Why Does The Leftywhore Media Romanticize Criminals?

One thing about the Sunday Left Angeles Times is that it almost writes a post in and of itself on unbelievable Leftywhore media bias.
Today's case in point is this front-page story on former Black Panther Pete O'Neal.
Now If one just looks at the photos, we see this dread locked old dude that surrounds himself with orphaned children. Children that he has taken care of.
Now that is the nice picture the writer, Christopher Goffard, wants to present.
But let's get to the heart of the real story.
Mr. O'Neal is a criminal that has evaded American justice for nearly 40 years.
Mr. O'Neal was convicted transporting a shotgun across state lines and was sentenced to four years in prison. And while out on bail, keep in mind he was already convicted, Mr. O'Neal and his wife, Charlotte, decided to get out of Dodge. And that was by way of Sweden and Algeria and eventually to his current home in Tanzania.
The head line of the story implies something different:

Former Black Panther patches together purpose in Africa exile

I highlight exile because the implication is that the United States exiled Mr. O'Neal to Tanzania. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. O'Neal jumped bail and is on the run of his own doing. He has chosen to live in a self-imposed exile. That should have been the headline.
Now keep this in mind.
The Black Panthers were some seriously bad dudes and gals. They wanted to begin "Black Liberation". In other words, they hated Whitey and all that they believed that Whitey stood for. They wanted not desegregation and all people to be treated equally, with respect. Not based on skin color but character. Nope, they wanted to kill Whitey and set up a Black, socialist utopia.
And Mr. O'Neal, himself a troubled youth, was the perfect kind of bad dude these people wanted.
The article implies that Mr. O'Neal has mellowed over the years. I suppose he has.
The article points out that he is embarrassed at the radical and the rhetoric he once employed. Yet he is not sorry for what he was trying to do.
In the meantime, the socialist, Maoist, whatever left-wing doctrine they were trying to figure out seems to have in a sense left Mr. O'Neal.
Mr. O'Neal owns four-acres in this rugged part of Tanzania. He even has modern conveniences such as television and a computer.
Yet the nagging thing is why Mr. O'Neal simply does not come back to the United States now? He probably would not serve a day in jail. A 40-year conviction on transporting a shotgun across state lines is hardly the thing one flees the United States and stays away for 40 years.
I believe it is in this statement he makes in the article:


For his radicalism itself, however, he won't apologize, even if — as he suspects — it is the one thing that might gain him safe entry back into the States.

"They will never convince me in my life," he says, "that what I was doing wasn't right."

Well, I won't try to convince you. But I will not celebrate you either.
One way that Mr. O'Neal earns a buck, or a Tanzanian Schilling, is hosting American high school students and regaling in the tales of his Black Panther days. I kid you not. Look at this photo of awe-struck students.



These young minds full of mush are allowed to go by parents, fork out $30 to spend the night and hear a boatload of propaganda. And they are lapping it up.
I do not get it.
Why would sane parents let their kids travel around the world to meet a guy that has such hatred for their nation? That at one time believed the White man was so evil that they had to be killed? And that almost all the students are. . .White?
But that is the whole problem with this article.
The result is that most people would feel sorry for this dude.
I do not.
I think that he should have come back long ago, either fought the charges or take the punishment. Or hope that there would be a compromise of sorts.
But, Pete O'Neal is a true-believer to the end. And that is nothing to celebrate but to mourn. For what he believes is in a fairy-tale. Socialism is a fairy-tale.

