Ashamed to admit
Frankly, I hadn't paid any attention to Santorum before his tied finish in Iowa. He seemed to be appealing purely to Catholics, and sounded weak.

There's really no point in imagining anything, because Rominee the Nominee has been Rominee the Nominee since 2008. It's His Turn. He's Next In Line. Nothing will change that fact.

Still, just for the sake of argument, let's pretend this is a peculiar sort of America, an America where those little decorative X's on ballots actually serve to decide an election. Strange idea, I know. Hard to digest. This is, after all, America! USA! USA! USA! We're Number 1! We're Number 1! (Well, actually we're Number 33 by most measurements, but who's counting?) I pledge allegiance to the Mortgage-Backed Security and to the Casino for which it stands. One mafia under Gaia, fully divisible into Senior Tranches and Junior Tranches, with liberty for Jewish billionaires and justice for Jewish billionaires. All others are free to starve. Amen.

But what would happen in an alternative America? In my weird little fantasy America where X's on paper decided elections, Santorum would be a worthy candidate against Obama.

The two men are stylistically and physically similar but have totally different thought patterns and agendas. They could be half-brothers in face, body and movements; both have the same intellectual and indecisive manner, the same speech prosody with end-of-sentence clipoff, and the same Senate career experience.

But Santorum emphatically does not think the same thoughts as BushObamaRomney. Santorum seriously opposes the "human rights" agenda, and has been serious for a long time in opposing Gaia. Of the Three Horsepersons of the Modern Apocalypse, Santorum supports only Free Trade[SEE BELOW!], while BushObamaRomney supports all three.

Check this paragraph from a Greenie website:

Before it was fashionable for Republicans to deny the science supporting the existence of man-caused climate change, Santorum pushed the issue. In his failed re-election bid for the Senate in 2006, Santorum said, "scientists have not decisively concluded" that global warming exists, and that government should react cautiously to calls for mandatory reductions in greenhouse gases.

Santorum has often rubbed environmentalists the wrong way, but he drew the most criticism in 2005 when he supported what has become known as the “smokestack rule.” With Santorum’s help, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Bush administration rolled back limitations on the amount of mercury that can be emitted from coal and oil power plants in the United States. Santorum’s support for this plan, and the totality of his record, earned him a score of zero from the League of Conservation Voters in 2006. The organization said defeating him in 2006 was a “top priority.” ... Time and again Santorum has voted to allow for drilling in ANWR.

I'm ashamed to admit that I hadn't paid any attention to this! He has a remarkably solid and courageous record.

This is a man I could actually support.

Rominee The Nominee is the other way around. He looks and acts different from Obama, has an entirely different biography, but shares precisely the same thoughts and agenda. Guaranteed 100% identical.

= = = = =

Later: Doubly ashamed. I was also wrong in thinking Santorum was in favor of free trade. A quick Google seemed to indicate support. A closer look by Brits picks up his true and consistent record:

He voted against NAFTA and has long opposed free trade. He backed higher tariffs on everything from steel to honey...

In short, Santorum is the ONLY national politician who is right about everything that matters.

Santorum has been working against all three Horsepersons of the Apocalypse for many years. Opposing the murderous pseudoscience of evolution and "global warming"; opposing the civilization-smashing "human rights" agenda of homosexualism and feminism; opposing the Wall Street Mafia and supporting real productive business.



I didn't notice any of it. I'm ashamed.
  ¶ 3:13 AM