Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

To Florida Voters Considering Santorum, Does His Character Matter?
http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/26/se.04.html/http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/01/south_carolina_gop_cnn_debate_.html ^ | Jan. 31, 2012 | RetSignman

Posted on 01/31/2012 12:02:51 PM PST by RetSignman

For those in Florida who haven't been to polls yet, I urge you to consider the questionable values of the 'squeaky clean' image he tries to portray.

(Excerpt) Read more at archives.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: santorum; santorum4romney; senatorsanctimonious; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
I think folks should take a look at how sneaky, petulant and underhanded Santorum has been in the South Carolina and Florida debates.

I’ve highlighted two excepts from both debates from transcripts. I’ll supply the links to the transcripts at the end of my observations.

South Carolina: The question is: Who’s the best person to take on President Obama? I would make the argument that a conviction conservative who has a clear contrast with President Obama on the most important issues of the day is the best person — someone who has a clear contrast on health care, a clear contrast on global warming, a clear contrast on the Wall Street bailout — will talk about the one issue — [that huge issue in the last couple of years where government has come in and taken over, and both Newt and Governor Romney have supported that.huge issue in the last couple of years where government has come in and taken over, and both Newt and Governor Romney have supported that.]

(Keep in mind they didn’t have the option to rebut)

Florida: I’ll repeat the question for you. Why do you think you’re the best, most qualified person on this stage to beat President Obama?

SANTORUM: I agree with the previous two speakers that this is a big election. This is an election about fundamental freedom. It’s about who America is going to be.

Are we a country that’s going to be built great from the bottom up, as our founders intended, or from the top down?

I just think I’m a lot better than the previous two speakers to be able to make that case to the American people. I’m not for a top- down government-run health care system. I wasn’t for the Wall Street bailouts like these two gentlemen were.

Governor Romney talks about the private sector and how he’s going to bring private sector. When the private sector was in trouble, he voted for government to come in and take over the private sector and be able to — and to bail them out.

Cap-and-trade — both of them bought into the global warming hoax, bought into the cap-and-trade, top-down control of our energy and manufacturing sector.

If you look at President Obama’s speech the other night, what did he lead with? He lead with manufacturing. He led with manufacturing why? Because the base of his party, the ones that are always the ones — not the base — the swing vote in his party, the ones that Ronald Reagan was able to get — we call them Reagan Democrats up in Pennsylvania. Those are the blue-collar working people of America who know that this president has left them behind. He has a plan for them, and it’s more dependency, not work, not opportunity.

So he went out and tried to make a play for manufacturing. That’s been the center point of my campaign. The center point of my campaign is to be able to win the industrial heartland, get those Reagan Democrats back, talking about manufacturing, talking about building that ladder of success all the way down so people can climb all the way up.

That’s why I’m the best person to be able to go out and win the states that are necessary to win this presidency and govern with the mandate that Newt just talked about.

(Again he attacks Newt and Romney when they can’t respond)

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/01/south_carolina_gop_cnn_debate_.html

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/26/se.04.html

Character matters.

1 posted on 01/31/2012 12:02:53 PM PST by RetSignman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

This is not helpful. Rick is a fine young man, and yes, I am growing impatient with him. I have said some things in anger I wish I had not. But we need his voters to vote for Newt. I would prefer them to vote because they want to stop Romney, not because we used ‘negative’ techinque just like Romney against him. I hope they will please consider what a Romney nominee will mean, and vote for Newt. Thanks


2 posted on 01/31/2012 12:06:39 PM PST by david1313 (Newt all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: david1313

Santorum must be doing better. Attack dogs are out in force.


3 posted on 01/31/2012 12:08:06 PM PST by Kenny (<p><i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman
He's running for the nomination - what do you want him to do, tell the moderator the other guys would make a better choice?

Exactly what was the matter with what Santorum said?

4 posted on 01/31/2012 12:08:37 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

So Rick had the last word, and he used it to his advantage? That’s a crime and lack of character? This scorched earth policy being used against Santorum is not engendering any support for Newt from people like me who want to see Romney and Obama defeated.


5 posted on 01/31/2012 12:09:32 PM PST by kosciusko51 (Enough of "Who is John Galt?" Who is Patrick Henry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

That’s what happens when Gingrich and Romney go first.

If you have a beef with anyone, it should be the moderator, who picks the order in which questions are answered.

Paul’s answer came after Santorum, do you have a beef with Paul as well?


6 posted on 01/31/2012 12:11:25 PM PST by guinnessman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: david1313

[Rick is a fine young man,...]

I am certain he is in his private life but by using tactics like he has in those two debates, shows a level of desperation that should be highlighted.

Ambushing your competitors when they can’t reply to his attacks are usually reserved and expected from the left.


7 posted on 01/31/2012 12:18:34 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: david1313

My brother-in-law lives in Florida and supports Santorum. But he also understands that the first order of business is to stop Romney.

He said to me, “I’m voting for Rick, by voting for Newt.”


8 posted on 01/31/2012 12:18:43 PM PST by guinnessman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: david1313

There’s no way the GOP is winning the white house this time around. The enemies list has grown far longer than the friends list. Good people were accused of secretly working for Romney and destroyed. The left would be proud of some of the filth being spewed at Michelle Malkin over her endorsement of Santorum.

Now its all about assigning blame when the voters themselves deserve the bulk of it.


9 posted on 01/31/2012 12:19:24 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Your post makes no sense.

It’s the obligation of every candidate to truthfully point out the differences between himself and his opponents.


10 posted on 01/31/2012 12:24:52 PM PST by guinnessman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman
Santorum's strong arguments are evidence that he is a compelling candidate for consideration. Thank you for highlighting these passages.

I'm not sure why you added the negative spin, though - I don't think FR is a site intended for attacking conservatives.

11 posted on 01/31/2012 12:25:27 PM PST by RygelXVI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Any good debator would have done the same. I really can’t follow your argument. By the way, your link is dead.


12 posted on 01/31/2012 12:27:09 PM PST by FresnoRobert (When born, you cried and the world rejoiced. Live your life so that when you die, it's reversed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: guinnessman

[Paul’s answer came after Santorum]

Read the transcript...Paul went FIRST. Santorum LAST.

THAT’S why I supplied them.


13 posted on 01/31/2012 12:27:36 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kenny; All
He is not "doing better" he's a bit more than the margin between Romney and Newt in FL. A vote for establishment player Santorum (remember Spector over Toomey?) is a vote for Romney's coronation.
14 posted on 01/31/2012 12:27:36 PM PST by newzjunkey (Media will say a FL win returns Romney to the "inevitability" path. Fight back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

Rush gets it. Says that people shouldn’t count on the Santorum vote breaking for Gingrich. I know that if my only choices are Romney and Gingrich when the race comes to Michigan, I’ll leave that slot blank simply because I’m disgusted by both of them.

http://www.therightscoop.com/rush-not-sure-santorum-vote-would-go-to-gingrich/


15 posted on 01/31/2012 12:29:02 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I agree. Though I have now put Michelle Malkin in the same catagory as Ann Coulter. Not because she endoresed Rick, but because her main concern is bringing attention to herself. No, she is not working for Romney, but she might as well do so. It will be an up hill battle for the white house. We can not win with Mitt Romney that is for sure. Newt has a fighting chance because he really is an alternative. I do think we need to quite trashing each other condidate. We can leave that to Mitt, he is doing fine without us.


16 posted on 01/31/2012 12:29:42 PM PST by david1313 (Newt all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FresnoRobert

[Any good debator would have done the same]

The debate had ENDED.

The links are at the top and brightly lit up.


17 posted on 01/31/2012 12:32:29 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

[The links are at the top and brightly lit up.]

...and you’re right, they are dead.


18 posted on 01/31/2012 12:34:32 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Now its all about assigning blame when the voters themselves deserve the bulk of it.

To be fair, certain strong candidates did not step up to run, and none of the GOP's factions, good, bad, or indifferent, pushed forward a truly compelling candidate.

Imagine a primary between Mitch Daniels for the Bushies, Paul Ryan for the grassroots, Don Carcieri for the northeast establishment, Dave Heineman for flyover country, and a prominent business figure from the private sector.

But I would agree that the voters have at times rewarded bad behavior by the candidates we have.

19 posted on 01/31/2012 12:34:49 PM PST by RygelXVI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Rick Santorum is a fine man ... and he is acting like a politician that he is, too.


20 posted on 01/31/2012 12:35:20 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/26/se.04.html


21 posted on 01/31/2012 12:39:13 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

People should just stay home I guess.


22 posted on 01/31/2012 12:44:00 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
There’s no way the GOP is winning the white house this time around.

Isn't it a bit early for such conclusions?

23 posted on 01/31/2012 12:47:46 PM PST by energized
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

I anyone ‘squeaky’ clean??

Is that really the argument? That is why we should vote for Newt because Santorum isn’t perfect?

lol

Are you kidding anyone but yourself with that line of reasoning?


24 posted on 01/31/2012 12:49:26 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: b9

Ping (if case you haven’t seen this thread yet)


25 posted on 01/31/2012 12:57:56 PM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

[Are you kidding anyone but yourself with that line of reasoning?]

I see ambushing your competitors as underhanded. You can view it any way you want.

Very presidential material. /s


26 posted on 01/31/2012 1:00:22 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FresnoRobert

Rush Limbaugh’s final comment of the day. I wouldn’t call it an endorsement of Santorum but he does say that Santorum is the only candidate without any serious transgressions against conservatism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGPUM3Z-7b0&feature=player_embedded


27 posted on 01/31/2012 1:06:08 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: guinnessman

My wife and I did the same thing. We thought a vote for Rick who we like is a vote for Mitt.


28 posted on 01/31/2012 1:08:51 PM PST by Surfer Bert (Remember when seconds count police are only minutes away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

[Rush Limbaugh’s final comment of the day...]

I wish I had the opportunity for a personal rebuttal to his final comment but I guess that would be unreasonable of me to expect that. Huh?


29 posted on 01/31/2012 1:17:57 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: guinnessman

[...truthfully point out the differences between himself and his opponents.]

ABSOLUTELY...DURING the debate when the other candidates can defend themselves.


30 posted on 01/31/2012 1:22:28 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Finny

Thanks!


31 posted on 01/31/2012 1:35:56 PM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Did he say anything that wasn’t true in his close? In my view he nailed it.


32 posted on 01/31/2012 1:38:13 PM PST by hawgwalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek; Finny

Rush is WRONG! Couldn’t be more wrong.

Santorum is most certainly guilty by OMISSION, if not commission, by allowing this to happen.

It’s called con-swervatism.


33 posted on 01/31/2012 1:48:35 PM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I consider Santorum endorsing Specter a serious transgression against conservatism.


34 posted on 01/31/2012 1:52:45 PM PST by beandog (Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Which statement was incorrect?


35 posted on 01/31/2012 1:54:27 PM PST by skr (May God confound the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beandog

Dede Scozzafava


36 posted on 01/31/2012 1:57:06 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: hawgwalker

[In my view he nailed it.]

It doesn’t matter WHAT he said, it’s WHEN he said it...THE DEBATE WAS OVER.

If Newt or ANY of the other candidates had taken that time in CLOSING to ambush HIM, he would be still whining about it.

What’s so hard to understand?


37 posted on 01/31/2012 2:00:32 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: david1313

Polls have Santorum beating Newt in Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. Santorum is doing fine. Haters are out in force today though.


