‘Conservatism Is Alive and Well:’ Santorum Sweeps Col., Minn., & Missouri
- Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:44am by
Mike Opelka
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Rick Santorum is looking to capitalize on a string of stunning victories that snapped his four-state losing streak and raised new questions about front-runner Mitt Romney’s clout with conservatives.
Charles Krupa (AP/Photo)
Romney shrugged off his poor showing, but his losses Tuesday in Missouri, Minnesota and Colorado laid bare his stubborn weakness just when it looked as if his party was beginning to embrace him. Bringing up the rear of the Santorum surge: Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who mostly skipped the contests and finished at or near the back of the pack in all three states.
Santorum cast the results as a victory for a purer form of conservatism than Romney has offered, heard more clearly by voters across the nation’s midsection without a deafening TV air war that the former Massachusetts governor has dominated.
“Tonight, we had an opportunity to see what a campaign looks like when one candidate isn’t outspent 5- or 10-to-1 by negative ads impugning their integrity and distorting their record. This is a more accurate representation, frankly, of what the fall race will look like,” a jubilant Santorum told a cheering crowd in St. Charles, Mo.
But it was far from clear that the former Pennsylvania senator, who has a post office box for a campaign headquarters and relies on volunteers to handle scheduling, can quickly turn the momentum into the millions of campaign dollars he would need to overcome Romney. Still, he looked past the nomination fight.
“I don’t stand here to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, I stand here to be the conservative alternative to Barack Obama,” Santorum said. On health care, cap and trade and the Wall Street bailout, he charged, “Mitt Romney has the same positions as Barack Obama.”
In Denver, Romney congratulated his rival. The revived questions about Romney‘s appeal with conservatives at the party’s core were even sharper in light of his aggressive push to court them in recent days. Santorum’s shoestring candidacy thrived. And the GOP nomination fight many in the party hoped would resolve itself after Super Tuesday now threatened to rumble past March 6 – while Obama watches from his presidential perch in the White House, and waits.
“This was a good night for Rick Santorum,” Romney told supporters in Denver on Tuesday night. He offered a bit of forced optimism: “We’ll keep on campaigning down the road, but I expect to become our nominee with your help.”
Romney added, “When this primary season is over, we’re going to stand united as a party behind our nominee to defeat Barack Obama.”
He wasn’t the only loser.
On the first day of multi-state voting, the trio of contests exposed a glaring deficiency for Gingrich.
The former House speaker lacked the resources and organization to compete just as he’s trying to project strength heading into the Super Tuesday elections. He made only minimal efforts in the three states that voted and stayed out of sight as the results rolled in. Gingrich is focusing on Ohio, where early voting has begun in the March 6 primary.
Texas congressman Ron Paul, meanwhile, reveled in his second-place win in Minnesota and vowed to keep collecting delegates to take to the GOP’s national convention this summer.
To be fair, Tuesday’s contests will have little bearing on the race for delegates. Missouri’s nonbinding primary in particular was little more than an extensive warm-up routine. The state will hold an official caucus in March.
But even symbolic victories can produce or slow down momentum.
Romney’s camp began downplaying the results hours before the voting began. Rich Beeson, his political director, released a memo earlier in the day noting that even Sen. John McCain lost 19 states on the way to capturing the GOP presidential nomination in 2008. And Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, the director of Romney’s congressional endorsements, released a statement as the votes began showing his candidate had lost in Blunt’s home state.
“I congratulate my friend Rick Santorum on his win tonight,” Blunt said. “But the fact remains that this is a nonbinding primary, meaning Missouri’s delegates are still very much up for grabs.”
Following Maine’s low-profile caucuses, which conclude Saturday, the candidates will have an extended lull. Beeson recently noted that momentum would be vital heading into the 17-day period without an election, something he likened to a grand canyon with no precedent in modern presidential politics.
“If you don’t have momentum and resources coming into it, it’s going to be hard to have momentum and resources coming out of it,” Beeson said.
That was a week before he realized his boss would suddenly see his momentum disappear.
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 583 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 367 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 367 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (512)
whereareyourbrains
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:28amBeing originally from Pa…………..makes me laugh. BUT………….I have to give him credit. He fell through the crack of the battle between Newt and Mitt…….and turned out to be a winner. I am ok with Santorum being our president……he seems to be a bit too mellow…….a lot like Carter personality.
Report Post »Not his visions just his personality. I did want Newt……….he got slammed by Mitt and by doing that, Mitt has cost himself the presidency…………..for that I am glad. Lets stop the negative ads…let’s stop the whining of what the other candidtes do………..Put up you plans….. If they are good ones the people will follow……….no need for negative attack on one another……..Congrats to Rick
LouC57
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:47amOh please, he’s NOTHING like Carter.
Report Post »bolsen00
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:06amSantorum is not a leader personality and neither was Carter. Santorum spends a lot of time looking around and trying to figure out what to do by watching others. Romney is a leader by instinct. Why didn’t Santorum run for governor? He is lacking all necessary experience for the job. I suspect he couldn’t get elected and he knows that. Don’t begrudge Romney being the leader…he deserves where he is…he did the work, he has the preparation, he has the support and it shows. Romney also has the executive experience. The others tried to jump over several steps and they need to go back and do the work.
Gonzo
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:23amCarter? You have got to be kidding.
Report Post »disenlightened
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:43amYou know, I’m starting to like Michelle Obama. It’s going to be fun having her and her wonderful children Sasha and Malia in my life four more years. She does know better than me how I should eat, and maybe she can also make me proud to be an American for the first time. My wife loves her clothes, and we love seeing the First Family on all the magazine covers at the grocery store checkout. Four more years! Thanks Rick! Thanks Arlen! Thanks so-called conservatives!
Report Post »Polwatcher
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:54amI can’t figure out why the Blaze would put a picture of Romney with this article when Santorum is the only winner here. Maybe they wanted to show the big winner standing next to the big loser.
Report Post »JesusH.Christ
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:00am@DISENLIGHTENED,
I know you’re being sarcastic,… but your comment tells the truth about “so-called” conservatives.
Frauds, posers and sell outs. All.
Chin up though, pal. Your wife will be happy. And you know what they say,… “Happy wife, happy life”.
:-D
JesusH.Christ
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:02amHonestly,… I don’t see how you could tell the difference?
Trading_barracuda
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:23am“One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”
Report Post »-Rick Santorum-
ashestoashes
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:56amRick Santorum voted for taxes in the Internet Access Tax Bill http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3250/7806/27054/internet-acces...
Report Post »Supported bailing out the airline industry.
Advocates preemptive war.
Supports the Patriot Act, which has done nothing but empower the federal government to steal our liberties!
Condones the use of torture.
Supports the federal war on drugs.
Has supported excessive government spending.
Voted to double the size of the federal Department of Education.
Named as one of the 3 most corrupt Senators in 2006. Read the report.
Says that the Pursuit of Happiness is harming America. See for yourself.
Required taxpayer dollars be used to collect weather data, but only distributed to specific private companies. Read for yourself.
Voted for the Medicare prescription drug entitlement in 2003 – the biggest expansion of the program since it was created in 1965.
Has campaigned for pro-abortion candidates including former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and former fellow Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter.
Voted in support of the Lautenberg Gun Ban in the 90s and for mandating locks on handguns in 2005.
Supports the idea of foreign aid.
Barack Obama the status quo
May Clark
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:57amOne thing you know about Santorum, he will not be supportive of the death culture. What we need to do is get committed to the most conservative candidate. Then, we must campaign for him in our neighborhoods. Once, he is elected, we must be committed to the accomplishment of conservative actions. For example, I believe most conservatives want to see an end to the Department of Education and other wasteful departments. If we all kept the pressure on, one by one we could get these ideas implemented. Every government department that is put out of business means all of us keep more of our money and have more freedom. We need to stay focused and vocal. If Russians have the bravery to go out in the streets and protest Putin, what is our excuse?
Report Post »gramma b
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:59amI could not bring myself to vote for a dirtbag like Newt. The man is utterly without principle. I could vote for Santorum. I think he is a good man. But he doesn‘t come off as a leader and I don’t think he can win. Like Ann Coulter, I believe Romney has the best chance of winning and will govern more conservatively than he campaigns. We’ll see. But, if it isn’t Romney, I guess Santorum is the best alternative. At least I won’t have to stay home.
Newt is great at throwing red meat to a crowd that already agrees with him. So much so that otherwise principled conservatives are willing to overlook the fact that he’s a bona fide dirtbag. But to the people in the mushy middle — the ones who decide elections, and who don’t get a thrill up their leg when he starts angrily pounding people he disagrees with — he’ll just come across as an angry dirtbag.
Report Post »slam
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:07amNewt and Mitt are both one-world big government folks…and Newt will always lie to us if it looks like he can pull it off, I don’t trust Mitt either, his RINO tendency could surface at anytime… Rick is better than the rest and will handle BO just fine!!
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:08amFor the Ron Paul supporters here, please sign this petition for a recount of the Nevada caucus votes.
When you see the graph, you’ll know why there seems to have been voter fraud committed in Nevada.
http://www.change.org/petitions/nevada-gop-we-demand-a-visible-public-recount-of-the-nevada-caucus
Report Post »JayCee
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:14amThere is nothing wrong with having a ‘Jimmy Carter like’ personality.
Carter is a far left, anti-semite, Marxist dirtbag,… but he is personable.
I hope this 4 state victory for Santorum gets the attention of the GOP machinery.
