Human Events Blog

Santorum: We might as well stick with Obama if Romney is the nominee

 

On the campaign trail in Texas, Rick Santorum decided to give the Etch-a-Sketch metaphor one shake too many, as reported by the Associated Press:

Presidential candidate Rick Santorum on Thursday said Republicans should give President Barack Obama another term if Santorum isn’t the GOP nominee and for a second day compared rival Mitt Romney to an Etch A Sketch toy.

Santorum reiterated an argument he has made before: The former Massachusetts governor is not conservative enough to offer voters a clear choice in the fall election and that only he can provide that contrast.

“You win by giving people a choice,” Santorum said during a campaign stop in Texas. “You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there.”

Santorum added: “If they’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk of what may be the Etch-a-Sketch candidate for the future.”

While he was saying this, “what we have” was burning thousands of gallons of fuel, and millions of taxpayer dollars, so he could have his picture taken in front of an oil well in Oklahoma.  Because that will make everyone think he’s an “oil president,” you see.

In case you’re unfamiliar with the Etch-a-Sketch reference, it has become, at least for the moment, a highly amusing metaphor for the Romney campaign, after one of his advisors responded to concerns that Romney was being pulled too far to the right in the primary campaign by saying the general election would be “almost like an Etch-a-Sketch: you can kind of shake it up and restart all over again.”

That was a gaffe, but Santorum’s musings about settling for Obama Part II instead of Romney are a disaster.  Every time the length and intensity of the GOP primary is discussed, people ask if the ultimate candidate will be weakened due to months of withering criticism from his opponents, and the bitter division of the Republican Party.  Liberals certainly hope that will be the case, but it’s not inevitable.  Plenty of successful candidates have emerged from tough primaries.  The Democrat contest in 2008 wasn’t beanbag, as any Hillary Clinton support will tell you.

What will weaken the Republican candidate is outbursts like Santorum’s, which weaken conservatism, or the Republican Party itself.  Turnout will be a crucial factor in this election.  It is absolutely unacceptable for the Number Two candidate to tell his supporters they might as well stay home if the other guy wins the nomination.  It’s a horrendous mistake to underestimate the powers of incumbency, inertia, and media bias.  The “default” winner in 2012 will be Obama, no matter how bad his poll numbers get.  We’ve got to defeat him, not hope he falls off his throne.

It’s also absolutely ridiculous to suggest President Romney would be worse than a lame-duck, let-it-all-hang-out Barack Obama, with four more years to “finish what we started,” as he’s been ominously promising in his 2012 campaign.  No matter how squishy one fears Romney might be on various conservative issues, he’s not proactively dangerous like Obama is.  He won’t deliberately try to shut down gas production, as Obama has.  He won’t be working to “transform” America in a hard-Left direction.  He won’t grab another trillion dollars and hand it to his cronies in dead-end junk-bond “green energy” companies.  He won’t waste a pile of money finding out that “shovel-ready jobs” don’t really exist… and then laugh about it.  His cabinet will not include the likes of Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, or Kathleen Sebelius.  He won’t be putting more Sonia Sotomayors or Elena Kagans on the Supreme Court.

We heard plenty of Santorum’s thinking during the 2008 campaign, when those dejected by the eminently dispiriting McCain campaign said we’d be better off letting Obama win.  How’s that working out for you, folks?  Was it worth six trillion dollars in debt, two million jobs destroyed, and the permanent re-alignment of the relationship between the State and its increasingly hapless citizens through ObamaCare? 

What do you think Obama will do this time, when victory means he never has to worry about standing for re-election again?  Can anyone seriously believe that a President Romney under constant pressure from his right flank, to live up to the most admirable accomplishments of his private sector and gubernatorial careers, would be worse than a fully unleashed Barack Obama?  Particularly after his electoral coat-tails have strengthened his party in Congress?  Dispirited Republican voters who decide to stay home on Election Day, because Rick Santorum told them it’s not worth the effort to fight for Romney over Obama, won’t be voting in House or Senate races, either. 

Close your eyes and imagine a beaming Obama dancing joyously through the First Hundred Days of his second Administration, while the media throws rose petals at his feet, and declares his re-election gives him a “powerful mandate” from the American people… and also fundamentally discredits all the concerns of everyone who criticized him during his first term.  That’s really preferable to finding out what the “severe conservatism” of Mitt Romney is really made of?

As related in the AP report, both Romney and Newt Gingrich were quick to make this point:

Romney, who made no public appearances Thursday, issued a statement expressing disappointment “that Rick Santorum would rather have Barack Obama as president than a Republican.”

“This election is more important than any one person. It is about the future of America,” he said. “Any of the Republicans running would be better than President Obama and his record of failure.”

Rival Newt Gingrich tweeted: “Rick Santorum is dead wrong. Any GOP nominee will be better than Obama.”

I’ll be perfectly frank: I didn’t vote for Mitt Romney when my state held its primary.  He wasn’t in my top three choices until there were only four candidates left.  But I stitched “ROMNEY #1!” into an over-sized oven mitt on the first day of this campaign, and I’ll be waving it madly when he takes the stage at the Republican National Convention if he’s the nominee. 

I have reservations about how Romney will fare during the general election campaign, and what he’ll do when he reaches the White House… but I want to be proven wrong.  I have no reservations about what Barack Obama will do if he’s still in power come 2013, and like all the other Obama critics, I was absolutely right about him in 2008.  No group of critics has ever been more thoroughly vindicated.

Whom the Etch-a-Sketch would destroy, it first makes mad.  What Rick Santorum said on Thursday was nonsense, and this campaign has no more room for nonsense.

Update: Via National Journal, a kinda-sorta walkback that also destroys the cottage industry of Santorum apologists who have been giving him immense benefit of the doubt, and claiming he was talking about what other people think regarding Romney vs. Obama:

On CNN’s Starting Point, Stewart defended the candidate’s comments Thursday in which he said: “We might as well stay with what we have” in Obama, rather than elect Romney.

“What we have with Mitt Romney is… a mirror image of Barack Obama,” Stewart said. “Both believe in government takeover of health care, cap and trade, big government spending, Wall Street bailout.”

On health care, she said, “We can’t take Mitt Romney’s word that he’ll repeal and replace it.”

But later in the show, when pressed on how Santorum could support Romney if he’s saying he’s the same as Obama, Stewart responded:  “Rick has made it abundantly clear once a nominee is chosen he’ll stand behind the nominee and do everything we can to replace Barack Obama.”

Does anyone recall an instance of a Democrat candidate saying we might as well stick with the Republican incumbent if his “me-too” opponent wins the nomination?  Or walking it back by saying that well, of course he’d still support the mirror-image Democrat when push came to shove?

Sign Up
  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    They are also against gay marriage and against funding abortion, also the ones I know personally are conservative and for smaller government.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    True if he needed to position as the guy who goes into bars, he would do that, and then if in the next election the voters were against drinking he would explain he never drank and just was in there for the peanuts and pickled eggs.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    By showing class are you talking about one line ripped from context, or are you talking about carpet-bombing his opponents with lies using money raised from his buddies who are paying him back for going along with the bail-out that allowed them to take from us so they wouldn’t have to take a haircut.

    Is that the class you are talking about?

    Ever notice Mitt keeps the focus on these alinski soap opera snits and never on his policys or his weak record? Or his bad polling in the core four swing states that Santorum is beating Obama in (but Romney is losing to Obama in)?

     I don’t blame him for trying, but I wonder you keep falling for it.

  • Borghesius

    Looking at the delegate count, and the remaining primaries, I predict defeat for Santorum and Gingrich.  It is now past tense.  The last three months of World War II (both theaters) and the end of the American War Between the Confederacy and the Union were like this.   Santorum and Gingrich can and should stay in, but relax and don’t sound desperate (Gingerich has been in this mode a long time actually).  Santorum may actually do better in that mode, in case Romney video surfaces with him drunk in a tu-tu dancing with 7 wives of assorted genders and/or species.  He had a good break with the etch-a-sketch and than gave it back with this comment.  Stay positive and have a good convention.  

    Looking at the money and other inherent advantages, I predict a very difficult time for Romney if he doesn’t produce a positive vision OR Obama screws the economy this summer.  These are both possible (the second even likely).  This is more advice to Romney than despair.  Get a vision, and somehow get the conservatives back.  I’ll send him my consultancy Bill.

    In sports, I never gave up on a play or race in my life, but this is no game (more serious than that) nor is it rape (less serious than that).   A Romney presidency would not be a disaster if we control the house and senate:  Romney will accommodate himself to the legislature, like in Mass.,  because he has no core that I can discern.  

    The cultural battle is actually more important, but there are other fronts.  The national political front gets all the attention, but it is a reflection of the culture not the main driver.  It’s fun to vent here but work is elsewhere.   

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    You want the guy who is polling above Obama? If that is true and you aren’t locked in to Romney, then look at Rasmussen right now and look at how Santorum is polling above Obama in the core four swing states,

    You know who is following Obama in those same states? Romney is losing to Obama in the “core four” swing states that he would need to beat Obama in the electoral college.

    So  if you are sincere about both wanting to win AND conservative principles then Santorum is your guy. Now one issue Mitt beats Santorum on is Mitt has better hair.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    He was just on Glen Beck explaining how he was trying to make the point that there isn’t much daylight between Romney and Obama. 

    In terms of Romneys record in office (not his stated positions) that is true. The difference between them is “black and white”

    So Glen said to Rick that the difference between Romney and Obama is that can you say of Romney “are you now, or have you ever been a communist”? and Santorum laughed and agreed.

    It is a pretty low point for conservatives that that is the standard we are going to have to lower ourselves too to prefer Mitt.

     

  • Leroy_Whitby

    You are wrong. Under the rules almost all the primaries prior to April 1 are proportional, so the current delegate counts are off. Romney is about to lose LA and NC. This isn’t even to the halfway point in the primary process. Ask yourself this, when is the last time Louisiana counted in a Republican primary battle?

    What I think the establishment is doing with the delegate counts is trying to create the sense that there is momentum for Romney, when in fact it is the reverse. That won’t last though, into the actual convention, if they fail to persuade voters to stampede for Romney, because they don’t want the can of worms to actually be opened at the convention!

    Me, I say let’s do it to it. Fight it out everywhere and always.
    Did you know that Santorum/Gingrich/Paul outraised Romney last month? Santorum alone raised 9 million to Romney’s 11 million. So the money is getting much tighter and Romney is burning through cash.

    It ain’t over.

    And this is very serious. So is the disaster of a nation that the Establishments candidate selection has given us. Child homelessness is up 33% under Obama. 14% real unemployment at LEAST. I’m not being flip. What the Republican establishment has done to conservatives and to this country is despicable, dishonest, cowardly, abusive and has had incalculably horrible consequences.

  • rdman_VietVet

    There are cultures where life is cheap, but thankfully, ours is not one of them. We have long respected life, at its beginning and at its end. In part, this is the product of our Judeo-Christian heritage. The debate over abortion puts two of our fundamental values in conflict: our respect for life and our love of personal freedom. Arguments in support of abortion generally revolve around the right of a mother to make decisions about her own body. But in any decision about whether to end a pregnancy, we must remember that two lives are involved, and own this point, courts have been long and conspicuously silent. Because the fact is that two lives, not one, is involved. I am unapologetically pro-life. Both mother and child are human beings, but only one does not yet have a voice to defend itself.
    Source: No Apology, by Mitt Romney, p.264-265 , Mar 2, 2010

    Q: Do you believe life begins at conception?
    A: I do. I believe from a political perspective that life begins at conception. I don’t pretend to know, if you will, from a theological standpoint when life begins. I’d committed to the people of Massachusetts that I would not change the laws one way or the other, and I honored that commitment. But each law that was brought to my desk attempted to expand abortion rights and, in each case, I vetoed that effort. I also promoted abstinence education in our schools. I vetoed an effort, for instance, to give young women a morning after pill who did not have prescriptions. So I took action to preserve the sanctity of life. But I did not violate my word, of course.

    Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 16, 2007

    Q: Why such a dramatic and profound change after pledging never to waiver on a woman’s right to choose?
    A: I was always personally opposed to abortion, as I think almost everyone in this nation is. And the question for me was, what is the role of government? And it was quite theoretical and philosophical to consider what the role of government should be in this regard, and I felt that the Supreme Court had spoken and that government shouldn’t be involved and let people make their own decision. That all made a lot of sense to me. Then I became governor and the theoretical became reality. A bill came to my desk which related to the preservation of life. I recognized that I simply could not be part of an effort that would cause the destruction of human life. And I didn’t hide from that change of heart. I recognize it’s a change. Every piece of legislation which came to my desk in the coming years as the governor, I came down on the side of preserving the sanctity of life.

    Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 16, 2007

  • Leroy_Whitby

    @rdman_VietVet:disqus 

    I’m just defending whoever it was you abused for talking about Romney’s pro-abortion stance. Here are some detailed facts:

    Mitt Romney

    Former Gov. of Massachusetts (R)

    Tier 4 – Personhood Never

    Mitt Romney gives pro-family speeches to conservatives but has an actual record of being aggressively pro-abortion both before and especially after his claimed “pro-life” conversion.

    As a “Pro-family” Republican Candidate: by his undeniable record fully documented below, Mitt Romney:

    - created RomneyCare which is terribly similar to ObamaCare but even worse for it openly funds abortion
    - put Planned Parenthood on the so-called “independent” board he created that offers $50 co-pay abortions
    - thereby instituted tax-funded abortion on demand two years after his orchestrated “pro-life” conversion
    - as late as summer 2011 continues to defend aborting tens of thousands of kids (denying their God-given right to life)
    - supported destructive embryonic research after his false 2004 pro-life conversion
    - put a pro-abortion Democratic judge on the bench after Romney had claimed a pro-life conversion
    - fabricates a claim that a court ordered him to institute same-sex marriage, a travesty he committed did on his own
    - single-handedly instituted same-sex marriage and later fabricated a claim that a court ordered him to do so
    - bragged that he would continue to defend abortion “rights” after he claimed a pro-life conversion
    - denies responsibility for the 10-member board that funds abortion even though his executive branch filled 7 seats
    - pro-choice in ’94; pro-life in ’01; choice ’02; pro-life ’04; choice ’05; life in ’06; then funded abortion in ’06

    Pro-life Profiles predicted with the publication of this profile that even though Romney enjoyed support in 2008 from many pro-family groups, hopefully that with his recent and aggressive pro-abortion record now fully documented, he will not regain their endorsements. For if God’s people lead, the leaders will follow.

    Change of Heart? Preparing to begin his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2005, Mitt Romney orchestrated a demonstrably false 2004 pro-life conversion1 

    2. Romney must have expected that leading conservative media outlets, groups, authors, and talk show hosts (like Sean Hannity and Hugh Hewitt) would ignore, deny, or even defend his subsequent pro-abortion efforts that prove his “conversion” is a political deceive to steal pro-life votes. So putting Planned Parenthood on the state board that he created which authorized even late-term tax-funded abortion on demand, a crime against humanity far beyond anything the Clintons or Barack Obama have been able to accomplish, is brushed aside by untrustworthy “pro-life” conservative leaders.

    Authorizing Tax-Funded Abortion: On April 12, 2006 Romney signed3 Massachusetts’ government health care plan that from the start has provided taxpayer funds even for what are called “elective” abortions, killing unborn children without even the facade of the typical though invalid medical excuses common in tax-funded abortion laws.

    Romney’s government-run health care plan predated Barack Obama’s health care reform and according to the government of Massachusetts, “All Commonwealth Care health plans include… abortion.”

    Tax-Payers Forced to Fund Abortion: Unlike the countless “liberals” and moderates who are “pro-choice” but oppose tax-funded abortion, “RomneyCare” goes beyond being merely “pro-choice” and is radically pro-abortion by overtly paying abortionists to perform any and all types of abortions with tax dollars.

    Co-pays of $0 to $100: Under Romney’s Commonwealth Care, a mother insured by Plan Type 2 renders a $50 co-payment to kill her child. Plan types 3 and 4 require co-pays of up to $100. Currently, the total financial cost to kill a child whose mother is covered by Plan Type 110 is paid by Romney’s government-regulated health care plan.Mitt’s 2011

    Defense of RomneyCare: “For 92% or our people, nothing changed.” This blatantly false claim ignores: that now Massachusetts health care premiums are the highest in the nation, that when other states stop underwriting the temporary Medicaid grants which Romney procured those premiums will further skyrocket, that the law forces thousands of businesses to underwrite premiums, that this government program has cost an estimated 18,000 jobs in 2010 alone, that household budgets tighened by $2.5 billion, and that this government health care reform forces 100% of the people in the state to pay to kill unborn children.

    That’s My Story and I’m Stickin’ To It: In his campaign’s Mitt Had No Choice press release, Romney called it a “myth” that the Commonwealth Care program even includes abortion as a benefit. (Just look at the torn stub above, or even click on it.) On the highest profile issue hurting his chances for a 2008 presidential nomination, he claimed this: “MYTH: Under Governor Romney’s Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform Plan, abortion services are offered as part of the Commonwealth Care benefit services package.”

    Just as the Democrats expect the New York Times to never fact check their claims, so too, Romney’s campaign wrote this release for the conservative talk show hosts and others whom they know are gullible, poor researchers, and who have a soft-spot for pro-abortion Republicans (e.g. “Romney governed as a pro-lifer.” –Ann Coulter). Even though Mitt calls it a myth that his plan pays for abortion, his press release goes on to explain why it is definitely not his fault that it does. “I didn’t do it, and if I did it wasn’t my fault.” 

    If I Did It, Here’s How It Happened:

    Can Mitt Romney be connected to the authority that offers tax-funded abortion? Other than, that is, that he created it, determined its composition, and staffed it? Romney and his executive branch had staffing control over seven of the ten members of the board he created. But here’s Romney’s lie to pass the blame for tax-funded abortion onto his friends.

    If I Did It: Romney claims, “The Commonwealth Care benefit services package was developed by the Connector Authority – an independent authority separate from the Governor’s Office. … Their decisions were made separate of the Romney administration.”

