Santorum's stance seems weak here. A true American would just bomb them now to be safe.

Remember kids, zero difference between republicans and democrats.

Well, yeah. Both groups are very much for acts of war against Iran.

Omg I'm the worst

Obama is following the policies of Bush and, ironically, Santorum from before he got kicked out of office. So, maybe?

Pretty sure Obama will blow that **** up if the sanctions don't work. Obviously he can not be as flippant as a 2nd tier candidate but I hope he will come to the same conclusion. There, I said it. Blow that **** up.

The saddest part of the entire Santorum surge is that the mainstream press pretends that Santorum actually knows **** about foreign policy, war, or diplomacy. I mean, if we are giving RELATIVE grades he laps the field, Gingrich included, in the Republican primary. But we aren't talking Bush41, Nixon, Kissinger, Baker, or even Bob Dole level national security, Burkean conservatives who actually read a real book or two on America and its role in the world.

Safe? Really? Iran with nukes is less dangerous than North Korea or Pakistan with nukes, or some drunken, krokodil injecting Soviet silo guard. Bad people in this world have nuclear bombs, and the technology is pretty easily assimilated. All you can do is negotiate, sanction, plead, and MAKE COMMON CAUSE with other countries until someone does something stupid or provocative. If we just skip international protocol AGAIN, and start bringing the rain, all we do is forestall the inevitable, lose allies, and make Muslims more intent on building or acquiring a bomb. As long as state actors, intent on staying in state power, have the weapons, we are as safe as we can be without conquering the whole goddamn world.

Are you saying that N. Korea with nukes is a bigger concern than Iran with nukes? If so Hard to disagree and irrelevant. Are you saying that the world would be safer if Iran had a nuke? I would hardily disagree and it is the relevant issue.
The world is less safe with the North Koreans have nukes. We should do what we can to make sure Iran doesn't get them. Obviously the best course of action doesn't include some unilateral action.

Rick Perry is hilarious

I guess he is conceding that no amount of preparation would have helped him to perform adequately.
He has a pretty good idea on Supreme Court judges. Limit terms and staggering expiry's so that a President gets to only appoint one. Sounds reasonable to me.

Good luck getting that amendment passed.

I'd be pleased if out Govt became functional enough to pass a full year budget.

Can someone explain this or link me to where it is explained? I don't think I've heard of anything like this before.

Here is where I read about it:

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.c...ting-it-right/

The world would be safer. People would stop attacking Iran. When everyone has a nuke, peace is the only option unless you want to get blown off the earth. Ideally no nukes would exist, but we can't go back in time and stop that sweet invention.

3rd most corrupt in Senate in 1996 - Santorum

I would not be surprised to find the whole Iowa caucus process is fixed and corrupt. Funny, that Frist is ranked also and it is so obvious considering the UIGEA and all the corruption at the Christian Coalition with Reed taking bribes from Indian tribes.

PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls

When mystics and clerics hold a significant power base in your country it is hard to assume the rational state argument. If you see North Korea as being a stabalizing force in the world then I can see how you would hold this view. if you don't see North Korea in this light I don't think it is a stretch to see Iran similarly. I expect you would have to have some pretty specialized knowledge in order to make this determination and i won't pretend to have it.

It is possible for Iowa to hurt Romney again. I argued with Cres when he said a third place finish would hurt Romney but know that expectations have been sufficiently raised a 3rd would hurt. A 2nd is still ok, I am sure he spent a lot less time in the state then either Santorum or Paul.

PPP - Iowa poll
12/31 - 1/1
1,340 likely voters (big sample)
The numbers in parentheses reflect a candidate's change from previous PPP Iowa poll conducted 12/26-12/27.

Paul 20 (-4)
Romney 19 (-1)
Santorum 18 (+8)
Gingrich 14 (+1)
Perry 10 (0)
Bachmann 8 (-3)
Huntsman 4 (0)
Roemer 2 (0)

PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls

This is great news for Romney. Santorum has no organization, no money, and no national polling. The threat, such as it is, to him is Gingrich. Even if Romney comes third in Iowa behind some order of Paul and Santorum this is fine as long as Gingrich is not top three

Plus santorum is a giant douche

Once Romney killed/let them self destruct Perry & Gingrich, the nomination was locked up.

Santorum doesn't need organization if he consolidates the christian right. Romney is still in th elow 20s nationally, and if the christian radio shows, megapastors, and groups like FoF unite behind him, he has money and organization by default.