Posted on 03/15/2012 8:33:43 PM PDT by God'sgrrl
Scared? No, I think amused is a better word.
Is Santorum afraid he doesn’t already have the church lady vote locked up?
1. Pick a controversial issue
2. Make up a “news” story about it and the candidate you want to smear and toss it to the MSM
3. Watch the candidate squirm
Santorum is damned if he confirms and damned if he denies it.
Alinsky lives.
Earlier today Gingrich folks were claiming that it disqualified a candidate to suggest they'd enforce existing pornography laws.
I wonder if they think Newt Gingrich should be disqualified?
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich in a face-to-face meeting: When MIM’s Executive Director Dawn Hawkins asked former Speaker Gingrich if he will enforce existing laws that make distribution of hard-core adult pornography illegal, he responded: “Yes, I will appoint an Attorney General who will enforce these laws.”Oops. Romney said the same thing.
So today, the Gingrich folks got punked by the liberal media. It's not hard, because they are desparate.
since he has already spoken about how important it is for the role of government watching over our lives. Newt, I could trust to work within the laws as Ricky seems to want to make new laws. FYI. Tucker is a Romney supporter.
Why is Santorum bothering with this crap? Alberto Gonzalez spent far too much time on porn also. Leave people alone. Leave online alone, so long as it is not breaking any laws (eg. children). Americans don’t want a “Universal Daddy”.
In other words, pure, raw prejudice governs you. You just admitted it. You already are against Santorum so you have to make up a reason why the same position held by all three would be bad in his case but good in the other two.
You are the worst possible advertisement for Gingrich. Pure, raw prejudice.
Remember when you asked about when Santorum made this statement on the enforcing internet porn laws? It wasn’t recent. Looks like it was months ago when Romney and Gingrich put out similar statements. News story in this thread.
A. Gingrich didn’t post a policy paper on pornography as a CENTRAL THEME of his campaign for President. Santorum did.
B. Gingrich was answering a follow up question from a reporter. Not making it a central campaign issue as Santorum did.
C. Perhaps you would LIKE Obama for another 4 years. Polls show even GOP don’t want anymore RELIGIOUS and social values talk. But if you want to hand the election to Obama - by all means. Support the guy who claims to be “adamantly prolife” then campaigns for a PRO-partial birth abortion candidate. Support the guy who claims to care about family values then covers up the affair of a fellow Senator who is sleeping with the wife of his staffer and who dismisses homosexual priests and who wouldn’t condemn Foley for whom HE recruited the victims. (stats on how voters of all sides view the religion in politics debate here: http://www.politijim.com/2012/03/interest-in-voters-and-social-issues.html)
All other documented verified stories on PolitiJim.com
I’m not much interested in that, but am looking forward to hearing more about this eligibility thing.
Oh, so Gingrich has the same position as Santorum, but Santorum bothers you because he wrote it down, while Gingrich just said it to an interest group that would like his answer?
Santorum has a lot if things he wrote on his issues page. That doesn’t make them the “central issue”, any more than Gingrich making a policy speech in which he promoted a moon colony make that a “central campaign issue”.
The point is that several Newt supporters claimed that a plan to enforce pornography laws made Santorum unacceptable as a candidate. There was talk about this being a sign of legislating morality, and a religious takeover.
But Gingrich has exactly the SAME plan, he simply doesn’t have it listed as an item on his campaign web site. But unless you are saying Gingrich lied to the reporters, and won’t actually do what he promised, he will do the same enforcement Santorum was attacked for.
Anyway, it seems you are just upset that Santorum says what he will do, and doesn’t try to hide it. I like candidates who come out and tell the truth. I appreciate that Gingrich has the same plans, because I think if there are laws on the books, we should enforce them, and if we don’t like them, we should repeal them.
And as I said before, if you want to lead an effort to repeal the pornography laws, go right ahead, but I’d check the site owner first before doing it here.
Just for the sheer hell of it, read the article.
All 3 candidtes were asked this same question. All 3 responded bascially the same.
So, what the article says is that Daily Caller didn’t bother to report that.
I think you will be contradicting yourself, frequently, as there is barely any daylight between the views of Gingrich and the views of Santorum.
You really need to tone it down a bit. Santorum is talking about laws already on the books.
Don't take the bait from Leftists, OK? Santorum says something MONTHS ago, and the MSM runs with it, now, and like Pavlov's dogs you salivate?
Don't let yourself get played so easy.
If a candidate really wants to do something worthwhile to clean up internet porn, than I suggest they win the presidency first. Don’t go tipping your hand and scaring an “industry” that has billions into donating millions to your opponent. I mean he’s already got the church vote locked up right? This also scares off the independent and libertarian voters. The voters he would need in November.
Although I agree that obscenity laws should be enforced this is a loser strategy, IMO. And it makes me question Rick’s judgement.
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.