Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Santorum Called for Federal Ethanol Mandate





Anyone turning on the news these days will be bombarded with reports about higher gas prices and how this effects every aspect of our economy. Governor Palin has made the further connection between energy independence and national security, a sentiment echoed by former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

In fact, all of the candidates have voiced support for energy independence. Gingrich, most notably, has revived his "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" campaign from back in 2008, which called for a substantial increase of drilling opportunities by opening up areas currently closed off by federal law, encourage more exploration and innovation and offering tax credits "to accelerate maximum efficiency in energy use and to accelerate the replacement of inefficient systems with more modern, more efficient systems."  His goal is to bring gas down to at least $2.50 per gallon:

If we want less expensive gasoline, then we have to demand the policies that will increase the supply of oil and reduce its cost.

If we want a reliable energy policy that reduces our dependence on foreign dictatorships, then we have to demand greater use of American resources and American technology.

If we want these changes to come before we are blackmailed or bankrupted by foreign dictatorships, then we must demand that politicians cut through the red tape, change the bureaucracy, and get the job done.

Another presidential candidate had an energy proposal back in 2008 as well. Former Senator Rick Santorum’s ideas, however, went an entirely different direction. Rather than increasing production, his solution was to "reduce US oil appetite" in an article he wrote, titled, "Reducing U.S. oil appetite This is one cause that could be helped by smart mandates and taxing":

Across Pennsylvania, farmers are also digging and planting corn and other crops that will be turned into ethanol that can replace gasoline in our cars. Most cars in America can’t run on ethanol, however, so who is going to install ethanol pumps at the gas station without the cars to run on it? At this point I would say to all of my hard-core conservative friends: Hold on to your hats.

What we need is a government mandate! We need to mandate that all cars sold in the United States, starting with the 2010 model year, be "flex-fuel vehicles" – that is, they should be able to run on a blend that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (the so-called E85 blend), or even a coal-derived methanol/gas mixture. This mandate would cost a fraction of the new fuel economy standard with the added benefit of saving barrels more oil.

Yes…that’s right. Santorum’s answer to the energy crisis…was corn. His response was to force car manufacturers to build vehicles that would rely on 85% ethanol…ie, a corn byproduct. (And yes, I’m aware that Gingrich supports ethanol (not mandating it, just exploring it as an option), an issue with which I strongly disagree with him.)

It seems an odd response from someone who says that on principle they don’t agree with the government meddling in the private sector, doesn’t it? So, he says he opposed the car company bailout because he didn’t like the government interfering in the private sector, but he’s A-okay with the government mandating all vehicles be ethanol-friendly?

With all due respect, Senator, I think this is the wrong way to go. Rather than "reducing our oil appetite", I believe as Governor Palin and Newt Gingrich do…that yes, innovation is coming, but that we must acknowledge the reality that we are a society wed to fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.

Our energy security depends on us acknowledging that reality. Either we open up our own exploration on our own land, or be bound to dictatorships and regimes that will use energy as a weapon against us.

We already have the left living in a fantasy world when it comes to our energy needs. They’re the ones who like to mandate things to try to shift society to their way of thinking. We don’t need folks on our side of the issue following suit.

 

PS.  How many people were aware that Santorum urged for a federal ethanol mandate in 2008?  I wasn’t until the other day.  It seems Governor Palin has once again been proven prescient in her call for continued vetting of all the candidates.

 

 



Tags: , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • http://lenbilen.com/ Lennart Bilén

