, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dr. Jack Wheeler was there.  Here’s his take on it.

Santorum Revealed as 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.

This article was written by Dr. Jack Wheeler of To The Point News. The Wall Street Journal called Wheeler “the originator of the Reagan Doctrine”. The Washington Post called him “The Indiana Jones of the Right”. Izvestiya, the organ of the Soviet Communist Party, called him an “ideological gangster”.

Visit To The Point here.