PDA

View Full Version : Is Santorum a Conservative ?



Franco
02-20-2012, 01:18 PM
I say no!
.................................................. ...............................
In that regard, Santorum has a pretty impressive record. By voting for the No Child Left Behind Act, he helped give President Obama the power to micromanage the nation's schools from Washington; and by supporting a prescription drug entitlement for Medicare, he helped saddle the taxpayers with a $16 trillion unfunded liability.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And, lets don't forget all the pork/earmarks he loves to vote for;-)

Santorum Is Severely Wrong
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=14103

charly_t
02-20-2012, 02:12 PM
I think that he is a lot like Obama in his political views etc. He is not my choice by a long shot. I think he is rather.....uummmm......uhhh, naive
( in other words, he is being "managed" by others and we don't need more of that ).

Hew
02-20-2012, 02:19 PM
And, lets don't forget all the pork/earmarks he loves to vote for;-)

LOL. Really? A Ron Paul supporter is playing the earmark card?!? I'm glad my term life policy is paid up because I have officially seen it all now.

road kill
02-20-2012, 02:22 PM
I say no!
.................................................. ...............................
In that regard, Santorum has a pretty impressive record. By voting for the No Child Left Behind Act, he helped give President Obama the power to micromanage the nation's schools from Washington; and by supporting a prescription drug entitlement for Medicare, he helped saddle the taxpayers with a $16 trillion unfunded liability.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And, lets don't forget all the pork/earmarks he loves to vote for;-)

Santorum Is Severely Wrong
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=14103

Hey, how is that bill going that Dr. Paul co-sponsered with Barney Frank??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvGJvzwKqg0

What is that bill anyways??


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !



RK

Franco
02-20-2012, 02:26 PM
Hey, how is that bill going that Dr. Paul co-sponsered with Barney Frank??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvGJvzwKqg0

What is that bill anyways??


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !



RK


Freedom/liberty scares a lot of folks! Afterall, we know it is better to spend a couple of billion on the war against drugs because it has been so effective.

And, we all know the government should be making those decissions for all of us.

Franco
02-20-2012, 02:32 PM
LOL. Really? A Ron Paul supporter is playing the earmark card?!? I'm glad my term life policy is paid up because I have officially seen it all now.

Can't compare the few earmarks and their cost compared to the earmarks that Santorum has supported. RP didn't vote of No Child Left Behind or Medicare Perscrption B!

Nor did he vote for the invasion of Iraq or the bailouts like your boy!

Hew
02-20-2012, 02:41 PM
Can't compare the few earmarks and their cost compared to the earmarks that Santorum has supported. RP didn't vote of No Child Left Behind or Medicare Perscrption B! Has Ron Paul not been one of the top GOP Congressmen when it comes to inserting earmarks into legislation year in and year out? But I'm sure you're right and inserting gobs of pork into legislation is meaningless compared to voting for it. :rolleyes:

Nor did he vote for the invasion of Iraq or the bailouts like your boy! Who would my boy be? I don't think I've thrown my support towards any particular candidate. There are a couple, though, that I know I don't support, though...and one of them is still in the race.
.......................

Marvin S
02-20-2012, 04:13 PM
NO Santorum is not a fiscal conservative - but is the liberal version of social conservatism. You can't legislate morals - but then again being a doper is not a victimless issue.

Social conservatives are as big a spenders as the liberal progressives, they just cut their hair shorter :confused:.

huntinman
02-20-2012, 04:54 PM
Can't compare the few earmarks and their cost compared to the earmarks that Santorum has supported. RP didn't vote of No Child Left Behind or Medicare Perscrption B!

Nor did he vote for the invasion of Iraq or the bailouts like your boy!

Maybe not... but he would support NUKES FOR IRAN:rolleyes:

Franco
02-21-2012, 06:00 AM
NO Santorum is not a fiscal conservative - but is the liberal version of social conservatism. You can't legislate morals - but then again being a doper is not a victimless issue.

Social conservatives are as big a spenders as the liberal progressives, they just cut their hair shorter :confused:.

That is correct! But, the costly war on drugs has only made gangs and organized crime rich all the while being a complete failure. And, those riches only makes it easier for them to import more drugs and make more money. A more sane approach would be to stop spending money on the war on drugs and put about 10% of it into drug education, save the tax payers the rest and quit financing gangs and crime!

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 08:05 AM
Got to love it when your President candidate is more worried about your sin than the job his is applying for.

http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/20030423santorumexcerpts0423p6.asp

"The idea is that the state doesn't have rights to limit individuals' wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire. And we're seeing it in our society."

Hew
02-28-2012, 09:08 AM
Got to love it when your President candidate is more worried about your sin than the job his is applying for.

http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/20030423santorumexcerpts0423p6.asp

"The idea is that the state doesn't have rights to limit individuals' wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire. And we're seeing it in our society."
Gotta love it when someone takes snippets of a decade-old interview and then pretends that it correctly represents a candidate's current position.

Btw, the context of his bolded quotes is that the govt. does have the rights to limit individuals who want to engage in sexual activity that society considers deviant; such as bigamy, polygamy, incest, sex with children, sex with animals, sex with marine life, sex with...well, you get the picture. Do you disagree? I gather from your scorn that you disagree with Santorum and you believe that the govt. has no right to pass laws that determine sex with a child is wrong?

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 09:31 AM
Gotta love it when someone takes snippets of a decade-old interview and then pretends that it correctly represents a candidate's current position.

Btw, the context of his bolded quotes is that the govt. does have the rights to limit individuals who want to engage in sexual activity that society considers deviant; such as bigamy, polygamy, incest, sex with children, sex with animals, sex with marine life, sex with...well, you get the picture. Do you disagree? I gather from your scorn that you disagree with Santorum and you believe that the govt. has no right to pass laws that determine sex with a child is wrong?


Is there a big push from folks wanting to legalize sex with children? What about marine life? Do the pedophile rights folks have a big lobby in Washington? Those are flaming red herring dodges to the reality of the rights of free adults. Not adults and property or adults and children, who cannot legally make those decisions for themselves.

No this is all about gay marriage and wanting to legislate what activities two consenting adults engage in with one another, most specifically whether or not they can participate in a marriage contract. I think they should be able to. You?

paul young
02-28-2012, 09:31 AM
unfortunately, he also is against sex between husband and wife, except for the purpose of procreation. and don't you dare enjoy it, either!

Hew
02-28-2012, 09:49 AM
My response is in bold...


Is there a big push from folks wanting to legalize sex with children? What about marine life? Do the pedophile rights folks have a big lobby in Washington? Those are flaming red herring dodges to the reality of the rights of free adults. Not adults and property or adults and children, who cannot legally make those decisions for themselves. So you do agree with Santorum, then, that govt. has the right to determine who we can and can't have sex with. You're no different then Santorum except that his religion tells him something different than yours does. But he's the crackpot and whoever agrees with you is in the right?

No this is all about gay marriage and wanting to legislate what activities two consenting adults engage in with one another, most specifically whether or not they can participate in a marriage contract. I think they should be able to. You? If this is all about gay marriage why are you not lumping our current president in with Santorum? Their positions on gay marriage hardly differ. But Santorum is the raging nut looking to ram his religion down your throath and Obama has the well-reasoned position (which, from a practical standpoint, doesn't differe one iota from Santorum's), right?

Me? I personally don't care if they're allowed to get married or not. Doesn't affect me, nor do I think it particulary tears at the moral fabric of the country.

Gerry Clinchy
02-28-2012, 10:42 AM
Someone hit the nail on the head ... we are talking about a "contract". The word "marriage" may apply to a heterosexual relationship within religious connotation.

Just talk "contract", remove the religious connotation, and the solution is simple.