Report Post »Conservatives are fed up with the rino candidates they are bringing to the table.
b.mclane
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:18amSo you are saying people are sheep and if they see a”negative ad’ ( despite the content being true ) they just fall in line? Newt did himself in by not controlling his ego. When he rose to the leader top like every other candidate had done he bragged he would be the nominee, despite NO primary held. When he looked strong in SC he talked of heeling judges to his hem and having poor kids do janitorial work. Florida, he went Moon crazy. Like Pawley, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, some dude who is still running but I don’t recall his name and Newt….Santorum will have his 15 min. His mettle will be tested and I predict his religious fervor and spotlight naivity will get the best of him and we will all turn AGAIN our attention to the slow, steady, CALM, FOCUSED hand of Romney. This is a REPUBLICAN PRIMARY…not a CONSERVATIVE Primary. Independents do not favor Santorum.
Report Post »Twinspeedr
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:41amWell. Obama was an exciting President, how’s that working out for you?
Santorum is not flashy… he is honest and competent. What is not to like?
I couldn’t give a whit about flashy. We are in BIG trouble and we need competence and honesty as the two cornerstones.
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:58am@Disenligtened. You’re welcome, oh man of little faith.
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:32amSantorum…a conservative? Seriously?
http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2012/01/11/rick-santorum-a-massively-expanded-welfare-state-is-the-genuine-conservatism-our-founders-envisioned/
Rick Santorum: A Massively Expanded Welfare State is ‘The Genuine Conservatism our Founders Envisioned’
“What was my vision? I came to the uncomfortable realization that conservatives were not only reluctant to spend government dollars on the poor, they hadn’t even thought much about what might work better. I often describe my conservative colleagues during this time as simply ‘cheap liberals.’ My own economically modest personal background and my faith had taught me to care for those who are less fortunate, but I too had not yet given much thought to the proper role of government in this mission”
“I suspect some will dismiss my ideas as just an extended version of ‘compassionate conservatism.’ Some will reject what I have said as a kind of ‘Big Government Conservatism.’ Some will say that what I’ve tried to argue isn’t conservatism at all. But I believe what I’ve been presenting is the genuine conservatism our Founders envisioned. One that fosters the opportunity for all Americans to live as we are called to live, in selfless families that contribute to the general welfare, the common good”
Lenin would be sooooo proud of Santorum.
Report Post »readytostand
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:00pm@ bolsenoo –Where do you get off saying Santorum, is like Carter ! Santorum is a conservative pro-life defender VS. Carter was an advocate for Abortion and was a SOCIALIST -JOB KILLING -ECONOMY WRECKING -LIBERAL !!! OH what was your comparison again ?? And you say he has no leadership skills ?? Maybe not in COMMUNTY ORGANIZING like your (little god Obummer ! ) BYE – BYE – troll
Report Post »tamara13
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:02pmNew here to the Blaze and love GBTV – thank you Glenn Beck:-) Just want to say congratulations to Rick Santorum who I prefer. I do have a question – was he slated to pick up these states or do you think the recent uproar within the religious community regarding the HHS mandate helped push him to the forefront? And wouldn’t the Obama administration want to run against Santorum as opposed to Romney? Look how fast the Abortionists forced Susan G. Komen foundation into reversing their decision. Make the election be about abortion to ensure the independant voters as opposed to the election being about the failed Obama economy? I urge the candidates to put their focus more on the Obama as opposed to each other. There is too much at stack.
Report Post »Bigliardi
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:24pmFolks are just tired of letting the elite, Ann Coulter, and effete, Karl Rove, tell them who to vote for…I like Santorum…I would vote for him….
Report Post »resme
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:27pm“[I will] fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican party and the conservative movement., he said last June. And in 2005, he remarked, “[Libertarians] have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do. Government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulation low and that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues, you know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world, and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone.”
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:35pm@resme
That statement right there will be the nail in the coffin for the Republican’s chances if Santorum get the nod.
Even the most ardent conservatives do not believe that Big Brother belongs in our bedrooms, and indepedents will NEVER go for such insanity.
Report Post »Rodney
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:44pmOK I gotta ask a stupid question. What makes a negative ad? Is it an ad that’s full of lies or misleading OR is it an ad that reports on bad things the target has done? If it‘s truthful but just makes the other person look bad because of a bad vote or position then I’m all for it. And in that case it’s a cop out to hate on “negative ads”. If it‘s an ad that’s dishonest then I would agree people need to cut that out. But which is it?
Report Post »RJL
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:45pmSantorium=4
Glitter Man=2
Nuked Newt=1
Paul=0
Beck talking with Bachman today on the show today. His response was “what happened”.
Report Post »guido.cavalcanti
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:02pm@ whereareyourbrains The irony of your username and the comment you posted.
“am ok with Santorum being our president……he seems to be a bit too mellow…….a lot like Carter personality.” Picking a president based on their personality, not using the brain, in fact this is probably one of the worst ways to pick a president, we did this exact same thing in 2008 with Obama.
“Put up you plans….. If they are good ones the people will follow” Our system of govt is a representative republic. We don’t follow our politicians, they are supposed to follow us, in theory at least. We no longer want to think about our problems anymore so we take the lazy route and let our politicians come up with solutions (which in most cases are the wrong ones), but hey as long as we don’t have to think and be active in our political process anymore, why not?
After caucusing in CO last night it struck me that the majority of repubs are exactly where you are, that is, where we were in 2008, fighting to get a progressive republican elected instead of a progressive democrat. I’ve never heard the word “conservative” used so many times by so many people, and not one of them had a clue what it really meant. For those of you who get this, I think it’s time to hunker down, this isn’t going to get any better anytime soon.
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”
-Thomas Jefferson
Report Post »GFR
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:17pmI think it’s funny that the Romney campaign manager is saying that McCain lost 19 states on his way to the nomination. So far Romney has lost five out of eight contests, so he’s well ahead of McCain at this point. And Romney has spent 45 MILLION dollars so far! – At the rate he’s accruing delegates Willard The Rat will need to spend 750 MILLION dollars to buy the nomination – we can’t AFFORD this guy!
I like Santorum – I don‘t think he’s obama-lite like Romney. I could see myself voting for Santorum, but I’m pretty sure Romney is going to be dumping millions of dollars worth of attack adds on Santorum directly – and they WILL have an effect.
Then the situation will be that Gingrich and Santorum will both have been trashed in the eyes of the public, and Romney’s brand will be poisoned because everybody knows that he is doing it.
I’m hoping that Newt can have a strong showing on Super Tuesday because of all the Southern States.
The take-home lesson that I see is that nobody wants Romney – Romney either has to quit with the attack adds, or get out. His attack adds are destroying whoever they are directed at, but they are also damaging Romney. If he continues this way he may win the republican nomination – but only a handful of Republicans will be left to vote for him in the General Election.
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:25pm@guido.cavalcanti
Excellent points.
It is clear that Santorum is no conservative. He’s simply using a word that flys in the face of his previous positions, and thus is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Just look at what he had to say about the welfare state.
http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2012/01/11/rick-santorum-a-massively-expanded-welfare-state-is-the-genuine-conservatism-our-founders-envisioned/
Now compare that nonsense with what the founders had to say.
“With respect to the two words “general welfare,” I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”
James Madison, letter to James Robertson
Santorum is a fraud.
Report Post »guido.cavalcanti
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:20pm@ Freedomluver I agree, the way Santorum views “promote the general welfare” is a complete and utter perversion of what our founders intended it to mean. If our rights we endowed to us by our creator then why does Santorum believe he can create those rights for us? Like medicare part D for example, which, he voted for. Because if he can create those rights then he can certainly take them away. Anyone who understands liberty, understands this principle. Health care BTW for those who don’t know, is not an unalienable right as most republicans see it these days.
Report Post »JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:06pm@ ashestoashes
Before you list the CREw’s charges of what makes Rick Santorum one of the “Most Corrupted” politicians, I suggest you read the report.
1) Their top issue is with regards to hi VA residency while serving, though his children attended an Online School in PA while living with him in VA. This is hardly a scam or corruption. In fact When the issue came to his attention of the policy of in-state tuition, he pulled his children (though expressed his wishes for them to continue the education). The school and the State reversed the convoluted laws to make exception for people serving positions that REQUIRE them to have residence outside of the state while serving.
Report Post »2) They label campaign donations that were made in hardly large sums of money for key votes:
a) $40,000 paid to Senator Santorum and the RNC (and they only state $2,000 went to Santorum) for a bill on privatizing weather forecast from the Nation Weather Service (save for in times of emergency). IE privatizing the weather.
b) $9,000 from the Tobacco Industry for blocking a $10 billion buyout of the Tobacco Farmers be the government (IE protecting private businesses). Oh he was donated to after he voted, not prior to.
c) $6,000 paid by Miller and Anheuser Busch six months price before voting to lower tax on beer per barrel (IE reducing taxes and the price of beer).
JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:29pm@ ashestoashes
Report Post »d) $79,000 that was donated from various Heatlhcare professional from Puerto Rico (and six months after Santorum introduced Medicare Puerto Rico Hospital Payment Parity Act). I suggest you read why he was passing it first:
http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20090706/MAGAZINE/307069980
Puerto Rico heavily relies on Medicare and Medicad, but get an average of $20 participant per month, while states get $330. This had lead to an almost collapse of their system.
e) $16,400 in donations over 4 years for a provision that granted a $100 million grant to a company in PA that was building a fuel plant.
3) A loan that the crew says was a gift in the sum of $500,000 to buy his VA home… Um… So long as he pays back the money he loaned, is it really a gift? Oh, they claim that due to the bank only offering to private members and he didn’t meet the requirements that it was a gift. But the home was not his residence and the investment in question of which was valued at $770,000. Of which he was fronting the sale of his other house in VA and other moneys to off set the $270,000 variance in price. How do they know what was agreed upon between him and the bank, as home investing was heavily being done in 2002 and is a viable reason the bank loaned the money. However, the bank owners have been a donator for 6 prior to the loan being made.
JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:44pmThere is the small list. But the CREW fail to mention Tony Rezko and Obama on the list. The $1.2 million home and the lot next door. Or the promotion that Michele received in May 2005 at the University of Chicago Hospitals.
They do not talk about the IPO insider trading of Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and many others.
In fact most, people on their list are Republicans. Not to mention most of Rick Santurom’s issues were nothing he profited off of directly. I would hardly think he is warranted the most corrupted list as you and the CREW claim.
Report Post »hauschild
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:06pmPardon me, but this dude does not excite anything in me. He’s not a great speaker, he’s from the East, his judgment is obviously questionable based on some things he’s supported and done while a senator. Plus, one gets the sense that he feels government can make a difference.
I see no difference between Santorum and the other lifers.
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:36pm@JohnnyMidknight
My real issue with Santorum is the fact that he simply does not get the idea of limited government, and has bought into the lie that providing for the “General Welfare” means programs like money for the poor and for healthcare. The way he applies these terms is in direct conflict of the founders wishes.
http://www.constitution.org/je/je4_cong_deb_12.htm
Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
Thomas Jefferson
“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.” -James Madison
With respect to the two words “general welfare,” I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. — James Madison, letter to James Robertson
That, and his willingness to back insane laws such as the Patriot act that spit on the Bill of Rights.
Ron Paul is the only one who actually gets it.
Report Post »SHOWMESTATEGUY
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:58pmMitt and Newt have so much baggage that they have to hire dozens of people just to carry it around for them. Santorum is the answer.
When Santorum flies he checks the “No Baggage” box.
Rick had better watch out though, Mitt will attack and try to fabricate some baggage for him.
Report Post »TimH
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:09pmThe debate within the GOP may hear but not listen to the non-progressive side of the party. In a perfect world there would be the GOP and the Libertarian parties as the two big boys. With the minor third parties like the, Green, Communist, and Democrat.
Maybe, just maybe the two that remain standing will be Santorum and Ron Paul. Where the debate belongs, far from Romney, McCain, Bush, Newt and Obama.
http://www.BornAgainHeathens.com
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:45pm@JOHNNYMIDNIGHT THank you Johnny…but that wasn’t what I was concerned about..I believe the reason he was named as one of the most corrupt had more to do with the coincidence of small campaign contributions to sizeable earmarks.. you know..the earmarks seemed to be going to the campaign contributers…at least that is how I read it..To me..it said he’s for sale.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:01pm“No Baggage Box”
Report Post »I didn’t realize the Walmart corporate jet had that Box! :-)
I like Rick Santorum, I will support him if he gets the nomination, however, I don’t think people really know him. He has flown under the radar since Romney fears Newt most and has gone balistic on him. I have been researching him.
He said he was the most conservative? That’s not quite true. His ACU rating is 88, say what you like about Newt his ACU rating 90.
I get so tired of hearing how Newt was the “King of K Street” when it was Santorum and Newt’s successor that ran the K Street Project…. not Newt. Folks like to talk about Newt’s sins of the flesh, but they don’t like to hear that greed and avarice are sins that God hates…. and the K Street project was indeed greed. Folks don’t like to hear that Santorum, Talent, and Foley cost us the Senate in 2006, and that this led to Harry Reid taking over as the Senate power broker. They seem to forget that Talent (who works for Mitt Romney’s campaign) and Santorum covered up the scandal. Just because Tim Russert is dead doesn‘t mean that his warning about the Foley scandal costing Republicans the Senate in 2006 can’t be found on the internet… and that scandal caused evangelicals to stay home and let the Democrats wins the Senate. It also set the stage for 2008.
Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:12pmCont…
Funny how the cover-up of the Ensign scandal never makes it to the ears of Santorum supporters… they are too busy screaming about Newt‘s divorces to see that Santorum keeps being involved in everyone else’s…
The last year Newt and Santorum were in congress in 1998 – Newts Annual 1998 ACU Rating 100% –
Santorums Annual 1998 ACU Rating 84%.
Santorum endorsed Romney in 2008
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/SantorumEndorsedRomneyin2008/2011/12/31/id/422676
This is what a Big Govt. Conservative Looks Like
Report Post »http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/06/what-a-big-government-conservative-looks-like/
He has many skeletons in his closet some make Newt look like a Sunday School teacher.
Please just do your homework so that you truly know who you are voting for and why!
WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges10
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:37am“ ‘I don’t stand here to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, I stand here to be the conservative alternative to Barack Obama,’ Santorum said.”
Is anyone here REALLY comfortable with this answer?
Report Post »BTW, Santorum stated in an early Glenn Beck interview that government should do things (not enumerated in the Constitution). That doesn’t sit comfortable either.
Babeuf
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:50amYa know, you can’t make this stuff up!!!!
What a circus this election has turned out to be!
7 minutes of praising Romney
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/seven-minutes-of-rick-santorum-talking-about-how-g
Santorum campaigning for Romney
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/watch-rick-santorum-campaign-with-mitt-romney-for
Things are really starting to make more sense now, like pieces of a puzzle that has to be put together for the complete picture!
Report Post »marhee9
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:29amI am very happy for Rick Santorum. Those who think we all need to just shut-up and get behind Mitt Romney are the ones who need to shut-up and let the process work. Nobody seems to remember the Dem. primaries just 4 years ago. The Obama campaign was calling a former 2 term President a racist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzy7c0JUWEA
Report Post »american1st
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:03pmconservative ??? what about
*** Padding his own wallet as a corporate lobbyist at the expense of taxpayers;
*** Voting to RAISE the debt ceiling five times;
*** Voting to DOUBLE the federal Department of Education;
*** Voting with liberals like Ted Kennedy on multiple occasions in support of Big Labor’s radical agenda;
*** Urging more federal involvement in housing with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
*** Voting to create a brand new, unfunded entitlement, Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of entitlement spending since President Lyndon Johnson – creating $16 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities;
*** Endorsing liberal Big Government RINOs like Arlen Specter over conservatives. Of course, Specter later became a Democrat and worked hand-in-glove with President Obama to pass his radical agenda;
*** Voting for Sarbanes-Oxley, which imposed dramatic new job-killing accounting regulations on businesses;
*** Supporting raising taxes on oil companies, which directly costs Americans more money out of their pockets at the gas pump;
*** Voting for gun control;
*** Voting to give Social Security benefits to illegal aliens, while voting against an additional 1,000 border patrol agents;
*** Voting to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea;
*** Voting to send hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood – the nation’s largest provider of abortion –
gotta love those cons
Report Post »american1st
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:04pmgotta love those conservative values..
cut off :)
Report Post »stullsy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:38pmDelagates is the name of the game. The votes don’t matter for ****, especially when nobody knows how to correctly vote in a caucus. A Romney loss is a Paul victory in any caucus state. Paul probably more than likely leads in the actual delegate race……. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/02/08/straw-polls-vs-collecting-delegates/
Check the graphs… Ron Paul pulled in 2 votes in Pueblo, Colorado, but came away with all the delegates, b/c everyone that voted for santorum or romney or gingrich left before the votes were alloted
Report Post »JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:31am@ Freedomluver
That concerns me too. I was just clearing one of the false comments with my post.
Report Post »JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:48am@ ashestoashes
I understand Ashestoashes, but what Ron Paul is pointing to is the CREW report that labels Rick Santorum as one of the most corrupt. No where in the report does it state earmarks, but certain bills created by Santorum that favored donator. However, many donations came after he created the bills.
I am sure there were conversations prior to the donations, but what do we expect Senators to do? Make bills based on their limited knowledge. I personally do not mind a political leader having donators discussing the issues and donating. However, where the bills heavily against the grain?
What I am against, is Congress actually profiting off of the IPOs and insider trading. Getting actual gifts that the CREW report does not even touch. A campaign contribution (especially at the small amounts Santorum) received are pretty much standard. The $100,000 Nancy Pelosi received personally in an IPO off of support of certain bills is out right criminal.
As for earmarks, earmarks were a natural part of the process, but it was getting abused. A fact that even Santorum backed. He believes that there are good earmarks. And earmarks are not corruption. However, the overspending due to them is unethical. Santorum acknowledges this and fought to end earmarks despite his belief they could be used for good purposes.
Ron Paul supports earmarks and is by far bigger than Santurom (and still does it):
Report Post »http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/earmark-reform/
JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 10:01am@ ashestoashes
Oh, and Romney accepted earmarks as Governor, but now cries foul about earmarks. Now Romney may have had a change of heart like Santorum, but to point a finger when he benefited and never spoke out prior to running for President is like the pot calling the kettle black.
In all honesty, I am for either Paul or Santorum. Romney and Gingrich are both Progressive. While Santorum is not 100% smaller government as I would like, I think he would be better in the foreign aid and relations department than Paul. However, Santorumis seems a little more reasonable (in the sense he would engage in intellectual conversation on smaller government. What I think he fears is lawlessness (IE Wild West), but we are talking lessening Federal Government not State (which I think he doesn’t get). I think State governments could be smaller too, but that is a State’s right issue.
I honestly think if Paul and Santorum linked up, they would make a killing. I think Paul would be great as VP. Imagine him in charge of the Senate. Now, that would be some getting stuff done right there… Paul can push for some of his foreign Policy, but can cut off most of the BS that comes from Congress that is clearly against the Constitution. Plus Santorum has stated that when he reads Paul’s ideas on the Constitution, he finds himself agreeing with most of what Paul states.
That means there is a middle ground between the two. If Paul picks up the anti-earmark (even better).
Report Post »fatsomann
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:26amGo Rick! All night long and this morning on the news I hear this was meaningless, only a beauty contest. If Romney had swept those 3 states the mainstream GOP would be singing his coronation song. It was a beautiful night for those of us who support Santorum, our alternative to Obama and Romney.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:32amPretty awesome! I have to laugh when I think about Gingrich wanting Santorum to quit and thow his support to him…………………..
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:13amTell me you guys…Since Santorum is not on about 17 State ballots, how can he win the nomination?
Answer…HE CAN”T..
Thay make both of you rocket scientists in bizzaro world i guess…
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:22amBring it on Rick!!
Report Post »Wilma
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:28amWelcome back, Tifosa! How’s it going?
Report Post »burned at edges
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:30am@baddoggy
Do you go to your bpou, caucus, conventions? I often am a delegate and have been to state convention twice. Getting the party nomination is not like the U.S. presidential election. Delegates are not won in these straw polls like electoral college votes. Delegates are voted on seperately on what they personally say and believe to represent others in the party at the conventions. At the convention the delegates can vote on whom ever they want. Unlike protest votes in the election they will not vote Mickey Mouse as it takes some resolve to be a delegate. That being said, Chris Christy could show up at the national convention and throw his hat in the ring. I doubt he would get the nomination if he waited that long, and would be against protocol.
That being said…As long as the delegates who make it to the national convention vote for Rick, then Rick can win the nomination.
So please stop with the misinformation.
Report Post »bpodlesnik
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:45am@ BADD
You don‘t believe in God’s miracles do you?
Report Post »JesusH.Christ
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:08am@BPODLESNIK
Believe me pal, if Santorum wins the nomination, it won’t be because God had anything to do with it.
Report Post »capnbrit
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:33amI’m thinking that this push of the abortion/contraceptive coverage attempt on the Catholic church might have awakened a sleeping giant. – Go Rick!
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:47amFATSOMANN: “Go Rick! All night long and this morning on the news I hear this was meaningless, only a beauty contest. If Romney had swept those 3 states the mainstream GOP would be singing his coronation song.”
You are right. Last night on O’Reilly, he was talking to Karl Rove and basically kept telling Karl the nomination is wrapped up. He kept saying it and then said to Rove, YOU know who it is going to be, YOU know. He said this 2 or 3 times to Rove until Rove finally said, let’s let the people decide. I wanted to jump up and down for his statement to O’Reilly. You can‘t tell me O’Reilly isn’t spinning for Romney. I was so digusted he said this.
Did anyone notice when Santorum spoke last night, the first words out of his mouth was to thank God. I almost cried because with all the anti-God out there, it gave me hope there are still people left who truly believe in Him. I like Santorum. I believe he could have done better all along if the Media would have given him the chance to speak. Stand up America and don’t let the Media choose your President.
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:55amYes, Santorum, conservative candidate. Today I send you another contribution. You see, folks, even if Romney gets the nomination who will he choose VP to bring in all we conservatives?. And for all those who were playing down VP as meaningless what country do you live in? At onetime, maybe depending on President. Did it make a difference with Lincoln Kennedy Nixon and even FDR? Could name more. Can swing as tie breaker in Senate.Not just VP but VIP. “These are trying times…you bet your grandma it makes a difference.As for Carter even Tip O’Neill (D) said Carter didn’t know how to work with Congress. Don’t believe me, go read. Yeah Santorum.
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:08amThanx Wilma. Awesome here! Always GOOD to see you!
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:30amLook i dont think baddoggy is a bad person…..its just that hes a ron paul fringy soooooo….i think that sums it up.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:27amTIFOSA says:
“Thanx Wilma. Awesome here! Always GOOD to see you!”
Yes indeed !!!
It’s always GOOD to see someone from the “STONED Age Family” again
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:55amTEXASGRANNY73
Check this mess out, and then tell me just how a so called conservative could betray his own so called ideology.
http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2012/01/santorums-specter-problem.php
Santorum’s Specter Problem
At the time, Specter was a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania trying to fend off a fierce primary challenge from conservative GOP Rep. Pat Toomey. Coupled with the support of President George W. Bush, Specter rallied to win with just 50.8 percent of the vote, fewer than 20,000 votes more than Toomey.
The endorsement infuriated the state’s conservative activists, and the hard feelings persisted two years later when Santorum desperately and fruitlessly tried to hold off a challenge to his Senate seat by Democrat Bob Casey. (He lost the race by nearly 20 percentage points.) The grassroots supporters did little to help him then, and, indeed, many of them to this day regard him as a member of a Republican political establishment who isn’t sufficiently committed to conservative principles.
And as much as the endorsement rankled eight years ago, it looks even worse now. Specter, of course, was a decisive vote in favor of President Obama’s economic stimulus in 2009, and soon thereafter, switched to the Democratic Party.
————-
Can you say TRAITOR!?
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:41pm@burned
Funny you bring this up since Ron Paul’s supporters are securing alot of those delegates. Everyone ignored that fact in Iowa, and now the same thing is happening in the three states last night.
As far as Rick goes, with any research you can find out Rick’s record. Its far from conservative. He is more of a social engineer type of guy. He wants more war and has no issue with growing the size of government.
Rick will get his butt handed to him by Obama just like Mcain did. Ron Paul supporters will not vote for this man. A vote for Rick, Newt, or Romney is a vote for Obama for sure. They pretty much all support the same things.
Ron Paul 2012. He is getting my vote even if I have to write his name in.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:49pmya a link from a george soros payed website …wont go far here.
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:22pm@Freedomluver You will excuse me of course for not rushing right back and responding. I have other things t do with my life aside from sitting at a computer all day to argue with people. My comments are my own and one or two are sufficient for me. I am taking the time although it is late to respond although I have seen where anyone who deigns to disagree with you is strongly suggested to be inferior to your superior intellect. Rather than argue about Traitors, your word, let me suggest to you it is rather strong and not knowing who you were referring to no, thank you. Yes I am aware of Specter-Toomey election. Now, my real response to you is this. I am a voter and always vote. Always. This is the first time ever that I spit myself out of the system. I am not a (R) I am not a (D) I am not an (I). Now we have 4 candidates left. One is a self admitted Progressive. One I (according to my research IMF World Bank and an article in their magazine online quite possibly is as well–it is a toss up and other programs) One is a Constitutionalist in all ways exception of Israel One is a self proclaimed conservative and I believe he is. I also believe he is a Constitutionalist. I chose my candidate to support based upon what my values are. Now RSantorum on some social values I do not agree but he comes closest. Not on what upsets others. I am not calling you names as you called others nor am I arguing. PS: Ron Paul hails from Pennsylvania; lives in Texas.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:19pmTexasGranny :
Regarding the IMF:
Report Post »Did you know that Santorum voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=2&vote=00044
John the Doe
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:23amI knew my vote in SC would become validated. Go Santorum go, take out Mr. Roman Noodles.
Report Post »ROMNEY2012
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:21amAs a Senator Rick Santorum voted for every bill signed by George Bush.
Obama will successfully portray him as nothing but a continuation of Bush and his policies.
America will not elect another ideological Senator with no leadership experience (voters will just keep the one they already have).
The Federal Government needs a CEO restructure the mess.
America needs a Proven Business Leader to help us win in the global economy.
FOR GODS SAKE PEOPLE, LOOK AT THE RESUMES!
Mitt Romney can get our country moving in the right direction again. His track record proves it.
Report Post »nolongeradem
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:15pmYou are right OROMNEY2012, I think Santorum has little chance of winning, but I’m sure grinning that he knocked out Oromney–another McCain’t. I’m still for Newt, but if it comes down to it I will vote for Santorum over Obama. However, I will sit the election out if Oromney is the RHINO in chief!
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:06pmNOLONGERADEM: “Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:15pm
You are right OROMNEY2012, I think Santorum has little chance of winning”
Why, because the “truthful” Media is telling you this? The Media also thought Romney would win the 3 states yesterday and surprise, surprise, they were wrong. Now they have egg on their face. I believe Santorum would have been further ahead if they had given him a chance to speak. We The People spoke loud and clear last night. I wish people would stop trying to second guess who will vote for who and who can, and cannot win. Vote for who would be best for the country and don’t try to figure out who the Independents will vote for. After last night, it shows no one really knows.
Report Post »burned at edges
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:20amI voted for Rick Santorum!
Some here probably know I have been a Ron Paul supporter. It became clear to me that he was not going to get the republican nomination. I also realized Rick had a shot at it. If Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich were to get the nomination I could not in good concience vote for them for president. I feel hopeful now that the party will have a nominee that I can vote for.
TEA!
Report Post »fatsomann
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:29amI feel that I can vote for Santorum too, not against someone else. Which is not how I felt in the last 2 elections.
Report Post »burned at edges
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:47am@Fat
Report Post »What is funny is I stated I was a Ron Paul supporter. So my vote for Rick in the strawpoll last night sort of WAS a vote AGAINST Mitt and Newt lol…but yeah, it would be nice to be able to vote FOR a president in the main election instead of holding my nose while filling in the oval.
soybomb315
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:18amthat is tough – glad your state was able to stop the ‘presumptive nominee’. I live in virginia – so only paul and romney are on the ballot. Easy choice for me
Report Post »no_more_harkin
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:41pmI’ll vote for whoever the Republicans choose. There’s no way I could sit this out. Too important. I’m voting straight R, unless there’s a close race between independent and the rest.
