Skip to comments.Don't Pick Rick
Posted on 02/25/2012 1:20:13 PM PST by WPaCon
Wish I had a nickel for every conservative who confidently predicted that the Arizona debate would, of course, feature obnoxious questions about birth control and the devil aimed at Rick Santorum. As it turned out, CNNs John King did not ask gotcha questions and, for the most part, conducted a fair and informative debate.
The debate moderated by King, along with other events of the past week, has resolved a question that has been swirling since the Missouri, Colorado, and Minnesota primaries: Why not Santorum?
There is much to like and admire about Rick Santorum. He did fine work enacting welfare reform in the 1990s. He was an eloquent and thoughtful advocate for the unborn. He has kept a weather eye on Iran for many years. Hes a dedicated family man. He was the first candidate to raise the issue of family structure in the context of discussions of poverty. And he had a solid, conservative voting record in Congress (with some exceptions there are always exceptions).
But Santorum would make a poor Republican nominee.
Because he has phrased his socially conservative views in vivid terms, he is precisely the sort of candidate who will evoke a Pavlovian response from the press. Just as they were driven mad by Sarah Palin, they will be outraged by Rick Santorum. The campaign will be cluttered by the continual discovery of controversial Santorum quotes from the past three decades, and precious time will be lost as he explains, justifies, or withdraws his comments on women in the workforce, contraception, gay unions, Obamas theology (by which he did not mean to question the presidents faith, something hell have to explain over and over), and so forth.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
“Because he has phrased his socially conservative views in vivid terms, he is precisely the sort of candidate who will evoke a Pavlovian response from the press. Just as they were driven mad by Sarah Palin, they will be outraged by Rick Santorum.”
Assuming this is true, should that bother us?
Are we being led to believe that they will be more fair or decent to someone else?
“but because of the childish and nasty behavior of a lot of Newt supporters, Im seriously rethinking my support.”
I’ve seen childish and nasty in support of every candidate, repeatedly. Don’t let that affect your decision. There is no one running for President who does not have ugly supporters.
>>>Charen sounds like a few certain freepers.
She’s an inside the beltway, elitist, Republican establishment shill.
Wonder what her Freep name is.
Gingrich, by making his two points to John King, one of which was Obama’s support of infanticide, saved Rick’s bacon on social issues in that debate. The positive response Newt got from that and the audience’s reaction to the original question ,turned the tide. But for that, I’m not sure if Rick could have avoided an even worse disaster in his performance.
Just heard Newt’s speech to the GOP Convention in CA. He eviscerated Obama on Obama’s speech in Florida yesterday and on the Energy issue in general.
He is asking everyone who supports him to twitter or email someone and let them know about his pledge for $ 2.50 per gal. gasoline, and to make a $2.50 donation at newt.org to support him as he fights on. He also asked supporters to encourage everyone to watch his 30 minute video on the step by step process of getting Energy independence.
Don't pick, Rick!
The more I hear Newt Gingrich on Energy, the more convinced I am that he Can defeat Obama. This issue resonates with voters. Folks are facced with the reality of it every time they fill up their gas tanks. The impact of high gas prices increase the costs of food and every consumer item we use. Hard to ignore.
Newt has a remarkable plan, and if you haven’t listened to his step by step Plan for Energy independence and $2.50 per gal gasoline, I encourage you to take 30 minutes and check it out at Newt.org and decide for yourself.
So, don’t choose Santorum because he sounds like Sarah Palin. Yea, that makes sense. So is Mona for Mitt?
I’m sure Wm. F. Buckley, Jr. is shaking his head over the timid piece of crap National Review has become.
No, like Barry M. Goldwater and so many others once firm in conservatism, Mr. Buckley had started drifting left by 2000 or sooner. Christopher Buckley endorsed Obama. The nephew, Brent Bozell, III, remained steadfast.
Then you are blind.
Well, Rick Santorum’s views on contraception are exactly what the propaganda media want you to focus on.
I saw his interview on Glenn Beck. Santorum is committed to repealing Obamacare, stopping the UN’s influence on US policies, and getting the Fed out of public education.
I’d much rather have President Santorum than President Gingrich, whose role model for US presidents is FDR.
I couldn’t agree with you more.
The devil can bring grievous natural circumstances, but can’t “make” anybody sin without that person’s permission.
It’s interesting where Bozell Jr. went politically.
CNN and fair are mutually exclusive.
“Im seriously rethinking my support.”
Then you were never much of a supporter.
I’m getting real tired of the Santorum crowd telling everybody to vote for Rick instead of their candidate of choice so that Rick can beat Romney. If Rick can’t win on his own then he doesn’t deserve to win. I haven’t seen any of them say if you will vote for Rick in MI we will vote for Newt in GA. It is all one sided. No reciprocity offered. Let’s just let everyone vote their conscience and whoever wins wins.
I understand Newt's your guy, but I think your stretching to think that he is the only candidate with the courage and the knowledge to have made the charge. It happened that Newt was the first person tapped in the questioning, so he got the first cut at the ball. Santorum has been living this topic for some time, so I doubt he wouldn't have had the knowledge or courage to have responded forcefully as well.
..and as President, per his own words, talking about the evils of contraception. Seriously. The media didn't make that up, Santorum said it. In fact he said it is one of the things that would make him different as President, he would talk about how contraception is "not okay".
Sorry, but that is one of his issues and he will never be able to avoid it on the campaign trail. You know why? Because he WANTS to talk about it. No matter what his advisers tell him, Rick will always be baited into talking about this stuff because it is his passion. It's why he is really only known as a social conservative crusader. Opposing contraception, porn, etc, are what Santorum really cares deeply about and you can see it when the topic gets onto the social stuff. This is all great for a Priest to discuss, but not something Americans are going to vote for in a President. Santorum will lose most moderates/indies and the Republican party will be deserted by the younger libertine generation that is willing to give the GOP a look on fiscal issues but is not going to vote for someone who is babbling about contraception.
Id much rather have President Santorum than President Gingrich, whose role model for US presidents is FDR.
I'd rather have my neighbor who I consider one of the best conservatives around, but he isn't going to win any elections. Our candidate has to at least be electable. We don't have the time to waste on candidates that are doomed to defeat from the outset.
Agree with you. NO to Santorum. He is a pious fraud or he has very poor judgement on his endorsements. One too many pro choice folks have been aided by Santorum.
Great idea. He could buy a station and have a gospel show.
And I’m picking a President, not a preacher.
Oh, don’t worry, Mona. I’m not.
Doesn’t Mona understand that it doesn’t matter WHO the Republican nominee is, he will be maligned by the MSM from the minute his name is mentioned at the Republican convention. At least with Santorum or Gingrich you’ll be more apt to actually believe what they’re saying, than you can with Romney.
One of the problems with Rick is that he has not been consistent in his personal decisions on social issues. He is advocating a position now that insurance companies should not cover prenatal testing, which saved his wife’s life and which he certainly did not pay for out of pocket.
In 1996, his wife Karen, in the 6th month of her pregnancy was diagnosed by ultrasound with a life threatening infection. The Santorums made a painful decision knowing that the treatment to save her life would terminate her pregnancy, a technical abortion.
I respect their decision, but find it hypocritical, to say the least, that he would now deny coverage to other women for the same life saving prenatal testing, and also the same type of prenatal testing that saved my grandchild’s life.
Don’t think for a moment that this won’t be an issue if he is the nominee. As was demonstrated by his own words in the debate this week, Rick’s core principals dissolve when the chips are down and it is politically expediant for him to “take one for the team”.
He needs to tone down the preaching and playing God with other people’s lives by allowing them the same right to make their own decisions medically, just as he and his wife did.
Also you imply they knowingly chose a treatment that would lead to an an abortion. I think they chose a treatment that attempted to save the baby but led to forced labor and the baby died.
Besides no one is going to be making any personal decisions with their lives now that the government is already in control of everyone's benefit plans.
I’m ok with that. Vote for whom you want. But if you really want to stop Romney, then vote santo in MI. If you are a Gingrich man, you know that if he’s going anywhere, it won’t be MI, it will be super Tues. So you could stop any Rom-mentum in MI if you wanted. Then donate to your man and call for him in the other states.
