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?
You darn right I did. That's a valid political critique.
You still have not cited an example of me attacking his religious convictions.
Instead you are inventing meanings in your head in order to smear other Freepers.