Santorum Iowa Ad: ‘Join the Fight’

Posted on | December 16, 2011 | 32 Comments

Last night’s final debate in Sioux City was probably the best yet for Rick Santorum, says Bryan Preston of PJ Media, noting that the former Pennsylvania senator “showed very solid instincts on a range of issues” — as he has all along. There has been no “drama,” no flip-flopping from Santorum, and he has gotten relatively little media attention while carrying his “consistent conservative” message to all 99 Iowa counties. Now at long last, his fundraising boosted by praise from Sarah Palin and others, Santorum has released his first Iowa TV ad:

ABC News reports:

The voice over narrates over quotes from Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Mike Huckabee praising Santorum and even a quote from rival Newt Gingrich lauding Santorum’s Iran policy.
On Wednesday, the former Pennsylvania senator bragged that he was running the leanest of the GOP presidential campaign. . . .
Santorum has been barnstorming the state for months hoping hard work will pay off on Jan. 3, but going on the air will undoubtedly help.

Santorum campaign press release has the transcript:

He’s Rick Santorum.
A loving husband, a devoted father, homeschooler and a man of deep faith.
He wrote the law that banned partial birth abortions.
Overhauled America’s welfare system.
And no one has done more to protect America from Iran’s growing threat than Rick Santorum.
It’s no wonder Palin, Beck and Huckabee are singing his praises.
Now it’s your turn to join the fight.

Meanwhile, a new pro-Santorum “Super PAC” — the Red, White and Blue Fund — has spent a reported $200,000 to air this ad in Iowa:

We all agree Obama’s reckless agenda must be stopped.
But who is the true conservative you can really trust?
Rick Santorum.
He’s fought for conservative values his whole life.
Father, husband a champion for life.
A visionary that saw and understands the threat of radical Islam.
And a proven reformer who took on Washington and won.
Rick Santorum.
Finally a true conservative we can trust.

Permit a necessary digression here: A donnybrook has erupted among some conservatives, typified by Rush Limbaugh’s remarks yesterday about “establishment Republicans [who] are dumping all over Newt Gingrich.” If you read that, you’ll note that El Rushbo also takes on the unexpectedly strong showing by “wacko nut job” Ron Paul. And Limbaugh takes on National Review, which also got a sharp retort from another leading conservative:

Brent Bozell, the nephew of conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., who founded National Review magazine in 1955, and whose father, Leo Brent Bozell, collaborated with Buckley for many years at NR, today dismissed the magazine as having lost the identity forged for it by its founder.
“National Review’s endorsement of Romney & Huntsman proves only that this is no longer the magazine of William F. Buckley Jr.”

But while “movement conservatives” like Limbaugh and Bozell fight the NR punks who have declared war on Gingrich, everyone seems to be united in their opposition to the Ron Paul surge. A conservative friend yesterday e-mailed me a link to an American Spectator item yesterday in which Jeffrey Lord brought up the controversy about the old Ron Paul newsletters and what Lord calls “the and-oh-by-the-way-pay-no-attention-to-all that-anti-Semitic-stuff that trails the Paul candidacy like the little cloud of dirt that used to follow the Peanuts cartoon character Pigpen around.”

Also, Ace notes en passant, Ron Paul is endorsed by Andrew Sullivan.

Need we say more? While I have lamented the anti-Paul crusade, arguing for an effort “to engage the more decent and rational Paulistas” on behalf of a united front against Democratic Party liberalism, I lack the influence necessary to broker such a peace. (For example, having long ago called for Rich Lowry’s ouster from National Review, I could never be published there until Jonah Goldberg finally decides to lead the uprising against the decadent Lowry regime, a long-overdue revolution.) So the internecine war rages on and the question must be asked:

Why not Rick Santorum?

Look, if you’re a “movement conservative” who hates Ron Paul, who is more diametrically opposed to Paulism than Santorum? He’s the pro-Israel neocon warmonger your mother (if your mother is a Paulista) warned you about. By comparison to Santorum, Bibi Netanyahu is a dhimmi pacifist.

OK, he sometimes seems a bit of a scold on the social issues. One of my friends has used the word “sanctimonious” to describe Santorum’s mien in previous debates. But while other Republicans can be accused of unprincipled and insincere pandering to social conservatives, Santorum is a man who argues for the pro-life, pro-family agenda out of sincere religious conviction. He’s a cradle Catholic, a father of seven, married to the same woman for 21 years and (unlike a certain other candidate whom we need not name) there has never been a hint of scandal attached to Santorum’s name. Tina Korbe at Hot Air expresses the mystery:

The Santorum phenomenon is a perplexing one. For, as the ad suggests, Santorum has betrayed conservatism on far fewer occasions than either of the two current frontrunners. . . .
I have to admit, a surprisingly stellar finish in Iowa from Santorum would sit far better with me than, say, a win from Ron Paul and probably Newt Gingrich, too.

The only reason why some leading conservative spokesmen have not backed Santorum, I would suggest, is that they’re afraid to back an underdog. They look at the poll numbers and say to themselves, “Well, I don’t want to embarrass myself by backing a loser.” This is an argument to which I have already made my own reply, borrowing a youthful oration from the future Senator Joseph Blutarsky:

Over? Did you say “over”? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no! … And it ain’t over now. ‘Cause when the goin’ gets tough… The tough get goin’! Who’s with me? Let’s go! …
What the f— happened to the Delta I used to know? Where’s the spirit? Where’s the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you’re gonna let it be the worst. “Ooh, we’re afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble.” Well just kiss my a– from now on! Not me! I’m not gonna take this.

“Where’s the spirit? Where’s the guts, huh?”

You may say it’s hopeless, that a candidate running a low-budget campaign with single-digit poll numbers cannot, with just 18 days to go before the Jan. 3 caucuses, suddenly surge ahead to win Iowa. And why not? Because “we’re afraid to go with you Bluto.”

All it would take is a few minutes of careful praise from Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin — maybe they could contact the Santorum campaign and do on-air interviews with the candidate — to light the fuse on a powder keg that could explode all the predictions of the pundits and pollsters in Iowa.

You, the ordinary “civilian” reader of this blog, are probably saying to yourself: “But that’s not going to happen.”

And why not? Because “we’re afraid to go with you Bluto.”

Can’t you e-mail this post to Rush, Sean and Mark? Can’t you post it on Facebook, send it out on Twitter, circulate it by e-mail to your friends? Yes — yes, you could do that.

As I said during the 2009 Doug Hoffman campaign, the key thing is this: “Stop asking what you can do, and start doing what you can.”

You can “join the fight” for Rick Santorum right now.

RICK SANTORUM
‘NO SURRENDER’
MONEY BOMB

RECENTLY:

Category: Election 2012, Iowa, Rick Santorum, Video

Comments

32 Responses to “Santorum Iowa Ad: ‘Join the Fight’”

Zilla of the Resistance
December 16th, 2011 @ 9:47 am

So why do I see the following posted in the after the debate post?

“Overall, I remain firmly committed to supporting the GOP candidate, plan
to vote for Sarah Palin in the primaries,”

Did YOU write that, Stacy? Or is Smitty trying to undermine your gig in Vanuatu? WTH?
Anonymous
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:24 am

This was Smitty. He’s still mourning the collapse of the Thad McCotter bandwagon, I fear.
Zilla of the Resistance
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:32 am

Then Smitty needs to put his name on it, lest President Santorum think such nonsense came from his Ambassador to Vanuatu.
Also, you don’t want our friend Lisa Graas thinking that YOU wrote that, do you?
Paul Zummo
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:38 am

I like Rick – both Ricks, as a matter of fact. As to why he’s not being backed by more people, well, in addition to what you mentioned there are legitimate negatives. He has no executive experience, having served only as a member of Congress. His endorsement of Arlen Specter did irreparable harm to his credentials within pro-life circles. He didn’t just lose his last election – he got mauled. And then there’s the whiny thing.

Now, I don’t think all of the criticisms are fair. The Specter endorsement especially is overblown. I don’t know how that one action totally wipes out an excellent lifetime record. For me the most serious negative is his lack of executive experience, but at least he was more than a backbencher in the Senate.

