The Santorum “big government conservative” debate continues

posted at 11:00 am on January 7, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

I seem to remember a time when “big government” and “conservatism” were pretty much mutually exclusive phrases. But the lines have been blurring on that for a long time now, a point which came to light significantly during the administration of George W. Bush with the expansion of Medicare and NCLB. This distracted and disillusioned many conservatives, along with the accelerated rate of spending. (It was nowhere near the current pace, obviously, but still enough to put many fiscal conservatives off their feed.)

At the Daily Caller, Matt Lewis highlights this debate and how it has swung the spotlight onto Rick Santorum. An unlikely pair of debaters are squaring off on the subject, too. In this case it’s Rush Limbaugh and Erick Erickson. First up… Limbaugh.

Now there’s a mantra — there’s mantra out there — and it’s even now spread to CBS News: “Will Santorum’s big government conservatism resonate?” It’s everywhere, folks. “Santorum’s big government conservatism.” Have you ever heard “big government conservatism” associated with Rick Santorum before today? Have you? Have you?

Lewis responds that yes, in fact, he has heard it before. And it’s not in terms of wanting the government to take a hand in matters such as pro-life issues or immigration. It’s about spending and entitlement programs, as I noted above. The response from Erickson:

I’m rather tired of all the people who don’t like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist. I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.

Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.

I think the main point of contention here is precisely how we are to define “big government.” (Which, for some reason, always summons up visions of Bill Clinton giving a speech for me.) We can debate the dollars and cents at the bottom of the column, but that’s a somewhat different argument than asking what the proper role of the federal government is. Immigration and national security are obviously the province of Washington. (Current appearances to the contrary not withstanding.) But the expansion of entitlement programs is going to be a hard sell with conservatives as not being a big government position.

Of course, all of this amounts to the type of sniping and attacks you’d expect to see during the primary season. It’s also not something that’s likely to hurt Santorum much if he manages to win the nomination, as those aren’t positions that are going to scare off moderates and independents.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

“Erick Erickson is annoying”.

aquaviva on January 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative.

Just look at Santorum’s record.

NickDeringer on January 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.

Yet Santorum also voted to transform AFDC into TANF, and got an earful for saying he didn’t want to make people’s lives better using other people’s money. Surely it can’t be both.

Stoic Patriot on January 7, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Rick Santorum is just Laissez-Faire. And yes, Laissez-Faire includes leftist economics and stuff like taxes, also.

The Nerve on January 7, 2012 at 11:08 AM

This is true.

Sarah left us in a huge lurch. I think she could have taken this nomination.

We are now going to have to unite behind Newt or Perry. Rev. Santorum is way, way, way too extreme to beat Obama. The media will not let it happen.

Rev. Santorum would be a good pope or bishop, not a president.

Flip a coin – Newt or Perry. I could vote for either.

stenwin77 on January 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM

“Erick Erickson is annoying”.

aquaviva on January 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Yeah…he is.

Rick Santorum has defended on principle congressional earmarks and started the K Street Project at the behest of Speaker Gingrich,voting against Right to Work legislation and is pro-union (not surprising since he comes from a Union state)

His surge is already deflating & he won’t play well in the south due to his persona as well as his record…2 weeks is a long time in this rodeo.

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM

As I have said so often before, there is one and only one question that matters: Can Rick Santorum be trusted to follow the original intent of the constitution? I don’t think he can be trusted to do that, but then again, I don’t think any of the other candidates can either. We are so screwed.

gryphon202 on January 7, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Rev. Santorum would be a good pope or bishop, not a president stenwin77 on January 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM

How about Lobbyist?

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM

“Ladies and gentleman, the Toupee of the United States.”

No, that’s not it.

“Ladies and gentleman, the Bedroom Regulator of the United Stares.”

Nope, not it either.

“Folks, here’s Mr. Also-Ran.”

Yep. That’s it.

M240H on January 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Ron Paul thinks so:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Aohgrn1peA

EddieC on January 7, 2012 at 11:14 AM

You get what you get from a Republican elected to statewide office in a northeastern state, whether it’s Romney, Santorum or Chris Christie (and you can toss Rudy Giuliani into that mix just with his city office election in New York). Any northeastern GOP hopeful is likely to have blemishes on their record because the swing voters in those areas want those sorts of things (or they wouldn’t be swing voters). The question comes down to how far a candidate went while in office to satisfy those voters and how likely it will be that if elected president, those as the same type of voters he’ll focus the most on pleasing, even though the swing voters nationally aren’t as liberal as their northeastern subset.

jon1979 on January 7, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Erickson is annoying”.

aquaviva on January 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Rick

x2

gerrym51 on January 7, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I seem to remember a time when “big government” and “conservatism” were pretty much mutually exclusive phrases.

That time must’ve been before Social Security was brought before Congress.

Dante on January 7, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Rev. Santorum would be a good pope or bishop, not a president.

I actually think this is accurate

gerrym51 on January 7, 2012 at 11:15 AM

“Erick Erickson is annoying”.

aquaviva on January 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Better to be annoying than dishonest, which Rush is being by jumping through all those hoops to whitewash Santorum’s record of falling in line with Bush policy.

He actually defended the K Street Project.

The quintessential Washington insider, he worked closely with Tom DeLay to set up the ‘K Street Project,’ linking lobbyists with the GOP leadership.”

Now, let me tell you something. Let me tell you what all that’s about. The Democrats own all of that. What Rick Santorum and DeLay were trying to do was disempower the Democrats’ bureaucrat lobbying reach into Washington. They were trying to get an equal foothold. It’s the way the game is played. For all of us who are devoted to ideas, God bless us, but it is money that makes that town turn. It’s money that makes that town run. It is money that motivates most people to want to be in that town. It’s money that motivates most people to want to win elective office. It’s being in control of the federal budget that is the great carrot that’s dangling in front of everybody’s eyes because that’s the power.

KingGold on January 7, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Santorum’s lobbying is annoying as well.

rubberneck on January 7, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Enough already. In six weeks Santorum will be off the radar screen. He lived in Iowa for the last year and performed well in a state caucus that allowed Democrats to vote for GOP candidates, thus upsetting the apple cart. Iowa and Santorum’s success there are but a campaign novelty, just like every other caucus they’ve ever held there.

fogw on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I think people still listen to Rush for entertainment purposes, maybe a sense of old comfort.

But his analysis has just been awful in recent years. He’s two steps behind social media and out of touch with reality.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Newt Gingrich looks better and better by the day. In fact, he almost pretty much looks like the only person that would give us smaller government outside of the Chamberlain Paul and that is giving Paul more credibility than he deserves, as I doubt he would be able to convince congress to do what he wants done.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM

He’s done that too.

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Santorum is a union guy. He voted against Davis-Bacon repeal, and refused to support national right to work legislation. He even voted to raise the federal minimum wage.

If he becomes a real threat to Romney in SC, Team Romney will destroy him this. There is no bigger issue in SC right now.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:21 AM

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Only Perry & Huntsman are the candidates that are consistent small government.

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Ron paul is running the “serous Hypocrite” ad in South Carolina except inserting Santorum in it instead of Gingrich. Who knew.

gerrym51 on January 7, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Question: Santorum is from PA–a coal-mining, union state. Now, can someone tell me whether Santorum advocates for public or private unions? To me, there is a big difference.

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I think people still listen to Rush for entertainment purposes, maybe a sense of old comfort.

But his analysis has just been awful in recent years. He’s two steps behind social media and out of touch with reality.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

But we do listen to Hot Air commenter Swamp_Yankee, because of his brilliant insight and commentary.
Romneybots could rationalize a wetdream.

Garym on January 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Are you trying to make the same case for Mittens?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM

“Ladies and gentleman, the Toupee of the United States.”

No, that’s not it.

“Ladies and gentleman, the Bedroom Regulator of the United Stares.”

Nope, not it either.

“Folks, here’s Mr. Also-Ran.”

Yep. That’s it.

M240H on January 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM

You really don’t like him, do you?
Our primary is a ways off yet, so I’m waiting to see who is still left standing.
If our nominee (it won’t happen) was to be Santy…I’m holding onto that hair, so it better be attached firmly…the ears on the other one have got to go!

KOOLAID2 on January 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Rush is stuck in 2004, that’s why he likes Santorum.

Erickson too, that’s why he likes Perry.

I’m not even sure how is this a debate once one looks to Santorum’s record and statements.

Obviously, the biggest problem for Santorum in the general won’t be his love for big government programs but his stridency on social issues and his statements on stuff like “personal autonomy”, “corruption of freedom of conscience” and on how the distinction made by JFK on his 1960′s speech has caused much harm in America. Plus his ultra-hawkish views and his association with Bush and things like the K Street Project.

He won’t win the nomination though.

joana on January 7, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Are you trying to make the same case for Mittens?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Your point is?

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Are you trying to make the same case for Mittens?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Rationalize Santorum’s apostasies because it was PA coal country.

Rationalize Perry’s apostasies because it was hispanic former Democratic stronhold Texas.

But Romney should have run as a Tea Party social conservative in Massachusetts in the 1990s. No excuses.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:32 AM

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Same background in public office. I’m not voting for either PERIOD.

How about someone who said he went to the border? More than likely it was a TexMex restaurant named “The Border”. A few months ago ignorant folk proclaimed he and Bachmann to know what the border needed, a fence on every square inch. Ain’t gonna ever happen, AND really dumb to put a fence on top of 1000 foot high sheer cliffs.

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:33 AM

With Santorum as a nominee, we won’t even be talking about his big Government ideas, or even jobs and the economy in general; no, instead we’ll be reduced to conversations that defend his prolific oft times viewed extreme visions as the right-wing nut bedroom philosophies, GOP version of porn.

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Newt Gingrich looks better and better by the day. In fact, he almost pretty much looks like the only person that would give us smaller government [...]

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Are you insane?

Gingrich supports or has supported federal regulation of “technology,” increased federal control over economic activity to stem global warming, national health care (with an individual mandate), expansion of medicare and medicaid, expansion of uber-corrupt FANNIE and FREDDIE, war with Iran, etc. And as an added bonus, he’s a total scumbag. Putting a megalomaniac lobbyist in the White House isn’t going to get you smaller government.

EddieC on January 7, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Speaking of Conservative…the voters in Iowa seemed to think Ron Paul is…but the media plants in one’s subconscious what they want you to think…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgSOpHXbXQQ

Fed Up on January 7, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Only Perry & Huntsman are the candidates that are consistent small government.

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Huntsman is no such thing.
Perry is more a cypher than a small government conservative. Remember, he spends tax payer money on companies much like Obama does. He thinks the government should have the power to force medical decisions on the little people, for their own good. He enjoys cronyism as if it were sports. Last but certainly no where near least, he has more affinity with illegal aliens that live in Texas than he does to United States of America Citizens who do not live in Texas.

So, Perry is a no. He has done nothing to allay my well founded opinion of him. I will not vote for someone who has more camaraderie with Illegal (Hispanic specific) aliens than he does with me, a Citizen of the United States of America and Veteran of the first gulf war.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:40 AM

With The Exception of Bachmann and Paul there ain’t a nickels worth of difference between any of the GOP candidates and it’s a sad fact that there ain’t a dimes worth difference between any of them and Obama. If your vote made a difference they would make it illegal.

roflmao

donabernathy on January 7, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Gingrich supports or has supported federal regulation of “technology,” increased federal control over economic activity to stem global warming, national health care (with an individual mandate), expansion of medicare and medicaid, expansion of uber-corrupt FANNIE and FREDDIE, war with Iran, etc. And as an added bonus, he’s a total scumbag. Putting a megalomaniac lobbyist in the White House isn’t going to get you smaller government.

EddieC on January 7, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I was about to reply, but I think your argument is stupid enough to just fall on its own merits.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I seem to remember a time when “big government” and “conservatism” were pretty much mutually exclusive phrases.

It’s sort of like how people call Romney a “moderate” even though he ran to the left of ultra-liberal Ted Kennedy and essentially invented Obamacare including the authoritarian mandate against liberty.

And all of the candidates pretend to support the Constitution yet all but one of them supported the NDAA, which gives the president the authority to violate the Constitutional rights of American citizens indefinitely.

This primary has been positively Orwellian.

FloatingRock on January 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Remember the olden times? I mean the really old days that have dissolved in to the mists of time when the TP and grassroots conservative movement was opposed to supporting a Washington insider? Try hard, you can recall how the movement used to say, “no more career politicians?” I know, it was so last summer, but my how attitudes have changed. Good times. Good times.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 11:43 AM

“Many conservative leaders that I talked to after the Iowa caucuses are rallying around the latest flash, Rick Santorum. But others have concluded that despite all of his debate mishaps and his poorly run campaign thus far, Mr. Perry may be the only Republican candidate capable of beating Mr. Romney. As one campaign aide told me: “We have to make a good second impression.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203471004577142813448683308.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTSecond

video at the article link.

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Let’s look at the behind the scenes whisper campaign in Iowa for a minute. Remember that Iowa is BIGTIME Ethanol State.

Which candidate threatens that the most, especially with statements regarding EPA (they are the ones who required ethanol in fuel as an oxygenate)? Anyone know the answer? Anyone?

Social conservative vote or threat to their government mandated windfall, who would they support?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Who did Iowa want most to be banished from the race?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:48 AM

My point about Santorum is that supporting private unions as different than supporting public unions. One is tax-payer funded and the other isn’t.

The other complaint someone mentioned is that he did not support legislation that all states be right-to-work states. I haven’t looked into that, but is it possible that perhaps he feels the states themselves need to decide that and not the federal government?

Relative to the border, I don’t know what you are referring to, but Santorum has stated that he does not believe in amnesty. Also, in researching it appears Santorum:

“Senator Santorum has been a consistent supporter of US immigration laws. He opposes benefits for illegal aliens, comprehensive immigration reform, and supports a border fence and making english the national language. However, he has hinted at providing some method of “dealing with” those already in the US.

In a losing 2006 re-election campaign, Senator Santorum promoted his support of border security and touted his opponent’s views as amnesty. Senator Santorum opposed the 2006 attempt to achieve comprehensive immigration reform and cited that position often in the election cycle. Senator Santorum also cited his opposition to plans to grant social security and other benefits to illegal aliens who have lived in the US throughout the election.

In the 2012 Presidential election, Senator Santorum has expressed support for a border fence, and english as the national language. He was also critical of discussion hinting at granting amnesty to illegal aliens in exchange for border security in the future. However, when directly asked what he would do with the illegal aliens already in the US, Senator Santorum stated that we would have to “deal with” those people seperately.”

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Senate/Pennsylvania/Rick_Santorum/Views/Immigration/

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Erik Erickson is just another blogger, and an annoying one a that.

I can understand referencing Rush Limbaugh who has years of experience and hundreds of political contacts. Hi opinion I will give credence to.

But, Erik Erickson. You have got to be joking!

Sparky5253 on January 7, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Note that inorder to get the 30 cents per gallon state subsidy, ethanol plants must each be majority owned by local farmers and NOT by the name of the company on the sign who designed, built and operates each plant.

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 11:48 AM

If you actually know facts about the border, treaties, executive orders, property rights, terrain, drainage issues, access to water issues, environmental laws, etc…

Only a FOOL would proclaim a border fence on every inch.

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Every been to the border?

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:54 AM

think people still listen to Rush for entertainment purposes, maybe a sense of old comfort.

But his analysis has just been awful in recent years. He’s two steps behind social media and out of touch with reality.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

You are just bitter that Rush isn’t shilling for your preferred candidate.

If you are so awesome at political analysis, why aren’t you on the radio? You are so spot on and in touch.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Erickson has no credibility left. He sold his soul to Perry and CNN … attacking any candidate other than Perry. I think his deal with CNN limits his coming out publicly in full support of Perry, so he attacks all the others.

