Tony Perkins announces evangelical support for Rick Santorum

posted at 2:30 pm on January 14, 2012 by Tina Korbe

At a major meeting in Texas this weekend, a group of 150 Christian leaders and conservative activists defied expectations and actually managed to coalesce around a single candidate.

Surrogates for Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum (no one for Jon Huntsman) made their pitches; the evangelicals considered them. On Saturday morning, they voted, and the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins held a call to debrief the media. He saw white smoke.

“What I did not think was possible appears to be possible,” said Perkins. After three rounds of balloting, “there emerged a strong consensus around Rick Santorum as the preferred candidate of this room.” It was a “clear, clear majority.”

Without doubt, this will be a major morale boost for the Santorum campaign — and a blow to the Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry camps — but whether it can morph into something more remains to be seen. Before the meeting, experts doubted that the group of aging activists would be able to alter the race much at this point in the nominating process:

But does the group stand a chance of reshaping the race? There are reasons for doubt: many of the leaders convening in Texas are well past their primes, with declining influence, and the nominating contest is already pretty far along.

One candidate – Mitt Romney – has won the first two contests, in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the South Carolina primary comes just a week after the Texas meeting.

“Some of these evangelical leaders are not as active as they once were in politics and the evangelical movement has changed a little overtime,” says John Green, a political scientist from the University of Akron. “Where this group could have an effect is if they coalesced around one candidate and then helped to provide resources.”

Boots on the ground, phone lists, robocalls, and even the possibility of an evangelical super PAC could move the needle for a candidate, Green said. But the time for such resource-intensive mobilization is growing thin.

Now that the group has demonstrated its ability to do the improbable by coalescing around one guy, it seems possible that they could also do the practical and provide actual, tangible resources to Santorum’s campaign. Maybe they should all board the same plane for South Carolina, where Santorum is far behind in the polls. At the very least, they’ll begin to mobilize their own constituencies for Santorum.

The Christian leaders insist they didn’t meet to brainstorm a way to stop Mitt Romney. One said it was an “anti-Obama meeting,” while another said he’s more concerned to stop Ron Paul than Mitt Romney. It’s obvious they haven’t been overly enthusiastic about Romney’s likely nomination, but Perkins said they didn’t overly discuss the former Massachusetts governor — and that his Mormonism came up not once.

Still, it’s clear they didn’t choose Santorum on the basis of his conservative credentials alone. Perkins said they overlooked Rick Perry, for example, because, while they liked his record, they had concerns about his electability. Santorum’s strong showing in Iowa surely nudged the group in his direction.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

MTLassen on January 14, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Let me get this right. You’re mad cuz someone called you “stupid”?

Reread your comments earlier above.

Freaking idiot.

smoothsailing on January 14, 2012 at 9:48 PM

I see the Santorum character assassination is still going strong.

smoothsailing on January 14, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Where does Jesus fit in Mormonism..as far as the salvation through Jesus is concerned? Do they reject it?

Mimzey on January 14, 2012 at 8:23 PM

In reply to your question, the LDS Church doctrine includes Thirteen Articles of Faith, of which these are the first four:

1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

AesopFan on January 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM

yawn.

Jurgis Rudkus on January 14, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Where does Jesus fit in Mormonism..as far as the salvation through Jesus is concerned? Do they reject it?

Mimzey on January 14, 2012 at 8:23 PM

In reply to your question, the LDS Church doctrine includes Thirteen Articles of Faith, of which these are the first four:

1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

AesopFan on January 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM

You forgot to say that Mormons don’t believe that Jesus IS God. Mormons believe that Jesus is a ‘spirit child’ of the god of this world and his ‘spirit’ wife…and that the devil is also a spirit child of them…so basically Jesus and the devil are the same, except in the Mormon world Jesus was the spirit child chosen to be the saviour. Oh yea, the best part is that Mormons believe that if you are a good Mormon you can become the god of your own planet.

We don’t need a Mormon leading this country…but I guess it’s still better than the sociopath there now…

Ltlgeneral64 on January 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM

I hope it’s time religious leader’s influence in conservative politics is diminishing. It will be a good day when it’s non-existent.

Demagoguing by the right (and left) on non-issues like abortion and homosexual rights detracts from real issues like corruption.

If you think abortion is a real issue consider Bachmann said she would support an Amendment to the Constitution to ban abortion. In effect admitting that legislating restrictions is a dead end and rendering it a phony issue. What do you think the probability is that an Amendment banning abortion would fetch 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states. Let me suggest 1 in a million.

If you think homosexual rights is an issue consider the reaction by fellow soldiers when their buddies came out at the end of DADT. Shrugged shoulders and ‘oh, ok’. Truth is most folks, like our soldiers, don’t care. Further most of us have a gay relative or acquaintance and we know most of them to be good people.

The real result of this illusion is to bolster womens and homosexual groups purse strings. Note these ‘groups’ heavily support leftists politicians with their attached leftist ideas. Drying up the demagaugoery of these issues will dry up the contributions.

Bottom line is if you don’t want an abortion don’t get one. If you don’t want to be a homosexual then don’t be one. Instead of spending 15 minutes of a debate on contraception (OMFG really!), we should be talking about corruption or the debt or getting people back to work.

As an aside I found out tonight standing in line that you cannot buy a Rockstar on food stamps. Bad news is you can buy a Reb Bull on food stamps.

old school on January 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM

The real result of this illusion is to bolster womens and homosexual groups purse strings. Note these ‘groups’ heavily support leftists politicians with their attached leftist ideas. Drying up the demagaugoery of these issues will dry up the contributions.

