Posted on 01/21/2012 5:58:46 AM PST by cap10mike
In an age when politicians mourn the fact that they only have two sides of their mouth from which to speak, Rick Santorum is unabashedly pro-life, pro-family and pro-traditional marriage. He doesn’t waffle; he doesn’t back-step; he doesn’t sashay. Rick made this clear as far back as the Clinton administration.
When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was first lady, she published a book titled, “It Takes a Village,” which was premised on the notion that it takes the work of the entire community to properly raise a child. Santorum immediately shot back with his own book, “It Takes a Family.” In it, he made a compelling argument that the breakdown of the family structure is the root cause of many, if not all, the country’s social ills.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
Mainly the fact that he folded like a cheap tent when we had Bill Clinton on the ropes because he had a bimbo eruption of his own.
Newt Gingrich has astonishingly high unfavorable ratings among women voters for a reason. We will need at least 45% of them to win and he isn't anywhere close.
Rick Santorum, on the other hand, has Newt's conservative positions for the most part and Romney's ability to control his schlong. What's not to like about Rick Santorum?
Do you know when Newt will have his next bimbo eruption and fold like a cheap tent? Do you know when the enemedia will put the next ex-wife, ex-mistress or ex-girlfriend on to drop another bombshell? I don't think even Newt knows.
Drudge did him a huge favor by outing the ex-wife interview and forcing ABC News to run it before the South Carolina primary. I think the momentum was in his direction anyway after the first debate performance. But the win was sealed when he hit it out of the park at the CNN interview. Next time, he may not be so lucky.
I think Sean Hannity had it right. The enemedia narrative was to push down Romney in South Carolina with the Cayman Islands story and then unload on Newt. Drudge disrupted their timing, but not their ultimate objective.
I'd be far more comfortable seeing them throw dirt at Rick Santorum. Because their just isn't that much. He used to be my congressman as well as my senator.
I’ll see your Specter endorsement and raise you an anti Tea Party Scozzafava endorsement.
Won a majority of conservatives elected with the contract for America which he wrote;
Who balanced the budget and reformed welfare through spending hours at night giving conservative arguments and speeches in the empty House chamber on C-span in order to talk around the media to the American people;
Over the pius guy from Pennsylvania who did nothing much in leadership of anything except bite at Newt’s ankles and thinks he is running for Pope. :)
I'm predicting only an 8% win, due mainly to wives who will tell their husband (or pollster) that they are voting for Newt and then will not do so in the privacy of the voting booth.
Well written...I was in the Corps when Newt was working miracles against slick Willie, and I too was disappointed by his fall. I’m rather proud of his recovery to the big leagues of politics. However, a persons morals and values DO influence the decisions they make. Just concider Obamas morals vs his decisions, or slick Willie’s. They rarely deviate from each other. I had never heard of Senator Santorum before this election but after looking into the guy I also decided to support him. If the senator doesnt make it I’m hoping for Newt. Hopefully, this will be the end of Romney’s presidential aspirations (don’t let me down SC)...,but I don’t hate or demean those who support him.
I have been very disappointed by many freepers behavior towards fellow freepers.
You've just stated why Santorum isn't ready. If President Rick had a hostile congress he would be toast. Newt, with all his flaws, is the one with the knowledge, courage, and arrogance to get things done.
You refer to the impeached bent one?
Or perhaps the fact that he had 83 ethics charges filed against him, by both sides of the isle, by rinos and dems, only to be exhonerasted from 82 of them, and then have the 83rd as well shown to be ok by the FBI, and then have the house ethics panel explain away the fine as a cost of hassling him in the first place?
Newt Gingrich has astonishingly high unfavorable ratings among women voters for a reason. We will need at least 45% of them to win and he isn't anywhere close.
Newt has high unfavorable ratings among liberal women, and liberal men, no surprise there.
Rick Santorum, on the other hand, has Newt's conservative positions for the most part and Romney's ability to control his schlong. What's not to like about Rick Santorum?
That he is a puss, tongue tied, unable to get it together sufficiently to take the fight to the media and libs. Perhaps more practice in the ring, but not ready at this time.
Do you know when Newt will have his next bimbo eruption
Probably as often as the media thinks it can get away with one, real on not. It is the appearance after all, not the reality.
and fold like a cheap tent?
I see exactly how he has folded so far.
Do you know when the enemedia will put the next ex-wife, ex-mistress or ex-girlfriend on to drop another bombshell? I don't think even Newt knows.Oh, he knows. It will be every chance they get, documented, undocumented, fake but real. I am surprised rather is not in on it somewhere.