38 posted on 01/31/2012 2:09:19 PM PST by napscoordinator (Go Newt! Go Patriots (America's Team)! America's is going the right direction in 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: skr

[Which statement was incorrect?]

OK, I’m going to try this again, his attacks against his competitors could have been be as right as right can be but the DEBATING TIME WAS OVER.

He chose to slam his Newt and romney when they couldn’t respond...AND HE KNEW IT.


39 posted on 01/31/2012 2:10:54 PM PST by RetSignman (I take responsibility for what I post not for what you understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

I am certain he is in his private life but by using tactics like he has in those two debates, shows a level of desperation that should be highlighted.

If only Newt would have done a better job in the debates but guess what? He sucked. He was awful. Santorum won the debates. He is winning numerous mid west states so now he is number one villian. Well that is great. Go Santorum. I am a Newt supporter but you guys are off your rockers today especially the revolting nonsense of using his daughter against him in other threads.


40 posted on 01/31/2012 2:12:45 PM PST by napscoordinator (Go Newt! Go Patriots (America's Team)! America's is going the right direction in 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Rush is supporting Romney and Santorum is his beard, to go after Newt.

12 minutes into his third hour today, you heard him tell us that Santorum voters will go to Romney, NOT NEWT, when Santorum drops out.


41 posted on 01/31/2012 2:13:21 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

Seems as if you are whining about an effective close. Gingrich and Romney had plenty of money to spend to counter anything that Santorum said in a debate.


42 posted on 01/31/2012 2:24:13 PM PST by hawgwalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

It’s called politics and was a fair play for a closing statement. No comparison whatsoever to the scorched earth ‘slampaign’ Romney is waging. Newt wanted to keep it clean, but Romney insisted on going gutter.


43 posted on 01/31/2012 2:32:07 PM PST by caper gal 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

It’s called politics and was a fair play for a closing statement. No comparison whatsoever to the scorched earth ‘slampaign’ Romney is waging. Newt wanted to keep it clean, but Romney insisted on going gutter.


44 posted on 01/31/2012 2:32:17 PM PST by caper gal 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

This has got to be the most absurd attack on Santorum - or any individual - I have seen on the matter of character. Is this meant to be sarcasm, I hope?


45 posted on 01/31/2012 2:34:45 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman
Character matters.

If character really mattered, Gingrich would have been buried months ago.

46 posted on 01/31/2012 2:34:57 PM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

I guess you weren’t being sarcastic.

Beyond absurd - now it shows ‘poor character’ for a candidate to claim he believes he’d be the strongest candidate to draw a contrast with the opposing candidate and has the nerve to explain why he believes that’s the case...? And that’s a sign of “desperation”?


47 posted on 01/31/2012 2:39:54 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: beandog

Specter put everything on the line for Santorum twice before in tight races and no doubt helped him go over the finish line - it would have required a complete lack of integrity on the part of Santorum to have stabbed Specter in the back at that juncture after what Specter had done for him before. In the end, Specter stabbed everyone in the back (including, ironically enough, himself), but that’s on Specter, not Santorum.


48 posted on 01/31/2012 2:45:38 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

This is pretty thin gruel as criticism of his character.


49 posted on 01/31/2012 2:47:55 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman
[Which statement was incorrect?] OK, I’m going to try this again, his attacks against his competitors could have been be as right as right can be but the DEBATING TIME WAS OVER. He chose to slam his Newt and romney when they couldn’t respond...AND HE KNEW IT.

You did not answer the question. The responses to those issues had already been hashed out during the debate, and in his close, Santorum was drawing the contrast making the case he believes he would be the strongest because those previous positions could not be brought back on him like he believes could be used against the other candidates. So in order for this to be a 'slam' or an 'ambush' it would have to be something either untrue or not previously discussed in the campaign - and this of course has been rehashed repeatedly over the course of the campaign.

This is a flimsy, nonsensical attack on Santorum's integrity. You should be embarrassed.

50 posted on 01/31/2012 2:51:12 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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