Santorum vs Reagan on the Libertarian Influence in the Republican Party

THIS HAS COME UP ON THE RADIO AND TO THE FRONT OF DISCUSSION. THIS IS A RE-POST WITH UPDATED INFORMATION INCLUDING LINKS TO THE RICK SANTORUM VIDEO. SEE THE VIDEO AT http://www.jasonlewisshow.com/2012/02/santorum-vs-reagan/

Before showing the quote on Rick Santorum I wanted to give the definiton according to dictionary.com of what a libertarian is

lib·er·tar·i·an/ˌlibərˈte(ə)rēən/

Noun:

An adherent of libertarianism. A person who advocates civil liberty.

and again from thefreedictionary.com

1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

2. One who believes in free will.

Now what Rick Santorum says regarding the libertarian influence within the Republican Party.

 “I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement.”
(SEE THE VIDEO AT http://www.jasonlewisshow.com/2012/02/santorum-vs-reagan/)

A famous Conservative named Ronald Reagan once said this regarding the same topic

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism …The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Case closed Rick Santorum is scared of civil liberty influencing the Republican Party.
Case closed I will not vote for him and won't even think about it again.
He has put a nail in his coffin of my potential vote. I will write in a candidate or vote 3rd party before I vote for Santorum.

The Bantam Voice
"Freed people free people"

Rick Santorum = Prohibition

Prohibition was something that many people thought was a good idea. It was the "christian" and godly thing to do.

Government intervention even for a good cause only results in more power to the government. Prohibition set the precedent for the government to be involved in what we were allowed to consume. They have since outlawed raw milk, selling neighbors certain foods, and allowed massive control to be given to the "food police."

This is the easiest explanation of why Rick Santorum makes me nervous. Everything he says he wants to do with good intentions and the "right and godly thing to do (little g on purpose)" will only give more power to the government and more reason to be invovled in our lives.

I believe that if we outlaw gay marriage then the government would now has the keys to the bedroom and then can start to control who can have sex with and when. How far away would we be away from the government deciding how many kids we could have? They could decide that sex was only for pro-creation or that only the "best looking" citizens could have children.

Don't throw your liberties away with a wrong sense of "godliness." When the government mandates something you are is no longer doing it because you believe it is wrong and no "godliness" is then created. Government doesn't create godliness it just creates tyranny and oppression.

All the good intentions in the world can still result in freedoms being ripped from our lives. Of course we all know that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

In another point the right and "godly" thing (prohibition) was eventually repealed, but the government still maintaned the power over our lives. Even if Rick Santorum does all the "right" things, but does it with government power it can just be undone and actually used again the people of the country.

The answer is always freedom. The answer would be to take away power from the government and give it back to the people. Take away the benefits of marriage and gays will no longer want to be recognized as being married. Being married is a religious union. Most people only want to be recognized as being married because of the tax benefits. Take away the tax benefits and treat all people as equal instead of the government "granting more benefits" to other people.

Rick Santorum is openely not for less government involvement in your life especially when it comes to social issues because of this I cannot vote for him and hope that you will at least think on my thoughts before deciding to vote for anyone.

I of course endorse Ron Paul

The Bantam Voice
"Freed People Free People"

U.S. Constitution Original Intent - Complete Liberty?



I just listened to Rick Santorum on Glen Beck while he explained what he meant when he said,

"Ron Paul has a libertarian view of the Constitution, but I do not."

Santorum has the perfect view of the Constitution and how our country was founded. He believes that you cannot separate the Declaration of Independence from the Constitution because the Declaration was the base for the Constitution.

The Founding Fathers believed that the Constitution and government that was set up was only for a "moral"/"God fearing people." Santorum believes that it is our governments role to not allow "prostitution, pornography" and all other kinds of "sins."

　

Santorum and Glen Becks view, that the Constitution was only for a moral/God fearing people and that true and complete liberty (including immorality) was not meant to be achieved. My opinion and what I believe is right vs. what is flawed with the previous view is that it is not the Federal Governments role to choose what is right and what is wrong. What is moral and what is "God fearing" is not to be decided by the Federal Government.

Logically this thinking doesn't even hold up outside of the government and the constitution. I will give an example of this

I will use the example of prostitution being illegal which is one example Santorum stated the founders never intended liberty be exercised through.

What is the difference between prostitution and one night stands?

Prostitution is a monetary transaction for sex.

One night stands are commonly transactions for companionship, dinner, concert, gifts in exchange for sex (for male one night stands generally are just looking for sex) (women mainly for companionship, dinner, concert, gifts, and also sex)

What is the difference? One is through money the other through things you would have to pay money for to receive. No difference

Argument-Prostitution is only about sex and sex is the only goal. A one night stand may come out of a serious date seeking a relationship with another person. That is the difference.

Answer-Then we should make illegal any one night stands that are only intended for sex from the beginning? Wouldn't that be being the thought police? We don't want the government to be the thought police. So prostitution being illegal just results in more dates that are pointless and are gone on for sex only. Why in the world would we want the Federal Government to outlaw "prostitution?" It just creates more criminals.

(there are endless argument that could go on and on, but this isn't about legalizing prostitution as much as it is about the federal governments role in dictating what the people can and cannot due right or wrong)

This line of thinking that government makes laws to create "godly" behavior would not produce "God fearing people." It would create government fearing people or criminals. You cannot make people be "God fearing" through laws and government. The very existence of a government law would result in less fear of God and less testimony or examples of how we are a God fearing people. God fearing people do what is right even in the existence of liberty and freedom.

