Time and time again, I’ve read post after post from people who I thought were conserative until the last few months.  Since then, I’ve heard alot of posters who pick President Obama as their 2nd or 3rd choice for president.  Right now the 4 move like GOP nominees are: Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, and Paul.  Somehow, some of the same posters who supported Romney in 2008 now would rather vote for Obama than Romney.  Somehow, some of the same people who supported Newt in 1994, and hailed his Republican Revolution, hailed his welfare reform, tax cut, balanced budget, and supported him then — now would rather vote for Obama.  Somehow some of the same folks who thought Santorum was a super-star in 1994, 2000, and who donated money to his campaign in 2006 — now think that the person who wrote the ban for partial birth abortion, the man to who helped sound the alarm of the house banking scandle, the man who has been at the forefront of every major conservative battle during his time in the House and Senate, and who in every one of his elections 1992, 1994, 2000, and even 2006 outperformed).  In 1992, Santorum won his district when Bush lost it.  In 1994, Santorum won in blue PA.  In 2000 Santorum won PA when Bush lost it.  In 2006, Santorum lost by a smaller margine than did the GOP candidate for PA governor — even though Santorum was runing against Bob Casey (the most popular democrat in the State) — and the GOP candidate was running against liberal Ed Rendell.  And yes I know Paul is imperfect, but does anyone actually think he is worse than Obama?

I’ve heard alot of spin.  But, none of these men are worse than Obama.  Romney may have no spine and no core beliefs.  But what is worse, electing a self-centered, spineless, moralless man, or electing someone who thinks he is helping the country when he is actually destorying it?  To quote C.S Lewis:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

To suggest Obama is better than Gingrich is an act of insanity.  It can only mean a person is at-heart a liberal.  Gingrich has a proven record of governing as a conservative.  Welfare reform, balanced budget, tax cut, etc.  With all due respect, I don’t see why Redstate even allows such posting.  In my opinion a supporter of Obama over Gingrich is a liberal.  And let’s not forget that Gingrich won the House for the GOP for the first time in 40 years.

The same is true about Santorum.  Senator Santorum was a leader in every conservative fight for over a decade.  He fought to cut taxes, ban bartial birth abortion, refrom welfare, etc.  Sen. Santorum was the Democrat’s #1 target in 2006.  They put up their best candidate against him — Sen. Bob Casey.  In Sen. Casey’s last election — for state treasurer he beat the republican candidate by over 25%.  Santorum last to Casey, yes, but by less of a margine than Casey won 2 years earlier, and by less of a margine than the GOP governor candidate lost in 2006.  Santorum outperforms.  He outperformed when he won re-election in 2000 when Bush lost.  He outperformed in 1992 when he won election in a district Bush lost.  Santorum consistantly does better than other candiates running the same time.    Oh, and in 2006, Santorum got a higher percentage of the vote in PA than Perry did in Texas when Perry ran for re-election as governor.  Santorum, like Gingrich, is an electable conservative.

Romney is less electable and less conservative than Gingrich or Santorum.  Romney replaced the GOP governor — unless Gingrich and Santorum who replaced Democrats.  Romney did not stand for re-election and would have lost in a landslide if he did.  That said, he is still a better candidate than Obama.

Paul, despite his flaws, continues to not be Obama.  That is enough for me.  Paul is a fiscal conservative.  He is a supporter of the 10th amendment.  He may have a radical agenda, but Congress will limit his ability to carry it out.  Paul will not win the GOP nomination, but if he does, he is better than Obama.

I hope Redstaters who support Obama as their 2nd choice will reconsider.