    I just checked the price of corn. It is $ 7.82 a bushel.
    One bushel of corn makes 2.5 gallon of ethanol
    That makes the feedstock price to make ethanol $3.13 a gallon. Add to that 50 cents to make the stuff and distribute it and the price per gallon is $ 3.63.
    Since the heat content of ethanol is 70% of gasoline the gasoline equivalent price of ethanol is $ 5.11.
    Over five bucks a gallon for ethanol! And that is before profit, blending, selling and taxes!
    That’s the good news.
    For the people that are worried about CO2 the bad news is:
    To make corn you have to use 150 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per acre. It takes the equivalent of 0.15 gallons of gasoline to produce one pound of nitrogen fertilizer. That comes to the equivalent of 22.5 gallons of gasoline to fertilize one acre. One acre of corn yields about 150 bushels of corn.
    The fuel spent to produce one bushel of corn is therefore more than 0.15 gallons of gasoline. Since it also involves sowing, preparing the soil, cultivating, pesticides, phosphate fertilizer and harvesting it takes 0.25 gallons of fuel to produce one bushel of corn.
    Here comes the kicker: When you ferment sugar into alcohol half the weight disappears as CO2! Let us examine the formula: C6H12O6 + Zymase ? 2C2H5OH + 2CO2
    The molecule weight of C2H5OH is 46 and the molecule weight of CO2 is 44.
    Well almost half anyway.
    Let us assume you have a car that gets 25 miles to the gallon and you drive 100 mile on pure gasoline. You have used 4 gallons of gasoline.
    Now take the same car and drive 100 miles with a 10% ethanol mix, mandated by the EPA. Remember, they are concerned about CO2.
    The ethanol has only 70% of the heat content of gasoline so the gas mileage will be lower. In addition the car’s computer was set at the stoichiometric point or leaner for pure gasoline so it will be a few percent less efficient. Add it all together and you will get 24 miles to the gallon at best.
    So you consumed 3.75 gallons of gasoline and .375 gallons of ethanol, for a total of 4.125 gallons. We have all experienced this drop in gas mileage. And this is best case.
    What about CO2 up in the air? In the gasoline case we produced 4 gallons worth of CO2.
    In the ethanol mix case we produced 4.125 gallons worth of CO2.
    Add to that another .375 gallons worth of CO2 from the fermentation, and another .0375 gallons worth of CO2 to produce the corn in the first place.
    The sum total is 4.5375 gallons worth of CO2, or about 11.35% more than in the gasoline only case.
    But corn does absorb CO2 when it grows! Doesn’t that count?
    Corn is one of the worst crops for soil erosion and uses up other nourishments that will not be used if you make ethanol of it. Granted the cattle are happy for the cakes that are left when the sugar is removed.
    In this age of looming food shortages nearly any other use of available tillable soil is to be preferred over ethanol production.
    Oh, and one more thing. Assume that pure gasoline is 4 dollars a gallon at the pump.
    Unsubsidized 10% ethanol blend should be $5.80 a gallon.
    But we subsidize the ethanol production so the price is still 4 dollars a gallon at the pump.
    If we used pure gasoline the hundred mile trip would cost sixteen dollars.
    If we paid full price for the ethanol blend we would pay $ 17.75 for the trip and produce 11.35% more CO2.
    We are really paying $ 16.50 for the trip, produce 11.35% more CO2 and leave a bill of $1.25 for our grandchildren to pay, plus accrued interest.
    This is EPA legislation at work.

    • pete4palin

      As a corn producer,  I can tell you your facts are 99% garbage.   The problem comes when media sorces with no agriculltural background writes stories using "facts" from non-friendly agicultlural sources.
      Corn is going to be grown regardless wether it’s used for ethanol or not because it’s profitable to do so. This is a good thing for consumers.  Sweet corn which people eat, of course is not used for ethanol.
      These plants will continue to produce ethanol regardless of mandates, because it’s profitable…. especially with highher gas prices.  And that’s the important thing to take away here. American know how… American can do spirit…  getting the job done and running the country without the need to bow down for the Arabs. 
      If people are interested in getting real facts about this topic…  there are pro-American farmer news sorceses that will give a ballenced and factual approach.  
      The more ethanol will use…. the less we import and all that profit stays right here in the heart of the country.     Buy American…   it works.        

      • Freempg

        Pete, seen any of this activity in your neighborhood?

        http://gulagbound.com/14976/soros-buying-heavily-into-american-grain-elevators/

        • pete4palin

          That’s news to me. 
          The thing of it is,  in the past few decades, there has been the trend in agriculture for greater consolidation in the processing end. So something like this is becoming more possible and more hurtfull to farmers who seek the best free market price for their crops.  There is a huge tremendious disconect between what farmers recieve, and what consumers pay for their food.       

          • Freempg

            Pete, keep an eye on this site, she is great. Watches ags and cattle like a hawk.
             
            http://barnhardt.biz/ 

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Randall-Pickard/100003011397298 Randall Pickard

        Actually, no "continued vetting" was needed. Just reading what’s been out there for a long time.  Club for Growth says:

        In early 2011, Santorum said, “Prior to 9/11, I was not a big fan of ethanol subsidies, but 2001 change[d] my mind on a lot of things, and one of them was trying to support domestic energy and this is part of it." 
        The evidence does show that Santorum was opposed to ethanol before 9/11.  Twice, in 1997 and 1998, Santorum voted to end ethanol subsidies.    And the evidence also shows that, at times, he was supportive of an ethanol mandate after 9/11.  