I DO believe that our founders knew that without a moral and God fearing people the republic would falter. The reason it would falter is with great freedom, liberty, and power comes great responsibility and if a generation embraces the freedom, but doesn't accept the responsibility our culture and republic would become increasingly corrupt, immoral, and lose the foundation it was founded on.

Our republic has faltered and the only hope for our nation is for freedom and liberty to exist. "God fearing" people do what is right in the absence of restrictive law not because of it. If people are not presented with the choice to do what is right based on fear of God we will never again be a nation of "God fearing" people and our republic will never last.

According to our constitution governments role isn't to ensure it's own survival from an immoral people, but to ensure the survival of liberty regardless.

The Bantam Voice

"Freed People Free People"

Game On (Iowa Caucus) Santorum Miracle

Mitt Romney ended up winning Iowa by 8 eight votes over Rick Santorum. Both Candidates had 25% of the vote and Ron Paul was a distant 3rd with 21% of the vote. History has shown the top 3 candidates are the only candidates to do well for the rest of the primary process.

The story of the night will be Rick Santorum coming from low single digits last week to end up with 25% of the vote a week later.

I watched the entire process until 2am this morning and was able to hear more of Rick Santorum plans to do than I ever had before. I thought it important that I give a little more thought about Rick Santorum because I have been so critical of him, because he will be the "anti-Romney" for all intents and purposes.

Santorum I believe is a good guy with seemingly good intentions. With his speech last night he made clear he is for freedom and personal liberty. He is strong on abortion and homosexual marriage, but has said we recognize homosexual marriages, but we just don't call it marriage.

Last night Santorum expanded on his economic plan of

0% capital gains tax for manufacturing
cut the capital gains tax for all other business in half
make a 2 tier tax system 10 and 28% with only 5 deductions

Overal I came out of last night with a better view of Santorum, but he still makes me nervous by giving the Federal Government more power through being a moral standard versus giving the liberty back to the people.

Santorum seems to be the clear evangelical conservative pick and I'm out on whether I would vote 3rd party for Ron Paul or Santorum if he was the nominee against Obama.

Buckle up it will be fun to watch the rest of this primary. From here on out it will be a 3 way race of Paul, Romney, and Santorum.

The Bantam Voice

Best Candidates for .... You

Here is my list going into the Iowa Caucus of who I believe the best candidate is for freedom and a seperate list for Christians and for standard "Republicans. I will only list the top three of each candidate.

My personal list "Freedom" being the most important factor

1. Ron Paul

2. Michelle Bauchmann

3. none fit the bill (no one else even talks about personal liberty frequently)


List for Christians which the msot important factors being abortion and banning homosexual marriage

1. Michelle Bauchmann/Rick Santorum

2. Rick Perry

3. Ron Paul


List for "traditional" republicans with important factors being on strong military and being intellectual

1. Mitt Romney

2. Newt Gingrich

3. Jon Huntsman (basically a democrat)

Rick Santorum (in review)

The Iowa Caucus is about a month away now and I feel it is important that I give where I stand on each candidate. Anyone who has read any post of mine probably knows I'm for Ron Paul, but that doesn't mean there aren't things that I like or dislike about all the other candidates. I will also add the key points to their page.

I started the primary season (in the spring/summer) thinking I would be voting for Herman Cain, but my mind has been changed so it is possible in the future that I update these reviews of the candidates with new information. I will start from the candidate that I think is least likely that I will vote for

Rick Santorum Bantam freedom score of 2 (out of a possible 10)
Key notes-
1. former senator for Pennsylvania
2. devout Catholic
3. strong family values

Conservative Strenghts (Conservative strenghts not what I believe is good)
Against abortion
Against Gay Marriage
For huge military and strong against terrorism
For Homeschooling

Conservative Weakness
For huge government intervention in your life
Believes law is there to "teach" (presidents should make laws based on their morals, not just the constitution)

I like Rick Santorum as a individual and I believe he does have good intentions and would make good decisions as a president based on his views, but he would be disastrous in the long run for America.
(Continue on below)

Debate Review: Nov. 19th Thanksgiving Family Forum

http://www.citizenlink.com/2011/11/19/thanksgiving-family-forum-complete-video/

(link to full video of the debate)

This debate was unlike any other that I have seen thus far. The church that housed this "debate/forum" held 3000 people and was maxed out as you would expect.

Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman declined to attend (mainly because they are mormon and didn't want to be questioned on this in the church setting)
The candidates sat at a table set for Thanksgiving. This was a very telling debate because unlike other debates I've seen they were among friends. The candidates were not as guarded because everyone in that room has a similiar standard of right and wrong. There was no real time moderation and you really got a lot of information out of each candidate. (Continue on below)

Where the Candidates Stand on Legalizing Marijuana

This is where the Candidates Stand on Legalizing Marijuana

Mitt Romney -1
Michelle Bauchmann -1
Rick Santorium -1
Herman Cain -1
                    Newt Gingrich -1
                    Jon Huntsman -1
       
                     Only Candidate to support legalizing Marijuana

Ron Paul +1


all candidates that oppose will lose -1 for not voting for freedom and all who oppose will be +1 on the Bantam Voice freedom score.

Now a lot of candidates are copping out of answers including this one (Herman Cain and Jon Huntsman I know for sure) by saying
(continue on below)