Posted on 02/15/2012 12:10:39 PM PST by NoPinkos
...Jonah Goldberg explained that Mike Huckabee's brand of conservatism was inconsistent with traditional conservatism, in that the former Arkansas Governor believes that government exists, not to protect individual liberty, but to make people live moral lives in accordance with his personal beliefs....
While Rick Santorum doesn't have the record of supporting tax hikes that Tax Hike Mike had or some of the other points listed above--though some of the do apply, he certainly has a record of backing certain social policies based upon the notion that government exists to ensure a certain behavior from its citizens....
On the fiscal and regulatory side of the equation, Santorum doesn't even come close to having a record worthy of Tea Party support....
The only two conclusions I can draw from this is that the anti-Romney faction in the Republican electorate will so blindly follow whoever is deemed to be their "guy" at the moment that they don't care about his economic statism....
The other is that the Tea Party movement has been completely overrun with social conservatives. If that's the case, Republicans will lose this election, and lose it badly. That's not to say that social conservatives can't be fiscal conservatives, rather fiscal issues must come first in this election....
Santorum's social conservatism is going to turn away independent voters. For example, his strange rant against contraceptives is going to sound nutty and unserious to many on-the-fence voters in swing states. And national polls show that voters are now supportive of gay marriage, which Santorum vigoriously opposes.
This is the bed that Republicans have made. The idea that Santorum would be any better on fiscal issues than Romney is absurd. They're both fiscal moderates that aren't going to change the culture of waste in Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at unitedliberty.org ...
Someone who is not unabashedly pro-life and inflexibly so (Romney, Alan Simpson, Ron All Mouth and No Action Paul, Mark Kirk, Scott Brown, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Lisa Murkowski for a number of examples) is simply NOT conservative. It's a litmus test. "Fiscal conservatives" can take their place at the back of the bus and recognize that they are free riders of whom little is expected and less is usually delivered. If there is any political capital left after enforcing pro-life, pro-family, anti-perversion, pro-gun, pro-military, interventionist issues, then and only then should anyone get their panties in a wad over spending issues. "Fiscal conservatism" is strictly a nice to have and not a must have.
Sorry post #63 - my 6 sticks
It is a total liberal program, it just does not encompass every single bill. Go link to the bills and you’ll see many are not related to labor at all.
I don’t know Nick. Maybe you can explain why I am joined by:
JC Watts, Fred Thompson, Herman Cain, Todd Palin, Thomas Sowell, Rick Perry, Michael Reagan, etc etc etc.
Only conservative for one year? You’re no longer taken seriously. Go get fitted for your sweater vest.
In 2001, Santorum launched a charitable foundation called the 'Operation Good Neighbor Foundation'. The foundation raised more than $1 million, from donors who overlapped with Santorum’s political fund raising. Where did the majority of the charity’s money go? In salary and consulting fees to a network of politically connected lobbyists, aides and fundraisers, including rent and office payments to Santorum’s finance director Rob Bickhart.
The experts estimate a normal charity gives out at least 75% of its income in grants, but 'Operation Good Neighbor Fund' grants were less than 35% of the funds. The charity, which didn’t properly register in Pennsylvania, as required by law, was closed down in 2007.
People are scared of Romney and letting the media effect them. Some of those same people endorsed Romney in 2008. People do stupid things. The one that amazes me is Sowell. He should know better.
Geee.... is it so difficult to figure out? /s
It's called the INTERNET! :)
Considering you are ignoring 90 percent of Newt’s history to focus on what you perceive to be as bad marks, while at the same time refusing to acknowledge or even respond to Santorum’s history or platform, which you falsely insist is “more conservative”, I have a feeling the person who really should “know better” is you. Unless you’re living in a bubble, this kind of self-delusion has no excuse.
I’ve asked multiple Santorum supporters to actually argue from Saint Rick’s platform. What legislation he wants to push. What he supports. And how it is superior to Newt’s. So far, no one bothers to respond, and only throws out BS like “Newt was only conservative for 1 year!” It’s utter ignorance that we are witnessing here, folks.
“instead of returning this money to the treasury and paying down the debt, or giving tax rebates the Kenyan Clown is going to spend it” TARP - The projected long-term cost of the government’s bailout of the nation’s big banks is going to be at least $200 billion less than previously thought, a United States Treasury Department official said Sunday. The Obama administration had estimated the cost to taxpayers of the $700-billion Troubled Asset relief Program, or TARP, would be $341 billion but now says it can cut that by $200 billion.
“That improvement is driven by the fact that Treasury’s investments to stabilize the system are delivering higher returns than anticipated and that Treasury does not anticipate having to draw upon the full $700 billion in TARP authority,” the Treasury official said...
With markets now firming up and banks lining up to repay their TARP funds, “Treasury now will have some room to consider whether and how some TARP funds can be used for other purposes.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2401979/posts Extension Of TARP Now Official - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2403787/posts
Did I fail to make plain that I have no interest whatsoever in engaging in further dialogue with you? I will gladly support Gingrich if he ever gets back into contention. As of today, Newt is 4th out of 4 candidates and a distant 4th at that. Santorum is in 1st place in the national polls. As I have told you previously, I got along without you before I met you and I have every intention of getting along without you now. Be gone! Stop stalking. Buh-bye, Ebenezer!
Given a choice, I would favor Sarah Palin over any other possible candidate. As a candidate, she has special qualities and would be as talented a candidate as Ronaldus Maximus. Sarah is not giving me that chance unless there is a brokered convention and even then there is no guarantee that she would accept nomination. I cannot force her to run.
I have supported Gingrich (and just about everyone but Romney or Huntsman or Paul in this cycle) previously when he was the frontrunner. If his candidacy is revived so that he is the primary non-Romney, I will have no problem supporting Newt again. As of today, he is deep in 4th place out of 4 in nationwide polling while Rick Santorum is in 1st place out of 4.
My first priority is that Romney be defeated and preferably destroyed in the GOP nomination sweepstakes and become a posterboy for crushed moderate mushballs seeking the GOP nomination for POTUS now or ever. Then we can get about the business of destroying Obozo. It may well be that the strongest ticket would be Santorum/Gingrich or vice versa but right now Santorum has stronger support and I suspect that will continue. If Gingrich is not the GOP POTUS nominee, he is an indispensable idea man, the best in American politics. Newt is not always right but he is always a genius.
???! The media? Seriously? The 'media' hates and fears Newt. They call him crazy not conservative.
Newt is easily the best of the three taking into consideration conservatism and ability to beat BHO, which is why the media trashes him.
Should Rick get the nomination, in-your-face freaks like that will be coming out of the woodwork to protest him; they won’t be able to help themselves, and the ‘mainstream’ democrats will not be able to sweep them under the carpet. The more outlandish and bizarre they become, the more the middle-of-the-road, typically apolitical voters will be driven to Santorum.
Let's see how the unions rate him:
2005 American Federation of Government Employees: 0%
2005 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME): 0%
2006 SEIU rating: 12%
2005 AFL-CIO rating: 7%
So your assertion has no basis in reality.
Do you have some personal grudge against Santorum or something?
Looks like you beat me to it!
What the Hell is wrong with people on this site who keep acting like Santorum is liberal?
Sure we can, as long as we stop calling any of the others Conservative.
Fixen to legalize gay marriage are you?
Well DougInTheArmy, how do you like all those GLBT buddies?
Best response of the day for me. Most will ignore the wisdom of your reply, but plant a seed....
No more answers for you! as the soupnazi would say :)
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.