Specter Fallout SANTORUM IN TROUBLE

American Spectator ^ | 1/24/2005 | The Washington Prowler

[cynicom]

I am tired of these politicians that will sell their souls for reelection. Santorum chose to sleep with dogs and now he has fleas.

[Badray]

I would rather Santorum be trustworthy and faithful to his professed values.

Let me pose this to you . . .

I can understand political ambition. The higher you rise, the more power that you wield. You are in a better position to advance your agenda. Makes sense to me. You too, right?

Okay, so you build your reputation as a fiery conservative who isn't afraid to be politically incorrect, someone who has challenged the power structure and protocol of the Senate. That's how you ran. That's how you won. That's why you won.

Ricky has risen to high office within the Senate and is in a position to make a difference to and for conservative values. He's influential. He can make deals. He may be a future kingmaker or even a future King because of his success.

Yet, after all the years of work, all the years of being criticized for his strong conservative positions, when he is now in a position to really make a difference, he goes back on everything that he has claimed to stand for. He turns his back on the people that brought him to where he is to wield this power.

Why did he do this?

What is his real agenda.

What are his core beliefs?

Did he just ride the conservative wave to the top for his personal advancement and ambition?

What good is all of those years of being attacked if you don't do what you claim is the reason that you endured the attacks?

Why not solidify your reputation when you have the chance? Why not back the conservative over the liberal who opposes everything that you seemingly are for?

Is it just the power, and not the principle, that drove him?

I think so. To me, he is nothing more than a political hack that cannot be trusted.

[marty60]

I'll defer to you on this one. I haven't really kept up with his opnions on different items. But, I can see the point of going for Casey if this is the case. apparently, some of Specters duplicity has rubbed off on Santorium. Or someone has some really bad dirt on him.

[Badray]

" Now I know you are rather wacky. A vote that was not for Bush was in this election a vote in effect for Kerry."

Not really, but congratulations. That is the proper usage of the party talking points.

Have you ever heard of the Electoral College? Do you know how it works? Do you know that on November 2nd we had FIFTY (count'em 50) elections for president? Bush lost by well over 100,000 votes here in PA. Subtract my vote and he still loses by over 100,000 votes.

[Badray]

Thanks.

I don't claim to be an expert on his votes, but I do know that he has voted for some highly questionable, low profile things.

I questioned Santorum for about ten minutes at a breakfast meeting 4 or 5 years back. He was the front man for 'allowing' us to put 2% of our money, that the government confiscates from us each year, into private retirement accounts. Sounded good at the time. Sounds good even now, right?

When I questioned the notion of a SS program, he got back on his heels and defended that system like he was the one who originally proposed it. I poked and prodded (in front of 120 supporters) and he came up with one socialistic defense after another until his face got so purple with rage that he finally disengaged and took other questions.

Long story short (if it's not too late), 18 of the next 19 people were emboldened then to question him critically on his votes and when his scheduled time was up for speaking, he beat a hasty retreat. He was furious.

Those 18 questions challenged his votes on the Panama canal and a chemical weapons treaty and other issues where he voted opposite of what we'd expect.

On pro life and a few other high profile issues, he has been consistently good. He DOES have a good ACU rating, though I am beginning to wonder about those numbers and more particularly the votes that are used to determine the score. I say this because of David Keane's (ACU boss) close personal relationship with liberal Specter.

Call me crazy, wacko, purist, nut case, etc., if you want. Others do. But we are involved in serious business here.

Support a man who supports the killing of unborn children, big government solutions for everything, and many other liberal positions when you have positioned yourself to be the arbiter of what a good conservative is, seems to be a conflict of interest. That said, Specter does get a low rating from the ACU.

My point is this. A man like Specter whose value system is anathema to mine CANNOT be my friend. Any person who works against my liberty IS not my friend and he is not simply a political antagonist. He IS my enemy. Any man, anywhere who would take my liberty -- whether by the stroke of a pen, a pull of the lever, or at the point of a gun IS my enemy.

You don't work with and accomodate your enemy. You don't build a tent big enough to house them. You root them out and destroy them.