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JEMIRSUTVBDVULQ6Q56JI5VCWU N0

        So you won’t be upset when all of the Tax Code Tricks and Treats go away?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JEMIRSUTVBDVULQ6Q56JI5VCWU N0

      Citations please.  Where exactly did you find this? 

      I am inclined to eliminate ALL TRICKS & TREATS from the tax code and other regs… and…

      see where the FREE MARKET produces energy

      • http://lenbilen.com/ Lennart Bilén

        I did the calculations myself. The date was Apr 11 2011.
        http://everestlancaster.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/in-this-are-of-skyrocketing-food-prices-and-ahortages-get-rid-of-ethanol-as-a-fuel/

        I realize that since then the market exchange price of crn is down to 6.45/bushel and that the ethanol subsidy is not renewed.
        I got the best numbers I culd out of what I know about producing corn. I live in Lancaster County, PA, the cuntry in the nation with the largest agricultural output for a non-irrigated county. I stand by my numbers.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JEMIRSUTVBDVULQ6Q56JI5VCWU N0

           I actually think the cost of using corn for fuel is much greater than you have calculated.

          Did you consider the increase in food prices? Did you consider the expense related to the diversion of capital from more productive activities (and the overall cost of all the subsidies (Tax Treats) and regulation changes required). Did you consider the damage caused to all of the cars, boats, planes and other power tools when the mixed fuel was used – I have heard of some major engine damage.

          We should all realize the CO2 arguments as straw men. There is absolutely no way man can overcome the influence of all the volcanoes in producing CO2… and more CO2 makes what plants we have grow faster and bigger. And the EPA knows this.

          I might suggest you visit wattsupwiththat.com and search the archives… as i think this was debated quite a bit on that site… 

  • stlouisix

    Gov. Palin cannot stay out of the fray in the face of the abysmal candidates running!

    • ramorywebb

      Palin voted for " the cheerful one".  Doesn’t that tell us where to focus our energy?

      • SarahFan

        only if you are a sheep.

        • http://conservatives4palin.com/ Mary Beth House

          I don’t think that’s a fair response. It’s reasonable to consider why Governor Palin chose Newt above the others and give due respect to that process.

          • SarahFan

            We should not be robots and do whatever we are told by someone else to do. This cult of personality worship is wrong. I love and respect Sarah but I will never stop thinking for myself and come to my own conclusions. I see a bit of "Sarah said or did this or that so we must do the same" that is giving up one’s own observation and rationalization for the authority of another. I agree with Mark Levin on the candidates. Rick is my 1st selection, Newt second and Romney against Obama if it comes to that. I am not of the mind that it’s everything Rick and everything Newt is bad. None of them excite me, they are not Sarah, so we have to pick the best we can get at this time. You don’t see Mark Levin just doing whatever Sarah does and waiting for a direction from her, he thinks for himself and logically. I am seeing a lot of drama here when someone has their candidate and the viewpoint is "my guy is great and the other guy is bad" it is really childish and embarassing. Focus on the goal, drop the drama.

            • http://conservatives4palin.com/ Mary Beth House

              I agree.  I don’t support a cult of personality.  I didn’t see anyone advocating for the over the top worship you’re describing.

              But this is a Palin support site.  So we’re going to take her words and her thoughts and give strong consideration to it here.

              • SarahFan

                Look I’m with you but I’ve been reading a lot of the posts here in the last couple of days and it’s getting depressing. There are many "attacks" on Rick and a few on Newt. Neither one of them are our problem. One could come up with justifiable reasons against Rick or Newt but they are a waste of time to focus myopically on them. They are each less than half behind Romney, who is a complete fake, in the delagate count unless one is secretly wanting Romney to get it what purpose does it serve to knock down either Newt or Rick. NONE OF THEM ARE SARAH AND WILL BE IMPERFECT ok, let’s admit that and get on with what needs to be addressed which is Romney 1st and then Obama.

                • http://www.911dj.com Greg Legakis

                   I like your way of thinking.

                  • SarahFan

                    Thanks

            • Freempg

              SarahFan, the "cult of personality" thing goes without saying. We are not Democrats.

        • ramorywebb

          Now I am really confused. So you are a Palin fan,  yet are not willing to support her " good judgemement" in getting behind a candidate that she beleives in. ( presuming that Palin votes her convictions as to who is best to bring " sudden and relentless reform to DC).

          I suppose being a " fan" allows for certain lattitudes whereas being a supporter requires conviction and loyalty. 

          And Romney marches on. 

          • Independantminded

            I think what they were saying is they listen to the input from Sarah but make up their own mind on who to support like everyone should.

