Santorum is a Fake Conservative

[Ogre]

I think some of you hate the GOP candidates so much you'd actually vote for Obama.. if so, shame on you!

not so much hate, just don't see much difference between the "best" the GOP is pushing and Obama...

 

[rambone]

Rick Santorum Swarmed By Supporters At Campaign Stop


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MVvXPFfnh8

 

[Rizzo]

I would NEVER vote for Obama or anyone who holds his views.... Like Romney.

 

[lashicoN]

I think some of you hate the GOP candidates so much you'd actually vote for Obama.. if so, shame on you!

Shame on the GOP for attracting and harboring candidates like Newt, Rick, and Mitt.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

It looks like I know where my next suppressor won't be coming from.

I say what I think without reservation and without whispering from the shadows. I don't hide behind the keyboard in my mom's basement. Everyone knows who I am. I have the courage to say what's on my mind anyway.

If the price of my being able to speak freely is the $4.00 that would ultimately hit pocket from you purchasing one of our products I'll take my freedom over your $4.00 every day.

If that offends you, oh well.

not so much hate, just don't see much difference between the "best" the GOP is pushing and Obama...

Who say's they're the best? They are the only ones who want to run. Doesn't that say something about our political climate?

I would NEVER vote for Obama or anyone who holds his views.... Like Romney.

Romney is no Reagan, but he isn't anywhere near Obama either. Obama is a Marxist Communist. Seriously, I don't get the skewed thinking from you Paul guys.

Shame on the GOP for attracting and harboring candidates like Newt, Rick, and Mitt.

So Republicans should have litmus tests like Democrats?

I would have liked to have seen a few more conservative candidates (OK, just one real conservative would have worked). I don't know where they've all gone. I do know I'm left with the choices on the board.

 

[Cerberus]

You claim I don't know anything about him but I just pointed out he published a racist self-titled publication. I know enough

And I will ask again. What were the supposed racist statements made?

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Romney is no Reagan, but he isn't anywhere near Obama either. Obama is a Marxist Communist. Seriously, I don't get the skewed thinking from you Paul guys

We Paul supporters just don't understand how conservative is now a relative term. Just because someone is to the right of Nancy Pelosi or President Obama doesn't automatically mean that person is a consevative. Set your sights low enough and we can lose even if one of these supposed "conservatives" wins.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

We Paul supporters just don't understand how conservative is now a relative term. Just because someone is to the right of Nancy Pelosi or President Obama doesn't automatically mean that person is a consevative. Set your sights low enough and we can lose even if one of these supposed "conservatives" wins.

Because the world does not revolve around absolutes, and conservative does not equal right wing nor liberal left wing.

Take our founders for example. Every one of them (OK, almost every one of them) was highly accomplished and the tops in their fields. These were not common men. They were extraordinary. Most were lawyers. There were financiers and land owners. They were merchants and politicians and plantation owners. They owned slaves. They were the very same people that if alive today many who extol their virtues would hate if in similar circumstances.

They were God-fearing religious men. They were also power hungry, ambitious misogynists who cared more about their own fortunes than those of the new nation's. They were jealous of their English counterparts, who were titled and had land holdings. They were colonials. Stepchildren. And they didn't like it.

They were not conservatives. They were extreme left wing, liberal radicals hell bent on overthrowing their government. Some wanted a King, just not the one they had. Some wanted no government. Even after a new government was formed, those that stayed in politics worked to improve their fortunes and increase their power.

Paul supporters yearn for some gilded age that does not, will not, and never has existed. They think that Ron Paul will return this country to days gone by, either ignorant or willfully blind to the true nature of the founding of America. They spout one liners and pull quotes from our founders that often take a sentence out of context but that somehow makes them more resolute in their cause and convictions. They refuse to acknowledge or accept that those days left us because of the very men that founded this nation.

They were also great men, because even though they did it for selfish reasons, they created the greatest nation on the planet.

There is no such thing as conservative or liberal without context. They are not absolute positions, but absolutely relative to the position of another on an issue. That imperative is lost on Paul disciples.

 

[firehawk1]

Paul supporters yearn for some gilded age that does not, will not, and never has existed. They think that Ron Paul will return this country to days gone by, either ignorant or willfully blind to the true nature of the founding of America. They spout one liners and pull quotes from our founders that often take a sentence out of context but that somehow makes them more resolute in their cause and convictions. They refuse to acknowledge or accept that those days left us because of the very men that founded this nation.

They were also great men, because even though they did it for selfish reasons, they created the greatest nation on the planet.

There is no such thing as conservative or liberal without context. They are not absolute positions, but absolutely relative to the position of another on an issue. That imperative is lost on Paul disciples.

THIS deserved the rep.

 

[Paul]

Because the world does not revolve around absolutes, and conservative does not equal right wing nor liberal left wing.

Take our founders for example. Every one of them (OK, almost every one of them) was highly accomplished and the tops in their fields. These were not common men. They were extraordinary. Most were lawyers. There were financiers and land owners. They were merchants and politicians and plantation owners. They owned slaves. They were the very same people that if alive today many who extol their virtues would hate if in similar circumstances.

They were God-fearing religious men. They were also power hungry, ambitious misogynists who cared more about their own fortunes than those of the new nation's. They were jealous of their English counterparts, who were titled and had land holdings. They were colonials. Stepchildren. And they didn't like it.

They were not conservatives. They were extreme left wing, liberal radicals hell bent on overthrowing their government. Some wanted a King, just not the one they had. Some wanted no government. Even after a new government was formed, those that stayed in politics worked to improve their fortunes and increase their power.

Paul supporters yearn for some gilded age that does not, will not, and never has existed. They think that Ron Paul will return this country to days gone by, either ignorant or willfully blind to the true nature of the founding of America. They spout one liners and pull quotes from our founders that often take a sentence out of context but that somehow makes them more resolute in their cause and convictions. They refuse to acknowledge or accept that those days left us because of the very men that founded this nation.

They were also great men, because even though they did it for selfish reasons, they created the greatest nation on the planet.

There is no such thing as conservative or liberal without context. They are not absolute positions, but absolutely relative to the position of another on an issue. That imperative is lost on Paul disciples.

I would say you are right on a lot of this. The Jeffersonian's were there to keep government small and less corrupt. It is the Federalist early on that did exactly what you wrote about. But saying that Ron Paul supports long for a time that has never existed is wrong. I would say Ron Paul supporters are the resurrection of Jeffersonian party. We want a smaller Federal government. We believe that the Constitution means that the Federal government can only do what it specifically calls for in the Constitution. Everything else goes to state and local government. We believe in state sovereignty. We believe in liberty and freedom. We actually believe in the Bill of Rights, not just what is convenient. We do not believe in preemptive wars. We do not believe the President should be able to preemptively start wars. We believe that Congress should declare war. We believe in free and open trade. I can go on and on but I think you get the point.

 

[Cerberus]

I would say you are right on a lot of this. The Jeffersonian's were there to keep government small and less corrupt. It is the Federalist early on that did exactly what you wrote about. But saying that Ron Paul supports long for a time that has never existed is wrong. I would say Ron Paul supporters are the resurrection of Jeffersonian party. We want a smaller Federal government. We believe that the Constitution means that the Federal government can only do what it specifically calls for in the Constitution. Everything else goes to state and local government. We believe in state sovereignty. We believe in liberty and freedom. We actually believe in the Bill of Rights, not just what is convenient. We do not believe in preemptive wars. We do not believe the President should be able to preemptively start wars. We believe that Congress should declare war. We believe in free and open trade. I can go on and on but I think you get the point.

Everything that most of the GOP abandoned years ago. Got to rep ya on this.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I would say you are right on a lot of this. The Jeffersonian's were there to keep government small and less corrupt. It is the Federalist early on that did exactly what you wrote about. But saying that Ron Paul supports long for a time that has never existed is wrong. I would say Ron Paul supporters are the resurrection of Jeffersonian party. We want a smaller Federal government. We believe that the Constitution means that the Federal government can only do what it specifically calls for in the Constitution. Everything else goes to state and local government. We believe in state sovereignty. We believe in liberty and freedom. We actually believe in the Bill of Rights, not just what is convenient. We do not believe in preemptive wars. We do not believe the President should be able to preemptively start wars. We believe that Congress should declare war. We believe in free and open trade. I can go on and on but I think you get the point.

The Jeffersonians fought to keep the government small right up to the point that Jefferson was elected President. Then he increased his government threefold, bringing all of his supporters into the government. Kind of funny how power changes perspective and principles.

[STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I want a smaller Federal government. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I believe that the Constitution means that the Federal government can only do what it specifically calls for in the Constitution. Everything else goes to state and local government. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I believe in state sovereignty. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I believe in liberty and freedom. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I actually believe in the Bill of Rights, not just what is convenient. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I do not want [STRIKE]believe in preemptive[/STRIKE] wars. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I do not believe the President should [STRIKE]be able to [/STRIKE]preemptively start wars. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I believe that Congress should declare war. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I believe in free and open trade. I can go on and on but I think you get the point.

I can do all that and still reject Ron Paul as a loon. I don't think he is the best candidate. I don't think he's even a good candidate. Everyone talks about the lesser of two evils - I think he is equally evil. He is another Carter or Harding waiting to happen. He would spend an entire administration hiding in the White House with no support in Congress. He is nothing more than the Pied Piper gathering up disciples. The founders rejected the laissez faire approach to governing that he espouses. He wants to govern as if the Articles of Confederation were still in force. The voters in droves reject his message, and he does a great disservice to people who believe in limited government.

YMMV

 

[firehawk1]

I can do all that and still reject Ron Paul as a loon. I don't think he is the best candidate. I don't think he's even a good candidate. Everyone talks about the lesser of two evils - I think he is equally evil. He is another Carter or Harding waiting to happen. He would spend an entire administration hiding in the White House with no support in Congress. He is nothing more than the Pied Piper gathering up disciples. The founders rejected the laissez faire approach to governing that he espouses. He wants to govern as if the Articles of Confederation were still in force. The voters in droves reject his message, and he does a great disservice to people who believe in limited government.

YMMV

Oh my GAWD.... you have really stepped in it now.

 

[level.eleven]

This is why it is important for the populace to keep the warrior caste in check.

 

[rambone]

[STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I do not want [STRIKE]believe in preemptive[/STRIKE] wars. [STRIKE]We[/STRIKE] I do not believe the President should [STRIKE]be able to [/STRIKE]preemptively start wars.

You must have been playing devil's advocate all the dozens of times we've discussed preemptive war.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

You must have been playing devil's advocate all the dozens of times we've discussed preemptive war.

No, you're just incapable of differentiating between what I think we should do, what I wish we would do, and what I know we can do.

 

[Cerberus]

The Jeffersonians fought to keep the government small right up to the point that Jefferson was elected President. Then he increased his government threefold, bringing all of his supporters into the government. Kind of funny how power changes perspective and principles.

Did he do this before or after he slashed the size of government? Or was it the Louisiana Purchase non-scandal?

I can do all that and still reject Ron Paul as a loon.

So which part of his message is loony? Is it the parts that have borne themselves true? Or all the past predictions that seem to be coming true with a vengeance?

I don't think he is the best candidate. I don't think he's even a good candidate.

He's a horrible candidate. After all he could have spent the last 30 years in office flip-flopping, lying and adjusting the principals he has stood for.

Everyone talks about the lesser of two evils - I think he is equally evil.

Yep real evil. Take care of our own problems first evil.

He is another Carter or Harding waiting to happen.

Grasping for straws here a bit aren't ya?

He would spend an entire administration hiding in the White House with no support in Congress.

Conjecture, or are you clairvoyent?

He is nothing more than the Pied Piper gathering up disciples.

A goal that would be much better served by being as disgusting as the rest of the current field.

The founders rejected the laissez faire approach to governing that he espouses.

Oh they did? Lot's of foreign entanglements espoused by the founders?

He wants to govern as if the Articles of Confederation were still in force.

Seems to me he talks of the constitution quite a bit. Never heard him say anything about the Articles of Confederation.

The voters in droves reject his message, and he does a great disservice to people who believe in limited government.

What do you expect from an entitlement enslaved electorate? Most people will not vote away their free s**t.

YMMV

Yep, my milage definately varies.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

The Jeffersonians fought to keep the government small right up to the point that Jefferson was elected President. Then he increased his government threefold, bringing all of his supporters into the government. Kind of funny how power changes perspective and principles.

Did he do this before or after he slashed the size of government? Or was it the Louisiana Purchase non-scandal?

After. Had nothing to do with the Lousiana Purchase.

I can do all that and still reject Ron Paul as a loon.

So which part of his message is loony? Is it the parts that have borne themselves true? Or all the past predictions that seem to be coming true with a vengeance?

It's OK for Iran to have a bomb. It's our fault we were attacked on 9/11. We shouldn't have allies. I don't have to get any further than that.

I don't think he is the best candidate. I don't think he's even a good candidate.

He's a horrible candidate. After all he could have spent the last 30 years in office flip-flopping, lying and adjusting the principals he has stood for.

Or he could have spent the last 30 years in office doing absolutely nothing of note or consequence. Oh wait, he did.

Everyone talks about the lesser of two evils - I think he is equally evil.

Yep real evil. Take care of our own problems first evil.

No, naive don't really understand world dynamics kind of evil.

He is another Carter or Harding waiting to happen.

Grasping for straws here a bit aren't ya?

Nope.

He would spend an entire administration hiding in the White House with no support in Congress.

Conjecture, or are you clairvoyent?

Based upon the fact he's spent 23 years in Congress with no support in Congress, I'd say I was judging by past performance.

He is nothing more than the Pied Piper gathering up disciples.

A goal that would be much better served by being as disgusting as the rest of the current field.

No, I'd say he's much better at it.

The founders rejected the laissez faire approach to governing that he espouses.

Oh they did? Lot's of foreign entanglements espoused by the founders?

Just one of many such issues.

He wants to govern as if the Articles of Confederation were still in force.

Seems to me he talks of the constitution quite a bit. Never heard him say anything about the Articles of Confederation.

He talks a great game, until you start actually listening to the words.

The voters in droves reject his message, and he does a great disservice to people who believe in limited government.

What do you expect from an entitlement enslaved electorate? Most people will not vote away their free s**t.

He gets ~ 10% of the vote. Are the other 90% of Republican voters part of the entitlement enslaved electorate? I don't know. I don't go to the meetings.

YMMV

 

[justcallmedoc]

None of them are perfect.. We can find flaws in all of them.. But Santorum has more charactor, honesty, and morally sound.. And #1 point, he's behind the Constitution and our freedom and liberty's..

 

[sepe]

None of them are perfect.. We can find flaws in all of them.. But Santorum has more charactor, honesty, and morally sound.. And #1 point, he's behind the Constitution and our freedom and liberty's..

Unless he doesn't agree with the freedoms that certain groups of people want. There is NO reason for him to be obsessed with what consenting adults do in their bedrooms. His personal opinions are fine but if he wants to legislate morality...that is another reason for me to not vote for him.