You make sense. You must be hated too.

borntoraisehogs on January 14, 2012 at 10:36 PM

In reply to your question, the LDS Church doctrine includes Thirteen Articles of Faith, of which these are the first four:

1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

AesopFan on January 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Do you believe in Jesus as God?

liberal4life on January 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM

You make sense. You must be hated too.

LOL, usually! Anyone borntoraisehogs has gotta be rational!

old school on January 14, 2012 at 10:49 PM

You guys who keep asking if Mormons believe Jesus is God, look at the title page of the Book of Mormon, “…that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD.” Of course, the reply is then, “But Mormons don’t REALLY believe the Book of Mormon.” Sigh

Alma on January 14, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Who cares? Santorum is a one trick pony that will appeal to a limited group of Republicans and conservatives.

lexhamfox on January 14, 2012 at 11:12 PM

old school on January 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM

What will also diminish is our participation in voting for candidates in the republican party. Are you also okay with that?

hawkdriver on January 14, 2012 at 11:13 PM

None of that makes much sense.
Christianity is an belief in a purpose in life and values and whatever means of selfless devotion one can honestly muster in the faith that shortcoming will be forgiven.
Catholic
Protestant
Mormon
Lutheran, etc, are religious paths.
All include Christ in their teachings.
There are many rooms in the temple.

Mimzey on January 14, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Meanwhile…as you all argue about the deities…and their place in various theologies…..there are millions of people wanting to behead the unbelievers !

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2012 at 11:14 PM

If you think abortion is a real issue consider Bachmann said she would support an Amendment to the Constitution to ban abortion. In effect admitting that legislating restrictions is a dead end and rendering it a phony issue. What do you think the probability is that an Amendment banning abortion would fetch 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states. Let me suggest 1 in a million.

Of course a pro-life amendment doesn’t have a chance in Hades. I roll my eyes when politicians suggest things like that, because it’s pointless at this point with the death culture being what it is. That doesn’t mean other avenues (such as selecting certain kinds of justices when vacancies appear on the Court) are invalid.

Bottom line is if you don’t want an abortion don’t get one. If you don’t want to be a homosexual then don’t be one.

old school on January 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Oh, now this is really something else. I can’t believe you dare mention abortion and homosexuality side by side! Even if a person thinks homosexuality is a choice (I don’t), it’s a matter between two consenting adults. So yes, if you don’t want to get married to another dude, don’t do so. But abortion involves ending the life of a separate entity that doesn’t have a choice in the matter. Blech.

McDuck on January 14, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Calling together a council of evangelical leaders to discuss what candidate to endorse reminds me a lot of the practice of convening councils of Bishops introduced by Constantine. Jesus taught that his followers should not become involved in political issues, i.e. “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s,” and “My kingdom is not of this world.” The intrusion of sectarian religion into politics has lead to jealousy and violent emotions and civil wars in Europe which drove many seeking religious freedom to this land.

They should stick to teaching moral principles and let their congregations choose their own candidates.

These points aside, if they were going to unite against Romney the Heretic, they should have done so much earlier. They had no one like Huckabee who was organized and well funded in advance and who was able to call on the general Evangelical movement merely by invoking Christianity in his campaign. He also presaged the populist attacks by Newt and Perry with his attacks on Romney as being a silver-spoon baby with a sense of aristocracy and entitlement. That characterization of Romney is false and this kind of politics is harmful to the Republican cause. It will only help Obama in the end.

flataffect on January 14, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Romney is tough to beat b/c he does have a lot more money than the other candidates.

He is kind of a fortunate son, his daddy was a politician too. There is a lot of entitlement aurua about his coronation because let’s face it, he’s never been a conservative.

Dr. Tesla on January 14, 2012 at 11:46 PM

What will also diminish is our participation in voting for candidates in the republican party. Are you also okay with that?

Uh, where else ya gonna go> Third party, right…

old school on January 14, 2012 at 11:49 PM

I do scoff at this notion that Romney is somehow a fiscal conservative.

Sorry, the RomneyCare guy isn’t fiscal conservative. You don’t do that if you are a fiscal conservative. He worked with Ted Kennedy to secure federal subsidies for it, for god’s sake.

It’s amazing people think Romney is more fiscally conservative than Santorum is.

Dr. Tesla on January 14, 2012 at 11:52 PM

I can’t believe you dare mention abortion and homosexuality side by side!

As a moral discussion sure you can make a distinction. As a political issue there’s no difference.

old school on January 14, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Do you believe in Jesus as God?

liberal4life on January 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM

When in doubt refer to #1…Duhhhhh

rich801 on January 14, 2012 at 11:57 PM

yikes, I am glad I missed this discussion.

Jailbreak on January 14, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Oldschool,

you don’t get it, do you? Corruption is a moral issue. Ditto abortion and homosexuality. How about politicians take your thought process and apply it to their jobs: Don’t like bribes masked as campaign contributions? Don’t take one. Don’t like influence peddling? Don’t engage yourself in it. Don’t like pay to play schemes? Don’t do it. This ‘live and let live’ attitude toward wrong-doing is what got America where it is.

Abortion has real-world consequences: one major reason we’re running out of younger people to pay for the Social Security Ponzi scheme is because we’ve taken 63 million people out of the system. Add to that the lower birth rates from the ‘sexual revolution’ and you’re asking for serious trouble. Look up the impending Chinese demographic disaster if you want a preview of what’s coming.

Homosexuality and pedophilia have a strong relation. Even the pagan Romans realized homosexuality is not good for a society. They had Lex Scantinia, which was ignored during the Empire, when they fell to pot.