If we don't destroy the enemies of liberty within the GOP, they will destroy us.

[paltz]

Specter must have something on Santorum...something big. Santorum might as well be going "woof woof" for Specter at this point.

[meema]

Casey is not a charismatic campaigner and will not bring out the blue collar Dems in force

That's good to know. I had the impression that his father charismatic, and thought the son might be, too.

Speaking of old and tired, boy, that's how I feel tonight. Love your screen name.

[meema]

Well, in the meantime, are we going to email and phone and turn the fire up under ALL those Clubbie Pubbies (especially W and Frist).
'Cause if we don't, they'll think they have gotten away with something really big... and we must be too worn out to fight anymore.

'Nite all, it's way past my bedtime.

[NittanyLion]

I'm sure glad a bunch of RINO's decided (incorrectly, it turns out) that Pat Toomey couldn't win that seat.

[FreedomHasACost]

Yes, I do know about the electoral college. And Penn. was one of the "close states" if I remember. And you would not have known that it would not have come down to it. So looking back you pretend you know it all and it would not have hurt anything, oh my.
Who was it that you would of voted for?
Anyway what are the specific bills that Santorum has supported that you don't like? Who in the senate who you like did not also support those bills? Did anyone you like support Specter for the chair of the Judicial Committee? What senators do you like?
I think you are a discontent to not be happy with a man who is much better than the average senator, and in my opinion one of the very best.

[Badray]

If by close, you mean 120,000 votes, then yeah, it was close.

I would have, should have voted 3rd party as a protest. The GOP at the National level is acting like the Democrats with their 'borrow and spend, government knows best' attitude.

Give me some time and I'll come up with a senator that I respect. Off hand, none come to mind.

Santorum has been good on most of the high profile issues. I have acknowledged that. He has been less than great on the not so high profile votes and that is troublesome.

I related an incident where I confronted him about SS. He defended it as though it was his idea. That is very troubling. SS is a Ponzi scheme and socialism at it's worst and he defended it.

I am very upset with him. My assumption is that he has just been playing a role -- Ricky Santorum appearing as "The Firebrand Conservative" coming to a theater near you.

I might be wrong.

He may not be duplicitous at all.

Maybe he's being blackmailed.

Maybe he was bought off with promises of higher office.

Maybe he is just spineless.

There are just so many possibilities. You can pick the one that you think fits best.

[litehaus]

Ol' Arlen was the inventor of the "magic bullet" sold and used only once in Dallas, I believe.

[Kryptonite]

We got the distinct impression that Specter is going to continue to hire people like this. If conservatives care, they need to mobilize now. Because it's largely out of our hands."

Conservatives cared. They already mobilized. You ignored us. You didn't care. Hope you don't mind if we don't care in the next election.

Yessir. I cared enough to spend hours writing letters and phoning Senators after Specter issued his "warning" to Bush about nominees. I got a big bag of nothing for my efforts, and a Senate Majority leader who thinks he is Hillary Clintoon on a healthcare reform agenda.

My line is drawn in the sand. If Bush does not get the equivalent of Scalia on the SCOTUS, I am done supporting Republicans.

[Lurking in Kansas]

Ol' Arlen was the inventor of the "magic bullet"...

You are correct, sir.

[Lurking in Kansas]

Ol' Arlen is the one on the far left.

[Zechariah11]

Are there any options left for the Republicans on the committee?

[jammer]

Isn't the irony of this bitter? First we have Bush I. He won only because of being Reagan's VP, but then almost destroyed the Reagan Revolution--and hurt the GOP badly. Then we get Clinton (I call it the Bush--Clinton era). Almost destroyed the Democrats, lost the House, etc. A big thank you to Newt, no matter what else we think of him.

Now Bush II. In the name of conservatism, proposes and passes a liberal agenda. The GOP will be in tatters by 2008.

And no one needs to respond to the last paragraph unless he/she can cite where Mr. Bush is any different, except rhetoric and a minuscule tax cut, than Lyndon Johnson. Until you can, bide your time (and I will apologize if wrong) or change your vote from the Three-Monkey wing of the Republicrat Statist Party.