« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

A Legacy for my Children

What type of future do I want for my children and future grandchildren?  I do not wish for them a future with a financially unsustainable, cradle-to-grave dependency on the federal government. Rather, I wish for those I love so much a future where the federal government encourages and empowers success, personal responsibility, and financial independence.  I also want a future where state governments, or the federal government, can provide fiscally sound, dependable safety-net programs to protect our most vulnerable citizens from a life of poverty.  We have a choice – government dependency, or a dependable, fiscally-sound federal government.  We cannot have both.  I ask America to join me in the fight to end the ever-growing cycle of government dependency – for our children and grandchildren – the fight for freedom and opportunity.

Liberals have continuously expanded entitlement programs far beyond stability.  They have created generation after generation of citizens more and more dependent on the federal government.  This has resulted in greater power for the federal government.  We need to do what is necessary to keep these programs from collapsing under a mountain of deficit spending.  It is a choice between saving and strengthening these programs, or further weakening and destroying the safety net programs that provide security and poverty protection to those most in need.

We must modernize our federal entitlement programs to meet the needs of current and future beneficiaries, and reduce the financial burden on our children and grandchildren.  In many ways our entitlement programs have been successful at protecting millions of Americans from a life of poverty.  We need to save and strengthen these programs so that they are there for our children and grandchildren.

Doing nothing is an unacceptable option.  We are borrowing four out of every ten dollars we spend, and we’re dependent on low interest rates.  If we wait to act, the only solutions will be drastically higher taxes, massive new borrowing, and sudden and severe cuts in benefits or other government programs.   Doing nothing threatens our financial security, as well as that or future generations.

This is why the next President of the United States needs to show true leadership and put federal entitlement programs on a course towards fiscal sustainability.  Tragically, President Obama has not shown such leadership.  He has expanded eligibility for entitlement programs into the middle class and above.

I have demonstrated my commitment to fight for entitlement reform through the successful effort on welfare reform, which ended a federal entitlement for the first time and created opportunity and reduced poverty.

In contrast, President Obama and Mitt Romney’s records are creating health care entitlements and expanding Medicaid dependency through ObamaCare and Romneycare instead of free market opportunities and choice.    Instead of taking entitlements head on, Mitt Romney continues to play games about the earmarks that he has supported.  While Romney focuses on 1% of our fiscal challenges, I will continue to focus on 100% of them for a sustainable future for seniors and young people in America.  We can’t afford not to.

With our government spending 40% more than it has, and our national debt exploding beyond 15 trillion, the time is overdue for strong fiscal leadership rather than kicking the can down the road.  My guess is that the Vegas odds on either President Obama or Mitt Romney actually reforming entitlements are quite low.  I don’t think that even Mitt Romney would make a $10,000 bet on that one.

My plans for entitlement reform would unshackle beneficiaries from the federal government, unleash the power of market competition, and empower Americans with choice and control. For example, I would reform Medicare with a premium-support program that offers beneficiaries choice and control over their healthcare options.  This would transform Medicare from a program run by government to a program that empowers seniors.

I would also block-grant Medicaid so that states have the flexibility to effectively manage their programs and offer the best options for beneficiaries.  These, and other reform ideas will transform our federal entitlements from programs that breed dependency to programs that empower beneficiaries and encourage independence.

Conservatives know that I am committed to limiting government, expanding freedom, and putting America back on a sustainable fiscal path through cutting federal spending and entitlement reform, repealing and replacing ObamaCare, instituting pro-growth tax and regulatory policies, and unleashing America’s energy and manufacturing potential for a brighter future for America.

America faces a deficit of over $1 trillion for the fourth year in a row. The only way to truly tackle these deficits and to preserve our freedom is to reform entitlements, the fast-growing component of government spending.  For the health of our economy and for the sake of our children and grandchildren, that is the path I will take.

 

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • habeumnominee

    Senator Santorum, for the good of the party that sent you to Washington in 1994 to represent conservative values, please suspend your campaign and endorse the presumptive nominee as Mitt Romney did in 2008 and John McCain did in 2000.

    You have a bright future ahead of you in the GOP if, and only if, you show the presumptive nominee the respect that he has earned.

    If you didn’t get the hints from Jim Demint, Mitch McConnell, Jeb Bush, and now Rush Limbaugh, it is time for the party to unite against Obama and put this ugly primary season to bed.

    • adamsweb

      in 1994 to represent conservative values, please suspend your campaign and endorse the presumptive nominee as Mitt Romney did in 2008 and John McCain did in 2000.

      First of all, John McCain didn’t endorse Bush May, 2 months after Bush had the required delegates to be the nominee.

      Second Point, how well did Mitt Romney quitting leave the Republican Party? If 2008 taught us anything, it’s that it’s more important to get the right nominee than it is to get that nominee quickly.

      Conservatives have enough experience turning tail and letting the establishment have its way. It’s time for conservatives to gain experience standing firm.

      • dajeeps

        What could we possibly accomplish outside of what primary voters have expressed? We tried, made a pretty strong go of it, and Romney didn’t just run away with it. I just don’t see a clear path for Santorum, or Gingrich, and not even for a contested convention this time around. We’ve already shown the “establishment” that we are indeed a formidable force. There will be plenty more opportunities for us to get the upper hand in the future with congressional elections and various issues. We have not won this battle, but we have not been silenced and surely, there are better uses for our energies than to expend them on a lost cause when we have a pretty good idea of the stakes involved.

        Just look at what’s going on in government right now. Democrats don’t want to cut anything but defense. In fact many of the economists on their side keep pounding the drum for more fiscal stimulus, even after we’ve been down that road with very little to show for it with the exception of nearly doubling the debt. They would just go on whistling past the graveyard with counterproductive high tax policies, head on into a Greek-style financial crisis looking for a way to pin it on Republicans instead of preventing it. All they care about is power, and they would rather be kings of chaos than not have power at all.

        We don’t have much longer to fix this problem and avoid the certain calamity that would dwarf the crisis of 2008 by an exponential degree. The GOP must win this one; there is no other option. The longer we keep eating our own, the less of a possibility there is for that outcome.

        • hayekwasright

          We don’t have much time indeed. But as long as the GOP is happy to serve as courtiers of chaos, I don’t see much value in coalescing behind that strategy.
          You have a great signature line, maybe you should read it again.

      • habeumnominee

        “how well did Mitt Romney quitting leave the Republican Party?”

        Explain what you mean by that.

        If you are trying to ask how it benefited the Republican Party for Mitt Romney to quit, that’s an easy one. Romney stepped aside when it was obvious to him and his campaign that he had no path to the nomination.

        Gingrich was big enough to admit that Romney will get the 1144 delegates he needs to seal the deal. Gingrich just wants to keep campaigning because it’s more fun than playing golf at the country club. Plus the guy just loves to hear himself talk.

        Santorum needs to be man enough to admit that he has no path to the nomination. There is no possibility that he will be the nominee this year and the longer he stays in the race, the more committed conservatives like me are to never voting for him for any office that he might plan to run for in the future.

        By trying to sandbag the presumptive nominee (Romney), he is also eliminating any possibility that he might be asked to serve in the Romney administration. (I love the sound of that. Get your T-shirts now before the price goes up next year.)

        Santorum needs to man-up by admitting that he will not be the nominee this year. Once he drops out, the money that is currently being spent on Republican-vs-Republican in-fighting can be spent on an all-out “evict Obama” campaign.

    • RJLigier

      Gay

    • hayekwasright

      All indications are that Romney cannot win the general on his merits. Now, it is possible that if Obama continues to act stupidly, his opponent may win by default. However, I really expect the dems to come up with some october shenanigan that helps people forget how destructive Obama has been to this country and also to expose Romney’s considerable weakness. No, I say let the ugly primary continue while there is a miniscule chance that the GOP could bring forth a strong candidate at the convention. It will take rock ribbed principle to restore this great nation. As long as the GOP movers and a shakers continue to rank party far above principle, I do not see a future of freedom and prosperity for any of our children and grandchildren.

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

    Then Senator, you’re going to have one hell of a time justifying your career as an elected official where you consistently – as in at every opportunity – voted to expand the reach and power of the federal government.

    Rather, I wish for those I love so much a future where the federal government encourages and empowers success, personal responsibility, and financial independence.
    Yeah, right. How about a federal government that simply lives up to it’s duties in the Constitution as put forth in the Enumerated Powers and did nothing else.

    As for “personal responsibility”, I’m assuming – given the theme of your campaign from day one – we’re talking about you legislating your moral view from the federal level. Even though I happen to agree with most of it, it’s a bad idea and it’s not achievable.

    “[F]inancial independence”? Thanks for expanding the Department of Education and voting for Medicare Part D. And, heck of a job with those earmarks.

    You were always a fringe candidate, and had you not bought the Iowa primary after spending two years there doing nothing, you’d be a forgotten candidate. Hopefully, we’ll be able to forget you sooner than later.

    Want to leave your kids a legacy? Get a private sector job and make a contribution to the nation. You likely won’t be able to offset the damage you’ve done as an elected official, but it would be a start.

    • garfieldjl

      I mean seriously, you can blame the man for earmarks but let’s be honest about Santorum’s actual record. He was never for a cradle to grave government control of our lives, neither was Gingrich, what next are people going to claim Ron Paul is somehow responsible for Obamacare, good grief.

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

        Where did I say ANYTHING about OCare. I specifically noted the DoE, which would be his active support of NCLB, and Med D.

        His record is one of support for government expansion and NCLB and M-D are part and parcel of cradle to grave government, you’re just not bright enough to be able to figure that out.

        Don’t believe it, watch the Dems push for “Medicare for all” of OCare goes down.

        • garfieldjl

          Give the man some credit, he admitted some of the things he voted for were mistakes.

          I seriously don’t believe a President Santorum would go along with the Dems and their power grabs, nor would a President Gingrich.

          • aesthete

            He said that it was a function of his having been a team player, and defended both decisions at the time that they were made on their own merits, as well as in his book.

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

            Heh. Life in a cave is a real bitch.

            Teddy Kennedy had been overtly trying to find a way to nationalize K-12 education since the early 70s and NCLB was a sell-out by Bush to him to be “bipartisan”. The Democrats have been pushing – again overtly – for nationalized health care since at least the 60s when they saddled us with Medicare. Followed by Medicaid. And the unfunded nightmare that is Medicare and Social Security didn’t just suddenly appear in 2005.

            There are really only two options on this particular subject. Santorum knew and just didn’t care OR he’s just plain stupid. I’m voting for door number one, The guy may not be the brightest bulb in the box, as evidenced by his tax proposal, but he’s not stupid.

  • bpgmswv1646

    …says Medicare Part D was a mistake.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/24/santorum-admits-medicare-mistake/

    Santorum said NLCB was a mistake in at least a dozen debates.

    Besides Senator Santorum is the only candidate who is willing to tell the real truth behind our financial and debt problems.

  • snowshooze

    You hear what we are talking about here?
    You and Newt should run around together having debates all over.
    Invire Romney, and always have a podium there with his name on it.
    How long could he take it?

    • Ender

      “debates”? I’d say since the first one.

      • snowshooze

        Gee.That is sad.
        But I think you aren’t half as scared as Romney would be.

        • Ender

          especially not of your stupid idea of debates that no one would cover or attend.

          • snowshooze

            Wouldn’t you enjoy watching some more debates?
            Oh, maybe not.
            Well, speak for yourself, but don’t speak for me.

          • habeumnominee

            If you want to watch Rick Santorum debate Ron Paul over when Jesus is going to return, be my guest.

            Romney has a general election to prepare for. He doesn’t have time to argue with losers.

    • clintonformccain

      Santorum versus Gingrich. Three each week between now and August. That way they can both feel like they are “still in it, all the way to the convention”.

      Why not include Michele Bachmann and Herb Cain, too. They have about the same chance of being the Repubican nominee!

      I’m all for it. Of course, I wouldn’t watch any of them, but at least it would keep them out of trouble (and the news).

    • vastrightwingconspiracy

      …not enough?

      Were they sandbagging during those debates?

      What would be different? What “new” information has come out since the last debate that wasn’t talked about during the first 20?

  • tnguy

    ….you had to back up these words with your votes when you were in office. You did not.

    Medicare D is one of the most destructive programs of the last 20 years. Some estimates have the unfunded actuarial liability at $20 trillion. And you supported it. Little else needs to be said.

    • garfieldjl

      Actually, it makes us all even less inclined to vote for Romney.

      How about you give us reasons to vote for Romney (if there is any, which I’m starting to doubt there is any reason to support Romney at all), instead of trying to smear everyone else.

      Santorum acknowledged he made a mistake, I’m willing to accept that and move on.

      The only reason this keeps being brought up is to distract people for questioning Romney’s record, and so Mitt supporters can get out of having to make a case for why anyone should support their candidate.

      I don’t know about other conservatives, but I for one have had it. I’m a Gingrich supporter, there are things I don’t like about Santorum, but I’m not going to sit here and watch Team Romney smear a good man, and fellow Republican, simply because he can’t run on his own record!

      Enough is enough!

      • tnguy

        As much as I dislike Santorum’s record, I have almost total disdain for Romney’s.

        You want to direct your righteous anger against someone, try one of the candidates.

        Me? I’m comfortable holding fast to my principles. Can’t say that I’m brave though, not by Sen. Santorum’s definition. From his own mouth, true courage is ignoring what you believe for political expedience. That’s absolutely screams leadership…..

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

        against Santorum”. That doesn’t matter. Nor does it matter that Rick Perry supporters are still enamored with him.

        The bottom line is that Rick Santorum, and to a lesser degree, Newt, are engaging in the political equivalent of public masturbation. It may make ‘em feel good for a moment, but all it’s really doing is making fools of them.

        Santorum is nothing more or less than a big-government pro-lifer – thank you Erick – he’s never been anything else. Nice enough guy I suppose and I’m sure his family loves him. Presidential material he is not. Any more than the current occupant of the White House. Two guys with nice families, one wife and all that stuff, who’ve never held a real job and whose only accomplish is to turn “public service” into a lucrative career.

        Romney “can’t run on his own record”, well in case you missed it, Santorum’s is every bit as bad and he’s never had a leadership role or actually been responsible for running something. Even a lemon-aid stand. No thanks. And that’s an opinion shared by the majority of people showing up to vote in Republican primaries.

        I’m no fan of Romney, but in this game, he with the most votes wins and Santorum (and Newt) is a loser.

      • habeumnominee

        This website is for conservatives, not fake conservatives.

        Every conservative I know wants to see Obama gone.

        If you don’t like Romney, start your own website and get all of that nastiness out of you.

        Romney is the presumptive nominee. Santorum and Gingrich are the presumptive losers.

        • Scope

          and appointed you the new leader of the site? Where do you get your brass ones to tell anyone to leave the site? A freakin’ newbie telling others to go elsewhere?

          • habeumnominee

            You can use the same door if you like. You obviously have personal reasons why you’d never even consider voting for Romney, even if your only other choice was Obama.

            It’s Romney or Obama. Make your choice.

          • lineholder

            I’ll make this simple for you. We KNOW that it is likely to be Obama versus Romney. We KNOW that our nation’s entire future is stake. And you can count on it as sure as the sun rises in the east that we’ll be pulling that lever come November.

            But for right now, we don’t trust Mitt Romney. You can put a rose-colored illusion on all you want to, but we’re not buying it.

            Now, it’s folks like YOU who keep shooting off their mouths who drive people away from even trying to overcome what objections they have where Romney is concerned and put their boots on the ground!!

            If that’s what you’re striving to accomplish, then many congrats, because you’re succeeding in it extremely well.

          • westcoastpatriette

            and what a creepy bunch they are. Just reinforces our disdain for Romney. They go around pompously insulting most everyone here. Wish I were a moderator. I’d get rid of most of ‘em.

          • lineholder

            Blinder than bats and so full of themselves they can’t see straight.

            We’re not stupid. We do know what the reality is that we’re likely to be facing. If they think it’s going to help Romney to gets boots on the ground, coming from the Conservative end of the political spectrum, to deal with people at a Conservative site this way….that’s so short-sighted that it borders on sheer ignorance.

          • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

            This site is for conservatives, not fake conservatives.

            That’s apparently why Governor Romney hasn’t bothered to write and submit a single diary to reach out to us. It’s also why I’m wondering what you’re doing here.

            If you and Governor Romney don’t like conservatives, why don’t you go visit the Larsen brothers over at whyromney.com.

          • SoFiMil

            I’d forgotten all about the Larsen brothers.

          • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

            They’re too easy to spot. Just wish we could get them all herded together in one place, and I thought whyromney was as good a place as any.

          • EyeofMitt

          • jamesm

            Romney flashes some money and some jump on board.

          • SoFiMil

            However, when given the opportunity in a recent debate, he didn’t cite even one of the items. This leaves me no choice but to conclude all is well in Romneyville.

            I can understand if there are are one or two misperceptions about Romney. But when they reach the double-digits, it’s most likely the truth.

      • renl57

        We Romney supporters made the case for him, over and over.

        And Romney does a pretty good job making the case for himself–go to his campaign website and check out his stands on issues.

        But it all falls on deaf ears. You don’t care, because you want a Rick Perry equivalent–a swaggering Southerner or Westerner who’s a favorite son of the GOP base–and that’s something that Romney is not.

        Rick Perry lost. A long time ago.
        Get over it.

      • Michael Dugas

        OK how about this. A lame Duck Obama with no fears of re-election. That’s a fantastic reason to vote for Romney. It’s the most important reason to vote for Romney. Romney isn’t my guy but it appears he will win the nomination and I will be 100% behind him in an effort to de-throne Obama. The irreparable damage Obama can do with 4 more years is truly frightening and those refusing to see that are blind to logic and gambling with our country’s future.

        • garfieldjl

          Why should I want to vote for Romney, pretend he’s running against Bill Clinton for a minute. Why would I want to vote FOR Romney?

          • morrigan

            You DON”T want to vote for Romney. You’re not GOING to vote for Romney..Can we drop the charade in which you pretend to be open to reason if only somebody would provide you with one?

            I get it. You’re not voting for Romney. You don’t need to repeat it one hundred times a day every day.

          • garfieldjl

            I have a low opinion of Romney, but it’s extremely doubtful that I’m alone in this.

            You people are supporting Romney, so you should be able to provide reasons of why I should put my trust in Romney.

            If you can’t do that, then it looks to me you’re supporting the wrong person to be the nominee.

  • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

    someone preaching to me about values, etc. when the MOST important issues facing our Country have to do with economics and size of government. If I wanted to hear a preacher, I’d go to Church. You fail, IMHO, on these issues.

    I live in your old Congressional District, I’ve met you a few times on constituient (sp?) matters. Unfortunately, I can not and will not support your candidacy. Your support for Spector plus your ‘big government’ history? Enjoy your think-tank career.

    To all – I have no preferred candidate at this point. I supported Governor Perry. Even aas a Republican local commitee memeber, I’ll probably sit out the May Primary, something I rarely do. Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul? You have to be kidding me if this is the best we can do. I’ll vote AGAINST Obama in the Fall, not FOR the Republican.

    • resilient

      unmanageable debt, gambles and tosses out his (or her) moral compass, he cannot keep his family together no matter how good his accountant might be. So it is with America. A bookkeeper president can move numbers around but that won’t change the root cause of America’s economic flopping about. America needs a president who can persuade Congress not only to stop the spending but also to reform itself and its legislation. And the president must also be willing to return to Congress the power which the executive has in recent years stolen.

      I think Rick Santorum is your man for the job.

  • duramater

    concerning the Zimmerman/ Martin case has revealed just how ill suited you are as leader of the free world. Greater is he who ruleth his tongue than he who taketh a city.

    The Obama experiment has failed miserably but you are simply not of sufficient metal to replace him.
    There is another.
    And it’s not Romney.

    • habeumnominee

      There is no one else running for president this year that has Romney’s business experience and leadership experience.

      We need both to navigate out of the crap-circus that Obama has led us into.

      I agree with you that Santorum is not ready for prime-time. He can’t get a single senator or governor to endorse him. Not even his home-state senator, Pat Toomey, will endorse him.

      • SoFiMil

        All three legs are important. Deemphasizing any is at our peril

        And to clarify, I don’t think Romney has anything exceptional to offer in terms of economic ideas. And even if he did, wouldn’t treasury secretary be a better fit?

        • snowshooze

          But still.. they persist.
          Is there a name for that?

        • EyeofMitt

          So you happen to know all of us rational conservatives and our thoughts. Wow, amazing. I really envy your crystal ball.
          SoFi, I’ve got all three legs of conservatism and a fourth if you want to add in immigration (as some do). Just because we support Romney as the presumptive GOP candidate does not take away who we are or were prior to all of this. I honestly wonder how we as conservatives can be so far apart. The animus that has erupted just in our corner of the GOP is amazing to me.

          • SoFiMil

            Feel better?

          • garfieldjl

            I think I remember reading about it on Red State from other posters, wouldn’t mind if someone put up a link to it.

            So the presumptive nominee is conceeding his core issue to Obama, and he’s supposed to be the only chance we have to stop Obama?!?!?!

  • quill67

    You may be right on whatever points (I think you usually are wrong) but please be respectful. We have all lost our cool and tongiht you have.

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

      by demonstrating that you’re an ignorant fool. I would never stand in your way. I might, however, point out the obvious.

      Grow up kid. This ain’t tiddly winks.

      • quill67

        n/t

    • jamesm

      for Mbecker. So many threads this guy personally insults posters and then he kisses up to the moderaters. This cur has no respect and deserves none.

  • doctorcynic

    However, you also have a reputation as a government-expanding legislator (see above comments). The truth of the deservedness of this is shown in several declarations in your diary.

    “I also want a future where state governments, OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, can provide fiscally sound, dependable safety-net programs to protect our most vulnerable citizens from a life of poverty.” Capitals mine.

    I don’t want this, Mr. Santorum, and I’d wager the phrase I capitalized stuck out at many others here. Where in the Constitution is protection from “poverty” within the purview of the federal government? It simply isn’t there. That means that the power lies rightfully with the states. I want a President who can make that case. I’m not sure you’re able to, you want to, or you even recognize the fundamental problem.

    “It is a choice between saving and strengthening these programs, or further weakening and destroying the safety net programs that provide security and poverty protection to those most in need.”

    Mr. Santorum, this is a false dichotomy. Again, based on the enumerated powers of the federal government, these programs ought not to be in existence at the federal level. They need not be strengthened. They need not collapse on themselves through fiscal unsustainability. They need to be challenged as unconstitutional and the issue of appropriate social safety nets be given to the states to do as they will. I know it will never be a popular position. It’s the American one, though, and it’s the right one.

    You almost assuredly have my vote when comes the Texas primary. As you said, among you, Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama, you’re the best hope we have. Comments like those above won’t get me excited about the fact, though.

  • rabun1016

    “I would also block-grant Medicaid so that states have the flexibility to effectively manage their programs and offer the best options for beneficiaries. These, and other reform ideas will transform our federal entitlements from programs that breed dependency to programs that empower beneficiaries and encourage independence.”

    Rather than conflating the huge difference between a federal takeover of health care, and state health care programs…. a la Massachusetts, please reread the tenth amendment.

    We don’t need to transform our federal entitlements. We need to reduce them. Your contention that these programs are “protecting millions….from a life of poverty” is dead wrong. It is ensuring millions will stay in a life of poverty.

  • freedom555

    on the “social issues”.

    But I RESPECT YOU as an honest man with a consistent voice.

    I can’t trust Romney to know his own mind. For that reason I think we’d all be living in a constant state of uncertainty. Uncertainty destroys markets—-and morale. We can’t afford Romney.

    TRUST and RESOLVE build confidence in a leader. Even as I do not embrace your views on gay marriage and contraception…….I would have strong confidence in your leadership of our country.

    PLEASE DON’T YIELD TO ROMNEY !

  • ss396

    You write that you want a “federal government [that] encourages and empowers success, personal responsibility, and financial independence.” I bring to your attention that encouragement and empowerment by the federal government is still a choosing by it of winners and losers. That kind of thinking is what we are trying to end.

    I don’t want a federal government that encourages and empowers; I want a federal government that does not impede these.

    • garfieldjl

      What Santorum is saying and what you are saying is basically the same thing.

      Government getting out of the way is encouraging and empowering people to succeed. Fixing the tax code nightmare would encourage and empower people to succeed.

      That’s the same as saying that he wants it so the government isn’t impeding people’s ability to succeed.

  • Xasteius

    The only difference between you and Romney is your stance on social issues; otherwise you are the same big-government guy (as documented by Erick) as he is.

  • retrocon87

    then go with the FreedomWorks strategy and just focus all your efforts on electing more conservatives to the House. Trying to prop up dead presidential candidates to be a thorn in the side of the likely Republican nominee is not helping conservatism one iota.

    • garfieldjl

      I think trying to keep him from being the nominee would be rather important.

      Obama is already ahead of Obamney by double digits.

      • snowshooze

        Why am I not surprised?

      • snowshooze

        But Romney still loses.
        I guess that is the game.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Don’t ever quit.

    Keep at it. Get Gingrich to help. If Gingrich would rather tank your campaign than quit when he can’t win and guarantee us Romney then Gingrich shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near any of the levers of power ever again.

    • garfieldjl

      If Gingrich wanted to tank Santorum, he would have dropped out a while back and endorsed Romney.

      Instead Gingrich started comparing Romney to an “etch-a-sketch” followed by Santorum.

      Santorum needs Gingrich if for no other reason, he’s better at coming up with catchy phrases that stick into people’s heads.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …for blogging elsewhere is apt; I discussed ongoing fealty for The Newt, which encompasses many of the concerns herein [minus the vitriol].

    http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2012/04/02/mitt-romney-for-president/#comment-16755

    Remember that Santorum advocated [ref. "It Takes A Family"] providing matching-funds for minorities who deposit $ into their local bank accounts [legislation co-sponsored by Lieberman].

    He is a big-spender and he mis-stated his rationalization for supporting Big Labor…as I detailed in my diary…and all the rhetorical moralism he can muster hasn’t altered these fundamentals.

  • Spartan4Life

    Even in trying to come late to presenting a more limited and fiscally responsible role for the Federal Government you can’t help yourself but to qualify it by stressing the importance of the “safety net”, which has been anything but. Have you noticed in your 20+ years in Washington that the Federal government is singularly bad at doing anything it lays it’s greedy hands on?

    We need a transformative leader who can make the case against the Federal Government, not just to propose to run it better. Not saying Mr. Romney represents that, either, but you go around as if you weren’t part of Washington for 20 years. I, for one, aren’t buying that it is anything other than the attempted self promotion of Rick Santorum.

  • alliek

    I think it is arrogant for these elite republicans to deny twenty states their right to vote in this primary! Mitt Romney is a big boy, if he can’t handle Santorum, with his limited resources then he surely can’t handle Obama and his limitless resources! I believe if Rubio, Ryan or any of the other republicans I used to respect were in the same position as Santorum they would stay in and fight for the nomination! I respect a fighter, someone who won’t back down, that’s a leadership quality all of Obama and Romney’s money can’t buy, you are born with it!

    • rabun1016

      The Taliban also believe what they are fighting for. Hopefully, Santorum has more rationality in calculating ego v leadership. Right now, ego is winning with both him and Newt. And I do not blame anything on “elite republicans”. Everybody gets one vote. If you spend time on the street and in the shops, I think you will find that small business and the quiet Republicans, not the elites, are not putting their hopes, right or wrong, on Romney.

      • rabun1016

        sorry, meant to say “now” versus not in last sentence.