Michelle Malkin endorses Rick Santorum:
Santorum opposed individual health care mandates — clearly and forcefully — as far back as his 1994 U.S. Senate run. He has launched the most cogent, forceful fusillade against both Romney and Gingrich for their muddied, pro-individual health care mandate waters.Amen. Read the rest.
He voted against cap and trade in 2003, voted yes to drilling in ANWR, and unlike Romney and Gingrich, Santorum has never dabbled with eco-radicals like John Holdren, Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi. He hasn’t written any “Contracts with the Earth.”
Santorum is strong on border security, national security, and defense. Mitt the Flip-Flopper and Open Borders-Pandering Newt have been far less trustworthy on immigration enforcement.
Santorum is an eloquent spokesperson for the culture of life. He has been savaged and ridiculed by leftist elites for upholding traditional family values — not just in word, but in deed.
He won Iowa through hard work and competent campaign management. Santorum has improved in every GOP debate and gave his strongest performance last week in Florida, wherein he both dismantled Romneycare and popped the Newt bubble by directly challenging the front-runners’ character and candor without resorting to their petty tactics.
He rose above the fray by sticking to issues.
Most commendably, he refused to join Gingrich and Perry in indulging in the contemptible Occupier rhetoric against Romney. Character and honor matter. Santorum has it.
In case you missed it, here's Santorum on the absolutely crucial issue of Obamacare/Romneycare:
"Folks, we can't give this issue away in this election. It's about fundamental freedom."
Florida voters, are you listening? Or do you agree with Moderate Mitt that this is not worth getting angry about?
Most recent posts here. Twitter feed here. Amazon store here.
Don't know how anybody can call somebody that voted for Davis-Bacon a conservative!
ReplyDeleteDavis-Bacon is now the litmus test for conservatism? Could you be any more obviously a Ron Paul Fan?
ReplyDeleteYes, in fact Davis-Bacon is now ONE of the litmus tests for conservatism. Ron Paul has added a lot of good input into the campaign. Is he perfect? No. But then I guess Santorum is. My bad.
ReplyDeleteDavis-Bacon was from 1931 - the government mandating "prevailing" wages on Federal projects. Bush waived it in the wake of Katrina and later it was restored. It's a rotten idea, pols using taxpayer dollars to buy votes with patronage, but an awfully common one. Tell us more about Santorum's culpability here, please.
DeleteNobody, not Malkin or Pundette or Chris-2-4, is calling Santorum perfect. Reagan wasn't perfect, he's the guy who brought no-fault divorce to CA. Neither were Lincoln and Coolidge. No angels are on the ballot.
Paul's poison, though. CPUSA's Noam Chomsky prefers Paul's foreign policy to Obama's, and no wonder. He's a Truther kook. And those racist newsletters of his hang like the Sword of Damocles over his every success with the GOP electorate.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNo, Santorum is not perfect, but then who is? At least he's sane.
ReplyDeleteSocial conservative, yes. Fiscal conservative, not so much. There is a very long list of things he supported that by no strech of the imagination can be called fiscally conservative. He is more than willing to use big government to solve social ills in this country. Not the place of the government to solve those problems.
ReplyDelete"Davis-Bacon is now ONE of the litmus tests for conservatism."
ReplyDeleteSo you have a full battery of litmus tests and if a candidate doesn't pass every one then he's not qualified to call himself conservative? And does Ron Paul happen to pass every one of them?
I accept that no one candidate can achieve 100% compliance with each of my individual convictions. What matters politically is the aggregate, and Santorum is consistently conservative on the issues that matter most to me.
ReplyDeleteOn the personal side I am looking for honor, intellect, vision, courage, fearlessness, steadfastness, and grace, in their quality of leadership. Santorum meets that test for me.
I'm voting for Santorum in the primary. This is where you vote your conscience, not "who has a chance of beating Obama or winning". I watched him with Cavuto yesterday and Neil said, "If you had a vote for every time I heard, 'I would vote for him if I thought he had a chance of winning.' You would be ahead by a mile." Rick laughed and said he agreed. But the truth is he believes he can be a winner if people quit just looking at the two anointed candidates. The way Santorum keeps his faith and his moral code covers a lot for me. His obvious love for his handicapped child also showed through. He's a regular guy. Not a rich son of a rich man who is a big government RINO, or a man who not only thinks he's the smartest guy in the room he's in, but the smartest guy in any room anywhere and thinks all solutions to problems are his only and others with ideas may not intrude.
ReplyDeleteTrust me on Newt. I love the guy, but realize he is not a leader but a demander. He is more like Obama in personality than you realize. Romney is a leader. He is willing to admit he doesn't know something and will get someone who does know it and listen. His problem is he is really a liberal. His attempts to paint himself differently are horrible to watch.
We're screwed as the best and brightest of the conservatives did not run this time around, much like in 1996. We got "Doled".
"Romney is a leader. He is willing to admit he doesn't know something and will get someone who does know it and listen."
ReplyDeleteGee, if only he could admin he knows Romneycare isn't working in MA. (It is propped up with federal Medicaid funding.)
Like I said, he is a leader, he got all the experts to design a what he thought was the answer to uninsured citizens of his state. Of course it doesn't work as planned because the experts he brought together were liberal thinkers- like him.
ReplyDeleteChip, you need to read the whole post. Romney is a big government liberal in RINO clothing. It doesn't make him stupid or a bad leader. It just makes him lead in the wrong direction. But again, as I said, we got screwed because true conservatives stayed out or were encouraged to get out. Why?
Read this from American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/01/the_mask_is_off.html
An excerpt-
"Now why is that? As always, money and power. And, as Ayn Rand told us, the biggest pile of either resides in Washington, DC. For the Republican and Democratic establishment and their lackeys, it has never been about principles or the middle class. It has always been about saying or doing whatever it takes to feed at the public trough. Anyone who gets in their way or dares to shrink the trough will be destroyed. Those at the trough do share with each other, though. How often do you see anyone from either party suffer consequences from fleecing the taxpayer?"
Romney is a place holder. Newt is placeholder with an planet sized ego. Obama is a strawman behind which his cronies are stealing the national treasury blind, converting their bad investments into hard cash- our cash. The ones who would have asked questions or demanded different results were pushed home or told to stay home.
This can only end one of two ways. You really should read the book. www.truthandcommonsense.com
MM is right of course. I like watching Newt in the debates; he's brilliant. And he's spot on with in his positions on Israel. But he's a drama factory, and he would blacken mothers milk if it would get him elected, to paraphrase Bernard Shaw.
ReplyDeleteRomney avoids the drama, but there's always the question: was he fooling Massechusettes by pretending to be more liberal than he really is? Or is he fooling us now? It's one or the other.
Santorum would be a great choice. But the entrenched GOP establishment doesn't want him, and they will do their best to prevent him from getting the funds to be competative.