Romney today on Santorum’s debate performance last night: “I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a politician explain in so many ways why it was that he voted against his principles.”
I suppose that would hit just a little bit harder if there weren't so many questions about what Romney's own principles are.
One thing that is becoming increasingly clear: Santorum makes for a challenging target for Romney, because most of Santorum's weaknesses are related in some way to Romney's own. Romney can claim that Santorum is a Washington insider; Santorum can point out that while Romney is not a Washington insider, it has not been for a lack of trying. Romney can claim that Santorum has betrayed his principles; Santorum can point out that Romney's contradictions on his principles are difficult to highlight because no one is entirely certain just what Romney's principles are. Etc., etc.
Very clever line of Romney's. . . too clever by half. The greater principle, which Romney cannot see, is that loyalty to the greater good might take precedence in certain circumstances. Another way to put this is that sometimes we have to put up with a half-loaf in order to set the meat on the table. It is strange that Romney could not recognize this since it comprises the whole G.O.P. argument for voting for Romney. Maybe Romney cannot recognize this because his greatest loyalty is to himself.
Were he ever actually to attempt it, I wonder how many words Romney would need to excuse his achieving Ted Kennedy's dream of subjecting citizens to the state in their most vulnerable moments.
I am just excited to see where all these principled and real conservatives flock to now. I mean their staunch conservative views and conviction first led them to Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, Gingrich, and now the very principled Santorum.
I can't wait to hear them preach about real conservatism and conviction once more when they find their next "Reagan" conservative.
As I was explaining to my son recently, politics works like this:
A congressman proposes to spend billions and billions of taxpayer dollars from around the country to build a stadium in his own district (the owners having given said congressman millions in campaign contributions). The congressman also includes 50K for health care for puppies.
You vote against the bill. In your re-election fight our opponent runs advertisements saying you "voted against puppies".
You know you had a bad debate when you leave Mitt Romney room to criticize you on this with your own words.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI suppose that would hit just a little bit harder if there weren't so many questions about what Romney's own principles are.
One thing that is becoming increasingly clear: Santorum makes for a challenging target for Romney, because most of Santorum's weaknesses are related in some way to Romney's own. Romney can claim that Santorum is a Washington insider; Santorum can point out that while Romney is not a Washington insider, it has not been for a lack of trying. Romney can claim that Santorum has betrayed his principles; Santorum can point out that Romney's contradictions on his principles are difficult to highlight because no one is entirely certain just what Romney's principles are. Etc., etc.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney himself has never acted against his principles because he's never had any to violate.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney was a principled man in 2008 when Santorum and Limbaugh and many other conservatives supported him.
But now he's a man with no principles? Not merely less worthy of support than your choice, but completely lacking in principles. What hogwash.
I think these conservatives flip flopping on Romney look worse than Romney's change on abortion.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTruth--succinctly stated! Well done.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCheap and untrue.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney doesn't vote against his principles, he just changes his principles to suit his vote.
Then he changes back, or maybe not. What day is it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAt least Santorum has principles to vote against.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRight. Once Santorum's actual principles are revealed by examination of his statements and actions, I want to vote against them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseVery clever line of Romney's. . . too clever by half. The greater principle, which Romney cannot see, is that loyalty to the greater good might take precedence in certain circumstances. Another way to put this is that sometimes we have to put up with a half-loaf in order to set the meat on the table. It is strange that Romney could not recognize this since it comprises the whole G.O.P. argument for voting for Romney. Maybe Romney cannot recognize this because his greatest loyalty is to himself.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWere he ever actually to attempt it, I wonder how many words Romney would need to excuse his achieving Ted Kennedy's dream of subjecting citizens to the state in their most vulnerable moments.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am just excited to see where all these principled and real conservatives flock to now. I mean their staunch conservative views and conviction first led them to Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, Gingrich, and now the very principled Santorum.
I can't wait to hear them preach about real conservatism and conviction once more when they find their next "Reagan" conservative.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe best moment was Santorum and "courage." Somewhere Dan Rather must have thrown his remote control.
Santorum has so much courage he endorsed Specter and was a "team player." A courageous political wouldn't have voted against right to work.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs I was explaining to my son recently, politics works like this:
A congressman proposes to spend billions and billions of taxpayer dollars from around the country to build a stadium in his own district (the owners having given said congressman millions in campaign contributions). The congressman also includes 50K for health care for puppies.
You vote against the bill. In your re-election fight our opponent runs advertisements saying you "voted against puppies".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse