Posted on 09/13/2009 2:33:46 PM PDT by NYer
ORLANDO, FL, September 12, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Speaking to a room full of prominent US Catholic leaders Friday night, Senator Rick Santorum was challenged to run for the Republican Presidential nominaion. Responding to a room already thick with applause, Santorum revealed that he was indeed "thinking about it" but asked for prayers and detailed his thinking on the matter.
His remarks came after his address to the closing dinner of the 12th annual Catholic Leadership Conference - an invite-only gathering of Catholic leaders from academia, law, media, medicine, and politics, as well as leaders of movements within the Church such as pro-life, pro-family and evangelization. Posing the challenge was long-time legal, political, and media activist Keith Fournier.
Santorum is not only a Catholic in name but a faithful one who is noted for his strong pro-life activism and work to bring decency back to America. He revealed that he has seven children, with one in college. The reason why the sixth is not college-bound is the fact that his 16-month-old 'Bella' was born with Trisomy 18, a genetic disorder which is fatal before birth in 90 per cent of cases.
Santorum referred to Bella as "our angel" marveling at how she changed his life, and that of his family for the better. Speaking of children like Bella, he said, "They teach you things you can't even imagine."
Here Santorum turned to abortion describing his reason for fighting against it politically saying, "I think of we treat these people in society and how we destroy them. 86% of Down syndrome children are aborted - killed. And Down syndrome is 5 times better than what Bella has."
Considering how his children may themselves be the targets of nasty politics, as has happened in the recent past, gives Santorum pause. "That weighs on me," he said. "When you stand up for the things I do and say the things I say, they brutalize you and they won't stop at you."
Those are the things, he explained that "as a father I've got to think about."
"On the other side," he added, "as a father, I've got to think about whether they are going to have a country to live in … Are they going to be able to practice their faith in a way that's consistent with what the Church teaches."
The last consideration in favor of his run was on the practical level. He said: "Six months ago I would not have spent ten seconds on your question, but it's not six months ago. I see that, I hate to be calculating, but I see that 2012 is not just throwing somebody out to be eaten, but it's a real opportunity for success."
In closing he said that while he was "thinking about it", it is the first time his ambition which is, as he said, "in his DNA" was checked by a resistance saying, "no, I'm not sure."
Ending the session, Catholic political powerhouse Deal Hudson (President George W. Bush's Catholic advisor for a period of time) cited Plato's famous saying that the best governors are those who do not wish to govern.
So now in a post-Obama world you have to be born overseas in order to be constitutionally qualified for President?
Wow, that's change...
;-) <-- Note the 'wink' emoticon before responding pls.
Sarah didn't lose to Bozo, McCain lost to Bozo, Sarah enabled McCain to garner enough votes so he didn't look like any bigger fool than he did already.Where have I heard that argument before?
Well Laffey was obviously the well known conservative preference in 06 too.
The endorsements were not quite equivalent. The main difference being Rick’s was much more significant to the outcome and was accompanied by vigorous campaigning on the behalf of Specter in the primary, Santorum being from the same state. Thompson’s endorsement while just as foolish (and on top of that there was no pressure for him to make it) probably made very little difference.
They both thougt they were helping the “electable Republican”tm. They were both wrong.
Endorsing and praising the front running RINO is an all to common practice amongst conservatives. Witness the Kirk campaign.
Even Palin has donated to Lisa Murkowski and John McCain.
I don’t disqualify Santorum but I think he’d be a terrible candidate. I don’t think he’s particularly sharp and he was creamed in his home state by Casey.
He is much better than Romney or Huck, but then again so is the cockroach I killed last week.
That remains to be seen now doesn't it?
Or did I miss some grand move to shift the balance of the court...as if that were the problem.
If you actually believe someone can become a governor without this amorphous "minimum competence," your "standards" aren't informed enough to mean anything.
For example, I have unfortunately found myself arguing with grown men who really believed George W. Bush took us into Iraq to avenge his daddy's failure. And while they have the right to hold any opinion the wish, they don't have the right to be taken seriously by those of us who don't find Jerry Springer, riveting.
Thanks for the heads up.
Jeri Thompson is raising money for Zack Wamp.
If Santorum runs for President, then which state will Santorum declare to be his home state, PA or VA?
Is there any precedent for a Congresscritter to lose an election in his home state, then work in the DC area as either an activist or lobbyist, and run again for Congress in MD or VA?
Anyway, methinks the purpose of a potential Santorum run is split the socially conservative to prevent Huckabee and Palin from winning and allowing Romney to slip to victory.
I use to like him, until he supported Specter over Toomey. He didn’t have the guts to support the right person. I would not trust him to have the guts to do the right thing at anytime.
But, I thought he did a great job on PBA-ban! Look up his debate with Boxer on the subject! Too bad he didn’t keep up that kind of moxie.
Here, here! Couldn’t agree more.
Zack Wamp was usually supportive of Fred’s efforts. But that still doesn’t change my opinion of Wamp as a grandstanding RINO phony and prima donna whose prior drug use will be issue #1 for the Dem attack machine if he’s nominated. I will not vote for him, not even in the general. 16 years in DC has warped him.
The closest I can think of is former AR Congressman Brooks Hays. He served 16 years in the House and was beaten for being, IIRC, too liberal. He left the state after his defeat in ‘58, held some governmental positions and later as co-chairman for Former Members of Congress (whether that could be considered as a lobbyist of sorts is possible), and then moved to NC and ran for Congress in a GOP-leaning district and lost in ‘72.
If Santorum persists on a quixotic venture for the Presidency, especially if it becomes apparent he is a stalking horse for Slick Willard, that will blow up in his face. Conservatives are solidly behind Palin, and we’re tired of the games from the DC crowd/RINO establishment.
I pray we can get control of at least 1 house in 10 and then someone with the strengths of Reagan in 12.
I believe there have been a few congressman in history that have represented more than 1 state.
But I don’t know of any that stayed in the DC area and ran there. Larry Pressler though about it though.
The most recent was Ed Foreman. He won a West TX Congressional seat in 1962, but got caught in the anti-GOP landslide in ‘64 that swept him and Dallas Congressman Bruce Alger (the lone 2 House Republicans, excluding John Tower who was Senator) out. He moved a short distance into Eastern New Mexico, and when the state was divided into two districts (changing from At-Large) in 1968, he won that district (but was swept out in 1970 by DINO Mud Runnels). He later became a motivational speaker (he sent me one of his tapes, funny guy).
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.