Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sellout: Santorum Proves Hes Just Another Washington Insider
The Red Side of Life Conservative Musings from New York ^ | 4/19/12 | RedInNewYork

Posted on 04/19/2012 11:47:55 AM PDT by jmstein7

In my estimation, the hallmark of the true politician, the true Washington insider, is the intentional evasion of responsibility and/or blame – the sin of omission. By this standard, Rick Santorum, in the end, is nothing but a typical two-bit political hack.

For all his bloviating and posturing, painting himself as a true conservative, selling his alleged “genuineness”  and values – a regular Joe – Santorum has shown his true colors by failing to endorse when it could have made a difference. Plainly, he is avoiding the ire of the GOP establishment by not endorsing Gingrich, and he is avoiding the ire of his own base, the base that believed in him, by not endorsing Mitt – who does not share the values of the Santorum base.

Of course, Santorum’s silence is indeed a tacit endorsement of Romney – but, in the spirit of jim Taggert, Rick “hasn’t said that.” It is beyond dispute that a timely endorsement of Gingrich would have likely injected the Gingrich campaign with fresh life – in both supporters and in news coverage. His silence has resulted, instead, in the further atrophy of the Gingrich campaign. But don’t blame Rick… he “hasn’t said anything!”

On the basis of my “Caucus Theory,” as a friend put it, Santorum has the right to endorse anyone still in the race; he certainly has the right to endorse Romney if he so chooses. He clearly has – but in a way that undermines his integrity… in a way that allows him to evade the responsibility for an explicit Romney endorsement. Rick has elected the Washington two-step over Main Street candor.

Rick, indeed, has the right NOT to endorse, just like an uncommitted or undecided voter has the right to NOT go to the polls. But the exercise of such right by Santorum, or a voter who has committed to a candidate and/or a set of principles, is distinguishable because such a non-vote implies a rejection of a professed set of principles or a loyalty (to a candidate). And, in Rick’s case, the implication of a non-endorsement is of great magnitude and consequence.  Here, Rick has sold-out on principled conservatism by not endorsing the remaining principled Conservative (Newt has a 95% Conservative lifetime rating by the ACU, the only objective measure to go by here).

THIS is the art of the dodge – something that makes Santorum more like Obama. As you may recall, Obama was notorious for voting “present” in the State and US Senate to avoid creating a record, to avoid being pinned-down for supporting, or not supporting, a measure that may become relevant, popular or unpopular. On his support of Conservatism, Rick Santorum has voted “present.”

TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: aerofthedodge; artofthedodge; biggovernment; endorsement4sale; evangelicals; falsealternative; falsechoice; fauxconservative; fauxtrueconservative; gopeusedrick; mittusedrick; present; rick4rick; rick4sale; santorum; usefulhack; usefulidiot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: finnsheep

He’s got my vote, and my wife’s and mom’s. Bob

21 posted on 04/19/2012 12:27:15 PM PDT by alstewartfan ( 27 of 36 Romney judicial appointments were DEMOCRATS!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ivory49

Well you are one voter who can’t be duped - TOO many can be and have been. And they got offended if they were told.

22 posted on 04/19/2012 12:27:15 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

If you think Santorum is a Conservative, in any manner other than his social views you are completely ill informed.

He has no qualms expanding government intrusion in everyones lives for those views, nor spending taxpayer money for graft and endorcements etc etc.

He may not be a communist, but he’s hardly a bastion of conservatism.

23 posted on 04/19/2012 12:31:43 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
It's probably just smart politics. I don't think Gingrich can win at this point no matter how strongly Santorum endorses him.

Smart Politics™ is what has brought us to the brink of collective hell.

24 posted on 04/19/2012 12:34:10 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: finnsheep

Hahaha.. Rick isn’t going to win, and wasn’t going to win PA, that’s why he withdrew when he did. The writing was on the wall he was going to lose his home state, and that would finally and without question be the end of his political career.

It should have been over when the voters of PA sent him rightfully packing by a 17 point margin, but alas a whole lot of folks who haven’t had to deal with the guy directly in the rest of the country got duped into backing him to ensure a Romney nomination.

Santorum, is, was and ever will be nothing more than useful hack. Not politically intellegent or savvy enough to know when he’s being played the fool.

25 posted on 04/19/2012 12:35:09 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7

We can only hope that you have a real job that doesn’t involve dealing with people or expressing cogent thoughts.

26 posted on 04/19/2012 12:35:20 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7
Why is it so hard to understand that Gingrich was a fringe, vanity candidate that never had a chance, and his time for preening in front of the mirror is over?

Dissatisfaction that milquetoast Romney will be the nominee is one thing we all share.

But The inability to see that Newt is a major turn off to about 80% of the people who's votes matter, with questionable conservative credentials of his own (see couch/Pelosi. Also see trough feeding: Freedie Mac), that would lose 40 states if nominated, requires willful blindness.

27 posted on 04/19/2012 12:35:42 PM PDT by ltbigv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Obviously, you don’t, ad hominem.

28 posted on 04/19/2012 12:36:15 PM PDT by jmstein7 (A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Has anybody in this country heard of core conviction and priciple.I don't care if Newt is down in the polls.Rick claims he's the conserative,why not stand on pricipale?
29 posted on 04/19/2012 12:38:41 PM PDT by ivory49
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7

Even Sarah didn’t officially endorse Newt. Santorum has no obligation, nor does he owe Newt a darn thing. Newt did pen that article about how Santorum isn’t qualified. On that note, I would tell Newt to pound sand.

Newt isn’t a popular guy. He was out of this race a long time ago. He may pick up some Santorum votes in the coming weeks. But he is done and he knows it.

30 posted on 04/19/2012 12:42:24 PM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ivory49

You expect Santorum to endorse Gingrich when Gingrich was trailing badly and refused to drop out and endorse Santorum?

Santorum owes Gingrich nothing!!!

And your core conviction and principles are warped if you think he does.

31 posted on 04/19/2012 12:44:23 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jmstein7

Are you kidding? Gingrich would make a bad President, even if FReepers are so enamoured of him. He’s the best running currently, which is not a hearty endorsement. He’s a good historian and debater but he doesn’t stick to conservatism in life or politics. He just likes a good fight.

Santorum is doing the only decent thing. Not endorsing Romney.

32 posted on 04/19/2012 12:48:33 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

Not conservative? What do you call balancing the budget for 4 years in a row? You do recall that he won back the house leadership after 40 years in dem. control. And the list goes on. By the way don’t you think that we need a fighter as our next President? Go NEWT.

33 posted on 04/19/2012 12:58:09 PM PDT by nurse-rn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

And, here, I thought you were gonna say something STUPID!!!

34 posted on 04/19/2012 1:07:06 PM PDT by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

We know which type of candidates that Santorum endorses.

In 1996 he endorsed Arlen Specter for president, Specter was running to remove pro-life from the republican party platform, Santorum tells us that he himself was pro-abortion until he started putting together his run for Congress.

In 2008 of course, Santorum felt that Mitt Romney was the man who was superior to the pro-life, more conservative candidates.

35 posted on 04/19/2012 1:33:49 PM PDT by ansel12 ( Romney is a Mormon Bishop, as was his father, his uncle was in line to be the Mormon Prophet/Pope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Deb

Nah, there was enough ‘STUPID’ in his comments about Zimmerman for all of us.

36 posted on 04/19/2012 1:45:34 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Vis-versa.When Newt was up in the polls,and Rick was trailing bad, Rick could of drop-out then.
Go pound sand.
37 posted on 04/19/2012 1:47:28 PM PDT by ivory49
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Deb
Yea, like Santorum is ‘wounded’, more like a 5th columnist, used by the Romney campaign.
38 posted on 04/19/2012 2:25:23 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!-Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

39 posted on 04/19/2012 3:08:39 PM PDT by Fiji Hill (Deo Vindice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Exactly. But I didn't know this Specter was running to remove pro-life from the republican party platform.
40 posted on 04/19/2012 3:13:12 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson