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

Skip to comments.

Santorum Called for Federal Ethanol Mandate
Conservatives4Palin ^ | 3/11/201 | Mary Beth House

Posted on 03/11/2012 5:56:18 PM PDT by katiedidit1

"Another presidential candidate had an energy proposal back in 2008 as well. Former Senator Rick Santorum’s ideas, however, went an entirely different direction. Rather than increasing production, his solution was to “reduce US oil appetite” in an article he wrote, titled, “Reducing U.S. oil appetite This is one cause that could be helped by smart mandates and taxing“

(Excerpt) Read more at conservatives4palin.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 2congressionallosers; doublespeaktwins; ethanol; googlenewtlaudenberg; ibtz; maybealittleblow; mymuslimfaith; newtbootedfromhouse; newtethanollobbyist; proillegal; prounion; rick4ethanolmandate; rickbootedfromsenate; santorum4bigcorn; santorum4ethanol; santorum4mandates; santorum4romney; vote4themuslim; voteobama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-88 next last

1 posted on 03/11/2012 5:56:26 PM PDT by katiedidit1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

I’ve been moving into the Gingrich column for a few days. That clap-trap pushed me over. Too bad more of this wasn’t out before our primary.


2 posted on 03/11/2012 5:59:20 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Newt or nuthin’.


3 posted on 03/11/2012 5:59:42 PM PDT by BipolarBob (When do the salmon return to Capistrano?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1; Marguerite; b9; caww; RitaOK; Gator113; TitansAFC; onyx; sodpoodle; Windflier; ...

What we need is a government mandate! We need to mandate that all cars sold in the United States, starting with the 2010 model year, be “flex-fuel vehicles” – that is, they should be able to run on a blend that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (the so-called E85 blend), or even a coal-derived methanol/gas mixture. This mandate would cost a fraction of the new fuel economy standard with the added benefit of saving barrels more oil.

Yes…that’s right. Santorum’s answer to the energy crisis…was corn.


4 posted on 03/11/2012 5:59:45 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Watching the Undefeated now...it is excellent! Breibart did a fantastic job. Found the post on Santorum on Sarahs facebook site:)


5 posted on 03/11/2012 6:01:04 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

I hate to say it, but almost everyone has supported the ethanol mandate. A few exceptions, but not many. Why? Because unless you vote for farm subsidies, you will be thrown out of office in most of the farm states.

I remember back a number of decades ago, I’m not sure exactly when, when the Republicans voted to reduce farm subsidies. Those who did were thrown out of office, and the Democrats got an immediate majority in congress.

I HATE ethanol in the gas. But it’s going to be a huge job doing something about it.


6 posted on 03/11/2012 6:02:25 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Except for S! there is no Conservative candidate.

Accept that the Senate has been run by a Mormon and vote for Willard over Zer0.

7 posted on 03/11/2012 6:02:39 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/gingrich-backed-by-ethanol-lobby-supports-subsidy.php


8 posted on 03/11/2012 6:03:07 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

GO NEWT GO!


9 posted on 03/11/2012 6:03:07 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

So much for him then.


10 posted on 03/11/2012 6:04:01 PM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Santorum is Huckabee 2.


11 posted on 03/11/2012 6:04:15 PM PDT by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob

Important to note..Santorum wants a MANDATE on corn used for fuel..Newt only wanted exploration...BIG difference.
“Yes…that’s right. Santorum’s answer to the energy crisis…was corn. His response was to force car manufacturers to build vehicles that would rely on 85% ethanol…ie, a corn byproduct. (And yes, I’m aware that Gingrich supports ethanol (not mandating it, just exploring it as an option), an issue with which I strongly disagree with him.)

It seems an odd response from someone who says that on principle they don’t agree with the government meddling in the private sector, doesn’t it? So, he says he opposed the car company bailout because he didn’t like the government interfering in the private sector, but he’s A-okay with the government mandating all vehicles be ethanol-friendly?


12 posted on 03/11/2012 6:04:25 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Big difference..Newt did not favor a mandate..ONLY exploration...Santorum wants a govt mandate!


13 posted on 03/11/2012 6:05:41 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
I like Gingrich, but I know longer think he has a chance.

And? It was Newt that sat on the couch, with Nancy, not Santorum!

I think you should find some other issue to use, this one does not work well, for Newt.

14 posted on 03/11/2012 6:05:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Which is worse? Healthcare mandates supported by Newt, or Ethanol mandates supported by Santorum?


15 posted on 03/11/2012 6:06:34 PM PDT by Allon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

And Newt is pushing ethanol subsidies to this day.


16 posted on 03/11/2012 6:06:36 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

Santorum even wrote an article on mandating ethanol..and raising taxes on gas. “Rather than increasing production, his solution was to “reduce US oil appetite” in an article he wrote, titled, “Reducing U.S. oil appetite This is one cause that could be helped by smart mandates and taxing“


17 posted on 03/11/2012 6:08:29 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Allon

Okay...the healthcare mandates are worse. Arrgghhh! I don’t know who to believe.

I still prefer Herman Cain.


18 posted on 03/11/2012 6:09:13 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Newt equals exploration...Santorum equals FORCED MANDATE AND HIGHER TAXES..also wants to reduce Americas appetite for oil


19 posted on 03/11/2012 6:09:55 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Newt sat on the couch..oh my. Santorum endorsed Spector and that is why we have Obamacare. They needed 60 votes and Arlen gave it to them. Also, Santorum endorsed Romney..fully aware of Mitts socialized medicine in Mass...much worse than sitting on the couch ...also, Santorum voted for Sotomyer..another liberal. Even McCain voted NO on her...3 strikes and he is OUT


20 posted on 03/11/2012 6:13:03 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

not mandates like the big govt man..vesty


21 posted on 03/11/2012 6:13:56 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

I’m watching it too on Reelz network.

My God, I can’t believe she decided not to run. I had put her chances of running at 90%.

She would have defeated these four with plenty of ammo left.

Mitt is completely clueless to the decline of the country.

Gov. Palin not running put a HUGE vacuum in the GOP Primary. Many other early possible candidates, including Huckabee, believed she was going to run so they didn’t bother running themselves.

Bachmann had no business running and trying usurp the leadership of the Tea Party Movement. Perry ran I suspect when he and his people were sure she would not jump in if he did first.

I’ve sent Gov. Scott Walker $400 for his recall election fight. He will be the Tea Party favorite in 2016.

Sarah should have run. Great reformer and constitutionalist who understands how economics works, and someone we could trust to choose interpretationists for the federal court system.

Lost opportunity.


22 posted on 03/11/2012 6:14:22 PM PDT by Sapwolf (Talkers are usually more articulate than doers, since talk is their specialty. -Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Allon

The only “healthcare mandate” was that people who did not want to buy insurance would post a bond. That’s reasonable and does not involve forcing anyone to buy a particular product.


23 posted on 03/11/2012 6:14:31 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Rick gave away the issue of the economy today. He know agrees with Obama.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2857625/posts


24 posted on 03/11/2012 6:15:46 PM PDT by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: trappedincanuckistan

now.


25 posted on 03/11/2012 6:16:31 PM PDT by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

You idiot. He was saying this as an alternative to the cafe standards and other crap that is holding us back. Would you rather he sat on a couch making out with Nancy Pelosi over “global warming” like a certain ‘other’ conservative?


26 posted on 03/11/2012 6:16:31 PM PDT by GulfBreeze (Still a Santorum guy !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Santorum played a major role in getting Obamacare passed by his endorsement of Spector. Dont forget he also endorsed Romney who introduced socialized medicine to this country and set the framework for Ocare...which includes mandates


27 posted on 03/11/2012 6:16:44 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Newt equals exploration...Santorum equals FORCED MANDATE AND HIGHER TAXES..also wants to reduce Americas appetite for oil

That's all nice and good but he still supports ethanol subsidies and incentivizing flex fuel vehicles (Can you say "Volt"?) And then there's the whole other issue of wanting to replace the EPA with a whole new taxpayer funded federal agency.
28 posted on 03/11/2012 6:16:57 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Sapwolf

Love her and have so much respect for her. She is a fighter and a true conservative.
America needs her


29 posted on 03/11/2012 6:18:11 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Giant ethanol maker among Gingrich’s top campaign donors
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-06/newt-gingrich-ethanol-campaign-donor/51682042/1

Gingrich’s support for ethanol subsidies puts him starkly at odds with some of his party’s prominent conservatives, who have pushed to end the $6 billion-a-year subsidy. It also offers another example of the ways Gingrich has amassed millions as a consultant since leaving Congress in 1999.

In 2009, for instance, he penned an editorial for POET’s quarterly magazine proclaiming ethanol “pro-American” because of its potential to reduce the nation’s reliance on foreign oil while acting as a consultant to the ethanol trade group. The group paid Gingrich $575,000 between 2009 and early 2011, Growth Energy spokeswoman Stephanie Dreyer said.

“For fiscal conservatives, this is almost a classic case of wasteful government spending, entirely designed not to serve any useful purpose but to buy votes,” said Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. “Gingrich is not a fiscal hawk, and this is symptomatic of it.”

Campaign spokesman R.C. Hammond said Gingrich has never wavered in his support for “any type of American energy.”

“It is better to have it come from inside our borders so the dollars that are generated by whatever it requires to make that energy, whatever it requires to ship it and develop it, stays in America and doesn’t go to Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela,” Hammond said.

Gingrich has faced scrutiny in recent weeks over his business activities, including as a consultant to mortgage giant Freddie Mac. Bloomberg News reported last month that Gingrich’s consulting firm earned at least $1.6 million from Freddie Mac.

Gingrich has repeatedly emphasized that he has never worked as a lobbyist. His consulting work for Growth Energy came as the trade group lobbied to increase ethanol use and boost federal aid for pumps that allow drivers to blend ethanol with gasoline at gas stations. The organization, created in November 2008, spent nearly $2.5 million on lobbying in 2009 and 2010, Senate records show.

Dreyer said Gingrich was tapped for his Washington expertise and support of ethanol.

“We were a newly formed organization at that point, still trying to figure out who we should be talking to and who we should be seeking counsel from,” Dreyer said. “He helped us answer those questions.”

Gingrich has long backed government support for ethanol, voting as far back in 1984 in favor of the subsidy. He also has staked his presidential campaign on a strong showing in next month’s Iowa caucuses, where the subsidies and other federal ethanol aid are supported by the state’s corn producers.


30 posted on 03/11/2012 6:19:46 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GulfBreeze

Resent your personal attacks. Disagree with the post is one thing but this is a fact on Santorum. He even wrote an article on it which I will send to you.
Yes…that’s right. Santorum’s answer to the energy crisis…was corn. His response was to force car manufacturers to build vehicles that would rely on 85% ethanol…ie, a corn byproduct. (And yes, I’m aware that Gingrich supports ethanol (not mandating it, just exploring it as an option), an issue with which I strongly disagree with him.)

It seems an odd response from someone who says that on principle they don’t agree with the government meddling in the private sector, doesn’t it? So, he says he opposed the car company bailout because he didn’t like the government interfering in the private sector, but he’s A-okay with the government mandating all vehicles be ethanol-friendly?

With all due respect, Senator, I think this is the wrong way to go. Rather than “reducing our oil appetite”, I believe as Governor Palin and Newt Gingrich do…that yes, innovation is coming, but that we must acknowledge the reality that we are a society wed to fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.


31 posted on 03/11/2012 6:21:14 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Yadda yadda blah blah—they all have a few skeletons in their closets—ain't nobody perfect—Newt certainly has some big gruesome bones in his little rooms—but I'm not going negative.

Fact is the biggest BIGGEST issue threatening America today is the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE in Obamacare—this is where you are FORCED by the GOVERNMENT to BUY a particular product just because you have a pulse in America.

Newt was for it and Mitt invented it so Rick is the only one with the standing and credibility to confront Obama on it.
The single most important issue right now and only one of our candidates can even talk about it without being called a hypocrite—the GOVERNMENT telling Americans what they WILL buy or be “HELD ACCOUNTABLE” in Newt's words.
Yeah it sux that some people will abuse the medical system and the rest of us will have to pay for it—but is having the GOVERNMENT taking away individual freedom and the slippery slope it introduces the answer?
Obama, Mitt and Newt thought so...
...not Rick.

32 posted on 03/11/2012 6:21:26 PM PDT by Happy Rain ("Better add another wing to The White House cause the Santorum clan is coming.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10

“I’ve been moving into the Gingrich column for a few days. That clap-trap pushed me over. Too bad more of this wasn’t out before our primary.”

??? Gingrich was an ethanol LOBBYIST!!!
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/%E2%80%9Cprofessor-cornpone-ethanol-lobbyist-newt-gingrich%E2%80%94and-the-future-of-the-gop%E2%80%9D/


33 posted on 03/11/2012 6:22:55 PM PDT by Bulwinkle (Alec, a.k.a. Daffy Duck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

Mister NOOT must be doin’ back flips. somethin’ was telling me this guy was light in the loafers. I bet he had that deer in the headlights look in his eyes when he said it


34 posted on 03/11/2012 6:26:38 PM PDT by stickywillie (a corrupt parallel universe exists beside our wonderful Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Gingrich the lonely Republican in supporting ethanol subsidies
http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2011/11/03/gingrich-the-lonely-republican-in-supporting-ethanol-subsidies/
November 3, 2011

In Iowa, four out of five Republican candidates for US President say that it’s time to end ethanol subsidies because it’s not the government’s place to support one source of energy over another.

Newt Gingrich was the only candidate at a manufacturing forum held Tuesday that supported ethanol subsidies, while two current frontrunners Mitt Romney and Herman Cain weren’t in attendance at all.


35 posted on 03/11/2012 6:27:33 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

You mean be FORCED by the GOVERNMENT to post a bond for not buying a particular product.


36 posted on 03/11/2012 6:27:55 PM PDT by Happy Rain ("Better add another wing to The White House cause the Santorum clan is coming.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

“Following his 16 point defeat from the Senate in 2006, Santorum penned a weekly column for the Philadelphia Inquirer. In one column “Reducing U.S. oil appetite This is one cause that could be helped by smart mandates and taxing,” the former Senator came out in favor of government mandates for fixing American oil dependence.

What we need is a government mandate! We need to mandate that all cars sold in the United States, starting with the 2010 model year, be “flex-fuel vehicles” - that is, they should be able to run on a blend that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (the so-called E85 blend), or even a coal-derived methanol/gas mixture. This mandate would cost a fraction of the new fuel economy standard with the added benefit of saving barrels more oil. “ Rick Santorum


37 posted on 03/11/2012 6:28:37 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: madison10

WSJ blasts Gingrich on ethanol
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/48520.html
1/31/11

Challenging his fiscally conservative bona fides, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board slammed Newt Gingrich for supporting ethanol subsidies in Iowa.

The influential Journal said that Gingrich’s “ethanol lobbying raises larger questions about his convictions and judgment.”

But what appeared to really irk the Journal’s conservative board –long critical of the subsidies – was the way Gingrich singled their position out as “just plain flat intellectually wrong” in a speech he gave last Tuesday to a renewable fuels summit in Des Moines.

“Obviously big urban newspapers want to kill it because it’s working, and you wonder, ‘W]what are their values?’” the editorial recounted Gingrich saying.

The Journal also blasted Gingrich for supporting George W. Bush’s 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit and for suggesting he could support government mandates for flex-fuel vehicles.


38 posted on 03/11/2012 6:30:16 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Santorum penned an article on his support of flex fueled vehicles..can RS and you say Chevy volt? this is his own words..Following his 16 point defeat from the Senate in 2006, Santorum penned a weekly column for the Philadelphia Inquirer. In one column “Reducing U.S. oil appetite This is one cause that could be helped by smart mandates and taxing,” the former Senator came out in favor of government mandates for fixing American oil dependence.

What we need is a government mandate! We need to mandate that all cars sold in the United States, starting with the 2010 model year, be “flex-fuel vehicles” - that is, they should be able to run on a blend that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (the so-called E85 blend), or even a coal-derived methanol/gas mixture. This mandate would cost a fraction of the new fuel economy standard with the added benefit of saving barrels more oil.


39 posted on 03/11/2012 6:30:16 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

None of the remaining GOP candidates is 100% pure on all issues conservatives like and hope to see implemented to improve our country’s future.

As the primary process goes on, vote for the one you like and respect the most and he may be the final nominee. Contribute as money is necessary to go forward.

What we shouldn’t do is to get too nasty or promote too much bloodletting against our guys, as that helps the one we fear most, Obama.


40 posted on 03/11/2012 6:30:22 PM PDT by RicocheT (Eat the rich only if you're certain it's your last meal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
I triple-dog-dare anyone to read this article and then come back here and post that Rick Santorum is a conservative.

They won't.

Instead they'll come back here and post how bad some other politician is.

41 posted on 03/11/2012 6:32:58 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bulwinkle

Its been out there but its been being shouted down by the echo chamber.

This was posted in February of last year.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2669660/posts

January of last year.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2665981/posts

In fact I fail to see his conservatism in a few things. If he’s going to promise to defund planned parenthood wouldn’t the conservative thing be to cut the spending rather than spending the money elsewhere?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2834401/posts


42 posted on 03/11/2012 6:34:52 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Comparing government mandates on energy resources to GOVERNMENT MANDATES removing God given PERSONAL FREEDOMS from Americans, like what Newt and Mitt support, is comparing cherries to watermelons-IMHO.


43 posted on 03/11/2012 6:35:49 PM PDT by Happy Rain ("Better add another wing to The White House cause the Santorum clan is coming.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

“I hate to say it, but almost everyone has supported the ethanol mandate. A few exceptions, but not many. Why? Because unless you vote for farm subsidies, you will be thrown out of office in most of the farm states.”

True, and that is why for a long time I have been railing against letting Iowa be the first state to vote in the primaries. Every candidate has to go there and pander to the ethanol folks.


44 posted on 03/11/2012 6:36:25 PM PDT by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA
Uh, there's a slight but significant difference in supporting the existing subsidy and advocating for E85 via federal mandate.

Hell, it's not even slight. It's an enormous difference.

45 posted on 03/11/2012 6:37:17 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain; All

Ethanol fliers sent out in support of Santorum and Mitt during the Iowa election. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/ethanol-group-sent-out-fliers-supporting-rick-santorum-mitt-romney-before-iowa-caucuses/


46 posted on 03/11/2012 6:39:14 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Santorum penned an article on his support of flex fueled vehicles..can RS and you say Chevy volt? this is his own words..Following his 16 point defeat from the Senate in 2006

And Gingrich IS STILL SUPPORTING THOSE THINGS.
47 posted on 03/11/2012 6:39:22 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

You’ve been citing Santorum without attribution. Those are called “talking points” when no links are included.

If you don’t want to look like an idiot on Free Republic, please include links in the future.

If you don’t, you just look like another troll.


48 posted on 03/11/2012 6:40:33 PM PDT by Jean S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: trappedincanuckistan

Newt supporters have trashed Rick for so long. I have never said anything negative about Newt because I said I would vote for him if Rick did not make it. Well, since the Rick trashing won’t stop, what goes around comes around.

Newt;“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

The cozy relationship Gingrich has with the ethanol industry led to his consulting business winning more than $300,000 in fees from the ethanol lobby after he left Congress. The Wall Street Journal noted April 27, 2011 that “Professor Gingrich says his ethanol support is grounded in his lifetime of studying history and intellectual problems, but what about that $312,500 from the ethanol lobby?... We’ve never suggested Mr. Gingrich has been bought off, though of course there wouldn’t be an ethanol lobby to hire Mr. Gingrich if there weren’t politicians like Mr. Gingrich willing to prop it up with taxpayer dollars, tariffs and mandates.”


49 posted on 03/11/2012 6:44:06 PM PDT by Linda Frances (Only God can change a heart, but we can pray for hearts to be changed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
Santorum supported individual healthcare mandate during the 1994 republican primary.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/09/401038/santorum-supported-individual-health-insurance-mandate-in-1994-republican-primary/ Santorum and Watkins both oppose having businesses provide health care for their employees. Instead, they would require individuals to purchase insurance

50 posted on 03/11/2012 6:44:52 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-88 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
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson