netster007x on February 29, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Well said.

I’d add that it’s one thing for the Dems to set up robo calls to influence who their opponent may be in the fall. Rush organized a similar movement in 2008. To his credit, Romney is not being critical of the Dems.

But when a GOP candidate starts appealing to the Dems to crossover and vote in the GOP primary, they’ve crossed a line and made a huge statement regarding what they are all about.

Romney is right: Santorum has some explaining to do.

Not to mention the hypocrisy that he also voted against the bailout.

Santorum has lost my respect.

I am beginning to think that somemost of the hostility toward Santorum has more to do with his faith and the fact that he is not afraid to show it(unlike some people), than for any other reason that his opponents(on both sides of the political fence) give.

His faith, by the way, that he has stated himself he will not force on people(like taking away their contraception; jailing them for homosexual acts; or other stupid “extremist” stuff like that. Stuff that the MSM wants you to think).

Sterling Holobyte on February 28, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Really – you believe many people on the Right hate it for the most part when Christians talk about their Christian faith? Didn’t Rick Perry’s wife say the same thing about her husband, too?

I disagree with you – I think most of the hostility that’s directed at Santorum originates in the same place that has the answer to the question, ‘What’s the explanation for good ol’ Rick being the very last of the “True Conservatives” to be glommed onto by the candidate-jumping “Anyone but Romney”ers?’

Think about the main criticisms Santorum received in the early debates – he has an overly aggressive, negative persona. Rick just isn’t a very pleasant guy on a personal level, like Ron Paul and Tim Pawlenty aren’t, and his unlikable qualities are having a repellent cumulative effect the more exposure he gets. If you remember, people got sick of him in PA, too.

I was referring to real Christian conservatives who make up the bulk of the GOP’s stalwarts and Hot Air, not RINO filth like you and Romney, who hide behind pitiful mewling cries of “fairness” to disguise your truly noxious anti-religious, glibertarian “fisc-con” (HA!) agenda.

You are outnumbered. We don’t want you in OUR party anymore. Leave now, before it gets ugly and we make you leave. This is our party, now and forever. If you want to shut up, pipe down, and let us save conservatism, you’re welcome to watch as a junior partner. But true conservative TEA partiers are calling the shots. As Rush pointed out today, it’s FAR more important for us to take over the levers of power in the Republican Party and show the Establishment who’s boss than to win a fake victory by getting rid of Obama with a guy who won the nomination without our support.

Esoteric on February 28, 2012 at 4:25 PM

lol if I believed you were doing a bit, I’d give you an A+, but you look too much like another poster here, HondaV65, for to me think you aren’t as moronic and unhinged as it seems you are.

You mention “real Christian conservatives” – who do you think they are? Rick “Take One for the Team” Santorum? Again, you believe you’re one? On what basis? I thought Jesus wanted people to follow His lead by condemning hypocritical behavior? I can see you don’t like Him either, because to you, critics of hypocrites, like Jesus, are whiners who all “hide behind pitiful mewling cries of “fairness”" whenever they care to comment on such a trivial matter as ethical virtue. If He were in the GOP today, no doubt you’d call Him a filthy RINO, too.

For someone who complains about the “whining” of others as much as you, you sure whine a lot – your mommy still hasn’t learned to change your diapers often enough, even though she’s had more than 40 years to master the skill, right? No wonder you’re so miserable.

“It’s the Republican nomination, not the independent nomination or the Democratic nomination,” he said on the call. “If you’re a Democrat and you want to be a Democrat, then vote in the Democratic primary, not the Republican. If you want to vote in the Republican Party then become one.”

Story at CNN political ticker. It is not letting me post the link.

ryandan on February 28, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Yawn. Kinda like saying I think there should be a rule that you can’t tackle the kicker on field goal attempts, but as long as it’s not on the books, my team will hit him hard.

There’s no hypocrisy in wishing for a rule change, yet play it the way it is.

Rush Limbaugh is Santorum’s stauches supporter with the conservative radio shows. Levin is a very close second. I have quit listening to both of them. This kind of bias reporting is sickening. Santorum is not a fiscal conservative and they both know it. I am totally disallusioned with these talk show icons. Loser loser for them.

ihavehadit on February 28, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Agreed. It’s almost like Rush and Mark want Obama to win.

Did you know that Reagan shunned democrats when he ran for POTUS? According to the second RonMe supporter that is a fact. Who would have thunk that? /s

Time for me to go see if Rick is doing his happy dance yet.

“The only one left standing who can honestly be said to share most of our conservative principles is Mitt Romney.”
Rally for Romney

whatcat on February 28, 2012 at 7:39 PM

You’re so disingenuous. Yeah, Santorum supported Mittens in 2008 as an ALTERNATIVE to McLame.

As much as I hate Mittens, I’d still vote for him today OVER Mclame!!!

You sound like a leftist with your distortion of the truth. Why not just vote for Maobama and get it over with??

BTW, CNN is interviewing Democrats who are saying they voted for Santorum because he is the weaker candidate and they want him to run against Obama…think of the ads that will make for future primaries.

Mittens will stop at nothing to smear real conservatives but he will not fight nearly as hard against Maobama.
LevinFan on February 28, 2012 at 7:32 PM

“The only one left standing who can honestly be said to share most of our conservative principles is Mitt Romney.”
Rally for Romney

Mittens would be such a tough opponent. He won’t make incendiary comments about Maobama or call him a socialist. Mittens will only attack conservatives.

Just what we need. McLame 2.0.

At least McLame had the decency to wait until the General election to lash out at conservatives (McLame threatened to sue the NC GOP for running Rev Wright ads and also threatened to fire any staff members who were too harsh attacking Maobama).

Many Democrats voting for Santorum, Paul to deny Romney a Michigan win

“Some Democrats have put together a fairly organized effort to get Democrats to vote for Santorum or Ron Paul in order to rob victory from Romney. The Santorum campaign joined the effort Monday with a robocall aimed at Democrats urging them to vote for him because Romney opposed the bailouts of General Motors and Chrysler. The call didn’t note that Santorum also opposed the bailout.”

I will most probably vote for Romney! if he turns out to be the nominee, but the relentless attacks on Santorum by them is not endearing me toward their candidate.

JannyMae on February 28, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Goes both ways. I don’t see you calling out the likes of Esoteric for their ridiculous over the top anti-Romney posts. He’s certainly not encouraging any Romney supporter to vote for Santorum (or any other “pure christian conservative” for that matter).

Michael Savage is on now; discussing at length his distaste for Santorum using campaign funds to send out robocalls encouraging Democrats to vote for him and help Romney lose the primary. States this act alone shows him to be just another dirty politician and unfit to be the POTUS.

Belle on February 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Weiner Nation is a clown. The Great One has forgotten more about conservatism than Little Wiener Nation has ever known.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/28/toughen-up-mitt-ercup/

How can you support this clown?? It was ok when Mittens HIMSELF voted for Democrat Paul Tsongas in the Democrat primary in the 90′s to try to get a “weaker” opponent for George H.W. Bush. It was ok when Mittens and the Establishment pushed for an open primary in Michigan when he though it’d help him. It was ok in NH when 53% of VOTERS in the primary were INDEPENDENTS OR DEMOCRATS!!

But now it’s not ok when Santorum is trying to use the rules to his advantage to get Reagan Democrats to vote for him. Can you say hypocrite??

It was ok when Mittens used his millions and his SupePac to smear Newt in Iowa and Florida. Ok to use liberal scare tactics to say that Newt was going to cut social security (which was total BS).

It was ok for Mittens to use robocalls smearing Santorum — he played a clip of Santorum endorsing Mittens over McLame in 2008 (as big as a piece of trash as Mittens is I’d STILL vote for him TODAY OVER MCLAME). That was a disingenuous ad by Mittens. However when Santorum fights back by running his own robocall showing Mittensas a hypocrite supporting the Wall St Bailouts (TARP) but then opposing the auto bailouts suddenly it’s “dirty”?? WTF???

How much more evidence do you need?

Now today Mittens comes out and says “he doesn’t need to make INCENDIARY comments about Obama to get attention”. Mittens also refused to call Maobama a socialist back in December and said Maobama was just in over his head (sounds like McCain who threatened to fire anyone who went “too far” in criticizing Maobama”

We don’t need another moderate panzi who won’t stand up to Maobama and the media.

Mark my words. Mittens will stop at nothing to smear real conservatives but he will not fight nearly as hard against Maobama.

We all know damned well that if Romney had done what Santorum did, his supporters would praise him for his genius.
JannyMae on February 28, 2012 at 7:16 PM

The reply, when I was a young un, when someone intoned the “Royal We” to attempt to shore up a not-so-sure “I” was: “What? You got worms?”.

But seriously, I cannot recall any candidate desperately pleading with the opposition party to help him sabotage his own party’s primaries ever before as Santorum is doing. This is one of those times where “new low” actually does refer to a “new low”.

So what?

Did you miss the link earlier to Michelle Malkin’s site, where she provides evidence that Mitt was in favor of the open primary in Michigan? The fact is, the primary in MI is an open one, so since it is, that leaves it open to such “dirty tactics” by a Republican presidential candidate. Don’t like it? Get the rules changed.

Of course Romney is trying to hurt Santorum. What I don’t see is him asking Obama supporters to disrupt the Republican primary process knowing they will never vote for him in the general.

That being said, politics is tough and dirty. Let the candidates do whatever they think will help them as long as it’s within the rules. Michigan is an open primary – Santorum can call for anyone he wants to support him there if he thinks it will actually help his chances.

gotsig on February 28, 2012 at 6:01 PM

I was responding to someone who said Santorum was “only doing this to hurt Romney.” To me the issue is the hypocrisy among the Romney supporters. One of them even told me, over the weekend, that they didn’t care how Romney won, as long as he wins.

We all know damned well that if Romney had done what Santorum did, his supporters would praise him for his genius. Instead, Romney is raking Santorum over the coals for dirty tactics, when his campaign has been a prime proponent of dirty tactics, and his supporters are whining and using it as just another excuse to bash Santorum. IOW, typical.

I will most probably vote for Romney! if he turns out to be the nominee, but the relentless attacks on Santorum by them is not endearing me toward their candidate.

Romney can do no wrong? Maybe for Santorum, he was the one calling him a great conservative! To me, he’s not even a conservative. Just not quite as bad as Santorum.

Well, you’d never know it by reading your posts. This is the first time I’ve seen you make a comment like this, and frankly, my dear? I’m not buying it, after watching you spam threads with your anti-Santorum propaganda.

As for the personal remarks, someone is kind of bitter. Sort of creepy, actually. Chill out.

joana on February 28, 2012 at 5:16 PM

No, I don’t think she’s bitter. I think she’s tired of being talked down to by people like you who act condescending toward anyone who disagrees with them. I know I am.

You fool, we WON by losing in NV, DE, and CO. Would you have rather had a squish like Mike Castle, Sue Lowden, or Gale Norton in the Senate, doing indefensible things and tacking to the moderate/lib winds in order to please the budding socialists in those states? No. Far better to lose with dignity and principle with Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Ken Buck. Losing, under the right circumstances, is far, FAR better than winning. That’s the point Rush is making today (and I believe in my soul): it’s better to lose with Santorum than to win with Romney, because if Romney beats Obama, he will have proven that he didn’t need us to do it. And we here on Hot Air are going to make sure that the Republican Party knows from now on that when WE say “jump” THEY (and squishes like YOU) say “how high?”

You are so wrong about this, the fact that you don’t understand that you are is simply evidence that you are more of the trash that the TEA Party needs to take out and kick to the curb during this election cycle. Go vote Obama, I’m sure you want to. Me, I’ll be voting for Rick Santorum, the only real conservative in this race.

Esoteric on February 28, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Haha…wait, we “lost with dignity” with the likes of Christine O’Donnell? You cannot be serious. Here’s a general rule of thumb…if you have to tell people you’re not a witch, dignity is no longer applicable.

I’m not sure what bizarro world you inhabit, or what you’re smoking to get there, but losing is not better than winning. You don’t gain anything by giving seats away to people who won’t vote with you at all. Something is better than nothing.