You provided dozens of charges here, and one link to the sewer you drug it out of.
I went over there to look at the information.
On issue one, the charge is well founded. Santorum did vote with the most disgusting Republicans and Democrats in the day. That was fourteen years ago.
So what is his view on defunding the Endowment for the Arts today? Do you know? No. So what you did was post something here to trash Santorum, even though you have no idea if he agrees with you now or not. Is that particularly honest? No.
On the second issue, the writer took Santorum to task for not supporting a 10% reduction in the Endowment for the Arts. When you use the link he provided, the Senate bill has to do with increasing funding to an American Indian group. There’s no way to verify what he was claiming.
On the third matter, is was charged that Santorum “Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.”
What the author left out, was that Santorum voted to make sure the debts of pro-life demonstrators who accrued debt due to the UTILIZATION OF VIOLENCE, could not get that debt wiped away during a bankruptcy proceeding.
I support folks out there protesting abortion, but I’m not going to give them a free ride if they cause damage with bombs, burn buildings down, torch cars, or injure people and become responsible for their hospital bills.
If you had used those links, had studied up on what this guy was up to, I think you could have avoided trying to tarnish someone on such flimsy evidence.
Of course that if that wasn’t your goal was all along.
Santorum’s positions now are softly spoken, and solely for the purpose of geting nominated.
He has yet to take a robust stand against a past position, unlike Newt who has humbly and vocally rejected his failings in nationally broadcast events.