Uncle Bill
02-28-2012, 12:53 PM
The atheists on board here can buy into anything they want. If your personal moral fiber allows any deviations you wish to view as being allowable in your site, then who can argue? It's a free country right?

As for me, I'm pretty sure I have a Higher Power to answer to, so forgive me if I am not on the side of the same-sex marriage cult, or the partial-birth abortion crowd, or the infanticide groupies.

I do find it perplexing, however, when an atheist rails against the killing of young military members, but finds no faults with far more killing that ensues via abortions.

UB

charly_t
02-28-2012, 01:20 PM
I hear that he said ( recently ) that he did not think religion and government should be separate. Or words to that effect. That does not sound conservative to me. Of course some words do not mean the same to everyone ! :confused:

road kill
02-28-2012, 01:36 PM
Someone hit the nail on the head ... we are talking about a "contract". The word "marriage" may apply to a heterosexual relationship within religious connotation.

Just talk "contract", remove the religious connotation, and the solution is simple.

It is part of the "secular progressive's" assault on religion and morals and values.
It is part and parcel to their efforts to desensitize us to the assault!!!

RK

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 02:29 PM
My response is in bold...

If this is all about gay marriage why are you not lumping our current president in with Santorum? Their positions on gay marriage hardly differ. But Santorum is the raging nut looking to ram his religion down your throath and Obama has the well-reasoned position (which, from a practical standpoint, doesn't differe one iota from Santorum's), right?

Me? I personally don't care if they're allowed to get married or not. Doesn't affect me, nor do I think it particulary tears at the moral fabric of the country.


Well, because Obama is not the big government, big spender, supporter of Medicare part D (or is it B), supporter of the department of education and "No child left Behind" (more like no teacher left standing), supporter of huge deficits and endorser of other Liberals who is running as the "Real conservative for the Republican nomination" on the basis of his views as a social conservative and evangelical christian. Iv'e never heard Obama's position on gay marriage. What is it?

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 02:30 PM
I actually wrote this last week but it applies here aswell.

I used to think I was a conservative but this current crop of Republican presidential candidate has me rethinking what I am and what a conservative is. If Newt Gingrich is a conservative then I am not one. If Rick Santorum is a conservative then I am not one. Ron Paul has the most conservative actual voting record of any of the candidates but the conservative talk show wing of the party, such as Rush say he needs to change parties to the Democrat party, where he'd be more comfortable :confused:?

I cannot speak for all of Middle America. I can only speak my own convictions. I believe that gay marriage is wrong and the sinners will be judged by God above. He'll decide that not me. I believe abortion is murder. Bigamy is wrong from a contractual community property point of view. Polygamy is just weird. Incest is even worst than homosexuality. Sodomy between a wife and husband, you freaks have a ball but it's none of my business.

However I don't vote based on abortion. I don't know how to define when life begins. I would vote to legalize gay marriage. I believe that free people are free to enter into whatever same legal contract together that other groups of people are in spite of what sex they are. People are either free or they aren't and it is not Governments place to restrict what contracts two legal consenting adults engage in. I am very weary of Social Conservatives running for office. Most of the time, in my experience anyways, they are using the social issues to cover for a moderate-liberal fiscal voting record. Anytime a candidate is running on the basis of "Iím for God, Vote for Me" I get real nervous and start looking at who they are, not what they say they want to do. Folks that identify themselves as "Evangelical Christians" get the same distain from me that the militant feminist and animal rights supports do. All three of those groups want to use the law to force their own personal values on other people. Isn't that a pretty good working definition of Tyranny after all?

Hew
02-28-2012, 02:47 PM
You think abortion is "murder" but don't want the government to interfere to prevent murder because that would be tyranny? All righty then.

Hew
02-28-2012, 02:50 PM
Someone hit the nail on the head ... we are talking about a "contract". The word "marriage" may apply to a heterosexual relationship within religious connotation.

Just talk "contract", remove the religious connotation, and the solution is simple.
This is what I wish I had said earlier and what more-closely resembles my beliefs on gay marriage than what I previously wrote.

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 03:15 PM
You think abortion is "murder" but don't want the government to interfere to prevent murder because that would be tyranny? All righty then.

And where in the world of Hew did I say I didn't think abortion should be legal? $5 if you can find it in any post I ever made.

Franco
02-28-2012, 03:20 PM
I actually wrote this last week but it applies here aswell.

I used to think I was a conservative but this current crop of Republican presidential candidate has me rethinking what I am and what a conservative is. If Newt Gingrich is a conservative then I am not one. If Rick Santorum is a conservative then I am not one. Ron Paul has the most conservative actual voting record of any of the candidates but the conservative talk show wing of the party, such as Rush say he needs to change parties to the Democrat party, where he'd be more comfortable :confused:?

I cannot speak for all of Middle America. I can only speak my own convictions. I believe that gay marriage is wrong and the sinners will be judged by God above. He'll decide that not me. I believe abortion is murder. Bigamy is wrong from a contractual community property point of view. Polygamy is just weird. Incest is even worst than homosexuality. Sodomy between a wife and husband, you freaks have a ball but it's none of my business.

However I don't vote based on abortion. I don't know how to define when life begins. I would vote to legalize gay marriage. I believe that free people are free to enter into whatever same legal contract together that other groups of people are in spite of what sex they are. People are either free or they aren't and it is not Governments place to restrict what contracts two legal consenting adults engage in. I am very weary of Social Conservatives running for office. Most of the time, in my experience anyways, they are using the social issues to cover for a moderate-liberal fiscal voting record. Anytime a candidate is running on the basis of "I’m for God, Vote for Me" I get real nervous and start looking at who they are, not what they say they want to do. Folks that identify themselves as "Evangelical Christians" get the same distain from me that the militant feminist and animal rights supports do. All three of those groups want to use the law to force their own personal values on other people. Isn't that a pretty good working definition of Tyranny after all?

It is not you that has changed, it is what constitutes a Conservative that has changed!

You may not know it yet but, welcome to the fastest growing political party in America, the Libertarian Party! It is where disinfranchised traditional Conservative come together;-)

As the GOP hands over the 2012 election to Obama, join and be a part of the party that gets traditional Conservatism back on track. The GOP will take such a drubbing in the election combined with the damage done during the Bush years that the survival of the GOP is in serious doubt! I won't be surprised to see Obama get 85% of the female vote.

This should create some fireworks from the religious right on the forum.

Hew
02-28-2012, 03:33 PM
My thoughts are in bold...



... I believe abortion is murder....

However I don't vote based on abortion. I don't know how to define when life begins. If you don't know how to define when life begins how do you know it is murder? I would vote to legalize gay marriage. I believe that free people are free to enter into whatever same legal contract together that other groups of people are in spite of what sex they are. People are either free or they aren't and it is not Governments place to restrict what contracts two legal consenting adults engage in....Like a doctor and his patient deciding to abort a healthy baby. I am very weary of Social Conservatives running for office. Most of the time, in my experience anyways, they are using the social issues to cover for a moderate-liberal fiscal voting record. Anytime a candidate is running on the basis of "Iím for God, Vote for Me" I get real nervous and start looking at who they are, not what they say they want to do. Folks that identify themselves as "Evangelical Christians" get the same distain from me that the militant feminist and animal rights supports do. All three of those groups want to use the law to force their own personal values on other people. If you don't want to use the law to force your own personal values (including your belief that abortion is murder) then you're contending abortion should be legal. How else would it become illegal...Harry Potter waves a magic broom? Keep your $5...use it to purchase a cogent position on abortion. ;-) Isn't that a pretty good working definition of Tyranny after all?

Hew
02-28-2012, 03:41 PM
It is not you that has changed, it is what constitutes a Conservative that has changed!

You may not know it yet but, welcome to the fastest growing political party in America, the Libertarian Party! It is where disinfranchised traditional Conservative come together;-)

As the GOP hands over the 2012 election to Obama, join and be a part of the party that gets traditional Conservatism back on track. The GOP will take such a drubbing in the election combined with the damage done during the Bush years that the survival of the GOP is in serious doubt! I won't be surprised to see Obama get 85% of the female vote.

This should create some fireworks from the religious right on the forum.
Oh puhlease...you'll be shakin' your red, white and blue GOP pom poms louder than anyone here when Romney picks Rand Paul as his running mate. ;-)

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 03:49 PM
Wow... That was very creative Hew :rolleyes: As if you earned it or something.

I know that somewhere between getting up to get a towel and 3 weeks later when my wife was heaving her guts out on the side of I-26 life began. I am not pompus enough to believe I know exactly when that happened. Currently the law views the fetus as Property it would appear since it is the mothers decision on when and how that life can ended if desired before birth. I think the fetus has atleast the right to life. The other two come with the age of adulthood.

I judge a candidate on a lot of issues. Abortion is not one of them. It doesn't make me pro abortion.

Franco
02-28-2012, 03:59 PM
Oh puhlease...you'll be shakin' your red, white and blue GOP pom poms louder than anyone here when Romney picks Rand Paul as his running mate. ;-)

Rmoney would need RP for credibilty but I doubt he is that bold. Maybe Rand is more likely since he is prettier that his dad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=o9iEtZnrb3M&t=38s

They way the Repubs are alienating the vast majority of women, Rand won't be enough to get the win.

"Democrats were practically gleeful over what they saw as the damage the GOP had sustained from focusing on issues like contraception, ultrasounds, and the role of religion in government."

I agree with Ghost River, too many more important issues facing this country.

Hew
02-28-2012, 04:02 PM
Bold = me


Wow... That was very creative Hew :rolleyes: As if you earned it or something.

I know that somewhere between getting up to get a towel and 3 weeks later when my wife was heaving her guts out on the side of I-26 life began. I am not pompus enough to believe I know exactly when that happened. But pompous enough to call it "murder?" Currently the law views the fetus as Property it would appear since it is the mothers decision on when and how that life can ended if desired before birth. "The law views..." didn't you say a few posts earlier that when govt. (the writer of laws) interferes between two consenting adults that's tyranny? But when it comes to abortion issues you're perfectly ok with the govt. interfering? I think the fetus has atleast the right to life. The other two come with the age of adulthood.

I judge a candidate on a lot of issues. Abortion is not one of them. It doesn't make me pro abortion. But it does make you super-duper hyprocritical (that's being generous) if you claim that abortion is murder and then support a candidate who doesn't believe the same thing. Murder. The unlawful taking of a human life. There is no greater crime morally, socially or religiously. I don't see how you could NOT vote for someone who agrees with you on the issue of murder?
................

Colt Farrington
02-28-2012, 04:15 PM
Yes its murder. I am pompous enough for that. NO I don't know when you define life happened. I don't beleve it was at the moment I got the cramp in the back of my leg.

If you have a vasectomy are you guilty of murder. I say no but Santorum would disagree with me. Yes the US government has a responsibility to ensure the rights of its citizens. I believe a fetus is entitled to at least the right to life. To my knowledge I have never voted for a candidate that was pro abortion. If I were to vote for Romney I believe he would be the first that has a record of supporting it. What is not clear about that?

Franco
02-28-2012, 04:41 PM
http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/430576_394971107183122_156280577718844_1690220_235 186396_n.jpg

Gerry Clinchy
02-28-2012, 06:27 PM
If you have a vasectomy are you guilty of murder. I say no but Santorum would disagree with me.

While the RC church believe both abortion and contraception are unacceptable, I don't think that the equate contraception to murder, as would be their case with abortion. I know that I don't see them as equal.

Not absolutely sure Santorum is totally against contraception, even though he is RC; but the RC church's official position is against contraception.