As for your comments about religious leaders and their influence, you might want to go back and read some history about the American revolution. Pastors played a HUGE role in influencing the populace to support liberty. There is a huge collection of political sermons edited by Ellis Sandoz from the Liberty Fund to get you started.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Homosexuality and pedophilia have a strong relation. Even the pagan Romans realized homosexuality is not good for a society. They had Lex Scantinia, which was ignored during the Empire, when they fell to pot.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Talk about utter absolute dishonesty! You social con scum have are just liars! Homosexuality was seriously penalized by Rome only after Rome became Christian. It’s a historical fact. It’s easy to check. The Wikipedia article on Lex Scantinia is contrary to your assertions–not that Wikipedia is the truth. But if you do more reading, you’ll realize the Wikipedia does get this right.

thuja on January 15, 2012 at 12:38 AM

All include Christ in their teachings.
There are many rooms in the temple.

Mimzey on January 14, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Including Islam by that definition.

lexhamfox on January 15, 2012 at 12:44 AM

Voddie Baucham announces support for Ron Paul.

air_up_there on January 15, 2012 at 12:49 AM

Corruption is a moral issue…

vgjo on January 15, 2012 at 12:25 AM

One does not have to be a bible thumper to understand the disgrace and downfall of corruption.

Sure, churches have great impact on US history. I do not doubt that will remain. Some has been positive, some not so.

But I do not not believe for a moment a Christian nation run by Christian humans will be any better that the corrupt nation we currently enjoy. In fact I’ve read the Bible and the new Testement several times. The idea scares me to death. Who should be president eh, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim or Tammy Baker, Robert Tilton, Vaughn Reeves, the Catholic Church? OMG help us! Please don’t tell me you just need the right guy, that’s the communist failing argument.

This nation is constructed on the rule of law. Elected officials should be required to follow the rule of law, all of them and all the laws, not exempt themselves from it.

old school on January 15, 2012 at 12:51 AM

thuja

The wikipedia article on Lex Scantinia is sourced by ‘LGBT’ ‘scholars’. They have an agenda. Go look up some primary sources.

‘Social con scum’. Wow. What objective language. Goes to credibility, I suppose.

You ‘gay’ rights supporters all react instead of respond. I notice you didn’t even try to refute my statement with evidence. I cite the ucdavis article I linked to above as something that tries to refute the homo-pedo relation and instead supports it.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 1:09 AM

Old school

Just curious, what exactly constitutes a ‘bible thumper’ in your estimation?

Also, where does the idea of ‘rule of law’ originate? What is its historical relation to God (or ‘the gods’) in historical record?

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM

Santorum is a stronger conservative than Romney, just as good on the economy, and less likely to be manipulated by appeals to “bipartisanship.”

He also hasn’t spent his entire political career distancing himself from conservatism, unlike Romney. True, Romney ran as a conservative in 2008, but we can see now that it was a pose all along. For the rest of his political career, he ran from the conservative label.

Romney’s only advantage over Santorum that I can see is his executive experience as a governor. And seeing what he did in Massachusetts finishes that as an argument for voting for him.

For all the venom against evangelicals, they made a sound judgement on this one, and picked the best candidate. He’s not the best candidate that I would have wanted, but he’s the best of those that are left.

And he’s more electable than weak-soup Romney, in spite of all the pundits trying to claim otherwise.

Let the Mittdogs rage, and the Perrykrishnas imagine a vain thing (Perry winning anything at this point) …

tom on January 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM

Perkins said they didn’t overly discuss the former Massachusetts governor — and that his Mormonism came up not once.

Tina Korbe on Jan 14, 2012 2:30 PM

Huh. Why not? Many suffering in hell are the tragic result of this unbiblical gospel. The nation will be next if Romney is President and his Mormonism came up not once! This is supposed to be a group of 150 Christian leaders and conservative activists. Wow! Well, that’s modern evengelism for you!

apocalypse on January 14, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Presumably because the discussion was about electing a president, not a pastor.

tom on January 15, 2012 at 1:20 AM

Just curious, what exactly constitutes a ‘bible thumper’ in your estimation?

Also, where does the idea of ‘rule of law’ originate? What is its historical relation to God (or ‘the gods’) in historical record?

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM

Bible thumper would be evangelicals or anyone that thinks we all should live by their particular interpretation of the Bible.

I don’t have a problem with God giving me my inalienable rights, nor the idea of ‘rule of law’ coming from ancient religions if that truly is the source.

God also gave me free will. The Constitution gave me the Bill of Rights and a Supreme Court to protect them in a supposedly free nation.

Abortion and homosexual rights remain a dead end issue. Constantly arguing these narrow single interest issues and making them a litmus test is simply a distraction from addressing good, legal governance by the consent of a free people. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good.

old school on January 15, 2012 at 1:36 AM

I don’t know any evangelicals who think that. I know a lot who believe that if you don’t accept the basic tenets of Christianity, you’ll go to hell. But I don’t know any who want to force it on anyone. If a person doesn’t believe they’ll go to hell for not accepting Christianity’s tenets, and no Christian is trying to force them to believe, I don’t know why it bothers them.

It’s not in ancient religions. You might check out Cicero’s ‘On the Laws’ or Aristotle’s Politics, Bk V. Their views on this actually ran pretty different from the religion of their day. They were primarily philosophers, not religious men.

God did give you free will, as He did everyone in this country. But there are consequences to using it contrary to His will. And America’s currently suffering that. And it’s gonna get a lot worse, if people don’t acknowledge Him and His law.

The Constitution didn’t give you anything. It was an acknowledgement of timeless ‘unalienable’ rights from God. Without Him or His law, they become perfectly subject to the whims and interpretations of those in power, as we see with the Supreme Court that is supposed to be protecting your rights, and is actually legislating from the bench. Without an absolute standard for rights and law, yours and my rights become nothing more than what the powers that be say they are. And THAT’S the ultimate danger in looking at politics through a purely secular and materialistic lens.