Report Post »I’ll never vote Democrat until they clean the extreme radical socialists and communists out of their ranks. Judging by the way huge parts of this country are sliding into despair, that probably won’t happen in my lifetime.
ozchambers
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:16pmI think I have to consider myself a newbie Ron Paul supporter, who would choose Santorum over Romney or Newt. Ron Paul could mop the floor with Obama and any other contender if he had some slightly different viewpoints, particularly in regards to his actions as commander in chief. I would also HATE to see how ugly the left would get with Dr. Paul in the general election regarding some of the objectionable things that were printed in his newsletters in the past. They’d probably make him out to be some cross between Dr. Josef Mengele and David Duke. I despise politics, it’s such a sham. I‘m not gonna get all goosebumply over Santorum’s rise, but he’s more palatable to me than Romney, far more palatable than Newt (his God complex definitely rivals Obama’s), and light years better than Obama. I know there are plenty of folks who dont wanna see Santorum, but at the least, if you choose to not vote for the Repub nominee, at least vote for congressmen and Senators to swing things to the right. Whoever is president, we need to have the legislative branch assert its power in DC cuz things are too weighted to Executive and Judicial branches right now.
Report Post »CottonMPG
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:12amFinally!!! I’m so glad to hear this! I voted Santorum in Florida and felt I might have handed the nomination to Romney. : ( I was feeling sorry that I hadn’t voted Newt, but I know Rick is the best choice.
Report Post »As far as Mitt goes, if you have to move to the right to win the primary, you are too far to the left!! He is too, he‘s a liberal in conservative’s clothing and doesn’t wear it well. Don’t get me wrong. I don‘t think he’s a huge threat to the country if he gets a first term as president. He’s much better than Obama! I think he’d try to do what is good for the country, and I think we might start to recover. A second term would probably be a given and who knows what he’d do at that point! He is a big government progressive and without worries over re-election his true colors would come out. Think of the worse things Bush did. Romney would be as bad or worse. Bush was sincere, Mitt changes with the wind and trends left!
DrFrost
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:12pmMitt would be infinitely better than Obama. If Mitt gets the nomination and Gary Johnson isn’t polling in the 30%+ then I’m voting for Mitt. But at this time he has not convinced me that he’s the best candidate running for the republican nomination.
Report Post »CrazyChuck
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:05amLots of Dems, socialist and commies appear in this blog wearing either Republican or Conservative clothing ala wolves in sheeps clothing. That said, I hope all are giving Romney, Santorum, and Rand a thorough look. We do not need RINOs taking on Obama and his regime. Congrats to Santorum. Remember the American electorate is and can be fickled and apparently can be quite emotional rather than logical. Freedom is the issue which is the issue of all Americans of all ilk.
Report Post »So keep informing yourselves and think.
louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:11amCrazy,
Report Post »Why do you think Santorum is not a rino….?
Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:35amSpeaking of freedom:
Did you see this video of Santorum?
http://youtu.be/PL9HrU6Y5-s
While I am a Newt supporter, I was glad to see Romney NOT WIN! Congrats Rick!
Report Post »jujubeebee
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:12amRon Paul’s son Rand is not running.
Report Post »Robert Hawk
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:00amMore evidence that Romeny is not the choice of the American people.
Report Post »I expect Romney to win in all of the states which are heavily democratic-marxist states such as Nevada, Florida, the West coast and the North East. The bastion of constitutional Americans do not support Romney. The GOP however will not adhere to this evidence and will place Romney as the front runner, by using what ever means necessary. The GOP has already settled on Romney, they are simply using these skirmishes as air time for their cause. Eventually they will start to eliminate the three in opposition to Romney. But don’t expect that to occur until sometime this summer, as OWS and the Mexican border issues ramp up toward a state of full blown crisis.
mikee1
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:58amThe DUMMYCRAPS are voting for RINOROMNEY by the DROVES IN THE REPUKE PRIMARIES, and STILL A CONSERVATIVE WON. GINGRICH AND SANTORUM MUST JOIN FORCES IN THE PRIMARIES TO STOP RINOROMNEY. ONE OF them must drop out before SUPER TUESDAY. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR RINOROMNEY. Will vote for SANTORUM, GINGRICH OR PAUL. I will vote LIBERTARIAN AGAIN, LIKE I DID IN 2008 IF RINOROMNEY WINS.
Report Post »tajloc
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:06amI agree w Mikee. I have an RP sticker on. But I know what the nominating convvention looks like. It is just possible if Ron’s voters go to Rick then it really will be a strong sweep. Let’s pray for it.
Report Post »By the way don’t respond to the demos on this blog. Rom 8:28
louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:51amDoes America really want a clear alternative to Obama? Reading the posts here answers that question.
Tell me…..how does a progressive republican and a progressive democrat debate each other when there is basically no real difference in philosophy?
Has America already given up on Liberty in our short existence as a nation?
“Where the Spirit of God is, there is Liberty”.
Look at what America has become. Is the Spirit of God in America today?
Report Post »whereareyourbrains
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:33amYour funny. Obama pretty smile won’t work this time…..I don’t see 2 people the same…..you might..only because you don’t look into what Obama is REALLY doing to our country. There is no other canidate that would continue Obamas plans…………..You can say they all are progressive…..but none of these candidates are like the King Obama………..stop trying to say they are alike. They are night and day (get it) LOUIS
Report Post »louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:58amWhereareyourbrains: They are alike….look at their records and how they voted. Their records cannot lie.
Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »flipper1073
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:23am@ LOUISE
I hate to disagree with you BUT The republicans may be Moderate/Progressive.
Obama is Marxist/ Communist. BIG difference
I know you are a Ron Paul Supporter I hope He gets a Primetime Speach at the
Report Post »Convention an a Cabinet Post ! He’s driveing the rest toward the Right/Constitution
an add’s much to the debates.
Have a Nice Day
JJ Coolay
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:52amThank you Flipper. So tired of everyone calling Romney an = Obama. This is totally untrue and yet people flap their lips like they’re political know it alls.
Report Post »Romney may be moderate, for sure. But he is FAR from what Obama is.
WakingSheep
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:57am@JJCOOLAY
Yeah there is no telling what mitt really is. He doesn’t even know who he really is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9njHHyRI7g
Report Post »jujubeebee
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:19amLouise, none of the candidates would do to the country what Obama will do if he gets a second term. You are out of your mind if you lump any of the GOP candidates in the same “progressive” category. Maybe you have watched Glenn Beck too much? Obama is a marxist communist out to fundamentally ruin the USA. If you stay home and whine about not getting your person in to run against Obama you are an idiot. One progressive type vote does not equal a marxist communist.
Report Post »louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:37amJuJu,
I don’t watch gbtv. We did subscribe at the beginning, but after 2 weeks my husband and I cancelled.
Don’t think I am out of mind by saying all the candidates, except for Ron Paul, are progressive republicans. Again, research their voting records and you (and others) cannot deny the truth any longer.
They all vote to take away our liberties except for Ron Paul. All of them obviously see nothing wrong with unconstitutional, undeclared wars. And apparently all of them, except for Ron Paul, think giving foreign aid to enemies of Liberty is a wise thing to do. Also, they all apparently believe the Keynesian economic model is just the berries (instead of the Austrian economic model).
You also said this: ” If you stay home and whine about not getting your person in to run against Obama you are an idiot. One progressive type vote does not equal a marxist communist ”
JuJu, There is not just one ‘progressive type’. The whole political system today is progressive from both parties. One monster with two heads and the monster is leading us to marxian communism. Doesn’t matter who is at the helm or how “quickly” we get there. End result is the same!
Report Post »So what to do?
imho, I suggest supporting the candidate who knows what he is talking about when he speaks about correct constitutional foreign, economic, and domestic policies.
It is not rocket science….just common sense.
blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:42am@louise
Report Post »I partially agree, newt is a progressive no doubt and mitt is very liberal in his view……but i dont know how santorum is just like them ….i think u need to throw your support behind someone who is actually going to do something instead of not voting for or against it …and than later saying i was against obama care or taxes even tho he didnt vote against it …basically what im saying is not going against it …is actually contributing to the evil…..and his stance that we need to return to pre ww1 and ww2 isolationism is beyond me ….its an outrage that he wants to leave isreal with no support, south korea to fend against china and north korea….and all of our providences around the world and allies that rely on our support……absolutly rediculouse ….reagan had a balanced budget and probably the biggest active military force since ww2 and still had a balanced budget ….how come ron cant do that ????????
blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:48am@flipper
Report Post »I agree with most ofyour post im def. not a ron zombie …but obamas an extreme progressive ..with marxist roots …hate to say this but if he was a communist things i think would be alot worst …and if he was a full fledged commie …well lets say they would run as one theyre very proud to run as a communist candidate.
ashestoashes
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:50amNone have a fiscal plan to pull us out of financial collapse..but Ron Paul
Report Post »No one has a plan to eliminate the 5 gov depts which reek of Communism /Islamism.. the EPA..homeland Security. and the Federal Dept of Education except Ron Paul
No one will protect our Constitutional rights being against the Patriot Act ..SOPA and Indefinite Detention but Ron Paul..his voting record and bill producing proves it
blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:02am@ashestoashes
Seriously ?! Go eat from ur ron troff somwhere else…
Im ron paul vote for me even tho i never voted for or against anything ! I will better the nation by stripping our national defense and leaving the second holocaust to isreal , theyre problem. and south korea needs to fend against china and north korea…….and basically the whole south pacific against china. and i will lower taxes by investigating the fed. …praise be to me
Report Post »louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:12amBlameless,
Ron Paul is not an isolationist. He is a non-interventionist which was the stance of our founders who penned the Constitution.
He wants to close down most (not all) of our bases overseas because we simply cannot afford to be the go-to military of the world any more. We don’t have the money.
As for Israel, they have made it clear that they do not want or need our “help”. Israel is a sovereign nation with a military second to none. Israel should NEVER have to come to America for permission to do what she thinks is necessary and in her own interest. As it stands now, America says she is Israel’s ally. Is it wise for our government to be foreign to her enemies….? No.
As far as a balanced budget, the only candidate that has a real plan is Ron Paul. Cut 1 trillion the first year. He pledges to only accept a salary of $39,000. Here is a link to a video with a WSJ economist who loves Ron Paul’s plan to get America working again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BjCq6woC_hg#!
Ron Paul 2012 to restore America
Report Post »louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:19amcorrection: “Is it wise to be giving foreign aid to her enemies”
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:52amIm not saying isreal has to come to us……but to not back her up in the middle of an onslaught is rediculouse….and im pretty sure they do want our help…..wow so the fact that theyre president wanted our help in case of a second arab invasion of isreal is ….them not wanting our help????…so Ron comes out and says im not an isolationist im a non interventionist……Non-interventionism is the term for a foreign policy in which political leaders avoid political alliances with other nations while retaining a friendly relationship which includes free trade. Non-interventionists avoid wars that are not related to direct self-defense. This is based on the respect for principles of state sovereignty, allowing nations to govern themselves as they choose.
Isolationism is a foreign policy in which a country abstains from all alliances with other nations, applies strong limitations on foreign trade and maintains a virtually anti-immigration policy.
Fine il play ur game …this is where im coming from …both dont want alliances …but non interventionism makes the state defend itself in times of war …..even though currently theyre our allies. so here is my though isreal gets invaded …so does kuwait. not only do ur gas prices escalate to 20 dollars a gallon …but also the terror threat …god forbid theyres an invasion and somhow isreal loses one of theyre nuclear assets theyre …theyre our last ally theyre in that region and ron wants to leave them defensless..just
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:54pm@blamelessace5
You really did take a huge gulp of the NWO Kool-Aide, and your Boggie man that you fear so greatly is the excuse given to pass laws like the NDAA that allows Obama to arrest you with no charges, no witnesses, no trial, and no release date.
You have been bamboozled into willingly destroying the Bill of Rights by a bunch of con artists.
I bet you didn’t know that when Saddam was working on his nuke program, Ron Paul was pretty much the ONLY one who voted to allow Israel to bomb Iraq…now did you?
That just does not fit your NWO propaganda that distorts Paul’s views…now does it.
Now look out…the NWO Boogie Man is just around the corner….
BOOOOO!
Report Post »readytostand
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:29pm@ LOUISE — I have studied some of the thoughts of Ron paul ! There are many points of his i could certainly agree with , such as fiscal, IRS , FED R. ! But i will never vote for an Isolationist or a man who apoligizes and claims that all the Evils in the world were brought about because of the U . S ! Not to mention his lifespan in a one on one debate ,after about 5 minutes , he derails and i am trying to figure out what planet he’s actually from.! I am not trying to be a jerk by saying this , he just seems to go way -way out there for me !! Wacko -KOO -KOO
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:45pm@readytostand
It‘s quite obvious that you have been listening to the lies spewed by the MSM that distort Paul’s position on 911. Here’s an excellent video that explains the truth.
http://www.youtube.com/user/EndorseLiberty?v=AwbBWEljyYE
Now I’ve got a question for you…do your views on foreign policy come closer to Obama’s and the CFR, than they do to Jefferson, Adams, and Washington?
http://www.fff.org/comment/AdamsPolicy.asp
Think about it.
Report Post »guido.cavalcanti
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:16pm@ flipper1073 Communism, Progressivism, Socialism, Fascism, all have the same origin and all sprung up around the world around the same time. Progressivism is patently an American political Ideology but the differences it has with these other ideologies is very minimal.
In fact most progressives in the 1920s and 30s glorified the fascist and communist movements happening at that same time in Europe, and vice versa.
Remember it was FDR, a progressive, who signed a treaty handing over all of the eastern European nations that would become a part of the Soviet Union. He certainly wouldn‘t haven’t done this if he had any major objections to their communist govt. So you’re right communism and Progressivism are not the same, but the differences between the two are so small they’re hardly noticeable.
Report Post »readytostand
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:27pm@Freedum luver – i do not need to rethink any thing over about Ronnie ! Any candidate who says the worlds evil has all been started from the U . S ! And Apoligizes for it , is crazy and dangerous, and will not get my vote !! Foreign dictators will find this man to be very WEAK ! And i do not follow the main stream media ! And know i quit , clicking into your Goofy ,Conspiracy, wacko offpoint videos ! Ron Paul has no chance of winning TROLLS ! Better start pushing Mitt now TROLL !!
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:55pm@freedom lover
Not really a koolaid man myself …but ok …now him having the audacity to give them bombs then and now he preaches non involvment in world affairs is just another reason how he says one thing and does somthing to contradict it …look pedal ur stuff somwhere else …most people dont support ron i got over it a month ago …the guy is too fringe he wants us to believe that hes a conservative but his votes say different ….hes too buisy trying to please everyone…and the fact that no one in the house or senat support him …he himself got one piece of legislation put through….sorry man im not drinkin ur koolaid or whatever hes havbing u smoke …sorry he lost me after he said ditch isreal and that 9/11 was our fault ….santorum fits my values and i like his record of consistancy…and all of u calling me names and stuff just makes my decision more cilidifyed.
Report Post »good luck on winning a state.
tharpdevenport
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:50amI told a friend this today:
I have an idea for a Rick Santorum commercial. You all remember that shampoo commercial from about ten or so years ago with the ladies in the showers rubbing it in their hair saying they got the “urge” and shouting “Yes!”.
Report Post »Okay, instead of “urge”, they are moaning “Surge” and are all wearing sweater vests.
ozchambers
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:28pmI for one, thought this comment was pretty funny!
Report Post »Montereyzman
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:43amHa Ha Ha …. Rombots
your boy not leading now … lol
Report Post »Charity in Truth
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:07amRick Santorum for President 2012! All Glory to God!!!
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:53amUmm, yeah, he is.
Report Post »Check the delegate standings.
jujubeebee
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:33amThe turnout was slim for this. The voting yesterday was done by people who are passionate about getting the non-Romney candidate. When this is for actual delegates there may be a bigger turnout and different results. People are all over the place undecided. I still think Romney is ahead. He has the most delegates so far. For me it matters most that Obama is defeated. I’ll take any of the four left standing. But who can win against Obama matters the most to me.
I would prefer hearing the ideas. The truth is that most of them have the same positions with the exception of Ron Paul and I don’t want drugs legal and have reservations over his foreign policy even though I agree that we do not need to be nation building elsewhere or policing the world.
My worry is the average voter …..those that are influenced by the negative ads and have no clue what is going on ~~~ the Jesse Watters man on the street types~~~~~the jerseyshore watchers. This election is the MOST important election in my lifetime. Winning matters!
I was leaning toward Newt until he was wasting time on negative Romney stuff because I liked his ideas and thought the negativity was not effective. Some of the things he was criticizing him for were not valid or effective. So what if he voted in a democratic primary to use his vote against Kennedy! So what with alot of it. Rick Santorum is steady eddie as he calls himself. Romney is not as bas as some on here say he is either.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:51amamen go rick
Report Post »TORREY
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:34am★Rick Santorum 2012★
Even though I like Newt Gingrich, I voted for Rick Santorum! Chew on that Fascist Mitt Romney and Communist Barack Obama!!!
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:54amFacist?
PLEASE.
Report Post »Tandem2011
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:09amWhen Rick Santorum came to Colorado recently, Focus On The Family Founder James Dobson came out to show his backing. While I like Santorum and know he needs the votes of the evangelical far right voters, I see Dobson as an intolerant extremist who condemns homosexual behavior and heterosexual erotica of every sort. (Dobson was behind the UN-Constitutional anti-gay legislation in Colorado Springs in the early 1990s, dividing state citizens further over the issue.) He fears human sexuality as “sin” while ignoring science and the experienced knowledge of millions. Americans should fear his tyrannical leanings against anyone who opposes his obsessive and intrusive ideology. Like Obama, Dobson would try to suppress our Constitutional freedoms if given influential powers over the president. When Dobson’s rank and file followers fall behind Santorum, I’m not inclined to vote for him in November.
Report Post »Robert Hawk
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:52amTandem2011 provides the comments of a true Stoic sophist, based completely upon the dialectic as it was defined by Hegel and his students Marx & Engels. The posters writings attempting to demonize Dobson are bound upon the tactics of Saul Alinsky.
It could have been simply stated that the poster did not believe in Christian doctrine as Dobson does, and was in disagreement with Dobson concerning the stated issues of sexual promiscuity and its Christian application as opposed to those of believers in Stoic philos-sophos doctrine. There was simply no need to use character demonization to depict Dodson who had a viewpoint bound in Christian doctrine as stated by the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 1, and as stated by the Scribes of Israel in the book of Judges.
Christian doctrine views sexual acts to be related to the command of the book of Genesis “ be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth”. The accounts of other sexual acts are explained in several areas of biblical text (Genesis, Judges leviticus etc.) The destruction of Sodom was due to unacceptable sexual acts considered perversion by our Father. Romans 1 is the most recent account defined by the Apostle Paul.
Non-Hebrew/Christian doctrine, allows/accepts all type and manner of sexual acts, none more than the doctrine of Stoic philos-sophos, which is the base doctrine of Hegel and his students which includes Marx and Engels.
Report Post »louise
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:08am@ Robert Hawk….
Report Post »Good to hear someone talk about the Hegelian Dialectic.
Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:10amTandem,
You wrote – “intolerant extremist who condemns homosexual behavior and heterosexual erotica of every sort”
Have you researched Santorum? That sounds alot like him!
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:18am@Robert, Are you saying that if someone isn’t a puritanical prude, they’re a marxist?
Report Post »CottonMPG
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:28amOk Tandem2011
Vote for someone who supports your sexual exploits of all types then. Do we have any outspoken advocates for orgies and homosexuality? Vote Obama or Ron Paul. I voted Santorum and I’m planning on voting for him in the general election as well. Then, I’m a Christian and believe God has a right to limit our behavior as he sees fit whether we like it or not. That is between us and Him of course. Laws are put in place to protect the weak from victimization and to protect society from decay. There have always been laws on the books to prevent extreme open perversion but behind closed doors it is between the participants and God.
Report Post »CMDR6
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:42amCottonMPG, stated very nicely. I is impossible for a non-christian to understand that we try everyday to live as God has designed and instructed/commanded us to live. “Be holy as I am holy” I am learning that not all people that consider themselves as beleivers actually are seeking out God’s plan and His kingdom.
Report Post »If Rick is against homosexuality, and he is, then that tells me that he is standing for the principals that my God has established. Go Rick! 2012
If someone has a problem with that, then so be it. There is plenty of room on that wide road to hades, I choose the straight and narrow.
Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:31pm@CottonMPG
Your strawman is quite weak indeed, as Dr. Paul is a Christian who does not advocate what you claim he does. If you have proof of your ridiculous claim, please post it.
Here’s a statement from Santorum that should frighten the daylights of anyone who beleives in the Bill of Rights.
“This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the BEDROOM, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”
Rick Santorum
Take note of the fact that he says government DOES belong in the bedroom.
Just because someone believes the Government should stay out of the bedroom does not mean they have an anything goes mentality, so your‘s and Santorum’s strawman just went up in flames.
Report Post »GulfPeg
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:03amGlen Beck was the one that kept the Republicans motivation up. The turn out to vote in 2010 I think was due to his show on FoxNews. Obama just won his 2nd term. His strategies are working! First the fake unemployment numbers, then once again dividing the nation, enfuriating the Catholics. This just made people vote for Santorum. Cannot believe my party, the Republicans can be such sheep.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:41amWhile I will always be grateful to Beck for opening my eyes to what was going on and I really do thank him for that. I must go on to say that I REALLY wish he had learned to be more like Limbaugh in refraining to choose sides in primary elections. To me that is a good plan for a man who holds a position of public trust as an arbiter of a particular set of values. His job is to lay out principles that others can apply to life situations. If he starts telling people what to do, he becomes a private-sector version of big government: a know-it-all who figures out other people’s lives for them. And that is where he lost me!
Report Post »Tigress1
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:43amBabeuf, I understand where you are coming from, but respectfully disagree. I’ve listened to Rush and Glenn for quite a while, but I give Glenn a lot of courage for coming out and saying who he supports. Rush is trying to appear impartial, but we all know he is one of the most opinionated people around! (I am not using the word “opinionated” in a negative way.) Everyone knows that Rush has a favorite candidate (there is no way that he is “undecided”!) and it strikes me as being manipulative since we don’t know his frame of reference on the candidates. For another example, lately I’ve actually listened to some of the liberal channels for the news because at least I KNOW they are liberal. Fox has been trying to act like they are conservative, but they have been getting more and more liberal all the time. I like knowing where people stand so I can take it with a grain of salt based on my own perspective. I prefer direct honesty over sly incrementalism any day.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:15amWhile I agree Tifosa to some degree…. You have also got to understand it’s one thing to have a favorite and quite another thing to constantly bash you and your candidate. I like Mark Levin best, we know he is for Santorum BUT his is fair in his presentation and does not try to divide his listeners or in Becks case viewers/listeners. I lost almost all the respect I had for Beck, stop listening and cancelled my membership. You can not “preach” Love and mean it, then spew the hate he has for others. That’s called a hypocrite.
Report Post »readytostand
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:53pm@gulfpeg – I guess from your statement you do not support Santorum ? Let me guess Crazy Ron, or are you pushing Mitt the flip -flopping pro choice / gov’t healthcare man ! TROLL MAYBE ??
Report Post »1conservativeman
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:03amOK, Rick Santorum is “The Guy”. Now is the time to stand up to the RINOs and the Republican establishment and throw our weight behind a true conservative. The lame stream media has been attempting to pick our candidate (read – shove them down our throat) for months. Watch the coverage, they don’t know what to make of the sweep last night. They will make excuse after excuse, and try to push their choice back to the front and we need to stand up and stop this madness. BHO must go! Everyone knows that. Even the independents know they can’t vote for “The One” this time around or this country is in for a world of hurt we have not see before. The issues are clear. We must reverse Obama Care, Wall Street bail outs, and defeat the liberal Energy plan (Cap and Trade is coming in O’s second term). Wake up! SLAP! Yes, that was my hand on your cheek! Get behind Rick Santorum while momentum is on our side. BHO has not spent a penny on attacking republicans YET. Yes, liberal super PAC’s are coming! Yes the democratic machine is winding up. Do you think Romney can stand up to Obama Care with his record in Mass? HELLO??? Gingrich supported Cap and Trade! Can he stand up to the BHO machine? Heck NO! They both supported the Wall Street bail outs! Common Man… Rick Santorum will be the nominee… Let’s get behind him and roll back the last three…uh…no…four years of disaster and get this great country back onto her feet and headed into the right direction. Sign up now! Backbone r
Report Post »Fed up in Bama
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:11pmI’m with you. Bring it on. :)
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:46pmSo if you want us to stand behind the only true conservative we should all be voting for Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is for following the Constitution. He is the only candidate in the race with true conservatism in mind and has shown it through his voting record. Check Santorum’s record and you will see this isnt the case. Santorum will get you 4 more with Obama.
Report Post »GulfPeg
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:00amGlen Beck was the one that kept people motivated and got them to vote in 2010. Since he has left Fox News, people’s motivation went down the drain. Obama’s strategies are working. First the unemployment fake numbers, then dividng the country by enfuriating the Catholics. Well done, Republicans. Just a bunch of sheep! You just handed Obama a 2nd term!
Report Post »Parrid1
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:54amModeration is best…….Is exactly how we got to this point in our country…broke……culturally, fiscally, and ethically and morally. If Santuram gets attacked on those social issues it will only fuel the belly of the voters…The guys biggest asset is his ability too stand….
Report Post »Git-R-Done
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:09pmIt’s time for social conservatives to stand their ground and NOT compromise with the left on anything.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:30pmOnly time will tell.
Report Post »Smaug090
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:42amGo rick go!!!
Report Post »1conservativeman
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:34amOK, Rick Santorum is “The Guy”. All you conservatives out there that have complained about RINOs here is your chance. We can bury the big government pretenders now. Independents will follow because they know that four more years of the Obama administration will be devastating to this country. The momentum is here! Let’s step up and do the right thing here. Stop letting the lame stream media, White House and establishment Republicans set the agenda! SLAP! Yes, that was my hand on your face! WE are the government! WE elect the representatives! Take the country back now!
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:11amWill you please point out where Santorum has voted to shirnk the size of the federal governement, curtail federal spending, or protect our civil liberties?
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 7:33amAnyone?
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:00amNo one can, simply because he hasn’t and all you have to do is look at his voting record.
Report Post »Santorum’s voting record shows that he embraced George Bush–style “big-government conservatism.”
While I like Rick, one thing I don’t like is he rejects having government leave us alone, True liberty, he writes, is not “the freedom to be left alone.”
marvel
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:37amRick Santorum is the latest anti-Romney candidate, since Newt failed. Rick is the only “conservative” merely because he asserts that he is.
The anti-Romney voters have proven that they have no real values if they would rather elect an adulterer Washington insider like Newt over Romney. Ron Paul has a real shot here in the end actually. Once Romney wipes the floor with Santorum, where will the anti-Romneys go? Some will finally accept Romney and the others will join Paul, which will be fine with me, since Romney and Paul are good personal friends.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:12amGod the Ronnies are out today hard huh ………. heres some things he voted for.
Former Rep. Rick Santorum has caught the attention of the voting public since his star began to rise after last week’s “statistical tie” with Mitt Romney in the Iowa Caucus. As they say, actions speak louder than words. Whether you’re a fan or a critic, this sample of Santorum’s voting record from his years on Capital Hill will provide some food for thought.
Santorum authored the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which ordered sanctions on Iran and those who provide “goods or services for Iran’s weapons programs.”
Santorum voted against the National Right to Work Act of 1995. This bill would have repealed certain provisions of Federal law that “require employees to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment.”
According to his website, Santorum supported The Protection of Lawful Commerce Act, which prohibited lawsuits against the manufacturers and distributors of firearms as a result of “the misuse of their products by others.”
He coauthored a bill with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) to give the President authority to implement sanctions against Syria to motivate the Syrian government to withdraw its support of terrorists.
He voted for H.R. 5970, which would have raised the Death Tax Exemption to $5 million, according to Vote Smart.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:32am@Blameless, I don’t think any of those votes really addressed what I asked, do you?
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:58am@justangry
i listed a few theyre,
Senator Santorum is a supports a balanced budget amendment. He stated that a balanced budget is neither extreme nor draconian and would return the US to it’s nominal spending level of 18%.
During the debt ceiling negotiations of 2011, Senator Santorum opposed the plan put forth to allow President Obama to raise the debt ceiling on his own. He supported the cut, cap, and balance plan put forth by Republicans. He was critical of Republican representatives who stated that the ceiling should not be raised and called that unrealistic and not leading on the issue. He supported the final deal on the debt ceiling, but was stated that it did not go far enough to reign in the budget and did not guarantee a balanced budget amendment.
As part of his 2012 spending and economic plan, Senator Santorum proposed a balanced budget with a spending cap, a reduction in non-defense spending, and a spending level freeze.
•Commit to cut $5 trillion of federal spending within 5 years.
Report Post »•Implement Strong America Now reform through Lean Six Sigma management process as a key engine for cutting government waste and improving efficiency.
•Immediately reduce federal (non-defense discretionary spending) to 2008 levels through across the board spending cuts.
•Freeze spending levels for social programs for 5 years such as Medicaid, Housing, Education, Job Training, and Food Stamps, time limit restrictions, and block grant to the States like in Welfare
blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:16pmNow answer me………why didnt he (ron) vote for :
Passed VOTE 923
Payroll tax cut
To extend a one-year break in the payroll tax and accelerate the construction of an oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast.
……………………….didnt vote for or against that one ….even though its a no brainer
he didnt even atleast vote for this
Passed VOTE 929
H R 3421
To Award Congressional Gold Medals in Honor of the Men and Women Who Perished As a Result of the Terrorist Attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001.
……………didnt vote for or against that one either …at the minimum
so between actually cutting taxes hes done neither…and when it comes to his caracter …nothing.
im so sick of u ronnies …running around spewing ur crap with no evidence …but questioning us ???
go eat from ur dear leaders troff somwhere else.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:22pmAnyone??
Report Post »Freedomluver
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:18pm@blamelessace5
It‘s a waste of time to run around Washington to vote on a bill who’s outcome is already determined.
Just as Ron Paul did not run back to Washington to vote on the NDAA that was a done deal with or without him, and everyone knows where he stands on that disaster.
He did however go back to Washington to propose a bill to repeal the most disgusting parts of the NDAA, because that might actually make a difference.
You ain’t too sharp…are ya?
Now tell us…what does it feel like to hold views on foreign policy that are much closer to Obama’s and the CFR, than they are to Washington’s, Jefferson’s, and Adams?
Please….do tell.
After that, you can defend Santorum’s love for the WELFARE STATE.
http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2012/01/11/rick-santorum-a-massively-expanded-welfare-state-is-the-genuine-conservatism-our-founders-envisioned/
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:00pmI didn’t ask what he said he was going to do. I asked what he’s actually voted for. The bills you mentioned in your previous post are irrelevant to the three areas I referred to. I don‘t know why RP didn’t vote on the two bills you listed. I would guess there was something in them he believed was unconstitutional. Furthermore, there’s no reason for you to get uppity and bash Ron Paul supporters because I asked questions, which neither you or anyone else seem to be able to answer.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:47pmNeither did i …those are what hes done …..and what does that say about your dear leader ….so what were just suppose to take him by his word ????? even though he voted on nothing ….good luck is all i have to say.
welfare state ya
go pedal somewhere else
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:38pmMy bad, I misread. So he promoted curbing spending to the MASSIVELY INCREASED spending level that he and Bush gave us. I hate to burst your bubble dude, but we were going broke in 2008, no?
Report Post »justangry
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 6:08pmOh and for the record, I’m a civil liberties-type Ron Paul supporter. I do desperately want our national debt under control, I just don‘t really know the ins and outs of economics at that level other than our dollars would have more purchasing power if we didn’t owe so much. I merely asked because I’m on the fence about not writing in RP based on the fact Santorum said we needed to appoint originalist judges. My questions weren’t meant to piss anyone off.
Report Post »Pacman116
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:27amCongrats Rick! Wish you the best of luck the rest of the way.
Report Post »Wolverine Attack-Bot
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:16amAn encouraging night! I noted, with interest, that Santorum has raised nearly a record low in big funds up to this point. It’s nice to see him win. Nice to see people putting more value on substance than polish, perceived electability, or the most ads on TV.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:26amAgreed, I’m about sick of Romney touting his resources. We all know you have money Mittens, that’s not high on my list of prerequisites for POTUS. Keep it rolling Rick.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:12amHopefully this FINALLY gets him the attention from the media he hasn’t gotten in the past. Along with that, however, I fully expect them to try to destroy him .. let’s hope they are unsuccessful in that.
Santorum 2012!
Report Post »OMG 2012!
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:21amPlease don’t let this guy be the nominee. I want someone who can beat Obama. I know there are polls that say that he is doing better then all the Republicans when compared to Obama, but one could argue that it is because most of the talk is about Romney/Gingrich.
The second the Obama machine starts running attack ads against Santorum on his comments about homosexuality, birth control and other issues, I think they will turn off about every gay person every young voter who may not be gay, but support gay people and have gay friends and some of the women vote.
Only time will tell.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 5:48amMODERATIONISBEST What makes you think Mitt Witt can beat anyone? Some poll? Same poll would tell ya that Mitt Witt should be on top as we speak……… Remember the lib media picked Mcdillweed and you know how that worked out. Keep Mr Plastic northeast lib……..
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 9:52am@MODERATION
I have seen and heard Santorum in person .. he loves this country … he has great ideas to get the country BACK and he can beat Obama .. if people who were Paul and Newt and Mitt supporters will get behind him … and do what is right for the COUNTRY .. and not just play .. my guy or no guy.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:43pm@MODERATIONISBEST
I was going to ask if you really thought that Mitt could win, but since you are not responding to me any more, I will just comment.
Here is a previous post from you:
MODERATIONISBEST
Posted on January 6, 2012
“Sadly, I don’t see anybody beating Obama. I BET I”LL JUST END UP NOT VOTING.
Rick means well and is probably a nice guy but when you start talking about simple things like being against birth control, that to me is just so far outside a rational thought I have trouble taking him seriously on other issues.
I like Ron Paul but don‘t think he’d be able to be President. I think he’d be a good number 2 or 3 in an administration. A guy that can come to you and tell him serious issues that need to be looked at and addressed but then allow the President to be the one to bring it up in a Presidential way.”
So you don’t like Rick, you don’t think Ron is qualified, and you said no one can beat Obama, so you will most likely won’t vote at all.
This was my response to that post:
“You said ”Sadly, I don’t see anyone beating Obama”
That implies that you WANT him to lose, but yet you might not vote to remove him?
Isn’t that the same thing as voting FOR him?
Unless you think the alternative is worse?
Would you then not vote FOR Obama to keep the bad alternative from winning?
Still you say you might not vote.
I thought atheists were supposed to be logical”
Can you tell the Blaze who you want to win, and will you vot
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 1:49pmContinuesd:
And will you vote for him?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 2:45pm@CAT
I am not calling into question his sincerity in his comments. He may feel it is the best way to “bring back” America.
The fact is, the Government we have now is fueled around attack ads, and Santorum has given Obama and his administration plenty of material to use in the general election.
Those ads will paint Santorum as an extremist when it comes to moral issues. I can just see some of them now, “Rick Santorum equates homosexuality to child molestation and bestiality” and “Rick Santorum thinks that privacy isn’t guaranteed in the Constitution, and that homosexual acts can be regulated by the state similarly to child molestation, and incest.” I will not even go into his comments about the Catholic church sex abuse scandal and what is behind(no pun intended) it.
My whole argument is, while this guy may have some decent ideas on the economy, his views and statements on moral issues will scare off a lot of potential voters because they view him as some gay hating religious zealot who wants to “comport civil law with the higher law.”
Until he starts to do better in other states that aren’t heavily religious, and actually have binding delegates, I just can’t take him seriously as a candidate and think that if the GOP mistakenly gets behind this guy, Obama will get re-elected.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:15pmI don’t understand how people can call me “silly” for thinking that America is over time, becoming more and more like a theocracy. I have always said explicitly, not a theocracy in the terms of, “You have to be my religion” but a theocracy in the terms that “I will pass legislation forcing you to conform your life and actions around my beliefs.”
As I stated in here, Santorum continually talks about comporting civil law with a higher law, and he has 4 won states in this Presidential election(although 3 of them were non binding so we will see how much weight he carries). So there is obviously some support out there for a guy who wants to use the Government to FORCE people to conform their lives around his views of what the higher law stipulates.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 3:32pm@MODERATIONISBEST
I just can’t help but to wonder which of the remaining candidates you are rooting for, and will you actually vote for him in November?
Report Post »Wdawg
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:12amThe rise of Santorum!
Report Post »carbonyes
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:07amWay to go Rick. there will no doubt be some critics on the Blaze, but your grit, resolve and a fire in your belly and a never give up attitude, along with a love for this country and the American people and a profound belief in God, will continue to carry you forward. You are the best we have going and we will continue to do what we can to help you.
Report Post »bolsen00
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:16amCarbon—Oh get real! Time to come out of fairy land and stop being part of the problem uneducated masses!
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:57am@Carboneyes..I am with you.
Report Post »blamelessace5
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 11:23am@Bolseeno
Really?! ur a ronnie huh ! lol u sound like an obama supporter.
Dont pay attention to facts ..unless u want to be a contributor to the uneducated mass. its that kind of mentality that got obama elected and said to all conservatives that theyre too illiterite to do anything right. ….so go bow to ur dear leader somwhere else.
Report Post »Al J Zira
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 12:02pm@Bolsenoo: Get real? Are you so enlightened that you know something no one else has the privilege of knowing? Oh wait! You said earlier that: “Santorum spends a lot of time looking around and trying to figure out what to do by watching others.” So obviously you have insight to things the rest of us do not. Now can you prove what you said?
Report Post »Zoe
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 4:03amRick Santorum 2012!
Report Post »right
Posted on February 8, 2012 at 8:12amWoo Hoo !!! Hope this keeps up.
Report Post »