This again? Santorum picked the establishment traitor Arlen Spector over Pat Toomey in the Republican Primary. Newt endorsed the REPUBLICAN, not the third-party candidate.
I do agree with you that Newt endorsing the Republican candidate after she had already been nominated is also not a huge issue.
Santorum caved in to pressure from President Bush and the NRSC and supported the incumbent RINO who most people (wrongly, in my opinion) assumed would have a far easier time holding the seat than would Toomey. Newt not only endorsed the RINO-party-hack-selected DIABLO Dede Scozzafava, who is so liberal that she made Specter seem like Jesse Helms by comparison, but he doubled down and kept supporting her even after poll after poll showed her below 20% and Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman running neck-and-neck against the Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman was 100 times more conservative than Scozzafava, and had 100 times greater odds of winning, and Newt still stuck by Scozzafava. Oh, and Scozzafava then dropped out of the race and ENDORSED THE DEMOCRAT, who went on to beat Hoffman narrowly. Thanks a lot, Newt, you sure can pick ‘em.
Rick Santorum made a mistake by caving in to the GOP president and supporting Specter, but if Newt’s idiotic, illogical decision to make nice with the RINOs in 2009 and endorse Scozzafava (of all people) does not mean that he’s not a bona fide conservative (and I don’t doubt for a moment that Newt is a conservative who made a huge mistake), then Santorum’s much smaller transgression shouldn’t even be given a second thought.
For the record, I was really pissed at Santorum when he supported Specter over Toomey (I even sent him an e-mail about it, which I post below), but I eventually forgave him. I haven’t really forgiven Newt for endorsing Scozzafava and sticking with her after there was absolutely no argument for a conservative backing her, but that wouldn’t stop me from voting for him over Romney. But between Santorum and Newt, I would vote for Santorum every day and twice on Sunday.
Here’s the e-mail I sent to Santorum back in 2004:
Dear Senator Santorum:
Let me begin by saying that I am not a resident of Pennsylvania, so I am not technically your constituent. But as a member of the Republican leadership in the Senate, you represent Republicans throughout the nation, and as such I feel at the liberty to drop you this friendly note.
I am an active participant in the conservative movement, and regularly mention your name not only as an example of the type of leadership, platform and voting record Republicans need to get elected in competitive states and districts, but also as my preferred candidate for President in 2008. I defended you when you were unfairly attacked for your foresighted criticism of the pro-sodomy arguments in the Lawrence case, and I am certainly proud to have someone like you in the Senate to speak out and act on issues near and dear to me, such as opposition to abortion and judicial activism and support for tax relief and national defense. But I am at a loss for words when someone asks me why you are actively supporting the reelection of Senator Arlen Specter, who disagrees with us in every single one of those important issues.
I know that tradition dictates that incumbent Senators not oppose the reelection of their colleagues from the same party, especially when they represent the same state. And as Republican Conference Chairman, it would be unbecoming for you to actively campaign for the defeat of a Republican colleague. But is it really necessary for you to run commercials supporting Arlen Specters candidacy when he is running against Congressman Pat Toomey, a true conservative Republican from a blue-collar Democrat district (just like a certain Congressman Santorum from a decade ago) who can lead the party to a statewide victory?
I am especially disheartened by your claim that Arlen Specter votes with conservatives on votes that matter. When the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, which you had been fighting for years to pass, got to the floor last year, it was nearly derailed by a sham substitute amendment by Dick Durbin that would not have prohibited a single abortion so long as the doctor stated that the mothers health (including mental health) may be in danger. You know better than I that passage of the substitute amendment would have signaled the defeat of the PBA ban, and would have been a major setback in the pro-life movement. I remember that you spoke eloquently on the Senate floor as to why the sham substitute had to be defeated, and that the only way to end that heinous practice was to vote against Durbins substitute amendment. Wouldnt you call that a vote that matters? I sure do. And, in case youve forgotten, Arlen Specter voted in favor of Durbins sham substitute, and the only reason it failed was because a few Democrat Senators, most of whom were up for reelection in 2004, voted against the amendment. Arlen Specter can only fool ignorant pro-lifers into believing that he supported the PBA ban, since he voted for its final passage, the results of which were a foregone conclusion. (Why, even Tom Daschle voted for the final bill! I hope that, in his Senate race against John Thune, Daschle doesnt run ads saying that he supported President Bushs agenda on votes that matter.) But most pro-lifers are not that ignorant, and we will not support someone like Arlen Specter for reelection.
I could go on for paragraphs about Specters voting record, the dangers posed by someone as unreliable as him serving as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee (had Specter not opposed Robert Borks nomination to the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade would have been overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey back in 1992, which would have saved millions of lives), the fact that Governor Rendell would name Specters replacement in case he cant serve out his entire six-year term, and how Specters proven inability to attract votes from blue-collar Democrats in the Pittsburgh area and in the T, not to mention the fact that he cannot rally the conservative base, will make him more vulnerable to a challenge from Congressman Hoeffel (who will not allow Specter to win by his usual margins in the Philly metro area) than would Pat Toomey (who would defeat Hoeffel by winning votes from pro-life, pro-gun, pro-defense Democrats, the group that gave you two House victories and two Senate victories), but I know that you already know all of that. My plea to you is that you think about these things, and reconsider your participation in an active campaign to defeat Pat Toomey in the GOP primary. If, God forbid, Specter defeats Toomey, then it would certainly be acceptable for you to campaign actively for Specters reelection. But now is not the time to go wobbly.
I hope that you receive this note in the spirit with which it was intended, and that, after meditation and prayer, you do the right thing.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Santorum picked the establishment traitor Arlen Spector over Pat Toomey in the Republican Primary.
A very good decision but you know that. It was brilliant but you don’t understand a thing. It was more important to the United States than anything else these candidates have done. We will be glad for his decision for decades but you know that. You are just running your month on nothing.