Abortion in particular is contributing to the economic destruction of our country. If you believe in God of the Bible, you’ll notice He calls homosexuality an ‘abomination’. We can all ignore His influence in our affairs, but He’ll make Himself known regardless.

I suppose we’ll just agree to disagree. But thanks for at least keeping it civil and adult. It’s a refreshing change.

Good night, oldschool.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 1:45 AM

I have read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and did not see Joseph Smith. Did I miss something? – liberal4life on January 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Pick up a copy of the book of Mormon at a bookstore. Or, perhaps go to a Church of Latter Day Saints and buy a copy.

SC.Charlie on January 14, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Lib4life is trying to stir up some big fight over Mormonism. Why let him?

tom on January 15, 2012 at 1:57 AM

Alternate headline:

Breaking: Guy no one has heard of makes announcement no one cares about.

rogaineguy on January 15, 2012 at 3:31 AM

God did give you free will, as He did everyone in this country. But there are consequences to using it contrary to His will.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 1:45 AM

Then it’s not free will is it? If we had free will we COULD do whatever we want without concern for consequence. But whether you believe in a god or not, we STILL erect basic laws to decide how we treat each other, and governments to enforce them… JUST in case.

The Constitution didn’t give you anything. It was an acknowledgement of timeless ‘unalienable’ rights from God

Inalienable… INalienable rights… But we didn’t get these rights from god, we got them from the progression of mans morals and ethics.

Abortion in particular is contributing to the economic destruction of our country.

How so? This is just spurious, my friend.

If you believe in (the) God of the Bible, you’ll notice He calls homosexuality an ‘abomination’.

Thank god more and more people are moving away from that god. It wasn’t god in the bible who called it an abomination, it was the men of the day who wrote the bible who did… And that idea and bigotry exists to this day, but thankfully more and more people are learning to live and let live.

We can all ignore His influence in our affairs, but He’ll make Himself known regardless.

Wrong, we will see what we want to see and call it gods will or intent when it’s really just us projecting our own hatred and contempt for the wishes of others that run counter to what we think and accept as right and true behavior…

SauerKraut537 on January 15, 2012 at 3:59 AM

…while another said he’s more concerned to stop Ron Paul than Mitt Romney.

As a Ron Paul supporter, this fills my heart with joy.

gyrmnix on January 15, 2012 at 4:39 AM

@Sauerkraut…

How do you define will? As I define it, it merely means choosing to do what you want within the parameters of what you are capable of. It doesn’t imply anything about consequences. I see it as a distinction between ‘free to do X’ and ‘freedom from consequences of doing X’. There is a BIG difference.

‘Unalienable’… that’s how it was spelled in the Declaration. Notice the quotes I put around the word. Attention to detail is your friend, mi amigo. Nice instantiation of what I call the ‘ad litteras’ fallacy.

Progression of man’s morals and ethics? As in the 20th century and its unprecedented slaughter?! I notice from my reading of history that two things progress in terms of man: technology and capacity for slaughter. I do notice in European history that as the interpretation and practice of Christianity became more and more in line with what the Bible taught, freedom and progress did expand, culminating with America.

Have you heard of the Ponzi scheme called ‘Social Security’? I’m not sure if you’re aware of it, but a Ponzi scheme stops working when you don’t have enough people to cover the obligations coming due to the first victims of the scheme. We’ve killed around 60 million taxpayers since Roe v. Wade. Sure could use that right now to cover SS and other gov’t-run ponzi schemes.
re: God of the Bible.

So you assume all knowledge, then? I trust that you can prove such a strong statement as asserting that what many millions of people believe to be a statement from God is really a statement conjured up by men? Notice I said ‘prove’, not ‘speculate’ or make extrapolations from (truly) spurious assumptions.

‘thank god’

Which god would that be, exactly? Because all the monotheistic religions’ (wherein it would be proper to say ‘thank god’ and not ‘thank the gods’ etc.) sources (Bible, Koran) teach that homosexuality is a no-no. I presume it is a god of your own making? Please tell me how you came to know this god. It would be very interesting.

I think your last statement was a projection. ‘Seeing what you want to see’ would be wanting homosexuality to be considered normal or morally acceptable and molding religion and history to fit that desire.

‘projecting our own hatred and contempt for the wishes of others that run counter to what we think and accept as right and true behavior…’

As in hatred and contempt for the wishes of tradionalist Theists that run counter to what you think of and accept as right and true post-modern behavior?

I do want to thank you for one thing. With your condescending but empty ‘arguments’, really rhetoric dressed in post-modern talking points, you’ve illustrated nicely for many readers here examples of the intellectually rotten foundations of our current cultural and social morass.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 5:13 AM

Tony Perkins doesn’t matter and never will matter in the Republican party. Republicans threw out family values when it made Gingrich the front runner (before Iowa).

rubberneck on January 15, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Homosexuality and pedophilia have a strong relation. Even the pagan Romans realized homosexuality is not good for a society. They had Lex Scantinia, which was ignored during the Empire, when they fell to pot.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Tyranny and oppression, it’s not just for Liberals!

Spliff Menendez on January 15, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Tony Perkins doesn’t matter and never will matter in the Republican party. Republicans threw out family values when it made Gingrich the front runner (before Iowa).

rubberneck on January 15, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Because family values are the top priority of the Federal Gov’t.

Spliff Menendez on January 15, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Wrong, we will see what we want to see and call it gods will or intent when it’s really just us projecting our own hatred and contempt for the wishes of others that run counter to what we think and accept as right and true behavior…

Which is exactly what I’m doing.

SauerKraut537 on January 15, 2012 at 3:59 AM

Added in a detail for you.

