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!
You need look only at Santorum's voting record to confirm that assertion.
LOL!!! Then you need to move to Oklahoma where we have just elected Dr. Tom Coburn to the United States Senate and took over the Oklahoma House with a whole group of Conservatives. You will find out that we have a big Conservative base out here that got Dr. Tom Coburn elected in probably one of the largest grassroots movements ever.
I have a ton of faith and the only way conservatives are to keep electing more conservatives is to get off the dime of "if you don't like something a conservative did then you are going to show everyone by voting in the RAT." We haven't worked this hard over the years to get more conservatives elected and throw out someone with a 96 ACU Rating because you don't like something he did. That is lame!
Time for "CONSERVATIVES" to wake-up and realize that you are not going to get 100% of what you want in the person you elect but getting 90% or more is a whole lot better than a RAT especially since they have moved further left. Even if they claim to be conservative when they get to D.C., they are under the thumb of Pelosi and Hillary. Very few Zell Millers left that would defy Hillary Clinton in the Senate.
I don't know her, so you may be correct. But her assertion is absolutely, completely, incontrovertibly true.
Meanwhile, your argument is...well, schoolyard trash-mouth.
Hey, I love Coburn. I'm not sure how that self-proclaimed accolade of getting him elected enhanced your argument, however.
Sometimes being practical is more important than being pure. If you wait for an electable candidate who reflects all your views precisely, you will be waiting a long time I dare say. In any event, Santorum is solid - his views regarding his opposition to gay marriage have echoed, he has been a solid vote for President Bush's programme. He is not in the same catagory as Chaffee, Snowe or the other traitors with an R after their names. I see no gain in turfing him out, only to provide greater power to the likes of Harry Reid.
Regards, Ivan
I've voted "pragmatically," delivered the Republicans into the majority, to little avail. We now have Arlen Specter, a man who ran for President on a platform which included removing the pro-life plank from the Republican platform, chairing the Judiciary Committee. I cannot and will not support the man responsible for that: Rick Santorum.
I am with you -- I read this and just started shaking my head. Have never seen so many vanities either by people I don't know -- maybe this is Howard Dean's plan for FR -- if you cannot beat them then have your people join them and work from within!
RICK SANTORUM 2004 VOTES (per ACU)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
+ + - + + + + + + + + + + + + A + + + + + A + + +
ONE negative vote, 2 absences, 22 positive votes. Yessir, Marxism if I've ever seen it.
She's a grade-A kook.
It's 'single issue' proponents like you that make me sick. Pro-Life.Pro-Life.Pro-Life. Get a grip and realize that some of you 'holier than thou' types are not very useful. I, too, am against abortion, but I WILL NOT let a single issue cloud my judgment or support of a particular candidate. Roe v Wade will NOT be overturned in our lifetime and, probably not during our children's lifetimes. Do you REALLY think Democrat control of the Senate would be in the best long-term interests of the Country?
The one and only one area in which there is no room for compromise is in the pro-life area. Compromises need to be made, but not at the expense of innocent life. Ricky sold out the pro-life movement, and that is inexcusible.
So, you propose, to keep from shooting yourself in the foot, you put the gun in your mouth before pulling the trigger?
Because we had some doubters out here that he wouldn't be conservative enough and they turned out to be for the other side. I left that out which was probably the most important part. You should have heard the ads from the campaign run by "Hillary's" people. Carson was the only "true" conservative in the race. In fact, in State's surrounding us they thought Carson was the Republican and Coburn the Democrat pretending to be Conservative.
We had a lot of experience with people just like the person who posted this. It was striking to read this -- right out of the Clinton playbook used against Dr. Tom.
Piffle
Please see number 46.
Someone like Pat Toomey.
Karma. It's a bee-otch sometimes, eh, Rick?
Then don't the let door hit you on the way out. Your anger is misplaced. Furthermore, I saw you troll this nonsense on FR yesterday.
How would you reward a traitor? If our remedy is not at the ballot box, where? How? When? Ricky has been in office for over a decade, and as he ages, his votes become more liberal. Enough.
You're going to punish Santorum for doing the same thing that President Bush did, i.e., supporting Specter? Did you vote for Kerry in 2004 or what?
One misjudgement does not (usually), a bad senator make.
Regards, Ivan
Then go support someone who will sell you out on everything as they will be answering to Hillary Clinton! I am pro-life but not going to sell out a Rick Santorium who votes pro-life for someone who wouldn't have the nerve to vote against Hillary Clinton.
I don't care what the one issue is -- I am against turning out a good conservative Republican for a RAT. Some of you need a dose of reality! Roe v. Wade is not going to be overturned anytime soon. Took years to get partial birth abortion banned and you didn't get that done by electing a Democrat claiming to be pro-life until he meets Hillary Clinton. Without Republicans, you still wouldn't have a ban on partial birth abortion!
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.