Posted on 04/03/2013 11:38:51 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Rick Santorum appears to be eyeing the White House again, with the former Pennsylvania senator telling Newsmax TV’s Steve Malzberg that he may run for president in 2016.
“I’m certainly leaving the door open for that,” Santorum revealed on “The Steve Malzberg Show” Wednesday afternoon. …
“The same advisors who botched these last two campaigns are now saying, ‘Well, you know, since we can’t win with moderate Republicans, we have to now try to be liberal Republicans to win instead of standing up for the values that made our country great,’” he said. …
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
A personal insult, but no challenge of the facts, that is revealing.
Thanks.
Go away Rick. Just go away.
NO RETREADS!
What facts are there to challenge?
I don’t find any fault with it either, but that is two posts you have made that have nothing to say.
I had to put that in there, BUT you are correct. No way should we vote based on looks, but that Howdy Doody thing haunts me.
He just doesn’t have it in any category.
Well there’s nothing to defend. So I can understand that.
Hating on Santorum for Santorum’s sake is understandable.
Yeah, except for being a social conservative. Gosh, imagine a nominee who believes that abortion and gay marriage is wrong.
Surely we can’t have that!
Do you ever post anything of substance or do you just post insults and useless attacks, insults and strange claims of “hate”?
Surely you read post 10, or other posts on this thread about Santorum, didn’t you?
I’m not sure why you feel compelled to attack social conservative Catholics.
You assert that Catholics vote for Obama, then attack a Catholic Republican candidates. You would think if you had an interest in drawing Catholics into the republican coalition that you would welcome Catholic conservative republicans.
Trolling and stalking and dragging threads and personal grudges around are discouraged at freerepublic.
Personalizing your attacks also makes for some strange posts and evidently forgetfulness.
I guess you know the Catholic that freerepublic endorsed in the 2012 primary?
""To: ansel12
Sez Newtbot12.
24 posted on 4/4/2013 3:38:31 AM by JCBreckenridge""
Which makes your apprehension to Santorum even more bizarre.
Unless of course you support Newt’s stances on gay marriage, etc.
Evidently hijacking a thread to express your personal dislike of individual freepers is all you are interested in.
See post 10, and while you are at it, look at the thread topic.
You probably already know this about Santorum but if you haven’t seen it yet.
People don’t know that Santorum was anti-Reagan and pro-abortion like his man Romney, who in 2008 he was comparing to Reagan, Santorum switched to pro-life for his first run for office, remember that Romney spent years trying to create the myth that Reagan was “adamantly pro-choice”.
Santorum endorsed and campaigned for, the presidential candidate in 1996 that was running on the platform for making the GOP pro-abortion and removing life entirely from the party position and platform.
In 2008 Santorum (who has campaigned as a “progressive conservative”) who had himself been anti-Reagan, was promoting Romney who had also been anti-Reagan, as the new Reagan leader for conservatism.
Santorum has shown a level of devotion to Arlen Specter that cannot be explained away.
Santorum fought Toomey like it was truly important for him to be kept out of the Senate and to keep Santorum from losing Specter.
Sigh. Same ole talking points. Did you know that Rick endorsed Romney JUST BEFORE Romney dropped out only because he thought he was better than McCain? HARDLY a ringing endorsement.
Who was YOUR candidate in 2012, and did he finally endorse Romney as well?
If you did your research, you would know that Rick endorsed Arlen Specter because he thought Arlen could win, and as head of the Judicial Committee, Specter would see that Bush’s nominees would be able to get their up or down vote. Rick said that Alito would not have been Justice, if it weren’t for Specter. If Pat Toomey were the U.S. Senator at the time, he would not have been a leader in the Judicial Committee, he would have been just another senator.
I can understand if you don’t agree with Rick on this, but his logic made sense, because we have a really great Justice in Alito. Sounds to me like Rick did the right thing.
And I’ll let Rick Santorum answer your other comment:
“I won my first four races. I’m four out of five — not bad — and three of the first four races I ran twice for the House, once against this incumbent Democrat. The second time I got redistricted into a 71% Democratic district against another incumbent Democrat. I won that seat. The third time I ran for the Senate in Pennsylvania with 600,000 more registered Democrats Republicans, against another Democratic incumbents, I won that — and then in 2000 when George Bush lost the state by four points I won it by five. In 2006 it was a horrible election year,”
excerpt http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/06/08/the_rick_santorum_interview
Thank you.
No matter who the conservative nominees are, I sure hope next time voters do their homework, and get BOTH SIDES of the story, rather than go with their knee-jerk reactions.
Same old talking points?
Fighting for Arlen Specter to defeat Toomey in 2010, until Specter finally switched to the democrat party?
Endorsing and campaigning to make the GOP a pro-abortion party?
Making history by being thrown out of office by a bigger margin than the rookie Christine O’Donnell lost by when she has never even held office?
The thread, I believe, is about Rick Santorum running again. I fail to perceive how bashing Rick is pertinent to the thread topic.
He was a Newtbot.
Last I checked it was his nominee that endorsed gay marriage when he wasn’t running as a staking horse for Romney. And a magnificant staking horse he was.
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.