Santorum: You Know That Cruz And Paul Are Really Just ‘Bomb Throwers,’ Right?

With 2016 rumblings abounding, we forgot about Rick Santorum. The former Pennsylvania Senator threw some early punches last week at his potential rivals, calling Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) “bomb throwers,” who had no real accomplishments on their resumes (via NYT):

Discussing Mr. Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and winner of the 2008 Iowa caucuses, Mr. Santorum raised four policy issues that he said would prompt questions about Mr. Huckabee’s fealty to conservative principles. Mr. Santorum was even harsher when discussing Mr. Paul of Kentucky and Mr. Cruz of Texas, both first-term senators, dismissing them as “bomb throwers” with scant achievements.

“Do we really want someone with this little experience?” Mr. Santorum asked, referring to Mr. Paul, Mr. Cruz and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who is also in his first term. “And the only experience they have basically — not Rubio, but Cruz and Paul because I don’t think Rubio is going to go — is bomb throwing? Do we really want somebody who’s a bomb thrower, with no track record of any accomplishments?”

As for Huckabee, Santorum noted that the former Arkansas Governor once supported cap-and-trade legislation: Reminded that Mr. Huckabee had once backed a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon emissions, Mr. Santorum exclaimed: “Climate change. This guy was for climate change.”

Mr. Huckabee’s spokeswoman declined to address the individual issues, instead criticizing Mr. Santorum for “pulling the pin on grenades tossed in our own G.O.P. tent.”

So, while we’re on legislative records, let’s rehash RedState’s Erick Erickson’s 2012 post about Santorum’s voting record in the U.S. Senate, where he voted against a flat tax, the National Right To Work Act, food stamp reform, Medicaid reform, and paying off the debt within 30 years.

As Erickson wrote back then, “the only real justification for supporting him [Rick] now is he is not Mitt Romney.” He then added that Santorum personifies “big government conservatism,” something I do not think the party base will find palatable after eight years of Obama in 2016:

Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state. Suddenly we’re all forgetting what a big government conservatism is. The term was coined by Fred Barnes in defense of George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservative” agenda. Bush intended to use domestic social welfare policy for conservative ends. In the process, he expanded the welfare state to do so through No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit, etc. Rick Santorum was a willing participant in this. Santorum is a conservative. He is. But his conservative is largely defined by his social positions and the ends to which government would be deployed. But he has chosen as the means to those conservative ends bigger government. We see big government conservatives most clearly when they deviate from the tireless efforts of people like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint and the others who were willing to oppose George W. Bush’s expansion of the welfare state.

Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.

Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.

Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.

Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.

Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.

Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.

Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.

Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions. If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.

Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.

Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations. Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here

Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.

Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device

Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.

Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.

Voted for the Specter “backup plan” to allow campaign finance reform to survive if portions of the bill were found unconstitutional.

Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.

Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens

Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.

Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border partrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.

Voted to increase tobacco taxes to fund health insurance subsidies for small businesses.

Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an $8 billion increase in child healh insurance.

Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies.

Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.

Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.

Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.

Voted to increase the FHA loan from $170,000 to $197,000. Also opposed increasing GNMA guaranty from 6 basis points to 12.

Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum’s Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)

Voted against requiring that highway earmarks would come out of a state’s highway allocation

Just some food for thought given that most of the candidates considering a 2016 bid so far are not what conservatives are looking for in 2016.

He'll eat those words when he's brought in as the VP nominee. ;')

Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"
I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.
[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]

Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance
...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.
[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]

Rand Paul's immigration speech
...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.

Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.

Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.

If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...

This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform
Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...
[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]

Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'
Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt's military -- even as Cairo's security forces massacre anti-government activists. [by "anti-government activists" is meant church-burning Christian-murdering jihadists]
[Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]

Santorum is an idiot, Paul verges too close to his nut-case father, and Cruz is not a bomb thrower but so abrasive that I doubt that he could be a national candidate.

Cruz is a very smart, well-educated guy, but somehow, he just doesn’t come across like one, and believe me, nobody is going to cut him a break as they did with the idiot Obama.

Romney ruined the last election, and it looks like all the other failures (such as Santorum) are coming out in force. I hope they don’t ruin this one and land us with a horrible candidate.

FYI, I like Walker and Jindal. Rubio would be a good VP, too - people here don’t like him, although his immigration proposals were very reasonable and have been distorted by the Dems, but he’s an excellent speaker and is quite conservative.

I can’t think of any women I like, but probably the Dems will run a woman, so start thinking, people!

"He is a big government conservative"

Ain't no such thing.

There is if "conservative" is code for "promotes Christian values," though Santorum uses the phrase "family values" instead.

If "conservative" refers to the use of the force we call "government", then you are right, Rodamala! "Big government conservative" is literally a contradiction.

Conservative use of government creates "small government." The liberal use of government, wielded to assume every assistance for our welfare -- creates big government and ultimately, tyranny.

Democrats kid themselves that they are big-minded and "liberal" when in fact they are only liberal in an amoral, free-handed way with the force of government.

By the same token, Republicans like Santorum and Huckabee kid themselves that they are "conservative" when in fact they are righteous good Christians who are liberal in a MORAL, free-handed way with the force of government.

Government is only a force. It is supposed to be our servant, but over-use of it has made it a tyrant.

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.