Who can beat Obama?

Who can beat Obama? Rick Santorum, the man with staying power
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Who can beat Obama? That seems to be the most important question during the race for the Republican nomination. Although the question has remained the same, the answer has changed with each debate and/or state contest.

Who can beat Obama? The pretty ones

Who can beat Obama? Michele Bachmann? Too pretty

Michele Bachmann poses before an American flag. Photo: United States House of Representatives

First up to bat was the Tea Party darling, Michele Bachmann. Mrs. Bachmann has an undisputable record as a champion of conservative issues. Her record in the private sector is one to admire by any standard. Yet, her popularity dwindled with every new flavor of the day – and there were many. While Bachman was a competent competitor, she never seemed to be able to generate the interest necessary at this level of campaigning. One can only speculate as to why. It is this reporter’s sad opinion that Michele Bachman was simply too attractive to be taken seriously. Hillary Clinton never had Bachman’s problem of breaking through the glass ceiling, but of course Hillary Clinton never had Bachman’s looks either. It may be that a double-standard regarding the sexes is still alive and well today, albeit in a more stealth fashion. The color of one’s skin may not be a factor in judging one’s abilities in the new millennium, but we still seem to be a long way from judging according to one’s character.

First to steal Mrs. Bachman’s thunder was Governor Rick Perry – a pretty boy to be sure. However, this seems to be an acceptable image for men – the double standard strikes again. However, even Perry’s good hair couldn’t overcome his poor debating skills and foolish answers. Surprisingly, the successful Governor of Texas fizzled almost as quickly as he sizzled.

Always in the back wings, was Senator Santorum – as solid and consistent a conservative as Michele Bachmann. Mitt Romney stole the thunder of his Iowa victory, and no one seemed to take him seriously. Iowa seemed to be anomaly overshadowed by the statuesque Romney and bullish Gingrich. Poll after poll confirmed that either of these two establishment giants were the most likely to beat Obama. But Santorum proved over and over again that he could hold his own in a debate and his conservative credentials seem to be unassailable.

No one could have anticipated the impact of Herman Cain. A straight-talking intellectual giant, as accomplished as Romney in the private sector but with a whole lot more substance. With a few debates under his belt, Cain rose to the top of the primary food chain – not a bad place for a pizza entrepreneur to be. The media tried to resist his appeal but didn’t quite know how to handle this charismatic candidate. Silly attacks were made against his abilities, but Americans were buying none of it. At last a glitch appeared in the pizza man’s armor and the politically inexperienced Cain handled it poorly. To America’s dismay, another champion of the people bit the dust.

Romney and Gingrich duke it out

Who can beat Obama? Mitt Romney -- can't shovel fast enough

Former Governor Mitt Romney at a townhall in Sun Lakes, Arizona. Photo: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0 Generic License

If the electorate was looking for the “image” of a perfect president, Romney would be a shoe-in with any casting director worth their salt. Poised and perfect in appearance and demeanor, this well-groomed centrist seemed to be the country’s best hope for beating Obama – at least that’s what the polls indicated. The sexist double-standard strikes once again. While Bachmann’s looks may have been her greatest liability, Romney’s looks may have been his greatest asset. Additionally, his private sector record impressed the job-weary America. Romney certainly knew how to raise money. Even though his job creating record as a public servant was non-existent, the public believed he knew how to create jobs. The Romney image-making machine once again trumped reality. But image can only take you so far when you have a vigilant attack dog like Newt nipping at your heals.

Romney’s popularity was overshadowed by Newt’s quick wit, which catapulted Newt into the lead and oddly enough contributed to Newt’s downfall as well. America fantasized over a Gingrich/Obama debate where the champion of conservatism would wipe the proverbial floor with the stammering elitist. South Carolina fed the short-lived fantasy, but Florida decimated it. On national television America watched their heroic wordsmith crumble at the hands of the image progenitor. Quick wit is a good thing but self-control is essential. Newt proved he had one but not the other. While Newt did his best to travel the high road, he unfortunately found enough mud there to smear his own campaign.

Knowing he needed a boost, Newt turned to trying to inspire with big ideas. Big ideas can be inspiring but only if those big ideas are practical as well. Instead of inspiring, his big ideas made him look foolish. Additionally, Newt’s big ideas added to the realization that he is loose cannon of sorts that can explode in any direction at any time.

The question of whether or not Newt could beat Obama may have been answered in the Florida debate. Neither his quick wit, nor his big ideas could save his campaign. If Newt couldn’t beat Romney, America knew that it was unlikely that he could beat Obama. America’s lofty champion of conservatism began looking more like a junk yard dog than a giant slayer.

America’s two favorite sons battled it out in the media and in debates, rendering both candidates less than admirable warriors who could triumph over the elitist in the White House. The question still to be answered: who can beat Obama?