        • cabensg

          That’s why I did my homework and long before Palin decided anything I knew Gingrich was the only person to get the job done. His 21st Century Contract with America can be as successful and his original Contract with America while speaker. That Todd endorsed him and Palin voted for him in a primary is certainly icing on my cake.

          This is what leadership looks like. Actual plans that the others are now trying to copy because they have none of their own.

          http://www.newt.org/

  • palin45potus

    What is the morality in burning perfectly good food for fuel?

    • Betsey_Ross

      It’s insane to use food stuffs for gas.  Absolutely insane.  Drill here, drill now!!!!!  Bring it on, Sarah. 

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

        Well, food is food, food is "energy" for the body. There is no morality that is against using food for car energy. The problem is that it isn’t effective and cheap energy for gas, and there is no global warming from which to flee from. Ergo, lets drill down, drill here. 

      • pete4palin

        It’s not insane…   it’s profitable.  And we need to thank the American farmer for giving us the ability to feed the world and our cars.    That’s called good-ol American know how. 

        • Betsey_Ross

          Well, yes we can do that, feed the world and gas up our cars, but the price for corn is steadily increasing.  Ask the Mexicans who are not happy with higher prices. They have been rioting in the streets.   We can feed the world, but they can’t pay for it.  Corn isn’t cheap anymore because the supply has been diminished by making ethanaol which doesn’t turn out to be that wonderful.   

          Ethanol is difficult to transport and requires special handling all causing it to be more expensive.  For prolonged cold periods it has proven that it will freeze.  Not good if you live in MN and drive a school bus or any vehicle for that matter.  That means that we need more "blends".  Also not cheap because we do not have  enough refineries to deal with that.  So the price goes up for awhile and never seems to return to the place it was.  It always marches upward. 

          We do not have a coherent energy policy in this country .  Using corn is not the answer or any plant material that humans and animals eat.  Now that would upset the geo-political system, as the riots in Mexico show.  It would also upset the eco-system for the amounts of plant material that we would need to suppliment oil.  See if you can get that by the EPA.  We just don’t have the technology or the path way yet to make this green energy happen no matter how much money Obama pours into it.  They knew when throwing money at Solyndra that the techonology was flawed and that it would fail.  We aren’t even close.  Government interference isn’t going to help at all.  It has to be done privately. 

          When will it happen?  IDK.  It won’t be in the next 20 years.  Economically we are not growing.  No research until we find our heads above water.  Right now we are about to drown.  Obama has set us back for a very long time.  Meanwhile using food stuffs is insane.  We can’t afford it.

        • Independantminded

          It is pretty hard to argue with people who have never been around agriculture and haven’t the slightest clue how it really operates

    • irishcoins

       The main problem with ethanol is it reduces the supply of corn for food, and thus, drives up the price of food.

    • pete4palin

      The morality is this…     The corn we (people) eat is called sweet corn. This is not used for fuel.  The corn animals eat is called field corn.  That is the corn that is used for many things including fuel.  Not only that, but after this corn is boiled down to get the ethanol (moonshine) two thirds of the orginal corn is still available for the animals to eat. This is in the form of mash which can be eaten as is.  Other than the sugars, very little of the food value of the ANIMAL CORN is actually in the fuel.
          

      • colliemum

        pete4palin – what you say is all true, and if farmers get more profit from using field corn for ethanol production, that’s fine.

        However – what do you think would happen if, as Santorum proposed, all US cars are mandated to use bio-ethanol? 
        How much field corn would be needed? How many acres would be needed to be used to produce that much field corn? 
        Remember – Santorum proposed a mandate for all US cars.

        I think politicians must keep out of mandating this, that and the other, especially in regard to ‘green’ renewables.
        If it is profitable then entrepreneurs will do it. If it isn’t, mandates will destroy business, small enterprises, and affect the money everybody has left after taxes, to spend on things they need.

        ‘Green’ politics are shown all over the world to be hugely detrimental to the economy. 
        We’ve been on the receiving end of such policies here on the UK for some years now, and are paying with job losses in industry, with reduction of incomes, destruction of wildlife – and deaths of older people because they cannot afford to pay the mandated ‘green’ taxes on their energy bills.

