuses and to thousands of college students about the threats to our nation and how it is critical that the next generation of leaders not back down, but defend our nation.”

Here are some links to help you make an informed decision.

As you can plainly see after reading the quotes from his published resume and the articles from the links, the accusations are obviously false and have been used to try to smear Senator Santorum because he has become such a serious contender in the 2012 Presidential race. Especially, since it is now official that he won in Iowa by 34 votes.

SEO Fort Lauderdale

The Truth Behind Senator Rick Santorum’s Earmarks

By Adam Wetmiller:

rick-santorum-for-president-2012Unfortunately we hear a lot about earmarks when other candidates refer to Rick Santorum but it is about time voters hear the truth behind these earmarks.

During the early stages of both the Afghan and Iraqi wars, an early threat to the lives of our brave soldiers became apparent: IEDs. At the time our troops were equipped with Humvees that did little to stop an IED attack. I know this because there is now a post office on Hillsboro Blvd. and Lyons Rd. named after a good friend I lost in such an attack PFC Daniel Agami. In Congress at the time there was talk about an armored vehicle, that we now know as the MRAV, which has saved countless lives. The Pentagon at the time denied funding for the development of this vehicle. Senator Rick Santorum among others EARMARKED funds for the development of this vehicle which has been instrumental in clearing paths to insurgent strongholds and saving American lives. The Pentagon has since funded the project.

I am sure all who read this are familiar with the drones that we hear about on a daily basis. AGAIN, a program in which the Pentagon opted not to fund. Again Senator Rick Santorum amongst others earmarked funds to develop these drone which have been instrumental in not only saving lives but also providing key reconnaissance on insurgent movements and supply chains

Last but surely not least lets speak on the LARGEST earmark Senator Rick Santorum brought back to the state of Pennsylvania. Senator Rick Santorum earmarked funds for a doctor who was working on a ground breaking project, the regeneration of limps, appendages, etc. This project is not being funded by the federal government and has benefited thousands of wounded warriors.

Does this sound like a man on a shopping spree or a man who thoroughly researched projects and allocated funds towards developments than can TRULY help Americans?


PFC Daniel Agami

SEO Strategies for Helping Rick Santorum’s Online Identity Problem on Google


By Brian Hughes

SEO Strategies for helping Rick Santorum’s Online Identity Problem on Google www.ricksantorum.com


ATTENTION! WE NEED YOUR HELP! We need your help with the issues we are having on Google with www.ricksantorum.com. To learn more about these issues, go to Google, type in the search bar, “rick santorum” and you will see some of the unsavory results on the first page of results.

Here are a few action steps that can be taken to help bring about better search results when people search for “rick santorum”. Contact me if you have any questions.

What is SEO?

Link building: The plan of action is to create as many editorial links to the other Pages on the root domain. For example, whenever you are commenting on a blog, article, post or tweet, please post a link pointing to www.ricksantorum.com/donate and make the anchor text “rick santorum” if the option to make anchor text is available. This will help boost the ranking for that particular page result in Google.

How to make anchor text links.

Please post editorial content with links on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn, YouTube, Reddit, Digg, StumbleUpon and any other Social Media accounts you may have.


Warning! Please don’t just post links without some type of content that makes sense or try to create any link farms. That would go against Google’s Webmaster Guidelines and against what we are trying to achieve.


Bloggers: For all you Bloggers out there, we need your help.  Create a page on your blogs and optimize it for the keyword phrase “rick santorum”. Than start building links pointing to that blog page using the same anchor text “rick santorum”. After creating the Blog Page with positive information about Senator Santorum and with links to www.ricksantorum.com/donate than send it to all of us to comment and link too.

Video Marketing: If you have any videos of Rick Santorum on sites like YouTube or Vimeo, please do the following; First, make sure you have the keyword phrase ‘rick santorum” in the title, description and the tags. Secondly, make sure you have a live hyper link pointing to http://www.ricksantorum.com/donate in the description and make sure it’s on the first, second or third line.

