Posted on 02/10/2012 2:29:53 PM PST by Kaslin
NCLB was passed shortly after Bush became President. Few Republicans wanted to oppose him at this time. That’s no excuse, and Rick has called his vote a “clunker”. Look, I’m from Pa, and Santorum was the best senator from Pa in my lifetime, though Schweiker was good as well. Toomey would not have won in ‘04, and Arlen DID deliver on Alito and Roberts. It’s not much, but better than nothing from him.
Repeal Obamacare, and Rick has a definite plan to repeal Obamacare and put a stake in its heart, repeal that and the economy will improve. Why? Because the people will understand they're once again in charge of their own destiny.
The notion you can have a Conservative that is not socially Conservative is an abomination that leads to candidates that look a lot like Ron Paul. GoldWater was very Conservative, but he was not Socially Conservative, look where that led him in his old age.
Do you recall that we lost both the House and Senate in that year, largely because of GW Bush and Karl Tokyo Rove.
Newt has no chance to win the nomination. He has no pathway and no money. He has ruined his own chances over the years.
He would lose even worse than McCain. He never planned to get where he is today. He peaked early on and now he is over.
Santorum's defeat was no ordinary loss. It was more than a reflection of anti-Bush sentiment.
Here are six reasons the man who rose to the No. 3 leadership position in the Senate suffered one of the most humiliating defeats an incumbent has ever endured. ~National Journal, 2.10.2012
Exactly. You reinforce Malkin's assertion that Santorum was a go-along, get-along, big-government Republican.
I have no reason to believe that Newt or Milt would have opposed this sewage at the time. I believe that Malkin supports Santorum, BTW. Bob
Yes, Malkin endorsed Santorum. And I’ll vote form him if he’s the nominee, but he’s not my first choice. In fact, he was never in my list of top 3 or 4 choices.
We need a social AND and fiscal conservative. The economy is in shreds. We’re driving off a cliff into socialism. A “go-along, get-along, big-government conservative” doesn’t have the necessary convictions about small government to make the hard choices that need to be made. If he believes compromise is the best way to govern, we’re going to end up with more compassionate conservative programs and progressive Republican regulations.
Santorum will appoint socially conservative judges to the bench, and that alone is probably worth supporting him, but will he appoint originalists to the Supreme Court? He has no executive experience, no foreign policy experience and no governing experience. What kind of people will he appoint to his cabinet? Does he listen to his advisors? Does he make decisions by consensus? Does he listen to his constituents? Will he take on the liberal media when they attack him? How will he handle the potential of a nuclear-capable Iran? How will he respond to an aggressive Russian-Chinese coalition in the U.N.? Will he protect liberty or attempt to legislate it?
As Rush has stated many times...”Stark constrasts instead of pastel platitudes....that’s how you win elections.”
Exactly.
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.