Santorum likes Romney, hates McCain

"OLD GOP CHEERLEADERS SPEAKS"

WHO CARES! GO BACK HOME TO MAMA AND KEEP ON LOOKING FOR YOUR LOST EMAILS. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE THEM.

Hey Rick, the feeling's mutual. How's life as an EX-senator?

Remember all you republicans, crazy Rick just told you that a gun-grabbing, pro-abortion MASSACHUSETTS governor who installed a socialized medicine healthcare system in his state is more conservative than a senator with a career 83 ranking from the American Conservative Union. You be the judge.

So, Jim "I take my marching orders from Media Matters and moveon.org" Oliphant, since you write that Santorum is the VERY conservative former senator, do you call Barack Obama the VERY liberal senator? Bernie Sanders as VERY liberal? Do you? No, I didn't think so. Objectivity is not one of your strong suits as a "journalist."

The ACU has given Ron Paul an 82.3 score, yet conservatives won't back him.

Santorum is a good example of a bad Republican. To most conservatives in the Republican Party, social issues, however important, are supposed to be dealt with on the State level, and not by the feds. This is in keeping with the conservative ideals of federalism and "small government," and the refusal to follow the Democratic Party model of federalizing society. The main conservative objection to Roe v. Wade, for example, was not simply that the decision violated conservative social values, but rather that the federal Constitution doesn’t protect such rights. Since it was a matter of State law – as conservatives believe - the State Courts, and not the Supreme Court, should have had the final word on the issue.

As such, a true conservative would have no proper occasion to weigh in on issues of social conservatism on the floor of the Senate. It is because of this preference for federalism, and the perceived role of the People and the States as the primary guardians of morals, that the Republican Party had a strong anti-prohibition faction during the beginning of the 20th Century. It is the same reason seven conservative Republicans (as opposed to the neo-cons) voted against the Gay-marriage amendment to the Constitution. They believed, in the words of New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg, “ . . . that federalism, not more federal laws, is a viable and preferable approach.” Senator McCain was one of those who voted against that amendment for that reason.

[BTW – Ron Paul gives a good explanation for his and other conservatives’ opposition to the anti-gay marriage amendment. See: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html ]

It’s people like Santorum who confuse things by perpetrating the myth that the federal government is a “central government” with plenary power over social issues. To paraphrase Ron Paul, Santorum should have opened his Constitution and read it. Thus, I agree with Jeff that its a good thing that Santorum is an ex-Senator.

A post-script to my last post.
Did anyone else see Chicago
Tonite yesterday evening?
Representatives for the McCain, Paul and Huckabee campaigns answered questions, and without a doubt, the Paul rep appeared to be channeling that now semi-famous beauty pageant contestant that gave an incomprehensible and lengthy answer to a question from the emcee.
The Paul representative couldn't articulate a single policy or position clearly, and stumbled from
one talking point to another.
If this is the level of competence exhibited by his campaign staff, it's no surprise to me that his appeal would be limited no matter his ACU rank is.

Romney!!!!! There is no better choice for the Republican party and our nation. The liberal media would have you think otherwise.

McCain is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is STILL working with open borders people and plans.

Open borders advocate Juan Hernandez has joined the McCain campaign

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/25/dr-juan-hernandez-has-joined-the-mccain-campaign/

McCain Immigration 'Adviser' Believes in 'Mexico First'

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/d-s-hube/2008/01/26/mccain-immigration-adviser-believes-mexico-first

McCain Advisor: "Think Mexico First"

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/01/27/mccain_advisor_think_mexico_first

Romney 2008!

The DNC Swamp headlines Santorum's comments using the word "Hate", which Santorum never used. Typical.

And Mr. Oliphant, if you label Rick Santorum "very conservative", shouldn't you label Barack H. Obama (according to National Journal, the most left-wing senator) "very liberal"?

While I'm not a backer of Congressman Paul, johnf makes a good point. A far-right wing ex-legislator like Santorum should logically back the candidate closest to him ideologically---and that clearly is a far-right candidate like Congressman Paul---not a Massachusetts governor who took liberal positions on any number of issues, especially social issues.