Ron Paul’s failing

Can Ron Paul beat Obama? There are many who think he can. Regardless of what you think about the man, his passion and knowledge about the Constitution is second to none. One of his greatest pitfalls, in my not-so-humble opinion, is that during his long career in Congress, he managed to pass only one insignificant bill that he authored. Leadership is an important quality for any president to posses, and whether you think Paul is insane or a genius, his record has proven that he is not a leader.

Rick Santorum emerges

Who can beat Obama? Rick Santorum, the man with staying power

Rick Santorum as the junior Senator from Pennsylvania. Credit: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License

Rounds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 concentrated on the question of who can beat Obama. As the campaign progressed America was settling down to a more important question. Payback to the elitists running Washington is enticing. But someone with the ability to pull the country back onto the right track is significantly more important. If cream always rises to the top, then Santorum may well be the cream of the crop.

It is indisputable that the country is craving and needs a candidate who can beat Obama, and it would be very invigorating if that candidate could wipe the proverbial floor with him in a debate as well. However, many understand that the damage done to this country goes far beyond economics; a great deal of it can be attributed to ideology. The very heart and soul of America has been systematically torn apart.

Of course electing someone who can beat Obama is imperative. But it is also imperative that that someone be able to pick up the pieces and start putting this great republic back together. This person must be able to handle himself under pressure and win a debate. Santorum has proven he can do that. This person must be able to work with both sides of the aisle and actually accomplish something. Santorum has proven he can do that. This person must also understand that our rights come from God and not from government. Santorum understands that. This person must be able to generate their base. The media doesn’t believe Santorum can do that. I do. I believe he can do that because he is both substantive and articulate. I believe he is a consistent conservative and doesn’t say what you want to hear just to win a few votes. I believe he knows how to fight and keep his cool at the same time. I believe he understands America’s role in a global community and will not sacrifice our sovereignty to maintain our security but will maintain our security in the process none-the-less.

With characteristics like those why hasn’t Santorum peaked until now? Perhaps we needed time to sort out what we wanted as opposed to what we needed. My only fear is that America will resort to electing an image without substance, as it did back in 2008. The Bible says that in the last days there will be those who have the appearance of godliness but deny its power (2 Tim 3:5). We are admonished to have nothing to do with them. The many ministers who have endorsed Santorum seem to have embraced this admonition. The fate of America may lie in our ability to do the same.

Can Santorum beat Obama? The media may have its opinion, the pundits may have much to say. But the truth is that anyone can beat Obama if the American people step up to the plate on November 6th and cast their vote for ABO (Anyone But Obama).

Website | + posts

RoseAnn Salanitri is a published author and Acquisition Editor for the New Jersey Family Policy Council. She is a community activist who has founded the Sussex County Tea Party in her home state and launched a recall movement against Senator Robert Menendez. RoseAnn is also the founder of Veritas Christian Academy, as well as co-founder of Creation Science Alive, and a national creation science speaker.

11 Responses to Who can beat Obama?

  1. Bill says:

    I don’t know why any conservative would want to vote for a man who believes the government has a right to decide whether a married couple can use a condom. That’s not limited government in my book.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      I think you’re exaggerating. I never heard anything about that. Evidence? Source? Link?

      As to what you might be exaggerating: a republic depends on a rock-solid foundation. That foundation is: responsible heads of households. Married households, not mere roommate pairs or some kind of “communal entity.”

      • Bill Miller says:

        Terry, what is a limited government conservative supposed to think of this man who is obsessed with sex, prying into my bedroom and what I do with my wife:

        “One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. Sex is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.”
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KN7WfIZh690

        One issue was Santorum’s opposition to the Supreme Court’s 1965 ruling that invalidated a Connecticut law banning contraception. Santorum said he still feels that a state should be able to make such laws.
        “The state has a right to do that, I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statues they have. That is the thing I have said about the activism of the Supreme Court, they are creating rights, and they should be left up to the people to decide,” he said.
        http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/santorum-explains-06-loss-still-supports-state-right-to-outlaw-contraception/

        “Human beings have a purpose, or ‘end,’ a telos,” Santorum writes in his book. According to the tradition of natural law, every part of our bodies has a telos too. In the case of our genitalia, that natural end is heterosexual sex for the purpose of procreation. It follows that marriage between a man and a woman “is fundamentally natural,” Santorum writes. “The promise of natural law is that we will be the happiest, and freest, when we follow the law built into our nature as men and women. For liberals, however, nature is too confining, and thus is the enemy of freedom.” Later on, he elaborates on his jaundiced view of freedom with a quotation from Edmund Burke: “Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains on their appetites.”

        How could Tea Partiers who once dressed in three-cornered hats and waved “Live Free or Die” flags now swoon to reasoning like this?
        http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/the-first-principles-of-rick-santorum/

        • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

          I have news for you: the Senator has a better understanding of our founding history, and of natural law, than you have.

          • Bill Miller says:

            Well, if natural law means that you believe the government can tell me I can only have relations my wife for procreative purposes, and that they can ban us using a condom, then that’s fine with me.