I agree that I hated it when people told me I had to vote Gingrich for strategy. But if I had to I would.
Big government making medical decisions for people is one of the big objections to Obamacare. That is what has to be repealed. Sonograms and even amniocentesis can save lives.
Spinal bifida can be corrected in the womb and some other conditions can be successfully treated before birth.
They did know that the treatment would cause an abortion, but the alternative was that both Karen and the baby would die. They made the only decision that they could make, and I know it was extremely painful for them to go through.
We have to repeal Obamacare and I don’t believe Mitt Romney will do it.
I’m not piocking Rick, but the article is garbage.
>> “Everything from NRO needs a BARF alert. Everything.” <<
National Review was softheaded crap 20 years ago, and it is 20 times worse now.
Adios moaning Mona.
>> “What in the world has happened to Mona Charen?” <<
Nothing, she’s always been a joke.
>> “No one was criticizing Newt in the way Santorum is being criticized.” <<
>> “since the Santorum critics are most critical about his stances on social issues” <<
No, we’re sick of his establishment, tax and spend acquiescence to the big government, big tyranny thugs.
I support Newt, but Rick would be better than Romney.
There’s been no POTUS named Rick, let’s keep it this way. Oh wait, sorry, I forgot Rick Nixon.
I do get it. I heard charen speak once, years ago, and she was rather patronizing to the mostly older crowd. I lost some respect for her. She looked like shed rather be doing her laundry.
(1) Many of the griefs we see (robberies, murders etc.) ARE a result of other humans’ sin.
(2) I’m not saying that Satan-less human sin isn’t theoretically possible, only that it’s apparently how God arranged things with respect to our local fallen creation. Adam and Eve had nothing to be ashamed of until taking what (uh huh) the serpent offered. Why this and not some lone human disobedience to God was the prototype of all sin, I think there has to be a reason.
how God arranged => not how God arranged
Yeah, I was pretty surprised when I first started visiting this site to see that Santorum was unpopular with a lot of people here.
Well, Romney is electable. Newt is progressive, and the media will crucify him with his baggage.
You know it does not matter whatever baggage or skeletons the democrats have, be they just as bad and probably worse.
The propaganda media makes sure that republicans are the only ones held to ethical standards.
Don’t you think Carter, Clinton, and Obama said and done things that made them seem unelectable to their constituents?
Carter admitted to having lust in his heart, Clinton was a known serial philanderer, and Obama went to a racist hate “church”.
How in the world did they get elected?
We have to stop letting the media select our candidates.
When you are tempted, you shouldn't say, "God is tempting me." God can't be tempted by evil. And he doesn't tempt anyone. But your own evil longings tempt you. They lead you on and drag you away. When they are allowed to grow, they give birth to sin. When sin has grown up, it gives birth to death.The popular idea that sin happens as a result of Satan or one of his demons coming and whispering in one's ear is the same sort of myth as that which posits God as the ruler of heaven and Satan as the ruler of hell; the angels and demons fighting over one's soul, one whispering in one ear, the other whispering a contrary message in the other, trying the pull the person one way or the other (the funniest example seen in South Park Episode, Ike's WeeWee, when Mr. Mackie gets tempted to drink after getting fired for losing control of a lid of Columbian red). It's popular imagery that's more Zoroastrian in origin than Christian.
“Because picking moderates who won’t upset liberals is a goal we should all strive for. LOL”
Americans are ready to elect a conservative EXCEPT they will not tolerate criticism of the sexual sin that is destroying society.
When was the last time your pastor spoke about fornication?
Rick Santorum is not savvy enough to escape the trap Obama has set for him. There are so many things to make this election about - fornication isn’t one of them.
Might want to make sure that you aren’t the one in the trap.
I have a hard time with that statement. First of all, any republican who wanted to was free to jump in the race. Many did and and some did not. Various candidates were eliminated after the people voted in the primary states we've had so far. We are left with Santorum, Newt and Mitt. That's just how it played out.