« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Rick Santorum and the Big Hairy Philistine

The story of David and Goliath is too often used as an analogy for any battle in which one side is perceived to be weaker. It’s sad that the greater lessons of this Biblical masterpiece are lost in our sloppy, shallow interpretation. There’s so much more to take away from what God was trying to teach us, and from these lessons, we can also find striking similarities to the Santorum versus Romney fracas that has been playing out.

This epic battle has little to do with Goliath and even less to do with the Philistine army. It’s really a story about character — the character of a man on a mission of obedience. The resolve of a man who refused to morph into something that he wasn’t, simply to receive the victor’s crown.

When the opposition donned the finest armor and wielded formidable weaponry, David relied on faith to be his shield. Where others were unwilling to go, David went. In the shadow of a giant who hurled insult after insult, David stood firm. When everyone else ran away from the fight, David ran headlong into battle with supreme confidence. When even his supporters doubted a favorable outcome, David remained steadfast.

Rather than be intimidated by appearances, David was guided by a reality that mattered.

Sound familiar?

As I considered this story, the word “courage” kept coming to mind. I assumed it was due to the nature of Goliath’s size in comparison to David’s humble frame. Then, it dawned on me — Rick Santorum’s answer to the Arizona debate’s “describe yourself in one word” question was, indeed, “courage.”

This election cycle is about courage. Not just the courage to take the fight to one of the wealthiest and most relentless campaigners in the history of presidential politics, but the resolve to take it a step further and deliver blow after blow to the unconstitutional actions of the current administration.

And Rick Santorum has proven himself to be the candidate with the courage to get in the trenches and fight.

Now about those five smooth stones …

This is where I come into the story. Where you come into the story. Where we step out and take our place in history. David used items that most would consider to be insignificant — stones — and in using them, won a battle of historic proportion.

We are the stones. With our words, with our dollars, with our stickers, and with our signs. In February, we were 130,000 strong in political contributors, overshadowing the elite, far-fewer-in0num Romney backers.

What an honor to be a part of such a large army of conservative fighters, doing all we can to encourage our champion. I take pride in being a simple smooth stone rather than some bejeweled sword.

After all, it was a stone that delivered the final blow.

______________

*** I realize that Mitt Romney could be our next president, and if that is the case, I will give him all the respect I can muster. However, he isn’t the president and I won’t apologize for the “hairy Philistine” reference. Besides, we all know that Mitt isn’t some big unkempt ogre. I wrote it for dramatic effect, so anyone who is upset can just simmer down.

COMMENTS

  • jamesm

    It is now time to for conservatism to be given a chance. With the results in Alabama and Mississippi it is time for conservatives to come together and knock Goliath out of this race. Courage is what is needed.

    • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

      You’re absolutely right, jamesm. Courage combined with an absence of ego.

      #DropOutNewt

      • Flagstaff

        Rick Santorum

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …does that mean that we can expect to be chased by the armies of Saul (Obama) for many years to come?

    • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

      (Nice though. Let’s hope not.)

    • texastaxpayer

      Quick wit…

    • Seedyrom

      money is the biblical equivalent of a rock. Metaphorically speaking.

      Obama is no Saul, lets keep this one sided considering history..

    • elizaliza

      kinda depressing thought there.

  • http://about.me/JohnMuzyka johneagle

    Great analysis. I love that David did not waver, did not flinch. He was confident because he knew God was with Him. If God is for Us, who can be against us. Romans 8:31

    • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

      Thank you, johneagle. I figured I wasn’t the only one who could identify with this Biblical parallel. Appreciate you for reading it!

      • redeyes

        This is what’s it’s always been about for me! I just had a gut feeling since August, but I know it’s not safe to say that!

        • redeyes

          what it has, sorry

      • joeydavis

        who said it would take an “act of God” for Santorum to win?

        Hmmm I’d expect “act of God” would sort of be the expectation of evangelical Christian voter supporting the candidate running on the God and family first platform.

