Angry Santorum: I never said I’d vote for Obama over Romney!

posted at 6:00 pm on March 23, 2012 by Allahpundit

Twelve minutes from today’s Cavuto. I agree, he never said he’d vote for Obama over Romney. What he said was that “we” the electorate might collectively conclude that there’s not enough difference between them to justify replacing the incumbent, the implication being that that would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. Right? Read his comments from yesterday again or watch the video; the clear impression I got was “I wouldn’t blame anyone who thought that way,” an impression apparently shared by Santorum supporter Ed Morrissey. There are a lot of ways to hit Mitt for being a squish, first and foremost that America can’t afford one when bold action on entitlements is desperately needed, but anything that legitimizes the idea that the differences between Romney and The One are too “little” to justify a strong preference for one or the other is poisonous to the larger Republican effort. What he said yesterday did that, and his spokesman doubled down on it this morning by calling Romney a “mirror image” of O before adding the perfunctory bit about supporting the nominee. They’re not mirror images; there are hugely compelling reasons to strongly prefer one to the other, as I’d expect any committed pro-lifer who pays attention to Supreme Court vacancies to understand. I don’t mean to begrudge a guy a line of attack when he’s desperate to get traction somehow, but the attack on Romney from the right should never go beyond arguing that America needs a strong conservative to achieve meaningful improvements in policy. If you’re a prominent Republican with a big soapbox and you’re comparing Romney to Obama generally — even in the context of how “we,” not you, might feel — you’re playing with matches. (The only exception I can think of is on the specific issue of “ObamneyCare” because it’s hugely relevant to the primary and, let’s face it, there’s really no way around the mirror-image conclusion. But even in that case, the more likely it is that Romney will be the nominee, the more counterproductive that argument is.)

Interestingly, it’s Gingrich who’s made a bigger deal about this today than Romney. Statement one from Team Newt:

Newt 2012 Campaign Chairman Rep. Bob Walker released the following statement today criticizing Sen. Santorum’s comments about the possibility of an Obama reelection:

“As a former Pennsylvania colleague of Rick Santorum in the Congress, I am stunned by his statement that if he is not the Republican nominee, we might be better off with the reelection of President Obama. An Obama reelection would assure full implementation of Obamacare, a continuation of the assault on American energy production, more economic policies that destroy American jobs and the appointment of more radically leftist judges including perhaps to the Supreme Court. Whatever our differences inside the Republican primaries, no candidate should be suggesting that Barack Obama is a reasonable alternative.”

And statement two, a letter to RNC chief Reince Priebus (slightly edited):

Republicans must not lose sight of our ultimate goal in 2012: defeating President Obama in November. While we may disagree on which candidate will be the strongest opponent to the President in the general election, we can agree that any of the current Republican candidates would be a better president than Barack Obama.

As chairman of the Republican National Committee, you are in a position to focus our candidates on this goal. I request that you issue a pledge asking all the Republican presidential candidates to support our eventual nominee. It is imperative that Republicans unite once the nomination process is complete in order to defeat President Obama. We cannot afford four more years of his leadership.

Newt’s angle here, I assume, is to paint Santorum as a traitor to the cause so that voters will turn away from Team Sweater Vest in disgust and back to Newt as the designated Not Romney for the eleventh or twelfth time in the race. (I’ve lost count.) Mitt’s angle is not to mention what Santorum said anymore lest he end up repeating the “Romney = Obama” message inadvertently.



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 10

Wow what a tool.

Swerve22 on March 23, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Says Newt, the guy who attacked Bain from the Left. Ron Paul is right: they’ve become circus barkers.

John the Libertarian on March 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

What he said was that “we” the electorate might collectively conclude that there’s not enough difference between them to justify replacing the incumbent, the implication being that that would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. Right?

Right. Santorum is a nitwit and a lightweight. And he’s toast.

Jaibones on March 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Translation of nuance above: Santorum is lying, he said what it appears he said. His explanation doesn’t wash.

AYNBLAND on March 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

You’re too humble, AP. Don’t pretend you didn’t here Cavuto quoting your glorious snark from your post yesterday.

Kataklysmic on March 23, 2012 at 6:05 PM

FLIP FLOPPER! He was for Romney before he was against Romney before he was for Romney…

Seriously, man up and own what you said Rick.

V7_Sport on March 23, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Shrill, childish and not presidential. Santorum’s implosion is getting interesting to watch.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 6:06 PM

FLIP FLOPPER! He was for Romney before he was against Romney before he was for Romney…

Seriously, man up and own what you said Rick.

V7_Sport on March 23, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Are you a Romney supporter? Just curios….

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Mitt’s angle is not to mention what Santorum said anymore lest he end up repeating the “Romney = Obama” message inadvertently.

Mitt’s angle is, when you’re opponent is hanging himself, leave him alone to finish the job.

I’ve several of Ed’s posts about why likes(d) Santo. He never mentions a thing about Santo’s policies. Just the usual “he’s the conservativest guy in the race.” I say just as usual because I don’t recall any Santo “supporters” ever talking about his plans. Instead, all I ever hear are people saying they like him because he a social con, not that he would legislate that stuff he trumpets or anything like that.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

TOTAL MELTDOWN!!!

Roy Rogers on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

TOTAL MELTDOWN!!!

Roy Rogers on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Popcorn, please.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:08 PM

…and LOL at Santorum being so flustered he called Neil Cavuto, “Mitt”. This reminds me of Newt’s florida meltdown when Romney was really in his head.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Newt’s angle here, I assume, is to paint Santorum as a traitor to the cause so that voters will turn away from Team Sweater Vest

When Santorum’s the one supplying buckets of GOP traitor-paint, you might as well apply a few layers of it on him.

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Is this enough damage to cause Rick to lose Louisiana tomorrow?

JPeterman on March 23, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Are you a Romney supporter? Just curios….

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Yes, When are you going back to Kos? Just curious.

V7_Sport on March 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Mitt’s angle is, when you’re opponent is hanging himself, leave him alone to finish the job.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Why steal the rope when he’s so busy tying it around his own neck.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

When I hear any of these stupid statements from Santorum I don’t get mad at him. He’s a tool and can’t help it. I get mad at all the candidates who didn’t run who could’ve saved us from this embarrassment.

Mark1971 on March 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Is this enough damage to cause Rick to lose Louisiana tomorrow?

JPeterman on March 23, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Doubtful. I doubt this will make a 5 point difference. I would be that Rick still wins Louisiana.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:11 PM

How long will he put himself through his own “Dean Scream?”

ThePrez on March 23, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Um…

If you say something…

And THEN have to come back and say (or have others say) it was not interpreted correctly…

you are SCREWED.

Ragspierre on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

*bet

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Santorum’s telling the truth.

Why vote for Obama (the Blank Screen) or Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch) when you can cast a principled protest vote for the Constitution Party?

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Are you a Romney supporter? Just curios….

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

f you say something…

And THEN have to come back and say (or have others say) it was not interpreted correctly…

you are SCREWED.

Ragspierre on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Rule #1 in marketing: If you’re explaining, you’re losing.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

True! Just ask Rick.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Is this enough damage to cause Rick to lose Louisiana tomorrow?

JPeterman on March 23, 2012 at 6:09 PM

I doubt it….but this maybe the last state he wins for sometime. I’ll be voting against him in New Orleans tomorrow.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

…or 3rd party supporters.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Just heard Sanct-orum call the Martin shooting a “heinous act” on Hewitt’s show.

Throat.

Cut.

Ragspierre on March 23, 2012 at 6:15 PM

This is the same kind of knee jerk reaction as the Tebow/Pat Robertson outrageous outrage. Robertson didn’t say he wished Manning to be injured. Everyone knew what he meant, yet it was outrageous outrage time nonetheless.

Everyone knows Santorum didn’t say GO VOTE FOR OBAMA. But it’s outrageous outrage time once again.