Spliff Menendez on January 15, 2012 at 8:39 AM

AesopFan on January 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Do Mormons believe that Jesus Christ is co-equal and co-eternal with God the Father? Not trying to start an argument, just looking for a clear answer to that from anyone who subscribes to Mormonism.

kg598301 on January 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM

LOL
So them thar ‘gelicals like Rick ‘Anal Retentive’ Santorum, eh?
Good luck with that. Santorum might become President if the “rapture” ever happens. Personally, I’m not holding my breath. Mittens can help you get back to the mothership though!
(just please take Dennis Kucinich with ya)

Think with your heads, people. There’s only one conservative in this race: Rick Perry. Santorum hasn’t a prayer, as it were.

Who’s next on the bandwagon?
Pat Robertson?
Jimmy Swaggart?
The Oral Roberts family or the Grahams?
Etcetera, etc. …
The one-note Republicans need to get over the abortion meme. It’s settled law – bad law, but settled all the same and it aint changin’ in my lifetime.
Pax In Hoc Signo

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 15, 2012 at 9:08 AM

The one-note Republicans need to get over the abortion meme. It’s settled law – bad law, but settled all the same and it aint changin’ in my lifetime.
Pax In Hoc Signo

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 15, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Yeppers, because when you have debased your thinking to the point of ceding child sacrifice, a balanced budget is one ‘fiscal conservative’ away.

Not going to happen. Over 60 million, 60,000,000 babies have been slaughtered…And you think that magically the people of a nation that has such a poor view of life is going to get serious about a budget?

LOL!

tom daschle concerned on January 15, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Ya know, it really pains me to acknowledge this kind of thing, but I will:

I disagree with your politics, so you attempt to paint me as so stupid as to be at junior high-school level.

I disagree with your politics, so you attempt to gas-light me into believing the world doesn’t like me.

I’m fine looking in the mirror every morning, chief. Ya might check your own program sometime, ya f@cking hypocrite.

MTLassen on January 14, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Oh, I never painted you as STUPID….you asserted that yourself.

I called you out as immature. You can be intelligent and immature at the same time. Now your dropping F-bombs at me because of your insecurity.

Take care chump!

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

You know that Rick Santorum is Pro-Union! He voted against the repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act (which requires that all government contracts pay union scale wages not search for the best bid) while he was a Senator. He also requested Billions of dollars of earmarks during his 16 years in Congress. That is Billions with a B.

He is a terrific person and absolutely passionate on the issues of life and the family but he is a BIG GOVERNMENT REPUBLICAN. Plus I find it very hard to square the fact that he is campaigning as the Family Values candidate yet he as a father of 7 (some of them young and homeschooled and one of them severely handicapped) would run for POTUS at this time in his life when his family needs his time and devotion. POTUS is like NO other job. You never get to leave it or stop thinking about it. (Evidence the gray hair over-night of all who have assumed the mantle). You can not put it on hold to go sit in a hospital room with your wife to watch over Bella (the miracle 3 yr old). He has time to do this later. He is in his early 50′s.

I think Santorum might make a great President someday. I love his passion for the cultural issues. I just think it is the wrong time for the country because we are in such a financial pickle and we must cut spending and it is the wrong time in Santorum’s life because of the age of his family.

Rio2010 on January 15, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Tyranny and oppression, it’s not just for Liberals!

Spliff Menendez on January 15, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Actually they have the monopoly on them.

Name some examples of oppression caused by Christians?

(Crickets Chirping)

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Name some examples of oppression caused by Christians?

(Crickets Chirping)

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 9:35 AM

My dog, Torquemada, just told me you’re a dumba**.

M240H on January 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Is Romney legitimizing Mormonism worse than Obama legitimizing a liberal Christianity that is tantamount to atheism?

(Not all liberal Christianity is atheism. I’m just claiming Obama’s is–just as Ann Coulter has suggested.)

thuja on January 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM

None of this nonsense has anything to do with atheism. These people just believe in different imaginary gods.

Annar on January 15, 2012 at 9:48 AM

My dog, Torquemada, just told me you’re a dumba**.

M240H on January 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Couldn’t think for yourself???

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Bertrand Russell left behind such a deep bench.

tom daschle concerned on January 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM

The problem with this primary process is independents and democrats who voted for Obama in 08′ are voting in our primaries in states like NH.

Sure gives a rating of “damaged goods” to the primary system.

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 10:01 AM

tom daschle concerned on January 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM

The idiots will always have strength in numbers. Be better than the mob.

M240H on January 15, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Not going to happen. Over 60 million, 60,000,000 babies have been slaughtered…And you think that magically the people of a nation that has such a poor view of life is going to get serious about a budget?

LOL!

tom daschle concerned on January 15, 2012

You’ve now had FORTY YEARS to overturn Roe v. Wade. Howz it goin’?
YOU tell a woman who has been raped, by a stranger or worse, a family member, why she must bear that cell until fruition. Oh, don’t forget the abuse of unwanted children. But, have it your way. I prefer to leave regulations up to the STATES where it belongs.
Personally, it’s none of my business. So feel free to hook up with Fast Freddie Phelps.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 15, 2012 at 10:14 AM

abuse of unwanted children.

Karl Magnus on January 15, 2012 at 10:14 AM

You don’t believe innocent victims don’t deserve a second chance at life? So just kill em’ off?

b1jetmech on January 15, 2012 at 10:18 AM

A vote for Romney in the Republican primary = a vote for Obama in the general election. Bumper stickers and a major ad campaign need to gear up right now with this slogan!

Pragmatic on January 15, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Karl Magnus on January 15, 2012 at 10:14 AM

We’ve had forty years to overturn Roe vs Wade, without resorting to the unthinkable: civil war.