        I’m betting that’s one of many lines over the last couple weeks the Romney campaign would like to take back.

    • Agelaius

      Romney is rather hairy, and he is taller than Santorum, and he has a whole tribe of hairy relatives and sons behind him. And Romney is a philistine – all he drinks is water or 2% milk. At least Santorum can appreciate a good glass of Chianti.

  • texastaxpayer

    But a nice post all the same….

  • WillWong

    I thought you were writing a diary on Santorum, not Newt!

    Other than that, nice post! :)

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      Both require a lot of imagination to see a vague representation being clearly explained with words, but in the end making no sense to the adult that only sees a bunch of squiggles, lines and elliptical and oblong circular shapes…

      I’m not defending Romney here, nor dissing Santorum…

      a) Romney is not the indomitable enemy of God’s people
      b) Santorum isn’t the only willing hebrew to fight Goliath
      c) Santorum is more like a Samson, that turned his back on conservatism, only to pray for strength to bring the house down as one last final and dignified act to redeem himself in the eyes of conservatives.
      d) Courage is subjective. (One could argue Romney is courageous to stay in primary fight where “the base” is rejecting him, even though he’s winning in both the delegate count and in the popular vote. One could also argue that Newt is courageous for staying in the fight despite the fact that the MSM has declared him dead twice, and yet he’s still drawing large numbers of “stones”)
      e) the “Stones” by 1 vote = 1 vote favor Romney at this time.

      Hyperbolic drivel… well written… but still drivel.

      • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

        … you’re reading too much into this. I appreciate your willingness to dissect my writing (wow), but honestly, I don’t see how you find the time.

        It’s a simple story about courage. The parallels are obvious to me. That’s why I wrote about them. If they aren’t obvious to you, than scoot along and find something written by someone else with which you can better identify.

        As for other elements of the story that may/may not be relevant to Santorum, Romney, the GOP race, etc., well, I didn’t write about those for a reason. Shall we splice and dice who the Philistine army would be? Or King Saul … who better represents him? The stones … were they metamorphic? Sedimentary? It matters, doesn’t it???

        No, it doesn’t matter.

        I’m new to Red State, and I’m enjoying myself immensely, but I can’t help but notice that people need to lighten up around here. It’s one thing to disagree, but it’s another to … well, to do what you just did. I know it was supposed to look “intellectual” but honestly, it just looks silly.

        (Kind of kicking myself for even taking 60 seconds to respond to this, but I guess that’s what we’re supposed to do on here, so there ya have it.)

        • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

          Susan, welcome to RedState… I hope you sincerely enjoy your time spent here… I hope the signal to noise issues that all “grassroots” political sites tolerate won’t dissuade you from taking the best of what this website has to offer… I know I enjoy it, even though “intellectual” and “un-lightened up” commentators like me are ready to critique with our “big brains” and our “willingness to dissect” with our inordinate amount of “time” required to speak up and speak out.

          Sincerely, Thanks for responding. and again Welcome to in what is my estimation, the greatest conservative grassroots website on the web.

          I find it interesting that you attempt to suggest that I was attempting to look “intellectual”… maybe at face value that’s what you say to someone that challenges your assumptions… interesting because what I actually suppose, is that addressing me with an ad hominem subtext, must be easier to do that than to address the substance of my remarks. I’m sure you understand Radio works different than text, posted, where all can see it. I post under my legal name… because it keeps me honest… regardless of whether or not my ego seeks compliments with subtext like “big brains” and “intellectual”.

          Feel free to stop reading for a moment if that offended you.

          Now to address key points in your response:

          If all you were attempting to do is draw a parallel of courage…
          then you failed to address point “b)” above. To reiterate, Santorum isn’t the only one seeking to defeat Romney.

          Also, I didn’t ask for details that are “relevant” to the GOP nomination process… I provided my own that I deemed relevant to your “parallel” to which you also did not address. see points “a)”, “c)”, and “d)”.

          As for splice and dice… I’m not interested in working with a bad analogy in the first place… which was the main point that I addressed at the heading of my first comment.

          So when you say “It Doesn’t Matter”… well you’re perhaps correct.

          What does matter is the fact that you obviously support Rick Santorum. You obviously would like people to draw conclusions in their minds while reading your words that Santorum should be associated to the well known biblical underdog hero… filled with courage in smiting foes under insurmountable odds…

          And while there’s nothing wrong with *that* motive… the framework fails to achieve the desired effect. (Unless I’m incorrect in the motive…but I take your words at face value)…

          So if you’ve made it this far… I would hope you’re not kicking yourself… but rather accepting criticism from someone that is NOT already enamored with Santorum’s supposed “Courage”.

          • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

            … and I appreciate your comments. :)

            All I can say is that, judging from response I’ve received on Twitter/Facebook, thus far, plenty of people feel like the framework of this blog entry did, indeed, achieve the desired objective.

            As for addressing all your points (a, c, d), I simply don’t have time. I essentially debate for a living, so this … well, it needs to be an escape for me. Just a place to do a brain dump and move on down the road to my other responsibilities

            Thank you for your thoughtful response.

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            No Text.

          • littlehouse18

            I discovered this week that a friend of mine is also good friends with Karen and Rick. She describes them as pillars of grace and fortitude. The Santorums helped them tremendously when one of their children faced a dire medical situation. The Santorum’s have faced more in their life than people are even aware of, and persevered with faith and dignity, and have been a great support to others as well. My friend believes that their path is part of God’s plan, whether to actually win the race or for some other purpose. I was further inspired by her words.

            Flagstaff, Santorum’s answer to that question may not have been the best, but I assure you he and his family truly are courageous.

          • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

            (short explanation of ‘kowalski’ – a long time RedState member that is infamous to adding addendums by replying to his own comments sometimes in relevance, and sometimes not)…

            As a producer (and sometimes call screener) for Mark Davis, I would presume the value of your interaction with RedState members may extend beyond just drum-beating for your preferred candidate… This place isn’t as “un-lightened up” and you may suggest, and could prove valuable to gauging the temperature in the “conservative/libertarian” room… and pivotal in understanding how to frame discussions that appeal to a wider market in the right-o-sphere…

        • Flagstaff

          Well-reasoned argument combined with colorful prose is a welcome addition.

          We may seem to be wound a bit tight, but my guess is the Obamanation Administration has hit us harder than it has you. Quite a few of us are retired, some of us are hanging on by our teeth, and for us, the situation is serious. Hence, we may indeed need to lighten up, and sometimes we come back a bit too hard in responses. Usually, it isn’t intended to be too hard, it just comes out that way.

          There is a good bit of humor here, too, but about Prince Barack the Last, we are usually serious as a visit from Squeaky Fromme.

          • http://mark.wbap.com/ Producer Susan Cloud

            I appreciate your kind words, and do, absolutely, plan to stay! I’ll be as colorful as Red State will allow!

            – susan

  • elizaliza

    IDK, there’s something to be said for both POV’s
    Rmoney could be a hero because he’s got so many enemies in his own party.
    Santorum because he fights all that money. But i have problems with that last one, since he’s obviously funded by some billionaire, i forgot his name.

    Anyway, it;’s good to get battle hardened, for the real election

  • Vegas_Rick

    Welcome to Redstate. I really enjoyed reading your post. Although, when I look at Santorum, past and present, I do not see courage. I see a go along to get along big government social conservative. He is not an economic conservative. Not by a long shot. And that’s what this country desperately needs right now.

