Skip to comments.Here we go: Romney Super PAC rolls out first Michigan attack ad against Santorum (Watch Videos)
Posted on 02/15/2012 7:09:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Spot on NEWT!
Good post and great idea! That would be money very well spent. You should be on his campaign committee!
Too bad RS didn't use his money on the ads/commercials speaking the truth about mitt record instead of LIES about Newt. But that would go against the mitt/rick agenda.
That's as far as I got on your post since when one starts out wrong, they end up wrong.
Liars and deceivers are repulsive to me but, obviously, not to you or Mitt.
I disagree. I was never a Santorum fan, but after reading up on a couple of his quotes, particularly the one posted in post 17, I cannot support the man. I am a small government conservative who believes in less taxes and less spending, and, except on abortion, the government leaving us pretty much alone otherwise. Santorum clearly opposes that POV. You can rest assured that the Democrats will run that quote until the American people have it memorized.
If it comes down to Santorum and Romney in the primary, I will vote for neither. Romney could end up just being Obama-lite, and Santorum at the head of the ticket will mean we not only get clobbered at the top of the ticket, but likely get dragged down in Congress as well by people put off by quotes like the one in post 17.
Yeah, I know, 100% perfection would be nice. But there is only one man who ever achieved it. And he was the Son of God or God in the flesh, depending on your theology.
You are a classic case of why conservatives get marginalized, even though our numbers are roughly equal (or even larger) than self-identified moderates and twice the number of self-identified liberals.
The 100%ers (or 92%ers if you are a Gingrich supporter) love to sit in their lofty towers and point out the imperfections of mere 88%ers like Rick Santorum. Meanwhile, the Al Qaida supporters, pink mafia, gimme more free stuff lobby and rich ultrasecularists, who would normally be killing each other and disagree on a whole lot more, dutifully turn out to pull the Democrat lever.
And we wonder why we ended up with a complete and total creep like ObaMao as POTUS . . .
“And to think he got in Rick Perry’s face about giving $$ to illegals...(what a fraud) Immigration
Voted against increasing the number of immigration investigators
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border patrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.”
I think if I see yet another anti-Santorum ad on Fox News Channel (I’ve seen NUMEROUS Romney ads such as these but have not yet seen a Santorum ad on the FNC) I’ll barf. And the same goes for the numerous “talking points” posts by pro Romney forces. I’ve largely limited my (not large) political donations this cycle to various conservative/tea party type candidates for nomination as Republican Senate candidate in their states (to get rid of RINOs such as Lugar) and have made only a single presidential race donation (to Gingrich’s campaign). I think with the mainstream media and the Republican establishments current jihad against Santorum, it’s now time for me to adopt him as “my” candidate. And I hope other conservatives have a similar awakening.
Talking points such as “Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens” mean Santorum supported and voted for the HUGELY successful 1995 Welfare Reform legislations which removed millions from the welfare rolls. That legislation restricted the length of time certain legal aliens could get SSI (they previously could get SSI but had no such restrictions). So this and the other “talking points” you posted were taken entirely out of context.
I supported Romney in 2008 against McCain but believe that I am now beginning to absolutely DESPISE him as I learn more about him and his allies and their absolutely despicable misleading tactics.
RS is a fraud and it shows how so many can be deceived by what he says and never looking at what he has done and incapable of seeing his tactics.
I’m amazed as I watch evil drawing in those who are blinded - and they go cheering.
And that was the work of the visionary, the ONE that made clinton see the good of it - NEWT!!
I supported Romney in 2008 against McCain but believe that I am now beginning to absolutely DESPISE him as I learn more about him
How could you support a pro abortion, pro homo marriage, big gov't healthcare - NON PATRIOTIC candidate? But Rick actively campaigned for him while knowing everything about him!
as I learn more about him and his allies and their absolutely despicable misleading tactics.
And his ally is Rick!! among others and he is using misleading tactics, also. This is the GOP E! They can't win any other way.
Santorum, its now time for me to adopt him as my candidate. And I hope other conservatives have a similar awakening.
So you are making the same mistake again - I hope it is you who has an awakening! Tactics are still be used and unfortunately, so many cannot see it. It's is NOT on the up and up because Mitt could never win that way. That's where RS comes in.
No, I was familiar with Santorum's quote before this thread. My point was that the content of that quote of Santorum's is sufficiently objectionable to me to not support him. It is an overarching statement of philosophy that I think many conservatives would object to as well. Moreover, it does not appear to have been a misstatement or slip. It is perfectly consistent with similar opinions he has expressed in the past.
The 100%ers (or 92%ers if you are a Gingrich supporter) love to sit in their lofty towers and point out the imperfections of mere 88%ers like Rick Santorum.
You must be talking to someone else. I will vote for Santorum in the general election, but only because he isn't Obama. That's the same reason I'll pull the lever for Romney or Paul if one of them is the nominee. Gingrich is a slight improvement, but I'd be crossing my fingers for him as well.
Santorum isn't a 88% or even 77%'er for me. I dislike his articulated views on contraception. I think he is more a believer in government intervention in the economy than any of the other three remaining candidates, and I find his promise to attack Iran foolish. I think he comes across as sanctimonious, condescending, abrasive, and of middling intelligence. He's central casting's version of the Republican Democrats would love to run against.
And I'll bet that if he's the nominee, we'd be on the losing end of the biggest landslide since Reagan beat Mondale, and he'd scare enough swing voters to drag down the rest of the ticket as well.
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.