Religious leaders rally behind Rick Santorum

Los Angeles Times ^ | January 14, 2011 | Kim Geiger

[Cincinatus' Wife]

In an effort to avoid a repeat of 2008, when social conservatives failed to rally behind a single Republican presidential candidate, a group of more than 100 religious leaders who gathered in Texas this week reached a consensus to support former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, said the decision was reached after three rounds of balloting, with Santorum winning 85 votes in the final round, to Newt Gingrich’s 29. Texas Gov. Rick Perry had strong support at the beginning of the process, but was eliminated after the first round of balloting, Perkins said.

“The focus here was on people putting aside their preferences, putting aside the candidate they had signed up with, trying to reach a consensus,” Perkins said.

“Rick Santorum has consistently articulated the issues that are of concern to conservatives, both the economic and the social, and has woven those into a very solid platform,” Perkins said. “And he has a record of stability…He’s reliable.”

Three major issues guided the group: Repeal of the healthcare law that was passed in 2010, the national debt and government spending, and social conservative values.

“There were passionate speeches made on behalf of the various candidates, but there was this underlying desire to come to a consensus,” Perkins told reporters on a conference call after the event.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Gary Bauer endorsed Santorum earlier this week.

I guess we'll see if this works.

I'm still behind Rick Perry as he truly is the consistent conservative.

[Jane Long]

This group of religious leaders said “no thanks” to Perry and Rombama. Looks like Newt got the remaining 29 votes (out of 114).

[Theodore R.]

I’m afraid none of the alternatives have a prayer. The establishment always gets its man. And even with Reagan, it had Sandra Day O’Connor voting against the Reagan agenda.

[EternalVigilance]

The real moment of truth is going to come when those same people have to explain why they’re supporting Mitt Romney to their constituency.

At the moment they’re scared to death of that eventuality.

One reason being that lots of them have the money of Romney and his associates in their bank accounts.

[patriot08]

.

RICK SANTORUM

VOTED AGAINST INCREASING THE NUMBER OF IMMIGRATION INVESTIGATORS
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00201

VOTED TO ALLOW ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO RECEIVE THE EARNED INCOME CREDIT BEFORE BECOMING CITIZENS
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00154

VOTED TO GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00058

SANTORUM: TRIM SOCIAL SECURITY NOW- EVEN IF PAINFUL.http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j7O34Bpp42k-IlMMNiOLBkYF2zNw?docId=b1cff9ecefe24ca6ae1764a09761e361

VOTED TO GIVE WELFARE BENEFITS TO NATURALIZED CITIZENS without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=1&vote=00427

VOTED AGAINST HIRING AN ADDITIONAL 1,000 BORDER PATROL AGENTS, paid for by reductions in state grants.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00179

VOTED AGAINST FOOD STAMP REFORM
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00353

VOTED AGAINST MEDICAID REFORM
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00352

VOTED TO INCREASE THE SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT FROM $1 BILLION to $2 BILLION
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00302

VOTED TO RAID SOCIAL SECURITY instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=2&vote=00056

VOTED TO IMPOSE A UNIFORM FEDERAL MANDATE ON STATES TO FORCE THEM TO ALLOW CONVICTED RAPISTS, ARSONISTS, DRUG KINGPINS AND ALL OTHER EX-CONVICTS TO VOTE IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00031

.

And yet we had FReepers getting spastic over Perry signing an instate tuition bill in TX when the bill went through the legislature by a vote of 170-4

.

[Theodore R.]

I suspect most of the Gingrich votes at the conference really prefer Santorum, but they believe SC polls showing Newt competitive. Thus far, unity by the Romney opponents still wouldn’t work because all three are too weak. Santorum’s advantage is that he is steady and consistent and has a good personal story.

[icwhatudo]

Its about time someone stood up and made a decision. There are problems with all 3 (Santorum, Newt, and Perry) but we have to get behind one guy to have any chance of stopping Romney.

Rush and Palin need to step up. If both come out for Santorum, and Newt drops out and endorses Rick...we may still have a shot at stopping Romney.

[Eleutheria5]

MSM: Did Hamas endorse him? No? Well, then he’s a religious extremist.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

So you’re going to let someone else tell you who to vote for? Not me, I made my own choice. The “establishment” was not a factor.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Rick Santorum played the D.C. insider earmarks game.

He did the GOP establishment bidding and supported Arlen Specter.

He is a “team player.”

[SatinDoll]

“Santorum’s advantage is that he is steady and consistent and has a good personal story.”

Oh, boy! Democrats beware!

[Theodore R.]

The real moment of truth is going to come when those same people have to explain why they’re supporting Mitt Romney to their constituency.

Their answer will surely be "The Supreme Court"

[EternalVigilance]

Yes, he most certainly is.

[Anti-Hillary]

I am of the same mindset of this group in what I want in a candidate, but this was a STUPID move.

At this point in the game I do not see Santorum over taking Romney, but Gingrich on the other hand... They could have gotten the type of candidate they wanted AND someone who could beat Romney.

In the world of politics it really does NO good to hitch your wagon to a candidate the will not win. And for the record, I love Santorum, but see the writing on the wall.

[jpsb]

I wonder why it is that social conservatives do not care about the debt that is crushing this nation. Why do social conservatives always back big spending, big government candidates? Don’t they realize that making everyone dependent on government is a very very bad thing? Do social conservatives want us to become Greece? Why should a fiscal/constitutional conservative listen to these guys if they ALWAYS throw their support to BIG SPENDING SOCIALISTS.

[EternalVigilance]

Yeah, and what a scam that will be. It’s an old ruse, but unfortunately very effective with the naive and ignorant.

[BenKenobi]

See, this is why we have to get behind Santorum. If we make decisions out of fear, we lose, simple as that.

If Santorum is the best conservative out there, vote for him. Simple as that. Don’t vote for Newt because you think he has a better chance of winning.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

.....we may still have a shot at stopping Romney.

With Santorum?

I don't think so.

[jacknhoo]

A day late and dollar short.