Santorum Ad Cuts To The Heart Of The Real/Fake Problem With Politicians

Posted on | November 2, 2011 | 21 Comments

by Smitty

There isn’t a thing for me not to admire in this ad:

Rick Santorum is to Newt Gingrich what Tim Pawlenty was to Mitt Romney; Rick has all of the knowledge of how the sausage is made, without seeming a two-dimensional cardboard cutout.

I keep wanting to respect the fact that the Iron Law has made some inside grasp of that Byzantine/Rube Goldberg device we call DC a useful resume bullet. Thus, a guy like Santorum who, for all appearances, is cognizant but not compromised is an attractive candidate.

It is the height of irony that a nation which touts the Judeo-Christian underpinnings informing its founding spends so much energy ignoring an unabashedly Christian candidate like Rick Santorum. I’m talking around juxtaposing the words ‘nation’ and ‘Christian’ here because I don’t think such is theologically or practically possible, short of a Triumphal Return.

Rick Santorum for my vote, is the most underrated GOP contender, and the obituary of his campaign has been written far too soon.

Category: Election 2012, Rick Santorum

Comments

21 Responses to “Santorum Ad Cuts To The Heart Of The Real/Fake Problem With Politicians”

Anonymous
November 2nd, 2011 @ 9:04 pm

The problem is he comes across as rather an obnoxious fellow. (‘Course, I’m one to throw stones, right?) Personality isn’t everything, but it’s something. I don’t see how he overcomes it.
Joe
November 2nd, 2011 @ 9:10 pm

Rick Santorum is a wonderful father. I was moved by his love for his children and especially his daughter.

But I question whether Rick Santorum would be a good president. And while I do not want a litmus test on electability, I doubt Rick could win the nomination (let alone win the general).

There is something about Rick Santorum as a politician that rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Obviously guys like Dan Savage have treated him poorly. That Google does nothing to stop those attacks says a lot about Google’s “neutrality” (hint: It is lefty partisan all the way). I do not support that. But Santorum is also one of the architects of Compassionate Conservatism. And I do not support that either.
Dm
November 2nd, 2011 @ 9:13 pm

The reason his candidacy hasn’t taken off, when such non-entities like Cain have seen their campaign rise, is that Santorum is Roman Catholic.
Joe
November 2nd, 2011 @ 9:44 pm

Do you really believe that? There are some evangelicals who would never vote RC, but they are a small minority and not the reason Rick Santorum is not gaining traction.
Adjoran
November 2nd, 2011 @ 10:00 pm

I like Santorum and think he was a pretty darned good Senator. He lacks the experience of managing and administering a large operation.* The US federal government is the largest enterprise in the world, with an annual budget greater than any other country’s total GDP, except for China and Japan, with millions of employees.

It’s not the position – or the time in history – for on-the-job training as a manager. Just look at what we have now.

And as a candidate, he is not so effective. Notice his level of support which has never risen very high. But he lost his seat by 13% to a guy who was known not to even show up half the time for his last two public jobs. There are weaknesses as a candidate.

As a Catholic convert, I can tell you there is plenty of anti-Catholic bias out there I never noticed before (beyond the obvious, which I always did notice), but I really don’t think that’s Rick’s problem. He’s never become a strong enough candidate for it to become an issue.

* (The same of course applies also to Bachmann, Paul, and Gingrich – another reason I am sorry to see Cain scratch himself from the race, because he did have the necessary experience).
Joe
November 2nd, 2011 @ 10:23 pm

It was actually an 18% spread between Casey and Santorum…and Santorum was the incumbant. That is bad.

I am Catholic and while I have certainly seen some anti Catholic bias, it is far less than what Jews and Mormons go through. A big reason for that is Catholics make up 24-25% of the population–but like Jews, Catholics run a very big spectrum on politics. Ted Kennedy was supposedly Catholic. Santorum is orthodox Opus Dei.

Adjoran just nailed it above about the need for management skills. I did listen to Ron Suskind on Medved today. Wow. Suskind was just scathing about the Obama administration. And Suskind is no right wing guy (remember him writing about the Bush administration?). Obama is portrayed as completely feckless and Suskind does that with actual quotes (not unnamed sources).

It is a shame I do not trust Romney more because he probably does have the managerial skills to run the country. I trust Herman Cain’s instincts more–but while I do not give the latest scandal much creedence (because there is no real evidence to do so)–I am very disappointed and disheartened by a ham fisted organization.

Like a lawyer on cross examination (who only asks questions he knows the answers to), you do not make a claim you cannot back up. Mark Block hurt Herman a lot with the Perry accusation and then apology.
smitty
November 2nd, 2011 @ 11:25 pm

I’m Christian and anti-bureaucracy.
I can admit to youthful anti-Rome mouthings, but realized that, stylistic differences aside, I have no substantial quarrel with Rome.
Truly, religious pluralism is important. Mormon, Jew, Catholic: it really shouldn’t matter. A Moslem would really, really have to convince me that the Establishment Clause meant to him/her what the common Americans understand it to mean. Some might call that bias; others, due diligence.
Anonymous
November 2nd, 2011 @ 11:48 pm

I’m going with due diligence.
I could vote for Santorum without hesitation in the primary if he’s still in the race come May. I think he’d make a good president and don’t put as much stock in Governor over Senator as president as most seem to. If Obama had served a term voting present as Governor of Illinois or a decade running three or four corporations into the ground, it wouldn’t have made him anymore qualified to be President. It might, at best have prevented him from being president.
Video: Taking Another Look At Rick Santorum « Nice Deb
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:02 am

[…] Via The Other McCain: […]
ThePaganTemple
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:29 am

You’re right Smitty, Santorum’s obituary has been written too soon. About two months too soon.
Orrin
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:32 am

Big Government in the name of Jesus is still Big Government. He’s the kind of religious right Republican who made me think I was a Democrat back in the day.

When you hear Santorum’s solutions on things like education or the housing crisis, it is inevitably a Washington-centered one. Those are his instincts, and that’s how he would govern. Listen to him carefully in the debates with an eye towards a proper understanding of Federalism and the 10th AMendment, and you’ll hear a big government guy.

Also, I think he comes off as kind of a jerk. He just rubs me the wrong way, which may be unfair, but since I know I’m not alone in that by a long shot, it matters.
ThePaganTemple
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:54 am

You just encapsulated every one of my concerns about him, and did it quite well.
Joe
November 3rd, 2011 @ 1:31 am

That is exactly my concern of Rick Santorum.
Adjoran
November 3rd, 2011 @ 1:56 am

“It might, at best have prevented him from being president.”

Sorta the whole point, my friend.

I agree that wrong thinking isn’t necessarily improved with experience. But there is a good reason we have only elected sitting Senators three times, but Governors and Generals with frequency.
Anonymous
November 3rd, 2011 @ 2:43 am

How well did those ex-Senators do as presidents?
Dave
November 3rd, 2011 @ 4:01 am

The question is, and always should be, Character. Integrity. Honesty. A frog with those qualities would lead the US to prosperity beyong belief. We get that right in our candidate, and the rest will take care of itself.

At least that’s how it should be.

Unfortunately, those values mean nothing in the rat race for power, and are often a negative.

God help us all. GOD HELP US ALL.
The Wondering Jew
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:27 pm

You nailed it, Orrin.
Rick Santorum Releases Powerful New TV Ad - "Family" | REPUBLICAN REDEFINED
November 3rd, 2011 @ 12:49 pm

[…] for the Republican nomination for President of the United States, Rick Santorum, has released a new campaign ad as his campaign prepares to head down the homestretch toward Iowa and New Hampshire. I’ve […]
Tennwriter
November 3rd, 2011 @ 2:46 pm

People try to tar the religious right with being big government, but such is usually not the case. And the social conservative views tend to lead toward minimal government (not anarchy, but smaller gov’t, yes.).

This is the reverse of the point that a number of people have made that Solib policies create such a disaster that Fislib and big gov’t are needed to patch society up. Reverse that, and you see that Socon policies lead to Fiscon and small gov’t results.

Its inherent in the nature of Socons and their situation to have a limited gov’t.. Now, we may not charge there in a wild rush, and there may be some stumbles, but the trendline is going to be toward smaller gov’t.. Which is the reverse of the trendline for the last several decades.

You get one socon, and he might say ‘let’s grow gov’t’, but you get a bunch of them, and the compromise is going to be on the whole less gov’t.

And keep in mind, those oh so pure Libertarians, they still want to spend money on Science. Which is manifestly un-libertarian. What that reveals, is that even the single-issue fanatics are not that simplistic. Instead, they too are human and complicated.

If Cain implodes, and aaargh, it looks like he will, then Santorum becomes our best choice. And….heeheheeheh….all those Palin haters, who went out of their way to destroy a decent and even great person, get a pitchfork named Santorum shoved down their throats. Its poetic, I tell ya’.

You didn’t like my open hand? Well how do ya’ like my fist!?!
Orrin
November 3rd, 2011 @ 3:43 pm

I didn’t say that all Social Conservatives are big government types, I just maintain that Rick Santorum IS. He bragged in the debates about helping create DHS. When he was here in Reno, he told the group I was with that he wanted the federal government involved in home school regulations. He’s perfectly OK with federally administered welfare, without any seeming regard for whether or not the feds have any business in that arena in the first place.

I think social conservatism is an essential part of a Unified Theory of Conservatism because it creates a source of power and authority discrete from and in competition with government. But when someone wants to have large government programs centrally managed with the goal of “enhancing the dignity of the Family” or whatever, that’s Big Government. It’s an extremely fine line, and one that we should all be very, very cautious and aware of.

And I’m sorry, but a guy who lost so epically so recently in a swing state that knows him well just doesn’t inspire my confidence as a guy who can win in November nation-wide.
Tennwriter
November 3rd, 2011 @ 8:59 pm

Q: [To Santorum]: In his book, “Fed Up,” Gov. Perry says that it was
“unprincipled” for Republicans to vote in favor of creating the Department of
Homeland Security. You were one of those Republicans who voted yes. Respond?
SANTORUM: We created DHS because there was a complete mess in the internal
[workings] in protecting our country. We had all sorts of agencies that had
conflicting authority; we put together a plan to try to make sure that there was
better coordination

Me: That does not sound remotely big gov’t or disqualifying. Romney on Abortion or Perry on needing a heart transplant are actively bad. This ain’t.

As to Education, he got 27% rating from the NEA, so he has to be doing something right. He voted for Vouchers, and Education savings accounts, twice on both.

And….
SANTORUM: 20 years ago, the federal contribution to education was 3%. It’s now
at 11%, and our schools are doing worse. It’s because the federal government’s
meddling. The bottom-line problem is that the education system doesn’t serve the
customer of the education system. And who’s the customer? The parents, because
it’s the parents’ responsibility to educate their children–from the moment they
were born, they began the education of their children. At some point, the
government has convinced parents that it’s no longer their responsibility. They
force them, in many respects, to turn their children over to the public
education system and wrest control from them and block them out of participation
of that. That has to change or education will not improve in this country.

ME: Doesn’t sound to bad. Sounds pretty decent.

And here’s blogger Lisa Graas commenting….

He was floor leader on the Welfare Reform Act that was the only time in American history that a federal entitlement was ended. He also led on the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, the only federal abortion restriction ever to become law, got Democratic votes for it, and it withstood the test of the Supreme Court. He’s the “git ‘er done” candidate, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say he “doesn’t have the skill sets”. What “skill sets” are you referring to?

Me: This is a good answer to Adjoran’s concerns, and it looks like it counters Orrin’s charge about him being a lover of Fed Welfare.

As to your second para, this kinda sounds like the typical Be of Faint Heart advice that is offered way too often to socons.

And ‘enhancing the dignity of the Family’ is a potentially good thing to do. Our Founders created a gov’t strong in limited areas, not an anarchy. So I would need to look at this more.

As to your last para, I will refer you to RSM on this blog. He talked about how Santorum was made to walk the plank. And I think Obama lost in his first race even bigger….good thing that kept Obama from advancing…..:)

Overall, this Santorum is the new Huckabee meme seems unconvincing.

Let us compare…

Romney vs. Santorum……Any Conservative says Santorum.