Santorum spokewoman says he’ll support Romney if nominee … Update: Santorum statement added

posted at 10:25 am on March 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

As walkbacks go, this isn’t exactly … enthusiastic. Will it be enough to get Rick Santorum off the hook?

On CNN’s Starting Point, [Alice] Stewart defended the candidate’s comments Thursday in which he said: “We might as well stay with what we have” in Obama, rather than elect Romney.

“What we have with Mitt Romney is… a mirror image of Barack Obama,” Stewart said. “Both believe in government takeover of health care, cap and trade, big government spending, Wall Street bailout.” …

But later in the show, when pressed on how Santorum could support Romney if he’s saying he’s the same as Obama, Stewart responded:  “Rick has made it abundantly clear once a nominee is chosen he’ll stand behind the nominee and do everything we can to replace Barack Obama.”

Call this one a half-walkback.  Some of Santorum’s defenders claim that he meant that voters would react that way if given a choice between Obama and Romney.  Matt Lewis makes that argument pretty well, but uses the same paragraph I did in the excerpt:

“You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there. If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future,” Santorum told a crowd at USAA.

Well, if Santorum meant that’s what others would think, he certainly didn’t make that explicit in the statement.  It’s an arguable point, but interestingly, not one that Alice Stewart bothered to make on CNN, apparently. They’re still arguing that there isn’t any difference between Romney and Obama, but that Santorum will stick with a Republican rather than a Democrat.  Contrast that with Newt Gingrich’s consistent argument that everyone in the GOP race would be a quantum improvement on Obama, but that he’s more quantum than the rest — a perfectly legitimate argument, even if one doesn’t agree with Gingrich’s self-assessment.

This statement is an improvement over yesterday, but it’s not exactly an apology, either.  (via Keder on Twitter)

Update: Senator Santorum has given Hot Air this statement in response:

“I would never vote for Barack Obama over any Republican and to suggest otherwise is preposterous. This is just another attempt by the Romney Campaign to distort and distract the media and voters from the unshakeable fact that many of Romney’s policies mirror Barack Obama’s.  I was simply making the point that there is a huge enthusiasm gap around Mitt Romney and it’s easy to see why – Romney has sided with Obama on healthcare mandates, cap-and-trade, and the Wall Street bailouts.  Voters have to be excited enough to actually go vote, and my campaign’s movement to restore freedom is exciting this nation.  If this election is about Obama versus the Obama-Lite candidate, we have a tough time rallying this nation.  It’s time for bold vision, bold reforms and bold contrasts.  This election is about more than Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, or Rick Santorum – this campaign is about freedom and I will fight to restore your freedoms.”


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 5

Delusional.

BobScuba on March 23, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Oh gee!…Thanks Rick!

KOOLAID2 on March 23, 2012 at 10:27 AM

It’s what *I* think, Ed. And some here seem to think it makes me less than a man. So be it.

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 10:28 AM

So my initial, gut reaction during the early debates was that Satanorum is a douchebag. I am right. He’s basically a whiny, egomaniac, whoa-is-me! type. Basically a mirror image of Barack.

SouthernGent on March 23, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Will it be enough to get Rick Santorum off the hook?

Better question; will it be enough to keep Ed’s support?

BadgerHawk on March 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Is that the beep-beep-beep of a dumb-truck being put into reverse?

profitsbeard on March 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM

A Rockefeller Republican who’s a capitalist is a damn sight better than a marxist. Just be sure to primary him in 4 years. And give him a more conservative Congress.

rbj on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Santorum speaks the truth for once in his life and the republican lynch-mob will not get off his case.

Americans are better off with Obama. The economy is improving, even Willard admits it

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

This is how Santorum really feels:

http://s15.postimage.org/o3mmugsaz/Santy_etching.png

Midwesterner on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

It’s not an improvement…it’s the same darn thing Ed

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

He didn’t take it back Ed.

Having said this it’s just one more gaffe in a campaign of gaffes by everybody-Expect Ron Paul who never gaffes because he never changes

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Echo, meet chamber.

profitsbeard on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Some of Santorum’s defenders claim that he meant that voters would react that way if given a choice between Obama and Romney.

“Those Republicans are going to be out there saying, you know, that he doesn’t look like those other presidents on the dollar bills, or he’s got Muslim connections, or…”

- Senator Barack Obama, 2008

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

A spokesperson? He should address it himself, maybe he will get the opportunity later in the day.

Cindy Munford on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

I don’t think it’s enough but what do I know, I’m writing-in Mike Castle.

Bishop on March 23, 2012 at 10:32 AM

This isn’t much.

A viable Presidential candidate wouldn’t make the comments Santorum did.

He’ll keep running and win Louisiana & a few more primaries, but he is no longer Presidential material, if he ever was.

22044 on March 23, 2012 at 10:33 AM

He doesn’t need to apologize but he ought to come out and say he will support the nominee no matter who it is. His record indicates he has always been a party guy. He did get burned by Specter but he is a solid GOPer and we all know it.

Clear it up today Rick. You got frustrated while being vetted, something no dems has to experience. Obama openly ran as a blank slate and won, thats what we’re dealing with today.

DanMan on March 23, 2012 at 10:33 AM

A Rockefeller Republican who’s a capitalist is a damn sight better than a marxist. Just be sure to primary him in 4 years. And give him a more conservative Congress.

rbj on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Sure. Let’s replace the man wiping his ass with the constitution with someone who will ignore it. I guess that is a step up./

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 10:33 AM

As walkbacks go, this isn’t exactly … enthusiastic. Will it be enough to get Rick Santorum off the hook?

Probably not. It was a dumb statement. It’s one thing for a voter to think that. Lots of us have our doubts about Romney. But for a fellow Republican candidate to say something like that is beyond stupid. How can anyone take seriously the inevitable Santorum endorsement of Romney after this incident?

Doughboy on March 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Every variation of Santorum’s statement and his people’s response is a 30 Second Ad for Obama. Now, that’s normal, it’s part of internecine battle and why the incumbency is powerful but the statements by Santorum and earlier Gingrich (about Vulture Capitalism) are game changing fall sound bites. They’re worse than any flip flopping audio OFA can play of Romney. Why? Because Obama is a massive flip flopper. That was never a huge winner to go down that road with Romney for Obama. He doesn’t have to go there now. This is silver platter stuff. Santorum in the past 48 hours has walked around with a kid’s toy prop and said stick with Obama. “Supporting” him is now agreeing with him and agreeing with his statement.

AYNBLAND on March 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM

He didn’t take it back Ed.

Having said this it’s just one more gaffe in a campaign of gaffes by everybody-Expect Ron Paul who never gaffes because he never changes

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Ron Paul never gaffes? What about when he said border fences could be used one day to keep Americans in the country? What about when his eyebrow toupee fell off during one of the debates?

vegconservative on March 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM

A spokesperson? He should address it himself, maybe he will get the opportunity later in the day.

Cindy Munford on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

This. As usual, Miss Cindy gets it right.

SouthernGent on March 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Time for Santorum to step aside. It’s already a certainty he’s not going to be the nominee. And this “gaffe” is unforgivable.

In the words of Joey Tribbiani,

“Over the line? You’re so far past the line you can’t see the line anymore. The line is a dot to you.”

Chris of Rights on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

this is the kind of thing jack wagons like me say on HA – it’s not a tactic presidential candidates should be engaging.

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

interesting teaching moment…

gatorboy on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Erick Erickson makes the same argument as Matt Lewis, which I agree with. I get the feeling though that you really are looking for a reason to jump on the Romney train, Ed. You are probably in an uncomfortable position when pretty much all of your compatriots, the republican establishment, most pundits, bloggers, etc. are Romney supporters and you’re supporting the one they are now piling on.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

So, Ed, are you walking back your endorsement of Santorum, or not?

The Santorum campaign’s modified, limited, hang-out isn’t enough for me, but then I was never a fan of Santorum to begin with.

I could understand his attraction to social conservatives, but I though his minuses (hostility to individual liberty and libertarianism) more than outweighed his pluses.

