Posted on 06/07/2011 5:42:18 PM PDT by JimWayne
Rick Santorum must be opposed because he is a RINO who I think is setting himself up to be the running mate of Mitt Romney. At that point, we will have freepers saying we should unite behind them.
Santorum is not in the same category as Palin, Bachmann, Allen West or Herman Cain.
Santorum supported funding for Amtrak. Santorum was for abortion (in 1990) before he was against it. Santorum supported ethanol as automobile fuel. Santorum supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. Santorum endorsed Mitt Romney and called him a conservative. Santorum called himself a "progressive conservative" and positioned himself as such in the initial days.
Santorum and Arlen Specter were partners in pork-procurement and figured out that between them they could share the right rhetoric to get voters to vote for them.
Don't get fooled. He just knows to use the right rhetoric. DO NOT help MITT ROMNEY. Support for Santorum is support for Mitt Romney.
Bull crap. Santorum is not a RINO.
Good God. Posts like this must make liberal lurkers giggle with delight in anticipation of a second Hussein term.
Santorum is a typical Pennsylvania Republican. Moderate on economic issues, protective of unions, all over the map on social issues and many times to the Left of the Dems. He made a couple statements that made Social Conservatives swoon but if you look at the whole record, he’s a John Heinz / Arlen Specter Republican. He would never get my vote for anything.
Thank you. I thought it was just me.
Sometimes it is good to consider the opinion of those who live in the home state of the pol in question.
Not many responses on the thread...but just a quick search shows that three Keystoners (Tank, Opinionated and yours truly) pretty much have similar opinions on Santorum. Maybe we have YEARS of PA political watching in common?
I was friends with a couple people on his staff when he was in the House. He wasn’t as bad as Arlen but he was a true “moderate” on economic and union issues. No if, ands or buts. And he was an opportunist. Don’t get me wrong. I was glad he was our senator. Probably one of the best from a conservative perspective that PA had in a long time, but apart from a couple high profile Social Conservative battles, he isn’t any conservative standard bearer.
LLS
rick santorum (with michael steele... both guest hosting for Bill Bennett's “Morning in America” radio show). This was said a few days after the 2008 election. He was wrong then... he was wrong about specter and he is wrong for America. He is a rino Jim.
LLS
Had Santorum played policy over politics (and told GWBush and Arlen...gee, busy with the kiddies, can’t campaign today...) he would have become the Senior Senator from PA; with Toomey there earlier; with that EXTRA R vote in the Senate...
I am so tired of hearing about the Judiciary Committee and Specter’s blah blah blah support. He didn’t; he bailed asap; and then the Dems did to him what he did to PA all those years.
Meh.
Santorum coulda, shoulda stayed hard right; but he goes squishy every chance he gets. And the snark at Palin...uncalled for in any circumstance.
Come on conservatives, let's don't fall for this crap again. Remember the Maverick for change?
Vote for the most conservative candidate and let's not fall for the ol compassionate conservatism poppy cock again.
Compare and contrast with the likes of Teddy Roosevelt,George Washington, Sam Grant, or Andrew Jackson.
The caliber of men seeking and obtaining the office in the last couple of years has been breathtakingly low.
I’ll respect someone’s opinion from the home state, but it isn’t definitive.
I also know there are purists in every state...and especially on a strongly conservative political board. My point is true: no one is perfect, and ANY of the Republicans currently running...pro-abortion Gary Johnson, pro-Global Warming Mitt Romney, or pro-isolationist Ron Paul...would be BETTER than another four years of Hussein.
Santorum was there, traveling with Romney from rally to rally. I knew of Santorum's reputation of being a pro-life social conservative, and my main concern about Romney was his "conversion" to being pro-life. I have never voted for an avowed pro-abort presidential candidate, and I never will. But I know pro-life conversions are possible, and I was hoping that was sincere in Romney's case.
So I went over to Santorum and pulled him aside for a private conversation of a few minutes about Romney. Santorum assured me Romney was the real deal. I figured if Santorum, a pro-life hero, said so, it must be true.
My interest in early 2008 was mainly in stopping McCain, and I think a lot of other people at that time were looking at Romney for the same reason. (At that point in 2008, RomneyCare/ObamaCare did not have the spotlight on it that it has today. My main concern about Romney then was about abortion.)
But that was then, this is now. Now of course, I have much stronger misgivings about Romney and his sincerity. and I will not vote for him. And that episode at the rally in 2008 raises questions about Santorum, too.
BTW, later in 2008, on the day when McCain named Palin as his choice for running mate, that convinced me finally to support McCain. And I went to the McCain-Palin rally here two days later, before Palin's debut at the Republican convention.
Bottom line: I know I'm not voting for Romney, and I have serious doubts about Santorum. At this point, I don't have a real strong favorite among the possible candidates. (Pawlenty, Perry, Palin, Cain . . . no one jumps out yet, as far as *both* conservatism *and* electability.)
Taking a break from calling George Allen a RINO, I see. Might as well move on to Jim DeMint next, and make it a trifecta.
I think it’s true that Specter did a pretty good job with Bush’s Supreme Court appointments.
Bush himself went astray with his second candidate, but thank God pulled her. We got Alito and Roberts.
So, I think that may be true.
As I said, I continued to back Santorum back then, and was upset that so many people were persuaded to stay home and not vote for him. But it seems to me that his current conduct is another matter entirely. He no longer seems to have the principles he used to have.
“Santorum setting himself up as VP candidate for Mitt Romney”
What’s worse than one loser?
Why, two of them!
Just gripin’...
So you’re forbidding everyone from opposing those who forced ethanol on us? Feel free to believe in Global Warming. I am not a warmist. And your implied accusation that Jim DeMint forced ethanol on us to prevent Global Warming is not going to work.
Ronald Reagan, today, would not be able to win approval of many FReepers given the requirements and expectations that many on FR keep demanding.
You may be right, but it is about time we hardened our stance. It is important to be uncompromising in our principles at this time or else we will soon become another socialist country. And please, Santorum is no Reagan. He is someone who knows to game the system and play the conservatives to his advantage.
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.