Before We All Board the Santorum Train
As of late, many folks here at Ricochet have been pleasantly surprised by Rick Santorum's relatability, and his clear commitment to reason and argument as demonstrated by his recent celebratory speech in Iowa. I for one, found his willingness to engage with a largely hostile student audience on the contentious topic of gay marriage laudable, and his argument rather persuasive.
Nevertheless, since the get-go, I've harbored a fundamental distrust of Santorum when it comes to spending and his protectionist impulses. As the Club for Growth discusses,
His record is plagued by the big-spending habits that Republicans adopted during the Bush years of 2001-2006. Some of those high profile votes include his support for No Child Left Behind in 2001, which greatly expanded the federal government’s role in education. He supported the massive new Medicare drug entitlement in 2003 that now costs taxpayers over $60 billion a year and has almost $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. He voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, in a separate vote, Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
Indeed, Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania while he was in Congress....
And while Santorum voted against the Farm Bill in 2002, he sponsored a bill to extend milk subsidies in 2005, which he claimed he did to “save countless Pennsylvania dairy farmers.”
This is the weakest part of Santorum's profile, and in his latest ad, Ron Paul capitalizes on it.
The information conveyed in this ad should give any voter whose sympathies lie with the Tea Party pause before deciding to board the Santorum train.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Most of the Senate votes Santorum is criticized for today were mainstream Republican compromises in the Bush years. So, he's not a rebel. If you want a rebel, Ron Paul is available.
Apr '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I don't get the impression that Ricochet is entirely ready to board the Santorum train. Look back over the main feed, in particular, for a pretty strongly anti-Santorum spread. Slightly surprisingly (to me), the self declared ABR guys seem more attached to their particular candidates' superiority than the R guys.
The ad has some good spots (Santorum has not been strong on unions, taking a position somewhere between his union adoring co-senator and the sensible GOP mainstream), but also some very unfair hits. The debt ceiling votes didn't raise the deficit in a meaningful way; they were gimmicky showmanship for Democrats and Paul. Same goes for Newt's 29 votes to raise it (from memory).
Mar '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
We're all picking the lesser of evils here, unless you're voting for Ron Paul... because, The Dr. does no wrong, after all.
Oct '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Santorum opposed the Right to Work Act?! Douglas Kimball, are you listening?
Jun '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I am no fan of Bush's big spending or big government spending in general. Santorum doesn't excite me.
But what's your point? Romney is more discerning on his big spending? Romney is more conservative?
Jun '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I am no fan of Bush's big spending or big government spending in general. Santorum doesn't excite me.
But what's your point? Romney is more discerning on his big spending? Romney is more conservative?
Jul '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Now I'm starting to believe you don't read all the posts.
Santorum is not a conservative in any sense of the word.
There are only two candidates who actually in office put their money where their mouth is. Those two are Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich.
Fact. Deal with it.
Apr '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Michael Tee: Now I'm starting to believe you don't read all the posts.
Santorum is not a conservative in any sense of the word.
There are only two candidates who actually in office put their money where their mouth is. Those two are Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich.
Fact. Deal with it. · Jan 6 at 7:01pm
No, Ron Paul also has a good, consistent record on limited government.
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
The "all" in my title wasn't a literal "all." Of course I know that you, Michael Tee, as well as Kennedy Smith, and Sooper Mexican all lean toward Gingrich. Frozen, James of England, Richard Young, ParisParamus, and a handful of others are staunch Romney supporters. KarlUB is a Ron Paul defender.
But there's been a flurry of pro-Santorum talk around these parts lately. And I had a sneak peak at the latest Ricochet Center of Gravity poll that showed a bit of a Santorum surge, so I just want to let it be known that there's plenty of reason for caution before the ABR crowd chooses Santorum as their last not-Romney.
[insert smiling emoticon]
Jun '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Rick Santorum on Bush's Legacy (Aug 2008)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFBXzLfIyV4
May '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Re Michael's idea that there is some ocean of difference between Newt's conservatism and Santorum's conservatism:
Yesterday we learned that, after Newt ushered in the modern child-tax-credit era in the 90's, Santorum supports expanding it.
Today we learn that, while the earmarking game surged under Gingrich in the 90's, Santorum played too.
And of course Santorum voted for Medicare Part D, a program he now wishes he hadn't supported but which Newt still does support.
My point is not to pass judgment on any of this, but only to point out that when Gingrich said yesterday that Santorum was his junior partner, he was right. At the very least, they're kindred spirits, more or less, and this notion that Newt is "manifestly conservative" while Santorum is "manifestly not conservative" is manifestly false.
Apr '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Scott Reusser: Re Michael's idea that there is some ocean of difference between Newt's conservatism and Santorum's conservatism:
Yesterday we learned that, after Newt ushered in the modern child-tax-credit era in the 90's, Santorum supports expanding it.
Today we learn that, while the earmarking game surged under Gingrich in the 90's, Santorum played too.
And of course Santorum voted for Medicare Part D, a program he now wishes he hadn't supported but which Newt still does support.
My point is not to pass judgment on any of this, but only to point out that when Gingrich said yesterday that Santorum was his junior partner, he was right. At the very least, they're kindred spirits, more or less, and this notion that Newt is "manifestly conservative" while Santorum is "manifestly not conservative" is manifestly false. · Jan 6 at 8:27pm
On welfare reform, Santorum was the senior partner. Other than that, this comment put things very well.
Apr '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
He opposed a pretty clearly failed version of it (a 68-31 vote against cloture is terrible), as did all of the mid-western senators. I find the outrage of unions in PA on hearing that he's being attacked for being pro-union pretty funny, but pretty plausible.
Although I'm a firm supporter of the National Right To Work Foundation (even looked into doing an internship for them back in the day), I'm more troubled by his anti union position in the debates than his pro-union positions before. He said that he'd prevent collective bargaining by federal public employee unions (hurrah!) and by state public employee unions. The latter position is about as clear a breach of the Tenth Amendment as one could imagine. The Federal government is simply not allowed to tell states how to deal with state employees.
The mood of Congress and the public is such that I can't imagine a President Santorum passing pro-union legislation. All of the candidates would hammer federal unions. I don't like Constitutional disrespect, though.
Mar '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I'm afraid we are left with a bunch of Rino squishes, an inarticulate conservative, and a libertarian -- it's coming down to which Rino squish to pick.
I'm leaning towards Mr Santorum, fully aware that he is not my ideal conservative -- she is in Alaska.
Mar '11
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I think Michael Gerson hits the nail on the head (although, I think that there are other kinds of conservatism that those that he sketches here and I assume he would recognize them if cited to him--he was merely constrained by the number of words in a column, I presume).
Dec '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Santorum has the disadvantage of running from the Senate and having a record. It's a disadvantage Obama didn't experience because he intentionally obscured his positions by voting present, never holding a committee meeting, and never authoring legislation. And he had a lot of help from a complicit media unwilling to research and expose what his positions might be.
The pluses in Santorum's record are major: welfare reform, foreign relations.
I heard Rushie talking about how whichever Republican wins will be learning on the job. I trust Santorum to be different about spending from the Oval than he was from the Senate. I trust that he has core principles he'll apply. I can imagine him shouldering presidential virtues quite effectively.
I could forgive Romney Romneycare, if he asked. He hasn't.
I like Newt's combativeness and articulation of conservative principles, when he has them. But, he's got obvious ego problems.
Perry is too Bush. Maybe more Bush than Bush in slow reaction time and Texas twang.
Ron Paul discredits himself on foreign policy.
I haven't even considered Huntsman and won't until he makes it into double digits somewhere.
Santorum's my latest ABR.
Jun '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
I don't consider myself an ABR. After watching the first few debates I divided the field into two camps: acceptable and unacceptable. My acceptable list: Romney, Santorum, Newt, Huntsman.
As for my top choice, I was leaning toward Newt, now I'm leaning toward Rick. But I never supported Perry and I never got on the Cain Train, Romney is clearly a better choice than either of them.
Aug '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Scott Reusser: ... Yesterday we learned ...
... Today we learn ...
This isn't really new information.
May '10
Re: Before We All Board the Santorum Train
Misthiocracy
Scott Reusser: ... Yesterday we learned ...
... Today we learn ...
This isn't really new information. · Jan 7 at 5:24pm
Just a rhetorical device referring to the Santorum posts of the last two days.