Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Palin says Santorum is not a ‘threat’ to Romney
The Blaze ^ | 2-11-12 | Santerelli

Posted on 02/12/2012 2:35:54 PM PST by VinL

Former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin stole the show at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference where she delivered the event’s keynote speech Saturday. After slamming the President, shutting up some protesters, and saying that the drawn out Republican primary promotes competition and a better nominee, the former Alaska governor took a few questions as she headed for the door following the rousing remarks. When asked by Anneke Green of the Washington Times if she thought a surging Sen. Santorum was a threat to front-runner Mitt Romney; “Palin answered that she wouldn‘t consider him a threat but was still ’a good competitor.’”

Green writes that Palin praised the remaining Republican presidential candidates’ willingness to compete and appreciated their efforts as “warriors in the arena.”

While still not offering up an endorsement, Palin has spoken fondly about former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who she said she would have voted for in the South Carolina Republican primary.

(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: blog; braking; gingrich; palin; santorum; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last
To: VinL

I should be more accurate. There is no indication that the word “threat” was ever said by Palin. It’s not in quotes in the original article, it was in the question.

So there is no way to guess what Sarah Palin said; She could well have answered “No, I consider him a competitor”. Which would indicate she was rejecting the “threat” word, not claiming that he couldn’t beat Romney. “Good competitor” means someone who can win.

The question at this point might be, is Romney a threat to Santorum :-)


101 posted on 02/12/2012 5:41:54 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

If I’m not mistaken, Santorum is also rated higher by the NRA and GOA.

Not that I’m against Newt at all. I prefer him as our candidate but am sick of the unfair criticisms of Santorum.


102 posted on 02/12/2012 5:43:02 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: livius
I just wish she'd taken up the fight and gone for it. Seems like she had the fortitude to withstand the firestorm. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe she wasn't up to the crucible. But there's no one else who unflinchingly stands up for the America many of us believe in - apparently you undergo a withering and relentless attack if you do that.

We're back to the founding of this country where people felt they were sacrificing their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor (was "family" in that list?.) Looks like your family also has to go on the altar. Too high a price for many including apparently Palin.

103 posted on 02/12/2012 5:46:23 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

Ditto to you and your family, Christie. Romney site- brave girl. -:) Newt’s his only real competitor- they know that. Meanwhile, Newt’s out trying to raise money- Ca and Texas. If he takes the South, Perry folks will open the wallets. Then, it’s a new ballgame.

We just need to catch a break-— pray harder. -:)

Vin


104 posted on 02/12/2012 5:52:32 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: mylife
Palin is from first, the Goldwater School of Western, small (l)ibertarians which also included Reagan.

There's not a lot of desire to tall other folks what to do outside the sanctity of life.

Very small Federal Government in all respects.

I am not surprised she doesn't think much of Santorum.

105 posted on 02/12/2012 5:52:41 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Funny, that’s what everyone who worked with Gingrich says.


106 posted on 02/12/2012 5:53:25 PM PST by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: trisham

I really like that graphic.


107 posted on 02/12/2012 5:53:41 PM PST by CatherineofAragon (I can haz Romney's defeat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Sarah doesn’t think Santorum is a “threat” to Romney, he’s a competitor. She rejected the word “threat”, because it denotes combat, and she’s said she doesn’t think our candidates should be tearing each other down.
******************
Oh! Thanks for explaining that Charley. As you know, I just post, you decide. -:)


108 posted on 02/12/2012 5:56:32 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: livius

All I know is that Gingrich hasn’t won anything except SC and he’s trailing Rick in every state except GA, where he’s losing ground rapidly. In all the National polls, Newt is toast. And if you are hitting bottom as Super Tuesday, then it is probably time to go back to making global warming commercials with Nancy Pelosi.


109 posted on 02/12/2012 5:56:55 PM PST by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
"Glenn Beck's online hack rag pimping for fellow Mormon Mitt again."

Oh, there's a surprise. The other day a Freeper said that, for all Beck's hyperventilating about Santorum, he barely mentioned Rick's three wins and went right back to praising Romney.