I will never vote for McVain.

Here's Mitt for you...

Abortion rights
"I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard."
Boston Herald Debate, 10/29/02

"Roe v. Wade continues to work its destructive logic throughout our society This can't continue."
Speech to the Massachusetts Citizens For Life Mother's Day Pioneer Valley Dinner, 5/10/07

Immigration reform
"With these 11 million people [here illegally], let's have them registered, know who they are....those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship."
Lowell Sun, 3/30/06

"One simple rule: no amnesty.If that [Kennedy-McCain bill] is not a form of amnesty, I don't know what is."
New York Times, 6/4/07

Gun laws
"We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them. I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety."
Romney in 2002 gov. debate, Boston Globe, 1/14/07

"I have a gun of my own. I go hunting myself. I'm a member of the NRA and believe firmly in the right to bear arms."
Boston Globe, 1/14/07

Amendment to ban gay marriage
"Mitt does not support it...As far as Mitt is concerned, it goes farther than current law, and therefore it's unnecessary."
Romney spokesman, Boston Globe, 3/22/02

"When I was Governor, we took every conceivable step within the law to stop, block or slow down this unprecedented court decision."
Speech to National Right to Life Convention, 6/15/07

"No new taxes" pledge
"I'm not intending to, at this stage, sign a document which would prevent me from being able to look specifically at the revenue needs of the commonwealth"
Associated Press, 3/27/02

"Signing the pledge now sends a very clear message to those in Washington who have voted against tax relief and for tax hikes that such actions will never grow our regional and national economies."
Romney spokesman, Boston Globe, 1/5/07

Minimum wage
"I think the minimum wage ought to keep pace with inflation. I think the minimum wage is a good thing to have in our economy and I think it ought to be updated."
Boston Globe, 10/17/94

"[T]he challenge with raising the minimum wage excessively is it is a hurt to those that are entering the work force, the very poor, those that are trying to get early jobs, get those first jobs."
Associated Press, 7/25/06

Cutting Social Security
"I don't think you go back and rewrite the contract the government has with people who've retired."
Boston Globe, 10/17/94
"Personal accounts would be a big plus."... [Romney]also said changing the retirement age could be considered, as well as basing the Social Security cost of living adjustment on a different inflation gauge.
Union Leader, 6/7/07

Adoption non-discrimination
Governor Mitt Romney and a legislative leader yesterday delivered unwelcome news to the Catholic bishops of Massachusetts, who plan to seek permission from the state to exclude gay and lesbian parents from adopting children through its social service agencies. The governor said he was not authorized to give such an exemption...
Boston Globe, 2/17/06

"And then another slide along the slippery slope. The Catholic Church was forced to end its adoption service, which was crucial in helping the state find homes for some of our most difficult to place children... Now, even religious freedom was being trumped by the new-found 'right' of gay marriage."
Speech to National Right to Life Convention, 6/15/07

Stem cell research
[Romney]endorsed embryonic stem cell research, saying the controversial science might one day help treat his wife's multiple sclerosis...."I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research. I'd be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don't know if I could budge him an inch."
Boston Globe, 6/14/02

"FACT: Governor Romney Opposes Using Taxpayer Money to Fund Embryo-Destructive Research."
MittRomney.com A Record of Protecting Life

Bush tax cuts
Governor Mitt Romney refused yesterday to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush's economic program...In addition to refusing to endorse the president's tax cut, the governor surprised several people at the meeting by saying he is open to a federal increase in gas taxes.
Boston Globe, 4/11/0

[Romney] said it was "absolutely critical" to renew tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. Letting them expire would result in a "massive tax increase" that would retard economic growth, Romney said.
Detroit Free Press, 2/8/07

Reagan Republicanism
"I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
Boston Herald, 10/27/94
"Ronald Reagan is ... my hero. ... I believe that our party's ascendancy began with Ronald Reagan's brand of visionary and courageous leadership."
Boston Globe, 1/19/07

Desire to serve in Vietnam
"I was not planning on signing up for the military. It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam..."
Boston Herald, 5/2/94

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam."
Boston Globe, 6/24/07

Mitt with Kennedy universal health car
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzROK6s1KE8

Pro-Choice flipping
http://artlaction.com/
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D7y1HMZNJy0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToQbeBC_fOI

Mitt on Timetables
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32coCxmt5jo

Mitt with George Snuffalufagus about Flipping
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF0iVBCM-Oo

Mitt repeatedly hires illegals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwyAsvAZ8FU

Gun Laws
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IaUvmWHzqJ0

Mitt says McCain’s immigration plan is not amnesty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HotMWgYVm2Q

Mitt: “I’m not trying to return to Regan Bush”
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7pVqZzHm3Z4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LALQ-xXQxU0

Mitt: I saw Dad with MLK but I didn’t mean it
http://youtube.com/watch?v=k3A1is6xfZE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8GpZnJbjz4

Even after this his campaign still says it happened but it didn’t
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5eKfC6TYjk

Mitt’s dog “likes fresh air” tied to the roof for a 12hr trip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPpaJrJecjA

Mitt endorsed by a Democrat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suc3nlHT51Y&eurl=http://www.romneyfacts.com/

Tim1979,
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks to JohnW for providing
what I believe to be a sound answer to this paradox.
I read an outstanding article on Townhall a few weeks ago that laid out very clearly the reasons why social conservatism and strict constitutional construction are incompatible. I don't recall the authors name or the title of the article, and it appears to have been removed from the website.
JohnW's comments for the most part make the same valid points.
Santorum and other fellow conservatives would like Republican party members, and everyone else for that matter, to ignore this glaring ideological inconsistency, and for the most part, they have been successful.
And then came Ron Paul.
Ron Paul's campaign, if nothing else, has raised the awareness of many that the Congress can't legislate according to the wallpaper of biblical text social conservatives have managed to hang inside the congressional chambers, and ignore the text of our constitution that lay just outside the doors in the rotunda.
Did anybody else read that TH article, and if so, would they be kind enough, provide a link to it?

Anybody supporting McCain should be disappointed in his flat-out slimy tactics. Whether or not you agree with his positions, McCain is a loser.

Santorum was the scariest of the evangenuts, by far. If I were torn between McCain and Romney, which of course I'm not, Rapture-Ready Rick's endorsement would be the killer.

Rick who?

Who cares what this retrograde loser thinks about anything.

Go have some man on dog, idiot...

Give me a break. McCain has refashioned himself three times during this campaign for political expediency - his turnaround during the campaign on the Bush tax cuts, his turnaround now on his immigration bill (he won't push it he said during the debate because the people don't want it - a flip flop of major proportions). McCain lies about why he was against tax cuts saying he was concerned about spending when on record it was because he was against giving them to the "rich" (a Clinton line). McCain has been negative and sarcastic in every debate and his ads in New Hampshire. He claims Romney pointing out in his ads McCain's opposition to the Bush tax cuts started the "smear and character assassination campaign" Before the New Hampshire primary McCain sits by his aging mother while she goes on a tirade against Mormons and says nothing. Says he didn't know she would say this (LIE). Should we mention the Keating Five? It is a shame that in an election where racism is being put behind us with Obama that we still have the religious bigotry in this campaign. Romney has presented a detailed specific economic plan and health care plan while McCain has presented nothing except to keep us in Iraq for 100 years. McCain talks about how he is opposed to earmarks. Where is the objective press in investigating and reporting the earmarks McCain has put in legislation? I was an Olympic volunteer . At a volunteer training session at Cottonwood High School with several hundred volunteers with Mitt Romney we had a gridlock getting out of the high school parking lot. There was Mitt Romney sleeves rolled up out directing traffic out of the parking lot. He will likewise go to Washington and end the gridlock McCain is part off. I am a military veteran having served my country for 20 years. McCain talks of honor. He has none by the way he conducts himself . I was appalled to learn of his temper and lack of decorum and explicit tirade swearing against fellow Senators. Seems something suitable for ethics hearing where he can say it was a lack of judgment. McCain touts his foreign policy. Foreign policy is more than being a missile head it is diplomacy which McCain is seriously lacking in. Rambo endorsed him. Anyone who has been overseas knows that most countries in the world are offended by the Rambo mentality of some American politicians. By the way where is McCain's conservative values on the new Rambo movie with its obscene graphic violence. With shootings in our schools and shopping malls doesn't McCain find it disburbing to be supported by a Hollywood actor like Rambo?

Shame on the media!!! During this campaign they have created the divisive atmosphere. Rather than the media focusing on what specific plans are being presented by each candidate they focus on the "glaring looks" between Romney and McCain. McCain didn't have to spend his own money he had a free ride during this entire time with the media. McCain had the millions of dollars of free press while Romney had to spend his own money.
It has been the media with their hidden agenda saying Romney was negative (didn't say same thing about McCain who has been negative from get go). Romney has presented a specific detailed plan on the economy and health care. McCain has presented nothing. The lack of professional journalism by the media is appalling. Robert Kennedy was right years ago in his best seller "An Enemy from Within" where he wrote that we no longer have a free press. The media is owned by a few owners who run and own the editorial boards (i.e., Gannett). Why hasn't the media informed the public of Romney's specific plans and McCain’s lack of any specific plans (except stay in Iraq for 100 years)? Why don’t the media investigate and report on the earmarks McCain has put into legislation when he says vehemently he is against earmarks? McCain acts and smells like a Democrat. When the media covers what Romney spends of his personal money why don't they show the free millions of media dollars given to McCain by the biased unfree press?

Romney has changed views, but he kept a written list as governor and complied with each of his campaign promises.
He has also made every organization he has touched unbelievably successful. McCain just relies on his POW story and infamously bad legislation to qualify him for president.

I trust Romney over McCain any day. Changing views is much better than stubbornly refusing to admit your legislation is horrible!!!

Go Mitt!!!

It's the endorsements people give when they have to lose than to gain by endorsement that matter. Ingraham, AND ESPECIALLY HANNITY, have more to lose by endorsing Romney than to gain, since they know the risk alientating the probable winner with the endorsement (McCain). It shows Hannity and Ingraham have beliefs that matter more than their personal interests, and it reaffirms to me that they are principled. This is also the reason that Crist and Swarzenegger's endorsements of McCain mean nothing. They're opportunistic. They were waiting to see how they could gain the most with their endorsements.

WHEN SANTORUM WAS SINKING IN HIS RE-ELECTION HE ASKED JOHN MCCAIN TO CAMPAIGN FOR HIM IN PA AND HE DID. MCCAIN SPENT 3 DAYS SUPPORTING RICK. WHAT A PHONY THIS GUY IS, WONDER WHY HE LOST BY 18 POINTS TO CASEY ?

When Santorum says "most important conservative social issues", he assumes the whole Republican Party is beholden to the evangenuts agenda. Not all Republicans thought the U.S. government had any business intervening in the Terry Schiavo matter, for instance.
BTW, I think the voters spoke loud and clear regarding the job Rick did for his constituents.

I'm a conservative Catholic Democrat from CT who used to be a big fan of Senator Santorum. He was a hero to many of Knights of Columbus types for his strong Pro-life stand. Now however, he seems to be showing his true colors and is making the people of PA look brilliant for tossing him out of the Senate. His criticism of McCain is laughable. During his re-election campain in 2006, he begged McCain to come and stump with him in PA, and even featured McCain's endorsement prominently on his website. On Santorum's signature issue - the culture of life - he endorses a flip-flopper who's true feelings about the Pro-life cause are in serious in doubt. Santorum is either a.) intellectually dishonest b.) deluded c.)a phony

dt,

There you are, strapped into the rack, delirious with pain and someone sidles up to you just out of your vision, in a hooded shroud with the tools of reconciliation in his hands.

Suddenly;
"You will now be reconciled! I declare trial by ordeal!"

You recognize the voice! It's little Ricky Sanitarium!

Ricky continues;
"Who would have suspected! An American Inquisition!'

I am just sad that it is looking like a McCain/Clinton ticket in November. With so many great choices why do Americans always choose the most mediocre? I mean come on McCain?

Anybody but McCain/Clinton 2008!

so Rick Santorium is supporting that Masachusetts fraud, big whoop. It wasn't Romney who he begged to campaign for him when he got his butt kicked 2 years ago. You have to love these guys they use mccain to get reelected and then diss him after he gets them elected. I am a proud conservative who will not vote for that mitt fraudney. talk radio has sold its soul for a guy who didn't embrace ANY conservative stances until he was running for president. I don't feel like cutting off my nose to spite my face.

How did (will) Romney Govern? We know what we will get from McCain and we do not like it...May be time for a 3rd party..

If Rick Santorum thinks so little of John McCain, why did he beg him to come and campaign for him in 2006 when Santorum was sinking like the Titanic in Pennsylvania? The word for that is ingrate.

Santorum likes Romney, hates McCain??

This is the revenge of ex-senator. In one of the articles couple of days ago, he has mentioned that he hardly agrees with John McCain hardly any issues.

What a hyprocrate he is?

Hey Mitt supporter (supposedly very conservative)

Anybody remembers about Santorum reelection campaign???

He has asked John McCain to campaign for him.

Right now, you foolish folks think that he has the audacity to tell you who is John McCain.

He is the number ONE hypocrate?

There should be some limits about hypocracy. Somebody needs to remind him about his reelection campaign. You foolish folks believe everything you hear from Rush, Hannity, Ann Coulter gang.

I do not mind listening to them but you foolish folks need to analyze the points before your eyes.

That's all I have to say at this moment.

Rick Santorum... Rick Santorum... Isn't he the guy who asked John McCain to campaign for him? Who is he to tell me how to vote when he has liberals campaigning for him!

Santorum likes Romney, hates McCain??

This is the revenge of ex-senator. In one of the articles couple of days ago, he has mentioned that he hardly agrees with John McCain hardly any issues.

What a hyprocrate he is?

Hey Mitt supporter (supposedly very conservative)

Anybody remembers about Santorum reelection campaign???

He has asked John McCain to campaign for him.

Right now, you close-minded folks think that he has the audacity to tell you who is John McCain.

He is the number ONE hypocrate?

There should be some limits about hypocracy. Somebody needs to remind him about his reelection campaign. You close-minded folks believe everything you hear from Rush, Hannity, Ann Coulter gang.

I do not mind listening to them but you close-minded folks need to analyze the points before your eyes.

That's all I have to say at this moment.

Rick Santorum also endorsed rabidly proabort Arlen Specter against a strong prolife candidate (Tumey). The race was decided by as little as 1%.

Now he is supporting a man (Romney) who signed healthcare legislation mandating that Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the nation) must sit on the Advisory Board, and that uses taxpayer dollars to provide abortion on demand for a $50 copay. Shame on you, Mr. Santorum. Mitt Romney is NOT prolife, and you should know better. But apparently, you don't really care about the 48 million babies who have been slaughtered by abortions in the US, thanks in part to financial backers like the Romney family.
Conservatives: Check out the facts. Mitt Romney is no friend to the unborn, and no friend to those who value the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of life.

Anyone is is truly prolife could NEVER in good conscience vote for Romney, Hillary, or Obama.

Something to consider.

Per column: Robert Robb is a columnist for the Arizona Republic and a RealClearPolitics contributor. Reach him at robert.robb@arizonarepublic.com. Read more of his work at robertrobb.com.

Compared to Whom?
Despite their fervent wishes, conservatives cannot exhume Ronald Reagan and put him on the 2008 ballot. So, the actionable question is which of the candidates is the most conservative. In this regard, it is surely relevant that McCain has always thought of himself as a conservative and proclaimed himself to be such. There is reason to believe that he has not always acted as one and overall hasn't earned Buckley's article as "a conservative." Conservatism, however, is the team he has always seen himself as being on. That's obviously not true of Mitt Romney, whom many conservative pundits are trying to advance as the best overall conservative in the race. In his 1994 race against Ted Kennedy, Romney famously said: "I was independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
While the comment has made the rounds, I'm not sure conservatives have fully pondered its significance. This disassociation from Reagan didn't occur in 1979, when it was unknown what kind of a president he would be. It occurred six years after he had left office, when his record was fully established, including the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nor was Romney a young buck, just feeling his way around politics. He was in his late 40s and, as a substantial business leader, undoubtedly followed public affairs closely.
Before being crowned the conservative candidate, surely Romney should be required to answer more fully and candidly exactly what he found so repugnant about Reagan that he wasn't even willing to be in the same political party as the Gipper.
This isn't to argue that McCain should be the conservative candidate and Romney or shouldn't. Or Huckabee or Paul for that matter. Conservatives are divided because the choice isn't clear. In making that choice, however, this much should be acknowledged about McCain: He's always considered himself to be a conservative. And where he is clearly conservative - on spending, trade and foreign policy - voters can have a considerable measure of confidence that he will remain so.

The respected, nonpartisan "National Journal" rated Rick Santorum more conservative than 70% of his colleagues his last senate year.

The same "National Journal" just rated Barack H. Obama the MOST LIBERAL senator, more liberal than 100% of his colleagues.

Reporter Oliphant labels Rick Santorum "very conservative."

Reprter Oliphant doesn't even give Obama an ideological label, let alone the label "very liberal".

The in-bed-with-moveon.org Swamp reporters embarrass themselves by being so nakedly partisan.

Remember, a vote for huck is a vote for the mccliar, which is a vote for Hillabama.

Vote Romney, or you're voting democrat
http://www.apoliticsnowblog.com/

This is a unique situation in American politics. For over a century there have been two parties both opposing the other on issues. Yet, there was a balance created between them that was necessary in order to sustain order and value in government for the people by the people. One remained conservative while the other remained liberal in their perspectives. Now, the beginning of the "American Conservative" by John McCain has taken conservative positions and changed them to liberal perspectives. What do you call a two party system that believes in large government, high taxes, and no choice? I call it COMMUNISM! There is a reason why Senator McCain's run for the White House has as much of an appeal to conservatives as having Jane Fonda in Vietnam inspecting American prison camps. It is because he has betrayed our trust in him. He made a campaign promise after the South Carolina victory. He said, "I will never do anything to disappoint the American people." Well, he already has!

As a vet from the United States Army of Kewait and Iraq, I am extremely disappointed in Senator McCain. I am also disappointed in those of my fellow soldiers who are following this "mad man" to undo the most sacred of vows to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Perhaps, some of you might remember some of these words when you were sworn into the military.

McCain is a fine Liberal. You have to respect that!

To all those backers of Governor Romney who claim to be "real Republicans" and "true conservatives" and who are making angry-child "my candidate or no candidate" threats to bolt the Party in the fall: Good. Don't vote for Senator McCain. Goodbye. In the fall, find the inevitable ultra-right wing fringe candidate and vote for him. And then when your candidate gets only one tenth of one percent of the vote, you can congratulate yourself on your ideological purity, head down to your backyard bomb shelter, smoke a good cigar and think about how the world has been going to hell since Bob Taft lost to Ike.

Getting the endorsement of Laura Ingraham is almost akin to being endorsed by a hate group. Ingraham is little more than a wannabee imitator of Ann Coulter, who in turn is little more than a TV shock jock who basically ripped off Howard Stern's act and twisted it to fit a right-wing extremist agenda. Conservative and centrist Republicans are surging to Senator McCain's campaign, while the only new converts to the Romney campaign are a sad mix of the far right wing and whatever else can be scraped up by the Bush41/Bush43/Cheney/Halliburton/CarlisleGroup Corporatist wing of the Party.

Not that Ron Paul is any kind of a threat but to those of you who listen to what he is saying and think he actually is conservative need to take a better look at the guy. Upon going into the post office a month ago there was Ron Paul supporters out front and there signs read "Hate Bush" and "Impeach Chaney." They were out there yelling at the people who were going into the post office all things against what Republicans believe. Then a verbal arguement insued after I told them I back this war. They got nasty and started calling names, etc. Ron Paul and his supporters are wacko. I found that out first hand and I wasn't the only one that day who got harrassed. Forgetaboutit.

Rick Santorum tells it like it is. McCain has been crowned GOP King to elect Sen Hillary Clinton.They have worked for nothing to ruin our GOP party. Wakeup GOP voters why let our enemies define us with this old man as our supposed leader.Elect Mitt Tuesday and foil McCain. Fox News has become a whore for McCain at least Rush tells it like it is not a Fox news sellout with Chris Wallace having Hillary and McCain the Sunday before the election. As a FOX News Fan I am very disappointed someone at the top is pulling their anchors strings. Fred Barnes, Mort Kondracke have no respect left.Jerry White, Springfield, IL

I will not vote for John McCain who would permanently destroy the Republican party. He has spent the last 8 years betraying and undermining the Republican party while pandering to the liberal left. I would rather have a Democrat win and finally take the blame for this mess that we're sinking into. Whether it is Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John McCain, they will advance the liberal agenda. And each of them will take the country down the road to ruin. After 4 years, when the economy has tanked, when the dollar is worth nothing, when socialism has completely overtaken our economy and ground it to a halt, when social security has gone completely bankrupt, when the economic strain has undermined our military to the point where we are weak, when liberals have eroded the conservative values to the point of complete moral decay, only then will we realize the socialistic danger that we have been slipping into. At that point, we will go crawling on our hands and knees to Mitt Romney. And we will beg him to save us from disaster (the way that he saved the Olympics). Only then (when we are desperate for change) will we be willing to "get past" the "religion issue" (honestly, isn't this the REAL issue that has been holding people back) and accept this intelligent, principled, patriotic, great man. It took Jimmy Carter and the disaster that he brought in order for us to see and accept the greatness of Ronald Reagan. It will probably take a Hillary Clinton or John McCain in office to open the door for recovery (by tearing down this country to the point where people are willing to truly stand behind the values that have made this nation great). But if John McCain destroys our country, Republicans will be blamed. And we will not even get the chance to fix it.

Those of you who are conservatives, and think sending McCain to the White House would be a good thing should think about who McCain will feel loyalty to. Do you think he will feel obligated to serve the conservative base that despises him, or will he serve the liberal media and friends who handed him the election? McCain has a long memory for his enemies, and he is a stubborn and sometimes mean spirited enemy. When it comes to nominating judges, where do you think McCain's loyalties will fall? Do you think for a minute that they will fall with the conservative base that has scorned him, or will they fall with the liberal media that loves him? To answer those questions, you can simply look at his recent record in the Senate. He obviously feels more loyalty to his buddies across the aisle than he does to the conservative base that long supported him. Even when we supported him, he stabbed us in the back. Now that we despise him, how will he respond? Probably the same way he has over the past 8 years - with increasing disdain for conservatives. He even talks the liberal talk these days (class envy, business if evil, profit over patriotism, etc.). Do you really believe he is going to pick judges that you would like?

There is a big fundamental difference between McCain and Romney. Romney has a successful record of solving problems (even very complex and difficult ones); from business challenges (turning failing businesses into successes and growing jobs), to saving the Olympics, to governing successfully with conservative principles in the most liberal state in America, Romney has proven repeatedly that no challenge is too difficult for him to solve. McCain, on the other hand, has managed to make problems in the face of opportunities. Tell me one person in the country who has created more problems for Republicans over the last 8 years. From McCain / Feingold (which permanently shifted the fund raising advantage from Republicans to Democrats), to McCain / Kenedy (which would undermine the rule of law by essentially pardoning millions who have broken it, while yielding a tremendous political advantage to the Democrats), to rejecting the Marriage Amendment (which Romney fought hard on behave of), to rejecting the Bush tax cuts, to his gang of 14 (which allowed Democrats to block numerous conservative judicial nominations), to McCain / Lieberman (which will impose additional burdens on American businesses), to opposing oil drilling in Alaska, to undermining the war on terror with his protests about Gitmo, Rumsfeld, surveillance, "torture", he has consistently caused problems while betraying and undermining our Republican party.

Romney is correct. Washington is broken (and McCain is part of the problem). Spending is out of control, liberal judges are writing law, our laws (i.e. immigration) are broken without consequence, the deficit is growing while the dollar is falling, social security is on the road to bankruptcy, gas prices are rising while we become more dependent on foreign oil (even though we have reserves available that we don't tap because of the environmental lobby, and McCain), etc. The longer we delay fixing these problems, the worse they become. How much pain will it take before we wake up?

Romney will eventually turn the country around at that point (if given the chance). But it will be even harder then than it is now. But this is a man who has accepted and conquered these types of challenges in the past. And he will do it (as he did in Massachusetts) without taking a salary. He'll do it (as he did for the Olympics) because of his personal commitment to public service, and his patriotic zeal for America. And he will do it (as he did in his courageous stand in defending traditional marriage in Massachusetts) while defending the important foundation of the family, and the religious Christian values that founded this great nation. He will do it because he is a compassionate and patriotic man, and because he is one of the smartest people this world has known.

Jerry White from Springfield:

Get ready to move to Paraguay or Guatemala or some other right wing paradise.

It's America, Jer, love it or leave it.

Well, since JM is a liberal, if the choices are Bama, or Clinton vs McCain, it's win win win for America.

Sue N:

I'm afraid that, if you believe George W. Bush represents conservatism, and Ron Paul doesn't, you don't know what conservatism is.

Conservatism centers on three main interrelated ideas: fiscal responsibility, small government and the promotion of traditional American values (also known as social conservatism). The goal of each is singular: individual freedom within an open society. It stresses small government to insure that government does what it is supposed to do – namely, defend the nation and insure that everyone is secure in their rights – while, at the same time, keeping the state and federal governments vigorous in their own spheres of influence, and both off of people’s backs and out of their way. It stresses fiscal responsibility to insure that government does its job while remaining accountable to the public and minimizing its burden on the people. And it stresses social conservatism in the belief that those inculcated with traditional values are self-governing and, thus, in less need of a government to chase them around with a stick to make them behave. For a good idea of conservative values and policies, I refer you to George Washington’s Farewell Address to Congress (1796). It can be found at: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm

When judged by these standards, George W. Bush has proven himself to be a dismal failure as a conservative. Under his administration, the federal government has grown larger and faster, not to mention more duplicative and wasteful, than under any President since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Instead of protecting the rights of the individual, he has infringed them by employing unconstitutionally intrusive investigative measures, oppressive detention practices, and by signing into law measures that restrict our rights to free speech – among others. His record for fiscal conservatism is nothing short of abysmal. He has already grown the national debt by more than three trillion dollars. Up until last year, there wasn’t a pork-laden spending bill that he didn’t like enough to sign into law. His only excuse for authorizing such spending was that, by giving Congress everything it wanted, he was more likely to get what he wanted out of Congress. As for social conservatism, he proposed an amendment to the Constitution that failed, and he signed into law a bill that outlawed partial birth abortions. Even the latter was of questionable constitutionality. For more of what’s wrong (and what has been wrong) with the current Bush administration, see http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm So, yes, conservatives have a lot to dislike, and maybe even hate, about George W. Bush’s administration.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, is not only a true conservative, he is one of the last few honest politicians in Congress. As a Congressman from Texas, he has an impeccable voting record against pork, wasteful spending and unconstitutional measures. He has also been consistently in favor of individual liberty and justice. He has been so consistent, that he has earned the title, “Dr. No” for his opposition to anything but small government, fiscal responsibility and traditional American values. Now that’s a conservative.

If you have any questions on who to vote for in the republican primaries, please watch this video. Thanks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnU3G-HCf9w