Ideologically he’s the soundest. My one slight nitpick with him is foreign policy. I absolutely reject Ron Paul’s foreign policy vision, but I also reject going in the complete polar opposite direction. Santorum’s just a bit too interventionist for my blood. Otherwise he’s the one I agree with on most issues.
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:50 am

Neocon is not a description that could ever hope to win my support and I’m sure I’m not alone in telling you that if you want your candidate to win you might want to think about describing him in ways that will win him more support than it costs him.
richard mcenroe
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:59 am

“more decent and rational Paulistas” — sorry, just because you don’t personally wear the jackboots doesn’t mean you get to march in the same parade without being called on it. I don’t take that from lefties who insist that MoveOn, ANSWER, etc., ‘don’t speak for me’ even as they march with them; I won’t take it from Paulies.
richard mcenroe
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:00 am

I think you may have missed something,Z. I knew it was Smitty,
Anonymous
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:16 am

Wait: You didn’t get the layered nuance? The use of the phrase “pro-Israel neocon warmonger” in the sense that the Paulistas (and Kossacks) would use it? I’m speaking their patois, signifying that I understand their critique.
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:17 am

I hate to say it, because some Paulistas do come across as decent and rational. On the other hand, you do make a very valid point. If my best friends happened to be booger-eaters, I shouldn’t be surprised if people think that I, too, might be a booger-eater.
Anonymous
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:25 am

Richard, if you read the post linked, and if my explanation there wasn’t clear enough, I’ll try to boil the argument down to its essence:

While a certain number (and the most vocal) of the Paulista throng are fanatics, Ron Paul also attracts support from many decent, honest and reasonable people who believe that the GOP went overboard with militarism during the Bush 43 presidency. These people are not outright pacifists and are not Jew-haters, but they feel that the neocons have exercised too much influence in GOP foreign policy circles.

“Peace Through Strength” doesn’t have to mean the conquest and occupation of every foreign country with a dictatorial government (although I’ve often argued that Cuba would be first on my list for such treatment).

It is to such of Paul’s supporters — decent, intelligent and reasonable people, some of whom I know personally — that I believe overtures for a “united front” could be successful. And I think this would be true even if the Republican Party were to nominate the Paulista’s worst nightmare, Rick Santorum.

Always negotiate from a position of strength, I say.
Paul Zummo
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:43 am

Ron Paul also attracts support from many decent, honest and reasonable people
Clearly none of these people have access to the internet.
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:54 am

Oh, okay, point taken. Don’t get me wrong, I would vote for him if he won, gladly and proudly. I still prefer Bachmann though.
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 11:59 am

The best way to get their support would be for the ultimate nominee, whoever that is, to take Rand Paul as a running mate. They will deny it, but that’s probably mostly because they don’t want to admit their guy doesn’t have a shot at the top spot. That and they also hope if Ron doesn’t get it, he will run on a third party. But Rand as VP would be a great way to discourage Ron from doing that, plus it would at least draw a significant percentage of support from many who would never vote for anybody but Ron Paul otherwise. Also, Rand would not be anywhere as objectionable as Ron to the non-Paulistas, in my opinion.
Finrod Felagund
December 16th, 2011 @ 12:04 pm

My personal beef with Santorum is that he tried to hamstring the National Weather Service, which to my mind is behind only the US military and the Interstate Highway System in the list of federal programs that actually provide real help and value to its citizens. The concept of the tornado warning didn’t exist before 1950, and it would probably be an underestimate to say that the NWS saves hundreds, maybe even thousands of lives every year. Can you imagine what the death toll would have been in Joplin and Tuscaloosa this year if they hadn’t been warned about the impending tornado?
Anonymous
December 16th, 2011 @ 12:50 pm

Indeed, the ferocity of the online Paulbots gives them a bad reputation.
Anonymous
December 16th, 2011 @ 2:05 pm

Santorum has failed to catch fire because he doesn’t seem to have any charisma–he doesn’t come off as being statesmanlike, having presidential gravitas, whatever you may call it. His conservative credentials are impeccable. He is a decent, patriotic man. He also failed to carry his state before, losing his Senate seat doing and saying all the things he’s saying now.

At this point, if he fails to crack 10% in Iowa he will be under pressure to fold and endorse…whom? He could be a good VP pick for Newt or Perry (Rick&Rick?) if there is good reason to believe he will deliver the TP or at least Penn. We shall see. He is head and shoulders better than Bachmann.
Tennwriter
December 16th, 2011 @ 2:18 pm

Do we need hip? Do we need sexy?
Or do we need good?

Another way of saying this….Are we adults?
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley Endorses Mitt Romney - The POH Diaries
December 16th, 2011 @ 2:19 pm

[…] to be over with. I’d prefer Romney as much as I would anyone else left in the field. Sure, Santorum and Bachmann are more conservative, but there has to be a reason that their campaigns have either […]
Dai Alanye
December 16th, 2011 @ 2:42 pm

Santorum needs to immediately stop boasting about his record, worthy though it is, and in general, stop talking about the past. Elections are about the future not the past. In the meantime, conservatives must get over the Spector endorsement, a mere blip on the sunset side of the political horizon, and no indictive of Santorum’ views.

He’s the best true conservative in the race, so I guess it’s time for me to act upon your initiative and pry open my wallet. Just hope you don’t embezzle the take to pay your fare to Vanuatu.
Adjoran
December 16th, 2011 @ 2:59 pm

In what universe is Rand Paul qualified for the nation’s highest office?

Sounds like a dandy way to blow the election to me – although it could stimulate marijuana sales.
Adjoran
December 16th, 2011 @ 3:01 pm

Don’t we need “qualified” most of all?
Pro-Santorum Super PAC Ad – True Conservative | Race 4 2012
December 16th, 2011 @ 3:57 pm

[…] to R.S. McCain Share Tweet by Matthew Newman @ 2:57 pm. Filed under Campaign Advertisements, Rick […]
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 5:00 pm

His qualifications are he’s a living breathing American over the age of thirty. I’m not saying he would be the best choice, just that he could get a lot of Tard support and discourage Ron from running 3rd party. Plus, so far as I know he has done nothing to turn off more traditional GOP voters since his election, unlike his father. It would probably tickle the shit out of Mitch McConnell. It would give him a chance to put a RINO in Paul’s Ky. Senate seat when the seat come up. Somebody like Trey Grayson, the former Establishment GOP Ky Secretary of State that McConnell supported over Paul. Of course there is a downside, namely that Gov Beshear who is a Democrat would get to appoint Rand’s successor until such time as the seat come up for election.
ThePaganTemple
December 16th, 2011 @ 5:03 pm

Yes we do and we should think hard about finding a qualified person. Hey I know, let’s get some prick who’s been a liberal governor and worked most of his life on Wall Street.
Debra Lynn
December 16th, 2011 @ 5:09 pm

For a succinct summary of conservative values, check this
out by Charlie Allen, singing “Grandpa’s Recipe” http://www.charlieallenmusic.com/index.htm
Boonies in Loxahatchee
December 16th, 2011 @ 6:21 pm

Santorum reminds me of that guy who lives next door to Homer Simpson. A painfully earnest shithead with a family.
richard mcenroe
December 16th, 2011 @ 8:18 pm

And does not seem to give the reasonable ones pause.
richard mcenroe
December 16th, 2011 @ 8:19 pm

NOTHING will stop Ron Paul from doing whatever pops into his wizened and sundried little brain.
Tennwriter
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:29 pm

Ned Flanders would have been an excellent president. You see, you say ‘painfully earnest’, and I say ‘actually serious instead of a bad joke’.

Flanders would have gotten out a copy of the Constitution, read it, puzzled over it, asked lawyers what it meant…and then looked at the biggest problems of the nation and what he could do to solve them within th e Constitution…said ‘fiddle-e-I-de’ and tried to actually accomplish his goals.

He would not have been hip. He would not have been sexy. He might have even stumbled over a few words in a speech.

But he would have been good.
Tennwriter
December 16th, 2011 @ 10:32 pm

Are you really saying Rick Santorum is not qualified? Keep in mind that since the goal is the election of a conservative, any non-conservative, no matter how brilliant or how lengthy his resume is disqualified at the get-go.
ThePaganTemple
December 17th, 2011 @ 8:44 am

Yep he would but I think Boonie’s point is how he would be perceived by the average person. But Ned could solve that problem by picking Moe the Bartender as his running mate.
Rick Santorum Will Campaign Today in Council Bluffs, Red Oak and Atlantic, Iowa : The Other McCain
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:55 pm

[…] SURRENDER’ MONEY BOMB RECENTLY:Dec. 16: Rick Santorum Iowa Schedule Dec. 16-20Dec. 16: Santorum Iowa Ad: ‘Join the Fight’Dec. 14: Christine O’Donnell Endorses Mitt Romney; Des Moines City Council Member Endorses Rick […]