Skip to comments.Santorum and Freedom
Posted on 03/08/2012 8:18:12 AM PST by Eva
I went to Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, Monday to find out. Out of 1,189,530 votes cast the next day in bellwether Ohio, Mr. Santorum lost to Mitt Romney by only 10,288, at last count. He's doing something right, and what one learned in Cuyahoga Falls, an Akron suburb, is that it doesn't have much to do with the famous Santorum controversies over social issues. It's about ObamaCare. And it's about the idea of freedom.
....Rick Santorum should stay in the race, repeating from now till summer the perverse link between the ObamaCare mandate and the American idea of freedom. It looks like the best argument the GOP nominee will have for a win in November.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Santorum wasn't talking about social issues for a year in Iowa. He wasn't talking about social issues until the opposition media forced the social issues to the forefront. Obama and media was working to help Romney win the nomination because they want to run against Romney.
Spot on, Eva.
FReepmail Antoninus to be added or removed.
Henninger is right. All this nonsense about Rick being solely a Social Issues crusader falls apart once people bother listening to his stump speeches. They are totally focused on a Freedom agenda. He covers issues from the EPA to Obamacare constantly to show how freedom is being eroded by the Regime.
This is a good piece.
I am not opposed to a newt/Santorum or Santorum/Newt ticket. They would get my vote. I was hoping for Allen West for VP but I think there is a place for him in the next administration. I am presently in the anyone but Romney camp.
I do wish Gingrich would actually listen to Rick, realize that Rick is best, and then graciously bow out.
Oh, that works, too. Actually suggested it on another board. I just wish they'd start working together against Romney before it's too late.
Henninger is one of the more astute commentators at the WSJ.
I think Newt is expecting a lot of support from the south. If that does not happen he may join forces. I hope.
It was so surprising to see Henninger jump on board the Santorum train. It is a really significant endorsement, if you can call it that. Up until now, all the WSJ people have been in the Romney camp.
The article even explains why the libertarians should supporting Santorum, freedom vs. liberty just tempers the liberty with responsibility.
This is wonderful news!....Thank-you for posting!
I agree, I like Henninger a lot and I am excited that someone on the WSJ editorial board is supporting Santorum.
Newt would never accept the VP slot, though.
Henninger must have read one of my posts on FR.
I was listening to the Super Tuesday post primary speeches by the candidates.
Romney talked about who knows what.
Newt talked about wanting to debate Obama more than wanting to be president and lowering gas prices.
Santorum talked about Freedom and Liberty.
Why don’t these ‘suburbanites’ realize how precious Freedom is? Why do grateful naturalized citizens like me get it and they don’t?
I personally think a Santorum/Gingrich ticket would be ideal and I really dislike Gingrich.
My reasoning is this.
They are an ideal good cop bad cop team. Gingrich has the strength that would insure that lots of his policy ideas would would influence Santorum policies. Also Gingrich has the experience to herd the cats of congress. While Santorum was out explaining policy to the American people with a smile on his face, Gingrich would be in the background applying the whip to congress.
I think Santorum might actually be a lot tougher in dealing with the media than Bush was.
It may be too late. We shouldn’t wait to see what happens in the South. Santorum could wrap this up without Newt in the race.
I just hope that Santorum sticks to his refusal to do any more debates because it looks like Gingrich is planning to join Romney and Paul in trying to attack Santorum.
Newt needs drop out.
I have noted that Henninger has been off the Romney reservation at the WSJ. He has been arguing in favor of Santorum to some degree or another for a while now. This is by far his most forward argument for Rick over Romney. As you said, the WSJ is Mittensland and it is refreshing to get a blast of Conservatism from that paper once and a while.
I so hope he resists attacking Santorum. He looks so bad when he is on the attack. I’m afraid that would bring them both down and hand the nomination to Romney.
The “suburbanites” are too busy thinking globally, so busy that they fail to see and act locally.
For Middle American the local is all there is. Middle America even sees foreign policy in the way that it will affect their own lives. ...will we be at war, will our sons and daughters be risking their lives in the Middle East or elsewhere, will we be able to make our own health care choices, our own end of life decisions, will I be forced to accept government control of my personal decisions, of my faith, and very future?
From what I read yesterday, that is Gingrich’s plan, attack Santorum, join Romney and Paul.
Gingrich is trying to push for another debate, Santorum doesn’t want one. He learned his lesson in the last debate.
Santorum is fed up with the media. He wouldn’t face them with a smile, the GW Bush always did.
You think that he shouldn’t answer direct questions that are posed to him. You think that he should not have responded to Obama’s mandate to the Catholic institutions?
Rick Santorum stands for Freedom, the kind of freedom that is embodied in the “Live Free or Die” flag, the kind of freedom that is tempered with responsibility.
Ron Paul promotes Liberty without responsibility.
rickie is a big government establishment republican in the same line as bushie 1 and 2... I do not care what he says, I look at what he did WHILE IN OFFICE.... compare what he did IN OFFICE to what newt did IN OFFICE....
I do not support ron paul, but your statement worries me.... what part of his platform denies individual responsibilty for your individual actions???? I eagerly await your reply to this question.
Rush is talking about the Henninger piece right now. :) bttt
Rick Santorum understands what this country is about - freedom!
Yes, indeed, Let Freedom Ring - Voter Rick Santorum!
I do wish everyone would read for themselves how much better one candidate is than the other (in fact, the one Santorum once called his own "mentor"), and vote/advocate accordingly.
I am a Christian from a large, close family; I am very much against the homosexual agenda, and very much opposed to abortion, and in fact, against no-fault divorce. I'm about as "pro family" as it gets. I have READ and compared the entire platforms and websites of both Santorum and Gingrich.
As a working writer, I KNOW cotton candy verbiage when I see it, and furthermore, I KNOW what causes it: lack of vision, lack of focus, lack of meat. On Santorum's website he writes that "to have a strong national economy, we must have strong families." Yet if that was true, then Mexico, where families and family values are powerfully strong, would have a Herclulean economy. Folks, as well-meaning as he is, that Santorum even makes such inane statements is a huge revealer of how much of a lightweight he really is.
Tell me: what is the difference between "family values" and "Christian values"? If they're the same, why not say "Christian values"? Santorum supporters, please think about that honestly.
As Christian from a large family, I understand how much Santorum alienates and hurts good, moral Americans who, for whatever reason, are not blessed with big, close families; Rick PROMOTES the idea that people who don't focus their lives around children and grandchildren, are morally inferior, and less valuable to society. That's what Rick does, and it is A BAD THING.
Gingrich talks to all of us. His solutions work whether you're family-focused or not.
But most important, Gingrich is as passionate about cutting government as he is about the social issues, and THIS conservative understands that limited government is the best friend of Christian morality. Government is what stands in the WAY of morality; government is an AGENT of immorality, in everything from welfare to abortion to the gay agenda. Santorum fails completely to see that, and while Gingrich may or may not see it, the end result of HIS government-slashing plan will be to INCREASE our right to live morally in every aspect of our lives, from education to medicine.
Godspeed Newt Gingrich.
Our one shot at freedom.
Newt can’t seal the deal. No matter how “wonderful” he is, he is not doing it. How I wish his supporters would understand.
“Let Freedom Ring - Voter Rick Santorum!”
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
You are so right. Thanks for posting this article.
You are so right. Thanks for posting this article.
You’re wrong, did you even read the article?
Mexico doesn’t really have strong families. If they did, all those husbandless women would not be fleeing to the US alone, to work as housekeepers to support their families.
The Mexican male no longer has the same sense of family and responsibility that was traditional. So, your analogy falls apart.
Mexican culture is extremely family-oriented; it is one of the most beautiful and admirable things about Mexicans. They come to this country to support their families because the minimum wage here is enough to support an entire family that otherwise may very well be living in a cardboard box house. Have you been to Mexico and seen the cardboard villages? I have. Minimum wage, being immoral, is as big a contributor to the illegal immigrant problem as all the government charity -- also immoral -- that illegal immigrants receive in the USA. It can be argued that it is BECAUSE they are so deeply rooted in family that so many of them come here to work. I worked with a Mexican dishwasher who shared cheap lodings with his sister, who worked as a maid, and he often proudly showed me his bankbook, all the money he saved and sent to his family in Mexico; his sister did the same. He was an excellent worker, a good person, and deeply committed to his family, and he and his sister made many sacrifices in the name of their family.
I read the article. Have YOU read Gingrich's positions and policy proposals on health care and the economy, let alone education? I have read both Gingrich's and Santorum's positions and policy proposals. Santorum has an established record of fighting AGAINST cuts in the Food Stamp program. He has an established record of voting to increase the minimum wage, and he has an established record of being pro-union and anti right-to-work. He has a political philosophy of using and promoting government as a means of moral charity -- yet it is crystal clear that government used thus encourages and enables immoral lifestyles.
""What was my vision? I came to the uncomfortable realization that conservatives were not only reluctant to spend government dollars on the poor, they hadnt even thought much about what might work better. I often describe my conservative colleagues during this time as simply cheap liberals. My own economically modest personal background and my faith had taught me to care for those who are less fortunate, but I too had not yet given much thought to the proper role of government in this mission." Rick Santorum, p. IX It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good (2005) (Hat tip to Utmost Certainty)
Could you also kindly tell me the difference between family values and Christian values?
Most of the Mexican housekeepers that I knew, came to this country, alone because they could not support their family with an absent husband in Mexico.
Those women don’t earn minimum wage, either. A good nanny makes $20.00 an hour and pays no taxes. Oh, not all Mexicans come here without husbands, but enough of them do that I can’t say that Mexicans have more family values than Americans. Most of them with family values are also Catholic.
So, you don’t like Rick Santorum, you think that Romney’s Mormon values are better? You like a health care mandate on the state level instead of the federal level?
Obama is going to back off the federal mandate after Romney wins the nomination and call for a state mandate to pay for federal Obamacare regulation. He’s going to tell the states that if they want government help with health care, they must follow the legislation as it is written.
So, do want to trade free birth control pills for the loss of personal freedom and Obamacare?
I would no more vote for Romney than I would for Obama. :^)
They're not the same thing at all, Finny. I know a very close knit Sikh family (parents have been married for 40+ and their adult sons are model citizens) from India who are living, breathing example of practicing "family values" and they wouldn't know the first thing about about practicing Christianity. YOU should think about that honestly.
By contrast, unwed mexican women who have 8 children by 5 fathers are NOT practicing "family values" if they profess to be good faithful Christians who pray every night with a painting of the Virgin of Guadalupe in their home.
Think honestly about THIS, please: How do "family values" as you apparently see them, even if the government was able, through Santorum, to influence individual Amerians to practice "family values" -- HOW would it lower the price of gas, fix a horrible education system, reverse government health care, or roll back oppressive regulation that stifles the economy?
Santorum has a lot of talk about what's right and what's wrong morally, and whose fault it is, and on his website, he speaks in general terms about solutions and throughout refers to "families," as if those without families are irrelevant. Newt Gingrich -- who, unlike Rick, has turned things around to the right direction before -- has a well-thought, thorough, strategic plan that will make this country more free, prosperous, and moral.
Please do your DUE DILIGENCE and read for yourself, compare, the positions and political philosophy of Santorum and Newt, instead of letting other people inform you what they're saying. It takes some guts for a Santorum supporter to actually READ Newt's website, just as it takes guts for a Gingrich supporter to read Santorum's website. But the differences are stark and glaring, and clearly, Gingrich is just as good a Christian as Santorum and a much, much better political visionary.
Godspeed Newt Gingrich.
The only reason that you are having trouble separating family values from Christian values is that you seem to have bought into the post modernist relativity of Newspeak.
A family and marriage are not relative terms. It is the relativity and the amorphous definition that creates the confusion over values and degrades both the culture and the institutions, themselves.
I'll be voting for Santorum.
Have you done the same “looking in the eye” with Santorum?
Would you kindly translate?
Also, tell me how it would decrease prosperity and freedom-stifling nonsense regulation, lower the price of gas, and improve education?
If you want strong families, strong morality, strong righteousness, GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE WAY and let people be moral. For crying out loud, you can't even improve your own lot in life without being penalized by the government for doing what's right, whether it's having to get a building permit to improve your family's home, and the permit costs as much as the improvement being done, to trying to make a living farming, or fishing, or producing energy, without government crushing you on all sides -- taxes, codes, regulations, fees, requirements, oversight. Try openly rejecting open homosexuality in your schools, your churches, your workplaces, your military, your civic groups. Morally you know you have to do it for your children and for families ... and when you do, the government penalizes you. Morality is stifled. As a landlord, try refusing to rent to an unmarried couple because you don't want to enable that lifestyle. WHAT keeps you from behaving morally?
We don't need a candidate who can point out moral failings in people. We need a candidate who will slay government, weaken it in how it chokes and punishes, and create the freedom for moral people to prosper and thrive.
Godspeed Newt Gingrich.
Same with Tom Delay. Had quite a few conversations with him.The Hammer was a funny guy despite how the Media portrayed him. Too bad he got screwed over, but heck, he is a Republican after all so he must have deserved it. /s