Drudge did him a huge favor by outing the ex-wife interview and forcing ABC News to run it before the South Carolina primary.
That is what it is going to take, in concert action against the real enemy of this country.
I think the momentum was in his direction anyway after the first debate performance. But the win was sealed when he hit it out of the park at the CNN interview. Next time, he may not be so lucky.Newt knew going in he was going to get that fast ball right down the middle. That's how experience comes to play.
I think Sean Hannity had it right. The enemedia narrative was to push down Romney in South Carolina with the Cayman Islands story and then unload on Newt. Drudge disrupted their timing, but not their ultimate objective.
The media's goal is to shoot down anyone, anyone, that is not a lib, every time. It is what they do. Do not think there is an exception, ever. Expect the worse, and be prepared for it, to shove it back down their throats.
I'd be far more comfortable seeing them throw dirt at Rick Santorum. Because their just isn't that much. He used to be my congressman as well as my senator.
If ever Rick bubbles to the surface, bet your sweet ash the media will be on him like a pack of hyenas on a downed wildebeest. Currently, he poses no threat, thus the pass.
He’s a progressive bully who doesn’t care whether you want to fund his environmental energy solutions agency or not.
Santorum just doesn’t seem like the man for the job. Is he a nice guy? I’m sure he is. Does he have great “social-conservative” values? There’s no doubt he does.
But at this point in time, we don’t need a nice guy. We need someone to *drastically* address the overwhelming critical issues that are directly in front of us before the country reaches the point of no return. We aren’t looking for a spouse — we need a President who can take on the MSM (to counter their propagandizing) and who can make a compelling argument to counter the weak-kneed GOP leadership in congress and use the bully-pulpit to reveal the dem /gop statist insanity. Santorum strikes me as the nice-guy who would rather avoid confrontation, would compromise first and (ultimately) allow the dems to control the terms.
Gingrich has proven he can shame the MSM whenever they try the “gotcha” game. His command of the issues is broader than the rest. Paul has some fiscal ideas I really like, but that I also realize have no realistic chance in congress. I also agree with Paul’s general view of decreasing the fed’s powers and returning those powers to the states. Then he goes and completely blows it on national security. Romney is a greasy, scamming, used-car salesman who would quite possibly prompt cholecystectomies on a national scale.
Off the top of my head if given a genie in a bottle and one wish, my preferred better candidate might have Gingrich’s breath & depth of knowledge on the issues, Paul’s fiscal & state’s-rights agenda, Santorum’s pro-family stance & ability to keep his zipper up, Bolton’s foreign policy and Reagan’s ability to communicate it all and *LEAD*. I’d like to fit some Palin in there too somehow...
But, that franken-politician is an impossibility in this race or any other. I will *always* have to settle.
In my opinion the highest-priority and most critical issues this nation *CURRENTLY* faces are #1-Fiscal, #2-Defense and then (everything else). That prioritization is always subject to change and mid-course corrections based on how things are going. Who knows, the following election, the fiscal & defense issues may be on a good path to sanity and social issues could take the lead. That would be more fitting for a Santorum run. But right now, of the candidates running and considering the most critical issues we are facing, Newt appears to be the best (not perfect) choice remaining.
Santorum is a calm-water candidate. He’s the guy I wouldn’t mind having as President after someone more capable cleaned up most of the difficult mess we are faced with — when things are going mostly OK on the fiscal & defense issues. Right now, we desperately need a fighter and some tough-love.
Just my stinky opinion.
The problem with your statement is in the premise....all thing are not equal.
FWIW, my lonely vote would go to either Santorum or Gingrich against Obama. But in terms of which candidate is more electable, Santorum wins that battle.
Why? Gingrich does deserve lots of credit for his leadership in ‘94-’96. But, since that time, there are lots of problematic positions, statements, ethical and leadership issues, all of which haven’t been promoted yet by his opposition. It will take a huge leap of faith for Conservatives to not be troubled when this stuff all comes out, not to mention voters who trend less Conservative. I’m not even discussing personal issues here.
As for Santorum, he was a US Senator who has been pretty steady in his views all along. I would argue that his refusal to back down on core beliefs contributed to his big defeat in a blue Pennsylvania in 2006. A flip flopper he was not. He was a leading voice on the Iraq war as the right thing to do and was soundly defeated because of it. But, like other US Senators, he does have votes on the thousands of bills on which he voted that can be questioned. That’s his baggage. On the personal side, I don’t think there is any dirt to be exposed.
Now, you can mock him for attempting to live as a good Catholic, but in doing so you are reflecting a complete misunderstanding of one of his campaign themes, that the cause of much of our societies problems stems from the breakdown of the traditional family, a theme I happen to believe in.
All that being said, I hope for either to win SC today in order to stop Romney. But in the longer run, while Gingrich is the better debater (although Santorum is pretty good himself), I think Santorum has already proven who is the better campaigner. Plus, with Santorum, the main issue will be Obama. With Gingrich, the main issue could be Gingrich.
Can one or two debates this Fall be enough to overcome all of Gingrich’s baggage? I’m just not convinced.
I wanted Perry to have a second look too. But this is just not the year for anyone who is lacking in debating skills to win. Both Rick’s are nice people and conservatives. But people are more concerned about the candidate’s ability to smack down Obama.
.
YES. Santorum does deserve another look.
Santorum:
Voted AGAINST increasing the number of immigration investigators:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00201
VOTED AGAINST HIRING AN ADDITIONAL 1,000 BORDER PATROL AGENTS, paid for by reductions in state grants.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00179
VOTED TO GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00058
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00154
SANTORUM: Trim Social Security now- even if painful.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j7O34Bpp42k-IlMMNiOLBkYF2zNw?docId=b1cff9ecefe24ca6ae1764a09761e361
VOTED AGAINST FOOD STAMP REFORM
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00353
VOTED AGAINST MEDICAID REFORM
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00352
Voted to increase the social services block grant from $1 BILLION to $2 BILLION
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00302
VOTED TO RAID SOCIAL SECURITY instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=2&vote=00056
Voted to impose a uniform federal tax mandate on states to force them to allow convicted , rapists, arsonists drug kingpins and all other ex-convicts to vote in federal elections.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00031
.
Santorum; Big government spender:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt6XCZz2X1Y&feature=player_embedded
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087812/Rick-Santorums
.
Santorum needs to put his ego aside, place his country before himself, drop out and go back to wherever he came from.
Rick Perry is twice the Conservative Santorum is!
He deserves the VP slot.
Since 2000 he has led the second largest state in the union on to be the most successful economically.
Perry stated that in his administration he would start all countries getting U.S. foreign aid at ZERO, until they proved to be our allies.
He was also the first to bring the war on religion to the forefront.
.
We agree on one thing, however: The real enemy of this country is the enemedia and the fact that they can easily lead so much of the electorate.
Santorum understand this. Nobody else has been outing George Soros in the debates. Not Newt. Not Mitt. Not Ron Paul. Not anyone else but Santorum. He may not be the smartest debater in the room. But he's good enough to know what we're up against.
The only thing consistent about Newt is that he's inconsistent. One day, leading the conservative revolution. The next, beating a hasty retreat. One day, rallying the troops. The next, doing a kissy-face on the couch with Nancy Pelosi. One day, pumping out great ideas. The next, denouncing Paul Ryan for right-wing social engineering. Do you know which version of Newt we're going to get? I don't.
With Rick Santorum, what you see is what you get. Santorum needs to stay in the race in the event that Newt folds again. It's probably not a matter of if, it is when.
It’s a shame Rick didn’t get the well deserved bump from Iowa that he should have but he handled it with class. At least Romney had enough sense to call him and congratulate him.
Rick is an OK candidate, but just OK. He is not a fighter. He is not aggressive. To be President you need to know how to be a prick. Nice guys don’t even get to finish. Obama would play smear-the-queer with Rick. If he wants to be a President he needs to learn to make a fist. Let’s see if maybe in 2016 he can do all that.
Romney says he starting that on Monday. And you know after tonight's second place finish, Romney is going to continue to ratchet up the heat.
Santorum, Romney and Newt each won a state - the race is fluid.
If anybody should drop out, it should be Ron Paul.
“he supported that monster backstabber Snarlin’ Arlen.”
Newt endorsed RINO Dede Scozzavave in NY’s 23rd district, but Santorum endorsed Dede’s opponent conservative Doug Hoffman. We should not hold that alone against Newt, but we also shouldn’t hold a (perceived) mistake against Santorum either.
Santorum said Alito would not be a Justice if it weren’t for Specter. Specter was very effective at being the head of the Judicial Committee.
Rick Santorum realized that The Dems would have control of the Judicial Committee, if the GOP didn’t have the majority in the Senate, and Santorum realized that Specter was the one who would win the election, as well as be effective at getting Bush’s judicial picks nominated.
“but let us not pile on out of campaign zeal against people who have always been on our side,”
Too bad some people act as if a candidate isn’t THEIR candidate, they are the worst person to walk the earth. Some people are just plain silly, which might be why they call this the silly season.
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.