After 13 years of tireless work, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that fresh milk is 150 times more dangerous than pasteurized milk.

It’s hard to imagine just where we would be as a nation if the Federal Government wasn’t devoting decades of research to come up with arbitrary statistics on the benefits of avoiding bacteria.

In North Carolina, state inspectors have been examining school lunchboxes to ensure parents give their kids the foods the state deems appropriate. If one of these food cops determines a lunch is inappropriate, they order the kid not to eat it and instead feed him cafeteria mush.

President Obama is now trying to take this food policing nationwide, pushing for regulations on what can go in school vending machines. It’s one thing for the state to get involved, but why can’t the feds keep their hands off what school kids eat for lunch?

The answer:  Because, from the inner policies of churches to what kind of car you drive, our federal government knows what’s best for us. Just keep quiet and follow the orders of the faraway experts, America!

Maybe our Ruling Elite need to go back to third grade math class and learn basic principles like if you spend more money than you take in, you will go into debt.

Read about the Obama administration’s proposed school vending machine rules (two pages/951 words).

Read about the school lunch police at the website of the John W. Pope Civitas Institute (1.5 pages/809 words).

Even liberal Republicans who are not opposed to abortion are starting to support Rick Santorum. Why? His character and authenticity. Find out why Michiganers find Sanotrum appealing, in this well-reported L.A. Times story (two pages/968 words).

Now I can’t say I was alive to see these events unfold, but Billy Chrystal’s 61* is easily one of my favorite movies, and this 2012 campaign is shaping up a lot like the 1961 homerun race between Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris.

The single-season homerun mark set by Babe Ruth in 1927 was the most hallowed record in the sport where records are hallowed the most. The entire country was captivated when it became apparent the two were going to challenge each other for the most coveted honor in the land.

In the same way Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle both played for the Yankees, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney both play for the Republican Party. The country has now turned its attention to what is shaping up as a two-man race between the more conservative, blue collar Santorum and the leading-man, media-friendly Mitt Romney.

The Mitt and The Mick were both the original favorites. They both had the money, the fame, and the looks. Just as Roger Maris was attacked for not being more like Mick, Santorum is sometimes ignored for not being more like Mitt.

But both Santorum and Maris stayed in the batter’s box despite what the media had to say. Maris never changed his approach or his swing, unapologetically thinking “homerun” every single time up, even when all momentum seemed to have stayed with Mick.

The race stayed tight all season long and the media-frenzy got more and more intense. But guys like Mitt and Mick were both veterans of the bright lights and the pressure of reporters following their every move. They reveled in it, looking sharp and very Hollywood every step of the way.

On the other hand, Santorum and Maris both needed to get used to the public eye. The fame and the spotlight was the sacrifice that came along with the pursuit of the goal. But neither one changed who they were in order to win over fans or voters. Maris stayed quiet and humble, while Santorum has stayed humble and conservative.

As talented as Mickey Mantle was, eventually his active social life caught up with him. He was forced to end his season early due to health issues, six homeruns shy of the Ruth mark.

Mitt Romney’s  record on healthcare and history of changing positions seems to be catching up with him, as voters now realize that he doesn’t offer the contrast on key issues that is necessary to defeat Barack Obama.

Mantle, as it turned out, was just a little too much like the Babe to beat his record—the same way Romneycare is too close to Obamacare.

Maris, who lived in a small apartment in Queens and would rather watch the Andy Griffith show than go to the Tropicana, ended up blasting his way into history with his 61^st homerun on the last day of the season.

Was he the most flashy player? Not even close. Was he exactly what the media wanted? Not in a million years. But he is the one that beat the odds and broke the record and won the Most Valuable Player award.

No one will deny that Mickey Mantle was born to be a baseball player, and no one will deny that Mitt Romney was born to be a politician. But is that really what we want from the leader of our country? A man who achieves votes through style rather than substance?

At the end of 61*, following that final game, a reporter asked Maris if he felt like he had earned the respect of the fans. “I don’t think that’s something you earn on a ball field,” he replied.

Right now, America needs a man with that type of attitude and perspective–a man who believes in the things we once believed in most as Americans. While the asterisk attached to Roger Maris’s 61 in the record books reflected the extra eight games added to the schedule after Ruth’s retirement, we should denote this presidential election with an asterisk to mark the most influential election in history. We are facing a choice between freedom and government control, and there has never been a contrast as sharp as the one between Rick Santorum and Barack Obama.

At Rick Santorum’s Friday speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (at the 20 minute mark) he asked America to consider something we rarely discuss in our (to quote another sports movie with larger themes) “cynical, cynical world.”

“I am asking for your honor. To put your honor on the line. Honor is a term that is not used very often in America anymore. But that is exactly what is at stake,” Santorum said to the country in front of those uncomfortable bright lights. “We are stewards of a great inheritance. And it is our responsibility to shepherd that inheritance. To make it a greater and richer one for the next generation. And if we fail to do that, then we have failed our duty and our honor as Americans.”

Rick Santorum—surging in key states like Michigan, Ohio, and Texas—has the elites on edge, whether they’re Democratic or Republican. Maybe it’s because, as David Brooks has noted, he represents a “viewpoint that is being suppressed by the political system,” a system that has worn out most Americans.

What kind of viewpoint is that? Jon Ward, a senior political reporter at the Huffington Post, says that Santorum espouses “compassionate conservatism [with] a libertarian twist.” It’s essential to cut taxes and slash the size of government—but that’s not enough, Santorum argues.

America needs to strengthen civic institutions, families, and small businesses, using incentives and freedom, not mandates and control, he says. In addition to repealing Obamacare and reducing the federal budget, he proposes tripling the tax credit for children to help families thrive, reducing the manufacturing tax to zero to spur job growth, and slashing regulations that favor the big guys and hurt small businesses.

Santorum’s conservatism says if we have strong families, churches, synagogues, communities, we will not have to depend on Big Government, Big Finance, Big Business. He suggests that this election is a turning point: Do we want to reclaim our independence, or will we continue our march toward increasing dependence on government, bureaucracy, and big corporations?

The establishment, which relies on dependence, is desperately grasping to maintain control: Mitt Romney, the creator of government-mandated healthcare in Massachusetts, is calling Santorum a liberal, saying he was a big government proponent. But the facts are otherwise: The National Taxpayers Union ranks Santorum as among the most fiscally conservative senators during his time in that chamber.

Liberal elites are trying to paint Santorum as some sort of radical conservative because he opposes abortion—which most Americans do. Or because he opposes redefining marriage—which is the same position President Obama holds. As Bill McGurn notes in the Wall Street Journal today, the difference is people know that Santorum actually means what he says. And from Arizona to Pennsylvania, they are finding this honest and authenticity to be refreshing.

It is President Obama who is a social radical, having opposed banning partial-birth abortion on the federal and state level. He did not even support protecting the born-alive infant protection act in Illinois.

And while Santorum stands for pluralism and religious freedom, it is President Obama who is interfering with the internal affairs of churches, telling employers they must pay for something they find morally abhorrent, despite what their church tells them. It is President Obama, not Santorum, who says his tax policy is carrying out the will of Jesus Christ.

Santorum’s conservatism is not of the knee-jerk variety that automatically defends every big company as God’s gift to the world. “Candidly, I believe most corporations actually don’t mind big government,” Santorum has said.

But this doesn’t put Santorum in the camp of moderates and elites. Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Gary Bauer have praised Santorum for consistently standing by conservative principles, from defending the sanctity of all human life to developing an intelligent national security policy.

Santorum can’t easily be labeled, which is why the media is struggling so hard to comprehend him. But despite the media’s mischaracterizations, his message is resonating with those Americans who are fed up with the old labels and partisan battle lines.

Even liberals are finding something appealing about Santorum’s authenticity:  The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky praised Santorum last month for the “spark of feeling” in his “politics that goes beyond ideology and beyond even ‘commitment,’ but into a place where our political selves and our real and full human selves collide.”

Santorum doesn’t litter his speeches with slogans about hope and change, but he talks from the heart, he knows where he stands, and he has a vision for an America where the people are free, where families flourish, and where prosperity is possible.

Watch Santorum’s speech at the Conservative Political Action Committee conference earlier this month, where (at about the 20 minute mark), he speaks about honor, a “term that nis not used very often inAmerica anymore” (22:06).

For more reading:

Read Bill McGurn on the media’s double standard for President Obama and Rick Santorum (1.5 pages/822 words).

Read Jon Ward’s Huffington Post piece describing how “Rick Santorum Gives George W. Bush’s Compassionate Conservatism a Libertarian Twist” (two pages/1,097 words).

Read the Weekly Standard on how Romney’s scurrilous criticism of Santorum’s fiscal record (one page/488 words).

Trying vainly to depict Rick Santorum as someone from a different planet, CBS’s incredulous Bob Schieffer grilled the Republican candidate for his criticism of President Obama on Sunday (Can you believe someone would question the president’s worldview?!). Watch how Santorum adeptly handled Schieffer’s condescending questioning (13 minutes).

The payroll tax cut that keeps most American workers paying 4.2 percent of their salary instead of 6.2 percent has just been passed by the House with a 293-132 vote.

Speaker of the House John Boehner called the deal “fair,” but if the bill is passed by the senate, it will increase the federal deficit by $89 billion over the next ten years.

Right now the working American people are damned if we do, damned if we don’t. Until the Congress decides to get serious about ending entitlement spending, we will keep running these massive deficits and relying on these oh so generous tax breaks from the federal government just to pay the bills.

Remember when President Obama said earlier this month that his tax policies were the same ones that Jesus Christ would embrace if He were in Obama’s shoes?

There was no outcry from the media elite. Had a Republican said something similar, there would have been cries of “he’s trying to create a theocracy!”

Instead, the elites have directed their moral outrage at Rick Santorum, who last week deigned to question President Obama’s worldview, grounded in a radicalism that, among other things, elevates the Earth about the interests of humankind  (e.g., President Obama’s opposition to the Keystone Pipeline).

On CBS’s Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer accused Santorum of questioning Obama’s Christianity, the conceit being that if you question the president’s fundamental worldview, you are accusing him of not being Christian. Santorum adeptly and calmly answers Schieffer’s loaded questions, asked in an incredulous tone. Near the end of the appearance, Santorum also eloquently talks about the problems with American education. Watch it here (about 13 minutes).

Watch President Obama claim that he’s just doing what Jesus would do (1:09).

Homeland Security is apparently paying a private company $11 million to monitor social media for key words that deal with terrorism, natural disasters, and even watch for people tweeting about long lines at the airport.

This is a little confusing. I understand combing the internet for every possible advantage against terrorism, but is the government really interested in tweets about tornados and airport lines?

Are there average people on Twitter who can predict the weather weeks in advance?

“@frankthehardwarestoreguy says his bad knee feels a heck of a storm coming. We better get to Wichita.”

I could have sworn there was a certain profession in which people went on television and delivered the very same type of information based off of satellite readings.

And wouldn’t it be cheaper to just put a few Homeland Security guys in LAX, JFK, and O’Hare and save a few million bucks on tweets from people annoyed about taking their shoes off?