St. Louis Honors Iraq War Vets-New York Does Not

The city of St. Louis had a parade honoring those brave men and women that served in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror today.
And they get a big, double thumbs up from Right View From The Left Coast.
However, New York City will not have a parade honoring those that served in the WAIT, Iraq theatre.
The St. Louis effort was basically a home-grown effort by one Craig Schneider who began laying the ground work for the effort this past December. Mr. Schneider was able to get donations from Anhauser-Busch and Mayflower movers to help defray the cost. And there were 100 entries expected.
But Mayor Buttinsky, er Bloomberg, said no such luck in the Big Apple.
No, the mayor that wants to tell you what to eat said that he spoke with big-shots in Washington, D. C. and was told that a parade is premature because there are still troops in harm's way.
News Flash!
There are always troops in harm's way.
But a part of the mission in the WAIT is done. Those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are now home. And yes, they damn well deserve an honor. And a parade.
This Mayor Buttinsky should shut his yap about such things.
What is needed in New York City is a similar effort by citizens. Citizens telling Mayor Buttinsky to back off and let the citizens decide if they want to show their small but heart left gratitude to the brave men and women on the front lines.
It is giving me a thought that we need such a parade here in Pasadena. I can think of no better day than Independence Day, 2012.
What say you? Ready to get the ball rolling on getting this town to honor our troops?
Let me know.

Remember How Newt Supported Doug Hoffman In The New York State 23rd Congressional Race In 2009?

No, I bet you don't.
Neither do I.
OOPS! My bad!
I plum forgot that the former Republican Speaker of the House backed not the Tea Party choice for the infamous New York state 23rd congressional race in 2009.
No, Newt Gingrich, the stalwart conservative let the whims of a few Republican county party chairs sway who to support.

So, it is important to give a brief as possible history lesson on the race in question.
In 2009, the Dear Leader, President Obama, appointed John McHugh, a New York state Republican congressman to become Navy Secretary.
So, a special election was called by then-Gov. David Patterson.
In New York state, unlike California, the Republican party depends on the county chairs to essentially appoint a candidate. In California, a first-round of voting occurs and if no one gets 50% plus one, then the top two go to the second round, the general election.
The county chairs chose a little-known state assemblyman, Dede Scozzafava to be the choice the maintain the seat. Mrs. Scozzafava was and is a liberal Republican. Think of our former-thank God-governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In New York state, there are two small parties, the Conservative and the Liberal party.
Enter Doug Hoffman.
Mr. Hoffman supposedly "lost" to Mrs. Scozzafava among the 11 county chairs in the 23rd congressional district.
So, Mr. Hoffman ran an insurgent campaign on the Conservative party line.
This created huge problems for the Republican party everywhere. Especially in Washington, D. C.
You know who supported Mrs. Scozzafava?
Why none other than the current flavor-of-the-week conservative, Newton LeRoy Gingrich.
In fact, your humble blogger noticed that Mr. Gingrich had some undying loyalty to Mrs. Scozzafava. And he was one of the last Republicans to unendorse Mrs. Scozzafava.
And it was not just some conservative on the Left coast noticing this may have not been the wisest choice Mr. Gingrich made.
The Hill newspaper noticed that Mr. Gingrich stepped in it, big time here.
If you think that Mrs. Scozzafava was some moderate, consider that she supported the union-backed "card-check" legislation. Was more than just "pro-choice" on abortion. And she supported the so-called "stimulus" legislation in 2009.
Somehow, Mr. Gingrich thought that this was a principled conservative:

“Our best chance to put responsible and principled leaders in Washington starts here, with Dede Scozzafava.”

Sure, Newt. Sure was.
Oh, for the record, Mrs. Scozzafava dropped out of the race. Endorsed the Democrat and current congressman, Bill Owens. And now has a cushy state job she was appointed to by the. . .wait for it. . .Democrat governor, Andres Cuomo.
But remember, all of you who are saying Newt Gingrich is a true conservative fighter. When he had the chance to get on the right side of the Tea Party, he went right back to his Rockefeller Republican roots.
It is ironic that today, on the Gingrich for President website, he has to admit that it was a mistake to support Mrs. Scozzafava. Here is from the website:

Whether it was helping to build the Republican Party of Georgia back when Democrats controlled the entire state or leading the nationwide effort in 1994 to break 40 years of Democratic rule in the House, Newt has always tried to advance the cause of a truly conservative Republican party. This has always meant supporting the most conservative nominee possible as selected by Republican primary voters.

Therefore, Newt will almost always back the nominee of the Republican party and not back an independent candidate in a race against a Democratic candidate.

Newt still believes in this principle, however, he has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election. Although she was the Republican nominee, the problem was that Republican primary voters did not pick her, the local party leaders did, otherwise her liberal views would have prevented her from becoming the nominee.

I highlight the most important part because it was the process that was wrong. As a so-called reformer, he should have been demanding that the secretive process be opened to party rank-and-file voters, not corrupt county party chairs greasing the wheels for one of their own.
Newt was wrong then and while he admits that mistake, it cost the Republican party a congressional seat and dealt the Tea Party movement an unnecessary setback.
Leadership means sometimes throwing out the playbook. On this Mr. Gingrich did not and I think there are a whole lot of other issues that he has been on the wrong side of.
This is a glaring one.

The Cruise Industry Is Better Than One Lousy Italian Captain

a>
When I first heard about the accident that caused the capsizing of the luxury liner Costa Concordia, my first thought was this is bad and going to be really bad for a lot of people.
The good news is that fortunately, less than 50 out of over 4,000 passengers and crew died or are missing. And believe me, I am not dismissing any death, injury or distress for all those people.
There is a lot of conflicting information still to this day. That the captain, Francesco Schettino, steered the ship close to an island off of an Italian island for a crew member. That Mr. Schettino went in a life boat to escape before ascertaining the whole situation. That Mr. Schettino claims to have tripped and fallen into the said life boat. And that some of the panic once the situation was ascertained was that the ship had not had the lifeboat drill before leaving port.
And of course this is leading many to want to investigate the cruise industry in general.
So, as one who has been on several cruises, let me say here and now that most are wonderful adventures and rather uneventful affairs.
The first cruise Mrs. RVFTLC and I went on was our honeymoon cruise nearly 12 years ago.
It was on this ship, The Carnival Elation


Now it is a 13-year old ship. But it was new at the time. Our itinerary was Mexico. The West Coast. Puerto Vallarta, Mazlatan, and Cabo San Lucas. And a couple of full days out at sea.
It was the first time either of us were on a cruise. It was a gift from my mother in law.
A funny aside.
As part of it, there was a video that featured Kathy Lee Gifford signing and talking about the ship. There was corny throughout. "Its an Elation vacation!" It made us laugh silly. But once we stopped laughing, it was rather informative.
Once we got on the ship, we were amazed.
Everyone was pleasant. The crew. The people. It was amazing to realize that we were on a ship of roughly 4,000 people.
Most cruises are great affairs to rememeber.
Subsequent cruises were an Alaksan cruise and two more to Mexico.
But the only time one hears of cruises in the Leftywhore or any media, it is when disaster strikes. Or about how the crew is paid. And how terrible their working conditions are.
In other words, the negative.
Yet this once reserved for the rich way to travel has come to the middle income people. The industry has exploded. And in fact, there is a cruise line dedicated to family travel in Disney Cruise Line.
But to bash a whole industry because one captain was an idiot and a coward is not fair.
Cruising is safer than auto travel. Probably safer than air travel as well.
But you would not know the positives when there is this ship half-sunk off of the Italian coast.
That is too bad.

Newt Wins South Carolina

As seemingly expected, former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, has won the Republican primary in South Carolina and rather handily tonight.
With 99% of precincts reporting, Mr. Gingrich had 40% of the vote to Mitt Romney's distant second at 28%. Rick Santorum came in a solid third with 17% and Ron Paul came in last of the four still running at 13%.
It is a solid win for Mr. Gingrich. No doubt about that.
But I wonder how much of it is a "sympathy" vote after the ABC interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne? And the subsequent dressing down Mr. Gingrich gave to CNN's John King for even bringing it up?
I think that John Pitney, Jr. over at The Corner at National Review sums it up best in this posting. And the list that will now more than ever be spotlighted is given a brief overview:

Expect renewed attention to troublesome aspects of his public record: his past support for a value-added tax, his overdrafts at the House Bank and his other ethics problems, his denunciation of deficit hawks as “the perfectionist caucus,” his past skepticism about the Founders, and many others.

How will Mr. Gingrich handle legitimate questions on those and other issues. The phrase "I should not have said FILL IN THE BLANK." can only be used so much before people get a little annoyed. And those are the supporters. Imagine a whole nation of voters in a general election?
Its time for Mr. Gingrich to celebrate this win because they are going to get harder and much costlier to come by.
And now, on to Florida.

See South Carolina Election Results Here

This is a link to the Charleston Post and Courier election results.
It will be something to see in real time.

Why Do Some Conservatives Ignore Gingrich Transgressions Yet Salivated At Clinton Ones?

If there is one thing that this blogger seeks is truth. And sometimes it means that some people that I like and respect need to answer an obvious question.
The question in this case is simple.
Why are some conservatives ignoring or dismissive of numerous personal and policy transgressions on the part of Newt Gingrich? Yet when one William Jefferson Blythe Clinton was president, same said conservatives were salivating at every one of Mr. Clinton's transgressions?
A point here is I sure was one that saw Mr. Clinton as a threat to the Republic. Politically, of course.
It was well known that the lug was a womanizer with the best of them. Many of the same people said that automatically disqualified him to become president in 1992.
While a lot happened in the Clinton era, the dreaded impeachment of the president in a strange sense was a turning point.
I still believe that it was correct to impeach the president because he lied in a deposition on a civil matter. While president of the United States. If he will easily lie about a matter that he should have settled, what would he really lie about?
Ahh, but the Leftywhore media and the Democrat party made it an issue about sex and the president's private life. Most conservatives would have none of that. Remember when we mocked Mr. Clinton every Sunday as we saw him either walking into or from church? With Holy Bible tucked under his arm?
Fast forward to 2012.
One of the leaders of the impeachment of Mr. Clinton was Newt Gingrich.
To show how reckless and dangerous Mr. Gingrich was, the media successfully made sex the issue. And yet Mr. Gingrich was cavorting with the current Mrs. Gingrich, Calista. While still married to Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne.
And let us not forget that Mrs. Gingrich number two became that in the same manner.
Now, one can ask each of these women why they would have thought Mr. Gingrich would be any different with them.
But that is for the head-shrinkers.
For me, to listen to conservatives today, you would have think we are in another world.
When a Democrat is full of transgressions, we rail against them.
When a Republican is full of transgressions, we suddenly sound like, well Democrats.
Ah, its his personal life. That happened years ago. He realizes that he was bad and has sought forgiveness.
Yet in 1998, that was not enough for most of us.
Keep in mind, once the Leftywhore media changed the narrative, it was harder and harder to keep the basis of impeachment front and center.
It was not about an affair but alleged sexual harassment. And the president lied about it. And lied when a pattern of reckless behavior became evident. Again, that was what it was all about.
Again, I get why many like the fighter Newt Gingrich.
But he can not be the Republican standard-bearer in 2012.
The affairs are just one reason.
The policy transgressions, the attacks on people for making money, the seemingly lack of discipline, that along with past faults make Mr. Gingrich be suspect in the long haul.
But we cannot have a double standard.
Bill Clinton was and is bad.
Newt Gingrich was bad, but he is our guy so he is cool.
I want to win this election, but I am with Rick Santorum.
Here is what he said in the CNN GOP debate this past Thursday:

I mean, Newt's -- Newt's a friend. I love him. But at times, you've just got, you know, sort of that, you know, worrisome moment that something's going to pop. And we can't afford that in a nominee.

We need someone -- I'm not the most flamboyant, and I don't get the biggest applause lines here. But I'm steady. I'm solid. I'm not going to go out and do things that you're going to worry about. I'm going to be out there. I'm going to make Barack Obama the issue in this campaign.
Think about that fellow conservatives.
Mr. Santorum is right.
Most important, we need to admit that we have set a double standard if Mr. Gingrich is the GOP nominee. And it may be no turning back on that one.

My Prediction For South Carolina

Tomorrow, well actually almost today as I write this, the good voters of South Carolina will go to the polls and decide who they like in the Republican primary for president.
So, of course I will offer my fearless prediction.
It is as follows:

Mitt Romney: 30%
Newt Gingrich: 29%
Rick Santorum: 23%
Ron Paul: 15%
Other: 3%

This does take into account the fact that Newt Gingrich is really surging in So Carolina. And I think that this is not a place for the Ron Paul breakthrough.
If Mr. Gingrich does not win this one, how can he seriously keep it up through the remaining contests? I do not get how a fourth place finish in Iowa, a fifth place finish in New Hampshire and a possible loss in So Carolina and yet Mr. Gingrich can say he will be the nominee.
At some point, Florida becomes the place where either Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich becomes the so-called conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.
It will be interesting to see who Gov. Rick Scott in Florida endorses. By all accounts, as a former businessman himself, he tacitly will endorse Mr. Romney. And at some point may formally do so.
Despite a lot of nervous nellies in the Republican party, So Carolina does not end the primary season. It is just warming up. And now it is to see if Mr. Romney will be facing a rejuvenated Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Santorum in future races.

Say, That Newt Gingrich Fellow Kind Of Reminds Me Of Someone Named Nixon

It has been a long thought for me to write this overall assessment of one Newton LeRoy Gingrich. That in fact he is not necessarily the strong conservative that he makes himself out to be.
There was another American president that tried that shtick.
His name.
Richard Milhous Nixon.
Any regular reader of this blog knows that I believe that while he destroyed his own presidency, he almost single-handily destroyed the Republican party as well. Of course we all know that it took one Ronald Reagan to reform and renew the party.
But what Mr. Nixon did was talk a conservative game. Yet it was Mr. Nixon that believed in socialist medicine. Oh, he would argue that it was not, but in the end it would have created the bureaucracy that all of Europe sees.
Mr. Nixon never actually did anything to scale back the so-called Great Society of his predecessor, Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson. In fact, to fight inflation, Mr. Nixon not once but twice imposed wage and price controls.
In other words, Mr. Nixon essentially conceded domestic policy to the other team.
And Mr. Nixon was always a brooding figure. Seemingly not all that much of a happy man. Yet, he always had a fighter's view of politics.
And that is Mr. Gingrich.
A fighter. In last night's CNN Republican debate, Mr. Gingrich got conservatives excited because he slammed CNN's moderator, John King, for bringing up ABC's interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne.
Well, sorry but this is relevant.
This is Mr. Gingrich's third marriage. And he left his previous two wives while cavorting with the future wife. Wife number three, Calista, was who he wanted to share with wife number two.
Get all of that?
And Mr. Gingrich was carrying on that affair while pushing to impeach then President Bill Clinton.
An aside.
The impeachment was not about sex.
It was about the president of the United States lying under oath in a civil case. And he was caught. The fact that the lie was about a short-term affair is not what is important. What he lied about on that was in regards to a sexual-harassment suit brought against him by Paula Jones.
But knowing that Mr. Gingrich was shtooping Calista at the same time, what did that do the proceedings?
And if that does not bother you, how about this devastating piece in The American Spectator by Quin Hillyer? And Rick Santorum pointed out the grandiosity of Mr. Gingrich that Mr. Hillyer does in the piece. But this is the critical line of the piece:

Gingrich was great at rabble rousing. He was awful at actually managing things

I would alter it this way:

Gingrich is great at rabble rousing. He is awful at actually managing things.

And he has the Nixonian view of any disagreement as being an enemy.
We lived that before and it was a traumatic era in the United States.
This is the most critical election in my life. And to blow it because we like when Mr. Gingrich goes gonzo on the Leftywhore media. Or when he slams Mitt Romney for. . .making money. For once being a strong believer in Globaloney Warming to weaseling worse than anyone on stage. For once backing the individual mandate in national health care and now weaseling on that.
And yet Mitt Romney is called a flip-flopper.
And while it is not something that is good, optics and attitude matter.
A thrice-married, kind of short, a little chubby, white-haired White guy next to the youngish, handsome mixed-race success story with a very nice family. The first mentioned guy pretty mercurial a lot of the time. The latter guy with a smile.
Like it or not, people vote for someone who exudes a positive quality. Look at Mr. Reagan, both Mr. Bush's, Mr. Clinton.
At the end of the day, a vote for Newt Gingrich is a vote for Richard Nixon from the grave. And that is not a good vote for the United States.

Just A Reminder, Rick Santorum WON The Iowa Caucus Outright

From the In Case You Missed It file, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum did win the Iowa caucus by 34 votes.
According to the latest count, Mr. Santorum has 29,839 and Mitt Romney, the presumptive winner, has 29,805.
And if that is not maddening enough the Iowa Republican party is not going to formally certify the results.
Why?
Because eight precincts did not follow the rules and thus they do not count in the final tally.
So, Team Romney is going to call it a tie. Team Santorum, rightly, calls it a victory.
Oh yeah, and this does not put a black mark on the whole Iowa process, doesn't it?
If they want to maintain the first-in-the-nation voting in the presidential race, they can not claim one thing on election night and two weeks later say never mind.
Team Santorum needs to emphasize the fact they won the Iowa caucus. It should be a huge boost in South Carolina on Saturday.

Perry Out; South Carolina, Vote FOR SANTORUM!

To many, this did not come soon enough.
That the Texas governor, Rick Perry finally dropped out of the race for the Republican nomination for president.
But he did go out with a sort of bang by endorsing former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich in his bid for the GOP nod.
This is for anyone in South Carolina reading this.
So Carolina, do not vote for Newt Gingrich. If you want to keep the race going with an authentic conservative alternative, you must vote FOR Rick Santorum.
But Mr. RVFTLC, Newt will take the Dear Leader, President Obama, out in the debates!
OK.
But we will be lucky to see one debate let alone multiple debates no matter who the Republican nominee is.
But Mr. RVFTLC, Newt is full of ideas.
Yes, Mr. Gingrich is always full of ideas. And he says a lot without giving much thought. Take the assault on Bain Capitol. It was straight out of the Saul Alinsky handbook. And yet Mr. Gingrich does not seem to get why many of us would defend the good work of Bain Capitol. Mr. Gingrich, even the government at many levels (not the federal one) have had to shed jobs. That is what happens in the real world.
But Mr. RVFTLC, he is angry and that is what we need. A real fighter.
Yes, I do agree. But, and this is important, one that can thread the needle. Call it the Happy Warrior if you will. Like it or not, voters do not like angry people. And sometimes, Mr. Gingrich comes off as too much on the anger and not enough on the smile.
But Mr. RVFTLC, what about three marriages?
Ahh, there is a rub. And it maybe the rub that does him in.
Ronald Reagan was the first divorced man to be elected president. His divorce from first wife Jane Wyman was not because Mr. Reagan was shtooping the secretary. It was because Miss Wyman felt his political activities were cramping their life. It was irreconcilable differences but not scandal. And by the time Mr. Reagan ran for California governor, he was happily married for 14 years to the former Nancy Davis.
But Mr. Gingrich has not had the same situation.
Now on his third marriage, Mr. Gingrich has had another woman ruin the other two.
The latest former Mrs. Gingrich. Marianne Gingrich in an interview with ABC News seems to say that Mr. Gingrich wanted an "open marriage". Where he can have Marianne and his then paramour, Calista.
Oh yeah. Forgot this nugget. Too bad the second former Mrs. Gingrich was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis nine months before divorce proceedings began.
Look, I think people forgive one failed marriage. Two, and the circumstances make a lot of people turned off. And that, like it or not Gingrichnistas, is all you would hear from Team Obama.
So, if you are in South Carolina, it comes down to Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum.
And I ask you to vote FOR Mr. Santorum.
In almost every way he is the opposite of Mr. Gingrich.
A solid guy married to his wife, Karen, for 21 years. Have six children. A very blue-collar background. From a large swing-state, Pennsylvania. And has won races where he was written off almost every single time.
I want to keep the debate within the Republican party going. But to do so it must be between two men that are serious and do not flail all over the place.
If Mr. Romney is the eventual nominee, what better than to be sparring with some one like Mr. Santorum? Both are offering a different and positive vision for the United States. Both are disciplined. And it will be much easier for the party to unite no matter who wins.
But I just think that while a long shot falls in Rick Perry, he backs another long shot in Newt Gingrich. And in the end it all helps Mitt Romney.

Perry Going For The Anti-Catholic Vote?

I have written many times that I do not get the Rick Perry candidacy for the Republican presidential nod.
I mean, he has been a great governor of Texas. Policies that he has enacted has led to the state being one of the few to add jobs in this Endless Recession.
But now I am finding out that I kind of sort of loathe Gov. Perry.
And if this from Brian Bolduc over at National Review is right, it appears that a desperate Rick Perry is denigrating former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum.
Oh, it is not a new one.
But and oldie yet moldie.
It appears that Gov. Perry not once but twice in a speech emphasized that Mr. Santorum was one of them there Cathyliks.
Amazing.
And I write that as a staunch Protestant Christian.
When I was baptised, it was in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. No allegiance to the Pope or the church of Rome. Sure, I do the sign of the cross. But as a Christian, affirming the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And in reciting the Nicene Creed, I will not say one pesky little word.
So, here is that part of the Creed:

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

Nope, won't say it. I just skip over it. And before you explain to me it is not in reference to the Roman Catholic Church, does not matter.
So, I am here to denounce Gov. Perry and his clear slander about Mr. Santorum and his being a faithful Christian. A Roman Catholic Christian.
Although I still try to be a good Episcopalian, some days by the skin of my teeth, in many ways am much more inclined to accept Catholic teaching on abortion, same-sex marriage and being freely able to practice one's faith. That does not mean I am thinking of switching Christian denominations. It is just my reality.
But what makes me like Mr. Santorum is that he freely speaks of the meaning of his faith in his life. And does not denigrate others as Gov. Perry seemingly, in code, has done.
I guess Gov. Perry figures "Hey, I'm gonna lose anyway! Why not go out in a blaze of glory?! Huyuck, yuck, yuck!!!"
Is this what the GOP nomination contest has lowered itself to? Worrying about whether another candidate is a Roman Catholic or not? Bashing Mormons?
I should hope not.
Right now, if I had to vote in South Carolina, I would vote for Mr. Santorum. I think that he is the real deal. But hey, I could change that. I don't need some hayseed Texas governor not wanting to deal with issues, but throwing out the code word.
C a t h o l i c.
Really? In 2012 America.
Let's hope that South Carolina proves Gov. Perry wrong and gives a big boost to the Santorum campaign by voting for him on Saturday. Not against the others.
And hopefully, vote for Mr. Santorum because you agree with him on the issues.
Oh and for Gov. Perry, I have one for you.
Psst.
You know who else in the race is one of them there Cathyliks?
His first name starts with an N and ends with a T.
Are you gonna remind voters that he is a good Catholic too as you misrepresent his record.
Just askin!