Posted on 01/14/2012 2:05:00 PM PST by PieterCasparzen
Rick Santorum should be president for three basic but important reasons. First, his policies are sound. His economic recovery plan includes a reduction of federal non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels by enacting across the board spending cuts. He has called for and pledged to sign into law the repeal of ObamaCare and to replace it with market based healthcare innovation and competitive, market based solutions that will leave healthcare choices where they belong…. between doctors and their patients. Santorum has called for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution and a capping of government spending to 18% of GDP.
...
The second reason to support Santorum is the stability of his personal life. His commitment to his wife and family as a husband and father reveals a man of character who is willing to keep his word. You can’t be pro-family when your family is in disarray.
...
Finally, Santorum deserves our support because of his passion for God. He has had his faith tested in the crucible of personal trial and in the pressure cooker of public attacks against him because of his strong stands on moral issues. His personal relationship with Jesus Christ has in the past and continues in the present to sustain and strengthen him.
...
All of the candidates for the Republican nomination have their strengths. But only one can be the standard-bearer of true conservatism.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at christianfaithinamerica.com ...
Yeah, I could, but I've been reading here long enough to know that very few would follow the link. Better to paste the entire thing into a thread where more people will actually read it. And I know they do, because many have thanked me for posting Santorum's voting record.
I'd like to think conservatives would vote with their heads, not their hearts, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
I've repeatedly posted that copy of Santorum's voting record into multiple threads, precisely to give conservatives the data to make an informed choice. Now, the fact that you're complaining about it only says that you're not really interested in conservatives voting with their heads. You're angry because I'm exposing something which is discomforting to you.
I've already responded that I'm fully aware of Newt Gingrich's past transgressions against our commonly held conservative ideals, and that they irritated me just as much as they irritated any other conservative here. I've also stated that I believe the good he did while in office, far outweighs his errors and mistakes.
So, there it is. Go ahead and compile a list of Gingrich's voting record and 'spam' it to the forum if you like. I won't complain. It's what vetting these candidates is all about.
If you acknowledge what you know, you know nobody is reading your spam comment either — they ignore it just like the link, only you make it more painful for them. You aren’t offering information, you are beating them on the head with it.
Anyway, I just find it interesting that I see the same people I saw in July, still attacking good conservative candidates, only in support of different candidates than they supported. In my unaccepted opinion, if you are on your 3rd candidate, you need to stop beating other people over the head with your objections. Accept that you maybe have finally settled down, and leave well enough alone.
There’s a reason why back in July, few of the Gingrich supporters were supporting him. There’s a reason why, after Perry was destroyed, many went to the amateur neophyte Cain, who had no chance of winning anything, rather than jump to Newt Gingrich. There’s a reason Gingrich only got looked at after so many conservatives had been found wanting, or declined to run for office.
So fine, support Gingrich — but admit he’s the compromise leftover, not the principled conservative.
It’s not about height, it’s about voters’ personal preferences/prejudices. The voting public brings their personal prejudices, whatever they may be, to the polls with them. Whether they favor Evangelicals/Mormons, or blue/brown eyes, or tall men, or women, they want ‘someone like me.’ Only better.
Actually, tho, it is the case historically that the taller of the two presidential candidates wins. So, if the GOP race comes down to Romney/Santorum on stage alone, you’d better hope Romney, the Hollywood casting picture-perfect candidate, isn’t 6’5”
I’ve not been speaking here of who *I* like. I have no primary vote, and will go R in November no matter who the party’s nominee is. I would have voted for Newt, had I a primary vote, at least as it stands today. He could be out of the race by March 6 for all I know. Newt does not have a presidential demeanor, the farthest thing from it, and he has a ton of baggage, yada yada. But he does get folks’ attention. When he speaks, people listen, whether they love or hate him. He’s almost always fascinating to listen to, and some would think the disheveled professor is someone they’d like to have a beer with because he’s ‘like me.’
Santorum so far hasn’t gotten people to sit up and pay attention. He has an extremely interesting life story and, with enormous courage, has put his life decisions behind his words. What’s not to admire? But, the other side of that coin is, increasingly, he’s becoming perceived as the ‘holier than thou’ candidate, which doesn’t lead the average voter to want to have a beer with him, either. That’s just the way the electoral realities cookie crumbles.
Iowa disproved your ‘analysis’ that people haven’t sat up and noticed Santorum.
This analysis, a month ago - totally valid. But things change.
FYI, people did not sit up and take notice of Santorum in IA. They listened to their preachers. As happened in ‘08, there was a last minute push by IA’s Evangelical leaders. Apparently Evangelical voters do what their preachers tell them. There are not enough Evangelicals to get Santorum elected, as there were not enough Evangelicals to elect Huckabee.
There aren’t enough evangelicals in South Carolina, but there are enough evangelicals to push Santorum over the top in Iowa?
It just seems the simpler explanation to me that Santorum got people’s attention in Iowa, and his showing in Iowa got a lot of people’s attention that he hadn’t gotten in the year previous.
But what do I know? He was at 2 percent in South Carolina 3 weeks ago, and now he’s at 16. I sincerely doubt he would have got this far already without his showing in Iowa turning heads.
Who said there weren’t plenty of Evangelicals in SC? Where did that come from? Have you ever followed a presidential election before? Seriously?
“This stuff with Newt and Romney going back and forth is not necessarily all bad because we are getting educated here. (interruption) No Snerdly,it's not all bad! We got BACHMAN, SANTORUM, PERRY out there! We've got some GENUINE LEGITIMATE CONSERVATIVES out there!” The Rush Limbaugh Show 12/13/2011
nuff said
Yes, it was ‘people’ who noticed Santorum in Iowa. He met with small groups in each of Iowa’s 99 counties, quietly gaining support that was seen as a surprise to reporters in Des Moines. Iowa last-minute evangelical leaders’ push was as much for Gingrich as for Santorum. Evangelical leaders were in something of a quandary, as Catholics aren’t usually very popular.
Iowa has no more evangelicals than the national average, and no, that’s not enough to put a candidate over the top. Iowans are about twice as likely as the national average to belong to mainstream liberal Protestant denominations.
You could have to me to shut up and go away in less than 300 words, Charles.
I’ll just cut to the chase here, and tell you that I’m going to post Santorum’s voting record where and when I please, despite yours and others whinging about it.
That is all.
Like I said, I’ll just keep listening, if you don’t mind.
And others will disparage you for doing so, probably some in an attempt to use resentment over your absense of decorum to turn people off to whatever it is you are trying to post.
And that is precisely what they will be presented with an Obongo vs. Santorum race, the Clearest Choice of the Centure, a Crossroads for the Republic: Slavery and Destruction vs. Freedom and Revival.
I cannot countenance Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsmann for sure, as a recipient of my vote. I could hit some strong whiskey I suppose and pull a lever for either Perry or Gingrich over Obama.
I would need nothing but a good, enjoyable cup of hazelnut coffee AFTER voting for Rick Santorum in a race against the Messiah next November.
Only time will tell now. It is in God's hands it seems now. Let us hope that there, the trumpet of the Angel Moroni is silenced for good, but it does not seem that way by the polls.
And that is precisely what they will be presented with an Obongo vs. Santorum race, the Clearest Choice of the Centure, a Crossroads for the Republic: Slavery and Destruction vs. Freedom and Revival.
I cannot countenance Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsmann for sure, as a recipient of my vote. I could hit some strong whiskey I suppose and pull a lever for either Perry or Gingrich over Obama.
I would need nothing but a good, enjoyable cup of hazelnut coffee AFTER voting for Rick Santorum in a race against the Messiah next November.
Only time will tell now. It is in God's hands it seems now. Let us hope that there, the trumpet of the Angel Moroni is silenced for good, but it does not seem that way by the polls.
Thanks for the ping.
It gives me my new tagline.
If you can define a man by the depravity of his enemies, Rick Santorum must be a noble soul indeed.
Old tagline:
When a thing is owned by everybody nobody gives value to it. Communism taught us this. ~A. Rossi
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.