    The truth is that the “Connector” was created by Romney’s authority with the Act of 2006 that he signed,21 it was placed under Romney’s executive branch administration, and was run by a ten-member board with four members directly seated by Romney’s authority: the Planned Parenthood seat which he created,  and three others appointed by Romney himself, and three appointed by Romney’s attorney general who was also part of the executive branch and Romney administration.”

    It’s Not My Fault: The health care plan Romney signed into law states, “Any action of the connector may take effect immediately and need not be published or posted.” Romney’s denial of responsibility for tax-funded abortion is like a governor appointing a known racist and giving him authority to lynch and then denying any responsibility.

    Romney Expands “Medically Necessary” to ALL Abortions: Romney today falsely claims that 1981 and 1997 Massachusetts supreme court rulings referencing so-called “medically necessary” abortions forced him to provide tax-funded “elective” abortions. In the 1981 case the court opinion stated that if abortion for the life of the mother was funded, then the government must also pay for “medically necessary” abortions.

    The 1997 opinion stated that if the government paid for childbirth, it must also pay for “medically necessary” abortions 29, evidently reasoning that if the government is going to pay to help kids, it must be fair and pay to kill them also. Romney’s commitment to government intervention in health care prevails even when that “health care” pays to kill them. Not only is Romney’s claim false that he had no choice, but adults, let alone leaders, are never “forced” in such ways.

    Romney should have vetoed, rather than praised and signed, any legislation that would pay abortionists to kill children. As he did also by implementing homosexual marriage, Romney created activist judges on steroids by taking anti-family court opinions and maximizing them, in this case, by interpreting “medically necessary” to mean all abortions. [For more information, see Mitt Funds Abortion below.]

    Romney’s “Pro-Life” Pledge Lists the Children He Supports Killing: Because he was being criticized for refusing to sign the Susan B. Antony pro-life pledge, in National Review on June 18, 2011 Mitt Romney published “My Pro-Life Pledge.” He begins in his first sentence by listing the children that he supports killing. The word “exceptions” is a euphemism for children intentionally killed. Those who defend a politician with “exceptions” are breaking God’s enduring command, Do not murder, and they are hateful especially to that politician.

    See ARTL’s Oppose Exceptions Because to learn that even in saving the mother’s life, the goal when necessary is to “terminate” the pregnancy, not the baby, a life-affirming distinction that Romney is yet to show concern for.

     Promotes Chemical Abortifacients: Romney signed a 2005 bill, the year following his alleged pro-life conversion, that promotes chemical abortions with Plan B.31 32 33Romney’s Demonstrably False Claim (Lie): Mitt Romney claims, “On every piece of legislation, I came down on the side of life.”

    Discrediting Pro-Family Movement: Romney’s desire for power has further undermined the pro-life industry36 as many conservatives repeat his false claim, including Ann Coulter, that “Romney governed as a pro-lifer.”

    Still in 2010, Jordan Sekulow with his father’s ACLJ wrote, “Gov Romney would and still could make a great candidate.”39 Tony Perkins at the Family Research Counsel says Romney is “solidly conservative across the board”40 and a Focus Action Candidate Commentaryvideo from Focus on the Family shockingly agrees with Romney that, “on the social issues we are so similar. [Romney and Focus on the Family]“41 42 Focus and FRC say this of a candidate who recently:43
    - funded abortion
    - opposed a Massachusetts Defense of Marriage constitutional amendment
    - said homosexuals should be allowed in the boy scouts
    - officially celebrated “Gay-Straight Youth Pride Day”
    - sat on the board of directors for a leading purveyor of pornography without opposing the corporation’s exploitation of women
    - instituted homosexual marriage by ordering county clerks to issue “partner” licenses (see Coulter Hang-Ups video below),
    - lied claiming a court’s Goodridge opinion44 forced his hand when it never even mentioned the governor, and
    - was ahead of Barack Obama promoting government health care

    TV Ad that Ran in Early Primary States: In the weeks before Romney dropped out of the 2008 presidential primary race this pro-life ad, and others just like it but customized for the various early caucus and primary states, ran hundreds of times exposing Romney for repeatedly reversing himself on the killing of children, depending on whether he is seeking pro-life or pro-choice votes. ABC News published our Romney Fairytale TV ad transcript:

    Source: Prolife Profiles

    Not exactly worth all the abuse you heap on people with facts like these.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Hayward is a wonderful conservative writer. You should read him more and decide.

  • Dustoff

     Come on leroy…. Reagan was pro-abortion at one time too. 
    Your talking pure NON_sense.

    Mass care was a state idea that the foolish people of that state wanted and still want.

    It’s called state rights with WE Conservative believe in.

    I really wonder about you sometimes.

  • rdman_VietVet

    But you didn’t listen to Brain Kilneade this AM, did you…

    And Steyn essentially excoriated Santorum by stating that if Obama would block oil from Canada during an election year, just think what Obama would do if he was re-elected for a second term.

    Steyn’s statement was totally in reference to Santorum’s ridiculous comparison to Obama v. Romney.

    And I’ll add… your obfuscation and selective spinning. If you don’t remember “Bain Came to Town,” why would you label it “crapola?” What specific lie about Ricky’s record… just because Ricky says its a lie?? Look at his actual voting record…

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Oh don’t even go there Dustoff! You are seriously going to walk the plank and start supporting Romneycare? I don’t wonder about you, but get real. Don’t support Romneycare. We need a better candidate and blocking this loser (and flipflopper) is important. HE CLEARLY was for abortion. I also resent this tendency to drag other politicians through the mud. Just because Romney is dirty you don’t need to dirty up Reagan too. Reagan never wavered after Roe v. Wade. Not once. Pre-Roe he signed a bill for the health of the mother allowing abortion . . . and regretted it as he watched that get misinterpreted by the courts. Not comparable at ALL to Romney who was for abortion knowing everything a modern person does.

    Nothing about Romney is states rights except excuses for his liberal actions. What great proposal does Romney have for States Rights? If he has one I missed it, but fill me in.

  • rdman_VietVet

    His EGO controls his mouth… and to add to Adam’s comment… a total lack of integrity and common sense, typical of a Big Gov’t  Politician and K Street “For Sale” Lobbyist.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    That wasn’t excoriating Santorum! Relisten to it. He said Santorum already walked it back before all that.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGIFTB73YDE3SPLHRVMQZHLXZY Reno Rivera

    Jeb Bush endorses Romney and Santorum endorses Obama.

    So now there are three, two actually since Ron Paul is ignored. Santorum definitely will be ignored even if he doesn’t drop out after that comment.

    I could understand the anger towards Romney, negative ADS and so forth, but the goal is to defeat Obama and all liberals.

    I’ve often say Santorum is a mama’s boy. Can’t take the heat and get his own way, throw a spite fit.

    The establishment created this monster. He was told to run from the get-go, to neutralize Perry and Gingrich. He won Iowa and went rogue.

    Santorum voters will probably go to Romney. Both candidates are the same as their supporters.

  • crakpot

    You will not increase turnout or swing voters with a ‘lesser of two evils’ argument.   It worked for a corrupt but colorful Louisiana Democrat because he was against a former KKK wizard (Vote for the Crook – It’s Important), but will never work for an bland Etch-a-Sketch Republican unless they dislike Obama all on their own.

    If Santorum loses the nomination, all they will remember of him is that we defended our flip-flopping nominee over one of our candidates who at least spoke with conviction.

  • Brian_in_VA

    Ouch. My how the truth smarts…

  • Borghesius

    The campaign funding argument won’t work though, because Romney’s campaign can borrow enough to make it through the primaries to maintain it’s massive advantage.

  • rdman_VietVet

     Santorum is, in fact, not fit for any Public Service as evidenced by his total rejection by his own State’s constituents and his corrupt K Street “For Sale” lobbyist activities.

    He’s better suited to partner up with John Edwards (the dem’s former POTUS candidate) as an ambulance-chasing, slip and fall personal injury lawyer…

  • Guest

     Disparage me if that’s what you want but I’m a constitutionalist first and foremost.

    None are so blind as those with eyes that cannot see. You may be as described but not thee. Obama is ineligible simply because of his birth father is Kenyan and that means not natural born. Native born perhaps and we’ll never know until real documentation can be examined. Ignorance is bliss(Note, I’m calliing nobody stupid here, just believe you haven’t the correct information as pertains to the case against this usurper.)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGIFTB73YDE3SPLHRVMQZHLXZY Reno Rivera

    You can’t expect integrity from a RINO voter. 

    When Gabrielle Giffords was shot liberals stormed Human Efforts trashing Palin, Limbaugh and on.

    It was an invasion of tons of liberals posting blame and hatred at Conservatives in general for the shooting.

    Dustoff attacked me in defense of these liberals. I did not care to be liked by these leftist, he did. He was not alone.

    Others of these RINOs joined the liberals.

    In turn I posted, since they were posting Palin and Limbaugh of being evil, that Giffords is evil since liberals are evil. 

    These same people are all for Romney. The females who post here for Romney hate me with a passion. Go figure. 

    No need to name them. They name themselves with their anti-Gingrich and Palin, often anti-Conservative and pro-Romney posts.

    Go to past articles. Often they are still available. The date when the Tucson shooting occurred. Gabrielle Giffords shot, etc.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    I don’t know the details of that. It’s a lot of states to borrow that much for. Even Romney is going to notice a 20 million dollar debt. Would serve him right, going into debt in order to run a negative, profligate campaign.

  • rebelyell4

    Well. you’ve expressed my opinion exactly. It seems that Rick Santorum has also expressed my opinion pretty well.
     
    I was paying attention to Rush recently and he seems to think he can wake the dead silent majority. I hate to disagree with him. We’ve had our chance to use the vote. Now the rest is only quite natural and history will have to repeat itself. Our vote no longer counts as anything important so leaving Obama in charge is the best choice to bring out the real patriots.
     
    I know an odd view, but I am no longer so alone in that one.

  • Brian_in_VA

    Are there really people out there who are anti-Gingrich and anti-conservative? I mean besides ex-bimbos?

    Second question: How long will Gingrich keep Calista after he ends his campaign?

  • rebelyell4

    To me, it doesn’t matter what the delegate count is. The republican party has done us more than dirty. It’s present leadership needs to go and quite a few of the rest with them.

    My original suggestion that we gather that silent majority and go camp out in Florida is still the best idea in the long run. Whats it worth? We can donate to the republican party or take a Fla vacation?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DGIFTB73YDE3SPLHRVMQZHLXZY Reno Rivera

    He was a party guy. Maybe now he stopped being a party guy.

    Maybe this is preparation for running third. My thoughts are that Gingrich might run third.

    Seems now that perhaps Santorum bumped Gingrich in this. If he runs third, he keeps his voters. If he doesn’t, his voters will go to Romney.

    So in way Santorum’s remarks helps Romney and not hurt the party. How does it hurt the party? Right now it only hurts him thereby helping Romney. 

    It may also help Gingrich with some actual Conservatives who have chosen Santorum over Gingrich and now back to Gingrich.

    But the overwhelmingly voters for Santorum were RINO voters because Santorum has always been a RINO and dedicated party guy. He was Bush’s rubber stamp in the senate.

    The actual reason he lost reelection in PA and by a huge number, 18%.

    Ron Paul got that right about him. Santorum should have said that it’s better to vote for Ron Paul over Romney. 

    And you know what, it is.

    If not voting for Gingrich in these primaries, vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul has a much better record in beating Obama. Romney does not.

  • rebelyell4

    Romney had a Mexican birth father. He actually admits to being able to have dual citizenship. So where did the constitution go on that one?

  • rebelyell4

    No; we will fix it now by not electing Romney. There are enough of us out that really think you folks willing to compromise need a real life lesson in communism. We will not vote for Romney, or we will not vote.

  • rebelyell4

    This is way to simple. First off, write, stop pasting. Second, Romney was the lesser of two complete evils at that time. McCain is even worse of a Commie than Romney.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Go for delegate. Worst they can say is no.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    God’s will be done. I say fight everywhere and always. It won’t interfere with a system collapse, if that is our destiny, to also fight to win in every battle.

  • rebelyell4

    Have you noticed that Obama is giving the Chinese a fair shake of the blame for various things these days? It’s all leading up to the campaign. Obama knows Romney dealt with the Chinese to make his money and is still making money that way. Just watch.

  • rebelyell4

    Not a single person associated with Radio can be trusted, not even Rush. Eventually they will all back Romney because Bain controls their purse strings. The Machine has even bought our talk radio. Better check your gun closet, they may have walked off with them while you weren’t looking?

  • http://twitter.com/Doc_0 John Hayward

    If a comment has to post 3 times, I’m glad it was that one.  :)

  • rdman_VietVet

     Really… that’s how Romney made his money??

    How about some specificity… please explain because of all the research I’ve done on Romney’s record and private sector work, never ran into anything like your vague assertion.

  • Guest

    Obama is more 21st century.He uses a teleprompter while Romney uses an Etch-A-Sketch.

  • rdman_VietVet

     Not even Rush, eh?? How about Hannity or Levin or Savage or Kilneade or Lewis?? None of them??

    As long as Obama is in office, I check my guns daily. When Romney is elected POTUS, I’ll feel safe again.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    I could not find it. I looked at 4 Giffords articles.

  • Guest

    Odd how Santorum supporters believe his “explanation”, yet still rail on Romney for something he did not say, nor do they accept his explanation about the Etch-a-Sketch comment.

  • Guest

    Sadly, it speaks volumes if what Santorum said gives him a bump in the polls in Louisiana.

