Comments on: Rick Santorum For President

By: Harrison

Harrison — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:07:16 +0000

He may have been… but losing your seat doesn’t bode well for winning the presidency is simply my point.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:17:50 +0000

Thanks for commenting on Political Realities, James. I appreciate you sharing your perspective on Santorum with us. From everything I am seeing, the man is a good, all around conservative candidate. He certainly deserves a much closer look than he has been receiving.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:15:03 +0000

I noticed that. Perry looked like he was really squirming.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:14:28 +0000

I don’t necessarily blame Santorum for losing his Senate seat, as I explained in the post. I think he was caught up in the bath water.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:09:30 +0000

All good points, Bill. The tax rate is just one part of the solution, with regulation and labor costs playing a factor as well.

As for abortion, you are right. Morality can not be legislated. Again, you provide much food for thought.

By: James M. Leonard

James M. Leonard — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:53:23 +0000

Interesting that Santorum wins the recent Pennsyvlania straw poll, and national mainstream media and conservative bloggers don’t report it.

By: James M. Leonard

James M. Leonard — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:16:10 +0000

In these several debates, Republican opposition to two candidates has been solidified by Santorum’s knock out punches: Rick Perry and Ron Paul. It was not Romney who did the heavy debate punching, it was Santorum, for which he deserves credit.

Santorum’s 2006 defeat was probably inevitable. First, Santorum was the most vocal Senator supporting our efforts in Iraq, and Bush made little or no effort to counter liberal attacks on his policy. Secondly, Santorum’s candidate happened to have the same exact name as one of Pennsylvania’s most popular governor (Bob Casey/Bob Casey jr.); half the people voting against Santorum thought that their beloved Bob Casey Sr. was running. Thirdly, Pennsylvania is a blue state which has not voted Republican since 1988, largely due to a disproportionate Democrat registration.

On the other hand, Santorum has scored huge upsets against incumbent Democrats highly favored to win. He is the victorious underdog.

Finally, while some may like Santorum for his social values, and others like his fiscal/economic perspectives, I think his strongest strength is national affairs.

Jim Leonard

By: rjjrdq

rjjrdq — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 03:48:31 +0000

Unfortunately for Santorum, it looks like he just shredded Rick Perry, and Herman Cain was the beneficiary. Perry was looking very uncomfortable in that video clip.

By: Harrison

Harrison — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 03:38:53 +0000

Santorum lost his Senate seat. Coffee is for closers and he isn’t one. I’m sure he’d make a good cabinet guy but he’s way too preachy for me. Perry has really blown it in the debates. His immigration stance is a non-starter. I’ll have an article tomorrow about all this but I like Herman Cain.

By: bill

bill — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:03:01 +0000

mr. santorum seems to be a likable fellow. it’s a shame a nation always has to be ‘in crisis’
before the pols start talking reform. his proposal of a 0% corporate tax on companies that actually
‘make’ something shows us that he is focusing on the correct fiscal issue; unlike most of congress
and certainly mr. obamas’ administration. the problem is that reducing the tax rate and even waiving the
tax on re-patriated monies is only one-third of the equation. in the last ten years alone we’ve ‘lost’
40,000 american manufacturing companies; closed, bankrupt or gone ‘overseas’. the other two-thirds
of the equation are less regulation and cheaper labor cost. companies will not re-patriate until the entire
playing field is level; why should they? they are in business to make money.
we, as a country, have the same hurdle to overcome regarding abortion; but in reverse. remember, we’re
broke. how would we provide for the 1.2 million new live births in 2013 if we repealed the ‘roe’ decision in it’s entirety? just food for thought fellow social conservatives. we can’t ‘legislate’ morality, but we could begin at
the federal level by outlawing ‘all’ late-term abortions and immediatly defunding those entities that promote
and profit in this reprehensible arena.
i guess my point is that we’re not going to get those things the gop primary contenders espouse in the
debates; but if the ‘promise’ of change is sufficient to place one of them in the white house instead of the
current resident, then God bless and God speed…b