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

Skip to comments.

Santorum's provocative language could be obstacle
Reuters ^ | Feb 15th, 2012 | Ros Krasny

Posted on 02/15/2012 6:55:30 PM PST by Mariner

BOSTON (Reuters) - Republican candidate Rick Santorum has won support from American conservatives for his views on social issues but a habit of hyperbole may lead to stumbles in his White House bid.

In Boise, Idaho, on Tuesday, Santorum compared contraception to deodorant and soap when making a point about why he believes birth control should not be covered by health insurers.

"Let's mandate that every insurance policy covers toothpaste. Deodorant. That might be a good idea, right? Have everyone cover deodorant, right? Soap. I mean, where do you stop?"

Santorum also fell back on a well-worn Republican criticism that President Barack Obama and his administration are elitists.

"Don't you see how they see you? How they look down their nose at the average Americans? These elite snobs," said Santorum, who reported 2010 income of almost $1 million, according to financial disclosure forms.

Though he is giving Republican rival Mitt Romney a run for his money in the nomination race, Santorum's language might be an obstacle if he wins his party's nomination to challenge Obama in the November 6 election.

"As a frontrunner you have to watch exactly what you say," said Donna Robinson Devine, professor of government at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. "The attention has moved to Santorum, but to me he seems very whiny. I just can't imagine him as president."

Santorum's most famous equivalence came from 2003.

In an interview, he said that if the Supreme Court protected the right for gays to have consensual sex in their own homes, "then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

Comments in that interview that homosexuality was not as bad as bestiality...

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: biggovernmentrick; idiot; kstreet; kstreetproject; lobbyistrick; santorum; taxreturn; whiner; whining; whiny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-119 next last
Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: Ozymandias Ghost

He guy is a Dem troll and been scurrying around here for awhile


52 posted on 02/15/2012 8:19:53 PM PST by ncalburt (NO MORE WIMPS need to apply to fight the Soros Funded Puppet !H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

One part of me feels that Santorum has this in the bag, but the other part of me is terrified of the debate coming up right before Michigan and Arizona...

If Newt does well... it would cut into Santorums numbers at the last minute and hand Michigan to Romney, or if Romney stacks the audience with Mormons that give him standing ovations after he says anything ... then it might give Romney just enough of a boost to squeak out a victory in Michigan and enter super Tuesday in a much stronger position.

I wish the debates were over, they’ve done like 25+ of them, it’s just to risky at this point.


53 posted on 02/15/2012 8:20:58 PM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I’m really concerned about the administration’s ban on hunting rifles, myself.
I have a right to keep and bear arms, the constitution is plain on that, but no one has given me one (in a long time... and that one is long gone in a tragic gun show accident...).
After all, they are not forcing my employer to provide me one, or even making the NRA give me one for free. They seem to insist I buy my own, and jump through lots of hoops just to get one and even more to use it.
Why is there no discussion of this ban in the media?


54 posted on 02/15/2012 8:21:17 PM PST by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #55 Removed by Moderator

To: cripplecreek

Exactly.


56 posted on 02/15/2012 8:35:52 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

>> Let the parents and families get back to the morals and the govt get the hell out of our personal lives and stop spending our nation into oblivion

I completely agree with that position. A few will seize on that, however, as being supportive of an immoral candidate.


57 posted on 02/15/2012 8:39:51 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Since when was being with child equivalent to a disease?

Since at least AD 391, as pointed out in another thread:

“[I]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease [the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father’s old age [wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet, and universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting to prevent their beginning to live.” John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew 28:5 (A.D. 391).

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2847102/posts?page=1


58 posted on 02/15/2012 8:41:14 PM PST by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

It’s not like Obama has some decisive advantage in social issues.

He’s the guy who once voted for infanticide.


59 posted on 02/15/2012 8:42:09 PM PST by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

I think the democrat machine will make mincemeat out of Santorum if he is nominated. He is just too preachy and pompous, and a bit whiny, too.

It was only some months ago almost no one on FreeRepublic would give Santorum the time of day — now after winning a few fairly inoccuous polls he’s become a hero to many of those same folks.

I’ll stick with Newt Gingerich, thank you.


60 posted on 02/15/2012 8:42:58 PM PST by varina davis (A real American patriot -- Gov. Rick Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

I support Santorum.
I understand the Church’s position on contraception - I understand Santorum’s position, and God bless him for living according to his ideals.

That being said?....He really needs to stop talking about this issue.

Like.....now.


61 posted on 02/15/2012 8:43:57 PM PST by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
"Let's mandate that every insurance policy covers toothpaste. Deodorant. That might be a good idea, right? Have everyone cover deodorant, right? Soap. I mean, where do you stop?"

I asked my machinists, now that I am apparently responsible for their contraception, if it was OK if I just put a box of rubbers next to the Band-aids in the First-Aid cabinet.

62 posted on 02/15/2012 8:45:31 PM PST by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“You mean people won’t like it when they find out that conservatives want to protect marriage and fight the homosexual agenda of the far left?”

No, I don’t want the govt getting involved with personal lives, that’s right.


63 posted on 02/15/2012 8:46:58 PM PST by independent in tx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


64 posted on 02/15/2012 8:48:47 PM PST by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Gene, I am old school and grew up in the 50’s. It was a time when teen pregancies were rare; crime in my neighborhood was almost unheard of and parents controlled their children. Of course civility still existed in that era too.
Not to rehash the old cliche but we did leave our doors unlocked during the day and windows open at night.
The govt is treading a thin line when they interfer with social rights and issues that are none of their business. They are not our parents. Parents should be responsible for teaching morals in the home.
If our judges would abide by the constitution ...we would be a better nation for it. I am more concerned about our nations economy and once again..if the govt would stop with their inane regulations and interference our country would be better off.
I do not want them telling me what to feed my children, what they should or should not watch on tv or teaching them about sex. They should stay the hell out!


65 posted on 02/15/2012 8:51:41 PM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: independent in tx

That is two vague, cryptic, senseless posts, when you can speak clearly, then ping me.


66 posted on 02/15/2012 8:54:59 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Saint Rick is right, but he will never be able to explain this to the American people, many of whom are barely literate.


67 posted on 02/15/2012 8:55:19 PM PST by Theodore R. (Forget the others: It's Santorum's turn, less baggage, articulate, passionate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Scotswife; All
"Like.....now."

That's what I am trying to convey...

He can't stop now.

Hell, now it's going to be the PRINCIPAL subject of the debate just before the MI/AZ primaries.

Unfortunately, Romney has the position that plays best with most American women: "There's no reason to even be talking about this. It's a given."

And I earnestly, passionately, despise Romney.

I say he wins both states and Gingrich is second. 4th will be a close call between the other two.

Folks, 52% of the electorate are women. They are not going to give up contraception and they are not going to majority vote for a man that publicly espouses any negative energy toward contraception.

Everything else being equal this puts Santorum 5 to 8 points down in a general election.

Right out of the gate.

68 posted on 02/15/2012 8:57:35 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Katie

You're an effective communicator and advocate.

69 posted on 02/15/2012 9:12:41 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
I so agree. Been saying this for months. No one will listen, giving them warnings, no one will even think about it. Rush has got this guy on a artificial surge so when he collapses, we have none but Romney. Rush is pulling a clever operation. Rush knows, like me, a social conservative like Rick, will lose. I will write in Newt. The country is going to hell, so let it go full rebellion. ( these Rick people are being played like a fiddle and they think it is a ground swell for for Mr. Seinfeld) Rick, Rush Limbaugh’s candidate. Sarah better help Newt and fast or she will be helping Romney over the finish line that she won't even be able to do once conservatives get angry that she sells us out). Big problems on the horizon.
70 posted on 02/15/2012 9:12:41 PM PST by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach
"Sarah better help Newt and fast "

Agreed.

She ought to be on his bus and everyone should perceive her as Newt's obvious VP choice.

This silly sh!t has gone on long enough. The Republic is at stake.

71 posted on 02/15/2012 9:16:48 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

“This is not hyperbole, this is reductio ad absurdum.”

Marriage between a man and a woman is necessary for the responsible care and upbringing of children, and hence the survival of any serious culture. Homosexual marriage and communal humping should not be treated as being the equivalent of traditional marriage.

When Santorum complains about our leftist elites trying to trivialize marriage, he is not being “whiney”. The left is trying to trivialize marriage for the same reason that they are dumbing down public schools. They want to deconstruct our culture.


72 posted on 02/15/2012 9:17:59 PM PST by haroldeveryman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: haroldeveryman
"Marriage between a man and a woman is necessary for the responsible care and upbringing of children, and hence the survival of any serious culture. Homosexual marriage and communal humping should not be treated as being the equivalent of traditional marriage."

For at least 1,800 years the Christian Church did just fine without Government Sanction of Marriage.

It's amazing we made it this far!

If anything this is a 10th Amendment...or Constitutional Amendment issue.

I'd prefer the feds be out of marriage altogether. Completely.

Same with education.

73 posted on 02/15/2012 9:24:44 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
>>This silly sh!t has gone on long enough. The Republic is at stake

True, she has 4 candidates or if she wants the nomination.

What is the hold up-either she is in for our side to win with a bold change or another gimmick. Like you, she needs to be campaigning with Newt in Ohio and Michigan. She has to know, Rick is a weak candidate to fight Obama. Obama will twist his own words on him. The Daily Kos www.dailykos.com has an operation chaos going on calling for all dems to jump over and vote for Rick. same idea is on different lefty web sites too and www.HuffingtonPost.com has a old newspaper clipping of Santorum saying he is a progressive conservative not a Reagan conservative from a Pa. newspaper. The article -someone should share it here. That should make the news but they are covering for him. This thing is crazy and the social conservatives are taking the fiscal conservatives off the cliff.

74 posted on 02/15/2012 9:30:59 PM PST by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

So is this attack on Rick Santorum meant to push voters toward Mr. Moderate?


75 posted on 02/15/2012 9:59:57 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
He's got to remember he's dealing with a major portion of the population that are basically idiots.

Make your point simpler: don't talk about contraception, talk about how people are being forced to pay for drugs that cause abortion, and if Obama has no problem forcing insurance company's and churches, all of us through increased premiums, to pay for abortion and baby killing, it won't be long before he'll be forcing hospitals to turn off Grandma's life support. Obama has no respect for human life, especially the most vulnerable. Santorum shouldn't be comparing it to soap and deodorant, though I know what he meant.

76 posted on 02/15/2012 10:02:07 PM PST by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

For marriage to exist, it has to be defined.


77 posted on 02/15/2012 10:03:50 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“In a general election Santorum will spend far more time defending his positions on social issues than he will talking about spending, debt, tax reform, regulation, energy and defense...combined.”

If all we have to offer is the economy and it improves under Obama, we’re toast.

If we’re all about national security and Obama says “well, I’m the guy who actually got Osama bin Laden” we’re toast.

But if we’re about values then there’s no way Obama can touch us. Unless, that is, we pick a liberal Mormon or someone who was married 3 times and had to drop out from Clinton’s impeachment hearings because of his own personal failings.


78 posted on 02/15/2012 10:07:31 PM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“But unlike you I don’t think he’s electable. Of course he hasn’t won the nod yet and everything is conjecture at this point. “

Who says anyone we pick is electable? Only G-d knows. At least we can vote our conscience.


79 posted on 02/15/2012 10:13:03 PM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“I’d prefer the feds be out of marriage altogether. Completely.”

Me too

“Same with education. “

See ...
Educator: Parents Don’t Know Best
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2847086/posts


80 posted on 02/15/2012 11:12:46 PM PST by haroldeveryman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
While not denying the truth of your comments re Sartorum, is there any Republican Candidate worthy of the name who will NOT have to do "defend himself against endless "alarm" in the media and ads that either mischaracterize or lie about what he REALLY said."?

The MSM are not on our side. At best, charitably, they are on the side of alarmism and sensationalism, both of which make reasoned discussion pretty much impossible. This, of course, plays into the hands of liberals, who dont rely much on reason, their positions being generally thoroughly illogical and irrational.

81 posted on 02/16/2012 12:33:15 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
For at least 1,800 years the Christian Church did just fine without Government Sanction of Marriage.

Well... no.

Actually the government has always been involved with marriages. Or did you think that "bastard" "wife" "husband" and other such words had no legal meaning until the past few years?

In fact the Church Registry was considered a legal document and you could go there and get a copy of your parent's marriage lines to prove that you were legitimately the son of your father.

The federal government has been in the business of marriage and deciding what marriages were legal for a very long time.

It is only lately when people want to re-write the dictionary that they want the "government to stay out of marriage".

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

82 posted on 02/16/2012 1:29:55 AM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Would you sing if someone sucked YOU up the vacuum cleaner hose?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Telling the truth about Newt’s green agenda is hardly smearing him. Telling the truth about Newt sucking up to the open borders crowd is not smearing him. Telling the truth about Newt’s big government “solutions” is hardly smearing him.

When you get Romney Nominated, trust me, I’m going to make sure people remember who helped get it done. After all, here you are admitting that your little jihad is nothing but vindictiveness.


83 posted on 02/16/2012 3:23:39 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Considering that fact that you’re someone who proudly wears the screen name of a progressive eugenicist, I wouldn’t worry too much about the intelligence of others if I were you.


84 posted on 02/16/2012 3:27:21 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Whether you like it or not, Santorum is NOT presidential material. Period.

I don’t even know how he got in the presidential race in the first place.


85 posted on 02/16/2012 3:35:05 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Can you imagine Santorum as Commander in Chief?

Just the other day, he insulted 15% of the military personnel who serve in the US army - the women.


86 posted on 02/16/2012 3:43:23 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marguerite
Just the other day, he insulted 15% of the military personnel who serve in the US army - the women.

One more childish left wing attack.
87 posted on 02/16/2012 4:13:46 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Childish? Why don’t you tell that to these five women?

When asked what he thought of the Pentagon’s decision to formally open up combat roles to women, Santorum replied: “It could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved.”

Kim Voelz - Kim, who was part of the Army’s elite bomb squad, was killed at just 27 years of age while trying to defuse an explosive device.

Staff Sergeant Kametra Smith - Last year, Sergeant Smith surprised her 4-year-old daughter at school after returning from home from Iraq. Her daughter almost bursts from excitement, and the homecoming is one of the most heart-warming you’ll ever see.

Robin Roche-Paull Author of the book ‘Breastfeeding in Combat Boots’. Not only is she a veteran of the U.S. Navy, where she served as an aircraft mechanic, she breastfed her son while on active duty. Talk about dedication — to her country and her child!

Sgt. LaJuanna Baker and Cpl. Andrea Moreira-Rios - Baker and Moreira-Rios were approached by a midwife in Afghanistan to see if they would help deliver a local baby while they were handing out “hygiene packets” at a local health clinic. Of course, the two women said yes, and the rest is history. Not so sure a man would have been able to deal with something like that.

Florence Green - Last weekend Florence Green passed away at the age of 110. Her claim to fame? She was the last-known World War I veteran.


88 posted on 02/16/2012 6:14:56 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
"The federal government has been in the business of marriage and deciding what marriages were legal for a very long time."

That's not an accurate statement. Until the the very first "marriage" deduction in the income tax...the 20th century...the federal government had no role in marriage whatsoever. None. Zero.

The states got involved much, much earlier in which they began to codify existing church norms and add property protections for women and children.

89 posted on 02/16/2012 7:58:54 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“If we can outlaw smoking in bars, why not in private cars or homes?”

Hello.. Ever heard of the marijuana laws? Of course the government can do it, they’ve been regulating private smoking for decades. People just don’t see the connection, but if you give the government the power to regulate our most private behavior, it’s going to take that power and run with it. Sooner or later, it will be coming for you.


90 posted on 02/16/2012 8:03:07 AM PST by juno67 (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: juno67

Exactly my point with the comment. FReepers are jumping on board with this stupid attack and calling him extreme while exactly the same goes on every day all around us.


91 posted on 02/16/2012 8:06:09 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Telling the truth about Santorums endorsements which this country paid dearly for and his reckless big govt record is not smearing him ...it is a fact.

You didnt think twice about spinning on Newt but you dont want anyone to vet Santorum. Cain, Perry and Newt have all been attacked and now the truth is coming out on RS..much more to come before it is over.

Santorum may talk the talk but he doesnt walk the walk. No thanks to a fiscal liberal and I am wondering about him even being the social conservative


92 posted on 02/16/2012 8:09:08 AM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Just go lay down sycophant

Gingrich ‘Deeply Upset’ That Scozzafava Endorsed Democrat After He’d Supported Her (ROFL)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2376848/posts

Newt: “I am, however, deeply dissapointed that she has chosen to back Owens over Hoffman.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2376172/posts

Jarrett: Dems want Scozzafava nod (Newt? Newt?)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2375959/posts

Right To Work Prez Calls Out Newt’s Hypocrisy

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2375483/posts

Group Calls on Gingrich to Rescind Endorsement of Scozzafava

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2374566/posts

Who Lied to (RINO) Newt Gingrich?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373633/posts

Newt Gingrich - “King of the RINOs”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373107/posts

Gingrich: A Vote for Hoffman Is a Vote for Pelosi

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373068/posts

Farewell To GOP’s Squishy Gingrich Wing

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2372160/posts

Are you kidding me?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2372078/posts

Gingrich calls GOP support for Hoffman a ‘purge’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371959/posts

Newt on Greta talking about Scozzafava

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371587/posts

Newt Gingrich: Doug Hoffman support a ‘mistake’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371188/posts


93 posted on 02/16/2012 8:18:30 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Lay off the personal attacks if you want to make a point. Do not use the word jihad in connection to my posts on Santorum.

Very unimpressed with your ccp of the same ole same ole. Remember there are very intelligent conservatives endorsing Newt Gingrich. Don’t have to name names becaause you are aware of them all..they are the creme de la creme of not only conservatism but constitutionalist.

Santorum is going down...watch it and keep a box of kleenex near by...Newt will go back up..so you better make that two boxes.


94 posted on 02/16/2012 8:23:55 AM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Ha ha! LMBO, some of the very same posters from those threads are declaring the country dead without (their words) RINO Newt.


95 posted on 02/16/2012 8:26:38 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Do not use the word jihad in connection to my posts on Santorum.

LOL any other demands you want me to ignore Little Miss Romney Helper?
96 posted on 02/16/2012 8:27:28 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: dforest

There are several pages of threads like that. Just do a keyword search of “Scozzafava”.

For an added bonus, take a look at the threads about Gingrich announcing that he was running.


97 posted on 02/16/2012 8:31:17 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
"If we nominate this guy we're toast."

Newt is the only one that is clearly an alternative to mitty, santo, and hussein. If he can get on track again, he'll energize Conservatives and enough Indys to make it happen.

Otherwise, his three competitors are too similar to motivate folks to go to the polls. They'll stay home, the press will blow smoke about the improving economic picture, and hussein will win. Then we will definitely be toast.

98 posted on 02/16/2012 8:45:40 AM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marguerite

Well, can you elaborate on that assertion? Because whether you like it or not, given the latest opinion polls there seem to be quite a few people who disagree with you.


99 posted on 02/16/2012 8:57:46 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

That’s MY OPINION, which is not manufactured by polls.


100 posted on 02/16/2012 9:11:03 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-119 next last

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