Alan,
This has been interesting for me to watch as well. I agree that the two Rick's looked like they were in training. I like Santorum enough that I hope he comes back in another election. I think more time and more experience is going to be his friend.
That said, let's look at the other two candidates---Mitt and Newt. This is how I see them stacking up.
Mitt
Pros:
Good leadership abilities
Proven record of turning things around
Good education and understands financial/economical issues
Is able to work in a state of democrats and get things moving
Good values
Proven tract record of conservative voting when it comes to pro-life and gay marriage.
Has made money in the business sector and therefore understands the business sector and how employers employ and why--what helps, what hurts.
Cons:
More moderate when it comes to economical/financial issues. (This is looked at as a pro in some people's minds.)
Doesn't see taxes as the great evil.
Hasn't released his tax records yet.
Used to stand for pro-abortion and then changed.
Used to stand for climate change and then changed.
Now, I look at Newt:
Pros:
He is a really good debater.
Knows his history well.
Has been in leadership and been successful at times.
Stands for conservative issues at times.
Cons:
Was sited for ethics violations and fined (but the books have not been opened as to why and legally can't be leaving everyone in question for what he did.)
Was speaker of the house but booted by his own party for poor leadership.
Has been liberal on several issues and then changed including climate change.
Is morally corrupt in regards to his personal life.
Lobbied for Freddie Mac when Freddie Mac was in the process of destroying our fnancial sector.
Does not think before he speaks.
Now, it appears to me that those who do not trust Mitt, do not trust him on two issues---his past pro-abortion stance and his lack of giving his tax records when they were asked for.
And those who trust Newt have been able to overlook his unethical behavior in the House, his unethical behavior in his personal life, his unethical behavior after he left congress, his flip-flopping on liberal issues as well, and his lack of personal restraint in his comments.
Does this seem rational to you?
To me it reminds me too much of this comment "better that one man should perish than a whole nation dwindle in unbelief."