        • pete4palin

          Well the purpose of the mandates were to open up the markets and force the oil companies to let suppliers and consumers have a choice to begin with.  The tax credits were given to help this industry start and based on the same tax credits that the oil industry gets. Now what happens in the future, should and will be detirmed by the free market.
          Agriculture gets attacked from many sides. But if anybody wants to read news from a pro-aagriculture point of view…  it would be well worth one’s time.  Here’s just one general sorce that I recomend. 
          http://www.farmjournal.com  

        • Independantminded

          The mandate is that they are capable to run on E85, any individual car owner can put whatever they want into the tank. Myself I support the farmer more then the oil companies.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FTGJNWTIRG3KR3HENP4SKCLPEY Jules

    Rick Santorum has always been and will always be a big government RINO whose policies will make Ron Paul SCREAM.
    But he understand how to play the game with conservatives: Play the FAITH CARD and they will support you. For most conservatives, social conservatism comes first and well before fiscal conservatism. They will support the social conservative that panders to their faith before the fiscal conservative that actually provides them economic freedom and liberty.

    If anything this primary season is telling me, it’s NOTHING has changed in conservative land: It’s always about who is the most social conservative…All the 2010 Tea Party fiscal outrage was just a facade.

    Any Tea Party patriot that supports Rick Santorum is a hypocrite that should never outcry fiscal restraint…

    • Freempg

      You’re right on Jules. Romney, of course, is no social conservative, but plays one on the campaign trail which appears to be good enough. Santorum at least has street cred in that regard, but it amounts to the rope he will hand the liberals with which they will hang him in the general election. The GOPE is so insane we may end up with a Romney/Santorum ticket — a 1%er and a religious nut. Like shooting ducks in a barrel for the libs. I have warned against this ticket for months. I can see it coming. Rick will combine delegates to put Mitt over the top in exchange for a VP slot in a heartbeat. One thing we must all remember and keep repeating until hell won’t have it: Once the delegates set foot on the convention floor, they are not bound to any candidate, according to Rule 38, not even in the first round. If they go along with a ticket such as this, it’s like signing a suicide pact.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FTGJNWTIRG3KR3HENP4SKCLPEY Jules

         Most social conservatives cannot see past their Christian faith…and always vote their religion. That’s what’s wrong with the Republican base….All this Tea Party outrage is just a facade. When it comes time to choose, it’s all about who is the most religious candidate… There is no way a concerned American votes for Rick Santorum because he won’t be balancing any budget. He is no different than the RINO we have in Congress…He is a "Yes man" type of guy that will do exactly what the GOP leaders ask him to do…

        • Freempg

          I’m with you Jules, but for the Tea Party being a facade. The Democrats were eviscerated at the state level in 2010 thanks to the Tea Party, of which I consider myself a member. I am a man of faith with "a strong libertarian streak." I don’t have a religion per se, I am Catholic by birth, as is Governor Palin. I loathe those who wear their religion on their sleeve. They usually do so for personal gain, are stone throwers, and usually hypocrites. With that said, I would vote for Santorum before I would vote for Romney, he being afflicted of an even deadlier disease — liberalism.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

          Santorum is a Catholic though, and Catholics only represent maybe 21 percent of the entire population. One can assume that half or more probably aren’t practicing either. Santorum has been losing the Catholic vote to Romney over and over, but it has been Evangelicals who have gone to Santorum. I don’t think it is "voting their religion." I think it is voting their perception of religion, because they are desperate for a "godly" candidate. The issue of abortion, which is indeed a very important issue, also gets emphasized because they think the "godly" candidate will do something about it. But Santorum does not represent their theological views in the slightest, and the Catholics lean moderate to democrat every election cycle. It was Santorum who endorsed Specter both for President in 1995 (and t hat was an infamously pro-abortion campaign) and for Senate in 2004. You can’t expect him to do anything major with regards to abortion since he’s never done much that has been quite major. Only Newt, the "immoral" candidate with the ex-wives, actually has a significant plan regarding abolishing abortion.

          • Freempg

            Ricardo, and in the theater of the absurd that is the GOPE primaries of 2012, the Catholic vote went to Romney in Michigan or was it Ohio … I lose track of these things, but the point remains.

      • friskyness

         Never happen.  Romney will not select Santorum as VP!  He will select a sitting governor.

        • Freempg

          Frisky, you missed my point. If Romney does not have a majority of delegates to win in the first round of voting at the convention, he will sell his soul to Satan, if he hasn’t already, to get enough votes to get over the top. Santorum, a failed politician, who probably won’t be able to deliver his own state, will have the delegates to cede to Romney in exchange for the VP slot. This assumes Romney cannot win enough delegates pre-convention, which looks more and more likely and feeds into the Governor’s strategy that there be a brokered convention.

