Encouraged by his near-first-place tie in Iowa on Tuesday, CatholicVote.org has endorsed former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum for president today.
“I’ll be honest, I wanted CatholicVote to endorse him months ago,” CatholicVote.org’s president, Brian Burch e-mailed the group’s 600,000 subscribers Wednesday. “But any endorsement must involve the heart and the brain. And until the last two weeks, it wasn’t clear whether Santorum would get the traction he needed to compete.”
“Last night,” Burch continued, “he put these doubts firmly to rest. Traveling Iowa in a pickup for the past six months, he outlasted his competitors. Rick Perry faded, Herman Cain dropped out, and just hours ago, Michele Bachmann announced that she is suspending her campaign.”
“There’s no doubt it would be thrilling to have a pro-life Catholic president to atone for the years of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden,” tells me in an interview. “If we can help Rick Santorum win, that would be outstanding. If another pro-life or pro-family candidate ultimately wins the nomination, our members have made it clear that they will lend their support to that candidate. But our members have made one thing very clear to us. They want a very passionate pro-life and pro-family president, and right now they believe that person is Rick Santorum.”
The full interview follows.
KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: What besides the obvious changed last night? It’s not like 2008 Iowa Caucus winner Mike Huckabee went on to be president. And he even had a clean win in Iowa.
BRIAN BURCH: People have to remember that Huckabee did very well in 2008. He got a surprise third-place finish in New Hampshire, did great in South Carolina, and lasted longer than Rudy Guiliani, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson. So Huckabee isn’t a bad comparison considering that he was McCain’s last standing challenger.
An advantage that Santorum has over Huckabee is the way the Internet has nationalized this primary. Americans are keeping closer tabs on the nomination race than ever before, and not just voters in early primary states. It’s nationwide. With online political donations now the standard, a candidate can surge (or falter) overnight, while raising funds just as quickly.
Another change from 2008 is the advent of SuperPACs. While the CatholicVote Candidate Fund cannot coordinate with the Santorum campaign, we have the ability to raise unlimited donations to convince Americans that Rick Santorum is the best candidate to support on the issues of life, marriage, and religious liberty.
LOPEZ: What are you saying about the other candidates by endorsing?
BURCH: Primary elections are fundamentally about choices. We could choose to stay on the sidelines, or endorse the candidate we believe has the best record and message to challenge Barack Obama. The process has a way of winnowing down the choices on its own. But we also believe that advocacy groups like ours have a role to play in shaping the opinions of primary voters. And so when it comes to the issues that matter most to the Catholic voters we represent, there simply is no better candidate than Rick Santorum. That’s not to say there aren’t things to like about Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, or Rick Perry. Any of these candidates would be far superior to the current occupant of the White House. But Santorum brings leadership, a record, and a vision that frankly, even Republicans need to hear. And we believe it is essential that his message be maximized.
LOPEZ: What do you bring to the table by endorsing?
BURCH: We set out in 2008 to create a web-fueled new-media movement for Catholic voters. In the process, we were able to create a series of viral ads that helped build a substantial e-mail list along with a growing social-media platform. We currently communicate regularly with over 500,000 e-mail subscribers, and expect that list to grow substantially this year as we deploy new data modeling to identify Catholic voters. The Catholic vote has always been critical to the success of any candidate. We hope to organize and mobilize Catholics more effectively.
Finally, in the end, political campaigns are concerned with the size of your army, and how much money you can raise. Our army of Catholic voters may be small by comparison, but it is as dedicated group, and we intend to mobilize them for Santorum while raising as much money as possible to help him win.
LOPEZ: Catholics don’t really vote as a tribe, do they? Should they?
BURCH: Catholics don’t vote as a tribe, nor should they. When it comes to politics, Catholic social teaching is concerned with the dignity of the human person and the common good, not with a profession of faith. This is because the principles that inform Catholic social teaching are accessible by common human reason, and are not exclusive to Catholics. This means that any person of good will, be they Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, or Jewish, could faithfully represent Catholic voters.
We have been communicating with our members over e-mail and Facebook over the last four or five months as each new candidate rose on the scene. I can tell you that Catholics had no problem supporting Michele Bachmann or Herman Cain or Rick Perry even though none of them is Catholic. Many of them still like lots of what they are hearing and seeing in Ron Paul and Mitt Romney — all of them non-Catholics.
There’s no doubt it would be thrilling to have a pro-life Catholic president to atone for the years of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden. If we can help Rick Santorum win, that would be outstanding. If another pro-life or pro-family candidate ultimately wins the nomination, our members have made it clear that they will lend their support to that candidate. But our members have made one thing very clear to us. They want a very passionate pro-life and pro-family president, and right now they believe that person is Rick Santorum.
Wow, this deserved two posts apparently.
I recall the old days when NRO was treating Romney as a quasi-Catholic victim of Protestant evangelical discrimination. Now they've dropped him like a hot potato. Hilarious. And telling. I guess converts don't count (Newt). Of course to be fair, Newt and morals aren't a natural fit, I'll admit.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHaha.... This is like 2006 all over again when KJL was all-in for Santorum. I didn't think we could get back to that level of desperation, but two posts on the same topic on the same day...
Good grief.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTalking about endorsements, Fortunately Rick Santorum dodged this bullet!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a Catholic, I'm disgusted by this. Santorum is a joke -- the last in the line (the last possible candidate other than Huntsman, who isn't really a Republican anyway) to possibly receive a bump. There's a good reason why the mob went for every bum but Santorum. He's just not at all a big-leaguer. The man should be running for Tuscaloosa County Dog Catcher, not President of the United States. Abortion, gay marriage and (really?) condoms can only get you so far...
I thought my bishops and priests would have a bit more sense than this. Lord knows they can be odd (let them get married, already), but Santorum for prez? Why? Just because he's Catholic? That removes any pretense of thought from Catholics and puts us on the same plane as a black organization backing Jesse Jackson for president. It's just plain not-serious.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNow, seeing a post (delayed by moderation) from a sensible Catholic, I am feeling a little ashamed about my over-the-top, anti-Catholic rant above. (But it was fun.)
And not that there aren't a lot of mostly-sensible people who are Catholics. But Santorum gets on my last nerve, and now, seeing the already-disturbing, stridently-Catholic NR, under the spirtual leadership of Sister K-Lo, celebrating this Catholic PAC in its naked act of political tribalism...well, I guess I want to make the defense of having been provoked.
(This would be a good moment for National Review to discover some maturity and decide that it is a journal of politics and not of Catholicism.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd remember we've been hearing all day now from NRO about how this great Catholic vote in NH is going to make a big impact for Santourm. How many of those Catholics actually vote for the Democrats, anyway? Most Catholics don't agree with Santy's theocratic religious positions, believe me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBrutus, I'm from Tuscaloosa County originally and I wouldn't vote for him.
I honestly think the ideal spot for Santoum would be somewhere in the Vatican. I'm not being snarky. It would be a great spot for him, and he would be right at home (unless the Church ever liberalizes).
Maybe he could hire K-Lo as his secretary.
I'm still waiting, by the way, for her equally breathless announcements that Mormon.org has endorsed Romney, that Evengelical.org has endorsed Perry and that Adulterers.org has endorsed Gingrich.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"I thought my bishops and priests would have a bit more sense than this."
Bishops and priests aren't behind this PAC. It's entirely lay conceived and lay led. It's not endorsed by the Church. So you can have your differences with those involved with Catholic Vote. But those people wouldn't be bishops or priests...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCongratulations to the ecstatic Catholics who, feeling increasingly emboldened to out themselves as soldiers in a single, world-wide army directed from Rome and believing that getting to Heaven (if there were a Heaven) requires the assistance of some be-robed, hocus-pocus-mumbling local representative of the Pope, and aspiring to interfere in the most deeply personal matters of family life (birth control, among others), who now have their own candidate for the U.S. presidency.
So if Catholics want to play openly in politics, they can forget about any immunity from the full nastiness that applies there. (See above. And below.)
All non-Catholics: Remember the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre! Remember the revocation of the Edict of Nantes! Remember the countless thousands of barbarities perpetuated through the centuries by this cult. I wonder what penalties President Santorum will be proposing for citizens caught using birth control. The rack? The wheel? A good roasting at the stake?
We've not seen this kind of robbed boldness since the KKK was suppressed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo I guess you're not a fan of transubstantiation.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAh...good to see that my essential message did not get lost in the subtlety and delicate irony of my remarks. (grin)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour level of hatred is astounding. BTW, the Klan (a white democrat party organization) seems like a natural place for your hatred, as the Klan did indeed target both Catholics and Jews over the decades.
Those darn Catholics, who were the primary drivers behind ending slavery in this country. Perhaps that is your true beef with The Church?