I think we’re all running out of time.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Pragmatic on January 15, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Every candidate in the Republican primary is capable of beating BHO.

That kind of “campaign” will fall flat, or worse. It could be used against the Republican nominee (whomever it becomes) in the general.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2012 at 10:33 AM

My dog, Torquemada, just told me you’re a dumba**.

M240H on January 15, 2012 at 9:44 AM

FYI: More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

steebo77 on January 15, 2012 at 10:39 AM

WRONG CHICE…
HERE IS THE ONE THEY SHOULD’VE PICKED
A President For Our Time
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDE1ulafHUc&feature=related

nancysabet on January 15, 2012 at 10:47 AM

FYI: More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

steebo77 on January 15, 2012 at 10:39 AM

How are those Islamists doing in relation to the dead from the Middle Passage? The Catholic Church sanctioned and promoted the brutal Trans-Atlantic slave trade. Everyone looks dumb when the question becomes “which religion has sanctioned the murder of more people.” Shouldn’t the question be instead, why do people continue to invest in religious institutions instead of working on spirituality.

libfreeordie on January 15, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Well that endorsement should manage to turn off a lot of folks who might have been neutral about Rick up until now.

jeanie on January 15, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I still believe the following because Romney is the only Democrat in RINO clothing that is running for President (based on his record in Massachusetts: A vote for Romney in the Republican primary = a vote for Obama in the general election. Bumper stickers and a major ad campaign need to gear up right now with this slogan!

Romney has NO Republican, let alone CONSERVATIVE Republican credentials…Rick Perry does.

Pragmatic on January 15, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Newt is out on the campaign trail saying that Mitt Romney LOOTED some business or the other, he actually has the facts, but won’t say what they are, he wants Romney to confess it. That’s it for ME, no more Newt, the social conservatives have to support Santorum. Newt may talk about social conservatism, but he has not lived it. He is king of like Rush, who is not running for anything, like he says, who supports social conservatism but has had 4 wives!!!! You don’t have moral authority on marriage if you are not still in your first marriage, sorry. You know there are a lot of Catholics who feel badly that they are not in their first marriage, and Newt gets to waltz in and become a Catholic in his third marriage. Duh. Sorry, that’s not the playing field the rest of us live on, it reminds me of the Kennedys with all their special annulments.

Mitt Romney lives his life, walks the walk in conservative values. A fact.

Fleuries on January 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Well, whoever they support, we know the Evangelicals and other values voters aren’t going to Obama, especially after his latest religious fiasco … http://bit.ly/qVdDUt

ombdz on January 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM

ombdz–Right you are, but the moderates are still up for grabs and many of them run in the opposite direction when they hear ‘Evangelical’. This obsession with uber conservatism/Christian right works in Obama’s favor and yet they go on about it continually. When O makes his play for the middle, and he will,our own Party will have laid his ground work. GOP of ALL stripes should be working to include this group, not alienate.

jeanie on January 15, 2012 at 12:05 PM

And while I’m at it, this ‘values voters’ is a dangerous term in the sense often used here. Mderates see themselves as having ‘values’ too. While I doubt it’s meant this way, the implication is often that they do not or that mod values some how fall short. If the GOP is to win, they had better start working together and respecting each other. My lecture for the day–thankyou for listening.

jeanie on January 15, 2012 at 12:16 PM

We’ve had forty years to overturn Roe vs Wade, without resorting to the unthinkable: civil war.

I think we’re all running out of time.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2012 at 10:27 AM

You can’t possibly be serious. And I say this as a Christian who hates convenience abortions.

We don’t even have the remotest possibility of even overturning Roe V. Wade after four decades (which, BTW, is why abortion should’ve stayed a state issue) and you wanna try a civil war?

Where may I ask do you hope to get soldiers for that cause?

MelonCollie on January 15, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Romney is fine with abortions . . .when has he ever said he would make them harder to obtain?

Pragmatic on January 15, 2012 at 1:26 PM

If the Religious/Political leaders of the evangelical community are going to publicly endorse and support a candidate, you better believe they are going to go all out to make sure that support counts for something.

If they half-heartedly support a candidate and then that candidate goes down in flames, their influence and importance as voting bloc will be severely diminished, especially since they so publicly rallied to one candidate (something fairly unprecedented).

They want to remain influential. Santorum can expect some serious support.

Utica681 on January 15, 2012 at 1:41 PM

For those of you asking over and over again if Mormons believe if Jesus IS God…don’t hold your breath for an answer because they don’t want to tell you the truth. Because their answer will support the notion that Mormonism is a cult. They believe that Jesus is a spirit child of the god of this earth and his spirit wife…the devil is also a child of their union. Let me say that again….MORMONS DO NOT BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS GOD…look in the Mormon documents for your answers. Don’t ask Mormons. Their answers are canned to make is sound like they are in line with mainstream Christianity…

Ltlgeneral64 on January 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

At a major meeting in Texas this weekend, a group of 150 Christian leaders and conservative activists…

Acting strangely episcopal for a gaggle that don’t believe in bishops. I guess they believe in the self-appointed kind.

Akzed on January 15, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Extremely short-sighted on the Evangelical’s part.

Santorum is a Big Government Republican. Pro-Union (voted against the repeal of Davis-Bacon) and anti-right to work. Voted against it too.

He hasn’t had his day in the sun (press vetting) and the Evangelicals are going to have egg on their face.

I’m a classic Evangelical voter. Right to life is my litmus test issue. Perry is by far a better choice because of his record in Texas (45% of all the jobs created in the ENTIRE US in the last 2 years were created in TX) and consistent conservative record (chief executive of the world’s 13th largest economy for the last 11 years and gained 4 congressional districts during his tenure because businesses and jobs are moving to TX) and Newt is 2nd best because WHEN he is good, he is very very good. But both men are consistently pro-life.

Santorum wants the government involved in everything. Social as well as economic. He is thinks he can create a better and more just society through Government. I think he is wrong. The State can’t make you good. That is a job left to the church.

Rio2010 on January 15, 2012 at 2:46 PM

@Spiff Menendez

Wow, dude. I am SO impressed by your incisive wit. I wish only that your ratiocinative abilities could match it. Because I oppose homosexuality on moral and principled grounds, I am for tyranny and oppression? Then I suppose that any opposition to anything is a manifestation of tyranny and oppression? And please spare me any self-righteous baloney about my citation of Lex Scantinia. I presume you have reading comprehension and critical thinking skills beyond the 5th grade level (although that could be a dangerous assumption), so you should have been able to see that I was pointing out that understanding of homosexuality as dangerous to a society extends outside of Christendom. I’ll let you in on a little secret: citation is not approval.

@Karl Magnus.

Your weak-minded, wussified, fatalistic view of Roe v. Wade shows up on the right in just about every big battle we face. ‘Get over it, we’re never gonna get rid of big government.’ ‘Get over it, entitlements are here to stay.’ ‘Get over it, we’re never gonna pay off our debt.’ A loser’s mindeset leads to a loser’s results. Awesome, dude.

As far as your comment about rape/incest, your corrupted thinking is showing. So the baby should pay for crimes it had nothing to do with? Brilliant and just. Oh, you say, it’s just a mass of cells? With such a nuanced view of life, held by millions in this country, it’s not wonder we as a nation are going to pot. I notice, BTW ,you didn’t address at all my contention that abortion has contributed to the current financial situation. Cool.

Over and out.

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Perkins said they didn’t overly discuss the former Massachusetts governor — and that his Mormonism came up not once.

Tina Korbe on Jan 14, 2012 2:30 PM

Huh. Why not? Many suffering in hell are the tragic result of this unbiblical gospel. The nation will be next if Romney is President and his Mormonism came up not once! This is supposed to be a group of 150 Christian leaders and conservative activists. Wow! Well, that’s modern evengelism for you!

apocalypse on January 14, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Presumably because the discussion was about electing a president, not a pastor.

tom on January 15, 2012 at 1:20 AM

The faith of a president matters because it affects his or her work and the rest of the nation he influences. Any Christian leader who doesn’t understand that should stop calling themselves a Christian leader. Thanks.

apocalypse on January 15, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Rio2010 on January 15, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Here’s the other side of the story that Tony isn’t telling (in case this hasn’t already been posted).
Partial post which can’t be read unless a subscribed member: http://www.tothepointnews.com/

FULL POST: http://rickperryreport.com/article/2012-01-15/santorum-revealed-romneys-stalking-horse-brenham

THE MEETING THAT WON’T CHANGE THE WORLD Print E-mail
Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
Sunday, 15 January 2012

At least it was cordial. But the 150 or so “movement conservatives” gathered at Paul Pressler’s this weekend (1/13-14) were a fractured lot. Maybe 10% were for Perry. Almost all of them were against Romney. Well, sort of. Caveat below.

When the case was made that Perry was the only candidate who actually understood the Constitution and the power of the 10th Amendment, the only one who was not a big government guy, the most successful governor in the country who has a rock solid record of job creation and conservative judicial appointments – they just didn’t care. I want that to sink in.

These conservative leaders really do not care about jobs, people hurting like the Great Depression, America’s economy falling into an abyss. All they care about is “the family as the fabric of society,” and other Rick Santorum social conservative platitudes. So a majority of them voted for Santorum.

They could care less that Santorum would not do anything to reduce metastasizing government, much less castrate it (like Perry would), or has not the slightest trace of executive experience of any kind, government or private.

When asked one-on-one why they were going for Santorum when they knew he had no money, no organization, and stood not a ghost of a chance to win the nomination, the truth came out:
“If we unify behind Santorum, it will force Romney to pick him as his running mate – for he’ll know that’s the only way to get our support in the general (election in November).”

That’s the slimy deal behind this. They’ll go for Romney if he goes for Santorum on his ticket. Should we call them Judas Conservatives?

We suspected this all along: Santorum is a stalking horse for Romney. A vote for Santorum is a vote for Romney. Folks in South Carolina need to know this.

The cynical ploy, however, will not work – and not just because the Romney guy rolled his eyes when told about it (Romney has his heart set on Marco Rubio). It’s because there was no unity at this meeting.

The Drudge headline “Social conservatives back Santorum,” is a lie. A majority of the folks there chose Santorum – but there was no agreement that everyone would now get behind their choice. Some will continue backing Perry. A much larger number are now committed to Gingrich as the Not Romney. Others are going to focus on doing whatever they can to see no candidate gets a majority of delegates for a brokered convention.

A brokered convention, by the way, is how Sarah Palin could get the nomination. Or Rick Perry.

So there you have it.

This was a meeting that won’t change the world, that won’t change anything, except to marginalize these “movement” conservative leaders who really don’t care about the fate of America.

They say Perry blew his chance. They have blown theirs.

avagreen on January 15, 2012 at 5:05 PM

I remember this article from some years back. It’s surprising what a few years will help someone forget.

These guys have been a disappointment for some time and I can remember my disgust at Dobson after that and refused to listen to him anymore.

http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/04/how-evangelicals-traded-their-spiritual.html

avagreen on January 15, 2012 at 5:34 PM

@avagreen 5:34 p.m.

I read that article you linked to. I wonder if the author of it is informed about the role pastors played in the American revolution. He could check this book out, for example:

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=816&Itemid=99999999

As I told someone else regarding this topic, without the aid of pulpit promotion of liberty, it is a fair question whether or not the American revolution would have gotten as far as it did…

avgjo on January 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Wait…

I thought the Bible thumpers hated Catholics?

Mr Galt on January 15, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Extended version of this meeting.
Gag! How sleazy can Romney’s bots get?

Romney’s Stalking Horse in Brenham
Posted: Jan 15, 2012
Mitt Romney, left and his stalking horse Santorum, right.

At least it was cordial.

But the 150 or so “movement conservatives” gathered at Paul Pressler’s this weekend (1/13-14) were a fractured lot.

Maybe 10% were for Perry. Almost all of them were against Romney. Well, sort of. Caveat below.

There was an official Romney guy there who explained that “You’ll either work with us now or work with us later, but you’ll all have to get on Mitt’s train, because we have the money and the organization, so there’s no stopping us.”

This did not go over well. It just made everyone more determined than ever to do whatever it takes to stop Mittens. How to do so is what the group could not agree on.

I’m not going to name names, as I was asked not to. Just about every big name conservative you’ve heard of was there. A number of them didn’t come out for any particular candidate. Others said they were all in for Perry at the start, and just couldn’t overcome his blunders.

When the case was made that Perry was the only candidate who actually understood the Constitution and the power of the 10th Amendment, the only one who was not a big government guy, the most successful governor in the country who has a rock solid record of job creation and conservative judicial appointments – they just didn’t care. I want that to sink in.

These conservative leaders really do not care about jobs, people hurting like the Great Depression, America’s economy falling into an abyss. All they care about is “the family as the fabric of society,” and other Rick Santorum social conservative platitudes. So a majority of them voted for Santorum. They could care less that Santorum would not do anything to reduce metastasizing government, much less castrate it (like Perry would), or has not the slightest trace of executive experience of any kind, government or private.

When asked one-on-one why they were going for Santorum when they knew he had no money, no organization, and stood not a ghost of a chance to win the nomination, the truth came out:

“If we unify behind Santorum, it will force Romney to pick him as his running mate – for he’ll know that’s the only way to get our support in the general (election in November).”

That’s the slimy deal behind this. They’ll go for Romney if he goes for Santorum on his ticket. Should we call them Judas Conservatives?

We suspected this all along: Santorum is a stalking horse for Romney. A vote for Santorum is a vote for Romney. Folks in South Carolina need to know this.

The cynical ploy, however, will not work – and not just because the Romney guy rolled his eyes when told about it (Romney has his heart set on Marco Rubio). It’s because there was no unity at this meeting.

The Drudge headline “Social conservatives back Santorum,” is a lie. A majority of the folks there chose Santorum – but there was no agreement that everyone would now get behind their choice. Some will continue backing Perry. A much larger number are now committed to Gingrich as the Not Romney. Others are going to focus on doing whatever they can to see no candidate gets a majority of delegates for a brokered convention.

A brokered convention, by the way, is how Sarah Palin could get the nomination. Or Rick Perry.

So there you have it.

This was a meeting that won’t change the world, that won’t change anything, except to marginalize these “movement” conservative leaders who really don’t care about the fate of America.

They say Perry blew his chance. They have blown theirs.

avagreen on January 15, 2012 at 8:27 PM

SauerKraut537 on January 15, 2012 at 3:59 AM

I am assuming you think everything written in the bible is a lie and not some sort of recorded history. It states in the bible that God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of homosexuality and other depravities. There are many places in the bible where people are steered away from homosexual behavior. It kind of makes sense, doesn’t it? If God wants people to “be fruitful and multiply”, homosexual behavior would kind of interfere with that, I think.

LL1960 on January 16, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Romney is fine with abortions . . .when has he ever said he would make them harder to obtain?

Pragmatic on January 15, 2012

Thank you for setting the record straight.
Born of polygamist family, Mittens wants the “Lost Boys” aborted.
Don’t know who they are?

The Truth Shall Set You Free
Hidden Victims of Mormon Polygamy: The Lost Boys
Most guys tend to think of polygamy instinctively from the point of view of the man with many wives. By doing so, they fail to realize the basic fact that in the system of polygamy, the vast majority of men don’t get any wife at all, because a handful of men are taking multiple young women. In short, for every man with six wives, five men go without.

(snip)

http://tinyurl.com/7zhq86z

It’ the inverse of the ChiCom “one-child” policy.
Enjoy.
I know, I know, facts are stubborn things, eh?

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 16, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Read the article about Mrs. Santorum now at the daily beast and mrdiaite. I was shocked whrn i read it

gerrym51 on January 16, 2012 at 11:55 AM

For those of you asking over and over again if Mormons believe if Jesus IS God…don’t hold your breath for an answer because they don’t want to tell you the truth. Because their answer will support the notion that Mormonism is a cult. They believe that Jesus is a spirit child of the god of this earth and his spirit wife…the devil is also a child of their union. Let me say that again….MORMONS DO NOT BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS GOD…look in the Mormon documents for your answers. Don’t ask Mormons. Their answers are canned to make is sound like they are in line with mainstream Christianity…

Ltlgeneral64 on January 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

That is right folks. If you really want to know what Mormons believe, DON’T ask THEM. Just believe this clown, because he knows more than they do about what they believe. AND (we all know that) Mormons LIE!!!!

Gunlock Bill on January 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Rather late. It just means they did not like him enough earlier to endorse him when he could have used the boost to gain momentum

IMHO, you like someone or you do not. If they were not intending to endorse anyone, why now?

Where did we get the need to endorse one person anyway? It would have been better politics for these religious to make a list of acceptable candidates and therefore signal who were unacceptable. Doubt they are acting on new information, other than the mess created by everyone sitting on a fence until the last minute

entagor on January 17, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5