I think Bill Maher was right. We need an outrageous outrage free day. This is getting ridiculous.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Mitt’s angle is, when you’re opponent is hanging himself, leave him alone to finish the job.
MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Yup. But I expect even Mitt did a facepalm for Santorum when he first heard it. Teh One is the one who’s really enjoying this; “Rick says to vote for me.”.

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

He was reiterating the fact that with Romney we lose the arguments against Obamacare, cap and trade, HHS mandate, etc. because Romney was for it/did it all before Obama. Any honest person knows that’s what he was saying. And he’s right. He should have expressed it with less hyperbole, but it is what it is.

Get some sleep, Rick. Keep up the fight but fight smarter tomorrow.

pannw on March 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Get some sleep, Rick. Keep up the fight but fight smarter tomorrow.

pannw on March 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

It’s funny what some folks will say with the Specter of defeat hanging over them :-)

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Clarification OverLoad!

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:17 PM

More faux outrage over faux outrage. Yawn. Santorum was right yesterday, he is right today.

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

LOL, you wish, Mittbot. Many of us are neither, and will remain so through election day 2012.

Norwegian on March 23, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Santy didn’t specifically say he would vote for ObaMao over Romney. He just encouraged everybody else to do it.

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Sanct-orum…

“You have to comment on a horrible crime”

The guy is completely NOT presidential.

Right along with Bad Luck Barry.

Ragspierre on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Everyone knows Santorum didn’t say GO VOTE FOR OBAMA. But it’s outrageous outrage time once again.

I think Bill Maher was right. We need an outrageous outrage free day. This is getting ridiculous.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Remind me.

How many times did “Etch-a-Sketch” appear in your posts yesterday? Ballpark it for me, wouldja?

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

He was reiterating the fact that with Romney we lose the arguments against Obamacare, cap and trade, HHS mandate, etc. because Romney was for it/did it all before Obama. Any honest person knows that’s what he was saying. And he’s right. He should have expressed it with less hyperbole, but it is what it is.

Get some sleep, Rick. Keep up the fight but fight smarter tomorrow.

pannw on March 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Because “honest people” are mind readers…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

…or 3rd party supporters.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM

You are wasting your vote. There is no conservative patriotic case to be made for voting for Obama.

V7_Sport on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Remind me.

How many times did “Etch-a-Sketch” appear in your posts yesterday? Ballpark it for me, wouldja?

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Zero.

Next question.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

LOL, you wish, Mittbot. Many of us are neither, and will remain so through election day 2012.

Norwegian on March 23, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Anti-Romney paranoia strikes again. See what it does to people… Another of the afflicted for ObaMao.

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

I would take the word WE as including himself

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Up Next…….

Santorum accuses FOX of a Full-Blown Political Assault against him!
(sarc)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Santorum’s telling the truth.

Why vote for Obama (the Blank Screen) or Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch) when you can cast a principled protest vote for the Constitution Party?

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Dear Idiot,

1. The re-election of Barack Obama will result in the demise of the Republic.

2. Shove your protest votes right up your @ss.

Regards,

fiatboomer

fiatboomer on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Anti-Romney paranoia strikes again. See what it does to people… Another of the afflicted for ObaMao.

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Do you have Romney posters on your bedroom door?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Get some sleep, Rick. Keep up the fight but fight smarter tomorrow.
pannw on March 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM
It’s funny what some folks will say with the Specter of defeat hanging over them :-)
MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Defeat hanging over us…with Romney as our presumptive nominee that sounds about right.

pannw on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

u sweatervest, bro?!

Jeddite on March 23, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Zero.

Next question.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

My mistake.

It was Wednesday where you used it about a thousand times.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:21 PM

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

It has been 24 hours and the bridge is still burning isn’t it?..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Dear Idiot,

1. The re-election of Barack Obama will result in the demise of the Republic.

2. Shove your protest votes right up your @ss.

Regards,

fiatboomer

fiatboomer on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Hyperbole much? Wasn’t the Republic supposed to end when Carter was elected? Or Clinton? Or JFK? Or FDR? Or in 2008? Every election is the most important election of our lives and every time if the other guy wins it’s the end of the world as we know it.

Doesn’t this crap ever get old with you? Here’s a prediction: no matter who wins in 2012, 4 years later the USA will be around more or less the same as it was in 2012.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Just heard Sanct-orum call the Martin shooting a “heinous act” on Hewitt’s show.

What? Even he can’t be that stupid.

lowandslow on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

“Neil, I’m happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but this is the hatchet job of all time. Of all time!”

Fabozz on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

So, AngryEd, how does it feel knowing that since Rick picked up your talking points on HotAir and DeepSixed his campaign with them?

Did Rick at least pay you for your talking points?

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

I have zero respect for Romney, but I agree with AP on this one.

Sigh.

jazz_piano on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

My mistake.

It was Wednesday where you used it about a thousand times.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Nope.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Do you have Romney posters on your bedroom door?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Wow…

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Quick thoughts:

1) The Etch A Sketch thing will stick to Romney because it personifies the “severely conservative” “progressive” Romney.

2) Newt picked up the Etch A Sketch football, ran with it, and scored.

3) Santorum picked up the Etch A Sketch football, fumbled it, and Romney ran it back for touchdown.

In the end, both Romney and Santorum are negatively impacted overall. Romney, because he will continue to be seen as Mr. Etch A Sketch. Santorum, because he fumbled and whined after Mitt used it against him. Newt is the only one to be posititvely impacted.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Santorum’s telling the truth.

Why vote for Obama (the Blank Screen) or Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch) when you can cast a principled protest vote for the Constitution Party?

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Dude, if you’re not gonna take this seriously….

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Newt is the only one to be posititvely impacted.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Does this mean he’ll finally leapfrog Ron Paul and score third place?

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Do you have Romney posters on your bedroom door?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Better just a Mitt poster than having Santo conduct national bed checks.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

So, AngryEd, how does it feel knowing that since Rick picked up your talking points on HotAir and DeepSixed his campaign with them?

Did Rick at least pay you for your talking points?

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

LMAO!

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

So, AngryEd, how does it feel knowing that since Rick picked up your talking points on HotAir and DeepSixed his campaign with them?

Did Rick at least pay you for your talking points?

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

I wish he had. Doesn’t matter though. He’s 100% correct. There is no difference between the two. And the voters will do just what Santy said they will. When given a choice between real Coke and FakeCoke, people choose the real thing.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2012/0320/Alarm-bell-for-Mitt-Romney-New-poll-shows-Obama-surge.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

You are wasting your vote. There is no conservative patriotic case to be made for voting for Obama.

V7_Sport on March 23, 2012 at 6:18 PM

A vote for a third-party candidate is a vote for a third-party candidate, not a vote for Obama. Idiot.

Dear Idiot,

1. The re-election of Barack Obama will result in the demise of the Republic.

2. Shove your protest votes right up your @ss.

Regards,

fiatboomer

fiatboomer on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Dear Moron,

1.) It’s already screwed if it’s a choice between the black Obama and the white Obama

2.) Take your prostituting for Romney to your knees and just give the bozo a blowjob already

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Santorum will still win Louisiana, but by less than he would have a week ago. And the voters Santorum loses will mostly go to Newt, not Romney.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

I just checked the live web feed from the Newt cam. The view hasn’t changed. Just an image of Paul’s bony backside.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Huh?

Rick messed up, but he’s still right about Romneycare/Obamacare. He’s also right about the English language discussion too. Romney is going to win because he has no core, so it’s easy for him to say what people want to hear. Ok, fire away folks.

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Doesn’t this crap ever get old with you? Here’s a prediction: no matter who wins in 2012, 4 years later the USA will be around more or less the same as it was in 2012.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Agreed.

The republic survived 16 years of FDR, it will survive 8 of BHO.

The real question should be; will the GOP and/or Conservative Movement survive any time with Romney? That one is less clear.

Norwegian on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

I would take the word WE as including himself

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

He’s got a mouse in his pocket. That’s why it’s “we.”

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

He’ll always be a whiner to me…

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Do you have Romney posters on your bedroom door?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Wow…

cicerone on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

That’s a yes then?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Happy TGIF..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Santorum is a sanctimonious amateur. Who whineth far too often. And lies.

kevinkristy on March 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Newt is the only one to be posititvely impacted.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Does this mean he’ll finally leapfrog Ron Paul and score third place?

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Probably.

I’m a “Brokered convention or bust!” guy, myself.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Santorum will still win Louisiana, but by less than he would have a week ago. And the voters Santorum loses will mostly go to Newt, not Romney.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

That’s wish-casting… the polls of a Sant/Romney race show that Newt’s supporters divide nearly equally.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM

2.) Take your prostituting for Romney to your knees and just give the bozo a blowjob already

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I would gladly do it if it meant I can stop getting anal raped by Obama.

And yes, I meant every word of that.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM

In my opinnion, looks like Santorum kind of snapped and said something without really thinking about it. These guys are campaigning hard and have long days, so I can understand they may say something in a way they did not intend, BUT in the same way, I think Santorum made too much of a deal about a Romney staffer talking about an etch-a-sketch which Santorum ran with even though I think that was taken out of context too. What goes around comes around…..

WyoMike on March 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

One, watch your language.

Two, if anybody wants to vote for a hopeless loser with positions even Sarah Palin wouldn’t be comfortable with, they can find the Constitution Party on their own.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Hey DS!

Pass some of that margarita over here :)

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Santorum needs to engage his brain before opening his mouth!

lhuffman34 on March 23, 2012 at 6:30 PM

LMFAO! I’m listening to Santo’s Cavuto interview. I wouldn’t go near that tool without a geiger counter and a lead lined head to toe suit. Talk about a complete and utter meltdown!

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

“This is the hatchet job of all time!”

If so, you have your own hand to thank for that.

rukiddingme on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

He’ll always be a whiner to me…
cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM

The funny thing is, as we saw in the debates, is just doesn’t know when his mouth is his own worst enemy and he rambles on & on. He even managed, in this interview, to bring up his Spanish in PR fumble.

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Meltdown? Did you guys actually watch the clip?

That was an excellent, rational clarification by Santorum. It was exactly what he need to say.

I still support Gingrich, but I am relieved to hear Santorum correct the record so emphatically.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

One, watch your language.

Two, if anybody wants to vote for a hopeless loser with positions even Sarah Palin wouldn’t be comfortable with, they can find the Constitution Party on their own.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

1.) Too bad. If someone wants to insult me, I can hand it back in spades.

2.) If anyone wants to vote for someone who has switched his position on just about every issue, and served as the architect for Obamacare, then they can vote for the perpetual charlatan Republicans.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Santorum’s telling the truth.

Why vote for Obama (the Blank Screen) or Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch) when you can cast a principled protest vote for the Constitution Party?

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

No, Santorum is lying out of desperation, anger, and frustration. It’s evident in everything he says and does. He sees his chances slipping away and there’s nothing he can do to stop the slide.

Insofar as you are concerned, there’s nothing principled or patriotic about encouraging others to throw away their votes while the country is at a decision point. In this election, not voting or voting for an inconsequential protest party would be the moral equivalent of doing nothing. Encouraging others to do nothing when their country needs them is despicable. You’re despicable.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Santorum needs to engage his brain before opening his mouth!

lhuffman34 on March 23, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Or at least take his feet out before talking.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

The Republican Party is in a death spiral. First they had Bush, who for good reason was very unpopular by the end, followed by McCain who was even worse in many ways, and now the guy that lost to McCain in ’08 and has been a laughingstock the past four years, is the likely R nominee. The Republican Party is swirling the drain, it’s obviously time for something new. The tea party can’t just stick it’s head back in the ground as they appear to have done. The American people cannot afford to just sit on the sidelines because the establishment money that brought us Obama in ’08 is bringing us Romney in ’12, leaving the little people with no real choice. Obamcare/Romneycare; Romneycare/Obamacare, six of one; a half dozen of the other.

Let the big money buy their candidates if they want and let the MSM spend all their time talking about them if they wish, but the rest of the country needs a champion to put a leash on corruption in Washington and Wall Street.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Wondering why Rick can’t ever accept the fact that he was wrong in what he said or how he said it or how it was interpreted and move on. He seemed more intent on proving his point and re-iterating it than backing away from it.

I’m afraid the sweater-vest is going to be replaced by a white jacket before too long.

He should go back to Puerto Rico and spend some quality time at the pool with his family. I miss the old Rick.

Midwesterner on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Why vote for Obama (the Blank Screen) or Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch) when you can cast a principled protest vote for the Constitution Party?

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Because voting for the CP is voting for Obama by omission. I will say it again:

I am a libertarian. I dislike all of the drivers in the clown car crack-up known as the Republican primary, but I promise you this:

If the GOP nominates a ChiaPet to run against Obama, I will vote for said ChiaPet in November.

To quote The Magnificent Bastard, Andrew Breitbart:

“I don’t care who our candidate is and I haven’t since the beginning of this. I haven’t! Ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate! …When I walk through CPAC or a I travel the United States to meet people in the Tea Party who care – black, white, gay, and straight – anyone that’s willing to stand next to me to fight the Progressive left, I will be in that bunker. And if you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with [a certain] candidate, more than shame on you! You’re on the other side!”

The chance of repealing Obamacare if Obama gets reelected: 0%

The chance of repealing Obamacare if Romney is elected: >0%

The chance of Cass Sunstein and Harold Koh becoming Supreme Court Justices if Obama gets reelected: >0%

The chance of Cass Sunstein and Harold Koh becoming Supreme Court Justices if Romney gets elected: 0%

You are either with Obama and the Progs or you are against them. It’s that simple.

If you vote CP and Obama is reelected, we don’t want to hear any of your bytching during his second term.

Resist We Much on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

*clink*..We are drinking “Goldfish” today..But margaritas sound good..very good..Don’t forget the salt and the limes..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM
It has been 24 hours and the bridge is still burning isn’t it?..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Dire Straits:It appears!
=======================

*Air Strike Controller to B-1*’

*Nice shoot’n Tex,you took out both banks of the river
as well*!!
(snark):)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Santorum is a sanctimonious amateur. Who whineth far too often. And lies.

kevinkristy on March 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Whines? Yes. That’s something he really must improve.

Lies? No. He was speaking third-person, not first-person, and should have made it clear that he was speaking what he thought independents would say, not what he himself would do. Santorum never meant to imply that he would vote for Obama or thought that people SHOULD vote for Obama. What he meant was a variation on Reagan’s “bold colors not the pale pastels that the “severely conservative” “progressive” Romney offers.

When it comes to lies, that would be Mitt Romney, when he quit the 2008 race and lied about his reasons for doing so. Terrorism had nothing to do with his decision to quit, and he was lying when he said it did.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Sorry AP, but if the “stronger Republican effort” leads to the nomination of a gun-grabbing neo-Fascist like Willard, then maybe it needs to be poisoned.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

they can find the Constitution Party on their own.
KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Why aren’t you trolling at the fringe party’s sites instead of being here? Seriously?

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

1.) That’s for your sake, not mine – words like that get you banned. Not that I’ll lose a whole lot of sleep over that, but whatever.

2.) When the “Constitution” Party (they seem to have forgotten that the document’s been amended a few times) develops a platform that doesn’t disgust a full majority of the voting public, maybe I’ll pull for them. Until then, I’ll focus on getting the socialist out of the White House.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Climb off the ledge. Release the hostages. Mitt’s not going to be taking your guns away.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:26 PM
Happy TGIF..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Dire Straits:And TGIF to both of ya!!:)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

…or 3rd party supporters.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM

..crosspatch had it right. 3rd party == support for Obama.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

*Air Strike Controller to B-1*’

*Nice shoot’n Tex,you took out both banks of the river
as well*!!
(snark):)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

LoLz..rofl..Good one!!..Hat tip to you sir..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

That was an excellent, rational clarification by Santorum. It was exactly what he need to say.

I still support Gingrich, but I am relieved to hear Santorum correct the record so emphatically.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Okay, so now we’re defining rationality as the ability to dig a bigger hole for yourself?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 10