Karmi on January 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Santorum does need to support Right to Work. That is a basic conservative principle.

And if he’s anti-free trade and pro-tarriffs across the board, then he’s not conservative on that issue either.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM

RICK PERRY’S INTERNET STRIKE FORCE: OMG…this is sooooo awesome..lyric of NEW SONG FOR PERRY by
Rebecca Winterowd, coming soon to your nearest Y-Tube
“Perry Woman” (to the tune of “Redneck Woman” by Grethchen Wilson)
Lyrics by Dan Winterowd

… Well I ain’t never been the ‘Obama Girl’ type
No I can’t stand pay for play, I rather shoot straight and right!
… In Austin, there’s a cowboy, Rick Perry is his name
He’s got friends in his camp like Forbes, Gatlin and Strait!
Some people look down on him, but he don’t give a rip
He’ll stand tall in his boots and shoot straight from the hip!

Chorus
’cause I’m a Perry woman- I ain’t no far left broad
I’m just a product of my raisen’- I say ‘hey y’all’ and ‘yee-haw’
Real men are my passion and they have been all along
And I know all the words to every Ted Nugent song!
So here’s to President Perry, a real Tea Party Dream
Let me get a big ‘hell yeah’ from the Perry Girls like me- hell yeah!

Solyndra secrets, well that stuffs not right
We need a man with a real jobs plan- get us back workin’ overnight!
And still cut spendin’, balance budgets and a tax cut for all you see
Send Congress home, have’em work part time- They’ll answer to you and me!
Well you might think he’s handsome, gun totin’ and hardcore
But in my neck of the woods he’s just the man next door!

Note: Do you think any other candidate gets this kind of threat?

nancysabet on January 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM

With The Exception of Bachmann and Paul there ain’t a nickels worth of difference between any of the GOP candidates and it’s a sad fact that there ain’t a dimes worth difference between any of them and Obama

donabernathy on January 7, 2012 at 11:41 AM

No tell the rest of the class who can match Perry’s executive record that deliver results?

I don’t see any relevance to any larger stories in the fact that Texas’ economy has created more retail jobs than any other state, and more jobs overall than any other state, over the past five years. And that the state really has no competition.

The Lone Star State had 10,629,300 non-farm jobs as of November, a gain of 451,100 jobs since the same month in 2006, an analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data by The Business Journals’ On Numbers shows.

Louisiana was a distant second in the number of non-farm jobs added during that five-year span, with 57,000.

So both of the top states are GOP controlled? Means nothing. It also means nothing that in the same time frame, high tax Michigan is hemorrhaging jobs away.

Michigan ranks last on the percentage side, with a five-year retail loss of 9.7 percent.

No broad comparisons to be made. Nothing to see here. Move along.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/28/nothing-to-see-here-just-texas-continuing-to-own-the-nations-economy/

“Convinced America needs the same conservative policies Governor Perry will need your support to get America on track to control spending and balance the budget Convinced America needs the same conservative policies Governor Perry will need your support to get America on track to control spending and balance the budget.

* Texas is projected to collect $82.7 billion in this 2-year budget cycle, up from the $81.1 billion being spent. The result: $1.6 billion in surplus.
* Texas closed the 2010-2011 budget cycle with a General Revenue balance of $1.1 billion.
* Texas’ Economic Stabilization Fund (ESF), or Rainy Day Fund, is now projected to have $7.321 billion at the end of the 2-year budget cycle.

What’s more, the new projections from, based on actual receipts thus far, suggest that Texas’ fiscal picture could be even better than currently stated in The Texas Tribune:
Her projections are conservative. For instance, her projection is that the state’s sales tax revenues will increase by 5.3 percent during the current fiscal year; during the first three months of the fiscal year, the increases have been in the double digits. Combs said in her cover letter that she’ll revise the numbers if needed between now and the end of this two-year budget in August 2013.”
http://www.americanfreedombybarbara.com/2011/12/governorrick-perry.html

Gov Perry has signed 6 balanced budgets, pushed though the largest budget cuts since WWII & S&P upgraded Texas while they downgraded the nation citing Perry’s leadership.

“According to the below report from Standard and Poors yesterday, Texas’ decade of lowered credit risk rating had stifled growth and sucked millions of extra tax dollars in interest penalties. Rick Perry and his administration has performed a near miracle in Texas in spite of this obama depression. Half the jobs created in the US over the last 3 years of obama mania have been created in Texas. The state budget is now in surplus and 30% of its long-term debt has been erased in just the last 12 months… during a recession. Well, it looks like Rick Perry and Texas chose not to participate in the recession…

Standard & Poor’s (S&P) has raised Texas’ issuer credit and general obligation credit ratings to AA+ from AA based on the state’s strong and diverse economy and strong leadership from the governor and Legislature that has left a projected $9 billion in the state’s Rainy Day Fund. S&P also raised its rating on the state’s appropriation debt to AA from AA-. “The ratings continue to reflect our opinion of the state’s large and steadily diversifying economy, which despite the recession continues to perform better than the nation in terms of both economic activity and employment,” S&P credit analyst Horacio Aldrete-Sanchez said. “Furthermore, we expect that the Texas economy will recover earlier and at a faster rate than most other states given its continued population growth and relatively low cost of doing business, which we expect will contribute to gradual employment gains in 2010, particularly in the health, education and services sectors.”

S&P’s decision was based on Texas’ 2010-11 biennial budget, the state’s strong Rainy Day Fund, and Texas’ low tax-supported debt burden. The higher rating means Texas will pay lower interest on money it borrows, saving of millions of taxpayer dollars.

“In light of the economic downturn affecting the nation, this session we continued to make wise choices, such as cutting taxes on 40,000 small businesses and maintaining a multi-billion dollar balance in our Rainy Day Fund that have helped our state sustain its overall economic strength,” Gov. Perry said. “These prudent and fiscally conservative decisions continue to pay off for our taxpayers.”

http://conservababes.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=18674&mode=threaded

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Rationalize Santorum’s apostasies because it was PA coal country.

Rationalize Perry’s apostasies because it was hispanic former Democratic stronhold Texas.

But Romney should have run as a Tea Party social conservative in Massachusetts in the 1990s. No excuses.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:32 AM

you know, you wont have to racionalize for ron paul. if you want less goverment, he will deliver.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Erickson has no credibility left.

Erickson jumped the shark when he announced that he had solid info that Niki Haley’s accuser of adultery was lying, and then never presented any evidence, and his excuse was it was supposed to be like Rush Limbaugh’s satire.

Apparently Erick Erickson, when he’s not ignoring Perry’s DREAM act and private property rights violations surrounding TTC, uses expressions like calling Justice David Souter a “goat-fucking child molester”

I don’t know know why any conservative wants Erickson and Red Staters speaking for them.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Swamp Yankee is calling Santorum a statist while he supports the RomneyCare guy who banned semi-automatic weapons?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM

As I have said so often before, there is one and only one question that matters: Can Rick Santorum be trusted to follow the original intent of the constitution? I don’t think he can be trusted to do that, but then again, I don’t think any of the other candidates can either. We are so screwed.

gryphon202 on January 7, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Sorry about Santorum being exposed as a big Govt. phony.

Rick Perry can be trusted to follow the original intent of the constitution. He is the only candidate promising to make Govt. inconsequential in our lives.

Rick Perry is the only small Govt. conservative left in the race.

Those that oppose him cannot find anything meaningful in his record to criticize so they use ‘superficialities’.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

you know, you wont have to racionalize for ron paul. if you want less goverment, he will deliver.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:05 PM

How do you rationalize the fact he’s been in Congress for 20 years and hasnt delivered on anything, other than pork?

Hard to argue he will deliver as POTUS when he hasnt done it anywhere outside the delivery room.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Newt Gingrich newters them all. He is the guy.

bloggless on January 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Erik Erickson is just another blogger, and an annoying one a that.

I can understand referencing Rush Limbaugh who has years of experience and hundreds of political contacts. Hi opinion I will give credence to.

But, Erik Erickson. You have got to be joking!

Sparky5253 on January 7, 2012 at 11:49 AM

think by yourself.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM

The reality is Perry is a pro-business southern Democrat, not really a conservative.

Erick Erickson and the Red Staters don’t want to talk about the DREAM act and the texas corridor project, which as I understand it, would have violated all sorts of private property rights.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Swamp Yankee is calling Santorum a statist while he supports the RomneyCare guy who banned semi-automatic weapons?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM

No, I call him a hypocrite.

Here’s the problem with all you yoyos. You lacerate Romney for every apostasy in a 20 year record, and set the standard of scrutiny so high that no even your precious “Not Romneys” can live up to it.

None of them were Tea Party consrvatives 15 years ago. Not one. All have clunkers in the record every one.

So yeah, Santorum looks foolish. Santorum who opposed national right to work legisilation, opposed repeal of Davis-Bacon, voted for higher federal minimum wage, argued on behalf of stronger fedreal control of education, who voted to give felons voting rights.

This is your new golden boy. This is the hero to Romney’s anti-hero? Huh.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM

think by yourself.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Seems like Ron Paul does all your thinking for you.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Obviously, the issue of whether a candidate is for a physical border fence is big bone of contention for you. I’m looking at more than just the candidates opinions on the viability of building a physical border fence.

KickandSwimMom on January 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM

This is your new golden boy. This is the hero to Romney’s anti-hero? Huh.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM

That is all minor stuff compared to Romney implementing the biggest government overreach into our medical decisions in history, setting the stage for it at the national level called Obamacare.

This is on top of Romney being liberal on immigration, gun rights, taxes and fees, judges, etc.

It’s the case that Romney was just a little impure, it’s he was perfectly fine governing Mass as a liberal.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:18 PM

workingclass artist on January 7, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Thank you very much for your hard work in producing facts to support your arguments.

I find it funny that whenever a new Not-Romney aside Perry is raised and finally exposed, many commenters here circle the wagons trying to protect them.

These are the same commenters that criticize Perry for any little thing, including his ‘heartless’ comment and refuse to accept his apologies.

- Newt uses ‘inhumane’ and his big Govt. record – it’s all fine and dandy.

- Cain’s philandering and lack of political experience – it’s all fine and dandy.

- Santorum’s lack of management experience, big Govt record, and love of earmarks – it’s all fine and dandy.

But with Perry, everything from “Ooops” to “Gardasil” is used to bash him on the head repetitively.

And now that the last Not-Romney Not-Perry is falling, they are down to using the argument that “All the candidates suck.”

