Posted on 02/18/2012 4:23:55 PM PST by Mariner
Rick Santorum is a conservative Christian with the courage to speak openly about his faith.
Those who think he should keep quiet about it have already lost and are playing a leftist game of attempting to shove Christianity behind closed doors.
In Michigan (where Mitt was raised) we have a closed primary and Santorum is ahead. He is building a head of steam and Romney and Gingrich are faltering. That makes him unelectable?
(Good thing the likes of Mariner was part of the Baby Boomer generation vs. the Silent generation...too many Baby Boomers on younger would take one look at the multi-tasking involved in fighting a war vs. both Germany & Japan...as well as on so many geographical fronts...as simply too intimidating...cultural ADHD or something...can't concentrate on more than one foe and one issue at a time...With Baby boomers like Mariner, we'd lost WWII!)
However, we have a candidate talking about whether the current POS...er POTUS...is a real Christian.
***********************
I would agree—that is probably best left to Hannity, Beck and the like.
Can you say "Hyprocrite?"
Can you say "two-faced?"
Can you say "double-standard?"
Can you cite an example of me attacking the religious convictions of others?
And, have you resorted to name calling? How many arguments are you going to win with that?
That's been the absolute hallmark of Santorum supporters on this site for a few weeks now. Anyone that sheds a negative light on Santorum gets called a hypocrite, Godless Commie, Romneybot etc.
It's beneath this site and I'm surprised Jim has been putting up with it for this long.
I suspect he won't tolerate it much longer.
“It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible.”
That statement about President Obama is spot on. Whether one is interested in that line of discussion or not.
Whether Newt or Rick is the GOP pick is OK by me. I will show up on election day to vote for either. However, I will not ever vote for Romney anymore than I would Obama.
Both Newt and Rick have their particular areas where they will be targeted....Rick’s is his true moral conservatism (which unfortunately is not shared by most). Newt’s is his past mistakes (ex-wives, enemies in congress). However, in my opinion, either will generate more voters FOR the GOP pick for POTUS in a general election than Romney. I believe that a Romney pick will mean many, like myself, will stay home or leave the ballot blank on that issue.
I will not engage in bashing of either Newt or Rick. It is time to back one of the two and let the best man go forward. The only “Republican” for POTUS to bash is Romney and Paul (except Paul isn’t a Republican he is a libertarian).
I too have voted in every election since 1976 (I could have voted in 1972 but was in Basic Training for the Navy)...and always for the GOP nominee. I will do so again if Newt or Rick...but not Romney. THAT IS WHAT SHOULD WORRY FOLKS! Newt or Rick bashing is just idiotic in my thinking.....it is counter productive. Trash Romney and leave the other two alone.
I was not clear in my statement.
I would not argue in the AFFIRMATIVE that putting those issues at the forefront every day will win an election.
I don't believe they will.
No one and I mean no one, likes to be preached to by a pious politician about ones morality, religion, sexual activities, or anything else personal. If Brother Love continues down his righteous path, he will destroy any chance we have in november. He is exactly and precisely the image of what the public has been told regarding “right wing zealots” tea partiers, and evangelicals. Let’s get down to illegal immigration, oil production, job creation, obamacare, cost of living, war on terror and removing an enemy of the USA from the oval office.
You make the same assumptive/straw man error Mariner made in post #33...
Mariner came up with the out-of-thin air comment that theological issues with Obama would be "forefront, every day" matters...never mind that he has no track-record proof or evidence that Santorum runs a campaign that way.
And you, Appollo, have already made one Santorum theological comment into an entire "campaign" -- and made it a bogie man "campaign" at that.
Prove it that this a full-blown "campaign"...and if you can't, then you & Mariner need to reconsider the gossip straw men you so easily toss around.
You completely ignored the entire meaning of my message just so you can call me immoral.
I said that a campaign entirely run on Catholicism, contraception, gay marriage, family photos, is missing the entire point of what this campaign to unseat Obama is about.
A Catholic can get elected. A guy who is running on a religious/social platform to the detriment of economic issues is basically offering NOTHING. Gay marriage isn’t going to get people to come out to vote when THE ECONOMY IS CRASHING AND UNEMPLOYMENT IS SKYROCKETING.
That is the key point--thank you. He creates these issues out of nowhere and then has to waste time and credibility backtracking, defending, explaining, and generally leaving the rest of the party on the hook.
The outcome from this tomorrow will not be George Snuffalupagous asking "What really is Obama's theology?" The outcome will be Republicans answering for why the GOP is so intolerant and extremist on religious issues.
Any “public” that would be swayed by negativity coming from the media against Santorm’s religion and ehtics, would be swayed by the media against any Republican for any idea the media could come up with. Those people are dem lemmings and would not come to the side of the Light not matter what.
Exactly.
GO NEWT GO—it’s about the survival of our country!!
Santorum chooses these fights, then right after the speech has to back down and defend.
If Obama says he's a Christian, he's a Christian".
Of course, just not a BIBLE Christian.
He will not be able to control the dialog. Every question he receives will be on Social Issues.
If Santorum gets any more “preachy” he’s going to have to trade in his sweater vest for a “Church Lady” dress and begin every speech with, “Well, idn’t that SPECIAL!”
The number #1 Issue listed on his website is Pornography.
Newt is the Only Candidate in this race with a Plan to undo Obama’s damage and get our economy moving. His Energy plan alone would create thousands of jobs.
I didn’t call you immoral. You said it means nothing in a presidential race. You argue like the liberals I have to deal with that’s why I question your length of time here and think you may be a troll. He is not running on those issues alone. You and the leftist media want to make it look like that is all he is running on...
“Rick has talked at length about the economy, as well as national defense, etc., etc. He typically speaks about social issues only when asked. When asked he gives an honest answer.
Polls show that more than 50% of all Americans are pro-life. In my previous post I gave the example of the predominantly Democrat voters opposing same-sex marriage. Social issues aren’t Rick’s primary focus, but they can be a winning, not a losing, issue when mentioned.
One wonders about those who go into tantrums and post in all caps when social issues are mentioned. Perhaps it isn’t because they don’t think that the nation agrees with Rick, but because they themselves don’t agree with Rick.”
Trust me. You know nothing about me. I’m not immoral. I’m not an atheist. It’s pretty freaking simple:
Look at his campaign website. Just take a look. Count the photos stuffed with children. Go to his Issues page, and read the very first article. And read the second. And read the third. Count how many times “family” comes up, his grandpa, his kids, his wife, family values, pornography, etc etc, and how little any specific plans are even mentioned.
There is a difference between being Pro-life and committed to protecting the unborn, and running on a Family Image platform. Especially when Catholics don’t even make up a large portion of the population, and most of them, even their leadership, leans left.
Can you explain to me what should appeal to me, as a Southern Baptist, with some Catholic sitting up there lecturing the country about morals, contraception, the eeevils of pornography, and so on and so forth, when I could be unemployed or seriously hurting.
Do you think I don’t already have a pastor?
Do we need Saint Rick to be America’s Priest?
Do we need Saint Rick to be the father of morality in this country?
We need a political leader... not some goof ball who accepts everything out of Rome, who thinks pornography is a major issue that is disturbing people, who thinks we’re actually interested to long lectures about stuff, meanwhile his platform doesn’t even offer a flat tax or significant reforms to social security, and on and on and on.
When your best qualification for President is that you talk so much about family, you really aren’t ready for prime time.
Sure. Post #5: "...he could have been talking about other things and chose this."
Santorum elected to cover this angle (at least for today) -- and you critiqued him for it.
IOW, 'twas "A-OK" for you to post a thread highlighting religious convictions (Santorum's) --
--including Santorum's conviction that theology is politically relevant...
...and for you to get your two-cents' worth dig in that seems to say that even one theological comment overflows your hidden "quota" for candidates like Santorum...
...(IOW it was "A-OK" for you to discuss the relevance of a theological-political mix ... but apparently was "overboard" for Santorum to go there...)
That's what I say is two-faced.
Are you going to stand by your critiques or not?
Or when someone calls you on them, are you going limp out just so that your double standards aren't readily exposed?
“And you, Appollo, have already made one Santorum theological comment into an entire “campaign” — and made it a bogie man “campaign” at that.
Prove it that this a full-blown “campaign”...and if you can’t, then you & Mariner need to reconsider the gossip straw men you so easily toss around. “
Yes I can. Look at his campaign website. What are the first “Issues” on his positions page? I’ll give you a hint. It’s about pornography. The next one is about his grandpa and being a coal miner and believing in America and blah blah blah.
Now compare that to the campaign website of Herman Cain, or Newt Gingrich, or the former website of Rick Perry.
What difference do you see here?
Then we have to throw that question back at them and say “Did I stutter? Why are you so extremist and intolerant of my views?” The point is, the Republicans do not need to answer to liberal media haters.
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.