What this incident shows is Santorum really doesn’t understand, it seems, that there will be a huge difference in this country if Obama is re-elected and that Obama would be able to move the Supreme Court far to the left in another 4 years, as well as continue his assault on America.

Honestly, I don’t understand how any conservative of any stripe can say Romney’s the mirror image of Obama. Surely, Romney’s got many faults, but he isn’t Barry Sotero.

Santorum jumped the shark, and isn’t coming back.

I think he’s finished in the Republican party and with the Tea Party – which isn’t obsessed with social issues the way Rick is.

CatoRenasci on March 23, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Of course it’s not an apology. It’s a clarification.

He said that Romney did not offer a clear reason to pick him over “the devil we know.” Romney partisans jump on the comment to claim he’s saying Obama is better than Romney — or, even more ludicrous, that Santorum has “endorsed” Obama.

This is just a statement that no, he’s not saying that Obama is better than Romney, or pledging to support Obama.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 23, 2012 at 10:38 AM

I could grandstand here and announce my unwillingness to support Rick Santorum for President if he becomes the party’s nominee because of this idiocy, but it would be just as effective for me to announce my decision not to support Snooki for President if she becomes the party’s nominee, since the likelihood of both is roughly in the same neighborhood.

Red Cloud on March 23, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Dont blame Santorum. Blame your candidate Rombot. He is an Obama clone…all things to all people without the tiniest bit of heartfelt sincerity with any political philosophy.

Rombot will lose because of his own shortcomings…not because he was exposed as a fraud by his Republican opponent (again and again over the past 6 months)>

westaustin on March 23, 2012 at 10:38 AM

I don’t think it’s enough but what do I know, I’m writing-in Mike Castle.

Bishop on March 23, 2012 at 10:32 AM

If your not being sarc/ then you might as well vote as ricky will. He whines all the time. He whines at Drudge, he whines at Fox (who has had him on more than anyone except maybe Newt). But have you heard of him whining at Beck, who must be worth 10 nmillion to him in free advertising? No he takes Beck and makes a fool of him, and every time he makes a gaff, he explains it to Glenn and he agrees with him.

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

The stark difference between the two will become clear in a general election. Obama’s a far Left extremist being shielded by our Democrat Media Complex. Now Team Romney, you go and fearlessly make that case before the country. If you do so, you just may win, bro.

RepubChica on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Santorum got hyperbolic calling Romney out for the liberal POS he is. Unforgivable!

SurferDoc on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

He said what some of us are thinking, but coming from a candidate it sounded petty. I’m still dreaming of a brokered convention.

dmn1972 on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Rick is having a hissy fit.

Guess it sucks to lose to a moderate-liberal Republican who is also an extraterrestrial cult leader.

CorporatePiggy on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Not good enough, he has the lead in LA right now, how long will that last

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

I don’t know what you expect to accomplish by impugning Ed’s honesty – maybe a little self-indulgence, whatever – but the tone of his writing this morning clearly indicates that he’s not willing simply to trivialize this. And calling him a coward isn’t going to suddenly turn him into a hack like Erickson, trying to magick away every single flaw of his chosen candidate.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Will it be enough to get Rick Santorum off the hook?

..emphatic NEGATORY!

The Rat with Dentures is doomed!

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

It’s too late now to walk it back. He should have been out there this morning, not his spokesperson.

Actually he should have issued a statement last night IMO.

gophergirl on March 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Santorum jumped the shark, and isn’t coming back.

CatoRenasci on March 23, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Looks like Jaws got a piece of his azz!

Roy Rogers on March 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Stupid. Just stupid, plain and simple. I am not the most enthusiastic supporter of Mitt, but at the end of the day, he is exponentially better than the socialist-in-chief. All the years of flip-flopping during his campaigns have shown us that Mitt wasn’t “all-in”. Now that the reality is sinking in that he may very well be the nominee, combined with consistent pressure by the conservative base, could help him to focus on what really needs to be done. The sniping from Santorum is beginning to become unproductive to the overall cause. Ron Paul needs to understand this as well. Gingrich is a master tactician and I think he sees this. If we can get these guys to finish their “race” in a professional manner and then come together by June, we can blow the liberals out of the water in November. If they don’t recognize this, it could present our country with a real and present danger.

HomeoftheBrave on March 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Dont blame Santorum. Blame your candidate Rombot. He is an Obama clone…all things to all people without the tiniest bit of heartfelt sincerity with any political philosophy.

Rombot will lose because of his own shortcomings…not because he was exposed as a fraud by his Republican opponent (again and again over the past 6 months)>

westaustin on March 23, 2012 at 10:38 AM

is that you Rick?

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Santorum worded his comments very poorly…about as poorly as Romney did when he said he wasn’t concerned about the poor. However, if you read the entire comment for full context, he was clearly describing the thought process voters go through when deciding between an incumbant and a challenger. In no way did he suggest that HE feels that Obama would be better than Romney.

What I’ve said in this campaign is that if you look at the record on a lot of issues, I’ve taken a consistent approach throughout the course of my career. I believe in these fundamental freedom and the way we solve problems in America. And there are many on the Republican side of aisle who don’t…

That’s the sort of the approach. That’s the differentiation, if you will, between me going up against Barack Obama, where there really are real contrasts on the issues, as opposed to a lot of these candidates where it’s a race between Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee. That’s not how you win.

In the last century, there’s one person, one Republican candidate, who defeated a Democratic Incumbent for re-election. One in the last century. And that was Ronald Reagan. Almost every other time we ran a moderate because we had to win. Republicans and Conservatives were so worried about getting control back that we have to win so we have to nominate someone who can appeal to-

No, you win by giving people a choice. You win by giving the people an opportunity to see a different vision for our country not someone who’s just going to be a little different from the person we have in there. If they’re going to be just a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk on what may be the Etch-a-sketch candidate of the future.”

http://race42012.com/2012/03/23/santorum-preferring-obama-to-romney-you-had-to-not-be-there-to-get-it/#comments

takeamericabackin10 on March 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Of course it’s not an apology. It’s a clarification.

He said that Romney did not offer a clear reason to pick him over “the devil we know.” Romney partisans jump on the comment to claim he’s saying Obama is better than Romney — or, even more ludicrous, that Santorum has “endorsed” Obama.

This is just a statement that no, he’s not saying that Obama is better than Romney, or pledging to support Obama.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 23, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Exactly right. The Romney surrogates though jumped on it like a hobo on a hotdog because they need a diversion from the truth being outed by Ferhnstrom of Romney’s plan to backstab conservatives once he wins the nomination.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:42 AM

In the words of Joey Tribbiani,

“Over the line? You’re so far past the line you can’t see the line anymore. The line is a dot to you.”

Chris of Rights on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

One of the best lines ever!

gophergirl on March 23, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Who says an old handmade fly can’t still hook a green toothed weed shark?

Bishop on March 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Rick is having a hissy fit.

Guess it sucks to lose to a moderate-liberal Republican who is also an extraterrestrial cult leader.

CorporatePiggy on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

totes magotes

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM

So my initial, gut reaction during the early debates was that Satanorum is a douchebag. I am right. He’s basically a whiny, egomaniac, whoa-is-me! type. Basically a mirror image of Barack.

SouthernGent on March 23, 2012 at 10:28 AM

..goodbye Mr Spalding! That one’s outta here and there’s nothing left but a vapor trail! Touch ‘em all..

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Or maybe he just wants a GOP win in November? And is willing to do what it takes to make that happen?

Unlike many on this site, seems like Ed decided this election is critical for our collective future, and isn’t taking his ball and going home if his preferred candidate doesn’t pan out. Some of us see exactly what an Obama 2nd term means for the generations who follow.

gaius on March 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Time to poop or get off the pot Ed.

tpw on March 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Actually, give Ed some credit here. He’s being far harsher on Santorum than I expected. I don’t expect him to simply drop his support altogether or something (the man IS a Santorum delegate in MN, for crying out loud, he actually has some obligations), but he’s earned back some of my respect.

Esoteric on March 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

As much as I distrust Romney and as much as I don’t want him to get the nomination; that comment by Santorum was as close to the Republican unforgivable sin as one can get. I cannot imagine a primary candidate going that far to the brink. Even if he worded it badly, the impression will still be left. Santorum just gave the Jugears re-election campaign at least 2 weeks worth of campaign ad fodder with that one statement if Romney wins the nomination.

Santorum needs to walk this one back and in no uncertain terms. He can save face by saying that he meant to say, “If Romney is the nominee, given his past history, many voters may think there is little difference …”, but it better come with very strong endorsement of whoever the nominee will be and a great deal of regret for how he made his original statement.

AZfederalist on March 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Exactly right. The Romney surrogates though jumped on it like a hobo on a hotdog because they need a diversion from the truth being outed by Ferhnstrom of Romney’s plan to backstab conservatives once he wins the nomination.

Damn right. we wanted a diversion and we GOT IT. Ain’t life grand.

gerry-mittbot

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

I don’t know what you expect to accomplish by impugning Ed’s honesty – maybe a little self-indulgence, whatever – but the tone of his writing this morning clearly indicates that he’s not willing simply to trivialize this. And calling him a coward isn’t going to suddenly turn him into a hack like Erickson, trying to magick away every single flaw of his chosen candidate.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 10:40 AM

I’m certainly not impugning Ed’s honesty whatsoever. I am expressing the feeling I got in reading both of his posts about this event. Also, I was expressing empathy that it is often times uncomfortable to be supporting someone unpopular with most of one’s friends and acquaintances. I never called him a coward so button it up buddy.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

This statement is an improvement over yesterday

No, Ed, this makes it worse because it persists the story and continues to draw attention to how disorganized and disjointed Santorum’s message and campaign is. You almost give credence to the lame interpretation about how voters may respond, which is transparently pathetic spin. This two-faced response from Santorum’s spokesperson will perpetuate this snafu and the meme about his lackluster organization.

Santorum himself should have addressed this personally, and walked it back completely with a direct apology, citing his support for all GOO primary candidates vs. Obama, as he has in previous debates.

bhj on March 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

I caucused for Santorum in MN, and have regretted it ever since. He has become whiny and bitter and even more preachy than before.

Romney looks good by comparison. I want Santorum to go away. Quickly. And I hope I never see another man in an sweater vest.

teri_b on March 23, 2012 at 10:46 AM

what a great excuse for republicans to stop pretending that they care about conservative principles and unite behind sketchy mitt.

sesquipedalian on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

I don’t like being one of those “ban them!” martinets, but can somebody please explain to me why “liberal4life” is allowed to post here?

It’s not as if he’s a good-faith lefty trying to have a conversation with us (AoSHQ has one of those, by contrast). All he does is troll. A discreet “blam!” would not be a loss and would be well within the site’s rights.

Esoteric on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Old Sketch and Obama kinda cancel each other out to begin with. Sure we have to vote for Sketch if forced to to try to get Obama out, but how the heck do we campaign and show any kind of enthusiasm for Obama-lite?!? We’ll be arguing with ourselves and turning ourselves into pretzels. Rick should clarify but no need to apologize for telling the truth as much as certain republicans don’t like hearing it. That’s why he’s totally correct – we want to beat Obama and not just hand the presidency back to him by nominating Romney.

mozalf on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Exactly right. The Romney surrogates though jumped on it like a hobo on a hotdog because they need a diversion from the truth being outed by Ferhnstrom of Romney’s plan to backstab conservatives once he wins the nomination.

Oh goodness, hyperbole much?

If you had any grasp on general electoral politics you’d understand what Ferhnstrom was saying.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Romney is nothing like 0b0z0! And most of us understand (well some of us)understand why this anger at Romney is so extreme! Romney is a man with a great family, loves his wife and children, and grandchildren, LOVES this God and his country and all that it stands for. Romney has changed because he sees what will happen to his children and grandchildren if this is not turned around.
He would never, never have communists or maoists in the White House. There would be no hint of scandal either with him taking money, or going around the world on vacations.
Ann Romney would never take a plane to Europe a day (or even an hour or two) ahead of her husband, so that everything including secret service/SUV’s had to be doubled.
Gov Romney would never be golfing on Sunday, nor would he ever diss our troops.
They are nothing alike!!!

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

10 nmillion

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Nanomillions? So you have to move the decimal point … ok, so you have to take away like 14 zeros or something … so, something like, — tree-fitty? If that’s not right, it’s because the keys stuck what with all the pizza. :)

Axe on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney will probably get the nomination.

I am planning to hold my nose and vote for him.

What I’m hearing Santorum say here, is that I should rethink. If Etch-a-sketch wins, and governs as president like he governed Massachussets, then I’ll get no viable alternative in 2016. It might be better to keep the presidential powder dry in 2012…focus on the congress, and reload for 2016.

Santorum’s argument makes sense, in a way.

Deafdog on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Oh goodness, hyperbole much?

If you had any grasp on general electoral politics you’d understand what Ferhnstrom was saying.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Right back at you about Santorum’s comments.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

One man is an avowed Alinksyite radical, one has saved businesses and created jobs in the private sector.

Yup. Exactly the same!

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

I don’t like being one of those “ban them!” martinets, but can somebody please explain to me why “liberal4life” is allowed to post here?

Esoteric on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Comic relief

Deafdog on March 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

We may have witnessed what it looks like for a man to cut off his own legs in an election.

Weebork on March 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Obama is going to make a campaign ad out of this. Santorum will be endorsing Obama. Unforgivable.

teri_b on March 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM

The etchysketchy wordplay and now this, highlight to the silly season, I have had enough.

Obama and Santorum both say the same thing to pander the union workers, so should we conclude that it doesn’t matter which one we vote for?

Fleuries on March 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

mittens smells like a fart in the shower…I’ll still take him over Bamster.

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Right back at you about Santorum’s comments.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Romney and Obama are NOT the same at all.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

We may have witnessed what it looks like for a man to cut off his own legs.

Weebork on March 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Rick walked into the smokehouse by himself, hitched up his pants, and jumped through the smoke right up onto the shelf. More damp wood chips, please.

a capella on March 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Echo, meet chamber.

profitsbeard on March 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

.
That was kind of a “hanging pitch”, wasn’t it? : )

listens2glenn on March 23, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Meant to say Loves his God and this country!

Bambi on March 23, 2012 at 10:54 AM

what a great excuse for republicans to stop pretending that they care about conservative principles and unite behind sketchy mitt.

sesquipedalian on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Matched by demorats who have stopped pretending that they care about liberal principles and are uniting behind PBHO.

Funny thing, politics.

Bishop on March 23, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Romney and Obama are NOT the same at all.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

That is not what we were talking about. I was throwing your comment back at you–that if you had any grasp of politics you would have understood the context in which Santorum was speaking, but you aren’t interested in that are ya. Lol.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

predictable thing anyway

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM
liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Douchetude personified.

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney will probably get the nomination.

I am planning to hold my nose and vote for him.

Deafdog on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Holding your nose won’t do it. Better make sure you have your SCBA gear in good repair.

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Senator ChurchLady, it is time for you to go. You are embarrassing yourself.

JohnGalt23 on March 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

what a great excuse for republicans to stop pretending that they care about conservative principles and unite behind sketchy mitt.

sesquipedalian on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

We care about the future of our country over anything else, but I’ll say it’s great to see you dry-humpers getting hot and bothered over GOP cohesiveness and resolve to take down the extremist in the WH.

RepubChica on March 23, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Don’t feed the troll.

Weebork on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

That is not what we were talking about. I was throwing your comment back at you–that if you had any grasp of politics you would have understood the context in which Santorum was speaking, but you aren’t interested in that are ya. Lol.

KickandSwimMom on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

What context, pray tell?

He’s saying they are mirror images, and exactly the same. You can’t get around that.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

If you had any grasp on general electoral politics you’d understand what Ferhnstrom was saying.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

There’s a way to talk about campaign strategy that doesn’t involve implying that your candidate has no principles. There are lots of other things Fehrnstrom could have said that would have been better.

J.S.K. on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

He’s saying they are mirror images, and exactly the same. You can’t get around that.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

You mean they’re not? News to me.

/KABOOM

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM
liberal4life on March 23, 2012 at 10:30 AM

….huh?
When has the Liar-in-Chief told the truth? …

KOOLAID2 on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

There’s a way to talk about campaign strategy that doesn’t involve implying that your candidate has no principles. There are lots of other things Fehrnstrom could have said that would have been better.

J.S.K. on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Fehrnstrom implied that the voters have no principles and that they would rally around Mitt in the general election no matter what. Personally I find that insulting but ymmv.

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Santorum is a little brat.
He has been this way since the first time I watched him in a debate.
Something about him that I don’t like.

Dear GOP candidates,
Please stick to talking about YourSELVES and leave your opponents alone.
Thanks.

Where are all of the REAL MEN?!!?

bridgetown on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney will probably get the nomination.

Deafdog on March 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM

stops being clever after 1,000,000 people say it – precisely last Tuesday at 6:45 AM

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

What about when his eyebrow toupee fell off during one of the debates? vegconservative on March 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

I did not know that!

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Exactly right. The Romney surrogates though jumped on it like a hobo on a hotdog because they need a diversion from the truth being outed by Ferhnstrom of Romney’s plan to backstab conservatives once he wins the nomination.

Oh goodness, hyperbole much?

If you had any grasp on general electoral politics you’d understand what Ferhnstrom was saying.

blatantblue on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Oh, it’s easy to understand. He’s saying, “once we get that nomination, everything changes. We won’t be bound by what we said before.”

Yes, every candidate moves to the center after the primary. Of course, most candidates have moved to the right during the primary. Mitt’s plan seems to be to move to the center in the primary while trying to convince everyone he’s on the right, then move left in the general.

And since people already see him as a candidate who will promise anything to get elected, the “reset like an etch-a-sketch” comment is going to haunt him.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Santo was on Beck’s show in the second hour.

Beck verbally had to take Santo’s hand to make him walk it back.

Beck said “Mitt Romney is not, nor ever has been, a member of the Communist Party”.

They laughed and Santo agreed. Santo made a comment about supporting “whoever the Republican is”, but he still will not say their is a difference between Mitt and Barry.

Santo is lost. I’m really wondering if he thought God wanted him to be Prez, or if he’s blinded by ambition.

budfox on March 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future,

The “we” in his remark belies the idea that he was just talking about how voters would react. Why not say, ‘then the voters might conclude they should stick with Obama’. Instead, he included himself and everyone else in saying Obama was preferable to Romney.

changer1701 on March 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

what a great excuse for republicans to stop pretending that they care about conservative principles and unite behind sketchy mitt.

sesquipedalian
on March 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM

.
Santorum supporters should NOT be ‘giving-up’, unless/until Mitt wins a clear winning majority of delegates . . . period.
I’m telling you, I’m not.

listens2glenn on March 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Why would a serious man wear eyebrow toupes?!

I didn’t even know there were such things.

WTH?!

Eyebrow toupes?!

I’m speechless!

Eyebrow toupes!!!

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I wear eyebrow toupes…you wanna throw down?

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM

stops being clever after 1,000,000 people say it – precisely last Tuesday at 6:45 AM

DHChron on March 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Humor by repetition…the more you you say it, the funnier it gets!

Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney, Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney, Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney, Mitt “etch-a-sketch” Romney

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Deafdog on March 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Don’t feed the troll.

Weebork on March 23, 2012 at 10:57 AM

My bad.

Akzed on March 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Santo is lost. I’m really wondering if he thought God wanted him to be Prez, or if he’s blinded by ambition.

budfox on March 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM

I’m beginningt to think his calling is a streetcorner soapbox and a megaphone, to get the one, true message out. If nothing else, his lack of discipline makes me nervous.

a capella on March 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5