Sorry, Gingrich, Santorum, Cain, and Bachmann sucked! Perry doesn’t. He remains the only candidate with the record to sow that he will do what is needed to return America to greatness again.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Let me fix that for you, Jazz:

I seem to remember a time when “big government” and “conservatism” “libertarianism” were pretty much mutually exclusive phrases.

Mr. Prodigy on January 7, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I am currently dragging from the caboose of the Gingrich train, but feel we are in dire need of a late entry to stand a good chance of beating Obysmal. Since Rubio is clearly not taking the bait, I think Jindal would be a superb candidate to unite the (conservative) wing of the party. I read an interesting article about Perry stepping aside and allowing his buddy Jindal to take over. Why is this not gaining support? We are now in a desperate situation to save the country and contrary to conventional wisdom, it is not too late for a consensus candidate to jump in and run the board. Currently, only Rubio and Jindal fit that bill. This, coming from a die hard Palin fan who can read the writing on the wall.
Rush truly disgusted me with his redefining ‘Big Government’ as a way of cramming Santorum down our throats. It’s time to draft a new, unassailable horse. Jindal/Rubio 2012.

AmeriCuda on January 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM

What was conservative about Perry’s immigration views and the trans texas corridor project? What about the fact he used to be a Democrat and was Al Gore’s boy.

That all goes down the memory hole with the Red Staters.

They want to be able to attack Santy without telling us why Perry is truly for small government.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Doesn’t the fact that Perry can’t seem to run a solid campaign indicate he sucks?

Polls don’t even have him in the top 3 in South Carolina? How does he plan to win if he can’t compete in states like Iowa and SC?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

I think people still listen to Rush for entertainment purposes, maybe a sense of old comfort.

But his analysis has just been awful in recent years. He’s two steps behind social media and out of touch with reality.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Awesome, a non sequitur about social media and “reality”. How ya’ been, MeggieMac? Limbaugh is wrong on this one, but he’s normally right on the facts. Each of the candidates (with the possible exception of Ron Paul) has shown weakness with regard to the limitation of government, but Santorum is maybe the worst of the bunch. While lately Limbaugh has tended to whitewash some of the big government tendencies of Gingrich and Santorum relative to Romney, it’s not because he’s embracing their policy ideas. It’s because he’s made the calculation that, on aggregate, Perry, Newt and Santorum are the most conservative candidates available at this point…certainly more conservative than Romney.

Ultimately, his objective is to promote a conservative agenda – lower taxes, less regulation and a less hostile climate for business – as the medicine for what ails the country. The packaging for that medicine is far less relevant. If Romney more credibly expressed an embrace of conservative principles rather than rationalizing that Romneycare is in keeping with those principles (and don’t get me started on his support of artificial income level caps for tax breaks…pure class warfare pandering), he would get more enthusiastic support from Limbaugh and conservatives. But, alas, Romney seems to think you win elections by bending over for a loose coalition of “undecideds”, and he’d rather use the electoral process to buy their temporary loyalty with government handouts than to educate them on the contrasts between left and right and why right means correct.

Nevertheless, Limbaugh weakens his position with his relative endorsement of Rick Santorum.

fitzfong on January 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

How do you rationalize the fact he’s been in Congress for 20 years and hasnt delivered on anything, other than pork?

Hard to argue he will deliver as POTUS when he hasnt done it anywhere outside the delivery room.

swamp_yankee on January 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

ron paul delivers pork because it would be stupid not to get the money that would be delivered to some other district any way.

but ron paul consistance in small goverment is legendary. even in those cursed news letters, he talks about it.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Newt Gingrich looks better and better by the day. In fact, he almost pretty much looks like the only person that would give us smaller government outside of the Chamberlain Paul and that is giving Paul more credibility than he deserves, as I doubt he would be able to convince congress to do what he wants done.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Sorry, astonerii, Gingrich is every bit the big Govt. conservative that Santorum is.

They all believe in Govt. as the solution and not the problem.

Perry is the only small Govt. conservative left in the race. He has ALWAYS understood the proper role of the federal Govt. vs state Govts.

Vote Perry 2012 and make America great again.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:23 PM

He thinks the government should have the power to force medical decisions on the little people, for their own good. He enjoys cronyism as if it were sports. Last but certainly no where near least, he has more affinity with illegal aliens that live in Texas than he does to United States of America Citizens who do not live in Texas.

So, Perry is a no. He has done nothing to allay my well founded opinion of him. I will not vote for someone who has more camaraderie with Illegal (Hispanic specific) aliens than he does with me, a Citizen of the United States of America and Veteran of the first gulf war.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I was about to reply, but I think your argument is stupid enough to just fall on its own merits.

astonerii on January 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

First of all, thank you for your service to this country that allows us to continue cyber conversations with absolute strangers on blog sites. He walked back on big Government needle, said it was a mistake. Instate tuition beyond his control, veto proof majority in Texas Legislature. He suports it now, because Texans support it, I being one of them.

Astonerii, while your military service is appreciated, I doubt seriously you have ever visited the 1,200 mile border of Texas and quite possibly have never lived in Texas and dealt with an influx of illegal immigrants that the Federal Government refuses to deport en masse. They look for jobs over here, that is the magnet like landscaping and construction. They will migrate to tiny little states like Massachusetts to find money, most times they will wire the money back home to their wives and children. That is the magnet, not instate tuition to Texas A & M. Perry is opposed to amnesty, unlike Mitt Romney and even Newt Gingrich.

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 12:23 PM

What sucks most about Perry is that the fact that he got in, a 10 year govenor from a big conservative state like Texas, is that some other conservative candidates probably decided at that point he was going to be hard to beat and opted to stay out.

So he basically weakened our field yet we are still supposed to go vote for him.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM

How would Ron Paul beat a black president if Ron Paul wrote racist newsletters?

You have to be delusional to think Ron Paul is electable. Maybe 100 years ago. Not now.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Erik Erickson…

You mean the punk who did a 24-hour hate on Sarah Palin?

Yeah, I trust him to be the standard bearer of conservatism. One of the worst little slimeballs that Rick Perry has the uncanny ability to attract.

BKennedy on January 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

What’s up with all the quotes from Erick Erickson and Redstate? If I wanted to hear what Erickson was saying, I’d go to Redstate.

JPeterman on January 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Didn’t Erickson jump the shark when he announced on Red State that he had proof that the guy accusing Nikki Haley was lying about it, but then never presented that proof, and said he was just trying to do some Rush Limbaugh satire, even though that’s not the type of thing Rush does.

The guy is a joke.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Doesn’t the fact that Perry can’t seem to run a solid campaign indicate he sucks?

Polls don’t even have him in the top 3 in South Carolina? How does he plan to win if he can’t compete in states like Iowa and SC?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Polls change all the time and in this case, they will change. Let’s see what happens as Santorum is exposed for the phony that he is.

Perry was about to get his second look when Romney and the media machine quickly ‘created’ a Santorum surge by hyping a CNN poll that was released to start it all.

Let’s see what card they play now that Santorum is fading as fast as vanishing ink.

I am optimistic that Perry will do very well in SC and if current trends for his rivals continue, he might even be able to capture SC.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

I seem to remember a time when “big government” and “conservatism” “libertarianism” were pretty much mutually exclusive phrases.

Mr. Prodigy on January 7, 2012 at 12:19 PM

you really think you can pivot the last 3 years of teaparty\republican rhetoric in the middle of a primary?

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

88.1 ACU lifetime. Obviously a RINO. Get out the pitchforks.

When did EE join the People For A Perfect World?

ConservativeLA on January 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Erik Erikson also convenient ignores Santorum’s work in… wait for it…

1996 Welfare Reform!

Erikson exits to shill for Rick Perry and attack all who do not follow the Perry cult of slimeballs. He’s in it for whatever Perry is paying him.

BKennedy on January 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Let’s see what card they play now that Santorum is fading as fast as vanishing ink.

I am optimistic that Perry will do very well in SC and if current trends for his rivals continue, he might even be able to capture SC.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:29 PM

We heard this same cheerleading for Perry, that he was going to do well in Iowa, for several weeks. The polls never backed that up, and they don’t back up your assertion he will do well in South Carolina.

Illegal immigration is a big deal to a lot of people in South Carolina. Perry is worse than most liberals on this issue.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM

I believe Santorum was praised by Club for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform as well as other fiscal groups.

I don’t see them praising a statist.

But hey, Erickson said so and he’s got a website. Must be true.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Then don’t vote for him. Simple. I will say though that times are good here in Texas, 25 million people and growing. As a native Texan, never seen anything like it in my 44 years. Houses in my neighborhood are bought before they are completed, job growth unmatched by any other state, and during at recession period at that. Texans are not seeing the economic downturn that other states are seeing. Credit has to be given to Governor Perry, he has the mindset and Administration that encourages success for a large state. Lower regulations and lower taxes, tort reform. If someone like say, Mitt Romney & his Romneycare debacle, were to be Governor of our large state, we wouldn’t be where we are today, first in the nation for job growth. It’s about jobs and economy this election cycle. Astoreii wants to talk about big government needle and instate tuition instead. Wow, that’s a winning campaign strategy. Probably a former Bachmann supporter.

I hope you will change your mind about Rick Perry. If not, so be it. :)

sunshinek67 on January 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I’m not against Perry, I’m tired of emotional Perry supporters falsely accusing Santorum of being a statist rather than make a positive case for Perry.

His campaign sucks if that’s the only way he can get back into it.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Perry needs to show up at the debates too….he needs to start performing in the debates, that’s part of being a good candidate.

If you can’t make the case for yourself, how can you expect to win?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

What sucks most about Perry is that the fact that he got in, a 10 year govenor from a big conservative state like Texas, is that some other conservative candidates probably decided at that point he was going to be hard to beat and opted to stay out.

So he basically weakened our field yet we are still supposed to go vote for him.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Erik Erickson…

You mean the punk who did a 24-hour hate on Sarah Palin?

Yeah, I trust him to be the standard bearer of conservatism. One of the worst little slimeballs that Rick Perry has the uncanny ability to attract.

BKennedy on January 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM

And the bitter Palinistas on this forum continue to out themselves.

First, the ones that blame Perry for keeping Palin out – as per Dr. Tesla. Nonsense! Did he physically stop her from running? Better drop that meme – it makes you sound like a whining kid on the playground.

Second, the ones that take it out on Perry for choosing to declare his candidacy at the RedState forum. Why? Because Erick Erickson did an ill-advised 24-hr piece on Palin’s promise to let us know her decision by October 2011.

If these silly reasons are why we had the rise and fall of Cain and Santorum – candidates who everyone except Palinistas know have zilch chance of getting nominated – then we certainly deserve Romney’s nomination and Obama’s re-election.

You Palinistas better get over your butt-hurt and wake up to reality. Is this country worth saving or not? We are not having an American Idol contest for the presidency.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

How would Ron Paul beat a black president if Ron Paul wrote racist newsletters?

You have to be delusional to think Ron Paul is electable. Maybe 100 years ago. Not now.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Tesla, in case you didn’t know, the racist newsletter author has been identified. Please see Reality Check: http://www.fox19.com/story/16458700/reality-check-the-name-of-a-mystery-writer-of-one-of-ron-pauls-racist-newsletters

Regarding electability, we’ll find out soon enough, but the media isn’t on his side: http://bit.ly/baromoter

Fed Up on January 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Rick Perry can be trusted to follow the original intent of the constitution. He is the only candidate promising to make Govt. inconsequential in our lives.

Rick Perry is the only small Govt. conservative left in the race.

Those that oppose him cannot find anything meaningful in his record to criticize so they use ‘superficialities’.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

On what basis? The Trans-Texas Corridor? Gardasil? Sorry. You haven’t convinced me.

gryphon202 on January 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM

RightMan,

You need to stop campaigning against Palin.

I don’t think Palin ever was going to run, and I was talking in general, that I think Perry’s entrance shut the door on other candidates. I think it was a factor in why TPaw got out of the race, and I know TPaw had some problems but he’s preferable to Romney and seemed more prepared for debates than Perry does.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Ron Paul isn’t going to win the nomimation.

He’s a Liberterian running as a Republican. He can’t fool most conservatives.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM

…those aren’t positions that are going to scare off moderates and independents.

I wish people who should know better would quit equating “moderates” and “independents”. Independents skew heavily right/libertarian. Many are fed-up former Republicans.

cartooner on January 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM

How would Ron Paul beat a black president if Ron Paul wrote racist newsletters?

You have to be delusional to think Ron Paul is electable. Maybe 100 years ago. Not now.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:25 PM

he will probably wont win. maybe rand in 4 years.
anyway, what if romney\perry\santorum\gingrich are all fakes that in the end will not reduce goverment, what do i have to lose in supporting ron paul until he finally folds.
at least we deliver a message to the GOP that this anti big government message is to be taken serious.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:44 PM

The problem with Ron Paul is doesn’t think government has any role at all.

He’s to the left of Obama on national security and foreign policy. We need a government that takes national security seriously and that’s not Ron Paul’s view.

Ron Paul wants to go soft on crime and drug violatiors, again, he sees that as big government.

He probably sees government making prostitution illegal as big government too.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I believe Santorum was praised by Club for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform as well as other fiscal groups.

I don’t see them praising a statist.

But hey, Erickson said so and he’s got a website. Must be true.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

You might hate Erickson but his expose of Santorum cited FACTS – Santorum’s voting record.

Even the most ardent Santorumians here can’t defend his voting record save for some pitiful “Well, he was a Senator from PA so he had to deliver…” Yeah, right!

So care to go through Erickson’s list and defend Santorum?

I didn’t think so.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Rick Perry is the only small Govt. conservative left in the race.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I’m not a Perry fan and don’t much agree that he’s small-gov but he has a better record on the matter than Newt or Santorum, that’s for sure. Maybe Newt was conservative once upon a time but that was a long time ago, and since that time he became a big liberal, but with Perry it was the other way. He used to be a Gore supporter years ago and opposed President Reagan, but since that time he has become more conservative.

If Perry were really for small government—if he was a champion of the Constitution—he would have added his name to Ron Paul’s in opposition to the NDAA that Obama signed on New Years eve.

FloatingRock on January 7, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Santorum has a fairly dismal record on legal/illegal immigration issues. Most conservatives are in deep denial about the importance of that issue. It matters little in Iowa or New Hampshire, however, as they’re so far removed from the problem. DD

Darvin Dowdy on January 7, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Tesla, in case you didn’t know, the racist newsletter author has been identified. Please see Reality Check: http://www.fox19.com/story/16458700/reality-check-the-name-of-a-mystery-writer-of-one-of-ron-pauls-racist-newsletters

Regarding electability, we’ll find out soon enough, but the media isn’t on his side: http://bit.ly/baromoter

Fed Up on January 7, 2012 at 12:37 PM

cool link. i did not knew about it. thanks.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 12:48 PM

You might hate Erickson but his expose of Santorum cited FACTS – Santorum’s voting record.

Even the most ardent Santorumians here can’t defend his voting record save for some pitiful “Well, he was a Senator from PA so he had to deliver…” Yeah, right!

So care to go through Erickson’s list and defend Santorum?

I didn’t think so.

TheRightMan on January 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Dude, I’m not reading that guy’s stuff. I’ve looked over Santorum’s voting record and it’s not statist. It’s stupid to say that, and it’s obvious that Erickson is in the tank for Perry. He thinks if he sabotoges Santy than Perry may have a shot.

The reality is Erickson said on CNN that he and most Republicans were fine with Romney being the nominee. I’ve never see him call Romney a statist. Yet Santorum is? There’s no logical consistency in that. He’s a hack. He’s the Jennifer Rubin version of a Perry’s superfan.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4