          Santorum’s delegates added to Romney’s will but Romney over the top. Romney will agree to the failed politican Santorum as VP. Look for both of them to be standing, hands held high, with plastic smiles, on stage as balloons and confetti drop. They will be like sheep to the slaughter, delivered by yours truly, the GOPE.

          • colliemum

            You’ve only got to look at what the ‘coalition’ government here in the UK has achieved in the nearly two years in office. The liberal "Liberal democrats" are wagging the Tory dog. The policies enacted have more to do with appeasing a socialist electorate (Labour,Liberals) than with conservative policies.

            We’re already there, where a Romney/Santorum ticket will lead you. 
            A few of us warned a few of you about what Obama’s policies would look like, having experienced the socialist policies of Tony Blair.
            Heed our warnings now and work all out to prevent such a ticket.
            I’m preaching to the choir here, I do know that – but you have friends and acquaintances who don’t come to this site, but need to hear this, so tell them!

  • http://profiles.google.com/ajtelles Art Telles

    I’ve changed my "we the people" mind…

    - After mulling it over for a while about the articulate, as Sarah Palin called him, Newt "cheerful one" Gingrich…

    - After watching the 4 part video of the speech titled "Newt Gingrich Speaks to Wake County GOP"…
    >> Part 1 – http://youtu.be/rpa4aCiP1Cw

    I will be voting for Newt Gingrich instead of Rick Santorum in the primary in New Mexico.

    Why?

    To apply the "an idea whose time has come" phrase to this political
    season, my heartfelt conclusion is that maybe the time has come for the
    ONLY man with ideas who knows how to articulate the emotion behind the
    ideas that "we the people" also feel.

    Maybe Rick Santorum should wait until 2020 to pursue the Presidency
    when he is able to articulate his honorable emotions with focused
    coherency.

    Well.

    Go for it Newt Gingrich…
    … all the way to the "we the people" White House Gingrich/West… or whomever Gingrich taps for V-Potus.

    Art

    • alien4palin

      Thanks for the link. Excellent speech as always. I have followed his political career and his track record since President Reagan’s second term in the white house. He is a brilliant debater, great track record, vast experience and understanding in the working of government and a reformer. Although as a reformer, the odds are very much against him. You need control of all branches of federal government for real and lasting reform.

      He spent most of his working life in DC but always an outsider.

  • irishcoins

    So did Gov. Chrispie, and took plenty of money from the ethanol lobbyists.

  • Freempg

    Santorum, just another central planner.

  • Reynolds88

    Ricky-boy won Iowa on that little known endorsement of Corn based Ethanol subsidy.
    Who knew?

  • RightMom

     What Santorum talked about was not an individual mandate.  It was regulatory and it was in response to our dependency on foreign oil and the mileage mandates made by our government. Actually, it made sense.  Santorum didn’t support ethanol mandates, that was Newt’s forte.  What he was doing was trying to wean us from the likes of Chavez

    Mary Beth, Newt Gingrich called for a federal individual mandate on health care with a penalty of non compliance of 150,000 dollars per person.    Did you know THAT? 

    Gingrich is not liked.  Among Ohio Republicans who voted, 63% said they would be happy if Santorum were the nominee, 58% said they would be happy with Romney and only 48% said they would be happy with Gingrich as the nominee.  And these are the republicans!  Nationally, among all voters, Newt’s likability is in the toilet.  Newt also loses by the biggest margin to Obama.

    Newt Gingrich and those who support him have handed the nomination to Romney, just as I predicted.  Sometimes being right really sucks.
     

    • http://conservatives4palin.com/ Mary Beth House

      I didn’t say Santorum talked about an individual mandate.  I said he promoted a federal mandate and higher taxes with regard to ethanol.  And no, it does not make sense.  I do not support a federal mandate requiring we all use ethanol friendly vehicles.  I support as the Governor and Newt do…a massive expansion in our own natural resource development.

      And yes, RightMom, I am aware that in the past, Newt called for an individual mandate in health care.  He even originally supported the idea of Mittcare. But as he saw the problems that came along with the individual mandate and the necessary loss of freedom, he changed his position away from a mandate.  You can read about that here:  http://www.newt.org/answers

      As for your claim that Santorum did not call for an ethanol mandate… I’m sorry.  You obviously did not read Santorum’s article.  He very explicitly called for a federal mandate for ethanol.  I bolded his words above.

      Santorum is a talker.  He’s also a Bush Republican who embraces "compassionate conservatism" and rejects "radical individualism".  His words. 

      He was a good soldier for Bush and did what he was told.  And he lost by the biggest margin in Pennsylvania history.

      • pete4palin

        I find this discussion very interesting. What it shows is how powerful the anti-agriculture interests are at getting their propaganda out to the public.
        The reason for the mandates in the first place, was the oil companies were not allowing farm owned co-op access to fuel stations. They were preventing free enterprise and the ability of consumers  to have a choice.  The government steped in to open the markets up. This is how it started! 
        Now that the system has accepted a new sorce of gas for consumers to choose from and oil companies even own their own ethanol plants…    we can do without the mandates.  
        When talking about food, read from sorces that are pro-food.  You’ll get a much better view of it all.   

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FTGJNWTIRG3KR3HENP4SKCLPEY Jules

       Newt is not liked by social conservatives because of his past spouses sin, PERIOD… With all this outcry about fiscal restraint, Newt is the ONLY Republican that has balanced budget 4 straight years as Leader of Congress…But for Religious nut conservatives, it does not matter: He cheated on his wives so it does not matter how he can balance budgets and start another economic boom. It’s all about faith and religion even if the ocuntry is falling into a cliff.

      I am really having it with the social conservatives that cannot see past their Christian beliefs. Just why do we even vet candidates if the more religious guy always end up winning anyway? What was the purpose of the Tea Party fiscal outrage in 2010? To rally behind a well known big government RINO because he is a good Christian family man?

      Just how is Newt helping Romney? Without Newt, Romney would have won South Carolina then Florida and it would be all over. Newt winning SC kept this thing going. If anyone is helping Romney, it’s the unwillingness, inability of social conservatives to forgive Newt for his past sins and realize that he is the only candidate that actually balanced budgets nationally…
      Had social conservatives rallied around Newt in Florida and MI and OH, Newt would have won them all…and be the candidate to beat.

      • cabensg

         If your truly a Christian you should understand contrition, forgiveness and amends.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JEMIRSUTVBDVULQ6Q56JI5VCWU N0

       I would very much appreciate some back up to your statement…

      "Mary Beth, Newt Gingrich called for a federal individual mandate on
      health care with a penalty of non compliance of 150,000 dollars per
      person.    Did you know THAT? "

      Where exactly did you find that?

      • cabensg

        This is the oldest news I’ve ever come across on a comment section. Just Google it. Type in Gingrich and American heritage foundation pull support for individual mandate.

        It’s been explained and gone through ad nauseum ever since Iowa on just about every conservative website you can name.

    • onparade

      why did sarah vote for him then…..

    • cabensg

       I live in Ohio and the Republicans are a bunch of followers. Romney is their man and it makes me sick.

      Gingrich hasn’t handed Romney the nomination and he’d better stay in until the convention because he’s the only one capable of even beginning to fix the mess this country has come to.

      Sorry Mom but you are way behind with your facts on the individual mandate. Even a cursory look around would give you the correct information.

      As for Newt not being liked how could he be when the people who don’t like him only listen to establishment Republicans or the liberal press. The lazy uninformed don’t worry me because if Newt gets the nomination he will school them, they will get it, they will like him and they will vote for him.

    • Independantminded

      Newts negative rating is more then 60%, if he is the nominee it will be a landslide for O of epic proprtions. He plays well to the base but that is about it.

  • Yankee4Palin

    Virginia born. raised and resident  Santorum has spent too much of his life
    in the belt way area and is out of touch.

    Our fuel situation is simple.  We have more oil than we know what to do with.
    Why is Santorum talking corn when he should follow Sarah’s &  Newt, push for the Canada - Gulf pipe line.
    More areas in Alaska, off the coasts oil in may areas of America.

    And Santorm talks about corn?  Who on his K St. is pushing his buttons..  This person is not ready for prime time

    • cabensg

      Your right there.The vetting has only begun on Santorum.

      Gingrich was right this should have been between him and Romney. If not for millions and millions of Romney ads filled with lies Gingrich probably would have won Florida.

      Who was talking about gas prices? The press, Romney, Santorum. None of them were talking about or even thought to take it to Obama. Who has Obama had to answer to about this? Gingrich. Now everybody’s talking about it like this was all important before.
      This is what leaders do. They don’t let others control the narrative they start and control the narrative.

      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/8/mitt-beat-rick-but-newt-beat-barack/

  • http://twitter.com/JECarter4 James Carter

    Santorum also wanted a conservation mandate: 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=raf2fWseWqE

    • Reynolds88

      Oh yah, and he throws up at JFK, wants to outlaw TOTUS (big yuck yuck there) and well the list goes on.  He is "spontaneous" but in the presidential race that means spontaneous combustion.  Think before you exchange feet in the mouth. 

      Not to mention the Trapp Family (Santorum) singers who have to stand stick tall for up to 45 minutes as he recites platitudes and makes his speeches (saw this pathetic display at CPAC 2012).  Rick, leave the kids at home, we aren’t trying to fill the white house with a family, we want a president thats all.  Someone who didnt lose his last election by 19% as an incumbent.

  • Laddie_Blah_Blah

    I had narrowed it down to Newt and Santorum, but I have crossed Santorum off that list. Newt is now the only remaining hopeful I could vote for.

    Just saw the REELZ broadcast of "The Undefeated". None of this GOP crop can hold a candle to Sarah. Watching what Sarah endured at the hands of the Alinsky left and the corrupt establishment right just infuriated me, all over again. She exposes them all as the intellectual and moral dwarves that they are, a towering giant packaged in a petite lady among small men sporting over-sized egos.

    • 01_Explorer_01

      I’m still hoping for the contested convention route myself.  I have to support Sarah if she gets in but it a free country for you to support whomever you want.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JEMIRSUTVBDVULQ6Q56JI5VCWU N0

    Discus Is Flaky

  • HuntingMoose

    ================================================================

    The only vetting I care about is the vetting of the worst candidate, that is, Obama

    ================================================================

    without Sarah, to me, the other 4 are all, whatever, you can wake me up if you have a picture of one of them with bloody knife and a dead body next to them but short of that, whatever is in their closet, it does not come close on anything in Obama’s closet that need to be cleaned out and shown to the world.

    please focus on things that really matter. defeat Obama. by who of the 4, how much I care about that is insignificant compared with the defeat of Obama come November.

    • http://conservatives4palin.com/ Mary Beth House

      The goals are not mutually exclusive.

      Yes we must continually hit Obama and his failed agenda and radical background. But we must also ensure that we put the right person forward to challenge him. 

  • watchdogmom

    I’d like to see them debate and vetted until the cows come home! Dirty ads? Well people,do your own research,find out the truth on these polished politicians. The media is doing a real good job shoving corrupt Romney down our throats. Find out Romney’s connection to one Ed Falcone? Also, Communist-GHW Bush-whom refers to Americans as "useless eaters" I don’ care for any of these candidates and am praying for a brokered convention.

  • Jesse_Cornish

    Has anyone went to the grocery store lately? Have you ever seen the price of just about everything skyrocket? It is because of an ethanol mandate. 

    http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2011-02-09-corn-low_N.htm

    No matter what others may say, the free market did not determine this. Government regulations did. We have no reason to use inefficient ethanol when the solution, such a simple solution, as advocated by Governor Palin, is to simply go get what we already have! It is like sitting on a stash food when you are starving to death, afraid you might waste it all. 

    Yes, it takes hard work. Yes, it takes time and patience. It will take determination. But we can reap the rewards for decades. All we have to do is to go and get what is already ours. And if we did, there would be no demand for ethanol, as there would be no need for it.

    • pete4palin

      No it’s not.   You’re reading articles written by people who know nothing about agriculture what so ever.
      The number one factor in the cost of food is not what the farmer gets for it, but what the transportation costs are. And as I hve pointed out earlyer, the corn we eat is called sweet corn. The corn animals eat  and which is used for other things is called field corn.  Sweet corn is not used for fuel.
      I can see we need an Ag 101 class here. 

      • Jesse_Cornish

        I’m not a farmer but I can understand that farmland not used for growing grain for human or animal consumption (food for animals eventually feeds people anyway) but instead for ethanol production will cause the supply for food grain to go down, while demand for food grain continually rises. Therefore, the price of food will go up.

        The demand for ethanol is artificial. It is a result of federal mandate. The true solution to the problem is to drill for own oil and tap into our own resources.

  • 01_Explorer_01

    Just to be far someone needs to put an article up about fat b.

  • stlouisix

    Let me be perfectly clear here. 

    My concern is who I support, not who I’m told to support by anyone!

    It is fact that the best individual, the complete package, who could defeat the two biggest obstacles to freedom in America in order of priority: 1) The GOPE RINOS who enable Obama, and 2) Obama, is the reflection in Sarah Palin’s mirror!

    • SarahFan

      You can’t hear me but I am clapping right now.

  • westernhunter

    Thank you Mary Beth

  • http://www.911dj.com Greg Legakis

    I still prefer Santorum over the others.  I don’t trust Romney.

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets