To: chessplayer
I like Santorum; I think it took guts to say what he said because it’s not the popular line. The popular line is to overlook Gingrich’s past abuse of wives. It shows a lot of hypocrisy, though, on the part of the blow-hards who condemned Clinton for his womanizing but are willing to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Gingrich’s sleazy activities.
5 posted on
01/20/2012 5:26:58 PM PST by
Saundra Duffy
( For victory & freedom!!!)
To: Saundra Duffy
Aren’t you worried that Santorum helps Romney?
12 posted on
01/20/2012 5:32:39 PM PST by
ansel12
(Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
To: Saundra Duffy
In the old days FR was a place where most folks would say if his wife can’t trust him how can the country.
These days Rick Santorum tripped Newt and Newt ended up coupled with Marianne and Calista while married to others.
Change you can believe in.
13 posted on
01/20/2012 5:33:06 PM PST by
jwalsh07
To: Saundra Duffy
You're fooling no one. The only reason you 'like' Santorum is because he can take votes away from Newt tomorrow to help your RINO hero Romney win in SC.
But that ain't happening. Mitt is going DOWN.
16 posted on
01/20/2012 5:34:10 PM PST by
dirtboy
To: Saundra Duffy
And media hypocrisy for not saying a word about Kerry’s divorce, and John Edwards’ affair while his wife was dying. Santorum comes off as a priggish jerk.
To: Saundra Duffy
Santorum endorsed RINO Arlen Specter (!) over conservative Pat Toomey. That indefensible act is also an issue of character that needs to be addressed by those claiming that Santorum is “the only conservative left in the race.”
24 posted on
01/20/2012 5:40:23 PM PST by
kevao
To: Saundra Duffy
Anything that helps Mitt, you are in favor of. Let us not play games here.
28 posted on
01/20/2012 5:42:54 PM PST by
Grunthor
(I don't vote for Democrats, this includes Mitt Romney.)
To: Saundra Duffy
Was Bill Clinton ever repentant? Did he confess of his sins or elaborate about his transgressions in anyway? I’m someone that would seek an evangelical candidate above any other... until now- Santorum doesn’t have the ability or willingness to convey the damage wrought upon the USA by Barack Hussein Obama Soebarkah, like Newt does, and I approve of his message and strategy, and I want him to elevate his rhetoric as the electoral situations dictate.
37 posted on
01/20/2012 5:47:37 PM PST by
freepersup
(Today, we raise our glasses of spirits and mugs of ale high- to Budge.)
To: Saundra Duffy
Normally, Gingrich's past may bother me, but this is not a normal election by a wide mile. We need a tough, intelligent, brave fighter to go up against the liberal media and their darling Barack Hussein Obama. If we don't have a fighter, the Republicans will lose and our country will take a hard left nosedive to the bottom of the heap. Newt's past marriages mean nothing to me this time, in fact , he should be able to gain a few dem votes because of his past. They seem to love people with imperfect pasts and presents for that matter.
To: Saundra Duffy
How about Santorum’s wife living with an abortionist 40 years her senior. I guess Rick forgave her.. Not a character issue?
50 posted on
01/20/2012 5:55:51 PM PST by
Hildy
("When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - SocratesH)
To: Saundra Duffy
Santorum needs to get out of the way just as his three fellow conservatives, Cain, Michele, and Perry did.
It’s time to CRUSH Willard the Lib in Florida one-on-one:
SC + FL = Newt’s OUR nom.
53 posted on
01/20/2012 5:58:15 PM PST by
CainConservative
(Newt/Rubio 2012 with Cain, Huck, Petraeus, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Bachmann in Newt's Cabinet)
To: Saundra Duffy
"It shows a lot of hypocrisy, though, on the part of the blow-hards who condemned Clinton for his womanizing but are willing to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Gingrichs sleazy activities."Is that you Dana Perino?
That was a troubled marriage with a very obviously troubled woman.
To: Saundra Duffy
It shows a lot of hypocrisy, though, on the part of the blow-hards who condemned Clinton for his womanizing but are willing to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Gingrichs sleazy activities. You just can't help yourself in your sanctimoniousness. Is Newt's womanizing ongoing or well aired and in the past? Are there accusers of rape, sexual assault and the like against him? Has he lied under oath and obstructed justice?
Facts matter. Who's the hypocrite again?
89 posted on
01/20/2012 6:28:18 PM PST by
newzjunkey
(SC: a vote for Santorum or Paul is a vote for Romney's coronation)
To: Saundra Duffy
And just what is trustworthy about Mitt?
At least Newt admits his past failings while Mitt denies them or lies about them.
To: Saundra Duffy
I should have pinged you to post 21, you need to read it.
123 posted on
01/20/2012 7:05:15 PM PST by
ansel12
(Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
To: Saundra Duffy
The popular line is to overlook Gingrichs past abuse of wives. It shows a lot of hypocrisy, though, on the part of the blow-hards who condemned Clinton for his womanizing but are willing to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Gingrichs sleazy activities. There is no comparison between Newt and Clinton.
Clinton was and is a serial adulterer. There is no evidence that Newt hasn't been faithful to his present wife of the past 11 years.
Clinton was guilty of sexual harassment and, perhaps, rape. I have seen no similar accusations against Newt.
160 posted on
01/20/2012 9:22:37 PM PST by
Kazan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson