Why do Republican voters have so much trust in their leaders? [We know Dems love their leaders, but this makes sense because Dems love government]
Wh don't Republican voters that Santorum is imperfect. (and so is Romney, Gingrich, Bush, Reagan and fill-in-the-politician)
I remember when they set the perjury trap for Clinton. They used an army of people to secretly tape conversations about his private sex life. Meanwhile, the Republican congress is filled with adulterers and pedophiles.
The Republicans have been playing this game forever. They have built a voting-coalition out of stupid Americans who believe that one group of politicians - namely Republicans - have better values than another group of politicians - namely Democrats.
Here is the terrible truth: all politicians are human. Worse: they are, by virtue of their chosen career, opportunists. This means they lie routinely and methodically to gain and hold power. It's called politics. Reagan was a divorced man who was estranged from his children, yet he preached ceaselessly about the sanctity of Family. He did this because Republicans use values and religion to bait uneducated Americans into the voting booth. [If they were educated, and analytical, they would never buy into this stuff - they would never believe in men like Santorum, Romney, or Gingrich]. Or Reagan, who is a cult figure in Republican circles. [Yup, the most anti-government people in history have as their greatest symbol - wait for it - a government leader. Don't kid yourself: Ronald Reagan was pure Big Government. He raised taxes eleven times and doubled Carter's debt. He grew the Pentagon into a Big Government nightmare, far in excess of what an earlier generation of Republicans would find acceptable]
Indeed, Reagan never stepped foot in church. He passed the country's most liberal Abortion policy as governor of California (and he could have vetoed it with zero political repercussions. But he didn't because he is a politician - an amoral opportunist who preys on uneducated Republican voters). His wife Nancy was a notorious astrology buff who despised organized religion. Yet Reagan claimed to be a Conservative man of God. Republican voters bought it "hook, line, and sinker" . Why? Because they have total faith in their government leaders.
Who will Republican voters trust next? Which current candidate will be their next cult hero?
(don't they know that they are being fooled? Don't they know that their greatest political heroes grew government more than 95% of the presidents in American history? We are still paying for Reagan's failed StarWars, which was more expensive than Carter's budget over 4 years. Have Republican voters ever studied the actual numbers of Reagan and Bush? Did it ever occur to them that this values rhetoric - Bible and Flag, Religion and Patriotism - is merely a trick used to push naive people into the voting booth)
God help us.
Ok, so by your analysis then, it is of course that any above average, average or citizen/civillian with a somewhat trained or un-trained/unschooled character running for that office, in which is found in any man or a woman within their personal lives before hand, is not then ever fit for the job or to hold that office ? Gosh we are done then...........
Is it because they fall short of being perfect, honorable, decent, even Godly enough, patriotic enough and/or etc. before hand ? These canidates, men or women can't suit all that is expected of them ever of course, especially before hand, because there are none perfect, no not one, where as this matters not, because the office has in and of itself (a higher spiritual purpose) that is expected for a man or woman to step into when accepted to that office to honor and obey, and not the opposite, where as a man or woman somehow expects the office to conform to (or) somehow be accepted by him or her based upon their own standards and/or personal agenda's in life.
He or she should leave his or her own personal lives as it were at the door, and must leave his or her bad attributes far behind them when they do take the oath of office finally on that day, but do they do this ? Sometimes, but most times they don't, and that is the rub in which we all experience in a bad way when this happens, and it is happening way to much anymore.
You see the offfice itself holds the character that was formed by two hundred years of service, understandings, policies, blood letting, values, and etc. in which the man or woman is suppose to step into and aquire this character in respect of, where as they are then required to represent in that character "a goodness" that most if not all can except and relate to once they are sworn in. When a man or woman decides that their character is better than the character of the office in which took two hundred years to build, then Houston we have a huge problem.
Sadly, in what we have these days, is men who want to dictate or rule from that office, and this with their personal agenda's, greed, and personal characters involved, thus ignoring the stage that had already been built and set for them over two hundred years prior, in which they swore an oath to uphold & protect. Yet for some crazy reason, when they don't uphold that oath, and thus become a dictator from that office as it were these days, we for some reason allow this or have no power to stop this ? Think about it for a sec.. Let it all just sink in...
In summary: The office of the Presidency has a high standard and character that exist within itself, in which was preset and shaped within the hundreds of years of progress and blood letting that had preceeded that office to date, and what a man or woman is supposed to do when gain that office, is to respect that office highly, and to adopt even it's character in order to do the peoples business for whom do know the character of that office all to well, and when a man or woman decides that he or she will not honor that character and office for which resides within, then we instantly will know and see this, then it is up to us to decide what we need to do as a result of these inactions, come election day 2012.
PS. I would love to think that John Wayne would have been the type of character, that would have assumed that office and it's character fully, and that he would have left his own personal faults at the doorway on that day, thus accepting the role as commander and chief, in which is to be expected in character of our commander and chief by us, thus walking away a changed man from that day forward, to do the business of the nation based upon the character that exist within that office in honor of, and that was built and shaped from over two hundred years of struggles and achievements.