      • DinsdaleP says:

        Regarding Santorum’s comments on a state’s right to ban contraceptives, Bill’s not exaggerating. The remarks were made to Jake Tapper in a 2006 interview:

        Tapper asked, “Democrats say that one of the reasons you lost that year was because you are, in their view, out of the mainstream and they talk about the Griswold v. Connecticut case–that was an issue that Casey used against you–about whether or not a state has the right to make a law against married couples using contraceptives. Is that something you’re at all concerned about?

        “The state has a right to do that,” said Santorum. “I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right. The state has the right to pass whatever statues they have.”

        Here’s a source link:

        http://cnsnews.com/news/article/santorum-court-ruled-wrongly-griswold-v-connecticut-pre-roe-right-privacy-decision

        He’s also stated his objection on principle to contraception as recently as 2011, believing that it goes against God’s primary design for sexual relations to be for the purpose of procreation. Source video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN7WfIZh690&feature=youtube_gdata

        So here you have a person who has strong personal beliefs about whether married couples should use birth control, which is his right, but then also feels that states have the right to create laws that impose those views on every citizen whether they share those views or not.

        Whether it’s the federal, state or town level of authority, it’s wrong for ANY government entity to tell a married couple what they can or can’t do within the private bounds of their marriage. Santorum clearly disagrees, and that’s pretty disturbing.

  2. The article should be titled: “Who can beat Obama and will continue the global socialist agenda?”. That ofcourse would leave out Ron Paul since even though he has the broadest and most passionate base of support required to beat Obama, he would fight for liberty as he has his entire career. Which other candidate’s career demonstrates a 100% adherence to the Constitution? Dr. Paul hasn’t gotten his bills past because they do not fit the CFR’s globalist agenda. He has repeatedly introduced HR 1146 to get us out of the U.N. what did the other candidates do to fight the NWO? In 39 years and over 50 million abortions, he is the only one in Congress to apply Article III sect 2 to return the issue to the states where pro-life groups would have a level playing field to stop it state by state. What did any of the others do but talk? Santorum voted for funding for planned parenthood. The question the article really asks is: “Which candidate would slow but not reverse America’s decent into tyranny? One more question: Which candidate is consistently down played by the major media and take a wild guess why that might be? If America is to be preserved in freedom, we must not fight this fight their way. Read Page 1247 of Tragedy and Hope about the CFR’s domination of the “two party system” written by Clinton’s mentor Prof. Carrol Quigley. It is his treatise on the Council On Foriegn Relations. They (CFR) could not withstand a Ron Paul and they are the ones pulling the media’s strings and thereby the people’s and the author’s without their even realizing it. As America’s shadow government, that is their art. Ron Paul can not only beat Obama but unless he is elected it really dosn’t make any difference which of the CFR candidates wins or looses, only the rate of our decent will change.

    Peter F Boyce-
    Constitution Course Instructor

  3. What you see as a “pitfall” in Ron Paul is in reality proof of just how corrupt and lawless the congress is and has been for decades. Does that really need to be explained to you?

    As for Santorum’s record, I’ll just list a few things:

    -voted for No Child Left Behind, further federalizing education in America, and doubling the size of the Department of Education, in both employees and in budget size.

    -voted for the USA PATRIOT Act.

    -voted to raise the debt ceiling at least 8 times.

    -voted to bailout the airline industry with Federal tax-dollars.

    -voted for the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.

    -voted to create the TSA, which now unconstitutionally searches people in airports, bus stations, subways, train stations, on highways, and more.

    -voted to expand prescription drug entitlements with his support of Medicare Part D, which is now a $7 Trillion unfunded liability.

    -Endorsed pro-abortion candidate Arlen Specter.

    -He was the #1 most lobbied member of Congress.

    -Made list of most corrupt members of Congress.

    -Wrote an article titled Vote For Foreign Aid.

    -Endorsed Mitt Romney as his first choice in 2008 election.

    -Advocates a trade war with China.

    -Advocates sodomy laws used to imprison homosexuals.

    -Says that he would bomb Iran.

    I could go on, but Erick Erickson of RedState puts it best in his recent article:

    “Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist…This is not the record of a man committed to scaling back the welfare state or the nanny state… this is the record of a man who the tea party movement would have primaried.”

    You’ll need to scroll down to view this long list of Santorum’s very unconservative record….

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/06/what-a-big-government-conservative-looks-like/

    And this is the candidate to beat Obama? Hardly.
    Ron Paul also has support from Independents, Blue Republicans, (Democrats) and overwhelming support from our military.

  4. sorry for the double post – was not intentional.

  5. Geno says:

    “While Bachman was a competent competitor, she never seemed to be able to generate the interest necessary at this level of campaigning. One can only speculate as to why. It is this reporter’s sad opinion that Michele Bachman was simply too attractive to be taken seriously. ”

    Geno answers:
    Bachman’s looks had little to do with it. She wasn’t taken seriously because she’s a flake…. much like a female version of Rick Perry.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.