    Any one of you who buy Santorum’s backpeddling explanations need to listen to the video recording, paying particuliar attention to his tone of voice.  He meant it just as it sounded.

  • esto_perpetua

     ” I’m tempted to tell Iran were to drop their first Nuke” How about your neighborhood? You take first prize for mental depravity.

  • Guest

    Romney was way down in the polls in Ohio, yet came back to whip Santorum butt.  Polls are more acurate over a longer period of time.  The only poll which truly counts is the one done at the ballot box.

  • Guest

    Competitiom does not make our party weak.  Dragging the selection process on this long does.  Especially when we provide fodder to the liberals for the Fall campaign.

    Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment –Speak no evil of your fellow Republican– was clearly violated by Rick Santorum.

    Evil=a lie.  Truth, whether it is “negative” or not is still the truth.

    Santorum is not fiscally conservative.  He is not a good debater. He lies about his opponents. 

    He claims to be socially conservative, yet voted for prounion legislation, financial support for the ACLU, and Planned Parenthood, and glaringly supported the liberal Arlen Spector over the conservative Toomey.  He voted to raise the debt ceiling several times, when other truly conservative Senators voted against it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    I am glad you are not being an idiot like all the foe-conservatives who see this one misspeak by Santorum as a stake in the heart of the party, but all the scorched earth campaigns Romney has done against Newt, and all is all just fine, no they will even tell you it is good.

    The Romney camp has a good chance of winning the primary, but I have much less hope for their ability to win the general because conservatives hate looking stupid as much as they hate Obama’s policies (notice that it isn’t Obama they hate Mitt)

    A self described Romney supporter called Mark Levin today and tried to tell Levin that Romney actually was the best guy to make the case against Obama-care because he knew the most about it.

    Levin asked him if he would like to live under Romneycare in his own state and the guy said “no, but the people of Mass had wanted it” Levin said that Romney could have vetoed it, and also that a majority of people in Mass didn’t like Romneycare,

    the guy didn’t know what to say, I couldn’t think of anything either.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    That was before Romney was for the bail-outs and the nationalization of Romneycare, remember back when Romney was claiming he had had a coversion?

    I agree with you the worst thing Romney can say about Santorum is that he endorsed Romney in 2008.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OHBKTCSIRF6UL4KLQDAWQINPSE Thomas

    Why don’t you consider backing a candidate who can win the electoral college?

  • rdman_VietVet

    Witless writes… “your overheated and abusive rhetoric aside”

    Witless gets a bit of his own medicine, then whines like a crybaby…

  • Guest

    Now, don’t even mention for a second that Santorum’s wife got an abortion.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Tell me about that. Sounds pretty scummy of YOU, but I’m listening. Give your uglies Romneyite.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Romney supporters are ugly in order to minimize communication and turnout among Republicans and conservatives. Minimum turnout and communication benefit their lifeless negative candidate.

  • Leroy_Whitby

    Spin, spin. What I see is a base of voters that 2 to 1 don’t like Romney. He is being forced on the Republican base.

  • rebelyell4

    Romney’s track record of personal involvement with the Chinese for monetary gain proves he is one of them. He’s bought and paid for and you folks are of the opinion that it is “business as usual”. I’m very sorry, but it is not to me.

  • rebelyell4

    Romney’s track record of personal involvement with the Chinese for monetary gain proves he is one of them. He’s bought and paid for and you folks are of the opinion that it is “business as usual”. I’m very sorry, but it is not to me.

    I have posted numerous times about this and with specifics. The dems will bring it up one last time. Romney is doomed. Real conservatives will not vote for him and will stay home. The party has chosen to ignore us and all of you wimps have no guts to make a stand. It’s ok with me though. I am old. The rest of you will have to make it on your own. You’ve all been warned.

  • rebelyell4

    The party cannot force a candidate on the people and make the people vote for him. It’s the nature of the conservative beast to simply hide and sit still while things are not to their liking. The real conservatives will stay out of the race and so far they have. Romney is a proven failure. His fans have even written that his over 30% failure rate is business is a success story. Where in heavens name do that number of failures create success??

    Only in the world of high finance where the sharks sell the bits and peices while destroying lives and carreers of the people that used to have a job. While we can blame Obama for his activities to undercut American business, no one has done it more successfully than Romney. He has sold us out to the Chinese for personal gain and is flying over all the people he hurt while moving from one residence to another.

    The campaign for the presidency is already over and we have the republican party to thank for it unless we bother to go toTampa and let them know how unhappy we are, there isn’t a chance of getting a republican president.

  • apolloknowsall

    Remember this. Santorum is unfit to lead the GOP.