Rick Santorum must be either surging or plausibly on the cusp of a surge. Because there’s no other explanation for the Romney campaign’s abrupt, and intense, series of attacks on Santorum today in e-mail blasts to and a conference call with reporters.
“We need a next president who’s been strong and proven in fiscal and spending matters, and we had Rick Santorum voting numerous times to raise the debt ceiling,” said Tim Pawlenty in a call with reporters today. “So, he clearly has been part of the big spending establishment in Congress and in the influence-peddling industry that surrounds Congress. He has been part of that. He has been a champion of earmarks, and to hold himself out now as somebody who is an unquestionable conservative in these matters, just is not supported by the facts.”
Also in my inbox today from the Romney campaign: Santorum’s endorsement of Romney in 2008, an interview from that same year Santorum gave Laura Ingraham about why he had endorsed Romney, an e-mail entitled “A Summary of Santorum’s False Attacks on Massachusetts Health Care” that featured quotes from media outlets that argued specific criticisms Santorum had made were inaccurate, and a statement from Pawlenty (released before the call) saying that “Santorum is a nice guy, but he is simply not ready to be President. . . . As a U.S. Senator, he was a leading earmarker and pork-barrel spender.”
The Santorum campaign has retaliated with a couple of e-mails of their own, including one headlined “Santorum Surge Prompts Romney to Use Attack Machine.”
“If Governor Romney were confident running on his record and his vision for the future, he would,” said Santorum communications director Hogan Gidley in a statement. “But Gov. Romney does what he always does and directs his well-funded attack machine to destroy the opponent. Mitt Romney’s act is tired, old and wearing thin with voters and I suspect at this point, with the media too. Romney never touts his own record — because it’s abysmal. In the Republican Party we have a name for someone who supports government healthcare mandates, big bank bailouts, and radical cap and trade initiatives — we call them Democrats.”
The Santorum campaign also blasted out an e-mail headlined “Mitt Romney: Proud Defender and Author of ‘Obamneycare.’”
until one of the candidates promises to veto any congressionally passed budget that is not balanced, it is fair to say there are no fiscal conservatives running.
it is also fair to say that there are no moral candidates. at least until one of them explains to the american public the grave evil it is for this generation of americans to steal the fruits of future generations (those left to pay off this generation's debt) by incurring debt this generation cannot and has no intention of repaying.
when we find a candidate who promises to veto any congressionally passed budget that is not balance, we will then have a true fiscal conservative.
since there are no current fiscal conservatives, one is forced to pick a candidate based primarily on their social conservative and international affairs conserative principles.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo, that is what T-Paw is up to now? Sending e-mail Mitt-spam to people?
Hey, Tim: anyone who drops out of a campaign because the media told him to shouldn't be attacking anyone else on any basis.
You are, basically, practically disqualified from ever making fun of anyone else ever again.
Especially not in spam e-mails.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePawlenty has been bought by Romney. Mitt, his wife and kiddies and fellow Bainites reduced Pawlenty's campaign debt by about $300,000. Looks like Huntsman was bought as well but by less, considering his grudging endorsement of Romney. Possibly Pawlenty has been promised a cushy job in DC as well.
Romney is such a weak campaigner that without big money his political career would would consist of running for mayor of some small city, not Senator and President.
Santorum's ratings during his years in Congress:
American Conservative Union -- 88%
National Right to Life Committee -- 100%
Americans for Tax Reform -- 95%
National Tax Limitation Committee -- 92%
U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- 88%
League of Private Property Voters -- 94%
How can you get ratings like this and be a big government/big spending guy?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere's one constant regarding Mitt and his supporters.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThey will visciously attack anyone who looks like they might get between Mitt and his goal of being president.
At the same time they will complain loudly anytime anyone dares to criticize their messiah.
And this is different from any other candidate's supporters, how? (For example Newt's supporters, but he isn't the subject of this post.)
In a political contest, candidates attack and defend against their rivals, in addition to promulgating their own good points. Their supporters do the same. Romney and Santorum are rivals, fighting for the nomination. News at 11.
If Santorum is to be taken seriously as a candidate-- as many people have argued-- then it only stands to reason that Romney should take him seriously too. That's politics. Or is the person who currently happens to be the frontrunner supposed to tie his hands behind his back, to even the odds, or be complacent and just coast?
The fact that a candidate proffers a negative campaign or attack against another, by itself, tells me nothing. You have to consider the content of those attacks, case by case. Are they true? And if true, to what extent do those facts factor into my considerations and preferences as a voter? Different things will weigh differently in the minds of different voters.
Romney and Santorum are both good men. I much prefer Romney to be the nominee, for many reasons. But I believe a political battle between Romney and Santorum-- though it might get heated, as political battles are wont to do-- is likely to be much more substantive and mature than the narcissistic hysteria we've witnessed lately from Newt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSantorum has a really bad record as an economic conservative. He has supported ear marks on a number of occasions. He also has a terrible record on trade. He has supported a number of tariffs that would raise cost on consumers. He sponsored a bill that would raise tariffs and then given those tariff revenues to a special interest group.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExternal Link
Let's see if Santorum can use the negative ads to promote his vision as opposed to woe is me garbage like our resident historian.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe problem with Mitt Romney is that I have no idea *what* his vision for the country really is. I keep hearing people say he's a champion of free-market capitalism, but whenever I hear him speak, it sounds like a lot of general, boilerplate stuff. As I wrote in another comment, sometimes I think Mitt's big reason for running for President is just because he wants to be President.
This latest attack does tell us one thing: There probably won't be a deal for Santorum to be Mitt's VP. Obviously, Pawlenty or Christie or one of the many other GOP names who rushed to endorse Mitt are the candidates for that slot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSorry, but ether you haven't really studied Mr. Romney's inspiration to defeat and remove the Obama/Democratic Partisan folly sinking us all. Maybe you simply won't allow yourself to believe Mr. Romney's expression. A few won't stuck on some unhealthy bias.
Romney's aggressive defense and advocation for the US Free Market system is admirable. He is a true Free Market Capitalist, which is quite Conservative in nature.
Besides, personal ambition is a part of every Candidate. One can question everyone's desire for the Office, and everyone who runs (even many who do not run) "wants to be President". Personal ambition can be quite healthy, it has inspired many to achieve great things for all.
Quite a few have set up a different standard for Mr. Romney, whether it be the enormous success, religious affiliation, regional association, etc. Conservatism does not create a certain rules for a few, while excusing others.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePawlenty.
(*SMIRK*)
Let me guess... he wants to be VP - or at least a Cabinet member or Ambassador.
(*SNICKER*)
Listen... TRUE conservative can criticize EITHER Santorum or Gingrich all day long... but at the end of that day... no true conservative could possibly prefer Romney to EITHER man.
Here's what I wonder about Santorum though...
Can Romney "buy" his support?
I'm talk is Santorum "for sale" for a VP slot on the Romney ticket or a Cabinet post... or even for a "guarantee" to pursue a certain policy or group of Santorum holds dear should he (Romney) be elected?
Some of you don't trust Newt. I don't trust Santorum.
(*SHRUG*)
I'm confident that 1) Romney would never ask Newt to be his VP or appoint him to a Cabinet post; 2) Even if Romney were to try and "make a deal" with him, Gingrich would reject it.
(Others may disagree...)
Folks... whether you believe it's a positive (as someone like Bush or Rove or McCain would) to be a "Party" man when push comes to shove or whether you believe the GOP Establishment is only slightly less disgusting than the Democrats, between Santorum and Gingrich there's simply no question that Santorum is the guy more willing to "go along to get along" when push comes to shove vs. Gingrich.
(Arlene Specter, folks...) (*SHRUG*)
Anyway... I can respect Santorum supporters... I myself am a Gingrich supporter... I certainly respect Ron Paul supporters... but Romney supporters...?
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUntil "not-Romney" is under 50%,Romney can't win the nomination. People think that splitting the not-Romney vote benefits Romney, but it doesn't (so far). It weakens Romney as his target keeps shifting and he reveals more and more what a poor campaigner he is. He has been running for President for 6 years, it's his turn, the GOP elites are all in the tank for him but he just can't close the deal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObviously it is easy to buy T-Paw by paying off his election debt. Like a trained seal he will then send out spam email so Romney can stay above the fray.
And everyone wonders why conservatives don't trust Romney. He attacked McCain and Huckabee last cycle and now will attack any other candidate who "might" be on the rise.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseArticle: Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney’s attack dog
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne can only understand the Romney Team's reasoned response to the latest desperate attempts to block Mr. Romney's Nomination. Some are again trying to fabricate a Santorum fantasy. It is all too obvious, after the latest Gingrich flop.
With great regret, the once mighty NR seems to be enabling the folly. We watched after Romney's massive Nevada victory in the evening, no NRO front page reference to the enormous victory. Now we see a post from the tired Mr. Hillyer gracing the NRO front page foolishly selling Rick (after his mindless peddling of Newt failed). The same misguided source who foolishly entertained the ugly Gingrich attacks on Private Enterprise over at the Spectator. Hillyer has proven to be as bad as Mr. Kristol, exposed as being obsessed with some dysfunctional personal prejudice taking them downward.
Hillyer and others are now trying to overtly inflate Rick Santorum, having learned nothing from the ugly Gingrich train wreck. The same problems exist, as Rick is merely a Washington Politician of 17 years who stayed to make his fortune peddling influence. The same Beltway Insider who opposed "Right to Work", supported the "Bridge to Nowhere". The same established Senator who endorsed the dreadful Arlen Specter over the more sound conservative in Mr. Toomey.
The claims of Santorum being a "true" Conservative are rather insulting:
"Santorum Touts Work With Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton In 2006 Ad"
Why wouldn't Romney supporters remind everyone of the real reality of the poor Santorum existence? It only makes perfect political sense, a sign of a very serious - focused Campaign.
Besides, we all know Santorum is simply far from the ideal:
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"* Records ultimately showed that Santorum lived exclusively in a $600,000+ near-mansion in Virginia. This is another thing you need to understand about Pennsylvanians to appreciate just how damaging this was to Santorum. On paper, Santorum claimed his residence was a $90,000 modest house in a suburb of Pittsburgh, when in reality that house was abandoned and Santorum was REALLY living in a house six times as expensive in another state. Here in Chicago, $600,000 can’t buy you a big house, but in Pittsburgh it would land you a palace…so the people who heard about Santorum’s residency scam were enraged that he “abandoned the state” and “lied to his constituents” by living in what they perceived to be a mansion instead of the Penn Hills residence he claimed."