Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum has his conservative indiscretions too
The Daily Caller ^ | 03/21/2012 | Jamie Weinstein

Posted on 03/22/2012 11:48:36 AM PDT by Josh Painter

Contrasting himself with Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum portrays himself as an unwavering conservative who stands on principle. But his record is hardly without serious blemishes.

On ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, guest moderator Jonathan Karl brought up Santorum’s endorsement of then-Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter for president in 1996. Specter was a liberal Republican who became a Democrat before failing to gain re-election in 2010 (he couldn’t even get out of the Democratic primary.)

When he ran for president in 1996, he did so as a social liberal, which was an important plank in his candidacy. He wanted “strip the strident anti-choice language from the Republican National platform” and weaken the influence of social conservatives in the party.

No one ever accused Santorum of being a social liberal, but he nonetheless supported Specter. He explained on ABC that he did so because Specter was his Pennsylvania colleague and he didn’t believe Specter was going anywhere.

“I was his colleague in the United States Senate. He asked me to stand with him. That certainly wasn’t one of my prouder moments I look back on. But look, you know, you work together as a team for the state of Pennsylvania,” Santorum said.

“I certainly knew that Arlen Specter was going nowhere. I certainly disagreed with a lot of things that he said.”

If there was some strategic value in supporting Specter, this could possibly be understandable. For instance, during Specter’s re-election for Senate in 2004, you could make the case that you were supporting Specter because he was the most likely Republican to win the state and thus help the GOP keep the Senate majority.

But there was no similar strategic calculus in supporting a quixotic presidential candidate like Specter in 1996.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: biggovernment; federalspending; gop; ricksantorum

1 posted on 03/22/2012 11:48:45 AM PDT by Josh Painter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter

ABR


2 posted on 03/22/2012 11:52:35 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter

Romneycare, nuff said.....


3 posted on 03/22/2012 12:02:49 PM PDT by Sybeck1 (RIP Tea Party 2009-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter
Indeed, Santorum has his conservative indiscretions. Newt too.

I live in the congressional district which Santorum represented before he was elected to the Senate. It covers most of Westmoreland County. Our county was so Democrat that Walter Mondale carried it during Reagan's 1984 re-election landslide. In 2008, the McCain-Palin ticket carried it by 59-41% In 2010, our congressman with a very similar record to Rick Santorum was re-elected by a 2-1 margin. This year, he is getting a conservative challenger in the primary.

Bottom line: You need to consider the constituency in evaluating a candidate's conservatism. It doesn't count for everything. But it counts for something.

4 posted on 03/22/2012 12:03:24 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter

Yeah...but is he THOROUGHLY despicable like Romney?


5 posted on 03/22/2012 12:03:47 PM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter

I just shake my head when I read articles like this. What is the evidence that Santorum isn’t conservative? Everyone always points to the Specter endorsement. That is probably the least of the evidence that he isn’t conservative.

First, on Specter, I personally don’t count that against Santorum. They are both Pennsylvania Republican senators. Its would have been a huge issue if Santorum didn’t endorse Specter, especially since Specter endorsed him before and helped him campaign.

Second, Santorum has a long, long record as a big government, Christian Socialist, Bush / Huckabee type compassionate conservative. He is strong on social issues and weak if not liberal on government spending. He also was in bed with pretty much every lobbyist in Washington. He has reinvented himself for his campaign. Perhaps his conversion is true. I hope so. But he was never some 100% consevative, even putting the Specter endorsement aside.


6 posted on 03/22/2012 12:06:45 PM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Bottom line: You need to consider the constituency in evaluating a candidate's conservatism. It doesn't count for everything. But it counts for something.

the only problem with that is that Santorum repeatedly says he is THE ONLY conservative in the race who stands for conservative principles, no matter how difficult or costly it is. He is the ONLY ONE we can trust to do that. His history just doesn't back up that claim. And neither does a lot of his recent backtracking on the trail.

Oh, well. He never cheated on his wife.

from the article

In his classic speech to the electors of Bristol, Burke explained how he saw his role as their representative. After telling them that “it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents,” he powerfully stated:

It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable.

Burke believed that representatives should represent the nation and support policies that they believe are in the best long-term interests of the country, not necessarily what the momentary passions of their constituents dictated. If his constituents disagreed with the way he was acquitting himself they could always vote him out, which the residents of Bristol ultimately did with Burke.

Santorum’s position seems to be the antithesis of Burke’s principled position.

7 posted on 03/22/2012 12:15:30 PM PDT by true believer forever (If Newt is good enough for Sarah, he's good enough for me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: true believer forever

When I think of what we are really going to have with either a Romney presidency or Ricky the freshman, I am equally dismayed.

From what I have read, even Rickster self describes himself as a seat of the pants kind of guy. We have all the same charactoristics already sitting in the Oval.

Where in this era can THAT be found as comfort, competence, or even enough change?


8 posted on 03/22/2012 12:28:20 PM PDT by RitaOK (LET 'ER RIP, NEWT. Newt knows where all the bodies are buried, because he buried them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK
When I think of what we are really going to have with either a Romney presidency or Ricky the freshman, I am equally dismayed.

From what I have read, even Rickster self describes himself as a seat of the pants kind of guy. We have all the same charactoristics already sitting in the Oval.

Where in this era can THAT be found as comfort, competence, or even enough change?

I don't know the answer, but I know I am not inclined to accept the lesser of those two evils, as long as Newt stays in. I will quit Newt when he quits us. I feel the same way many people feel about not giving into the republican establishment because circumstances seem to warrant it. Circumstances change.

9 posted on 03/22/2012 12:42:07 PM PDT by true believer forever (If Newt is good enough for Sarah, he's good enough for me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson