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 ...
I am not bashing mr Santorum, I said I WILL VOTE FOR HIM, dang it. Ease up. He is not a fiscal conservative. Maybe I am not either under you criteria. Rick has risen to the top because in many opinion, because of Newt’s past transgressions he is disqualified. Rick Santorum is at best a second tier condidate in a very weak field. Again, I WILL VOTE FOR HIM. He just can’t be Obama. YES, my opinion. Newt has real solutions and real experience changing washington.
Yes, interesting that. I was prompted by this thread to take a poke around the internet to find video from that time period of Santorum opposing TARP and could find nothing. "He wasn't a political office holder at the time!" some say? Huh. Newt wasn't in office either and I managed to find THIS VIDEO from Hannity and Colmes calling TARP, among other things, "...about as bad as anything I've seen in economic policy since I've been active in public life."
Oh and wait, didn't Santorum accuse Newt of (like Romney) supporting TARP? He wouldn't LIE would he?!
And NO I am not a hater or unspiritual. I can have an opinion. and this is my opinion, Rick Santorum is a big government republican when it comes to fiscal matters. Personally, not sure I care if he was a team player. People say I am not a team player, maybe that is not always a bad thing.
Well, he DID support it at one point.
http://theiowarepublican.com/2011/newt’s-justification-for-supporting-tarp/
Thank you for the link, I’ve bookmarked and will read more in depth tomorrow (on my way to work presently). From a quick skim it seems that while instinctually opposed, he changed his mind after some in business spoke with him about it. I would love to know who they were and what was said!
Thank you! I have asked Santorum supporters to explain to me how a Senator, who could not withstand the pressure to endorse Specter, would have been able to stand against the all the “end of the world” wailing that was going on and vote against TARP.
Bump.
What's your source?
Do you have proof he didn’t?
You mean, can I prove a negative? Of course not.
I have no proof that he didn't say the following, either:
"The tragic death of Whitney Houston has soured me on contemporary R&B."
or
"You know what goes really good with a peanut butter and banana sandwich? A nice orange Shasta."
You can attribute any quote to anyone.
The question is: what grounds do you have to assert that he said this? The answer is: none.
It's not good practice to go around putting words in peoples' mouths.
“Santorum is NO fiscal conservative! An antitax advocacy group zinged Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum’s tax plan, giving him a grade of “D+” grade and the dubious honor of proposing what “may be the worst idea of any of the Republican candidates.”
” I’m rather tired of all the people who don’t like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist. I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.
Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.” - Erick Erickson
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/06/what-a-big-government-conservative-looks-like/
Anyone who raises spending is actually raising taxes, to support his high spending. And Santorum was NEVER shy in raising spending. In his Congressman career he sponsored or co-sponsored FIFTY-ONE spending bills.
Individual freedom and limited government, are the true values that made America great. The welfare, nanny state that Santorum strongly supported, is certainly not what the US was founded on.
We do not need the government to tell me how to live and to give me values, I can do that on my own just fine.
Santorum thinks he is the man, who hold all the truth, and that he and his government have the “obligation” to impose it on people.
Yeah, that’s what I got out of it. I think all of these politicians play politics.... It’s what we’re stuck with. And yes, wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall? Of course, if we were we would probably never vote again. I am not 100% opposed to Newt or Santorum. I am not thrilled with our choices, but they are better than what we have in office now. We need a conservative Congress regardless.
Simply not true.
The AFL-CIO scorecard, as disclosed on their website, consists of a list of votes on specific bills (looking over their scorecards about 15-25 per session) that they consider important for "the labor movement."
It is not a list of all bills voted.
Thanks for all the stuff to read, and more importantly, THINK ABOUT... now if we could get the Tea Party types to look at him clearly... there is still time.. Thanks!
I never said it was a total bills voted ledger - but it is not just labor bills. Far from it. “Important to labor” means a lot of things to labor union liberals and if you go thru and link to some of the bills, you will find out that many have nothing to do with labor per se.
There are some problems in his voting record, but it is statistically slightly more conservative than Santorums - which is ironic - because many of Santorum’s followers and Santorum himself wants folks to believe he is actually far more conservative than Newt. That’s my main point with that.
And Santorum did get more and more liberal the longer he stayed in congress (first the House then the senate).
I have looked at him clearly and judged him to be a better choice than Mr. Gingrich. I wish we had those two choices, without the distraction of Romney and Paul.
And Santorum did get more and more liberal the longer he stayed in congress (first the House then the senate).
I think the difference is that those who believe Santorum more conservative look at the post-Congress and pre-Contract years for Gingrich and compare them as a whole.
What “past transgressions disqualify” Newt ?
Newt is the MOST qualified candidate for the office of president, and the other contenders including Obama, cannot hold a candle to him, as far as their accomplishments are concerned.
And I tell you from the start, DON’T even dare bring the divorce matter on the table, I won’t even listen to them. If you elected a candidate for sainthood, then you could make a point, but as you elect the president, his past personal life is a moot point. Playing into the leftists’ hands, who never gave a damn that the democratic presidents from Roosevelt, Kennedy to Clinton, entertained their multiple mistresses in the White House, but are rediscovering their “puritan side” when they point their “horror” in face of two divorces in 50 years in a man’s adult life. It would be funny as hell to see all those Obama supporters - Hollywood stars rising this topic.
Other than that, his private life, which is none of your business, you have NOTHING against Newt. His 20 years record in the House speaks for itself - 91% conservative voting record , 98.7% pro-life voting record.
You guys, you tire me with the mantra that “Newt is disqualified”. He’s the BEST Republican candidate in the past 25 years.
I agree that’s what they do - I just don’t think it’s that valid - since most of them overlook or have no idea how Santorum was getting more and more liberal the longer he stayed in congress and they have no idea how incredibly liberal is last campaign was in 06.
I also submit they have set a high bar for themselves by sniping at other candidates while pretending to be pure. Very off putting.
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.