Image Alt Tag: For anyone posting up any photos on the web of Senator Santorum please add an Image Alt Tag if you can. When adding an image alt tag please use “rick-santorum-for-president-2012”. Please be sure to put a – in between the two words. Example below from Flickr.

If you have any questions please contact brian@integritymcseo.com

We help you get to the top of Google

seo-services-fort-lauderdale-search-engine-optimization-internet-marketing-integrity marketing and consulting

Do you need an SEO Expert?

Integrity Marketing and Consulting

SEO Fort Lauderdale

Why Senator Rick Santorum Is The Best Choice for Conservatives

By Brian Hughes


As we go into the 2012 election year Conservatives have been wondering who is going to be the GOP Candidate for them to follow. The theme has been since at least June that Mitt Romney is the Republican establishments choice for the Primary GOP Candidacy for the 2012 Presidential election. The Grass Root Conservatives have been looking for their alternative to Governor Romney.

Before the Iowa Caucus the options were Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Speaker Newt Gingrich, Congressman Ron Paul, Governor Rick Perry and Senator Rick Santorum. They all had their surge at some point during their time campaigning in Iowa, all except Senator Santorum. He has been the tortoise of the race and seems to have hit his surge at just the right time. The Iowa Caucus had a photo finish with Governor Romney winning and Senator Santorum coming in second place only losing by 8 votes.

Senator Santorum went from only polling in the low single digits all the way up until two weeks before the Caucus when his surge began. The Huffington Post says “Santorum took the highest percentage of the evangelical vote of any Republican candidate in Tuesday’s Iowa caucuses, registering 37 percent of the vote, more than double the share secured by the next-closest candidate.”

Conservatives are looking for the candidate that best matches up to their values and belief’s. It is obvious that Senator Santorum became their choice within the final two weeks leading up to the Caucuses. This is a great victory for Senator Santorum’s Campaign even though they came in second they changed the entire course of the race.

The steam from Iowa has carried through right into New Hampshire where the majority tends to be more liberal. His campaign generated a record breaking one million dollars from donations to their website over the next 24 hours after the caucuses ended. Conservatives don’t have much time left to put all their chips in on one candidate.

Senator Rick Santorum is that best choice for Conservatives moving forward to the 2012 Presidential race. He is Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Life and financially conservative.

Where Santorum stands on issues we face in our great Nation;

Like Senator Rick Santorum said in his Iowa Caucus speech, “GAME ON!”. You can help Senator Rick Santorum’s Campaign by donating.



Go to www.ricksantorum.com


BREAKING! Join Us For A Presidential National Tele-Town Hall with Senator Rick Santorum…

Wednesday night, January 18th, 2012, at 6:45-7:45 PM EST


Wednesday night, January 18th, 2012, at 6:45-7:45 PM EST, we will be holding our first-ever  Presidential National Tele-Town Hall for our members and supporters. Join us as we discuss the future of our country and how we can work together to restore America’s greatness and founding principles. Joining us for a special Q&A session is 2012 presidential candidate, Senator Rick Santorum, and our Founder and Executive Director, Anthony Verdugo.

Senator Santorum fought to maintain fiscal sanity in Washington before it was in fashion, fighting for a balanced budget and a line item veto.  He bravely proposed reforming entitlements, cutting spending and even developed a “spendometer” that added up the cost of Democrat amendments to spending bills. This record made him one of the most conservative senators in Pennsylvania’s history. Please visit www.ricksantorum.com

Christian Family Coalition                              

Join us for a Webinar on January 18
Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
Rick Santorum speaks with the Christian Family Coalition Members.
Title: Christian Family Coalition
Date: Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Time: 6:45 PM – 7:45 PM EST
After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.

System Requirements

PC-based attendees
Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server

Macintosh®-based attendees
Required: Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer

Thank you for supporting the Christian Family Coalition, (CFC), as we turnout social conservatives to the polls for the most important presidential elections in our lifetime.


Anthony Verdugo
Founder and Executive Director

By ricksantorumforpresident Posted in News