COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • izoneguy

    Rick Perry needs to run this ad again!!! LOL!!!

    • momac

      I guess this is what you do in office? But he’s a tariff guy, a protectionist, as whoever called him,, socially conservative statist. He is not looking out for anyone’s freedom, he knows what America needs already– just ask him.

      I can’t stand the guy. And I haven’t listened to Mark Levin for weeks because I hate hearing about him.

    • independentmike

      So now we’re supposed to reject Santorum or at least doubt his conservative credentials because he opted to support Specter over Toomey in the 2004 GOP primary race in PA?

      Hindsight is always great. But at the time there was some logic behind Santorum’s endorsement. Specter had been crucial in helping to pass the Bush tax cuts in the Senate. Also, it’s long been an unwritten tradition that Senators from the same state and of the same party endorse each other when they run for reelection. Even Toomey says he doesn’t hold Santorum’s support for Specter against him. What’s more, Specter’s support for Samuel Alito may well have made the difference in getting Alito confirmed.

      In fact, after Specter was reelected, he moved somewhat to the right from 2005 to 2008, as Quin Hillyer has pointed out:

      http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/13/re-specter-scozzafava-etc

      Does it matter to Santorum’s ultra-rigid conservative critics that Santorum campaigned against Specter in 2010 or that Santorum has said he now regrets backing Specter in 2004? How about the fact that Santorum had very high ratings (80% or higher) from major conservative groups during his time in the House and Senate? For example:

      National Right to Life Committee — 100%
      Americans for Tax Reform — 92%
      National Tax Limitation Committee — 92%
      U.S. Chamber of Commerce — 88%
      American Conservative Union — 88%

      And just look at Santorum’s economic plan: It is solidly conservative. In addition, Santorum has done well in the debates. He’s a good speaker, a good debater, and is well informed on the issues. So why not Santorum? Newt is my first pick, but I would gladly support Santorum if he were to get the nomination.

  • justonevoice

    When was the last time a sitting senator opposed his/her senate colleague of the same party in a primary? I’m sure it has occurred, but I imagine it is pretty rare. Specter was a miserable Senator but I can’t see how Santorum’s support for Specter in that race changes people’s minds by Tuesday.

    • Aaron Gardner

      You were saying?

      • seanl

        Try again.

        Furthermore, things changed a lot since the Tea Party came to prominence.

        • windwaker24

          nt

          • windwaker24

            So yes, just because you work with someone doesn’t mean you have to automatically endorse them, even if you are from the same state. Heck, Obama lives about 30 minutes away from me. I wouldn’t speak nice things about him even if someone paid me.

        • Aaron Gardner

          nt

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          Still playing the fool… Simply pathetic.

      • justonevoice

        DeMint is from South Carolina, not Utah. Hatch is the other senator from Utah.

        • Aaron Gardner

          I missed the “from the same state” part.

          That said, if you watch the video above, Santorum didn’t just not oppose Specter, he attempted to paint Specter as a conservative.

          Sorry, but that is idiotic, and the people of PA recognized that and remedied it by getting rid of Santorum and then getting rid of Specter and replacing him with Toomey.

          • The_Gadfly

            ultimately cost Santorum his seat, you have to concede that Demint is the exception, not the rule. Republican party practice, particularly at the Senate Leadership level, has been to endorse and back sitting Republicans against challengers. There is a certain logic to it. Because Chairmanships are assigned mostly by seniority, replacing a sitting Republican with a different one dilutes the power of the Republican party. Thus it is within the veil of acceptable party practice. If Santorum were the higher up instead of the lower down, he would get to call for the endorsements of certain persons and policies which the juniors would be expected to follow.

            Now, if there are policies he advocated which you think are outside the acceptable veil for the current election, that’s another the story. Frankly, knowing PA and what Santorum faced, I don’t see them. Especially after factoring in Mitt as the Establishment candidate.

            That said, in the current crop I’ll still take Perry over Santorum because as Governor of Texas he has produced positive results in a VERY negative environment. It’s going to be a tough election cycle and except where absolutely necessary, I prefer positive comments in support of candidates over negative ones. Luap Nor being the prime example of where all out attacks are necessary. WFB and the Birchers being the precedent.

