"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 societey, that I am aware of, where we've had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.” -- Rick Santorum
Santorum voted for raising the minimum wage six times. He was all for getting rid of Planned Parenthood -- good!!! Atta boy Rick! I hate abortion as much as you do, amen brother! -- but instead of ceasing its funding so free people as taxpayers kept more of their money, he wanted to continue government involvement by using at least some of those taxes to pay for pro-adoption programs. As if Americans couldn't handle it without government "help."
Moral Americans can do and have done incredibly great things. They would continue to do incredibly great things except their government is an amoral force that tyrannically overpowers them "for our own good." Rick doesn't trust Americans to do the right thing morally any more than the Democrats do -- he wants to use government force to assure they make the "right" moral choice. That's government tyranny.
Santorum supported government force backing of labor unions that favor them in no-longer "free" markets. Santorum worked happily and well on the model of applying government liberally -- free-handedly, and although it was in pursuit of Christian ends, it was still the liberal use of government.
Bottom line, fellow FReepers, is that during the 2012 campaign, I read every single word of the websites of both Newt and Santorum. EVERY SINGLE WORD.
I bet not a one of you Santorum supporters did. Newt laid out a plan -- a flawed plan, a bumpy plan, but a RIGHT plan -- to cut back government significantly on almost every level. It was detailed and it was mostly of substance with a minimum of feel-good phraseology.
Santorum had mostly a lot of happy talk about how strong "family values" build "strong economies" (?? Then why does Mexico, where family values rule supreme, have one of the weakest economies?????) though with some solid positions on taxation somewhat akin to Gingrich's except for favoring unions more. There was zero anywhere in Santorum's campaign or presentation that marked him as a conservative -- that is, advocating for the conservative use of government. Meanwhile, most of Gingrich's website detailed a plan -- flawed perhaps but a plan nonetheless -- that specifically addressed and declared a strong foundation in limited government conservatism.
People accuse me of being a "purist" because I, a life-long middle-aged Republican, refused in 2012 to vote for a Republican with a standing record of advancing the force of government on five major fronts: health care, homosexual "rights," environmentalism, abortion, and judicial activism (that would be Romney).
Yet if it had been Gingrich, I'd have voted for that Republican, with all of Gingrich's many flaws. So I was some "purist."
There are limits to what I will vote for, these days. I will only vote for politicians whose vision and goal is to CUT GOVERNMENT. Anyone who has looked at Santorum's standing record understands that his goal is fundamentally to change government into one more friendly to Christian values, but with the same tyrannical force.
The words in his quotes above illustrate it pretty clearly. "Conservative" if you mean "advocates Christian values," "liberal" if you mean "liberal use of government."
You do raise valid points with respect to Santorum, and it makes him look far more left-leaning and statist than he appeared to be.
However, saying that, we must realize that the group of candidates than ran in 2012 were second-rate (or worse). They weren’t the cutting edge of the Conservative movement, they were RINOs, has-beens, and others out of their league. I was very unhappy with what ran, and realized that minus someone of the calibre of Palin (or Gov. Walker, who was a superstar coming off his recall victory), the party had effectively “written off” the election.
I endorsed Palin and stuck with her until she confirmed she would not run. I then moved to Herman Cain’s camp (as did many Palinites), but his lack of seasoning showed, and he literally had no idea what the media would do to a Conservative Black man (one that enjoys lynching non-White males). After Cain pulled out, I effectively went the same route as the ‘08 primaries, “None of the Above.” Santorum I initially viewed as in over his head (and having lost reelection to the Senate in ‘06, not a very strong candidate). I only swung to endorsing him as a last-ditch attempt to stop the execrable Willard. That Santorum pulled out just as he was gaining momentum confirmed again that he wasn’t ready for prime time (then or now — I don’t support his running AT ALL in 2016).
But a word about Gingrich. Regardless of what he wrote, what he proclaimed, et al, Gingrich was, is, and always will be toxic. He did a great thing in being the leading force to finally bring to an end a 6-decade near-uncontested lock on the U.S. House. But as Speaker, he went from hero to zero in a year. We were on the brink of ending that rapist abomination’s tenure as President, and Newtie allowed Slick Willie to get his mojo back. With the so-called “government shutdown” of 1995, it was all over. That was the last and only year to date when the GOP was in the majority and RAN IT like they were in charge. It doesn’t matter the years of majority control since, they’re just the opposite side of the same statist coin as the Democrats.
Newtie coasted for 3 more years in the House and never turned it around, and was effectively fired by the caucus (for far less than the execrable and incompetent Boehner). He tried for years to remain viable or visible, but I think he simply just went silly. The hand-holding with Nancy Pelosi, the gross ignorance surrounding the Scuzzyflavor (or whatever the hell her name was) special election in NY. The third wife. He just became a caricature of himself (nevermind he was almost 70, which was frankly too old to be running, as was McCain in ‘08 — Reagan being the exception to the rule, though he probably would’ve been at the zenith of his capacities serving as President from 1969-77 or 1977-85. He was not fully up to the task from 1985-89 when he was almost 78 at his retirement).
Often forgotten about Newtie is that he was a Rockefellerite. When he first ran for Congress in 1974 (and 1976), he was to the left of the Democrat incumbent. He moved to the right after that. However, he still often had that strain of making common cause with the left-wing of the GOP caucus. He also had an obsession with wanting the media to like him and thought he could do that in the years after he was deposed. What he could never comprehend is that the media is not the friend of Conservatives, and they never will be. One Republican who understood that was Jesse Helms, and he treated them like the lying scum that they are and never once lost a race because of it.
In the end, Gingrich was never able to repair the damage to his terrible personal approval ratings. Had he been the nominee, the media would’ve took singular glee in ripping him to shreds and dredging up all the old crap from his tenure as Speaker. Despite many FReepers believing to the contrary, he was NOT a viable candidate in 2012. He only had an ounce of credibility and the appearance of leadership solely because of the field of midgets, but there was no way and no how he was going to the White House.
Exactly. Rick Santorum is an outstanding social conservative. But he is a Big Government spender and taxer. As was stated in the 2012 debates ... Look At His Record (yea, ronpaul but on this and other fiscal issues his straight talk is right on)
"He spends too much money. He wasn't leading the charge to slash the budgets and vote against big government."
Rand Paul added that Santorum's vote history proved he wasn't a true conservative.
"He voted to double the size of the Department of Education," Rand Paul said. "He voted to expand Medicare and add free drugs for senior citizens and he has voted for foreign aid. Those are not conservative principles. Seventy-seven percent of the American people are opposed to foreign aid and Rick Santorum has voted for it every time it's come down."
In 2016, we shouldn't be focusing our attention on any of the 2012 candidates. Period.
Put it on Cruz Control.