Skip to comments.Santorum: Gingrich Puts Social Issues 'in the Back of the Bus'
Posted on 12/05/2011 6:27:36 PM PST by Fred
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum on Sunday compared his war against reproductive rights and gay rights to the Civil Rights Movement, and attacked Newt Gingrich for putting social issues "in the back of the bus."
"In terms of social issues [Gingrich] has been married three times, he has two divorces, he's admitted to infidelity," ABC's Christiane Amanpour noted during an interview with Santorum. "Should voters hold that against him?"
"I think character is definitely an issue," Santorum opined. "I've been married 21 years, I have seven children. That's a factor that people are going to look at and should look at when it comes to the person you are going to have lead the country."
"Is he a real conservative with the social values?" Amanpour asked.
"I think that Newt has consistently put those, let's say, in the back of the bus," Santorum replied. "He's never really been an advocate of pushing those issues."
(Excerpt) Read more at videocafe.crooksandliars.com ...
>> I speak to tons of people. The social issues are a pure loser. >>
I somewhat agree with you. I would slightly adjust to “over emphasizing the social issues - especially in this cycle - is a sure loser.”
But I get your point.
>> If Newt is to be a serious candidate, it is time for him to attack Obama 24/7! >>
Um, well, er, what do you think has been going on? I would say that he already is a “serious candidate” and I would say he has already attacked not only Obama, but all liberals and the media, a ton already. If fact, I would say that is precisely WHY he is a “serious candidate.”
What are you looking for?
“I think character is definitely an issue,” Santorum opined. “I’ve been married 21 years, I have seven children. That’s a factor that people are going to look at and should look at when it comes to the person you are going to have lead the country.”
Can you remember where your house is, Mr. senator from Penn Hills?
Most people want to be left alone. People like Santorum come across as creepy as he’ll.
That's what I am hungry for. Someone that can launch broadsides on the stinking rotten pirate ship manned by Obama and his crew of death spawned maggots.
Hey Santy-torum...got any lumps of coal in your bag for Obama. Be a good Grinch and steal Obama’s Christmas. Leave the Repuby bashing to demrats...they are masters at it.
That's what happens when a politician chooses to use euphemisms and double talk and stick to the the politically correct lexicon.
What did he say?
Is he for or against perversion and baby murder?
>> Most people want to be left alone. People like Santorum come across as creepy as hell. >>
Agreed. As a Christian, I just want to be left alone by government indeed. Some folks seem to be obsessed with what I coined as a “Christian voyeurism” thing.
Conservatism is a three legged stool.
Economic issues, social issues and national security issues all matter. whatever candidate supports all three the best, I will support.
That is a very false phrase: Rick Santorum never said that he was fighting a "war against reproductive rights and gay rights" in the first place.
Santorum is pro-life.
Rick Santorum is my #1 choice of those running (Palin is my true #1).
But he is being dishonest here. Newt was constantly getting panned for pushing Social Conservatism. “Back of the bus” my rear end. Remember how they accused him of wanting to run a Christian Theocracy for advocating for voluntary prayer in school and for pushing abortion restrictions?
I don’t mind the rough and tumble of campaigning, but I take issues like The Right-to-Life too seriously to keep having people who either want to advance themselves or take out a candidate try to make enemies out of friends. Newt never put Social Issues on the back-burner, never.
Rick, you’re a great family man and a great Conservative. But you’re not being truthful here, and you know it.
Then I presume that you want Roe vs. Wade overturned above all else, as it is the most destructive example of Big Government intrusion ever.
After all, it is Big Government empowering one half of the human race (women) to kill the children of the other half of the human race (men).
Social issues don’t resonate with many (if not most) voters and Gingrich is smart for doing this. He knows the Dems and the MSM will label him as a “fundamentalist” if he talks about social issues too much.
More so than another four years of Zero?
Rick Santorum walks the walk.
Newt does not.
Yup. Gingrich doesn’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to the sanctity of marriage issue.
The “sacnity of marriage” has not much to do with the issue of permitting amoral liberals who hate both children and families to socially engineer it out of existence by changing it’s very meaning.
I do want Roe V Wade over turned - for any number of reasons of morality and sanity and legality. But I don’t need Ricky Santorum trying to prove he’s “more socially conservative” than anyone else to know that.
For sure Newt believes in marriage between a man and a woman. Obviously. He’s been for it three times. That takes dedication. Government doesn’t need to be involved in social issues. Christian churches should be more involved in social issues. Back in the day it was their job to keep people on the straight and narrow. Now they are afraid of losing their tax status, and have allowed the courts to take over our moral issues.
That's funny, I know a lot of independents too, and most of them think that taking firm conservative stances on social issues is pretty important, right along with the economy.
Guess it just depends on the kind of independent (hint: they're not a monolithic group, no matter now much pollsters and commenters like to think they are).
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.