          • thirstyboots

            Hahah, I mean, come on.

            Santorum lost his race because he became a strident social conservative with over-the-top rhetoric and because he was a fiery defender of the Bush administration (and many of its failed socialist policies) and the corrupt republican caucus.

            He became unpopular himself because Pennsylvannia doesn’t like to elect strident, loud, social conservatives (and Santorum was more of a fiscal conservative up until 2000) and he was tied to a very unpopular president/party. His endorsement of Specter was a non-issue.

  • sunshinek67

    #notmittromney

    • sunshinek67

  • texasref

    endorsement of Dede. :-)

    Good diary.

    • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

      One of the things Newt has to answer for.

  • WY_Cowboy

    Obviously, Perry is just not a true conservative, right?

    • jakeofalltrades

      Al Gore was a blue dog from Tennessee, which has a conservative population. Tennessee and the Democrat Party, of course, rebelled against the United States and lost that war to the Republicans. After the Democrat Party was re-legalized, they stayed loyal to it until the modern era, basically for the above cultural reasons.

      Being a Democrat in the Old South doesn’t mean you were a liberal. It almost certainly means you were a conservative.

      • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

        strange as it may seem to us today.

      • aesthete

        Most southern Dems were anti-Communists and social conservatives, but that was the extent of their conservatism. Anti-New Deal Democrats went the way of the dinosaur by the time Truman was President; most were intent on funneling federal funds into their districts and were in favor of large spending projects. Of course, southern Dems were the only game in town for a while in the South (and that included Texas), but Gore was by no means a fiscal conservative. (Heck, I think his nanny-statism would be too much for most social conservatives, as well.)

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          I don’t blame them at least thru the 50s…more later

        • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

          He was a lying, opportunistic politician going way back who just happened to be very good at hiding his real agenda. He was never conservative nor pro life.

      • greyeagle

        That is right. Al Gore was from TN and considered a Blue Dog Democrat. That was before he started his nutty ramblings about Global Warming and everything else. TX was mostly Democrat at that time. Rick Perry has always been a Conservative. He switched to a Conservative Republican in 1989, the same year I switched because the Democrat Party was going left much harder. I too, have always been Conservative. Now of course there are no longer Blue Dog Democrats. If they still exist, they have all switched to Republicans, and the Democrats are marching steadily to the left.

    • David123

      There is no significant dirt on either Santorum or Perry, so if either one is nominated, the Democrats probably try to paint them as “right-wing extremists.” It’s hard to paint a Specter supporter or a Gore supporter as a right-wing extremist though.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        after that and since that was much longer ago than what Santorum did. But you can also excuse Santorum due to real politic I guess?

  • mjs65

    we would be more “comfortable” with Santorum if had had sat on a couch with nancy pelosi touting global warming.

    Or better yet: if Santorum had been Al Gore’s state chairman in Pennsylvania.

    • clintonformccain

      moved back home to Pennsylvania and got a job selling cars in a Ford dealership in Alatoona or somewhere…

      • windwaker24

        too pushy and unfriendly.

    • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

      and that is a huge difference.

    • greyeagle

      Perry was not Al Gore’s Chairman in TX. I don’t know where that piece of garbage came from. Probably Ron Paul as usual. Someone asked Al Gore about that, and he said he did not know Rick Perry. This happened just after Perry entered the race. He endorsed Gore, but that was it.

  • mjs65

    Does this make you more “comfortable”?

    http://www.breitbart.tv/flashback-newt-praises-sharpton/

  • beric

    We’re whittling down all candidates to nothing. There won’t be anything left of them to run on come the general election.

    Let’s stop focusing on the past so much, and instead focus on solutions, and how to beat Obama. Whoops, I’m sounding like Newt now, the one candidate who refuses to be tied or to tie others to the past.

    Let the liberal media do the vetting. Let’s instead focus on the issues.

    • gekster

      Telling the truth about a candidate is not an attack.
      And if we don’t get all the dirty laundry out in the open now, it will be very well that the MSM and the Dems will get it out when we finally have a nominee.
      If we know about it now, then it will be no suprise (October anyone) when they bring it out later.
      And it will come out later.

      It’s called a primary, and this is how it works.
      It is not for the weak, as it should be.

      • beric

        But right now, our candidates spend more time focusing on defending themselves and attacking other candidates, than on the solutions they would implement as president, and why they can defeat Barack Obama.

        This is problematic to the extreme, and is why the race has been so volatile. A candidate becomes popular talking about the issues. They’re then driven to the ground with attacks. And repeat ad infinitum. We kill all our own candidates before the MSM can, and then Romney sails on to a win. We do Romney’s work for him.

        I’m not a Santorum supporter. But there are no flawless candidates out there. The more we tarnish the ones we have, focusing on minor failings, and ignoring their greater strengths, we more we hurt ourselves.

    • Bill S

      The primary season is about competition between candidates in the GOP. Politics ain’t beanbag…things get rough. And the candidates (and their supporters) have to be tough enough to take it, because heaven knows that Obama isn’t going to use kid gloves on whoever the nominee is.

      So, thanks for your concern, but … no.

      • beric

        nt

        • Bill S

          And that has been discussed here ad nauseum.

          This race is no different than 2008 or from any other. Candidates and supporters/opponents have slung mud at one another for over 200 years. Those who can’t handle it shouldn’t be involved in politics.

          • beric

            Clearly in the general, they will have to face large doses of it.

            But do we really need to encourage it in the primaries by engaging in it ourselves? I’m talking about the optimal solution here. Just because it’s been done for 200 years doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. There is such a thing as a bad tradition. And mud slinging isn’t fact-based. It’s money-based. Whoever can sling the most mud with the most ads, wins. While there’s no stopping candidates who choose to engage in it, I simply can’t see it as a profitable venture. It’s why Romney will have a hard time in the general: we’ve already tarnished him so much ourselves (the MSM certainly hasn’t).

          • Tavern Keeper

            If it is being applied to a primary. I also disagree with Sandra Day O’Conner on the SCOTUS and blanket amnesty for 3 million illegals.

            But, someone who I only disagree with 20% of the time is my friend . . .

          • texasref

            If it’s on the pro-life issue, then 1% is 100% wrong. etc etc.

    • lineholder

      We’re gutting our own. The American people are desperately looking for a leader, and we continuously gut our own. Is it any wonder voters have been hopping from candidate to candidate? And so quickly at that?

      But when voters get so desperate that they are willing to consider someone like Ron Paul (or even Rick Santorum) as capable of providing the type of leadership we’re needing…yeah, that’s a bit TOO desperate, if you ask me.

      No offense to Perry supporters, but “Secretariat” is just beginning to make the turn, so we’ll have to see how voters respond. (After all the cracks and jokes that we as Conservatives have made about Obama leading from behind, and yet no one sees the correlation the general public could make?)

      I have no idea at all about where Newt goes from here.

      Romney’s plateau maxes out at 25%, so obviously he doesn’t inspire many people.

      Then we have possibilities like Gary Johnson or Donald Trump?

      Just how far can we go in gutting our own before we reach the point of a self-inflicted fatal wound?

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    “…Arlen Specter was the key vote…”

    Yes. Yes, Arlen apparently liked being the key vote on things, because he did it again for Obamacare.

    So this is not precisely the most fortunate thing that Rick Santorum has ever said.

  • mjs65

    Specter, Santorum should have become a paid political pundit for the Communist News Network. (CNN)

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      Thanks for validating your banning!

      • lineholder

        be so blatant about it? Just wanting “I got banned from Red State” notches?

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          Especially at times like these. Not to complain, but banning people via iPad is kind of complex; the lack of a mouse is surprisingly limiting, even on a touch screen.

          Moe Lane

          PS: No, I think that I’ll keep mine for a while yet. :)

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      Heh.

      Erick’s opinions not only matter, but somebody pays for them.

      You’re so desperate to be heard you come back to places you’re banned just to spout off. Nobody cares who you are or what you think.

      Pathetic.

  • bzip

    Perry continues bashing Santorum on earmarks
    http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/30/perry-continues-bashing-santorum-on-earmarks/

    Oh did I mention the New Rick Perry Ad:
    A Fiscal Conservative
    http://youtu.be/726AV2dexM4

    • bzip

      A very nice article about Perry

      Perrys in the White House? He shows confidence, she less so
      http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/31/the-perrys-in-the-white-house-he%E2%80%99s-shows-confidence-she-less-so/

      Perry really stepped up his attacks on Santorum in this article:
      “Today, Perry moved to healthcare:

      ?I got to ask Rick, what is so important that (it) compelled you to ad greater debt to our children?s charge card?? Perry said. ?Was it support for the greatest entitlement program since Lyndon Johnson?s Great Society, which is Medicaid Part D?”

      ….

      ?(P)ork barrel spending, where senators, they scratch one another?s backs, is not federalism,? he said. ?That?s about fleecing the American public.?

      Perry has a overflowing crowd at today’s event as usual :-) .

  • Tim Griffin@griffinelection

    Then judge him by the fact that he has been so strong on social issues that gays threw glitter in his face yesterday at a campaign stop or the fact that the hateful Dan Savage has dedicated his life to destroying Santorum.

    Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.

  • A_Texan

    Santorum’s endorsement of Specter pales in comparison, for the following reason:

    1. Perry had no loyalty considerations supporting such an endorsement.

    2. Toomey was unlikely to win in 2004, while Specter was; Guiliani’s relative electability was far more questionable.

    3. Giuliani was a far more reprehensible person than Specter. Guiliani had a record of infidelity, both to his wife, and to his party (e.g., his throwing his support to Cuomo on the eve of the ’94 election).

    4. Most of all, a President Guiliani posed a much greater threat to the lives of the unborn than a re-elected Senator Specter.

    Perry is superior to Santorum in several respects–but not in the history of endorsements.

    • joshdunn

      Anyone who makes the “Santorum is a liberal because he endorsed Arlen Specter” must declare Rick Perry to be a liberal under the same logic.

      In reality, I found myself leaning toward Specter back in 2002 simply because I couldn’t see how Toomey could get elected in a state like Pennsylvania which was started to trend liberal. So I can understand where Santorum was coming from. Also, as Specter’s junior senator, it would have been foolish for Santorum to either sit out on 2002 or support the sitting Republican’s primary opponent.

  • gekster

    Where do you get that.

    • gekster

      ///

      • A_Texan

        That Perry’s endorsements do not reflect principled conservativism more than Santorum’s.

      • A_Texan

        That Perry’s endorsements do not reflect principled conservativism more than Santorum’s.

  • legendsofthepaul

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..

    • acat

      I will further remind you that Al Gore was, at one time, regarded as the most conservative Democrat in the Senate.

      He is responsible for this, after all:

      Mew

      • legendsofthepaul

        They will get nice wellfare subsidies as well.

        • gekster

          ingredients:
          one or two, or even three slices of bread, anykind, except pumpernicle.
          1 jar peanut butter, smooth or crunchy.
          Take one slice of bread, and apply peanut butter evenly on one side.
          Either fold the bread in half, or add another slice.
          If you want, take a third slice of bread, and apply an even layer of peanut butter on that, and add to the original two slices.
          enjoy.
          I hear that adding a slice of bread with an even layer of jelly or jam,
          or even marmalade makes it even better.

          I figured I would give you something you could easily handle, since it seams politics is hard for you.

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          nt

    • gekster

      This one.

      After announcing that he would run, Gore ran his campaign as “a Southern centrist, [who] opposed federal funding for abortion. He favored a moment of silence for prayer in the schools and voted against banning the interstate sale of handguns.”

      Or the lunatic we know of today.

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      The Perry story was debunked here months ago. Perry – and Gore at the time – were both very conservative southern politicians, at the time Gore was probably more conservative than GHW Bush, and Perry certainly was.

      Santorum, on the other hand, endorsed Arlen Specter who was easily more liberal than either the original Gore or Perry. Perry had the good sense to change parties shortly after that and has a very conservative record as both LtGov and Gov of Texas for 18 years.

      Santorum also has supported every government expansion put before him and has a record of earmarking that, while it’s far from Ron Paul’s, should be an embarrassment to him and his foolish supporters. And make no mistake about it, Santorum’s supporters are absolutely fools.

  • legendsofthepaul

    Tell me another fantasy story.

  • Pingback: We The People | Internet-Scam-Busters.Com