Posted on 03/29/2005 6:40:35 AM PST by Conservative Goddess
Some very smart people believe that U.S. Senator Rick Santorum is poised to become ex- Senator Santorum, a casualty of his scheduled re-election contest next year with State Treasurer Bob Casey.
....
In fact, a close look at the record suggests that his confrontational style and conservative rhetoric conceals more than it reveals. Too much attention has been spent on Santorum the cultural ideologue and not enough on his pragmatism and political opportunism; inside this raging bull of a conservative is a pragmatist for whom getting re-elected always trumps ideology, which may not make him any different than other politicians.
....
The independent and much respected National Journal’s rating system cited here is probably the most highly regarded measure of its kind. What its analysis reveals is that Pennsylvania’s junior senator consistently shifts toward the center in those years just before his reelection. Santorum may continue to talk like a conservative, but he’s voting like a pragmatist. Last year, for example, according to the Journal, Santorum was actually narrowly left of the Republican center, with his votes placing him closer to Arlen Specter than to his more conservative colleagues.
Last year was not the only year he moved left. He did the same in the run up to his 2000 re-election. The year before the election, he supported a decidedly un-conservative sales tax hike in 11 western Pennsylvania counties to build new sport stadiums in Pittsburgh, campaigned for pro choice Christy Todd Whitman, and supported increasing the minimum wage. In 2000, he supported federal funding for several Pennsylvania projects, including money for aquatic habitat. He also fought to save the health care benefits of 560, 000 Pennsylvanians who participated in the Medicare+Choice program. Most revealing of all, he backed off his commitment for the 1997-balanced budget act.
Similarly, this election cycle, Santorum is showing renewed interest in transportation and other Pennsylvania pork barrel appropriations. Indeed, he has now become a key player in bringing the bacon back home. He has also held high profile press conferences with John Kerry promoting a measure that would accommodate workers’ religious practices and with Hillary Clinton for money to study the effects of TV viewing, Internet and other media on children. And he is now rethinking his position in favor of capital punishment.
Santorum even now supports Clinton’s Americorps program that he once ridiculed as a colossal waste of taxpayer’s money for kids to sit around campfires singing kum ba yah.
His conservative talk and moderate walk were on display recently in key congressional budget votes. Initially, the “conservative” Santorum voted against a variety of Senate initiatives to restore budget cuts by the House--from Medicaid to Homeland Security grants, to education, and even Amtrak funding. But then on cue, the “moderate” Santorum, voted with the majority, 51 to 49, on final passage to restore the cuts to education, Medicaid, and the other domestic programs he had previously not supported.
....
But this focus on Santorum’s high profile rhetoric has been myopic, causing his adversaries to miss much that is important. In particular, insufficient attention has been paid to Santorum’s unflagging work at his party’s grass roots; how he’s established comprehensive constituency services; how he’s worked tirelessly for Republicans--ask Arlen Specter about this--and how he has joined Specter in the Pennsylvania pork brigade. And far too little notice has been given to how he has blended his conservative zealotry with political pragmatism.
Maybe Democrats will learn the lesson taught here. Maybe they will learn not to underestimate Santorum. Maybe they will learn to watch what he does more closely than what he says. Maybe they will learn to take him less seriously as an ideologue and more seriously as a politician. And maybe they will finally defeat him next year. Maybe!
Thanks for visiting. Yes, it appears that the majority expect and tolerate duplicity in their elected officials. Worse, their minds are made up, much as mine once was, and they don't care to be confused with new facts. When Rick supported Specter and allowed him to ascend, that was the moment that I was jarred from my stupor. It appears that the majority have not yet been jarred from their collective stupor.
It is sad and what is worse is that Santorum knew this would cause a serious rift with his base, but he did it anyway. We warned him, begged him not to do it, but he did it anyway. It's very easy to pontificate about pragmatism, but when a politician does that which he knows and understands will cause a rift with those who've worked tirelessly for his election, then he has no valid reason to complain when we abandon him. He abandoned us first. That is all lost on the majority of posters to this thread.
Your contention seems to be that Santorum would have been better off disrespecting the President and the senior senator from his own state, in order to curry favor with you.
SD
Did you read the article before you posted?
You disagree with a conclusion, but you don't dispute the fact that the votes are not what you expect.
Why?
I wonder if this "divide and conquer" strategy is part of that podesta (clintonista) started think tank in DC. When it oppened theys said part of their operations would be internet related in terms of monitoring and "getting the democrat party message out".
This seems no different than the absurd campaign of Bodonavitch (or whatever) which was little more than a transparent effort to divert votes from Bush.
What does your comment have to do with the article?
Why would you not be interested in examining Santorum's record?
Are you a RINO hunter or not?
Yawn. Post #48. Work on your comprehension and get back to me. His votes are exactly what anyone with a modicum of intelligence would expect.
Puh-leeze.
Can you read?
Can you think?
Where do you see anyone ADVOCATING voting for Casey?
Where do you see Santorum BEING who he says he is?
You don't have to answer. I'd only get more of the same garbage from you that you always spout.
Give it a rest -- calling Santorum a RINO has to be the biggest laugh of the day! I seem to remember this same thing being said against a host of Republicans that are conservative.
Bet you would have voted for Carson here in Oklahoma too because Dr. Tom probably would have done something you didn't like.
Posts like yours do serve a purpose -- they point out how little some Freepers know about politics when that cannot distinguish a conservative from a moderate. Guess the 96% voting record as a conservative is not enough for you? And yet you want us to take you serious? Not going to happen -- your true colors are showing of the "my way or no way" gang on here.
Last year, for example, according to the Journal, Santorum was actually narrowly left of the Republican center, with his votes placing him closer to Arlen Specter than to his more conservative colleagues.
Are we talking about the same guy? Are there 2 Ricks? It would seem so. The one who talks and the one who votes.
If someone told you that your house was on fire, would you shoot him too? Why are you so afraid of a message telling you that your 'friend' isn't really as friendly as you thought?
Yeah, you're right. Let him continue to lie and betray you until you can't tell him from Arlen Specter.
It's a year before the primary. We have a flawed and weakened candidate. What are you going to do? Ignore it and watch him lose? Pound him back into what he has said that he stands for? Good luck.
Or find a new candidate who won't compromise himself by taking help from the likes of Arlen Specter or Tony Soprano.
Ricky values his reelection. If he doesn't shape up soon, quick, and decisively, he will lose. Don't say that we didn't warn you.
ACU rating of 96 in 2004 and a lifetime rating of 87. Thats a good record. I am not afraid at all. I am just knowledgeable.
Is he, or is he not, supposed to be my voice in the Senate? You dance with the one that brought you....not the guy you meet at the dance.
What about this quote, from the article, do you find hard to understand?
Hillary Clinton is "shifting toward the center" as well. But none of us believe her. Why do you believe Santorum's electioneering and posturing is more indicative of his true self than his solid, over-time conservative ACU record?
There are always unpleasant things a politician has to do in ordert oget elected. Pretending to endorse a minimum wage hike is one of them. It's intended to fool those who don't pay attention. Why is is fooling you?
Or are you of the belief that only the pure and pristine are worhty of your vote? Cause there's a word for those who don't play election-year games. And it isn't "senator."
SD
Have any of you SAINTorum worshippers read the article?
It outlines his left leaning votes.
It shows his position relative to the other Republicans.
It shows that he talks to the right but votes to the left.
He is closer to Specter than to the more conservatives ones.
Why do you act as though nothing is wrong with him?
If you don't have any firm standards or principles, how can you expect a politician to have any? If you accept being lied to and being fooled, then you get the representation that you deserve. You may reward SAINTorum with your vote. I will not.
Believe it or not, he is the voice for all Pennsylvanians, and he must represent them all. Not just you and not just the conservative base. Politics is about the art of the possible. Not pipe dreams.
Now, do you really think it is a viable position for a senator to disresepect the senior senator from his own state and party and the President of the US as well?
What happens when Spectre wins anyway (as he was likely to do) and Santorum has to face him in the senate? What ahappens when Santorum wants to get his next bill passed and needs the president's help? What happens when Santorum needs help in his re-election fight and he finds the war chests of his GOP colleagues closed shut cause he refused to support one of their own?
You have to think large.
SD
How many pro death, pro gun rights congresscritters can you name?
There are benchmark issues that you can use to judge a candidate. Life and gun rights are the two most important because they are both essential to enjoying and preserving freedom.
But there is also such things as integrity and fidelity.
Santorum is Mr Pro life. He supported Mr Pro death. Mr Pro death who is also anti gun, anti small government. He is a huge tax and spend liberal. In one smooth move, Ricky's support for Specter backstabbed a lot of different 'single issue' voters. Specter is the antithesis of what Santorum proclaimed himself to be, but when he was needed to take the tough stand of supporting a like minded candidate, he supported the enemy.
Why do you believe that kind of man deserves to be rewarded with reelection? Because the new guy will be worse? HOW? At least you know Casey will screw you and you won't be surprised when it happens.
Replace SAINTorum in the primary or lose him in the general.
What you are saying is that Santorum made a political decision. Fine. The political process will decide if it was a good decision, or suicidal. I suspect that it was suicidal and the sweet irony will be that he won't have a chance to succeed Frist.....the whole reason he sold out his base. Ah, she who laughs last.....
If we continue to rubber stamp our ballots, because so called Republicans are the lesser of the evils, we'll simply elect those who have no allegiance to the electorate. NO MORE. Rick will lose and hopefully the others will learn from his mistake.
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.