The Washington Post: For Santorum, the fight goes on

By George Will

Perhaps Rick Santorum is demonstrating persistence beyond the call of plausibility, but he says that compelling political logic and high duty converge. Although he has not made a decision about 2016, he candidly says he is doing “everything consistent with running” — traveling to speak to sympathetic groups and donors. His hand is on his sword’s hilt.

When Santorum entered the fray for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, he drew that sword and threw away the scabbard. The stakes could not, he thought, be higher, so he was in it for the long haul, which ended with the April 3 Wisconsin primary. Now the former senator from Pennsylvania, who wound up being the last man standing between Mitt Romney and the nomination, probably needs a new scabbard to toss aside.

With disarmingly cheerful ferocity, he relishes combat in what he calls “a two-front civil war” within the GOP. The party is, he says, in danger of becoming “a one-legged stool.” The “Eastern establishment types” want to saw off the cultural conservatism leg, concentrating on economic issues. The rising libertarian faction, exemplified by Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, wants to saw off the strong foreign policy leg. Furthermore, Santorum says, “Americans are not ready for a dramatic withdrawal of government from their lives” of the sort many tea party types advocate.

This self-described “blue-collar Republican” insists, “We are not the anti-government party.” Government has a role in the creation of jobs for the many “who are not going to college.”

Santorum became a senator at age 36, a member of the Republican Senate leadership at 42 and an ex-senator at 48, when in 2006 he lost by 17 points in his bid for a third term. In 2011, however, this devout Catholic thought the other candidates for the nomination were perfunctory in their embrace of the social issues — principally, opposition to abortion — so he headed to all 99 Iowa counties.

Each rival had a brief moment as “not Romney”; Santorum’s moment came, serendipitously, on the eve of the Iowa caucuses. In the first vote tabulation he lost by just eight votes. Sixteen days later, a revised tally showed that he had defeated Romney by 34 votes, 29,839 to 29,805. He believes he might have won the nomination if the first headlines had said “Santorum wins.” He won 10 more states, but his campaign essentially ended when he lost by seven points in Wisconsin, where he had hoped to prove he could win where evangelical Christians were relatively thin on the ground.

Looking to 2016, Santorum rightly says Republicans “have got to work on the hopeful and optimistic side” of politics. But he wants to compel a troubling conversation the nation would rather not have.  Read full article here.

Do you like this post?

Showing 6 reactions


commented 2013-11-08 17:45:09 -0500 · Flag
Dear Ethan,

I will answer your comment by quoting to you my answers 8 and 10 months ago to Brenda and Shirley who had similar comments as yours:

Larry DeMejo commented on A PUBLIC APOLOGY 8 months ago · Flag

Dear Brenda,

I am responding to your comment the same way I responded to Shirley’s comment to my earlier post and comment on this forum. You are sadly mistaken and misled. You had a realistic choice not to vote for Barak Obama or Mitt Romney in last November’s election, by voting for Tom Hoefling. Hoefling actually had a mathematical chance to win the presidential election (see http://www.tomhoefling.com/8/post/2012/10/411-electoral-votes-76-tom-hoefling-for-president-final-2012-presidential-ballot-access-list.html ).

Romney, by his own admission during the presidential campaign, supported killing of innocent children in cases of rape, incest or the mother’s health, and also as president would have left the legality of killing innocent children to be decided by the Supreme Court first and then to the individual states.

Do you hear yourself? Your statement to allow some babies to be killed to save others is heartless. You have no God given right nor legal justification, according to our Constitution, to deny the right to life of another guiltless human being. The death of even one innocent child should not be tolerated by you or anyone else in this country.

Romney, furthermore, as governor of Massachusetts, was instrumental in allowing the legalization of same sex marriage, for the first time ever, in one of the fifty states. Regardless of these known facts about Romney, you and Rick Santorum apparently chose to support and vote for Mitt Romney anyway. Your choice and Rick’s choice was your loss and sadly also our loss, as a nation.

When are you going to wake up and stop voting for compromised candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum? Are you looking for principles and candidates to ensure equal protection for all of us and our posterity? Please consider http://www.selfgovernment.us/platform.html

May the LORD Jesus Christ richly bless you as you choose to obey Him without compromise.

love,

larry

Larry DeMejo commented on TOM HOEFLING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2016 10 months ago · Flag

Dear Shirley, you are sadly mistaken and misled. This is the right site for me to post on because it does represent mainstream RNC. You had a realistic choice not to vote for Barak Obama or Mitt Romney in last November’s election, by voting for Tom Hoefling. Hoefling actually had a mathematical chance to win the presidential election (see http://www.tomhoefling.com/8/post/2012/10/411-electoral-votes-76-tom-hoefling-for-president-final-2012-presidential-ballot-access-list.html ). Romney, by his own admission during the presidential campaign, supported killing of innocent children in cases of rape, incest or the mother’s health, and also as president would have left the legality of killing innocent children to be decided by the Supreme Court first and then to the individual states. Romney, furthermore, as governor of Massachusetts, was instrumental in allowing the legalization of same sex marriage, for the first time ever, in one of the fifty states. Regardless of these known facts about Romney, you and Rick Santorum apparently chose to support and vote for Mitt Romney anyway. Your choice and Rick’s choice was your loss and sadly also our loss, as a nation.

When are you going to wake up and stop voting for compromised candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, who squarely represent the RNC? Are you looking for principles and candidates you are willing to tirelessly defend? Consider http://www.selfgovernment.us/platform.html

May the LORD Jesus Christ richly bless you as you choose to obey Him without compromise.

love,

larry
commented 2013-11-08 17:25:07 -0500 · Flag
@demajo

Interesting comment.
Who did you support this last election? Sounds like you let Pres. Obama have a second term. How’s the pro life cause doing now?
If I remember right Mitt was against abortion and homosexual so-called marriage.
commented 2013-11-08 09:44:22 -0500 · Flag
A PUBLIC APOLOGY
Posted by Larry DeMejo 6pc on January 05, 2013 · Flag

Dear Rick,

How can anyone in good conscience contribute in any way to your cause when you unashamedly betrayed your principles regarding the sanctity of life without exceptions ( http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/2011_Straw_Poll_Rick_Santorum.htm ) and the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman ( http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/santorum-is-right-romney-is-still-wrong/ ) by deciding to back Mitt Romney in the last presidential election, after running against him for the Republican nomination in defense of those same principles? Mitt Romney during his entire political career, including the past presidential campaign, had no scruples about sending mixed messages to the American people for the sake of gaining votes and financial support, when his past record in public office clearly identified him as supporting abortion on demand and same * unions.

You concluded your 2012 RNC speech with the following words: “In November we have a chance to vote for life and liberty, not dependency. A vote for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will put our country back in the hands of leaders who understand what America can and, for the sake of our children, must be to keep the dream alive.”

Instead, by supporting Mitt Romney in the last election, you also, like those who voted for Barak Obama, voted and encouraged others to vote for dependency on the pro abortion and childless union choices of godless men against God’s unalienable rights to life and liberty, including our most fundamental and important God-given institution of marriage between one man and one woman.

You owe God and the American people a public apology for betraying your principles and your promises to them.

Sincerely,

Larry DeMejo
commented 2013-11-04 09:20:20 -0500 · Flag
I think he’s very wrong about Americans not being ready for a dramatic withdrawal of government from our lives. Republican candidates better get a hold of this idea.
commented 2013-11-01 21:39:57 -0400 · Flag
I too must admit my disappointment in some of Santorum’s recent statements.
For one: don’t dis the tea party when they are much of your support.
commented 2013-10-31 14:16:20 -0400 · Flag
I support the TEA PARTY Conservative wing of the party. With Ricks’s recent criticism of Senator Cruz, he has shown himself NOT to be the man I voted for in 2012. I WILL NO LONGER SUPPORT SANTORUM OR HIS PAC, AS I DISAGREE WITH HIS VIEWS ON TED CRUZ.