Why I’m Supporting Rick Santorum For President

March 2, 2012 11:36 am

by Buzz Brockway · 70 comments

In his Courier Herald Column on Monday, Charlie explained why he thought Rick Santorum was the weakest choice in the GOP field. He offered me an opportunity to present my views which I will now do. Thanks for the opportunity Charlie.

I’m supporting Rick Santorum for President because I think he presents the clearest contrast to President Obama. Unlike his main rivals, on the key issues of the day he doesn’t have to explain why he held a contrary view in the past. He has never supported, nor pushed for an Obamacare style healthcare reform. He never held the view that an individual mandate should be a key component of health care reform. He opposed TARP, the auto industry and Wall Street bailouts. He’s on record in opposition to cap and trade. Again, his top rivals haven’t always held the views on those issues they hold now.

If the aim of Republicans is to beat Obama, then the campaign needs to be focused on Obama’s record over the past four years. Thus our candidate should be focused on Obama’s record not explaining how views they held in the past aren’t really contradictory to their current views.

Rick Santorum connects with middle America in a way the other candidates don’t. It’s been a long time since a GOP nominee appealed to Reagan Democrats (if you’re too young to know who Reagan Democrats are click here). His background, the part of the country he represented in Congress and in the Senate, have impacted his views and his understanding of the importance of middle America. He’s seen the economic devastation they’ve suffered in recent years and understands how to fix it. His ecomonic plan, explained in this Wall Street Journal article, focuses squarely on middle America and his background gives him an authenticity on these issues I feel the other candidates don’t have, including the President.

Charlie is correct in saying the GOP lost it’s way on fiscal issue, resulting in the loss of both Houses of Congress and the election of President Obama. I disagree however, that Santorum as GOP Nominee allows Obama to blame all his problems on George W Bush. He’s been talking about the dangers of excessive government spending for a long time, as evidenced by this photo from 2003. During his time in the Congress, Santorum had a solidly fiscally conservative record, as described in this article.

NTU’s (National Taxpayer’s Union) scoring paints a radically different picture of Santorum’s 12-year tenure in the Senate (1995 through 2006) than one would glean from the rhetoric of the Romney campaign. Fifty senators served throughout Santorum’s two terms: 25 Republicans, 24 Democrats, and 1 Republican/Independent. On a 4-point scale (awarding 4 for an A, 3.3 for a B+, 3 for a B, 2.7 for a B-, etc.), those 50 senators’ collective grade point average (GPA) across the 12 years was 1.69 — which amounts to a C-. Meanwhile, Santorum’s GPA was 3.66 — or an A-. Santorum’s GPA placed him in the top 10 percent of senators, as he ranked 5th out of 50.

As for the assertion Santorum has no great accomplishments on his record, again I disagree. Santorum shepherded the 1996 welfare reform through the Senate and was instrumental in it’s development. People forget the 1996 reform was a radical shift in thinking on welfare. Prior to 1996 the major welfare program was known as AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) and it trapped people in poverty rather than providing help during times of need and assistance in escaping poverty. After the 1996 reform, the program is now called TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). The focus is on families, helping them during the hard times and helping them get back on their feet not trapping them in poverty. As President he’ll take on entitlement spending and he’s got a track record showing how he’ll do it.

This leads me to another factor in my decision to support Rick Santorum. Conservatives often get accused of not caring about the poor. Pro-life conservatives like myself get accused of only caring about babies before their born not after. While these accusations are largely false, they do contain a kernel of truth. We need a conservative alternative to the welfare state. This is not something we conservatives like to talk about and few of us do…with the exception of Rick Santorum. His 2005 book “It Takes A Family” is his attempt to articulate a conservative approach to helping the poor and strengthening families. Yes, I’ve read all 464 pages and while I don’t agree with everything he says, I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that assistance to those is need should happen at the level closest to them and it should strengthen families not harm them as so many government welfare programs do currently.

While I’ve got your attention let me address some other criticism’s of Rick Santorum.

He’s a corrupt DC Insider: Santorum fought corruption as a young member of Congress as a part of the “Gang of Seven.” Pretty brave for a new member of Congress.

Women hate him because he’s a pro-life Catholic: Actually, two recent articles blow up that myth. See here and here. The snarky side of me asks: And women love Newt?

We don’t need to be talking about all these social issues: Our problems are more than just fiscal problems. Read the book “Boomerang” by Michael Lewis. The flood of easy credit from 2002 – 2007 caused the world and certainly we here in the US to sacrifice our future for instant gratification. Balancing the budget and cutting spending won’t solve our moral problems. No, social issues always need to be talked about.

If his own State wouldn’t reelect him then America won’t vote for him either: Every GOP candidate left standing has lost races. in 2006 Governor Romney didn’t even bother to run for reelection. Yes, Rick Santorum lost by a huge margin in 2006, but people forget that a key factor in his loss was his support of President Bush’s social security reform, which didn’t sit will with Pennsylvania’s aging population. Most people now realize that was a good effort at reform and that Social Security is in dire straights. Santorum’s support of that reform, while unpopular at the time, is more popular now and won’t hurt him in the General Election.

Don’t ask me to defend every vote Rick Santorum cast during his 16 years in the Congress. I won’t do it. He’s not a perfect man, nor a perfect candidate. President Obama is well funded and the 2012 election will not be an easy victory for the GOP. But after thinking long and hard about the battle for the GOP nomination, I’ve decided to cast my vote for Rick Santorum. I hope you will too.

seenbetrdayz March 2, 2012 at 12:29 pm

Well, there’s always 2016.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 12:47 pm

Yes, 2016 is when Rick Santorum will be running for reelection. :-)

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 1:08 pm

Santorum and the Republicans probably need to extract themselves from the cleverly baited political trap set by Obama and the Dems by quietly backing away from the contraception issue in a debate where they have been suckered into coming out against female contraception and birth control.

The right’s perceived position against birth control is not a winner with women in the way that this debate is currently being framed. Comments from Santorum like “States should be able to ban contraception” and Limbaugh’s oh-so-glorious statements towards that Georgetown Law Student over the last couple of days also don’t do the GOP any favors.

If Santorum and the boys can stay focused on gas prices and the economy, they can make some significant headway, but they have got to stop playing right into the left’s hands and Obama’s book of dirty political tricks and that starts with dropping this contraception issue like the hot potato that it is. While it plays well in the conservative South and Midwest, I don’t know if this abortion and personhood obsession drive may be much of a winner either, nationally.

Conservatives can talk about social issues, but recent turn of events and the way that the Repubs have walked right into this cleverly set political trap by playing right along with the left’s sinister efforts to demonize them as being hostile to women’s health, which is how this is all being portrayed.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 1:29 pm

I agree that Santorum needs to be very careful on this topic. The media and his GOP opponents want to paint him as a misogynistic neanderthal because on a personal level he strictly follows conservative Catholic teaching. He doesn’t want to restrict anyone’s ability to obtain contraceptives. He’s done a good job lately pivoting from this question into the real heart of the matter: government has no right dictating to people on matters of conscience, be they religious of otherwise.

Calypso March 2, 2012 at 2:19 pm

“…government has no right dictating to people on matters of conscience, be they religious OR OTHERWISE.” [emphasis mine]

Buzz, I can hardly believe those words left your fingertips while referring to someone of Santorum’s ilk. What a hypocritical statement to make.

Santorum is diametrically opposed to keeping government from “dictating to people on matters of conscience”. That is, unless it’s Santorum’s conscience doing the dictating and not the conscience of the individual who actually has to live with the outcome of the decision.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 2:32 pm

I completely disagree with you about that. He doesn’t want to use the force of government to dictate to people on matters of conscience. Sure, the media has tried to tag him with that, just as the try to do with most devout people.

They’ll try to do it to Romney too. Don’t be naive, we’ll learn more about the intricacies of the Mormon faith than we ever wanted to know if Romney is the nominee.

L. Max Lehmann March 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm

“…we’ll learn more about the intricacies of the Mormon faith than we ever wanted to know if Romney is the nominee. …”

Of that, I am certain. Latter Day Saint (Mormons) followers tend to be likable, successful, family oriented individuals, and that is all most people will need to feel comfortable.

Framing this one about LDS will not resonate.

John Vestal March 2, 2012 at 3:24 pm

Santorum in an NPR interview (2006):

One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. You know, the left has gone so far left and the right in some respects has gone so far right that they touch each other. They come around in the circle. This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.

Santorum on libertarianism:

I am not a libertarian, and I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement. I don’t think the libertarians have it right when it comes to what the Constitution is all about. I don’t think they have it right as to what our history is, and we are not a group of people who believe in no government.

Contrast the above with comments from Reagan on libertarianism:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

Calypso March 2, 2012 at 4:15 pm

Thanks for the contrasting views, John. It further cements my poor opinion of Santorum, and I’m aghast that Buzz so vehemently supports him.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 4:37 pm

Reagan and Santorum weren’t in opposition.

John Vestal March 2, 2012 at 5:22 pm

Ah, yes, the Barton-esque insistence that The Constitution MUST be inexorably linked to The Declaration…simply because the latter mentions a Creator and the former doesn’t. It was supposed to, but the Founders simply forgot or got distracted or were all on Compuserve or something.

It’s not like they intended for the “owner’s manual” to be deliberately and decidedly secular and stuff.

Damn Them All To Hell.™

Calypso March 2, 2012 at 5:22 pm

OK, Buzz, so do those of us who have no belief in a god not have the rights provided for in the Constitution because Santorum says the Declaration of Independence is all about god-given rights?

Must one believe in your magical, mythical, sky person to be afforded those same rights under the law that you believers in the supernatural have?

That, is where I have a problem with Santorum and you supporters are too blind to see the issue.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 5:40 pm

The point is guys you can’t have a civil society without morality. I don’t care if you follow the same religion I do, or you choose to have no religion at all but if we toss morality out the window our Constitution will be of no value. Government must necessarily be a police state if morality is tossed out the window.

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 6:20 pm

Buzz, I understand that morality has been just as part of the success of this nation as has economics has been, but instead of repeatedly putting themselves in position to appear to be obsessed with what’s going on in people’s bedrooms by the Left and the mainstream media, maybe Conservatives need to talk about morality in slightly different terms that come across as more populist than divisive.

Talking about morality in terms like blatant corporate greed, blantant government waste and blatant government overreach in a way that does not appear to be preoccupied with personal sexual matters might be a good place for Conservatives to start.

But appearing to be on a 1950’s-style moral crusade against contraception in an era when female voters make up a clear majority of the workforce and pool of potential voters is NOT a the way to win an election that should be primarily about the long-term economic and financial health of this nation.

seenbetrdayz March 2, 2012 at 6:28 pm

The point is guys you can’t have a civil society without morality.

The question is: can you have a moral society without civil government?

I believe you can, and I believe you *must* have a moral society before establishment of a civil government to govern that society.

Otherwise, you end up with a government making laws that the people will not understand, and therefore, are not likely to respect. You have to change the minds of the people before you change what’s written in their laws; any other approach is just ‘pissin’ in the wind.’

It seems to me that Santorum believes that government creates the people, and not that the people create the government.

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 7:02 pm

@ seenbetrdayz:

“It seems to me that Santorum believes that government creates the people, and not that the people create the government.”

In other words, a big-government conservative.

seenbetrdayz March 2, 2012 at 6:09 pm

Santorum reminds me of how much I wish people who don’t understand libertarianism would STFU about it.

Three Jack March 2, 2012 at 5:28 pm

Buzz wrote, “He doesn’t want to use the force of government to dictate to people on matters of conscience.”

First, thanks for making your case in a public forum. Not many endorsers will open themselves to such scrutiny.

I disagree with your assertion based on Santorum’s overzealous involvement in the Terry Schiavo matter — (from HuffPost) In 2005, Santorum repeatedly demanded that Schiavo be kept alive against the wishes of her husband. “We need to do something to stop this unconscionable act on the part of the Florida Court,” he said. “Terri Schiavo is a daughter, a sister, and most importantly, a person. We cannot allow an innocent person to be put to death.” Santorum even used his position as a US senator to get Congress to subpoena the judge in the case. (The judge ignored Congress.)

Santorum has proven he will put his faith based beliefs above the constitution and the job he was elected to do. His 18 point whipping against Bob Casey had as much to do with the fundraising/political opportunist trip to Tampa in 2005 as anything else. No way he can be trusted to lead this country responsibly.

Max Power March 3, 2012 at 12:48 pm

No, he just wants the state to be allowed to restrict contraceptives. He’s repeatedly said he disagrees with Griswold and states should have the right to outlaw contraception. That’s not a winning argument.

Buzz Brockway March 3, 2012 at 1:22 pm

So Santorum doesn’t think the Constitution has emanations from penumbras and you think he wants States to take away birth control. Wrong.

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 3, 2012 at 6:18 pm

From the link:

“What Santorum has said is that the Supreme Court’s 1965 decision in Griswold v. Connecticut — which dealt with a case that was a Planned Parenthood official’s stunt — was a bad precedent and bad law. It created a constitutional right for married persons to use contraceptives. Writing for the majority, Justice William O. Douglas declared that ”specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance,” and that “various [of these] guarantees create zones of privacy.” That would be the basis for the Roe decision eight years later, which relied on a similar constitutional stretch.”

Come on Buzz, do you really think that the average voter or potential voter is going to understand the nuances of Constitutional law that Santorum was referring to in stating that states should be able to ban contraception if they wanted to?

The short answer is no…All that most people will hear through the mainstream media is Santorum saying that “States should be able to ban contraception” (the only part of what he said that has actually been played on TV), which will be grouped with other statements about contraception that Santorum and now other statements that others who shall remain nameless have said in the contraception “debate” in manipulated soundbites to make it look like Santorum and the Right want to take away women’s contraception and reproductive rights.

And how in the hell did the Right get suckered into being made to look like creepy bad guys who want to take women’s birth control, especially when gas is pushing $5.00 a gallon and the economy sucks wind so bad?

When Repubs let the Left (so easily) lure them into the debates about contraception and sexual issues they run the risk of getting lost in some really high and overgrown political weeds, but if they stick to what should be a gimme in gas prices, jobs and the economy they will have a great chance of defeating Obama in November.

Don’t let the Libs get you off message. Stay on message: The economy…the economy…the economy…the economy…the economy…and so on and so on…

Cassandra March 4, 2012 at 1:13 pm

I woke up and Peach Pundit was upside down! Rep. Brockway has never waivered, to his credit, but how can The Last Dem in GA be making sense in campaign coaching strategy?

I’ll just say that if Mr. Santorum is nominated, I’ll vote Democratic, something I have never done.

The GOP has gone so far to the Right, that the fact we are discussing if a State ought to ‘banning contraceptives,’ based on some arcane argument 50 years ago, is un-freaking-believable. This non-issue makes me want to throw up. And not from morning sickness either.

Here’s another good Dem campaign coaching tip: “It’s the economy stupid. “

Buzz Brockway March 4, 2012 at 2:18 pm

Santorum doesn’t want to ban contraceptives and you, the Mittens and the Paulians repeating it over and over doesn’t make it suddenly true.

Cassandra March 4, 2012 at 4:13 pm

That is how it will be framed, along with many other un-truths.

Max Power March 5, 2012 at 9:36 am

He thinks the states should be allowed to forbid birth control. Period. That’s not going to win.

fultonrighty March 2, 2012 at 12:43 pm

Two other factors in favor of Santorum beating Obama.
1. Santorum energizes the base of the Republican party–the ones who WORK, not just vote. Most Republican “moderates” will vote for the Republican nominee anyway, but they don’t work anyway; they think money wins elections. No real ground game for Dole or McCain… and they lost. The base was uninspired and put their energy and influence into other races.
2. Santorum resonates with the industrial swing states. He won in a Democrat House district and statewide in a Democrat state when he ran against a liberal Dem (like Obama), but lost only when up against a pro-life/pro-family Dem, Bob Casey. He did it by pulling over conservative Democrats.

TheEiger March 2, 2012 at 1:27 pm

1) Santorum does not energize “all” of the Republican base. I’m apart of the base that works every cycle and I can’t stand the guy. The person that is energizing the Republican base is Obama. Not Rick Santorum.

2) Do you remember that he lost by 18 points in an industrial swing state because of his radical social issues? This is not a social issue election. It will be an election about unemployment, high gas prices and federal spending. Santorum talks about birth control, abortion and gays. That isn’t going to energize the base. His voting record of voting for earmarks and big government spending in DC also doesn’t make us fiscal conservatives happy.

But you go on thinking this election will be won on abortion and hating on gays. We are guaranteed another four years of Obama if Santorum is our nominee.

ConservativeCaucus March 3, 2012 at 9:09 am

1. You are correct – each one of the candidates turns off a different section of the GOP base. In this case, Santorum turns you off. For others, it could be any one of the other three. The hope is that come November, all sections of the GOP base will be united to defeat one of the most Left wing Presidents in our country’s history.

2. You are incorrect here. Bob Casey ran as a socially conservative Democrat, taking away the right to life issue away from Santorum.

James Fannin March 5, 2012 at 10:27 am

Agree that Casey ran as a pro-life Dem and took that issue away from Santorum. At the same time, Santorum tried to take the labor issue away from Casey by running as a big labor Republican.

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 12:49 pm

“The snarky side of me asks: And women love Newt?”

Yes, women do love Newt….

….as long as cash is presented first and payments are made up front.

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 12:49 pm

Sorry, did I say that out loud?

ricstewart March 2, 2012 at 12:52 pm

“He has never supported, nor pushed for an Obamacare style healthcare reform.”
True, but he did vote for Medicare Part D.

“He opposed TARP, the auto industry and Wall Street bailouts.”
Also true, but just this week he paid for a robocall criticizing Romney for NOT supporting the auto industry bailout, even though Santorum himself didn’t support it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjgpOfT0FS8
Santorum is a hypocrite.

AMB March 2, 2012 at 1:43 pm

I was collecting my thoughts, arranging my arguments, and decided it was all a waste of time. He will not be the GOP nominee, so why bother?
Santorum has trashed the GOP brand among many women. He is unelectable. The GOP gurus will push him aside soon enough.

Cassandra March 4, 2012 at 1:14 pm

The single most rational comment yet.

saltycracker March 2, 2012 at 1:51 pm

#1 & #2 issues: the economy, the national debt –
These matters should be the first things on your list and out of his mouth.

Taxation he’ll cut the percentages and play with the deductions. Unacceptable.
Acceptable: A 10% flat tax, no deductions, no minimums or something close.
(Reality: for the majority that is under the radar, can shelter income or loves the deductions……who cares)

Spending: 18% of GDP & reduce deficit $5 trillion…..just words on a check sheet..s/b a first priority

Term limits ? not a chance he’ll do that

Federal agency eliminations, employee reduction 10% , where ?, overhaul pension programs ?

Foreign aid ? How ’bout we go to zero budgeting and vote on them one at a time ?
Military ? How ’bout we stop nation building with bases all over the world. A strategic few ?
Health care: How ’bout we open the doors of competition and regulate but not own ?
Housing: How ’bout we get pro-active and direct Fannie/Freddie to refi the underwater but current payers at 4% and begin a process to privatize this market. This is a captial that can do multi-billion dollar buyouts. How ’bout we tell the Feds to raise interest rates on the money charged to banks & they’ll begin to unload non-performing assets.

How about we begin to overhaul or enforce or eliminate programs that are eat up with fraud: medicare, medicaid, disability, immigration, student loans, unemployment, IRS and on and on ?

He is mired down in social issues which are currently way down on voter lists….

Tenacious G March 2, 2012 at 2:09 pm

Sorry, you must have confused Santorum with a Conservative…

saltycracker March 2, 2012 at 5:00 pm

Ted Nugent endorsed Romney – that settles it – Mitt is bonafide !

