Posted on 02/12/2012 10:13:02 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
On today's Meet The Press, "moderator" David Gregory gave a good preview of how the MSM/Obama industrial complex will try to cariacture and demonize Rick Santorum should he become the Republican presidential candidate.
Gregory asked Santorum whether, if elected president, he would only permit single women without children to work in his administration. That's right: Gregory was actually wondering whether Santorum would prohibit mothers from serving. Santorum didn't rise to Gregory's absurd bait, giving a smiling and good-natured response to the effect all women would be welcome in a Santorum administration.
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Santorum's own book attacks working women as using a fiscal argument as an "excuse" (his word!) not to be a stay-at-home mom.
All facets of Santorum need to be exposed before conservatives follow him down the proverbial rabbit hole. Unfortunately there's been some push back here against mainstream reporting on Santorum's record.
He needs to be vetted.
Really, why does David want us to think he cares about single young women anyway.
Really, why does David want us to think he cares about single young women anyway.
Really, why does David want us to think he cares about single young women anyway.
Did you see the post right before yours, #40?? Do you really think that a STUPID question about whether a man whose wife has had two high powered jobs would hire working moms in his admin was “vetting”?? It was simply GOTCHA BS.
However, P.O.F. before you hits on the perfect point. Why wasn’t Obama ever asked if he would only hire fellow socialists and commies in HIS future admin? He sure hired a lot of them... That was also “fact” from his book, but legitimate.
The spread is right the candidate is wrong.
The spread is right the candidate is wrong.
So what States do you see Santorum winning.
Remember, Santorum lost PA...a Catholic rust-belt state...by over 18% on virtually the same platform he espouses today.
___________________________________________________________
That is irrelevant today...or did you miss this: http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/poll-santorum-takes-1st-national-lead/
“30-40% of the GOP electorate who often votes as a bloc”
Really? And who did they vote for, as a block, in South Carolina?
Why is it that social liberals in the GOP get to vote for who they want - and they are going big time for Mitt - while social conservatives are expected to bow down and work for anyone ‘our’ Establishment wants without question?
Just look at his exit polls from 2006 when he took his 18+ point loss in 2006. His appeal is very narrow. He didn't bring in a majority of any category that his campaign espouses he would bring in a general election. Not Catholics. Not Union members or those who have a Union member in the household. Not Married men. Not Single men. Not Married women. Not Married men.
Santorum won ONLY Evangelicals and those over 65 as one of his principal positions was the protection of the Social Security status quo. The absolutely big government status quo.
I ask everyone to review this data, from an ESSENTIAL SWING STATE THE GOP NEEDS...Santorums' Home State...and then tell me this guy can win a general election.
It's laughable.
Dude. Chill.
My observations and suggestions of the likely vote based on analysis of data and observations of 40 years of GOP/National politics does not in any way suggest that I ENDORSE what I believe to be true.
If it was up to me we wouldn't have any of these problems. I would have hung the very first Federal office holder, after a fair trial, who violated their sworn oath to defend the Constitution.
On the Capitol steps.
And would continue to do so as long as the courts kept handing them over to the hangman.
“Santorum lost PA, similar to what you describe above, by over 18% in his last state-wide election.”
As I recall, he lost PA after he stabbed conservatives in the back by supporting Specter...
“In 2006, Santorum sought re-election to a third Senate term and ran unopposed in the Republican primaries. His seat was considered among the most vulnerable for Republicans and was a prime target of the Democratic Party in the 2006 elections. His opponent was Democratic State Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr., the son of popular former governor Robert Casey, Sr.. Casey was well known for his opposition to abortion, negating one of Santorum’s key issues....Santorum’s endorsements have been identified as factors in his 2006 defeat. Despite then-President George W. Bush having a 38% approval rating in Pennsylvania, Santorum said in a debate that “I think he’s been a terrific president, absolutely.”[94] Also problematic was Santorum’s 2004 endorsement of his Republican Senate colleague Arlen Specter over conservative Congressman Pat Toomey in the 2004 primary for Pennsylvania’s other senate seat. Many socially and fiscally conservative Republicans considered the Specter endorsement to be a betrayal of their cause.” - Wiki
“Democrats gained 30 House and six Senate seats, taking control of both chambers of Congress amid a series of scandals involving GOP lawmakers and weariness with the Bush administration and the Iraq war...
...”Rick was their No. 1 target that entire cycle,” said Dan Ronayne, who worked for the National Republican Senatorial Committee that year. “The first Democratic attacks came about a week after the 2004 election.”
Democrats scored a coup by recruiting Mr. Casey to run. Mr. Casey was the son of a popular former governor with anti-abortion and anti-gun-control credentials, neutralizing two potential Santorum advantages.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577145130339074066.html
You think Obama would take ID, UT, WY, ND? Richard Nixon lost his race to be Governor of CA in 1962 and won that state's presidential vote in 1968.
You think Obama would take ID, UT, WY, ND? Richard Nixon lost his race to be Governor of CA in 1962 and won that state's presidential vote in 1968.
You think Obama would take ID, UT, WY, ND? Richard Nixon lost his race to be Governor of CA in 1962 and won that state's presidential vote in 1968.
You think Obama would take ID, UT, WY, ND? Richard Nixon lost his race to be Governor of CA in 1962 and won that state's presidential vote in 1968.
That doesn't explain the loss in the general. Those conservatives who disliked his support of Specter would not have jumped to a democrat for that reason alone.
Gregory’s parents picked the correct first name for him.
Whenever these news readers play race and sex bait gottcha with Republicans, the Repulbicans should respond with how surpising it is to see the lack of diversity in their television news network in this day and age.
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.