Click to Donate to Newt Gingrich
Posted on 02/01/2012 3:36:06 PM PST by parksstp
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has picked up an endorsement from former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo (tan-KRAY-doh).
The failed gubernatorial and presidential candidate is a tea party favorite.
Santorum was campaigning in Colorado on Wednesday ahead of next week's GOP caucuses there in hopes of building some momentum for his White House bid. Santorum also was endorsed Wednesday by former congressman Bob Shaffer and former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Other than the Allentown Morning Call link which may be a sub link from yours, most politicians with the exception of a few, have this very annoying habit of changing their opinions with the direction of the wind.
If they are corrupt and self serving I will never defend any of them, regardless of their party or what they call themselves. BS and corruption is always what it is. When pols make statements and do things that rob their constituents, they need to pay a heavy price and much heavier than they typically do. “Remember the Payraise”
http://articles.mcall.com/1994-05-02/news/2979474_1_cooper-grandy-health-reform-employees-premiums/2
It was proven on another thread that Santorum NEVEr supported the mandate.
Santorum has no charisma. He will only split the Conservative vote.
I just hope Tancredo’s endorsement of Santorum doesn't harm him with Hispanic Roman Catholics.
FWIW, do not read my comments as being a fan of illegal immigration. I do believe we need an orderly system to bring workers to the United States to do jobs that it is patently obvious Americans refuse to do even if unemployed. We did that regularly in the 1800s with immigrants taking bottom-of-the-barrel jobs, and we've got even more of a need for such workers today. We also need aggressive efforts by Americans, just as the DAR did in previous generations, to teach “Americanism” to new immigrants.
With 2% of the vote and a seventh place embarrassment in the Ft Lauderdale FL straw poll, Tanc knew the country was in good hands with all the GOP candidates but endorsed border security legend Mitt Romney. Just 5 weeks later Tanc was calling McCain a traitor when it was becoming clear that McCain was gonna win the nomination. And this year he said...
“Thank God John McCain lost the election” - The Tanc Feb 2010
“Ditto's Tanc” - Barry Soetoro.
This again? Santorum picked the establishment traitor Arlen Spector over Pat Toomey in the Republican Primary. Newt endorsed the REPUBLICAN, not the third-party candidate.
Did you see the thread with the poll showing head to head with either Gingrich out vs. Santorum out? Santorum defeated Romney by a wide margin and Gingrich only statistically tied. Santorum’s support does not go to Gingrich - it pretty much splits down the middle.
Tancredo and Santorum both supported Romney in 2008.
Yes Santorum is trying to tie up and stop Newt, for Mitt.
I do agree with you that Newt endorsing the Republican candidate after she had already been nominated is also not a huge issue.
Wasn't true the first time you said, won't be true the millionth time you say it. It is complete nonsense. And Santorum's support would not all go to Newt it would split between them.
Exactly. When it’s his turn, The Splitter will be in and out of the meat grinder and shredded into nothingness before he knows what hit him... for some reason,Sanctimonium’s supporters think he can ride that out, then take on Willard and then beat barack... this is not rational thought.
Tom Tancredo was my second choice for President in 2008 after Duncan Hunter. All the fire power needed on illegal immigration at this time, for the two front runners' position IMHO, for example, are rather questionable at most and deplorable at least. One on his record (Mittens), the other on his professed "compassionate conservatism" (Prof. Gingrich) which bears little difference from that disaster promulgated by the likes of George W. Bush/Karl Rove/Juan Hernandez/John McCain/Lindsay Graham. The whole straw dog about "90 year old grandmothers rounded up". Gimme a break. The country is under attack and invasion and has incessently been so for 20 years, we are changing as a nation as a result of it crime, culture, language and demographic not to mention political-wise, and that half buzzard/half chameleon Romney is so insincere coming off as a Pat Buchanan, if he wins the nomination he is going to so quickly revert to the Gingrich/McCain position it isnt even worth debating.
Santorum caved in to pressure from President Bush and the NRSC and supported the incumbent RINO who most people (wrongly, in my opinion) assumed would have a far easier time holding the seat than would Toomey. Newt not only endorsed the RINO-party-hack-selected DIABLO Dede Scozzafava, who is so liberal that she made Specter seem like Jesse Helms by comparison, but he doubled down and kept supporting her even after poll after poll showed her below 20% and Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman running neck-and-neck against the Democrat Bill Owens. Hoffman was 100 times more conservative than Scozzafava, and had 100 times greater odds of winning, and Newt still stuck by Scozzafava. Oh, and Scozzafava then dropped out of the race and ENDORSED THE DEMOCRAT, who went on to beat Hoffman narrowly. Thanks a lot, Newt, you sure can pick ‘em.
Rick Santorum made a mistake by caving in to the GOP president and supporting Specter, but if Newt’s idiotic, illogical decision to make nice with the RINOs in 2009 and endorse Scozzafava (of all people) does not mean that he’s not a bona fide conservative (and I don’t doubt for a moment that Newt is a conservative who made a huge mistake), then Santorum’s much smaller transgression shouldn’t even be given a second thought.
For the record, I was really pissed at Santorum when he supported Specter over Toomey (I even sent him an e-mail about it, which I post below), but I eventually forgave him. I haven’t really forgiven Newt for endorsing Scozzafava and sticking with her after there was absolutely no argument for a conservative backing her, but that wouldn’t stop me from voting for him over Romney. But between Santorum and Newt, I would vote for Santorum every day and twice on Sunday.
Here’s the e-mail I sent to Santorum back in 2004:
“Dear Senator Santorum:
Let me begin by saying that I am not a resident of Pennsylvania, so I am not technically your constituent. But as a member of the Republican leadership in the Senate, you represent Republicans throughout the nation, and as such I feel at the liberty to drop you this friendly note.
I am an active participant in the conservative movement, and regularly mention your name not only as an example of the type of leadership, platform and voting record Republicans need to get elected in competitive states and districts, but also as my preferred candidate for President in 2008. I defended you when you were unfairly attacked for your foresighted criticism of the pro-sodomy arguments in the Lawrence case, and I am certainly proud to have someone like you in the Senate to speak out and act on issues near and dear to me, such as opposition to abortion and judicial activism and support for tax relief and national defense. But I am at a loss for words when someone asks me why you are actively supporting the reelection of Senator Arlen Specter, who disagrees with us in every single one of those important issues.
I know that tradition dictates that incumbent Senators not oppose the reelection of their colleagues from the same party, especially when they represent the same state. And as Republican Conference Chairman, it would be unbecoming for you to actively campaign for the defeat of a Republican colleague. But is it really necessary for you to run commercials supporting Arlen Specter’s candidacy when he is running against Congressman Pat Toomey, a true conservative Republican from a blue-collar Democrat district (just like a certain Congressman Santorum from a decade ago) who can lead the party to a statewide victory?
I am especially disheartened by your claim that Arlen Specter votes with conservatives “on votes that matter.” When the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, which you had been fighting for years to pass, got to the floor last year, it was nearly derailed by a sham substitute amendment by Dick Durbin that would not have prohibited a single abortion so long as the doctor stated that the mother’s health (including mental health) may be in danger. You know better than I that passage of the substitute amendment would have signaled the defeat of the PBA ban, and would have been a major setback in the pro-life movement. I remember that you spoke eloquently on the Senate floor as to why the sham substitute had to be defeated, and that the only way to end that heinous practice was to vote against Durbin’s substitute amendment. Wouldn’t you call that a “vote that matters”? I sure do. And, in case you’ve forgotten, Arlen Specter voted in favor of Durbin’s sham substitute, and the only reason it failed was because a few Democrat Senators, most of whom were up for reelection in 2004, voted against the amendment. Arlen Specter can only fool ignorant pro-lifers into believing that he supported the PBA ban, since he voted for its final passage, the results of which were a foregone conclusion. (Why, even Tom Daschle voted for the final bill! I hope that, in his Senate race against John Thune, Daschle doesn’t run ads saying that he supported President Bush’s agenda “on votes that matter.”) But most pro-lifers are not that ignorant, and we will not support someone like Arlen Specter for reelection.
I could go on for paragraphs about Specter’s voting record, the dangers posed by someone as unreliable as him serving as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee (had Specter not opposed Robert Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade would have been overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey back in 1992, which would have saved millions of lives), the fact that Governor Rendell would name Specter’s replacement in case he can’t serve out his entire six-year term, and how Specter’s proven inability to attract votes from blue-collar Democrats in the Pittsburgh area and in the “T,” not to mention the fact that he cannot rally the conservative base, will make him more vulnerable to a challenge from Congressman Hoeffel (who will not allow Specter to win by his usual margins in the Philly metro area) than would Pat Toomey (who would defeat Hoeffel by winning votes from pro-life, pro-gun, pro-defense Democrats, the group that gave you two House victories and two Senate victories), but I know that you already know all of that. My plea to you is that you think about these things, and reconsider your participation in an active campaign to defeat Pat Toomey in the GOP primary. If, God forbid, Specter defeats Toomey, then it would certainly be acceptable for you to campaign actively for Specter’s reelection. But now is not the time to go wobbly.
I hope that you receive this note in the spirit with which it was intended, and that, after meditation and prayer, you do the right thing.
Sincerely yours in Christ,”
The question isn’t so much how liberal his supporters are, you say they are half Romney supporters like Santorum was in 2008.
Santorum is double teaming Newt and helping Romney shape the campaign, get rid of Santorum and they can run a pure Romney-antiRomney campaign.
I personally think that, perhaps most Santorum people could drift to the right instead of of staying with Mitt.
His endorsement makes as much sense as calling a raised poker pot with a pair of 3’s.
I just can’t wait for Your boy Newt to win. I can hear the introduction at the inauguration party. Ladies and Gentlemen, The President of the United States and the First Homewrecker. That should go over real well.
***
Oh, cut the crap. What home? They didn’t have children together. Sounds like it wasn’t much of a marriage. Why don’t you just mind your own business.
“Rick The Splitter Santorum cannot win, when was the last time you shook hands with reality? Vote for Newt. And think about making a donation, believe me, you’ll be glad you did....”
Newt went into Florida with what, a 20 point advantage in the polls right after SC? And he still got hammered.
Rick Santorum is right: it’s time for someone else to have a chance.
Did you see the thread with the poll showing head to head with either Gingrich out vs. Santorum out? Santorum defeated Romney by a wide margin and Gingrich only statistically tied. Santorum’s support does not go to Gingrich - it pretty much splits down the middle.
***
I’ll give you that. Santorum STILL has no charisma.
Presidential politics are silly and childish. The “cool guy” always wins. Santorum is much farther from that than Gingrich.
You are absolutely right, he did get hammered, with 17-25 millions dollars, depending on the source, of negative filthy lying ads... in different terms, 16,000 ads to 200... He survived... that is the reality - you still haven’t shaken hands with it have you..
Sanctimonium needs to do the right thing... after all, according to him, he’s the only man of character, and principle in the race, and he’s better than everybody else... everywhere. Newt the bastard is staying, Sanctimonium the Saint should go home...
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.