  • Pingback: Waldo Gibney

  • Pingback: Claretta Weekley

  • Pingback: electronic cigarette

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Automobile Forum

  • Pingback: go here

  • Pingback: noclegi zakopane

  • Pingback: Investment House

  • Pingback: Fisch Futter

  • Pingback: Randki

  • Pingback: Sizegenetics testimonials

  • Pingback: Wedding planning

  • Pingback: distil vs distill

  • Pingback: Egal Gabbay Los Angeles

  • Pingback: Egal Gabbay Los Angeles California

  • Pingback: แทงบอล

  • Pingback: important supply

  • Pingback: Male Edge scam

  • Pingback: Mining

  • Pingback: descargar musica gratis tecktonik

  • Pingback: BBCAT

  • Pingback: ps3

  • Pingback: foreclosure

  • Pingback: lacna kozmetika

  • Pingback: usapaydayloansonlinenow.com

  • Pingback: diet mountain dew lyrics

  • Pingback: We loved this

  • Pingback: Pool Shop

  • Pingback: vinculado aquí

  • Pingback: Video on Demand

  • Pingback: chair recaning

  • Pingback: video2mp3

  • Pingback: their own explanation

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: กล้องวงจรปิด

  • Pingback: wow gold deal

  • Pingback: najlepsza randka

  • Pingback: home additions Orlando

  • Pingback: no fault car insurance

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: darmowa strona randki

  • Pingback: strona z randkami

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: Power Point

  • Pingback: credit card machine for iphone

  • Pingback: Susan Goodell counselor

  • Pingback: sonicare uv sanitizer replacement bulb

  • Pingback: majestic seo

  • Pingback: master cleanse ease in

  • Pingback: accelerated orthodontics

  • Pingback: scrapebox autoapprove list info

  • Pingback: Navigate To These Guys

  • Pingback: randka

  • Pingback: randka

  • Pingback: computer repairs

  • Pingback: Patrick Duett

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: znajdz milosc

  • Pingback: Arkadas Ara

  • Pingback: School

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: serwis randkowy

  • Pingback: beats cheap

  • Pingback: great web site

  • Pingback: payday loan online

  • Pingback: Evan Hardin

  • Pingback: youtube 2 mp3

  • Pingback: dry cleaning

  • Pingback: weddings in italy

  • Pingback: what ya feel

  • Pingback: ipl laser hair removal mascot

  • Pingback: Harlow

  • Pingback: here may possibly possibly are the findings

  • Pingback: Destinee

  • Pingback: Bari

  • Pingback: express

  • Pingback: direct investment spectrum

  • Pingback: your former mate reason

  • Pingback: Beverlee Anidi

  • Pingback: alfileres de novia

  • Pingback: Diseño web barato

  • Pingback: Angla Dallam

  • Pingback: thel Addison

  • Pingback: Franklyn Solliday

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: best green coffee extract

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: Inverter Servo Motion Control

  • Pingback: John Markin

  • Pingback: reverse phone numbers

  • Pingback: Teichfolie

  • Pingback: Website development in delhi

  • Pingback: xenon auto

  • Pingback: แทงบอลออนไลน์

  • Pingback: Automotive Forum

  • Pingback: Caron

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: rewelacyjny portla randkowy

  • tnguy

    …. (or at least 4 noted in the Bible) who were also giants. I believe David was so confident in God, he didn’t take 5 stones in case he missed, but took them to kill Goliath plus his 4 brothers.

  • Ann2012
  • Remington_Steele

    In 2 Sam.uel 21:18-22 (from the KJV):

    1. There were six sons of the giant listed and only one brother. 4 of the 6 sons were killed by David and his servants much later. The other two were killed by David’s nephew Jonathan and Elhanan.

    2. It may have been as you believe, but I don’t think Goliath was reciting his genealogy when he was challenging the Israelites as mentioned in 1 Sam. 17. The Israelites probably didn’t know who Goliath’s sons or brother were at the time David was preparing to meet him..

  • Remington_Steele

    The #1 and #2 above were meant to be analysis points, not quotes from the cited reference of 2 Samuel 21:18-22.