Where Have I Heard This Before?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/santorum-the-constitution-is-there-to-do-one-thing-protect-god-given-rights/

If you have followed my posts for ANY length of time, you have heard me say this exact same thing. Not even Ron Paul has voiced a similar belief. Paul speaks ONLY of liberty and the Constitution. Santorum stated the WHOLE equation last night.

And people wonder why I have decided to vote for this man.

25 thoughts on “Where Have I Heard This Before?

    • I know. He would be my second choice. But when Santorum said this last night, he NAILED it! This is EXACTLY the attitude I have been looking for in a candidate. It is an even better understanding of the founding ideals and principles of this nation than Ron Paul has shown, so I am going with Sanotrum. Plus, he has a MUCH better chance of getting elected than Ron – if that matters to anyone.

  1. Believe what you want to believe, but if Ron Paul runs as an Independent, he could very well undercut the R’s and the D’s.

    And the best part about Paul? He’s got a great sense of humour! (without a teleprompter, nonetheless)

  2. Actually, Santorum might be on his way out. He doesn’t have the money to keep campaigning in Florida. I would venture a guess that shortly after Florida, he will be endorsing one of the other candidates. I’m just sayin’.

  3. Agreed. That was a beautiful thing Santorum said. Socially conservative, his positions in this area are in agreement with my pallet. However, there are lurking things I wish I knew more about such as his record of mixed fiscal issues (ex: position of banning earmarks, but has used earmarks in the past himself), and then there is that pesky “K Street Project” that remains clouded.

    Clean those up, and I could stand behind him.

    • so my husband giot me one if these phones to work the internet from work. maybe this post will worj. augger, did you happen to catch m’s post on where the candidates stand on taxes¿ santorum was in last place! this sucks! i feelñlike the kid with the duce cap!

  4. Santorum’s social conservatism is where I have a problem with the guy. In effect, he is saying, “I am all for individual liberty, except where it conflicts with MY beliefs.” Unless the guy has had a change of heart since he voted for the Patriot Act AND its Re-Authorization, his stance now rings hollow.

    • Neither Mitt nor Newt have changed their positions on socialized medicine and amnesty. Give them either of those and you’ll have ruined the nation, as well. They will used healthcare to DICTATE EVERYTHING YOU DO! And the amnesty will mean this is the LAST election an “R” ever wins – period (“D’s” buy votes better than ANY “R” EVER has).

      I am repeatedly told I must compromise. Fine, I have. And I know he has warts. But his warts are still unkowns. I already KNOW Mitt/Newt are Progressives. I will NEVER vote for a Progressive again – period, EVER! So, if I know they are Progressive, I will not vote for them. It is that simple. I will NEVER budge on that.

  5. Black – remember, you are the one who is unable to settle for anything less than absolute perfection.

    Absolute values only occur in integers.

    • Did I NOT say I was willing to compromise if I could find someone who is NOT a Progressive? I think I did. I think I even said I can make myself vote for Santorum.

      So tell me, Augger, why do you post as though I am saying I won’t compromise?

  6. The hitch is in the verbiage, isn’t is Black? (I know what your trying to do).

    For the rest that aren’t catching the undertones while Black attempts to hold the moral high ground … He could state progressive tendencies in all of these candidates. He just will not in this thread.

  7. NO! Nice try, but I will not allow you to get away with that one.

    As YOU pointed out: NO ONE is a 100% pure ideology – NO ONE!

    So, this attempt to paint me as duplicitous FAILS! By definition (that means you cannot argue it), “tendencies” do NOT mean “equals” or “is.” Santorum is like ALL of us: he is a mix. I have acknowledged that. I have also stated he is a compromise for me (again, by definition, this means I know he is not “pure.”) But he has NEVER said “I am a Progressive.” Newt and Romney HAVE!

    Nice try, Augger, but you should really bring your A game if you’re going to try those liberal tricks on me. They don’t work when the left tries them on me, they will not work when you try it.

  8. Actions, can speak as loud as words, no?

    So again … hanging up on the details for the sake of misdirecting the readers here to maintain your high ground is the strategy your going to take?

    Since we are “bringing our A game” as you have stated, a person does not have to stand a podium and announce to the world that he is in any part a progressive. There is no “oath” for that movement.

    And you should be ashamed of trying to label me as a “liberal”. You, and everyone else knows better, and frankly, that just makes you look like a bitter little man.

    Now, if you state (I know how you hang on statements) that your going to help us defeat Obama, then we are good to go, and there is nothing further discuss.

    • Look, if you are voting for Ron Paul, just say so. I have already said I do not like Paul for President but I respect the reason people are voting for him.

      HOWEVER, if you are trying to defend Newt OR Romney, your words fall on deaf ears as you are defending Obama and I REFUSE to vote for Obama or his agenda.

      YES, a vote for a Progressive is a vote for Obama, and Newt and Mitt have BOTH said – with their OWN MOUTHS – that they are Progressives. They labeled themselves: that was all I needed.

      Furthermore, I did not label you a liberal, I said your tactics are one in the same with those you used to complain about on the old NH forum. My point – which you apparently missed – is that it matters little who uses them, fallacious reasoning is fallacious reasoning.

      Now, am I perfect? NO! I bloody well know this. BUT, am I applying a double standard here? NO – again! I have clearly proven the case that BOTH Mitt AND Newt have said they are progressives. End of game for me where they are concerned. I have also detailed that I am WELL aware that Santorum has issues, but I am a “bit” more satisfied with his explanations as they seemed to have achieved the goal he said he was seeking. In addition, I have clearly stated that Santorum would be a compromise for me. What I like most about him is that he has CLEARLY articulated the BEST understanding of our founding of ANY candidate in the race – INCLUDING PAUL! Now, is he lying? I don’t know, we’ll have to see. But I KNOW Mitt and Newt are lying to me and expect them to continue because it is part of their nature.

      So, by what you and Utah and others have told me, I have to vote for one of these clowns. Fine. I have also been told I must compromise on principle. NOT fine because that means I have no principles. Sorry, deal breaker. But, as it stands at the moment, I can accept Santorum because he has at least said he holds the same understanding of this nation as I do. THAT is something to start with that does NOT require me to sacrifice principle.

  9. yeah, a., i caught the vebiage. now, as usual, he will fly off the handle for you pointing out a fact. y iu are beating yiur oretty lkttle head against a brucj wakk. damnut! i feel klike beavis and bttthead wuth thus phione!

      • Maybe I just have big thumbs? I’m home now. I’ll translate phoneism (or Kells on new cell-phoneism): “You are beating your pretty little head against a brick wall. Damnit! I feel like Beavis and Butthead with this phone.”

        Seriously, I don’t know why A. trys with B. Let’s face it: He is a paradox. (B. not A., that is)

  10. “Look, if you are voting for Ron Paul, just say so.” – assumptions tisk, tisk. I voted. It was not for Paul. Do not care for his foreign policies. Nor the next two. 😛

    Your batting a thousand so far.

    “Nice try, Augger, but you should really bring your A game if you’re going to try those liberal tricks on me” – anyone else wanna take a stab at this. 14+ years of education, and I truly am, an idiot.

    No Black, I will digress my point for the sake of your sanity. You do not have to vote for a damn person. Not one. You don’t have to compromise your book margins either. Nor do you have to suck up a bitter pill and do whats right for your children.

    You sir, do have the freedom to do nothing. Please, by all means, take that liberty exercise it.

    Now your free to go bash upon someone else who is doing the best they can with an otherwise crummy set of choices. 🙂

    @ kells – whats left of my hair following male pattern baldness is blonde. I will take the role of an middle aged Beavis. I still got the “heh heh … heh heh heh” down pretty good! (wink)

  11. Augger, I was pretty sure you were not a Ron Paul guy when I wrote that. I was being sarcastic.

    “Nor do you have to suck up a bitter pill and do whats right for your children.”

    Now you see, that statement infers that NOT voting for a Progressive is “bad for my children.” If you believe that, it’s fine: you are supposed to have that right in this nation. But at least do us all a favor and stop calling yourself a “conservative” and admit to being a PROGRESSIVE – that is, IF you are going to argue that I have to vote for a Progressive to do right by my kids.

    “You sir, do have the freedom to do nothing. Please, by all means, take that liberty exercise it.”

    And there goes the implied ad hominem attack – right on time. You seem to have the same issue that Kells and others have. I NEVER said I wasn’t going to vote. But then, I think you guys all know it: you’re just hacked off because I won’t vote for one of your two leading PROGRESSIVE “R’s.” I can live with that. Have at me some more for trying to live according to principle rather than according to what my “Party” needs (funny, I thought that “Party first” thing was something you always heard in old movies about commies and nazi’s. I must have fallen behind the times 😉 )

  12. You keep assuming I am hacked off. Quite frankly, you do not have that power of me.
    bugger did, but you do not.

    You keep pushing terms like “liberal”, and “progressive”on me, and that’s fine if that’s how you have to rationalize it to make the math work in your brain. But honestly, you know better.

    Said it once, will say it again. All this blustering theory-crafting, and exhaulting of “The Great Ones” is fine, but you did give a solid impression that you would not vote, if you were faced to vote for someone you considered a progressive. Even if you feel you didn’t, you were ambiguous enough to make more than a couple of people confused… and that sir would not be our fault. Less wordy, and more concise, and you will write a clearer picture.

    And while we are here … do I remember you calling yourself a reformed liberal, progressive from your youth … or something of the sort? (someone go trudge through the forum posts as I am not creating a new account to go digging) The thought occurs to me, and if you can change, why judge any of the candidates who say “Yeah, I did these things in my youth, but age has made a difference in my perspective.” ?

    Why not give them a benefit of the doubt that you would demand of everyone surrounding yourself?

    btw – my vote went to Santorum. Need a photo document of the ballot? Would that convince you?

    Surprised you, didn’t I? C’mon …it’s ok to admit it. 😛

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.