110 posted on 02/12/2012 5:57:45 PM PST by CatherineofAragon (I can haz Romney's defeat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GoCards

>>Like it or not Santorum is in this race and doing not bad...

Which is really amazing, given that he seems really short on both ideas and charisma. Oh, and a record.


111 posted on 02/12/2012 5:57:45 PM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom

I continue to be amazed at the number of good people here on FR who insist on a candidate being “endorsed” before they will agree to vote for him or her
*************************
I agree with you. However, the benefit of Sarah endorsement would be if she actively campaigned for a candidate— she’s excellent on the stump.


112 posted on 02/12/2012 6:03:04 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty
Newt's been on a few positions.

Please don't mention Newt and positions in the same sentence. I just finished eating and that's not the mental picture I want right now!

113 posted on 02/12/2012 6:03:04 PM PST by jellybean (Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dforest
"He is no star. Sorry. Fonz, was cool, Newt is another pudgy gray haired old man like McCain. He won’t fly."

Well, Santorum sure isn't what anyone would call cool. Who in the world are we supposed to nominate----the next American Idol winner? Newt is tough and he's a pit bull. He takes control instead of waiting like a polite little boy for someone to hand it to him. That's cool enough for me.

114 posted on 02/12/2012 6:03:04 PM PST by CatherineofAragon (I can haz Romney's defeat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Arkady Orinko

The conservative women I know like Newt.


115 posted on 02/12/2012 6:05:39 PM PST by CatherineofAragon (I can haz Romney's defeat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll
Most of all, Santorum voted against NAFTA

Since Santorum voted against NAFTA then Now I will be glad if he wins. Go Santorum!

You cannot seroiusly be for NAFTA can you?

Most of our high tech and manufacturing jobs have been offshored.

Already the U.S. cannot even manufacture thousands of Products that China can. Pretty soon the U.S.A won’t be able to manufacture any product. Don’t believe me then read this article from Forbes which I excerpted at the bottom of this post.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

The U.S.A is in serious trouble. We need to do something and limiting the number of China products being imported is the key solution. Do any of you believe the U.S. won’t collapse under this mountain of Obama debt? Can any one answer?

Look 20 years ago, 99% of China people were living as they did 1000 years ago and the U.S. was far above any country in technology and manufacturing. Now China has left the U.S. in the dust in technology and manufacturing. This is what “free” trade with China has done: here is a short example that shows the problem:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

Amazon couldn’t’t make a Kindle here if it wanted to

Decades of outsourcing manufacturing have left U.S. industry without the means to invent the next generation of high-tech products that are key to rebuilding its economy, as noted by Gary Pisano and Willy Shih in a classic article, “Restoring American Competitiveness” (Harvard Business Review, July-August 2009)

The U.S. has lost or is on the verge of losing its ability to develop and manufacture a slew of high-tech products. Amazon’s Kindle 2 couldn’t be made in the U.S., even if Amazon wanted to:

* The flex circuit connectors are made in China because the US supplier base migrated to Asia.
* The electrophoretic display is made in Taiwan because the expertise developed from producting flat-panel LCDs migrated to Asia with semiconductor manufacturing.
* The highly polished injection-molded case is made in China because the U.S. supplier base eroded as the manufacture of toys, consumer electronics and computers migrated to China.
* The wireless card is made in South Korea because that country became a center for making mobile phone components and handsets.
* The controller board is made in China because U.S. companies long ago transferred manufacture of printed circuit boards to Asia.
* The Lithium polymer battery is made in China because battery development and manufacturing migrated to China along with the development and manufacture of consumer electronics and notebook computers.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

How will the U.S.A defend itself if we don't have the ability to manufacture anything but are dependent on evil communist China who has already destroyed us economically with their economic war against the U.S? We need to be for America first. Say not to trade with other countries and say no to illegals.

116 posted on 02/12/2012 6:06:39 PM PST by Democrat_media (China is destroying all our jobs and manufacturing ability. China makes everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: montag813
I don't know what Sarah sees that I do not.