Oh, and I didn't see mention of the Catholics who've been slaughtered for centuries, in every spot on the globe imaginable. In fact, it still goes on, in Egypt, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Sudan, and many other locales.
A few other examples:
- Calvin sought to persecute Roman Catholics so as to keep Protestant believers in the lands divided by the Reformation faithful to his new teachings. He viciously persecuted the Spaniard, Michael Servetus, having him burnt alive on October 27, 1553. As early as 1545, Calvin had written, “If he [Servetus] comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart alive."
- King Henry VIII of England, who took upon himself the role of grand royal inquisitor, took the lives of some 72,000 Catholics, many who were cruelly tortured.
- Queen Elizabeth, proved herself the former’s daughter by putting to death more people in one year than the Inquisition had done in 331 years!
- Britain (Anglican church) seized from Ireland’s producers tens of millions of head of livestock, tens of millions of tons of flour, grains, meat, poultry and dairy products-enough to sustain 18-million persons.”[20]. Note: While the British occupied Northern Ireland millions of Irish Catholics were starving from lack of food not the British.
Gallagher estimates 2 million died from the famine. Writer Chris Fogarty, places the numbers “murdered at approximately 5.16 million, making it the Irish holocaust.” Distinguished legal scholars, like Professors Charles Rice of Notre Dame U. and Francis A. Boyle, U. of Illinois, believe that under International Law, that the British pursued a barbarous policy of mass starvation in Ireland from 1845-50, and that such conduct constituted “genocide.”
But, you are right. The terrible thought of not being able to stick something sharp up a woman's abdomen and kill a live human being is far more worrisome than millions of dead Catholics, right?
I would have to say, it is always interesting to compare barbaric facts from many hundreds of years ago, as you do. However, I also included examples of how this is still happening TODAY...all over the world.
And, let us not forget those terrible Catholic zealots, Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin and Hitler. Lord knows those leftist fascists were doing The Church's work, right? Oh, oops!
The world would have been better off had those listed above been "be-robed", practicing "hocus pocus". Thanks for reading. Now, you can go back to lighting that cross aflame on your neighbor's lawn. But don't you dare get that sheet dirty!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour quite a bigot. Your one saving grace is that your quite an idiot also. Or is all this just a put on for attention? Congratulations, Bill
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought we already did the Catholic President thing? We had Kennedy and he was okay, some of the time. Worked for me but we don't have to do it again any time soon, not even if Mr. Santorum gets the coveted Arlan Specter endorsement.
Yet I must admit that K-Lo, et. al., have succeeded in putting me into a religous mood. I find myself increasing praying for a brokered convention.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEd in Cary... relax ...your spiteful bias is showing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm a faithful Catholic conservative and want to see the Obama regime voted out of office.
I like Santorum's demeanor and his pro life positions but I'm not convinced he is capable of dethroning the Obamanator. We shall see, but I still think Mitt is the most viable candidate to get the job done to save this nation (+16 trillion in debt slave state).
A little primur for your bombastic slanderish behaviour: The intention of Catholic doctrine teaching is directly focused on the common good of humanity ...and yes, that does include living life in this world on a virtuous path that nurtures the hope of heaven..
Brutus, your protest of the Church's marriage position reveals a wayward Catholic. Are you starting your own personal church for 2012? Just checking....
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEd in Cary: You compare the Catholic Church to the KKK, but surely you're aware that the Church was one of the Klan's principal targets and that your rhetoric is straight out of the KKK handbook?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseActually Leo, I don't own a copy of the KKK playbook. But I appreciate your consulting your copy and providing me this information. (I roll my own bile.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCatholic social teaching is concerned with the dignity of the human person and the common good, not with a profession of faith. This is because the principles that inform Catholic social teaching are accessible by common human reason, and are not exclusive to Catholics. So, they're "socialists"?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, some Catholic social policies seem socialist, but really the Catholic social and economic model is different from all the usual profiles. Catholics are pledged to take care of the poor and do not view the poor as somehow having 'earned' their position, but rather view them as Christ said to ('like HIm'--see Christ in them and treat them accordingly). This makes Christianity different from other Faiths. But Catholics economics (it was called 'distributist') totally supports the concept of private property (it can't be taken!) while at the same time saying there can be abuses of private property, especially when it gets large and concentrated, that must be regulated. So Catholics actually can't support the Tea Party free market mania. We must believe in policies that help people get to heaven, not just get rich. I hope I helped to answer your good question.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse