Rick Santorum Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Semper_Zelare
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In any event, does it concern you that the ADL intentionally distorted Santorum’s words? In an effort to support their narrative that Santorum is a bigot, they deliberately left out the portion of his comment where he says he did NOT mean that we always need a Christian candidate.
I’ve read the ADL’s statement and don’t see anywhere in it where they accused Santorum of being a bigot.
As for deliberately leaving out Santorum’s explanation, Santorum’s Boston radio statement was not as clear as his later explanation in NH. I agree that his one sentence clarifier in the Boston radio interview should have been enough, but sometimes people need to hear more.
 
*** I trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding the life issue, which is Santorum, not Paul. I also trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding traditional marriage, which is Santorum, not Paul.

*** They are equally pro-constitution, though I believe Santorum’s foreign policy knowledge is very current and excellent.

*** I believe Paul is too extreme for the majority.

*** Sadly, I believe that Paul is too old for the majority.
And Paul is to racist for a majority of Americans as well.
 
You completely blow off my point about lack of freedom in every Muslim country, and instead spout the meme that Christians were mainly responsible for “historical (horrors)” against them. Perhaps they were historically attacked by Hindus and Buddhists as well? That would explain their difficulty to get along with people of these faiths as well! :doh2: Rob
And one has to carefully edit these “historical horrors” to leave out those committed by the Muslims against the Christians. Entire centuries have to be skipped in history books.
 
It WAS vile and callous of Colmes to say that, but at least he apologized.

I agree with others here that Colmes basically is the designated default liberal on Fox------one to humiliate and embarass constantly for the condescending “amusement” of the anchors and regular viewers.

I never understood why HE was chosen for that dubious position. He really never has stood up for himself and has allowed the other commentators to define him and overwhelm him. I know many other liberals that would actually stand up for himself/herself and be a good “contrasting” presence on the news channel. Colmes has just been a lousy representative of his particular political affiliation.

Just my observations.

For what they’re worth.
A smart, stand-up, unscripted liberal might show them up on their home turf. They can’t have that, now, can they? He’s just a theatrical prop, part of a charade masquerading as reality.
 
*** I trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding the life issue, which is Santorum, not Paul. I also trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding traditional marriage, which is Santorum, not Paul.

*** They are equally pro-constitution, though I believe Santorum’s foreign policy knowledge is very current and excellent.

*** I believe Paul is too extreme for the majority.

*** Sadly, I believe that Paul is too old for the majority.
Go on YouTube and see how popular Dr. Paul is.
Stop listening to Fox news talking points regarding him.
 
Go on YouTube and see how popular Dr. Paul is.
Stop listening to Fox news talking points regarding him.
I am not going to youtube for an agenda driven message about Ron Paul (tons of those right here on CAF). Thanks, but no thanks. 🙂

I do not get talking points from anywhere, I do not use anything like that, and I rarely ever go to Fox News for anything. Might want to stop with the stereotypes.

I will vote for Paul if he wins the nomination–but he is the last person on the list imo, and I will have to really hold my nose if I have to vote for him.
 
I am not going to youtube for an agenda driven message about Ron Paul (tons of those right here on CAF). Thanks, but no thanks. 🙂

I do not get talking points from anywhere, I do not use anything like that, and I rarely ever go to Fox News for anything. Might want to stop with the stereotypes.

I will vote for Paul if he wins the nomination–but he is the last person on the list imo, and I will have to really hold my nose if I have to vote for him.
Sorry, let me correct my statement. “Mainstream media” talking points. 😃
 
I am not going to youtube for an agenda driven message about Ron Paul (tons of those right here on CAF). Thanks, but no thanks. 🙂

I do not get talking points from anywhere, I do not use anything like that, and I rarely ever go to Fox News for anything. Might want to stop with the stereotypes.

I will vote for Paul if he wins the nomination–but he is the last person on the list imo, and I will have to really hold my nose if I have to vote for him.
There certain parts of Paul’s message I agree completely and wish the rest of the nation would also listen to - especially about the Fed, national debt, and the limited scope of government. However, reading past issues of Ron Paul’s newletter makes me question how he even retains his House Seat.
 
Sorry, let me correct my statement. “Mainstream media” talking points. 😃
You are mistaken in both cases and quite insulting by continuing with the stereotypes (someone does not like Paul, so they must be using talking points from someone else). You will not win many people with such offensive tactics–most people can see what you are trying to do. 🙂
 
There certain parts of Paul’s message I agree completely and wish the rest of the nation would also listen to - especially about the Fed, national debt, and the limited scope of government. However, reading past issues of Ron Paul’s newletter makes me question how he even retains his House Seat.
I agree, and I have yet to hear any politcian who I 100% disagree with–even Obama says reasonable things from time-to-time. One has to look at the person’s entire history and foundation.
 
There certain parts of Paul’s message I agree completely and wish the rest of the nation would also listen to - especially about the Fed, national debt, and the limited scope of government. However, reading past issues of Ron Paul’s newletter makes me question how he even retains his House Seat.
Well if you listen to his numerous responses to that issue and believe he is sincere, how is it a problem?
 
You are mistaken in both cases and quite insulting by continuing with the stereotypes (someone does not like Paul, so they must be using talking points from someone else). You will not win many people with such offensive tactics–most people can see what you are trying to do. 🙂
Sorry. :o
But you used some of the same old talking points they use. I retract my comment as to not offend you though. 🙂
 
Well if you listen to his numerous responses to that issue and believe he is sincere, how is it a problem?
It’s a problem because I don’t believe he is sincere. If I did believe he was sincere I would then have to believe he is a moron - neither bodes well for a person running for president.
 
A smart, stand-up, unscripted liberal might show them up on their home turf. They can’t have that, now, can they? He’s just a theatrical prop, part of a charade masquerading as reality.
To O’Reilly’s credit, he often has on liberal guests, Jon Stewart from the Daily Show, Dr. Lamont-Hill, Leslie Marshall, Juan Williams, to name a few.
 
And one has to carefully edit these “historical horrors” to leave out those committed by the Muslims against the Christians. Entire centuries have to be skipped in history books.
Christianity has all but bin wiped out in North Africa, home of St. Augustin.

Go to Spain and see all the Moorish palaces. Charles Martel defeated the Saracens at Tours.
 
But I will Be Mailing in for my New ID Card next month & going & Voting For Rick Santorum .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top