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 5:20 pm

But so did Trump. :-)

ted in bed March 2, 2012 at 6:55 pm

John Bolton endorsed Mitt too.

Santorum voted for everything Conservatives hated about the Bush years. Obama will have a field day painting him as Lil Ricky Bush.

Most disgustingly, Santorum saved Arlen Specter over a Conservative. Santorum is a big government, big union Northeast lib.

If he is elected it will be another 4 years of Bush.

Calypso March 2, 2012 at 7:15 pm

If he is nominated it will be another 4 years of Obama.

John Vestal March 2, 2012 at 9:53 pm

↑ this ↑

The Last Democrat in Georgia March 2, 2012 at 10:05 pm

Are you trying to say that Santorum is really nothing more than a big-government liberal (wolf) dressed up and (poorly) disguised in a big-government conservative’s (sheep’s) clothing?

No way!

drjay March 6, 2012 at 3:57 pm

yes but who did bolton’s magnifcent mustache endorse???

kyleinatl March 2, 2012 at 1:59 pm

More importantly, is that Santorum’s daughter in that picture? Cause…yow, I’d totally work within Catholic doctrines with that one.

Buzz Brockway March 2, 2012 at 2:03 pm

Yes, that’s his daughter Elizabeth. Just remember like every Dad with daughters, Santorum fully supports 2nd Amendment remedies when dealing with men. :-)

kyleinatl March 2, 2012 at 2:14 pm

Soda came out of my nose on that one, nicely done!

L. Max Lehmann March 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm

LOLOLOLOLOLOL Too funny.

Calypso March 3, 2012 at 9:07 am

She looks like an extra in a Sir Mix-a-Lot video with that skirt she’s wearing.

CobbGOPer March 2, 2012 at 2:26 pm

I’m really only going to the polls Tuesday to vote in favor of Sunday alcohol sales in Cobb County. I doubt I’ll even vote in the presidential primary, I just have no one to vote for except maybe Gary Johnson.

Quaker March 2, 2012 at 3:00 pm

Can a non-Christian support Santorum? This is not a spurious question – I am not a Christian, and I frankly don’t see that Santorum brings a whole lot to the table besides radical, far right religious hysteria.

joe March 2, 2012 at 3:02 pm

I participated in a YouGov poll earlier this week. Four questions in particular still have me thinking.

1. Who is the stongest on Defense? I chose Gingrich.
2. Who is the stongest on the Economy? I chose Romney.
3. Who is the strongest on social issues? I chose Paul.
4. Who will you vote for? I chose Undecided.

For question 4, I am leaning toward Santorum, he does seem to be 2nd on each of the other 3 questions, but I still may opt for eeny-meeny-miney-mo. But in any case, OMG=Obama Must Go

gcp March 2, 2012 at 7:11 pm

His irresponsible tax plan would add at least 500 billion per year to the national debt but at least he is consistent considering he always votes to increase the debt limit.

seenbetrdayz March 3, 2012 at 10:20 am

And this is because most republicans seem to want politicians who can ‘get stuff done’ without prioritizing or emphasizing what they’d like to get done. They forsake principles for political power.

They prioritize ‘looking for someone who can work across party lines’ to cut government, and government always grows.

They prioritize nominating someone who can bring two sides together to decrease spending, and spending always increases.

They prioritize electing someone who can negotiate in the name of bipartisanship as that is apparently ‘the mark of a true leader,’ and they get exactly the bipartisanship they didn’t want.

I’m all for bipartisanship, but let’s get some bipartisanship that actually benefits the American people and preserves our rights, instead of coming up with these 86-13 votes to pass the NDAA out of the Senate. That’s bipartisanship, alright, and it’s just one of many issues that’ll come crashing down hard on republicans and democrats alike.

John Konop March 4, 2012 at 12:04 am

The problem is both parties make promises they cannot pay for, and voters like what they hear over reality. No one really wants to hear the truth, that the free lunch program is running out of cash.

oldman45 March 3, 2012 at 9:34 am

Too inexperienced. We’ve had to live the last 4 years with a rookie who doesn’t have a clue. Give me the old guy that has the Republican establishment scared to death. Newt!

Jane March 3, 2012 at 10:30 am

He has my vote. I understand he has a MBA and a Law degree.

Calypso March 3, 2012 at 11:04 am

Yeah, Santorum likes puppies too. That’s the clincher for me.

/sarcasm/

Chris Huttman March 3, 2012 at 3:19 pm

Even though I think Santorum is probably the better GOP candidate than Romney ultimately, what does it say about the guy that he can’t even get his act together to get on the Virginia ballot and file enough delegates to win his rightful share in Ohio? How you run your campaign is in some ways a proxy for your management skills, and these two examples are REALLY bad for Santorum’s case.

Dave Bearse March 3, 2012 at 10:56 pm

Santorum: long time conservative morality and principles you can trust (just so long as they don’t require he cross Rush Limbaugh).

Rick Day March 4, 2012 at 12:03 pm

I’m supporting Rick Santorum for President because I think he presents the clearest contrast to President Obama

Buzz, your honesty is refreshing. This is not about policy, neither Obama’s or Santorum’s. This is not about the country. This is about contrasting the men, the humans.

You are absolutely correct. Rick Santorum the man and his issues is the candidate with the starkest contrast to Barrack Obama.

As stark as Black and White.

Buzz Brockway March 4, 2012 at 2:15 pm

So I’m a racist?

Herman Cain presented a clear contrast to President Obama, and I’m not talking about his wandering eye.

SallyForth March 5, 2012 at 12:06 pm

Buzz, we know the REAL reason you support Santorum is because you agree with his statement last week that he opposes separation of church and state – right? Constitution, schmonstitution.

Calypso March 6, 2012 at 3:40 pm

Sally, I find Buzz’s lack of response to your question conspicuous by it’s absence, don’t you?

John Konop March 4, 2012 at 5:25 pm

Rick,

I know and respect Buzz even though we disagree on some issues like this one. I am voting for Romney on Tueday. And I think Buzz is dead wrong on supporting Santorum, especially after the latest BS from Rush. Santorum and or some of his supporters have questioned the faith of Romney and Obama, yet give a pass on Rush who calls women using birth control sluts and prostitutes. With all that said to even imply Buzz is a racist is wrong. Buzz is a bright guy and we also agree on other issues ie flatter taxes, fiscal restraints, multi track education……… I am all for vigorous debate but the personal Rush style attacks, on Buzz are wrong! I do think some social conservatives are off based on many social issues, but that does not make them racist.

Harry March 4, 2012 at 9:14 pm

+1

James Fannin March 5, 2012 at 10:29 am

Here’s Santorum’s biggest problem. He can’t win his home state – of Virginia. He has lived there for over 20 years and has been a resident since he lost his election 6 years ago and can’t lead his own campaign organization well enough to get his name on the ballot. And you want this guy to lead the country?

drjay March 5, 2012 at 12:12 pm

meh, at this point i’m seriously looking at voting for one of the folks who has dropped out, but is still on the printed ballot–that is how uninspired i am by the current crop…

BarryHalls March 6, 2012 at 12:51 am

Santorum consistent? Not hardly. He claims that he has always been pro-life and has continously dogged Romney for being a convert to the cause. Guess what? Rick hasn’t been very truthful. Not according to an interview he gave back in 1995.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frenchrevolution/2012/02/22/rick-santorum%E2%80%99s-pro-choice-past/

Not that it’s bad to change but to dog on someone for doing the same thing you have done is, well shall we say, hypocritical. Furthermore Rick endorsed Romney, Romneycare well out in the open at that time, as a true conservative.

Mitt gets hit with changing positions but Santorum is like a fart in the wind compared to Mitt. I’m sorry but Santorum isn’t what he makes himself out to be.

Calypso March 6, 2012 at 9:20 am

Your neen scrame is funny!

Buzz Brockway March 6, 2012 at 9:23 am

So in the early 90’s Santorum came to the pro-life position. Did he ever campaign as a pro-choice candidate? Nope. Can your guy say the same? Nope.

Comments on this entry are closed.