You know what she wants.

117 posted on 02/12/2012 6:06:47 PM PST by writer33 (Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

Newt once sat on Nancy's couch?

Rick's still in Mitt's bed.

118 posted on 02/12/2012 6:06:56 PM PST by anglian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

I love Newt and would go out in a blizzard to vote for him. Knowing his great accomplishments as Speaker of the House has me 100% in his corner. Not ONE candidate running has accomplished as much for this country as Newt.
And yes, I am a very conservative woman.


119 posted on 02/12/2012 6:10:55 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
The last thing we need is a trade war. But Rick has a solution. Import more workers.

January 24, 2011 interview, Sen. Santorum said the United States is in need of more foreign workers. “I do think we need more people coming to this nation who want to be Americans to grow this economy. You want to fix the Social Security problem? Let’s have more workers producing and helping out the situation. For me, I’m willing to allow increased immigration to this country...”

Just what we need. more immigrants. (’open the spigot’- in his words) is what is needed to fix our problems, including our low birthrates. This is what he said. And that they ‘learn English’- and just a guess I but I think I know where these ‘new’ immigrants will be comming from don't you?.

120 posted on 02/12/2012 6:12:36 PM PST by anglian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: VinL

The media has so mocked Sarah with, sadly, some on our side agreeing with the media, that she really can’t endorse anyone at this point.......Don’t forget the new movie being released which will surely paint her in a poor light.

I agree that she would be a great draw for whoever she endorsed........maybe she will at some point, but if she does NOT, it doesn’t influence me.


121 posted on 02/12/2012 6:13:52 PM PST by swpa_mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

Well, that would all be fine, but he is tanking over and over. He blew it with that snarky presser. He reminded people that they didn’t like him much over the past years.

Newt has too much baggage. Probably stuff we don’t even envision yet.

I don’t think Santorum is cool either. But he is a cut over old worn out Newt who people really aren’t sure means what he says. I’m not even sure he knows whether he means what he says. It could change on any given day. That is his history.


122 posted on 02/12/2012 6:14:08 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: dforest
Thank you for the link. the article is of someone else saying that Gingrich is whiny. The writer obviously does not at all support Newt. That article is not the journalistic: who, what, where, when, why. So much of what is suppose to be news is personal opinion injected into articles.

I saw Gingrich speak after the FL primary and not once did I hear his pronouncements sound "whiny" or petty. The direct quotes from Newt in this article seems like an objective analysis on his part.

Now, if readers believe Newt to be whiny from reading his exact quotes, then so be it. But, for the journalist to inject such pronouncements within the opening paragraph of the article is disingenuous and blatant editorializing. This reporter is a shame to the journalist profession; he is disgusting as a matter of fact.

Again, please provide direct quotes of Newt's that can objectively be viewed as whiny.

123 posted on 02/12/2012 6:14:27 PM PST by sand88 (Nothing on this Earth would get me to vote for Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
This is from a Presidential White Paper at the Club For Growth site.

http://www.clubforgrowth.org

FREE TRADE

Free trade is a vital policy necessary for maximizing economic growth. In recent decades, America’s commitment to expanding trade has resulted in lower costs for consumers, job growth, and higher levels of productivity and innovation.

Some of Santorum’s most anti-growth votes have come on trade issues. Before assessing his votes against free trade, it should be noted that he has cast several pro-trade votes, including:

•Voted YES on the Oman Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
•Voted YES on CAFTA
•Voted YES on the Morocco FTA
•Voted YES on the Australia FTA
•Voted YES on the Chile FTA
•Voted YES on the Singapore FTA
•Voted YES to Trade Promotion Authority
•Voted YES to extend normal trade relations with China
But beyond those pro-trade actions, Santorum has some real duds.

In perhaps the most important free trade vote of the last generation, Santorum voted against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993, perhaps the most important trade vote cast during his career in Congress. Days before the vote, he said, “NAFTA will produce pockets of winners and losers across the country. Our area is unfortunately one of the losers.” That analysis, while arguably correct with regard to a small number of industries in Pennsylvania, ignores the fact that every single consumer in Pennsylvania benefited tremendously from NAFTA, as well as did many more affected industries.

As a member of the Senate Steel Caucus , Santorum voted for and co-sponsored a bill to slap tariffs on imported steel in 1999.

In 2005, Santorum voted in support of an amendment that would impose a massive, job-killing 27.5% tariff on all Chinese imports if China didn’t readjust their currency upward.

In 1997, Santorum sponsored a proposal that would impose a one-cent tax on imported honey with the proceeds going to the National Honey Board to aid in their research, a special interest giveaway.

124 posted on 02/12/2012 6:15:52 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

I’m sorry, who was on the front lines getting the crap beat out of then by the media during the 2010 cycle? Here’s a hint: it want mitt, rock, or newt. It was Palin. And Palin alone. And who out of those men stepped forth to defend her like she had defended every one of them? NONE. She owes them NOTHING.


125 posted on 02/12/2012 6:16:56 PM PST by DrewsMum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sand88

That presser was whiny and everyone was talking about it.

My mother even mentioned it.

It really isn’t worth any more time because the outcome for Newt hasn’t been too good lately.

Look, if by some chance he gets the nomination, I will vote for him. But I think he may be pretty well finished.

We will see in the next weeks.


126 posted on 02/12/2012 6:19:06 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: anglian
Santorum voted against NAFTA. I'm against NAFTA and trade with China. are you for NAFTA and “free” trade with China?

WE are in a trade war , only it's one sided .WE are not fighting back . So that's why we lost our manufacturing ability and Obama is exploding the debt. We the U.S. have lost our manufacturing ability did you read the article I posted? International socialists want “free” trade to destroy our U.S. border sovereignty.

How is that “free” trade working out for you? You really think the U.S. won't collapse soon under the mountain of Obama debt of trillions? Think again.

We need to cut government, cut regulations on businesses, deport illegals and stop trading with China. Pat Buchanan has been saying this for 20 years. Even Perot warned against NAFTA but Clinton signed it.

Amazon couldn’t’t make a Kindle here if it wanted to

Decades of outsourcing manufacturing have left U.S. industry without the means to invent the next generation of high-tech products that are key to rebuilding its economy, as noted by Gary Pisano and Willy Shih in a classic article, “Restoring American Competitiveness” (Harvard Business Review, July-August 2009)

The U.S. has lost or is on the verge of losing its ability to develop and manufacture a slew of high-tech products. Amazon’s Kindle 2 couldn’t be made in the U.S., even if Amazon wanted to:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

127 posted on 02/12/2012 6:22:54 PM PST by Democrat_media (China is destroying all our jobs and manufacturing ability. China makes everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: lahargis

Like I said. Mean on this site, geez. Jungle Gym


128 posted on 02/12/2012 6:29:44 PM PST by GoCards (I am a Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll
As a member of the Senate Steel Caucus , Santorum voted for and co-sponsored a bill to slap tariffs on imported steel in 1999.

In 2005, Santorum voted in support of an amendment that would impose a massive, job-killing 27.5% tariff on all Chinese imports if China didn’t readjust their currency upward.

That's good . That's a start. China needs to be stopped. China has destroyed the U.S. We have no jobs in the U.S. they and factories have been offshored. America first not last ok? The U.S is dying because of a mountain of Obama debt , illegals, welfare dependents, de-industrialization, and big government.
The international socialists want “free” trade to destroy the U.S. border and sovereignty.

Are you for NAFTA and trade with communist China?

The U.S. was the greatest , most highly advanced country ever, with the highest living standards . And now in a few decades the U.S. is on the verge of collapse under a mountain of Obama debt, has lost millions of jobs to China, has lost its manufacturing ability, cannot even manufacture notebook computers, cell phones, nor the Kindle, and a slew of high tech products.:http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/08/17/why-amazon-cant-make-a-kindle-in-the-usa/

129 posted on 02/12/2012 6:37:17 PM PST by Democrat_media (China is destroying all our jobs and manufacturing ability. China makes everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon
He's conservative on national defense issues.

Defense and Foreign Policy

Voted for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.

Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.

Voted for the START II Treaty.
Voted to allow the sale of supercomputers to China.
Voted to ban anti-personnel landmines.
Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.
Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same pay raises as uniformed military.
Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyrannical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea.
Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions. If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.
Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.
Voted against the Conventional Trident Missile Program.

He's conservative on gun issues.

Guns

Voted to require pawn shops to do background checks on people who pawn a gun.
Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device.
Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.
Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.

_______________________________________________________

Rick Santorum’s Senate voting record:

What A Big Government Conservative Looks Like

130 posted on 02/12/2012 6:42:56 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dforest
The Newt fans like to paint Santorum like that

I was no one's fan while watching the debates. Rick came off as pompous - I thought it was funny considering he's just a pup wet behind his ears with no great accomplishments to his credit - just run of the mill stuff he was 'hired' to do but kept us in debut with his liberal fiscal views.

131 posted on 02/12/2012 7:20:07 PM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner
Palin for President!

President of the Faux News Debate Team!

Jorge Bush can be cheerleader!

132 posted on 02/12/2012 7:25:15 PM PST by airborne (Paratroopers! Good to the last drop!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1; All
I'm getting seriously annoyed with people who can't even READ the VoteSmart web page, and post blatantly false information from it.

Last week it was the bizarre claim that Santorum supporter HR796, when he in fact voted to recommit it, which means he opposed it.

This week apparently it's a lie about the gun lock requirement.

If you go to your link, you will see that the vote that Project VoteSmart is highlighting is a vote to TABLE the gunlock amendment.

Santorum voted YEA, as did a majority of the senate -- to TABLE the amendment, meaning to KILL it.

Worse, Barbara Boxer is listed AT THE LINK as voting NO on the motion to table; so any idiot who actually read their own links would know Boxer and Santorum voted OPPOSITE on this vote, not "with".

With such a blatant lie on the first thing I checked, I have no interest in looking at any of the other so-called "evidence" you post.

Go do some actual research; stop letting idiot bloggers do your thinking for you. Use your links, GO READ THE DAMN WEB PAGES, and come back when you know something.

Sorry, maybe that is harsh, but this is getting rediculous. There are things you can legitimately fault Santorum over, and yet freepers keep posting blatantly false "votes" that their own links refute.

133 posted on 02/12/2012 7:28:20 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: anglian
January 24, 2011 interview, Sen. Santorum said the United States is in need of more foreign workers. “I do think we need more people coming to this nation who want to be Americans to grow this economy. You want to fix the Social Security problem? Let’s have more workers producing and helping out the situation. For me, I’m willing to allow increased immigration to this country...”

Rick describes a Ponzi Scheme. We need more people to grow the economy and to fund social security.

No thanks!

134 posted on 02/12/2012 7:30:18 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

Rated A+ by the NRA. Which is why I guess some Newt supporter thinks they need to make things up about him on guns.


135 posted on 02/12/2012 7:32:24 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

Hey. Sweater Vests are cool. And Bowties. And Fezzes.


136 posted on 02/12/2012 7:33:38 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

If I’m not mistaken, Santorum is also rated higher by the NRA and GOA.

Not that I’m against Newt at all. I prefer him as our candidate but am sick of the unfair criticisms of Santorum.


137 posted on 02/12/2012 7:47:37 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

One thing she hasn’t said about him: vote for him.

And you really need to improve your reading comp. Expressing an opinion or floating a theory is just that - it is not a lie. Maybe it’s right or maybe it’s wrong, but it’s absolutely not a lie.


138 posted on 02/12/2012 7:53:48 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

no, they say other stuff. Then again, no one has ever claimed saint status for Newt - totally unlike Sanctimonium.


139 posted on 02/12/2012 7:55:37 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

IF I posted anything erroneous on Santorum..mea culpa. I did post a lot of info on his voting record that is straight from the legislation he voted yea and nay on such as his vote for Sotomyer for the circuit court during the Clinton presidency and will repost it. I too am fed UP and sick of the lies posted about Newt over and over and especially on those professing to be christians that judge him on the life he is living now.
Santorum did vote to raise the debt ceiling and he did vote to fund the National Endowment for the Arts and to INCREASE funding on it. He also voted for govt regulations of wages and so much more that are true.
IF you do not like my posts..don’t read them.


140 posted on 02/12/2012 8:06:15 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

If I’m not mistaken, Santorum is also rated higher by the NRA and GOA.

Not that I’m against Newt at all. I prefer him as our candidate but am sick of the unfair criticisms of Santorum.


Posting his voting record is unfair?


141 posted on 02/12/2012 8:11:45 PM PST by RBK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; Windflier; All

Check post #130 by Windflier. I clicked on the links that went straight to the actual votes and you may check them out and verify them.
BTW, even rino McCain voted nay on Sonia Sotomyer for circuit court.


142 posted on 02/12/2012 8:13:00 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; katiedidit1
This week apparently it's a lie about the gun lock requirement.

ACU has Santorum down as voting for The Gun Manufacturers Liability Act of 1994, which prohibited the sale of hand guns with safety devices.

143 posted on 02/12/2012 8:24:41 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: VinL

...then either wholeheartedly endorse Newt or keep your opinions to yourself!


144 posted on 02/12/2012 8:26:54 PM PST by bramps (Cama, Cama, Cama Chameleon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Everyone has bad votes.

Center for Security Policy gave him a rating of 94% in 03-04.

NRA graded him as A+.


145 posted on 02/12/2012 8:30:39 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Hated to ccp this and post it on the gun lock ammendment. This is straight from DC and on windfliers post #130. S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Kohl Amdt. No. 1626 )

Vote Number:

207

Vote Date:

July 28, 2005, 12:13 PM

Required For Majority:

1/2

Vote Result:

Amendment Agreed to

Amendment Number:

S.Amdt. 1626 to S. 397 (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act)

Statement of Purpose:

To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to require the provision of a child safety lock in connection with the transfer of a handgun.

Vote Counts:

YEAs

70

NAYs

30

Vote Summary

By Senator Name

By Vote Position

By Home State

Alphabetical by Senator Name

Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Allen (R-VA), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burns (R-MT), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Corzine (D-NJ), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Dayton (D-MN), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea

Dole (R-NC), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Nay

McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Nay
Thomas (R-WY), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Vote Summary

By Senator Name

By Vote Position

By Home State

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs -—70

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)

Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)

Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs -—30

Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)

Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inhofe (R-OK)

Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

Vote Summary

By Senator Name

By Vote Position

By Home State


146 posted on 02/12/2012 8:34:28 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign; CharlesWayneCT; katiedidit1
Hmm, just checked the ACU site and I don't see any mention of The Gun Manufacturers Liability Act of 1994.

I retract my pervious post until further investigation.

147 posted on 02/12/2012 8:37:14 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: RBK
Posting his voting record is unfair?

No. I never suggested such a thing.

148 posted on 02/12/2012 8:42:07 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; katiedidit1
I'm getting seriously annoyed with people who can't even READ the VoteSmart web page, and post blatantly false information from it.

Alright, so Santorum's vote on Senate Amendment 3230 (mandatory trigger locks) shouldn't have been included on that list. Obviously, the person compiling the list didn't delve as deeply into the history of that one vote, as you did.

Score one for CharlesWayne.

You can stand there using that one error to justify closing your eyes to the rest of Santorum's dismal voting record, but understand that everyone watching realizes that you're employing a rather childish defense mechanism.

The fact is, Rick Santorum has a voting record that doesn't mesh gears with patriotic conservatives. He's a big government guy who happens to be pretty good on some social issues. Other than that, there's little to recommend him.

149 posted on 02/12/2012 8:45:54 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

Article by Chuck Norris on why he is endorsing Newt and he mentions this very topic.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/why-i-chose-newt-over-santorum/


150 posted on 02/12/2012 8:55:46 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson