|This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.|
Locked on 02/29/2012 4:46:52 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator, reason:
Inappropriate and unacceptable keywords as originally posted.
Skip to comments.THE PROBLEM WITH SANTORUM
Posted on 02/29/2012 3:50:25 PM PST by Fred
Even when I agree with Rick Santorum, listening to him argue the point almost makes me change my mind.
I also wonder why he's running for president, rather than governor, when the issues closest to his heart are family-oriented matters about which the federal government can, and should, do very little.
It's strange that Santorum doesn't seem to understand the crucial state-federal divide bequeathed to us by the framers of our Constitution, inasmuch as it is precisely that difference that underlies his own point that states could ban contraception.
Of course they can. States could outlaw purple hats or Gummi bears under our Constitution!
(Excerpt) Read more at anncoulter.com ...
Ann Coulter, Botox Republican.
“If I read this right, Ann doesn’t support Santorum because, although he has conservative positions, he doesn’t know how to articulate them but is willing to support Romney, who has no conservative positions to articulate.
Is that about right, or is there some other angle I’m missing?”
Actually to put her nonsense on a stick and wave it around, she actually has said on more than one occasion that Bishop Willard it ‘the most conservative candidate in the race’. His record of governance as a state governor is probably to the left of Bill Clinton’s. I intend a side by side comparison one of these days.
I remember when she had a brain, and used it. Buh bye, Ann.
They'd better be good ones because she's p*ssing away all of the goodwill she's built up with her readers.
There seems to be desperation in Ann’s writing these days. I think she knows that she has destroyed her career.
Then I would have known her column was posted and not wasted my time posting it.
I think it is the pink triangle nexus, but that too is speculative. She certainly has picked this hill to die on, and is not alone on that hill. I cannot understand the fanaticism offered up to such a vapid chameleon as Bishop Willard.
I find myself agreeing with Santorum's positions but wishing he could express them more articulately.
His speech after the Michigan primary was good but did he have to say “the men and women who signed the Declaration of Independence.” No women signed it.
I liked how he used Rev Wright to shut up Charlie Rose but he could have delivered the line better and really destroyed him.
Santorum is sometimes very good in expressing his views but often I wish he would just make one coherent point.
Newt has a much better cadence and delivers his lines far more forcefully and convincingly.
But at least Santorum has never called himself a “severe conservative”.
“There seems to be desperation in Anns writing these days. I think she knows that she has destroyed her career.”
If you looked into the mirror and saw Eleanor Clift looking back out of it, you would be pretty desperate too.
Well, now, here’s the thing - I kind of LIKE Rick Santorum. He manages to be a real person, hanging out there warts and all, and not be consumed heart and soul playing politician all the day long. He has been snidely criticized BECAUSE of his pro-family attitudes, yet he does not waver. And his condemnation of the “Affordable Care And Patient Protection Act” helps to bring into sharp focus the many errors and omissions that were in the “Romneycare” legislation in Massachuetts.
SAntorum would work to REPEAL the “Obamacare” monstrosity, Romney would be content to “fix” it. Fixing up evil is still evil, and antithetical to the American way.
Still supporting the Santorum candidacy. But only because Herman Cain is not there.
Yeah, I read one statement from a UAW dem who voted for Santorum. He said, I voted for Santorum, just to mess with them. I will vote for Obama in the fall. Is this Rick’s idea of a “team sport?”
The problem with Ann Coulter is she’s a Mitt-Bot.
You're assuming Romney's past means he "has no conservative positions." Ann doesn't agree. Rightly or wrongly, she's ignoring that past and concentrating on what he says now, which, rightly or wrongly, she finds conservative enough for her.
She's assuming Romney will articulate those positions better than Santorum and won't crack up. She may be wrong about that too, where Romney is concerned, but so far it looks like she's right about Santorum. You could say that Ann sees Santorum's gaffes, but doesn't see Romney's, but everyone's point of view involves blindspots of one sort or another.
This is where Annie girl is WRONG. She thinks that inalienable rights can be voted away by the states—a majority can take away “inalienable” rights from children—and it is “Just Law” because a majority voted for it. Nope.
Can’t even GIVE AWAY inalienable rights if you wanted to, Annie Girl. That means that “homosexual Marriage” and abortion ISN”T A STATES ISSUE—it is the inalienable rights of children issue and the issue of DUTY that all human beings are required to do in a Just State—which is Raise their own biological children. Any laws that prevent this “General Welfare” of children is UNJUST and EVIL—this promotion of evil sodomy and EVIL of killing—is not “Just Law” by the definition put into our Constitution by the Founders and John Marshall.
Justice John Marshall would have declared all these types of irrational laws as unjust law—and declared them “Null and Void”. It is the DUTY of all justices to align ALL LAWS to the Constitution—it’s intent and meaning which declares there is a Right and Wrong according to God’s Laws-—not arbitrary Barney Frank Marxist laws designed to destroy logic and the natural family.
Santorum understands the importance of control over who becomes judges on the Supreme Court among many OTHER crucial issues. Romney is another zero and will allow these gross unjust laws that go against Nature. He is for promotion of sodomy in the military which destroys the freedom of conscience in all Christians soldiers and removes the once Christian paradigm which is in line with our Constitution to the ideology of Marx which intentionally denies Natural Law—to destroy the family and Christianity so they can make slaves of all—addicts to the sins of the flesh are easy to bribe and manipulate and control. Romney if for unjust, evil laws which deny reason, logic and science and destroys freedom because you destroy Virtue when you promote Evil.
All the Founders knew that laws had to promote Virtue. This irrational destruction of morality in law was a deliberate Marxist (John Austin, Holmes, jr.) coup to destroy “Just Law” and therefore, the Constitution, which will devolve into tyranny (Cicero).
We need to return to the Rule of Law which allows only “Just Law”!!!!!
He isn't the speaker Gingrich is, but on equal terms he's very much Romney's match.
Watch out. A lot of people here can’t handle “facts’.
You presented “facts”. And thanks for doing so.
Ann’s in for a bad shock when she releases her next book. She has completely and forever ruined her credibility with conservatives.
My Congressman who is a lawyer and is now on the House oversight committee, says repeal is the only way to get rid of Obamacare. When he was a candidate running against a 14-term incumbent, he actually read the health care bill. He says the length of the bill is deceptive. Much of the bill refers to other federal laws. He says the referenced laws are probably 10 times the size of the Obamacare law itself.
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.