Newt is just as conservative as Rick on social and religious issues, but knows that he has to communicate those views in more secular, moderate language in order to not turn off moderate voters. The fact is Newt’s policies are even better to advance social conservatism than Rick’s. Case in point, his analysis of how to stop activist judges in a constitutional way, which Santorum spoke out against. The reason Newt got the endorsement from that socially conservative radio host in Iowa is because he believed Newt’s policy on judges would help the social conservative movement better than anything else anyone was putting forth.
I concur, but forgot not the indignation is strong, the mediation not so much.
“Newt is just as conservative as Rick on social and religious issues,”
You mean the guy who came in behind Paul? You mean the guy who has had 3 wives? You mean the guy who supported liberal establishment candidates in the last midterm congressional elections?
That guy?
I’m sort of for Santorum by default. Part of that default position is the widespread belief by so many gullible people that Newt is somehow THIS time committed to something (this time it’s conservatism). Newt is committed to his own political ambition. He will be whatever he has to be to become president.
The establishment chose Romney over Newt, so Newt had to become something else.
You cannot with a straight face claim that Newt is a social conservative when compared with Santorum. You cannot compare Newt - a Catholic of Convenience (and political expedience) with someone as morally decent as Santorum.
I like what Newt says on reducing government - the problem is, I just don’t believe he’s committed to it - he’s never been committed to anything in his life!
How well-meaning conservatives can fall for this guy, this Clintonian figure, is beyond me. But politics is politics.